"Boris Johnson could lose majority overnight as Tory MP considers defecting to Lib Dems ‘At the moment, I’m increasingly feeling politically homeless,’ Phillip Lee says"
While I'm not without sympathy for what he's saying, if he wants to defect, defect. If he doesn't, don't. Wailing in the media about it just looks weak and reinforces the impression he's flying a kite to try and put pressure on/blackmail (delete according to taste) the leadership.
Defections should be entirely secret until the moment they are announced. I don't he'll jump.
Whereas the most likely Conservative to jump is barely ever talked about.
The reason Farage tends to be rubbish at FPTP is you need about 20%+ to get significant numbers of seats under FPTP.
They were getting that under May and after she extended Article 50 and could thus have expected to pick up a fair number of seats in Leave areas in Kent and Essex, the North and Midlands and South Wales but under Boris they are back to 10-15% ie UKIP 2015 levels which will only see them pick up 1 or 2 seats most likely in ultra Leave areas like Clacton which they won then.
The LDs can pick up a few more eg 12 seats in 2017 on 7% but that is because they have held those seats before and have the data and campaigning experience of those seats which is more difficult for a party like the Brexit Party which is starting from scratch.
Ironically the best hope for Farage is Boris extends again or a Corbyn minority government backed by the SNP and LDs holds EUref2 which narrowly backs Remain which really would give the Brexit Party a chance of picking up lots of Tory Leave seats again as well as a few Labour Leave seats too, otherwise their triumph in the European elections under PR may be the height of their achievements and once we Leave the EU they will become largely a party of those hostile to immigration and globalisation, not much more than 10%
Well of course geographical concentration of vote helps parties under FPTP. The Conservatives have rural and suburban England while Labour has the towns and cities. Even at 15-20% Labour holds a swathe of seats but at 15-20% the Conservatives would have far fewer.
20% everywhere gets you the sum total of bugger all as the Alliance found out in 1983 and UKIP to an extent in 2015.
As for future prospects, you've been quite certain about this in the past - IF Boris fails to take the UK out of the EU on 31/10, BP will be re-energised as they were when May failed to deliver on 29/3. There is a substantial and growing minority that wants the UK out of the EU, no ifs, no buts, no maybes. The problem is whether in the event of significant economic dislocation, that coalition will remain solid or will it turn round and blame the Conservatives for making a mess of a No Deal exit (which would be unfair to a point but politics isn't fair as we know).
Boris will be damned if he doesn't deliver a 31/10 Brexit but will he be damned if he does?
If the Tories make a mess of No Deal, it wouldn't be unfair to blame them in the slightest. It is a monumentally idiotic policy, which they could have stepped away from at any point. There will be no blame strong enough to do it justice.
Now here's a question for you all - given that the UK has a tourism deficit of over £20bn is it better that we encourage overseas visitors to the UK or to whine that foreign holidays aren't cheap enough ?
Do these tourists bring jobs to London exclusively or around the UK as a whole?
Not sure many jobs in places like Sunderland are supported by these long haul tourists.
Although, it is only fair to point out that Sunderland Uni, and the northeast in general has the highest proportion of Chinese students in the UK. Assuming the plan isn't to discourage them coming right now.
Here in Stockton, Durham University has a remote campus which is runs a foundation year / language course for mainly Chinese students.
Now here's a question for you all - given that the UK has a tourism deficit of over £20bn is it better that we encourage overseas visitors to the UK or to whine that foreign holidays aren't cheap enough ?
It's better to whine that foreign holidays aren't cheap enough.
I had lunch yesterday with our secretaries and receptionists. The costs of their holidays were quite a major topic of conversation (Leicester schools finish early July so Leicesterfolk usually go immediately schools break up to take advantage of lower rates).
The other big topic was redundancies. 2 of their spouses have just been served notice of redundancy, one in retail, and another in commercial construction. A third has a son working for an airline and fearing redundancy too. None are in industries where other companies are likely to be taking on.
Rather depressing anecdata, but perhaps I should have cheered them up by pointing out what great bargains there are for the Chinese.
Totally off topic, I am currently flying Air New Zealand from London to LA. It cost about £100 less in Business Class than flying BA Premium Economy, and it's excellent. Great wine, and terrific service
Highly recommended if anyone needs to fly to LA
I've heard they are very good: they are trying to compete with Emirates etc.
And I have to go to New Orleans in October. Hmm....
