Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Punters make it a 30% that Brexit won’t happen before 2022 or
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Punters make it a 30% that Brexit won’t happen before 2022 or not at all
Betdata.io chart of movement on the Betfair exchange
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Glad we've got that sorted.
I think that's right. If we haven't left by the new deadline it is probably because parliament has enacted a 'Confirmatory Ballot', and that means Remain.
There's also the DUP.
I agree, Mr. Rentool, that right now Remain/May's deal are significantly likelier than leaving with no deal.
Whilst much has been written of the potential for economic turbulence in the latter instance, I think most politicians and journalists haven't considered the political harm that would be caused by staying in.
And, as I've said before various times, trying to come up with a fair set of options in a second referendum is actually pretty tricky. The two step approach (Remain/Leave and, if the latter wins, May's deal/no deal) may be the best/least bad way to go.
'I am therefore attempting to even the playing field by today launching Remain United, a tactical voting and campaigning website to give voters advice on which remain-backing party they would be best off supporting in order to maximise the number of seats these parties capture between them in the forthcoming election.'
Someone's going to be upset, but might just work. Last thing the country needs now is Farage crowing that 'he's won' again.
> Writing in the Guardian today Gina Miller says that
> 'I am therefore attempting to even the playing field by today launching Remain United, a tactical voting and campaigning website to give voters advice on which remain-backing party they would be best off supporting in order to maximise the number of seats these parties capture between them in the forthcoming election.'
>
> Someone's going to be upset, but might just work. Last thing the country needs now is Farage crowing that 'he's won' again.
Good idea in theory, but probably quite a tough problem to work out good recommendations. If your data turns out a little bit wrong it can easily backfire.
> "There are two blocks of MPs Who are determined not to support that which is currently on the table – the ERG Brexit hardliners and those behind the People’s Vote campaign."
> There's also the DUP.
And Sinn Fein. Not a single one of their MPs has even bothered to vote.
> Well, Spurs!
I’m impressed you’re up this early.
> Good morning, everyone.
>
> I agree, Mr. Rentool, that right now Remain/May's deal are significantly likelier than leaving with no deal.
>
> Whilst much has been written of the potential for economic turbulence in the latter instance, I think most politicians and journalists haven't considered the political harm that would be caused by staying in.
>
> And, as I've said before various times, trying to come up with a fair set of options in a second referendum is actually pretty tricky. The two step approach (Remain/Leave and, if the latter wins, May's deal/no deal) may be the best/least bad way to go.
No
Because that still doesn't find the Condorcet Winner.
https://twitter.com/ScotNational/status/1126372980886523905
Or perhaps its self awareness that's shuffled off....
> > @OldKingCole said:
> > Writing in the Guardian today Gina Miller says that
> > 'I am therefore attempting to even the playing field by today launching Remain United, a tactical voting and campaigning website to give voters advice on which remain-backing party they would be best off supporting in order to maximise the number of seats these parties capture between them in the forthcoming election.'
> >
> > Someone's going to be upset, but might just work. Last thing the country needs now is Farage crowing that 'he's won' again.
>
> Good idea in theory, but probably quite a tough problem to work out good recommendations. If your data turns out a little bit wrong it can easily backfire.
Indeed; not a lot of time left, either.
If you look at where I live, Mid/N Essex, in one constituency you'd back the Greens but across the line in Chelmsford, it'd be the LibDems.
Vince is (at last, did I hear someone say) making all the right noises.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/05/08/train-drivers-hit-flying-scotsman-train-spotters-blame-delays/
> Good morning, everyone.
>
> I agree, Mr. Rentool, that right now Remain/May's deal are significantly likelier than leaving with no deal.
>
> Whilst much has been written of the potential for economic turbulence in the latter instance, I think most politicians and journalists haven't considered the political harm that would be caused by staying in.
