Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » It’s now just possible to contemplate that my 32p Euros bet at
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » It’s now just possible to contemplate that my 32p Euros bet at 990/1 might just be a winner
BMG Euros poll for the Indy hasBXP 26%LAB 22%LD 19%CON 12%GRN 10%CUK 3%So the LDs just 7 points behind BXP
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
1. UKIP/BRX split turns out to be a lot more even than people think. We're all political obsessives. We know about the new Brexit Party. The people who sign up to do YouGov polls. They're political obsessives too. If you go into the street and ask 100 people which political party Nigel Farage represents, I bet you'd get at least 20 saying "UKIP". So, I reckon a 3-1 split in the BRX/UKIP vote is by no means impossible. Now imagine the BRX/UKIP total is 32% (and that's probably on the low side, but not impossible) - well on 3-1, that means BRX gets 24% and UKIP 8%.
2. Bollocks to Brexit. The LDs get a lot of Remainer protest votes as the Chuckers chuck it in, and they become the perfect repository for protest votes.
For those two to happen is still only a small chance. I'd reckon no more likely than 33-1. But a lot more likely than 900-1.
> 1. UKIP/BRX split turns out to be a lot more even than people think. We're all political obsessives. We know about the new Brexit Party. The people who sign up to do YouGov polls. They're political obsessives too. If you go into the street and ask 100 people which political party Nigel Farage represents, I bet you'd get at least 20 saying "UKIP". So, I reckon a 3-1 split in the BRX/UKIP vote is by no means impossible. Now imagine the BRX/UKIP total is 32% (and that's probably on the low side, but not impossible) - well on 3-1, that means BRX gets 24% and UKIP 8%.
Also, UKIP get leaflets and a broadcast, right? Is it impossible to imagine that they'll come out with a message that convinces some of the voters to knowingly vote for them instead of Farage?
The article said "<I>It is hard now to see anyone at all competing with Swinson and winning. The former cabinet minister, Ed Davey, is now 12% in the betting and the only other movement is Christine Jardine who won Edinburgh West of the SNP at the 2017 general election.
According to the Evening Standard which broke the story her decision has nothing to do with the controversy when she admitted to facing charges which were dropped in a 2013 incident at the Party Conference in Glasgow</I>"
It took me several minutes of confusion and googling to work out who the "she" was in the second paragraph above. The context suggested Jardine. The other context suggested Swinson. It turned out to be Moran, who is the most remotely removed of the three from the words quoted. Does PB employ a proof-reader?
> Which is more insane, that OGH bet 32p, or that someone bet £316.48 to win 32p?
Possible that this was some sort of Arb/balancer for them? I occasionally have to place bets on Betfair that look absolutely nonsensical in isolation but which serve a wider strategic purpose.
BP surge not as high as it seems and there is a larger split with UKIP than predicted. Labour lose out but more to Green than LD, who rise but not as much as expected, and the Tory sympathy/core vote holds up better than expected as it is depressed due to embarrassment.
Ending with Tories inching out...first place.
I'd want better odds than OGH on his bet
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-48275795
> I see Alabama gets the 'bragging rights' of harshest abortion law in the US so they can get a challenge to the Supreme Court.
>
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-48275795
In some respects the Georgia bill, which specifically grants a foetus personhood, is more draconian still, since a woman planning an abortion might be charged with conspiracy to murder, or murder, should she self abort.
My theory is May will finally be forced out after next Sunday - given how frightened Tory mps are of the Brexit party and will recommend capitulation rather than fighting them by delivering Brexit- so the June announcement enables her and the cabinet to say they intended to see us leave but the party stopped them even trying, since Boris or whoever wont do it and if Brexit does not happen May and co can point to that.
> Perhaps. Though I think the BP/UKIP split or confusion would indeed be unlikely to be so high - the messaging and branding has been effective and people will come across BP the ballot paper first which should give them pause if they were even slightly confused.
Yup, also the Brexit Party has a big old arrow pointing at the box you have to tick. Whereas UKIP has a pound symbol, which will make their target demographic think they have to put some money in the slot.
