I think that BXP vote is solid - more votes than UKIP 2014 as more votes have been shed from CON. It is possible that LD's vote could go a lot higher if remainers coalesce around one party. Could be a great bet.
> @JackW said: > I understand there's some crossover in the Euro polling .... > > Is it the Tories now slipping behind both Change UK and UKIP ?!? ---------
Could the Tories fall far enough to end up with fewer votes than the SNP?
The party of One Nation below the party of one nation.
"The Labour leader said the six weeks of cross-party discussions could not carry on due to "the increasing weakness and instability" of the government. "
He means the increasing weakness and instability of Labour's poll ratings for the European elections.
> @williamglenn said: > > @JackW said: > > I understand there's some crossover in the Euro polling .... > > > > Is it the Tories now slipping behind both Change UK and UKIP ?!? > --------- > > Could the Tories fall far enough to end up with fewer votes than the SNP? > > The party of One Nation below the party of one nation.
How times change. If after the last European election you'd had told the Tories that next time they would poll around 10 points more than UKIP, I think Conservatives would have been jubilant.
If the Lib Dems do win in London, it will be <I>by far</I> their biggest election win* in the last 100 years.
* By 'win', I mean either a single constituency (single- or multi-member), or across a whole elected-body, whether that be a parliament, a devolved assembly, a council or something of that nature. By my reckoning, their current best is Devon County Council. For constituencies (single- or multi-member), I mean finishing first; for elected bodies, I mean winning an overall majority of seats. There may be some instances of the Lib Dems running larger authorities from a minority position.
> @david_herdson said: > If the Lib Dems do win in London, it will be <I>by far</I> their biggest election win* in the last 100 years. > > * By 'win', I mean either a single constituency (single- or multi-member), or across a whole elected-body, whether that be a parliament, a devolved assembly, a council or something of that nature. By my reckoning, their current best is Devon County Council. For constituencies (single- or multi-member), I mean finishing first; for elected bodies, I mean winning an overall majority of seats. There may be some instances of the Lib Dems running larger authorities from a minority position. --------
I think it would be massive for them strategically as well. If they can start to challenge Labour in urban seats, at the same time as challenging the Tories in rural seats, they could have the beginnings of a General Election winning coalition.
<I>In 2014 UKIP got 16.87% of the London votes and it is hard to see BXP+UKIP getting that much more.</I>
I'm not sure about that. In 2014, the Tories won 22.5%. That figures is likely to be substantially lower this year, with much of it shedding to the Brexit Party.
It has to be said that the overall Brexit share reported is extraordinary. No party this century has won more than 30% in a European Election within Britain.
> @david_herdson said: > If the Lib Dems do win in London, it will be <I>by far</I> their biggest election win* in the last 100 years. > > * By 'win', I mean either a single constituency (single- or multi-member), or across a whole elected-body, whether that be a parliament, a devolved assembly, a council or something of that nature. By my reckoning, their current best is Devon County Council. For constituencies (single- or multi-member), I mean finishing first; for elected bodies, I mean winning an overall majority of seats. There may be some instances of the Lib Dems running larger authorities from a minority position.
> @williamglenn said: > > @david_herdson said: > > If the Lib Dems do win in London, it will be <I>by far</I> their biggest election win* in the last 100 years. > > > > * By 'win', I mean either a single constituency (single- or multi-member), or across a whole elected-body, whether that be a parliament, a devolved assembly, a council or something of that nature. By my reckoning, their current best is Devon County Council. For constituencies (single- or multi-member), I mean finishing first; for elected bodies, I mean winning an overall majority of seats. There may be some instances of the Lib Dems running larger authorities from a minority position. > -------- > > I think it would be massive for them strategically as well. If they can start to challenge Labour in urban seats, at the same time as challenging the Tories in rural seats, they could have the beginnings of a General Election winning coalition.
It wouldn't be a coalition: it would be running two contradictory positions and campaigning messages which couldn't possibly hold together if they ended up with any power, and proving that the Lib Dems had learned nothing from their 2015 wipeout.
In 2014 UKIP got 16.87% of the London votes and it is hard to see BXP+UKIP getting that much more.
I'm not sure about that. In 2014, the Tories won 22.5%. That figures is likely to be substantially lower this year, with much of it shedding to the Brexit Party.
It has to be said that the overall Brexit share reported is extraordinary. No party this century has won more than 30% in a European Election within Britain.
At the very end of the 20th, twenty years ago, Hague's Tories got 33.5%.
> @david_herdson said: > > It wouldn't be a coalition: it would be running two contradictory positions and campaigning messages which couldn't possibly hold together if they ended up with any power, and proving that the Lib Dems had learned nothing from their 2015 wipeout. ---------
It would be United Remainia, given political coherence by the new dividing line in English politics.
Last night on BBC This Week, John Nicholson of the SNP said that if they lost a 2nd IndyRef, he would keep campaigning for a 3rd, but if they won independence, there could not be a 3rd.
> @david_herdson said: > > @williamglenn said: > > > @david_herdson said: > > > If the Lib Dems do win in London, it will be <I>by far</I> their biggest election win* in the last 100 years. > > > > > > * By 'win', I mean either a single constituency (single- or multi-member), or across a whole elected-body, whether that be a parliament, a devolved assembly, a council or something of that nature. By my reckoning, their current best is Devon County Council. For constituencies (single- or multi-member), I mean finishing first; for elected bodies, I mean winning an overall majority of seats. There may be some instances of the Lib Dems running larger authorities from a minority position. > > -------- > > > > I think it would be massive for them strategically as well. If they can start to challenge Labour in urban seats, at the same time as challenging the Tories in rural seats, they could have the beginnings of a General Election winning coalition. > > It wouldn't be a coalition: it would be running two contradictory positions and campaigning messages which couldn't possibly hold together if they ended up with any power, and proving that the Lib Dems had learned nothing from their 2015 wipeout.