>
> And, as I've said before various times, trying to come up with a fair set of options in a second referendum is actually pretty tricky. The two step approach (Remain/Leave and, if the latter wins, May's deal/no deal) may be the best/least bad way to go.
I asked yesterday and no one seemed to have an answer, what exactly would a no deal on a ballot paper mean?
For how long and on what matters can neither govt nor parliament make deals with the EU? Could we make deals with the EEA? Or France?
As a practical example, imagine we leave with no deal, Boris gets voted in PM and is offered a free trade deal but part of that is to pay £20bn upfront to cover the exit fees the EU thinks they are due. Is he allowed to accept? Is that not a breach of what (some) voters understand by no-deal?
Or no-deal turns out to be a disaster and hospitals are running out of medicine and death rate is significantly higher, opinion polling shifts to 65% for a deal and EU happy to offer it, are the govt allowed to act?
We would be setting ourselves up for another battle between the legitimacy of a binary vote with little context against the needs of a democratically elected govt to deal with complex issues.
> And, as I've said before various times, trying to come up with a fair set of options in a second referendum is actually pretty tricky. The two step approach (Remain/Leave and, if the latter wins, May's deal/no deal) may be the best/least bad way to go.
You've got that backwards: You need to decide what Brexit would be if you did it before you can decide whether you want to do it.
> And, as I've said before various times, trying to come up with a fair set of options in a second referendum is actually pretty tricky. The two step approach (Remain/Leave and, if the latter wins, May's deal/no deal) may be the best/least bad way to go.
We can debate the theoretical niceties between now and the end of time (without agreeing) but the political reality is that a majority in the Commons has voted for measures to prevent No Deal. They will not vote for a referendum where No Deal is an option.
> Is there an EU election due soon? I can't even remember whether it is too early to panic about the non-arrival of a polling card.
We had ours weeks ago
> Is there an EU election due soon? I can't even remember whether it is too early to panic about the non-arrival of a polling card.
Ours came a week or so ago.
Can they do that? IANAL but was not the rationale for revocation being a unilateral decision that the EU27 could not kick us out?
> Well, Spurs!
lol
between you and Eagles it will be a fun time
Advantage Farage, though.
"They won't even give you the option of what you want!" will be the cry. And those refuting it will have some difficulty as the popularity or not of no deal will be untested at the ballot box.
That said, if May's deal or Remain ended up with a large victory that would dilute the impact.
MPs voting for something they find unacceptable is why they find themselves in a cul-de-sac. Daft sods.
> > @SouthamObserver said:
> > Well, Spurs!
>
> lol
>
> between you and Eagles it will be a fun time !
good luck!
> > @DecrepitJohnL said:
> > Is there an EU election due soon? I can't even remember whether it is too early to panic about the non-arrival of a polling card.
>
> Ours came a week or so ago.
Thanks (and to Blue_rog). I'll check with the neighbours and give the council a ring.
> Because that still doesn't find the Condorcet Winner.
If you do it in the non-bonkers order, ie Deal vs No Deal then the winner of that vs Remain, I think you get the Condorcet winner if there is one. However you'll never know whether you got the Condorcet winner or whether there would have been a cycle.
> No deal Brexit -- OGH's OP wonders if the EU27 might kick us out without a deal.
>
> Can they do that? IANAL but was not the rationale for revocation being a unilateral decision that the EU27 could not kick us out?
My understanding is that the EU can refuse to extend the deadline and then de facto, we leave. Under those circumstances I can imagine the only recourse the UK would have would be to revoke article 50.
That would be 'interesting' politically in the UK
> https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/1126351663822966784
I'm supporting the Uber strikers by not having a social life.
> No deal Brexit -- OGH's OP wonders if the EU27 might kick us out without a deal.
>
> Can they do that? IANAL but was not the rationale for revocation being a unilateral decision that the EU27 could not kick us out?