> > @kle4 said:
>
> > I see Alabama gets the 'bragging rights' of harshest abortion law in the US so they can get a challenge to the Supreme Court.
>
> >
>
> > https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-48275795
>
>
>
> In some respects the Georgia bill, which specifically grants a foetus personhood, is more draconian still, since a woman planning an abortion might be charged with conspiracy to murder, or murder, should she self abort.
>
> Hell of a game of top trumps.
Quite.
The game is to introduce abortion bans without exceptions (which might muddy the legal argument) in order to give the Supreme Court an opportunity to overrun Roe v Wade.
> https://twitter.com/bbcnormans/status/1128539616947187714?s=21
Thank goodness. The EU is going to help force our politicians to make a decision after they have wasted another 7 months.
> I said it was a good bet, and here's how it (MIGHT) pay out.
>
>
>
> 1. UKIP/BRX split turns out to be a lot more even than people think. We're all political obsessives. We know about the new Brexit Party. The people who sign up to do YouGov polls. They're political obsessives too. If you go into the street and ask 100 people which political party Nigel Farage represents, I bet you'd get at least 20 saying "UKIP". So, I reckon a 3-1 split in the BRX/UKIP vote is by no means impossible. Now imagine the BRX/UKIP total is 32% (and that's probably on the low side, but not impossible) - well on 3-1, that means BRX gets 24% and UKIP 8%.
>
>
>
> 2. Bollocks to Brexit. The LDs get a lot of Remainer protest votes as the Chuckers chuck it in, and they become the perfect repository for protest votes.
>
>
>
> For those two to happen is still only a small chance. I'd reckon no more likely than 33-1. But a lot more likely than 900-1.
>
> Perhaps. Though I think the BP/UKIP split or confusion would indeed be unlikely to be so high - the messaging and branding has been effective and people will come across BP the ballot paper first which should give them pause if they were even slightly confused.
People who support Brexit obviously don't understand Economics. What makes you think they understand Politics. Secondly, you need to assess differential turnout.
A very good bet. I'd probably hedge to guarantee no loss
> > @williamglenn said:
>
> > https://twitter.com/bbcnormans/status/1128539616947187714
>
>
>
>
>
> Thank goodness. The EU is going to help force our politicians to make a decision after they have wasted another 7 months.
>
> You continued reading after “No 10 say”?
It might as well have said, “Anyone who wants either No Deal or Revoke shouldn’t vote for the deal.”
> https://twitter.com/bbcnormans/status/1128539616947187714?s=21
Meet the new strategy, exactly the same as the old strategy
I like Robert's thinking. Not a huge stretch to think that for a variety of reasons a brand spanking new party won't win the first election it ever contests.
> Has anyone on here ever won a 1000/1 or similar bet on politics?
>
Not won but I managed to cash out some of a 999/1 bet on David Lidington to be next Prime Minister at 5/1.
https://twitter.com/BethRigby/status/1128427953891811328
My only comfort is I know I would have laid that off way to early.
> > @kle4 said:
> > I said it was a good bet, and here's how it (MIGHT) pay out.
> >
> >
> >
> > 1. UKIP/BRX split turns out to be a lot more even than people think. We're all political obsessives. We know about the new Brexit Party. The people who sign up to do YouGov polls. They're political obsessives too. If you go into the street and ask 100 people which political party Nigel Farage represents, I bet you'd get at least 20 saying "UKIP". So, I reckon a 3-1 split in the BRX/UKIP vote is by no means impossible. Now imagine the BRX/UKIP total is 32% (and that's probably on the low side, but not impossible) - well on 3-1, that means BRX gets 24% and UKIP 8%.
> >
> >
> >
> > 2. Bollocks to Brexit. The LDs get a lot of Remainer protest votes as the Chuckers chuck it in, and they become the perfect repository for protest votes.
> >
> >
> >
> > For those two to happen is still only a small chance. I'd reckon no more likely than 33-1. But a lot more likely than 900-1.
> >
> > Perhaps. Though I think the BP/UKIP split or confusion would indeed be unlikely to be so high - the messaging and branding has been effective and people will come across BP the ballot paper first which should give them pause if they were even slightly confused.