It's pretty much New Labour with added Liberalism and Remain; worked for Tony three times.
> @isam said: > I’d like to know how a poll showing a party on 21% makes them a good bet at 7/2, when the same poll has a 4/1 shot on 25% 🤔
Mike's given his reasoning in the thread header, by referring back to the result in 2014, and to the idea that the Lib Dems will squeeze the vote of other Remain parties as they establish themselves as the largest under that banner.
Do you have reasons for disagreeing that go beyond a HYUFD-like faith in the infallibility of opinion polls?
> @OblitusSumMe said: > > @isam said: > > I’d like to know how a poll showing a party on 21% makes them a good bet at 7/2, when the same poll has a 4/1 shot on 25% 🤔 > > Mike's given his reasoning in the thread header, by referring back to the result in 2014, and to the idea that the Lib Dems will squeeze the vote of other Remain parties as they establish themselves as the largest under that banner. > > Do you have reasons for disagreeing that go beyond a HYUFD-like faith in the infallibility of opinion polls?
I think Mike's kidding himself if he can't see TBP getting more than Ukip got in 2014. I'd have thought the best bet would be to lay Labour.
I think today’s news might save Labour in London .
It might also help their general polling . Even though the talks were unlikely to deliver for many Labour supporters the fact they were happening and were being seen as bailing out May was a big drag on their support.
This might also help what’s left of the Tory vote, May leaving in June and talk of Johnson taking over might also see some who were going to vote BP to either stick with the Tories or be less enthused to turn out.
I fully expect the BP to top the EU elections but the last two days is likely to put a ceiling on their support and might see them lose a few points.
> I’d like to know how a poll showing a party on 21% makes them a good bet at 7/2, when the same poll has a 4/1 shot on 25% 🤔
Mike's given his reasoning in the thread header, by referring back to the result in 2014, and to the idea that the Lib Dems will squeeze the vote of other Remain parties as they establish themselves as the largest under that banner.
Do you have reasons for disagreeing that go beyond a HYUFD-like faith in the infallibility of opinion polls?
I certainly don’t think polls are infallible, but thanks for the implied put down.
This is the paragraph relating to the bet
“This one is on votes and the standout bet for me the 7/2 that the LDs will be top in the capital. The YouGov poll has a large sample which means that the regional subsets are more meaningful. In London BXP are on 25%, the LDs 21% and LAB on 20%.”
It just seems odd to quote that to back the 21% party being good value at 7/2 if the 25% party are the same or bigger price. Sorry for asking
I think @williamglenn has made this point in the past, but you might find that leavers in remainer majority parts of the country might be more Brexity. I can imagine that those Londoners who voted leave might be quite keen on Farage's party.
The onward march of the yellow peril has a silver lining as shares in Auchentennach Fine Pies have spiked as investors note a more secure supply of essential ingredients in the short and medium term.
This follows a difficult period for the company in recent years as worries were expressed over the endangered nature of the prized product. Speaking at a charity event for impoverished Scottish nobles, JackW of Auchentennach said :
"The European elections provide an excellent opportunity for the nation to consolidate the position of a wonderful culinary institution, founded in 1745 and with a worldwide reputation. I urge the electorate to strike a blow for British exports and vote Liberal Democrat in their tens, if not hundreds in this completely meaningless exercise in government induced election incompetence, albeit that it will only cost the taxpayer little more that £100m.
Additionally Mike Smithson would also win his 32p bet !! .."
You can't help thinking Vince is shuffling off the scene just at the wrong moment. Thanks to the local election boost and being quicker on their feet the Lib Dems have cleverly shafted ChangeUk and have more momentum with them than they've had for years. Labour are floundering and managing to under-perform all expectations. I'd be tempted to keep a crafty old stager like Vince going for a another year to ensure Heidi Allen and her upstarts are truly buried.
> @tlg86 said: > I think @williamglenn has made this point in the past, but you might find that leavers in remainer majority parts of the country might be more Brexity. I can imagine that those Londoners who voted leave might be quite keen on Farage's party.
Yes, and vice-versa. If you were a Remainer in a deep Leave area in 2016, you really meant it.
> @JackW said: > The onward march of the yellow peril has a silver lining as shares in Auchentennach Fine Pies have spiked as investors note a more secure supply of essential ingredients in the short and medium term. > > This follows a difficult period for the company in recent years as worries were expressed over the endangered nature of the prized product. Speaking at a charity event for impoverished Scottish nobles, JackW of Auchentennach said : > > "The European elections provide an excellent opportunity for the nation to consolidate the position of a wonderful culinary institution, founded in 1745 and with a worldwide reputation. I urge the electorate to strike a blow for British exports and vote Liberal Democrat in their tens, if not hundreds in this completely meaningless exercise in government induced election incompetence, albeit that it will only cost the taxpayer little more that £100m. > > Additionally Mike Smithson would also win his 32p bet !! .."
If Auchentennach Fine Pies are Auchentennach Fine Dining, would that mean you support AFD?