They can't stop the UK revoking, but they can stop it extending. Revoking is a much more politically adventurous thing for the UK to do than extending, so if the EU refused an extension it could well result in No-Deal Brexit.
> MPs voting for something they find unacceptable is why they find themselves in a cul-de-sac. Daft sods.
Yes. They did that because they were worrying about Farage. So they would be better off not worrying about Farage and simply advocating their case more effectively to the voters.
Farage will try and make a career out of claiming an establishment stitch-up regardless of what they do.
Nothing will happen before the summer 2022 General Election.
One suspects that whatever happens, there shall be much wailing and gnashing of teeth.
> No deal Brexit -- OGH's OP wonders if the EU27 might kick us out without a deal.
>
> Can they do that? IANAL but was not the rationale for revocation being a unilateral decision that the EU27 could not kick us out?
They can remove the option of an extension, leaving us theoretically with the choice between revocation and a no deal exit, but for practical reasons of time revocation may not be an option, particularly if the PM is opposed.
Semi-finals:
1) Leave group - Deal vs No-Deal
2) Remain group - David Cameron's Renegotiation vs David Cameron is a massive fucking bell-end
Finals:
Winner of (1) vs Winner of (2)
The advantage of that is that otherwise you have this whole can of worms about how much funding and media time each side gets.
> > @edmundintokyo said:
> > > @OldKingCole said:
> > > Writing in the Guardian today Gina Miller says that
> > > 'I am therefore attempting to even the playing field by today launching Remain United, a tactical voting and campaigning website to give voters advice on which remain-backing party they would be best off supporting in order to maximise the number of seats these parties capture between them in the forthcoming election.'
> > >
> > > Someone's going to be upset, but might just work. Last thing the country needs now is Farage crowing that 'he's won' again.
> >
> > Good idea in theory, but probably quite a tough problem to work out good recommendations. If your data turns out a little bit wrong it can easily backfire.
>
> Indeed; not a lot of time left, either.
> If you look at where I live, Mid/N Essex, in one constituency you'd back the Greens but across the line in Chelmsford, it'd be the LibDems.
> Vince is (at last, did I hear someone say) making all the right noises.
Mid/N Essex and Chelmsford are in the same Region for the EP election There's no difference in tactical voting between these two places, and it is much too early to consider the tactical landscape for the next GE.
> > @DecrepitJohnL said:
> > No deal Brexit -- OGH's OP wonders if the EU27 might kick us out without a deal.
> >
> > Can they do that? IANAL but was not the rationale for revocation being a unilateral decision that the EU27 could not kick us out?
>
> They can't stop the UK revoking, but they can stop it extending. Revoking is a much more politically adventurous thing for the UK to do than extending, so if the EU refused an extension it could well result in No-Deal Brexit.
If we revoke, re-trigger Article 50 and agree a deal, could we still leave on 31 October or do we need to wait two years? If the former then doesnt seem much practical difference even if a big difference politically.
> Mr. Above, if we revoke, MPs won't support triggering Article 50 a second time.
If we revoke through our choice then agree it seems very unlikely. If we revoke because the French "made us", I see it as plausible. Revoking may also cause a GE, and the new parliament may want to trigger Article 50.
> Or no-deal turns out to be a disaster and hospitals are running out of medicine and death rate is significantly higher, opinion polling shifts to 65% for a deal and EU happy to offer it, are the govt allowed to act?
>
If we leave with no deal, then deal is no longer available, even if the public opinion shifts to "I wish we'd left with a Deal". In practice the "Deal" is a transition agreement, and once we have left with a hard brexit, then the transition has already happened.
Most MPs are pro-EU and pro-Remain.
If they get exactly what they want, why would they needlessly risk losing it?
> OT the Telegraph's story about train delays caused by Flying Scotsman fans getting too close to the tracks is illustrated by a number of tweets from a train driver tweeting as Don't Buy The Telegraph.