>
> People who support Brexit obviously don't understand Economics. What makes you think they understand Politics. Secondly, you need to assess differential turnout.
There are economists on this site who I would argue with regarding their understanding of economics (for instance one believes that high house prices are good for the economy, I'm not so sure that's true).
> I said it was a good bet, and here's how it (MIGHT) pay out.
>
> 1. UKIP/BRX split turns out to be a lot more even than people think. We're all political obsessives. We know about the new Brexit Party. The people who sign up to do YouGov polls. They're political obsessives too. If you go into the street and ask 100 people which political party Nigel Farage represents, I bet you'd get at least 20 saying "UKIP". So, I reckon a 3-1 split in the BRX/UKIP vote is by no means impossible. Now imagine the BRX/UKIP total is 32% (and that's probably on the low side, but not impossible) - well on 3-1, that means BRX gets 24% and UKIP 8%.
>
> 2. Bollocks to Brexit. The LDs get a lot of Remainer protest votes as the Chuckers chuck it in, and they become the perfect repository for protest votes.
>
> For those two to happen is still only a small chance. I'd reckon no more likely than 33-1. But a lot more likely than 900-1.
I would have expected 1., but the VI polls strongly suggest otherwise. When you think how long UKiP has bee building its brand, such that most people would know its platform, it is a remarkable achievement by Farage to have broken through with his new party so quickly.
2. is starting to happen, but the Green vote will be resilient given the recent media focus on climate change. The LibDems would be in with a chance had the Greens been on the margins as they were last year.
'I'm afraid he's at an even greater disadvantage than Sir Humphrey when it comes to understanding economics, Prime Minister. He's an economist.'
Yes Prime Minister, A Real Partnership.
There's another way this bet could come in. We may be at Max BP. Some BP voters might start to notice that the Party has no policy other than leaving the EU and on shockingly awful terms. The Party's vote may then ease down to around 25% at which point the LDs can easily pass them by convincing the electorate that they are Remain's best hope.
I backed the Yellow Peril at 130/1 and then layed off the stake. I've gone back in at 30s. I don't think they should be any more than 10s.
>
> 2. is starting to happen, but the Green vote will be resilient given the recent media focus on climate change. The LibDems would be in with a chance had the Greens been on the margins as they were last year.
Going with “Bollocks to Brexit” was an inspired move that could help pick up a late swing to them if they get close to winning.
> > @williamglenn said:
>
> > https://twitter.com/bbcnormans/status/1128539616947187714
>
>
>
>
>
> Thank goodness. The EU is going to help force our politicians to make a decision after they have wasted another 7 months.
>
> You continued reading after “No 10 say”?
A fair point. Just a natural optimist I guess.
> Has anyone on here ever won a 1000/1 or similar bet on politics?
>
> I passed on £5 on Jeremy Corbyn at a similar 990 when I heard he was considering to be the Left candidate in the Labour leadership election.
>
> My only comfort is I know I would have laid that off way to early.
Ouch. Apart from the money, think of the bragging rights!
> Has anyone on here ever won a 1000/1 or similar bet on politics?
>
> I passed on £5 on Jeremy Corbyn at a similar 990 when I heard he was considering to be the Left candidate in the Labour leadership election.
>
> My only comfort is I know I would have laid that off way to early.
No. An acquaintance of mine pulls off this stunt several times a year but it's on the horses. He bets in running on horses that are out of camera shot. Works better at some courses than others. Chester is his happy hunting ground. Bangor and Fakenham are also good.
He makes money at it. The main problem, as you might figure, is getting enough on.
> > @rkrkrk said:
> > Has anyone on here ever won a 1000/1 or similar bet on politics?
> >
>
> Not won but I managed to cash out some of a 999/1 bet on David Lidington to be next Prime Minister at 5/1.
> @AlastairMeeks said:
> > @rkrkrk said:
> > Has anyone on here ever won a 1000/1 or similar bet on politics?
> >
>
> Not won but I managed to cash out some of a 999/1 bet on David Lidington to be next Prime Minister at 5/1.