If Jezza is to be believed, the Government remains keen on importing chlorinated chicken and (presumably) a whole load of other low-standard foodstuffs from the United States. Can anyone explain why they think this is a good idea?
> @_Anazina_ said: > If Jezza is to be believed, the Government remains keen on importing chlorinated chicken and (presumably) a whole load of other low-standard foodstuffs from the United States. Can anyone explain why they think this is a good idea?
If we exit the EU, presumably we can adopt better food labelling laws. Could we not require the packaging to show if the chicken had been chlorine washed and allow consumers to choose? Likewise with GM content?
If Jezza is to be believed, the Government remains keen on importing chlorinated chicken and (presumably) a whole load of other low-standard foodstuffs from the United States. Can anyone explain why they think this is a good idea?
> @MikeSmithson said: > > @isam said: > > Sorry, the London subsets have Brexit (4/1) on 25%, and the Lib Dem’s (7/2) on 21%, and the bet is the the 7/2 > > Because UKIP/Farage is crap in London.
40% of Londoners voted leave. If The Brexit party get over half of those voters (adjusted for a lower turnout) they might win. In my borough I think they will win comfortably. Ethnic minority voters will not go Lib Dem in large numbers which will hinder them.
> @ExiledInScotland said: > > @JackW said: > > The onward march of the yellow peril has a silver lining as shares in Auchentennach Fine Pies have spiked as investors note a more secure supply of essential ingredients in the short and medium term. > > > > This follows a difficult period for the company in recent years as worries were expressed over the endangered nature of the prized product. Speaking at a charity event for impoverished Scottish nobles, JackW of Auchentennach said : > > > > "The European elections provide an excellent opportunity for the nation to consolidate the position of a wonderful culinary institution, founded in 1745 and with a worldwide reputation. I urge the electorate to strike a blow for British exports and vote Liberal Democrat in their tens, if not hundreds in this completely meaningless exercise in government induced election incompetence, albeit that it will only cost the taxpayer little more that £100m. > > > > Additionally Mike Smithson would also win his 32p bet !! .." > > If Auchentennach Fine Pies are Auchentennach Fine Dining, would that mean you support AFD?
There is no alternative to fine dining at Chez JackW
If Jezza is to be believed, the Government remains keen on importing chlorinated chicken and (presumably) a whole load of other low-standard foodstuffs from the United States. Can anyone explain why they think this is a good idea?
Look at the thread title. The whole post relates to the bet.
The thread is based on a poll that has BXP on more than double the Lib Dem score, though that isn’t mentioned, and beating them 25-21 in London. I just don’t see how the best bet is Lib Dem’s win London at 7/2 on that evidence. It may be a good bet nonetheless
I think it would be massive for them strategically as well. If they can start to challenge Labour in urban seats, at the same time as challenging the Tories in rural seats, they could have the beginnings of a General Election winning coalition.
It wouldn't be a coalition: it would be running two contradictory positions and campaigning messages which couldn't possibly hold together if they ended up with any power, and proving that the Lib Dems had learned nothing from their 2015 wipeout.
Not at all.
The Lib Dems are becoming the party of the educated, affluent pro-Remain crowd. There are a lot of them in Labour-held London seats, just as there are in Conservative-held rural seats. "Rural" can mean the Cotswolds just as it can mean the south-west.
Inevitably, yes, there will be some degree of tailoring the message. But no more than Labour trying to hold together the pro-Remain votes of Islington South and the WWC heartland of Bolsover, or the Conservatives trying to hold together the Brexit voters of Essex and the small businessmen who are going to be trashed by Brexit. Outside the SNP, the Lib Dems are probably now the party with the most coherent internal coalition.
If Jezza is to be believed, the Government remains keen on importing chlorinated chicken and (presumably) a whole load of other low-standard foodstuffs from the United States. Can anyone explain why they think this is a good idea?
I don't think the government is at all keen to do that, but if you are asking about the merits of the idea, (a) it is safer than the salmonella-infested chicken produced in the EU, and (b) it is cheaper, a consideration which you might have thought would be rather compelling for a party which purports to be interested in the interests of the least well-off.
Not that the realities are relevant, of course. 'Chlorinated chicken' sound bad, despite the fact that consumers quite happily buy chlorinated salads and drink chlorinated water. So it won't happen, unfortunately.
> If Jezza is to be believed, the Government remains keen on importing chlorinated chicken and (presumably) a whole load of other low-standard foodstuffs from the United States. Can anyone explain why they think this is a good idea?
If we exit the EU, presumably we can adopt better food labelling laws. Could we not require the packaging to show if the chicken had been chlorine washed and allow consumers to choose? Likewise with GM content?
By that way of thinking, there would be no need for any food standards. You could literally sell a shit sandwich, as long as it was so labelled.
No, food standards are a good idea. There is nothing to commend importing the tons of quasi-edible trash that lurks in US supermarkets.
If Jezza is to be believed, the Government remains keen on importing chlorinated chicken and (presumably) a whole load of other low-standard foodstuffs from the United States. Can anyone explain why they think this is a good idea?
"If Jezza is to be believed"
*snort*
Well I recognise that it's a stretch, but it might be true. Who knows?
Am I the only one who finds Goodwin deeply annoying? He is academia's version of Han Dodges, he writes the same thing over and over again and gets some idiot to pay him for it.