>
> https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/05/08/train-drivers-hit-flying-scotsman-train-spotters-blame-delays/
>
> That makes me want to buy the Telegraph.
It's possible he changed his Twitter handle after the Telegraph used his tweets for their story without his permission. They would have had to pay a photo agency for use of their photos so I'd want a national newspaper to pay me for use of my photos.
Low turnout local elections are only the tip of the iceberg as they bring out the most loyal voters. We'll see what happens to the rest.
https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/scottish-conservatives-mocked-for-embarrassing-election-leaflet-1-4923341
> > @noneoftheabove said:
>
> > Or no-deal turns out to be a disaster and hospitals are running out of medicine and death rate is significantly higher, opinion polling shifts to 65% for a deal and EU happy to offer it, are the govt allowed to act?
> >
>
>
> If we leave with no deal, then deal is no longer available, even if the public opinion shifts to "I wish we'd left with a Deal". In practice the "Deal" is a transition agreement, and once we have left with a hard brexit, then the transition has already happened.
>
The EU are still going to want their £20bn! (approx)
Any future deal we have with the EU will get stuck on that unless it is addressed, in some form of deal, whether pre or post leaving the EU.
> If you wanted 3 options it might actually be cleaner to add a 4th, ie
>
> Semi-finals:
> 1) Leave group - Deal vs No-Deal
> 2) Remain group - David Cameron's Renegotiation vs David Cameron is a massive fucking bell-end
>
> Finals:
> Winner of (1) vs Winner of (2)
>
> The advantage of that is that otherwise you have this whole can of worms about how much funding and media time each side gets.
Ah but your second semi-final raises an important question of hyphenation.
https://twitter.com/vizcomic/status/1085960357850636290
> > @eristdoof said:
> > > @noneoftheabove said:
> >
> > > Or no-deal turns out to be a disaster and hospitals are running out of medicine and death rate is significantly higher, opinion polling shifts to 65% for a deal and EU happy to offer it, are the govt allowed to act?
> > >
> >
> >
> > If we leave with no deal, then deal is no longer available, even if the public opinion shifts to "I wish we'd left with a Deal". In practice the "Deal" is a transition agreement, and once we have left with a hard brexit, then the transition has already happened.
> >
>
> The EU are still going to want their £20bn! (approx)
>
> Any future deal we have with the EU will get stuck on that unless it is addressed, in some form of deal, whether pre or post leaving the EU.
That is irrelevant... "Deal", in the current context, only covers the transition. A future deal can of course be negotiated, but that takes years and in the mean time the UK is stuck with the "No Deal" conditions.
The idea makes a certain amount of sense, but assuming that there are voters committed to a specific party among LD/Green/CHUK then floating remain voters may need to split to multiple parties to get most seats - e.g. 20% of remain vote certain to go LD as LD supporters, 20%certain to go Green as green supporters and the combined remain vote is just capable of winning two seats then the remaining 60% need to split as evenly as possible to secure those seats. That cannot be organised easily, unless you sign up and get a personalised randomised recommendation.
There's also a lot at stake here for CHUK and LD with respect to each other, it's hard to see LD supporters being that keen on voting tactically for CHUK when a bigger CHUK share than LD could see LD lose all their apparent recovery momentum and given the leaked CHUK memo. Vice versa for those who want to see CHUK succeed long term.
Personally, I haven't yet decided my vote and quite willing to vote tactically if I can be convinced that the tactics are correct. Otherwise it will come down to other policies I support most, which looks like a challenge for CHUK as they don't seem to have any
> FPT @HYUFD The fact Labour are now polling at Brown 2010 levels and the Tories are polling worse than Major 1997 shows the contempt for the main parties currently held by the voters and confirms the trend from the local elections
>
> It's actually much worse than it looks. All parties are being flattered by high levels of don't knows and will not votes, which are excluded from the headlines, bumping up their figures. In 2010 63% said they would vote either Labour or Conservative, in the latest polls that's now a ridiculously low 38%. E.g. 20% fewer people are saying they will vote Labour than even at the beginning of 2010. Now that's not to say voters won't return but the situation is precarious.