That's superb. I'm still very green on Lidington in the hope it might happen.
> > @Fenman said:
> > > @kle4 said:
> > >
> >
> > People who support Brexit obviously don't understand Economics. What makes you think they understand Politics. Secondly, you need to assess differential turnout.
>
> There are economists on this site who I would argue with regarding their understanding of economics (for instance one believes that high house prices are good for the economy, I'm not so sure that's true).
It's hard to see how high house prices are good for the economy. It reduces labour mobility etc. I think rising house prices has been an illicit drug for the UK economy on which we have had several highs as well as some lows over the post war years. The notional wealth encourages spending, borrowing and leaks into overall consumption allowing us to buy more expensive cars more often than we need and other things.
That makes me wonder if reduced coverage of certain drivers on contra-strategies in F1 might, in-race, yield profit.
Are they doing it in desperation in the belief that it will shore up their vote for the Euros? If so they're fools. Nobody is going to vote on domestic issues in these elections.
Are they doing it in the expectation of a general election? If so, they're not fools, but they're rather rash to be showing their hand this early. The only reason this strategy sort of worked last time is that they revealed it very late and none of their opponents paid any attention to it. This time it is unlikely that mistake will happen.
Or am I overthinking this and it is the Ganesh explanation - they are as thick as pigshit and don't have a clue what they're doing?
> > @eek said:
> > > @Fenman said:
> > > > @kle4 said:
> > > >
> > >
> > > People who support Brexit obviously don't understand Economics. What makes you think they understand Politics. Secondly, you need to assess differential turnout.
> >
> > There are economists on this site who I would argue with regarding their understanding of economics (for instance one believes that high house prices are good for the economy, I'm not so sure that's true).
>
> It's hard to see how high house prices are good for the economy. It reduces labour mobility etc. I think rising house prices has been an illicit drug for the UK economy on which we have had several highs as well as some lows over the post war years. The notional wealth encourages spending, borrowing and leaks into overall consumption allowing us to buy more expensive cars more often than we need and other things.
As an OAP I am bombarded with 'offers' for equity release. Our IFA considers that they are the very last thing we should consider for cash-raising, if that becomes necessary, but it all looks too easy!
An accountant acquaintance reckons that they are the next PPI scandal.
> Mr. Punter, hmm.
>
> That makes me wonder if reduced coverage of certain drivers on contra-strategies in F1 might, in-race, yield profit.
As long as you are not looking at delayed pictures it might well work. Obviously you must have a TV feed that gives you pretty close to live coverage.
Alternatively you might like to follow the practice of a guy I used to see at Sandown. He would sit in a tree with his laptop.
Don't think it would work at Monaco. No trees.
'The ad watchdog has upheld complaints against William Hill for equating gambling with sexual success. The betting company said users could escape from being “stuck in the friend zone” (ie unable to get beyond the platonic level) by placing bets on its app. '
Any comments from the experienced gamblers? At least one of the Sean's seems to either not in fact gamble or to have few problems.
Sadly the fact the EU extended last time when we had no plan, something they said they would not do, means not enough will believe this is the final shot. They will continue to believe their dream outcome could happen and refuse to budge.
> > @Alistair said:
> > Has anyone on here ever won a 1000/1 or similar bet on politics?
> >
> > I passed on £5 on Jeremy Corbyn at a similar 990 when I heard he was considering to be the Left candidate in the Labour leadership election.
> >
> > My only comfort is I know I would have laid that off way to early.
>
> No. An acquaintance of mine pulls off this stunt several times a year but it's on the horses. He bets in running on horses that are out of camera shot. Works better at some courses than others. Chester is his happy hunting ground. Bangor and Fakenham are also good.
>
> He makes money at it. The main problem, as you might figure, is getting enough on.
I'm slightly embarrassed to admit that my most successful bet on anything ever was winning £1100 on the Tories winning Fulham in an election where they were clearly ahead - the bookies had got the odds the wrong way round, Sean Fear pointed it out, and I jumped in.