> @isam said: > > @isam said: > > > > > This is the paragraph relating to the bet > > > > Look at the thread title. The whole post relates to the bet. > > The thread is based on a poll that has BXP on more than double the Lib Dem score, though that isn’t mentioned, and beating them 25-21 in London. I just don’t see how the best bet is Lib Dem’s win London at 7/2 on that evidence. It may be a good bet nonetheless
Sure. I might even agree with you that Mike is guilty of wishful thinking. What I don't understand is why you won't make an argument based on his reasoning, rather than just petulant sniping.
If political betting were only about comparing opinion polls to betting odds then Mike would never have made that 50-1 bet on Obama.
> @_Anazina_ said: > If Jezza is to be believed, the Government remains keen on importing chlorinated chicken and (presumably) a whole load of other low-standard foodstuffs from the United States. Can anyone explain why they think this is a good idea? > > "If Jezza is to be believed" > > *snort* > > Well I recognise that it's a stretch, but it might be true. Who knows?
I wouldn't trust Corbyn if he told me it was 12.47pm. I'd check my watch first... i I am an hr ahead of gmt btw...
> @_Anazina_ said: > If Jezza is to be believed, the Government remains keen on importing chlorinated chicken and (presumably) a whole load of other low-standard foodstuffs from the United States. Can anyone explain why they think this is a good idea?
Well we thought it was a good idea to add chlorine to tap water 40 years ago?
> If Jezza is to be believed, the Government remains keen on importing chlorinated chicken and (presumably) a whole load of other low-standard foodstuffs from the United States. Can anyone explain why they think this is a good idea?
>
> "If Jezza is to be believed"
>
> *snort*
>
> Well I recognise that it's a stretch, but it might be true. Who knows?
I woildnt trust Corbyn if he told me it was 12.47pm. I'd check my watch first... i am an hr agead of gmt btw...
> @SquareRoot said: > > @_Anazina_ said: > > If Jezza is to be believed, the Government remains keen on importing chlorinated chicken and (presumably) a whole load of other low-standard foodstuffs from the United States. Can anyone explain why they think this is a good idea? > > > > "If Jezza is to be believed" > > > > *snort* > > > > Well I recognise that it's a stretch, but it might be true. Who knows? > > I wouldn't trust Corbyn if he told me it was 12.47pm. I'd check my watch first... i > I am an hr ahead of gmt btw...
So am I, where it is now 11:53. So I think you're ahead of yourself by an hour too.
Sure. I might even agree with you that Mike is guilty of wishful thinking. What I don't understand is why you won't make an argument based on his reasoning, rather than just petulant sniping.
If political betting were only about comparing opinion polls to betting odds then Mike would never have made that 50-1 bet on Obama.
The whole thread is about the opinion poll and the reasoning of the bet cites the London subset that has a bigger priced runner scoring better. I don’t get how you can’t see this?
> @isam said: > > The whole thread is about the opinion poll and the reasoning of the bet cites the London subset that has a bigger priced rubber scoring better. I don’t get how you can’t see this?
And I cited the parts of his post where Mike explains his reasoning for looking beyond the raw figures in the opinion poll.
Unless you are now able to see those paragraphs then I think this dialogue has run its course.
The main parties were warned repeatedly that this would happen. I don't see how the genie is put back now. UK has a Nationalist Populist party and it will win seats. Whether it can sweep aside the entire political system is another question.
No doubt Bannon is providing plenty of advice to Nigel.
> If Jezza is to be believed, the Government remains keen on importing chlorinated chicken and (presumably) a whole load of other low-standard foodstuffs from the United States. Can anyone explain why they think this is a good idea?
If we exit the EU, presumably we can adopt better food labelling laws. Could we not require the packaging to show if the chicken had been chlorine washed and allow consumers to choose? Likewise with GM content?
The US would not allow that ie would make it a condition of any FTA that we did not label such products so that consumers could refuse to buy them.
> @tlg86 said: > > @david_herdson said: > > If the Lib Dems do win in London, it will be <I>by far</I> their biggest election win* in the last 100 years. > > > > * By 'win', I mean either a single constituency (single- or multi-member), or across a whole elected-body, whether that be a parliament, a devolved assembly, a council or something of that nature. By my reckoning, their current best is Devon County Council. For constituencies (single- or multi-member), I mean finishing first; for elected bodies, I mean winning an overall majority of seats. There may be some instances of the Lib Dems running larger authorities from a minority position. > > Mayor of Bedford is a bigger win, surely?
No, the population of Bedford is only about 170,000 - way below that of Devon. Watford - the Lib Dems' other mayoral win - is also small.
> @_Anazina_ said: > Of course it might boost Labour support among Remain voters..... > > https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1129300905030037504 > > > > > Am I the only one who finds Goodwin deeply annoying? He is academia's version of Han Dodges, he writes the same thing over and over again and gets some idiot to pay him for it.
I cant help but feel you find him annoying because his analysis does not match your political views. Personally i find his analysis both interesting and at times compelling. But I also recognise that is because his conclusions are often more in line with my own political views
Wonder whether the rise of Faragism is starting to be noticed in Jezza's inner cabinet? They may be complacently thinking it splits the Right and Jezza gets in.
But look at BP latest advert: going straight for the older working class vote.
He certainly is. There is, at the risk of invoking Godwin’s Law, more than a hint of the Fuehrerprincip about him, with all this talk of betrayal and Will of the People stuff, and a party built purely around him with no checks and balances with him being funded personally by a man under investigation by the NCA.