>
> Low turnout local elections are only the tip of the iceberg as they bring out the most loyal voters. We'll see what happens to the rest.
There is a good reason why don't knows and won't votes are excluded.
If included as is then the bias for all parties will be much worse than if excluded. If they are accounted for by apportioning them by some system, then the system which minimises any bias is the same as excluding them.
The effect of having many don't knows is to make the polls less accurate but not more biassed.
> > @noneoftheabove said:
> > > @eristdoof said:
> > > > @noneoftheabove said:
> > >
> > > > Or no-deal turns out to be a disaster and hospitals are running out of medicine and death rate is significantly higher, opinion polling shifts to 65% for a deal and EU happy to offer it, are the govt allowed to act?
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > If we leave with no deal, then deal is no longer available, even if the public opinion shifts to "I wish we'd left with a Deal". In practice the "Deal" is a transition agreement, and once we have left with a hard brexit, then the transition has already happened.
> > >
> >
> > The EU are still going to want their £20bn! (approx)
> >
> > Any future deal we have with the EU will get stuck on that unless it is addressed, in some form of deal, whether pre or post leaving the EU.
>
> That is irrelevant... "Deal", in the current context, only covers the transition. A future deal can of course be negotiated, but that takes years and in the mean time the UK is stuck with the "No Deal" conditions.
So in your view the govt is free to make any deal it likes the day after we leave with no deal? I can pretty much guarantee that many no deal voters will cry betrayal, stitch up, whats the point in voting as soon as the govt enters any negotiations.
We should learn from our mistakes and having a referendum option that is not clear cut has led us into a mess where over 90% of the country are now unhappy with how the govt is trying to resolve brexit. The govt is trying its best and has an impossible situation to deal with.
Why on earth should we repeat it? If no deal is to be an option it is up to the senior no dealers (Farage, JRM, Boris) to specify exactly what they want and how it can be implemented. They will not bother as 1) that involves work and effort 2) the ambiguity suits them, many will not realise we will eventually pay that £20bn one way or another, and the anti immigration groups and free trade global Britain can both believe in their post Brexit futures when they are complete opposites.
If they're working off polls this is probably going to backfire spectacularly...
> Writing in the Guardian today Gina Miller says that
>
> 'I am therefore attempting to even the playing field by today launching Remain United, a tactical voting and campaigning website to give voters advice on which remain-backing party they would be best off supporting in order to maximise the number of seats these parties capture between them in the forthcoming election.'
>
>
>
> Someone's going to be upset, but might just work. Last thing the country needs now is Farage crowing that 'he's won' again.
>
> I saw (may have been on here) and followed an advert to another similar site, pretty sure it wasn't remainunited but cannot remember the address now, a couple of weeks back. Be interesting to see whether competing sites - unless this is a rebrand - make the same recommendations
>
> The idea makes a certain amount of sense, but assuming that there are voters committed to a specific party among LD/Green/CHUK then floating remain voters may need to split to multiple parties to get most seats - e.g. 20% of remain vote certain to go LD as LD supporters, 20%certain to go Green as green supporters and the combined remain vote is just capable of winning two seats then the remaining 60% need to split as evenly as possible to secure those seats. That cannot be organised easily, unless you sign up and get a personalised randomised recommendation.
>
> There's also a lot at stake here for CHUK and LD with respect to each other, it's hard to see LD supporters being that keen on voting tactically for CHUK when a bigger CHUK share than LD could see LD lose all their apparent recovery momentum and given the leaked CHUK memo. Vice versa for those who want to see CHUK succeed long term.