> I am still trying to work out what Labour are attempting to achieve with the recent flurry of mad, ooops, populist policies that they clearly haven't costed or thought through.
>
> Are they doing it in desperation in the belief that it will shore up their vote for the Euros? If so they're fools. Nobody is going to vote on domestic issues in these elections.
>
> Are they doing it in the expectation of a general election? If so, they're not fools, but they're rather rash to be showing their hand this early. The only reason this strategy sort of worked last time is that they revealed it very late and none of their opponents paid any attention to it. This time it is unlikely that mistake will happen.
>
> Or am I overthinking this and it is the Ganesh explanation - they are as thick as pigshit and don't have a clue what they're doing?
They are trying to change the story to anything except Brexit where Corbyn has got seriously out of line with where the party wants to be in an embarrassing and confused way. It's understandable but the timing, with the Euros and these desperately pointless talks going on, is not great.
> > @DavidL said:
> > > @eek said:
> > > > @Fenman said:
> > > > > @kle4 said:
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > People who support Brexit obviously don't understand Economics. What makes you think they understand Politics. Secondly, you need to assess differential turnout.
> > >
> > > There are economists on this site who I would argue with regarding their understanding of economics (for instance one believes that high house prices are good for the economy, I'm not so sure that's true).
> >
> > It's hard to see how high house prices are good for the economy. It reduces labour mobility etc. I think rising house prices has been an illicit drug for the UK economy on which we have had several highs as well as some lows over the post war years. The notional wealth encourages spending, borrowing and leaks into overall consumption allowing us to buy more expensive cars more often than we need and other things.
>
> As an OAP I am bombarded with 'offers' for equity release. Our IFA considers that they are the very last thing we should consider for cash-raising, if that becomes necessary, but it all looks too easy!
> An accountant acquaintance reckons that they are the next PPI scandal.
The next wave of pathetic moaners saying, "oh, I didn't realise that there is no such thing as a free lunch." Yes, its possible.
It might be as simple as it was on the schedule for now because they too thought we would be out by now and cannot be arsed to adjust.
Have a good morning.
Of course one of my larger wins was on the Brexit outcome which I now regret!
https://twitter.com/andrew_comres/status/1128557480257183744?s=21
> I see Alabama gets the 'bragging rights' of harshest abortion law in the US so they can get a challenge to the Supreme Court.
>
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-48275795
The Republicans really are loathsome scum . Utterly disgraceful , forcing a woman who is the victim of rape or incest to carry a child .
It should be stressed I was oddly frugal for a child, but even at the time I remember thinking it was insane to borrow money and have to pay back more rather than simply save up.
Edited extra bit: though unnecessary equity release seems far dafter.
> > @DavidL said:
>
> > > @eek said:
>
> > > > @Fenman said:
>
> > > > > @kle4 said:
>
> > > > >
>
> > > >
>
> > > > People who support Brexit obviously don't understand Economics. What makes you think they understand Politics. Secondly, you need to assess differential turnout.
>
> > >
>
> > > There are economists on this site who I would argue with regarding their understanding of economics (for instance one believes that high house prices are good for the economy, I'm not so sure that's true).
>
> >
>
> > It's hard to see how high house prices are good for the economy. It reduces labour mobility etc. I think rising house prices has been an illicit drug for the UK economy on which we have had several highs as well as some lows over the post war years. The notional wealth encourages spending, borrowing and leaks into overall consumption allowing us to buy more expensive cars more often than we need and other things.
>
>
>
> As an OAP I am bombarded with 'offers' for equity release. Our IFA considers that they are the very last thing we should consider for cash-raising, if that becomes necessary, but it all looks too easy!
>
> An accountant acquaintance reckons that they are the next PPI scandal.
>
> Equity release has its place for some people, but the ads for it are a disgrace because the people for whom it has its place look nothing like the people used in the adverts as possible customers. The chances of the wrong people using equity release are immeasurably higher as a result.
It's like those life insurance adverts for people who are barely pensioners and obviously in rude health. Those buying no medical life insurance should obviously be at death's door, not like that.
But if young mayor Pete pulls it off, then 270/1 comes in.