> @rottenborough said: > > @williamglenn said: > > > https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1129332991610818560 > > > > > > He is becoming messianic. Dangerous. > > The main parties were warned repeatedly that this would happen. I don't see how the genie is put back now. UK has a Nationalist Populist party and it will win seats. Whether it can sweep aside the entire political system is another question. > > No doubt Bannon is providing plenty of advice to Nigel.
Yep, if Nige can continue this momentum, then a GE becomes a lot more risky and dangerous for both tories and labour.
> @Cyclefree said: > > @williamglenn said: > > > https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1129332991610818560 > > > > > > He is becoming messianic. Dangerous. > > > He certainly is. There is, at the risk of invoking Godwin’s Law, more than a hint of the Fuehrerprincip about him, with all this talk of betrayal and Will of the People stuff, and a party built purely around him with no checks and balances with him being funded personally by a man under investigation by the NCA.
> The whole thread is about the opinion poll and the reasoning of the bet cites the London subset that has a bigger priced rubber scoring better. I don’t get how you can’t see this?
And I cited the parts of his post where Mike explains his reasoning for looking beyond the raw figures in the opinion poll.
Unless you are now able to see those paragraphs then I think this dialogue has run its course.
I think we are Jez and Tez and will not come to agreement
> He certainly is. There is, at the risk of invoking Godwin’s Law, more than a hint of the Fuehrerprincip about him, with all this talk of betrayal and Will of the People stuff, and a party built purely around him with no checks and balances with him being funded personally by a man under investigation by the NCA.
Yep. You invoked Godwin.
If the will of the people hadn’t been transparently betrayed, his behaviour would indeed look rather worrying
> Am I the only one who finds Goodwin deeply annoying? He is academia's version of Han Dodges, he writes the same thing over and over again and gets some idiot to pay him for it.
I cant help but feel you find him annoying because his analysis does not match your political views. Personally i find his analysis both interesting and at times compelling. But I also recognise that is because his conclusions are often more in line with my own political views
His recent book is v good (with Eatwell) and more established politicians should be reading it to understand where this is coming from. I'd say it is a little complacent over how easily Nat Populism can be tipped over into out-right hard far right politics of the nasty sort, but otherwise well worth reading.
Seems to me that Lab and Tories are standing on a burning platform and have no idea they are.
> @Cyclefree said: > > @williamglenn said: > > > https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1129332991610818560 > > > > > > He is becoming messianic. Dangerous. > > > He certainly is. There is, at the risk of invoking Godwin’s Law, more than a hint of the Fuehrerprincip about him, with all this talk of betrayal and Will of the People stuff, and a party built purely around him with no checks and balances with him being funded personally by a man under investigation by the NCA.
Did the Lib Dems ever repay the money donated to them by Michael Brown?
Comments
https://twitter.com/TelePolitics/status/1129318209293889536
> The self-love that dare not speak its name:
>
The author is the director of the Museum of Communist Terror.
> Mike, is this you trying to back the Greens at 1000 as a hedge, on the off chance the LDs don’t oblige?!!
I laid up the Brexit party at 1.16 for not much, and I'm glad it was not much I laid to lose.
Is it the Tories now slipping behind both Change UK and UKIP ?!?
> I understand there's some crossover in the Euro polling ....
>
> Is it the Tories now slipping behind both Change UK and UKIP ?!?
Chuka and Batten bringing up the rear still.
> I understand there's some crossover in the Euro polling ....
>
> Is it the Tories now slipping behind both Change UK and UKIP ?!?
Chortle
https://twitter.com/BBCBreaking/status/1129323253472931840
> I understand there's some crossover in the Euro polling ....
>
> Is it the Tories now slipping behind both Change UK and UKIP ?!?
---------
Could the Tories fall far enough to end up with fewer votes than the SNP?
The party of One Nation below the party of one nation.
He means the increasing weakness and instability of Labour's poll ratings for the European elections.
> > @JackW said:
> > I understand there's some crossover in the Euro polling ....
> >
> > Is it the Tories now slipping behind both Change UK and UKIP ?!?
> ---------
>
> Could the Tories fall far enough to end up with fewer votes than the SNP?
>
> The party of One Nation below the party of one nation.
How times change. If after the last European election you'd had told the Tories that next time they would poll around 10 points more than UKIP, I think Conservatives would have been jubilant.
Oh dear ....
* By 'win', I mean either a single constituency (single- or multi-member), or across a whole elected-body, whether that be a parliament, a devolved assembly, a council or something of that nature. By my reckoning, their current best is Devon County Council. For constituencies (single- or multi-member), I mean finishing first; for elected bodies, I mean winning an overall majority of seats. There may be some instances of the Lib Dems running larger authorities from a minority position.
> If the Lib Dems do win in London, it will be <I>by far</I> their biggest election win* in the last 100 years.
>
> * By 'win', I mean either a single constituency (single- or multi-member), or across a whole elected-body, whether that be a parliament, a devolved assembly, a council or something of that nature. By my reckoning, their current best is Devon County Council. For constituencies (single- or multi-member), I mean finishing first; for elected bodies, I mean winning an overall majority of seats. There may be some instances of the Lib Dems running larger authorities from a minority position.
--------
I think it would be massive for them strategically as well. If they can start to challenge Labour in urban seats, at the same time as challenging the Tories in rural seats, they could have the beginnings of a General Election winning coalition.
I'm not sure about that. In 2014, the Tories won 22.5%. That figures is likely to be substantially lower this year, with much of it shedding to the Brexit Party.