>
> Personally, I haven't yet decided my vote and quite willing to vote tactically if I can be convinced that the tactics are correct. Otherwise it will come down to other policies I support most, which looks like a challenge for CHUK as they don't seem to have any
CHUK has many policies. As the name suggests, it wants change, provided nothing changes. It wants elections although it will not fight them. Most importantly, it wants Chuka to be leader, provided Heidi Allen takes the job.
> > @SouthamObserver said:
> > Well, Spurs!
>
> I’m impressed you’re up this early.
Haven’t really been to bed!
> > @Alanbrooke said:
> > > @SouthamObserver said:
> > > Well, Spurs!
> >
> > lol
> >
> > between you and Eagles it will be a fun time !
>
> good luck!
>
>
Thanks. TSE is used to it. This is new territory for me. I never imagined it could happen.
https://www.remainunited.org/be-tactical/
It says they'll have another go with new polling on May 21st, though.
> > @Alanbrooke said:
> > > @Alanbrooke said:
> > > > @SouthamObserver said:
> > > > Well, Spurs!
> > >
> > > lol
> > >
> > > between you and Eagles it will be a fun time !
> >
> > good luck!
> >
> >
>
> Thanks. TSE is used to it. This is new territory for me. I never imagined it could happen.
Great result for Spurs who have just received the support of all Man Utd fans to defeat Liverpool in the final
> https://twitter.com/joswinson/status/1126389852625354752
It is blantly obvious that anti Farage supporters need to back the Lib Dems in a one off protest vote against him and all he stands for. No need for Gina Miller to make it more complicated
> https://twitter.com/joswinson/status/1126389852625354752
A bit infantile, surely?
With nominations already closed for a closed-list D’Hondt election, they’ve a high chance of getting it all completely wrong!
I need to do more digging but it looks like the numbers actively saying the will vote for the two main parties could be at an historic low, it's well below even the points of lowest combined headline VI.
> https://twitter.com/joswinson/status/1126389852625354752
I can see the "TO BREXIT" being omitted from that document and then issued as the next LibDem manifesto ....
Those already really against leaving might like that sort of thing, floating voters (who still exist in large numbers despite the loud volume of those on either extreme) are likely to think it's a bit pathetic.
Replacing 3 Labour and 3 Brexit MEPS with 6 Libdem MEPs seems unlikely to change anything when the European parliament has limited power and the ruling coalition has a near 200 seat majority?
Focusing on the peterborough by election seems more practical given one of the big Westminster votes was a tie and several others were extremely close.
> OK, it turns out that on current polling the tactical voting solution is for everybody in England to vote LibDem. This kind-of shows the limits of trying to do the whole thing impartially and mathematically rather than involving actual politics: It's hard to get Greens on board with this if your idea is for them not to get any seats.
>
>
>
> https://www.remainunited.org/be-tactical/
>
>
>
> It says they'll have another go with new polling on May 21st, though.
>
> Trying to get tactical voting up and running is a lot easier if the parties concerned are on board. There’s no evidence of that so far.
>
> With nominations already closed for a closed-list D’Hondt election, they’ve a high chance of getting it all completely wrong!
I fundamentally don't agree with quite a bit of that. For instance, in the SE with current votes splits it is quite possible to get LD, CHUK and Green over the line and, at very best, a second CHUK. The scenario Remain United shows actually delivers fewer MEPs than no tactical voting whatsoever.
> > @Scott_P said:
> > https://twitter.com/joswinson/status/1126389852625354752
>
> I can see the "TO BREXIT" being omitted from that document and then issued as the next LibDem manifesto ....
They should at least have the decency to cross the word "Democrats" out of the above document...
Art. 50 does not require a two year wait. Two years is the max (until extended at which point it isn't). There is no minimum, but the order of events requires the withdrawal deal to be negotiated after Art.50 is triggered, so must take some time. There is no direct provision for triggering Art. 50 and then unilaterally leaving in under two years without a WA. As a piece of drafting Art. 50 is GCSE D minus stuff.