>
>
> It's really terribly simple. You declare what your house is worth, and anybody can - within 30 days of declaration - buy it for 30% more than your declaration.
>
> Result: nobody will lie and say their house is worth half the real value, as they might lose it.
Wouldn't that lead to Buckingham Palace, Chatsworth, Harewood, Castle Howard etc all being bought by oligarchs or tech billionaires at 30% over declared value ?
Pleasant day all
> > @OldKingCole said:
> > > @DavidL said:
> > > > @eek said:
> > > > > @Fenman said:
> > > > > > @kle4 said:
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > People who support Brexit obviously don't understand Economics. What makes you think they understand Politics. Secondly, you need to assess differential turnout.
> > > >
> > > > There are economists on this site who I would argue with regarding their understanding of economics (for instance one believes that high house prices are good for the economy, I'm not so sure that's true).
> > >
> > > It's hard to see how high house prices are good for the economy. It reduces labour mobility etc. I think rising house prices has been an illicit drug for the UK economy on which we have had several highs as well as some lows over the post war years. The notional wealth encourages spending, borrowing and leaks into overall consumption allowing us to buy more expensive cars more often than we need and other things.
> >
> > As an OAP I am bombarded with 'offers' for equity release. Our IFA considers that they are the very last thing we should consider for cash-raising, if that becomes necessary, but it all looks too easy!
> > An accountant acquaintance reckons that they are the next PPI scandal.
>
> The next wave of pathetic moaners saying, "oh, I didn't realise that there is no such thing as a free lunch." Yes, its possible.
As will interest only mortgages.
I'll add that much of the extra consumption you referred to goes on imports and foreign holidays.
Both the BP and Lib Dem surges hit the buffers .
The BP on 27 just 2 points ahead of Labour and the Lib Dems on 13% the same as their Westminster score .
Also had near misses at high odds in Azerbaijan, when the Force Indias collided. But for that I would've likely had a pair of rather nice green bets.
[Best actual bet/tip, of course, was Verstappen for the 2016 Spanish win at 250/1].
> Maybe its because I've not been able to sleep since 4am, but man politics is making me tired right now. Theres a lot of frantic activity going on, but no forward momentum. Just seems like such a bloody waste.
>
> Pleasant day all
It will be interesting to see what happens in this summer's leadership election. Will the candidates spend all their time arguing over who will go back to Brussels and be harder, or will we actually get some discussion of what a Tory government will do in 2020-22?
http://aboutasfarasdelgados.blogspot.com/2017/05/the-problem-with-opinion-polls-polls.html
As it happens YouGov did down weight the politically engaged and were very accurate, possibly as a result, possibly for another reason.
> > @DavidL said:
> > > @eek said:
> > > > @Fenman said:
> > > > > @kle4 said:
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > People who support Brexit obviously don't understand Economics. What makes you think they understand Politics. Secondly, you need to assess differential turnout.
> > >
> > > There are economists on this site who I would argue with regarding their understanding of economics (for instance one believes that high house prices are good for the economy, I'm not so sure that's true).
> >
> > It's hard to see how high house prices are good for the economy. It reduces labour mobility etc. I think rising house prices has been an illicit drug for the UK economy on which we have had several highs as well as some lows over the post war years. The notional wealth encourages spending, borrowing and leaks into overall consumption allowing us to buy more expensive cars more often than we need and other things.
>
> As an OAP I am bombarded with 'offers' for equity release. Our IFA considers that they are the very last thing we should consider for cash-raising, if that becomes necessary, but it all looks too easy!
> An accountant acquaintance reckons that they are the next PPI scandal.
The people who used to ring you to say 'have you had PPI' are running out of time and punters. One of their new gigs is to look at who has died recently and contact their heirs to say 'you might have a claim against the estate's lawyers because they didn't check whether the deceased had PPI'.
Make what you will of that.
> > @DavidL said:
> > > @OldKingCole said:
> > > > @DavidL said:
> > > > > @eek said:
> > > > > > @Fenman said:
> > > > > > > @kle4 said:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > People who support Brexit obviously don't understand Economics. What makes you think they understand Politics. Secondly, you need to assess differential turnout.