It has to be said that the overall Brexit share reported is extraordinary. No party this century has won more than 30% in a European Election within Britain.
> If the Lib Dems do win in London, it will be <I>by far</I> their biggest election win* in the last 100 years.
>
> * By 'win', I mean either a single constituency (single- or multi-member), or across a whole elected-body, whether that be a parliament, a devolved assembly, a council or something of that nature. By my reckoning, their current best is Devon County Council. For constituencies (single- or multi-member), I mean finishing first; for elected bodies, I mean winning an overall majority of seats. There may be some instances of the Lib Dems running larger authorities from a minority position.
Mayor of Bedford is a bigger win, surely?
> > @david_herdson said:
> > If the Lib Dems do win in London, it will be <I>by far</I> their biggest election win* in the last 100 years.
> >
> > * By 'win', I mean either a single constituency (single- or multi-member), or across a whole elected-body, whether that be a parliament, a devolved assembly, a council or something of that nature. By my reckoning, their current best is Devon County Council. For constituencies (single- or multi-member), I mean finishing first; for elected bodies, I mean winning an overall majority of seats. There may be some instances of the Lib Dems running larger authorities from a minority position.
> --------
>
> I think it would be massive for them strategically as well. If they can start to challenge Labour in urban seats, at the same time as challenging the Tories in rural seats, they could have the beginnings of a General Election winning coalition.
It wouldn't be a coalition: it would be running two contradictory positions and campaigning messages which couldn't possibly hold together if they ended up with any power, and proving that the Lib Dems had learned nothing from their 2015 wipeout.
> I see Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn have taken David Herdson's advice.
>
> https://twitter.com/BBCBreaking/status/1129323253472931840
I'll send an invoice.
>
> It wouldn't be a coalition: it would be running two contradictory positions and campaigning messages which couldn't possibly hold together if they ended up with any power, and proving that the Lib Dems had learned nothing from their 2015 wipeout.
---------
It would be United Remainia, given political coherence by the new dividing line in English politics.
> https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1129327565829804032
What's that Labour supporters on here like to say about putting country first?
> It's all a bit of a mess, really.
master of understatement :-)
> The end of the talks , May going in June and a new leader coming in could effect next weeks EU election voting .
>
>
Doubt it. The Farage/Brexit Party juggernaut is unstoppable now.
> > @williamglenn said:
> > > @david_herdson said:
> > > If the Lib Dems do win in London, it will be <I>by far</I> their biggest election win* in the last 100 years.
> > >
> > > * By 'win', I mean either a single constituency (single- or multi-member), or across a whole elected-body, whether that be a parliament, a devolved assembly, a council or something of that nature. By my reckoning, their current best is Devon County Council. For constituencies (single- or multi-member), I mean finishing first; for elected bodies, I mean winning an overall majority of seats. There may be some instances of the Lib Dems running larger authorities from a minority position.
> > --------
> >
> > I think it would be massive for them strategically as well. If they can start to challenge Labour in urban seats, at the same time as challenging the Tories in rural seats, they could have the beginnings of a General Election winning coalition.
>
> It wouldn't be a coalition: it would be running two contradictory positions and campaigning messages which couldn't possibly hold together if they ended up with any power, and proving that the Lib Dems had learned nothing from their 2015 wipeout.
It's pretty much New Labour with added Liberalism and Remain; worked for Tony three times.
> I’d like to know how a poll showing a party on 21% makes them a good bet at 7/2, when the same poll has a 4/1 shot on 25% 🤔
Mike's given his reasoning in the thread header, by referring back to the result in 2014, and to the idea that the Lib Dems will squeeze the vote of other Remain parties as they establish themselves as the largest under that banner.
Do you have reasons for disagreeing that go beyond a HYUFD-like faith in the infallibility of opinion polls?
> https://twitter.com/pencreed/status/1129323647766806531
>
>
>
> Except one
Viagrage?
> https://twitter.com/pencreed/status/1129323647766806531
>
>
>
> Except one
'Don't take the blue pill, we'll get you hard with the red pill!'
I know we've had polling on the politcal proclivities of those with dirty pants, anything done on viagra users?
>
> It's pretty much New Labour with added Liberalism and Remain; worked for Tony three times.
-------
Or it's the pre-New Labour Tory party.
> > @isam said:
> > I’d like to know how a poll showing a party on 21% makes them a good bet at 7/2, when the same poll has a 4/1 shot on 25% 🤔
>
> Mike's given his reasoning in the thread header, by referring back to the result in 2014, and to the idea that the Lib Dems will squeeze the vote of other Remain parties as they establish themselves as the largest under that banner.
>
> Do you have reasons for disagreeing that go beyond a HYUFD-like faith in the infallibility of opinion polls?
I think Mike's kidding himself if he can't see TBP getting more than Ukip got in 2014. I'd have thought the best bet would be to lay Labour.
> Sorry, the London subsets have Brexit (4/1) on 25%, and the Lib Dem’s (7/2) on 21%, and the bet is the the 7/2
Because UKIP/Farage is crap in London.
It might also help their general polling . Even though the talks were unlikely to deliver for many Labour supporters the fact they were happening and were being seen as bailing out May was a big drag on their support.
This might also help what’s left of the Tory vote, May leaving in June and talk of Johnson taking over might also see some who were going to vote BP to either stick with the Tories or be less enthused to turn out.
I fully expect the BP to top the EU elections but the last two days is likely to put a ceiling on their support and might see them lose a few points.