BTW if the EU wanted us to remain (and for all I know it does) its best tactic might be to grant us an unlimited extension without any conditions at all. The laws of inertia accompanied by our now legendary incompetence should mean that the matter drags on until everyone gets bored and parliament can get back to doing what it does best: creating stupid new crimes, complicating the tax laws and displaying ignorance.
I see Brexit Party have selected for Peteborough. A secret millionaire.
Get it wrong and they all fall just short.
> Is there an EU election due soon? I can't even remember whether it is too early to panic about the non-arrival of a polling card.
As long as you are on the register , a Polling Card is not necessary to vote.
Bonus points that the local Tories know him as a donor.
> There is a variation to the Lib Dems sign saying "Lib Dems winning here" as they aren't "winning here" (in Horsham at any rate though they have more councillors). I cannot remember what it says but I'll look out for it today.
Didn’t realise that you’re in the same constituency, where about are you?
> > @Scott_P said:
> > https://twitter.com/joswinson/status/1126389852625354752
>
> It is blantly obvious that anti Farage supporters need to back the Lib Dems in a one off protest vote against him and all he stands for. No need for Gina Miller to make it more complicated
It is actually far from obvious , and a significant number who voted LibDem on 2nd May will be voting for Farage's Brexit Party on 23rd May.
> OK, it turns out that on current polling the tactical voting solution is for everybody in England to vote LibDem. This kind-of shows the limits of trying to do the whole thing impartially and mathematically rather than involving actual politics: It's hard to get Greens on board with this if your idea is for them not to get any seats.
> https://www.remainunited.org/be-tactical/
> It says they'll have another go with new polling on May 21st, though.
It is one thing for the leaders of the Green Party to say what they will or will not do. But it is quite another when we talk about their previous voters. I find that ordinary people are much more open to voting tactically in order to put an end to this Brexit nonsense that Farage and the Conservatives have unleashed on us.
The same applies to Chuk, of course. And even Labour.
LDs have the momentum Yes, and the Greens always do well in the Euros, and LDs in the Locals. We need better information by region for tactical voting under Dehondt. Indeed it shows what acrap system of PR it is that we even talk of Tactical voting at all.
> > @Big_G_NorthWales said:
> > > @Scott_P said:
> > > https://twitter.com/joswinson/status/1126389852625354752
> >
> > It is blantly obvious that anti Farage supporters need to back the Lib Dems in a one off protest vote against him and all he stands for. No need for Gina Miller to make it more complicated
>
> It is actually far from obvious , and a significant number who voted LibDem on 2nd May will be voting for Farage's Brexit Party on 23rd May.
So, let's get this straight. You think that people in the local elections voted for the most anti-Brexit party because they wanted Brexit?
That's a bit deluded isn't it?
> > @Sandpit said:
>
> > OK, it turns out that on current polling the tactical voting solution is for everybody in England to vote LibDem. This kind-of shows the limits of trying to do the whole thing impartially and mathematically rather than involving actual politics: It's hard to get Greens on board with this if your idea is for them not to get any seats.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > https://www.remainunited.org/be-tactical/
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > It says they'll have another go with new polling on May 21st, though.
>
> >
>
> > Trying to get tactical voting up and running is a lot easier if the parties concerned are on board. There’s no evidence of that so far.
>
> >
>
> > With nominations already closed for a closed-list D’Hondt election, they’ve a high chance of getting it all completely wrong!
>
>
>
> I fundamentally don't agree with quite a bit of that. For instance, in the SE with current votes splits it is quite possible to get LD, CHUK and Green over the line and, at very best, a second CHUK. The scenario Remain United shows actually delivers fewer MEPs than no tactical voting whatsoever.
>
> But what do you actually have to say to people, to make them get three different parties just over the line?
>
> Get it wrong and they all fall just short.
Exactly, and even if you do manage it, those extra votes for each party after they have got their elected candidate, but no more, could have added up to another seat (and one less for their opponents) if they were a single list and not multiple lists.