> > > > >
> > > > > There are economists on this site who I would argue with regarding their understanding of economics (for instance one believes that high house prices are good for the economy, I'm not so sure that's true).
> > > >
> > > > It's hard to see how high house prices are good for the economy. It reduces labour mobility etc. I think rising house prices has been an illicit drug for the UK economy on which we have had several highs as well as some lows over the post war years. The notional wealth encourages spending, borrowing and leaks into overall consumption allowing us to buy more expensive cars more often than we need and other things.
> > >
> > > As an OAP I am bombarded with 'offers' for equity release. Our IFA considers that they are the very last thing we should consider for cash-raising, if that becomes necessary, but it all looks too easy!
> > > An accountant acquaintance reckons that they are the next PPI scandal.
> >
> > The next wave of pathetic moaners saying, "oh, I didn't realise that there is no such thing as a free lunch." Yes, its possible.
>
> As will interest only mortgages.
>
> I'll add that much of the extra consumption you referred to goes on imports and foreign holidays.
Indeed but it still boosts GDP. Its been the permitted form of QE until we decided to try the real thing.
I can see the LDs overtaking Labour for second then if it is perceived as more committed to Remain by Remainers than Labour but I doubt it will overtake the Brexit Party, there are too many Remain parties dividing the Remain vote for that while Leavers are largely united behind the Brexit Party
He is getting no traction at all with a significant part of the Democratic base - currently polling 18% with whites in South Carolina and 0% with African Americans.
In less crowded field, he might turn that around sufficiently for a route to the nomination, but in this contest it doesn't look feasible.
> If you’re in the mood for long-shots, Shadsy has the Liberal Democrat’s at 100/1 to win Most Seats at the next Scottish Parliament election. Ruthie’s team at 7/1.
7/1 for the Conservatives is a lay for me.
> > @another_richard said:
> > > @DavidL said:
> > > > @OldKingCole said:
> > > > > @DavidL said:
> > > > > > @eek said:
> > > > > > > @Fenman said:
> > > > > > > > @kle4 said:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > People who support Brexit obviously don't understand Economics. What makes you think they understand Politics. Secondly, you need to assess differential turnout.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There are economists on this site who I would argue with regarding their understanding of economics (for instance one believes that high house prices are good for the economy, I'm not so sure that's true).
> > > > >
> > > > > It's hard to see how high house prices are good for the economy. It reduces labour mobility etc. I think rising house prices has been an illicit drug for the UK economy on which we have had several highs as well as some lows over the post war years. The notional wealth encourages spending, borrowing and leaks into overall consumption allowing us to buy more expensive cars more often than we need and other things.
> > > >
> > > > As an OAP I am bombarded with 'offers' for equity release. Our IFA considers that they are the very last thing we should consider for cash-raising, if that becomes necessary, but it all looks too easy!
> > > > An accountant acquaintance reckons that they are the next PPI scandal.
> > >
> > > The next wave of pathetic moaners saying, "oh, I didn't realise that there is no such thing as a free lunch." Yes, its possible.
> >
> > As will interest only mortgages.
> >
> > I'll add that much of the extra consumption you referred to goes on imports and foreign holidays.
>
> Indeed but it still boosts GDP. Its been the permitted form of QE until we decided to try the real thing.
Indeed.
I'm curious as to when the obsession with GDP started.
I wonder if it was about the time the media stopped reporting the trade balance.
> https://twitter.com/andrew_comres/status/1128557114002223104
>
>
>
> https://twitter.com/andrew_comres/status/1128557480257183744
>
>
>
> All outliers, these recent polls
I really thought that the Greens would be higher than CHUK-in-the-towel.....
> https://twitter.com/bbcnormans/status/1128539616947187714?s=21
Which given the current Commons makeup probably means revoke if the Deal fails again, then quite possibly PM Farage at the next general election due to the Leaver backlash
I refuse to believe that the EU would inflict the consequences of a no deal Brexit onto Ireland. That only becomes possible if the PM decides it is preferable (which looks fairly likely if we have a new PM by the autumn).