This is the paragraph relating to the bet
“This one is on votes and the standout bet for me the 7/2 that the LDs will be top in the capital. The YouGov poll has a large sample which means that the regional subsets are more meaningful. In London BXP are on 25%, the LDs 21% and LAB on 20%.”
It just seems odd to quote that to back the 21% party being good value at 7/2 if the 25% party are the same or bigger price. Sorry for asking
This follows a difficult period for the company in recent years as worries were expressed over the endangered nature of the prized product. Speaking at a charity event for impoverished Scottish nobles, JackW of Auchentennach said :
"The European elections provide an excellent opportunity for the nation to consolidate the position of a wonderful culinary institution, founded in 1745 and with a worldwide reputation. I urge the electorate to strike a blow for British exports and vote Liberal Democrat in their tens, if not hundreds in this completely meaningless exercise in government induced election incompetence, albeit that it will only cost the taxpayer little more that £100m.
Additionally Mike Smithson would also win his 32p bet !! .."
> I think @williamglenn has made this point in the past, but you might find that leavers in remainer majority parts of the country might be more Brexity. I can imagine that those Londoners who voted leave might be quite keen on Farage's party.
Yes, and vice-versa. If you were a Remainer in a deep Leave area in 2016, you really meant it.
> The onward march of the yellow peril has a silver lining as shares in Auchentennach Fine Pies have spiked as investors note a more secure supply of essential ingredients in the short and medium term.
>
> This follows a difficult period for the company in recent years as worries were expressed over the endangered nature of the prized product. Speaking at a charity event for impoverished Scottish nobles, JackW of Auchentennach said :
>
> "The European elections provide an excellent opportunity for the nation to consolidate the position of a wonderful culinary institution, founded in 1745 and with a worldwide reputation. I urge the electorate to strike a blow for British exports and vote Liberal Democrat in their tens, if not hundreds in this completely meaningless exercise in government induced election incompetence, albeit that it will only cost the taxpayer little more that £100m.
>
> Additionally Mike Smithson would also win his 32p bet !! .."
If Auchentennach Fine Pies are Auchentennach Fine Dining, would that mean you support AFD?
> If Jezza is to be believed, the Government remains keen on importing chlorinated chicken and (presumably) a whole load of other low-standard foodstuffs from the United States. Can anyone explain why they think this is a good idea?
If we exit the EU, presumably we can adopt better food labelling laws. Could we not require the packaging to show if the chicken had been chlorine washed and allow consumers to choose? Likewise with GM content?
*snort*
> https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1129332991610818560
Democracy only works if the participants don't cheat in the campaign
https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1129300905030037504
> > @isam said:
> > Sorry, the London subsets have Brexit (4/1) on 25%, and the Lib Dem’s (7/2) on 21%, and the bet is the the 7/2
>
> Because UKIP/Farage is crap in London.
40% of Londoners voted leave. If The Brexit party get over half of those voters (adjusted for a lower turnout) they might win. In my borough I think they will win comfortably. Ethnic minority voters will not go Lib Dem in large numbers which will hinder them.
> This is the paragraph relating to the bet
Look at the thread title. The whole post relates to the bet.
> > @JackW said:
> > The onward march of the yellow peril has a silver lining as shares in Auchentennach Fine Pies have spiked as investors note a more secure supply of essential ingredients in the short and medium term.
> >
> > This follows a difficult period for the company in recent years as worries were expressed over the endangered nature of the prized product. Speaking at a charity event for impoverished Scottish nobles, JackW of Auchentennach said :
> >
> > "The European elections provide an excellent opportunity for the nation to consolidate the position of a wonderful culinary institution, founded in 1745 and with a worldwide reputation. I urge the electorate to strike a blow for British exports and vote Liberal Democrat in their tens, if not hundreds in this completely meaningless exercise in government induced election incompetence, albeit that it will only cost the taxpayer little more that £100m.
> >
> > Additionally Mike Smithson would also win his 32p bet !! .."
>
> If Auchentennach Fine Pies are Auchentennach Fine Dining, would that mean you support AFD?
There is no alternative to fine dining at Chez JackW
The Lib Dems are becoming the party of the educated, affluent pro-Remain crowd. There are a lot of them in Labour-held London seats, just as there are in Conservative-held rural seats. "Rural" can mean the Cotswolds just as it can mean the south-west.
Inevitably, yes, there will be some degree of tailoring the message. But no more than Labour trying to hold together the pro-Remain votes of Islington South and the WWC heartland of Bolsover, or the Conservatives trying to hold together the Brexit voters of Essex and the small businessmen who are going to be trashed by Brexit. Outside the SNP, the Lib Dems are probably now the party with the most coherent internal coalition.
https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1129334980604116992
Not that the realities are relevant, of course. 'Chlorinated chicken' sound bad, despite the fact that consumers quite happily buy chlorinated salads and drink chlorinated water. So it won't happen, unfortunately.
No, food standards are a good idea. There is nothing to commend importing the tons of quasi-edible trash that lurks in US supermarkets.
Am I the only one who finds Goodwin deeply annoying? He is academia's version of Han Dodges, he writes the same thing over and over again and gets some idiot to pay him for it.
> > @isam said:
>
>
>
> > This is the paragraph relating to the bet
>
>
>
> Look at the thread title. The whole post relates to the bet.