> There is a variation to the Lib Dems sign saying "Lib Dems winning here" as they aren't "winning here" (in Horsham at any rate though they have more councillors). I cannot remember what it says but I'll look out for it today.
Not 'winning here' 'though they have more councillors'.
That's a good trick.
Anyone voting for Farage is voting for an economic shock and demagoguery in the bargain. It’s pathetic how Brexiters have turned against Mrs May, the only individual who has actually tried to pull a deal together.
Two votes for the LDs in this household.
His campaign is the slickest thing ever to hit these shores, regrettably.
From now on polls are partial exits.
Someone posted something about this being a political site but that's not the whole story. Sporting bets are often posted on here and those who took my 25-1 tip on Spurs for the CL are now in with a definite shout. Liverpool will be favourites but only a fool would write off Spurs.
Amazing amazing games. Breathtaking. I think both sets of supporters will come to Madrid with huge mutual respect after that. It will be a wonderful occasion. Teams who know that football is about the heart. Passion. Fight. Never giving up. Team spirit. Attacking to the last breath.
Bloody marvellous.
> > @justin124 said:
> > > @Big_G_NorthWales said:
> > > > @Scott_P said:
> > > > https://twitter.com/joswinson/status/1126389852625354752
> > >
> > > It is blantly obvious that anti Farage supporters need to back the Lib Dems in a one off protest vote against him and all he stands for. No need for Gina Miller to make it more complicated
> >
> > It is actually far from obvious , and a significant number who voted LibDem on 2nd May will be voting for Farage's Brexit Party on 23rd May.
>
> So, let's get this straight. You think that people in the local elections voted for the most anti-Brexit party because they wanted Brexit?
> That's a bit deluded isn't it?
Not at all. What would be deluded would be to assume that all people cast their votes on the basis of Brexit. Many who supported the LibDems - and the Greens - last week did so as an anti- establishment protest vote or for specifically 'local' reasons. The Brexit Party was not available as such a vehicle on 2nd May but will be very visible on 23rd May. Moroever, a significant part of the UKIP surge between 2012 and 2015 was as a NOTA anti-Establishment option rather than being EU related.
> > @Sandpit said:
>
> > OK, it turns out that on current polling the tactical voting solution is for everybody in England to vote LibDem. This kind-of shows the limits of trying to do the whole thing impartially and mathematically rather than involving actual politics: It's hard to get Greens on board with this if your idea is for them not to get any seats.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > https://www.remainunited.org/be-tactical/
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > It says they'll have another go with new polling on May 21st, though.
>
> >
>
> > Trying to get tactical voting up and running is a lot easier if the parties concerned are on board. There’s no evidence of that so far.
>
> >
>
> > With nominations already closed for a closed-list D’Hondt election, they’ve a high chance of getting it all completely wrong!
>
>
>
> I fundamentally don't agree with quite a bit of that. For instance, in the SE with current votes splits it is quite possible to get LD, CHUK and Green over the line and, at very best, a second CHUK. The scenario Remain United shows actually delivers fewer MEPs than no tactical voting whatsoever.
>
> But what do you actually have to say to people, to make them get three different parties just over the line?
>
> Get it wrong and they all fall just short.
I've time for this sort of message, and can understand the need to make it simple, but the truth somewhere like the South East where there are 10 seats available is that tactical voting is not needed and is itself likely to make more parties fall short than the tactically preferred party gains. Some nuance and explanation, by someone who has a snappier writing style than me perhaps, is needed.
I'm also not clear that LD are the lead party everywhere, in Y&H Greens were ahead in 2014 and I've not seen any convincing polling that has been overturned.
> Have any postal votes gone out yet?
Yes, I've sent mine in.
Straightforward. Clear. Incisive.
Love it.
Sports bets are fine. Occasionally people wibble about them, but not too much.