> > @Sunil_Prasannan said:
> > https://twitter.com/andrew_comres/status/1128557114002223104
> >
> >
> >
> > https://twitter.com/andrew_comres/status/1128557480257183744
> >
> >
> >
> > All outliers, these recent polls
>
> I really thought that the Greens would be higher than CHUK-in-the-towel.....
Well, they are in this poll (for the Euros). Anyway, it's a Tory surge! And a bit of a Labour recovery. I wonder if Farage's push has peaked.
The Westminster poll is fascinating but very hypothetical - I wonder where it'll be in 3 years...
> https://twitter.com/andrew_comres/status/1128557114002223104?s=21
> https://twitter.com/andrew_comres/status/1128557480257183744?s=21
Better for the Tories and Labour in the European elections poll in 3rd and 2nd respectively and a narrower Brexit Party lead.
Worse for the Tories and Labour at Westminster though, Labour now just 2% above its European elections score and the Tories tied with the Brexit Party who are already up to 20%.
LDs also now doing as well at Westminster as for the European elections on 13% for each
> Some weird goings on with Comres and it’s EU elections .
>
>
>
> Both the BP and Lib Dem surges hit the buffers .
>
>
>
> The BP on 27 just 2 points ahead of Labour and the Lib Dems on 13% the same as their Westminster score .
>
> The EU elections seem exceptionally difficult to poll, presumably because of the big uncertainty in turnout
True . On the weekend we saw a 13 point lead for the BP and now in two polls just a two point one .
I have a lot of free time today so am going to look at all the methodologies to see whether that can help to a degree explain this . We would expect normal variation between pollsters but given these ones are online we shouldn’t be seeing shy voter etc .
http://aboutasfarasdelgados.blogspot.com/2014/08/luis-louis-ladbrokes-life.html
Paddy Power are in trouble for the advert ft Rhodri Giggs
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/may/08/paddy-power-advert-ryan-giggs-brother-banned-rhodri-gambling
> Some weird goings on with Comres and it’s EU elections .
>
> Both the BP and Lib Dem surges hit the buffers .
>
> The BP on 27 just 2 points ahead of Labour and the Lib Dems on 13% the same as their Westminster score .
LAB 8/1 most seats seems long for a party polling 2 points behind the leader in such an uncertain race
> > @not_on_fire said:
> > Some weird goings on with Comres and it’s EU elections .
> >
> >
> >
> > Both the BP and Lib Dem surges hit the buffers .
> >
> >
> >
> > The BP on 27 just 2 points ahead of Labour and the Lib Dems on 13% the same as their Westminster score .
> >
> > The EU elections seem exceptionally difficult to poll, presumably because of the big uncertainty in turnout
>
> True . On the weekend we saw a 13 point lead for the BP and now in two polls just a two point one .
>
> I have a lot of free time today so am going to look at all the methodologies to see whether that can help to a degree explain this . We would expect normal variation between pollsters but given these ones are online we shouldn’t be seeing shy voter etc .
Is it possible BP can be explained by Andrew Marr's interview with Nigel Farage where, as some suggested might be a problem, Farage shed his cheery man-of-the-people image and came over as tetchy and, well, as just another politician complaining about being asked the wrong questions by the biased BBC?
> https://twitter.com/bbcnormans/status/1128539616947187714
> I refuse to believe that the EU would inflict the consequences of a no deal Brexit onto Ireland. That only becomes possible if the PM decides it is preferable (which looks fairly likely if we have a new PM by the autumn).
It must be revoke now then. No parliment will tolerate no-deal.
> > @OblitusSumMe said:
> > https://twitter.com/bbcnormans/status/1128539616947187714
> > I refuse to believe that the EU would inflict the consequences of a no deal Brexit onto Ireland. That only becomes possible if the PM decides it is preferable (which looks fairly likely if we have a new PM by the autumn).
>
> It must be revoke now then. No parliment will tolerate no-deal.
Revoke of course with no referendum will be an early Christmas present for Farage and see the Brexit Party surge even more