>
> The thread is based on a poll that has BXP on more than double the Lib Dem score, though that isn’t mentioned, and beating them 25-21 in London. I just don’t see how the best bet is Lib Dem’s win London at 7/2 on that evidence. It may be a good bet nonetheless
Sure. I might even agree with you that Mike is guilty of wishful thinking. What I don't understand is why you won't make an argument based on his reasoning, rather than just petulant sniping.
If political betting were only about comparing opinion polls to betting odds then Mike would never have made that 50-1 bet on Obama.
> If Jezza is to be believed, the Government remains keen on importing chlorinated chicken and (presumably) a whole load of other low-standard foodstuffs from the United States. Can anyone explain why they think this is a good idea?
>
> "If Jezza is to be believed"
>
> *snort*
>
> Well I recognise that it's a stretch, but it might be true. Who knows?
I wouldn't trust Corbyn if he told me it was 12.47pm. I'd check my watch first... i
I am an hr ahead of gmt btw...
> If Jezza is to be believed, the Government remains keen on importing chlorinated chicken and (presumably) a whole load of other low-standard foodstuffs from the United States. Can anyone explain why they think this is a good idea?
Well we thought it was a good idea to add chlorine to tap water 40 years ago?
Your post was timed at 1248hrs CET.
> https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1129332991610818560
He is becoming messianic. Dangerous.
> > @_Anazina_ said:
> > If Jezza is to be believed, the Government remains keen on importing chlorinated chicken and (presumably) a whole load of other low-standard foodstuffs from the United States. Can anyone explain why they think this is a good idea?
> >
> > "If Jezza is to be believed"
> >
> > *snort*
> >
> > Well I recognise that it's a stretch, but it might be true. Who knows?
>
> I wouldn't trust Corbyn if he told me it was 12.47pm. I'd check my watch first... i
> I am an hr ahead of gmt btw...
So am I, where it is now 11:53. So I think you're ahead of yourself by an hour too.
Can we have another summer time argument?
>
> The whole thread is about the opinion poll and the reasoning of the bet cites the London subset that has a bigger priced rubber scoring better. I don’t get how you can’t see this?
And I cited the parts of his post where Mike explains his reasoning for looking beyond the raw figures in the opinion poll.
Unless you are now able to see those paragraphs then I think this dialogue has run its course.
Which one of the parties is ready to set out a bold vision of how we can move forward from here rather than spout excuses and platitudes ?
No doubt Bannon is providing plenty of advice to Nigel.
> > @david_herdson said:
> > If the Lib Dems do win in London, it will be <I>by far</I> their biggest election win* in the last 100 years.
> >
> > * By 'win', I mean either a single constituency (single- or multi-member), or across a whole elected-body, whether that be a parliament, a devolved assembly, a council or something of that nature. By my reckoning, their current best is Devon County Council. For constituencies (single- or multi-member), I mean finishing first; for elected bodies, I mean winning an overall majority of seats. There may be some instances of the Lib Dems running larger authorities from a minority position.
>
> Mayor of Bedford is a bigger win, surely?
No, the population of Bedford is only about 170,000 - way below that of Devon. Watford - the Lib Dems' other mayoral win - is also small.
> Of course it might boost Labour support among Remain voters.....
>
> https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1129300905030037504
>
>
>
>
> Am I the only one who finds Goodwin deeply annoying? He is academia's version of Han Dodges, he writes the same thing over and over again and gets some idiot to pay him for it.
I cant help but feel you find him annoying because his analysis does not match your political views. Personally i find his analysis both interesting and at times compelling. But I also recognise that is because his conclusions are often more in line with my own political views
But look at BP latest advert: going straight for the older working class vote.
He certainly is. There is, at the risk of invoking Godwin’s Law, more than a hint of the Fuehrerprincip about him, with all this talk of betrayal and Will of the People stuff, and a party built purely around him with no checks and balances with him being funded personally by a man under investigation by the NCA.
> > @williamglenn said:
>
> > https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1129332991610818560
>
>
>
>
>
> He is becoming messianic. Dangerous.
>
> The main parties were warned repeatedly that this would happen. I don't see how the genie is put back now. UK has a Nationalist Populist party and it will win seats. Whether it can sweep aside the entire political system is another question.
>
> No doubt Bannon is providing plenty of advice to Nigel.
Yep, if Nige can continue this momentum, then a GE becomes a lot more risky and dangerous for both tories and labour.
> > @williamglenn said:
>
> > https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1129332991610818560
>
>
>
>
>
> He is becoming messianic. Dangerous.
>
>
> He certainly is. There is, at the risk of invoking Godwin’s Law, more than a hint of the Fuehrerprincip about him, with all this talk of betrayal and Will of the People stuff, and a party built purely around him with no checks and balances with him being funded personally by a man under investigation by the NCA.
Yep. You invoked Godwin.
Seems to me that Lab and Tories are standing on a burning platform and have no idea they are.
>
> Yep, if Nige can continue this momentum, then a GE becomes a lot more risky and dangerous for both tories and labour.
If he has enough ERG Tories willing to do his bidding, he could make it very difficult to avoid a GE.
> > @williamglenn said:
>
> > https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1129332991610818560
>
>
>
>
>
> He is becoming messianic. Dangerous.
>
>
> He certainly is. There is, at the risk of invoking Godwin’s Law, more than a hint of the Fuehrerprincip about him, with all this talk of betrayal and Will of the People stuff, and a party built purely around him with no checks and balances with him being funded personally by a man under investigation by the NCA.
Did the Lib Dems ever repay the money donated to them by Michael Brown?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jul/17/inquiry-fraudster-michael-brown-donation-lib-dems