I'm telling Extinction Rebellion about you two
Why? Do they object to sharing a plane with intelligent people?
The reason Farage tends to be rubbish at FPTP is you need about 20%+ to get significant numbers of seats under FPTP.
They were getting that under May and after she extended Article 50 and could thus have expected to pick up a fair number of seats in Leave areas in Kent and Essex, the North and Midlands and South Wales but under Boris they are back to 10-15% ie UKIP 2015 levels which will only see them pick up 1 or 2 seats most likely in ultra Leave areas like Clacton which they won then.
The LDs can pick up a few more eg 12 seats in 2017 on 7% but that is because they have held those seats before and have the data and campaigning experience of those seats which is more difficult for a party like the Brexit Party which is starting from scratch.
Ironically the best hope for Farage is Boris extends again or a Corbyn minority government backed by the SNP and LDs holds EUref2 which narrowly backs Remain which really would give the Brexit Party a chance of picking up lots of Tory Leave seats again as well as a few Labour Leave seats too, otherwise their triumph in the European elections under PR may be the height of their achievements and once we Leave the EU they will become largely a party of those hostile to immigration and globalisation, not much more than 10%
Well of course geographical concentration of vote helps parties under FPTP. The Conservatives have rural and suburban England while Labour has the towns and cities. Even at 15-20% Labour holds a swathe of seats but at 15-20% the Conservatives would have far fewer.
20% everywhere gets you the sum total of bugger all as the Alliance found out in 1983 and UKIP to an extent in 2015.
As for future prospects, you've been quite certain about this in the past - IF Boris fails to take the UK out of the EU on 31/10, BP will be re-energised as they were when May failed to deliver on 29/3. There is a substantial and growing minority that wants the UK out of the EU, no ifs, no buts, no maybes. The problem is whether in the event of significant economic dislocation, that coalition will remain solid or will it turn round and blame the Conservatives for making a mess of a No Deal exit (which would be unfair to a point but politics isn't fair as we know).
Boris will be damned if he doesn't deliver a 31/10 Brexit but will he be damned if he does?
Yes, he will. Boris needs Brexit on halloween but with no economic shock, which means BINO; which means something close to Theresa May's WA but perhaps even more so. Which might be where he is heading.
Trouble is, Boris also looks like he may have an American deal in mind, as he has been softening us up with talk of GM food. If not a bluff, that will probably deliver the economic dislocation Boris means (and needs) to avoid.
I wonder if we are being a little unfair. When it comes to General Elections all British parties are nearly always rubbish at them with the only exceptions being Con and Lab. TBP and UKIP are only suffering the same FPTP problem as SDP, Liberals, LibDems, Referendum party etc.
I think this tells us more about the faults of the system than it does about Farage's ability.
Mr Smithson, your articles on UKIP/Brexit Party have the same sort of petulant childish tone of grown up child Cif'ers in the Guardian.
The reality is, with or without MP's Farage has more power in the current debate than your party the LibDems have ever had.
As for Brecon and Radnor, nobody expected them to do well, and most of the LibDems I have read in recent weeks were expecting knocking on a 60% share, does that mean the LibDem campaign was a failure. So you won, and yet it will have 4/5ths of feck all impact on anything.
Do us all a favour grow up, act your age at least have the courtesy of treating your opponents with respect, especially in light of the willingness of the LIbDems to embracing people like Lord Rennard on the Brecon and Radnor campaign trail.
One LibDem suggested a 60% share. The immediate response of the rest was to ask what he was smoking. They all agreed with me it was likely to be close. They were also right - which I wasn't, at least at first - in saying that while narrow their win would be decisive.
Now here's a question for you all - given that the UK has a tourism deficit of over £20bn is it better that we encourage overseas visitors to the UK or to whine that foreign holidays aren't cheap enough ?
It's better to whine that foreign holidays aren't cheap enough.
I had lunch yesterday with our secretaries and receptionists. The costs of their holidays were quite a major topic of conversation (Leicester schools finish early July so Leicesterfolk usually go immediately schools break up to take advantage of lower rates).
The other big topic was redundancies. 2 of their spouses have just been served notice of redundancy, one in retail, and another in commercial construction. A third has a son working for an airline and fearing redundancy too. None are in industries where other companies are likely to be taking on.
Rather depressing anecdata, but perhaps I should have cheered them up by pointing out what great bargains there are for the Chinese.
Do so next time.
And explain that's because China creates more wealth than it consumes whereas this country does the opposite.
It wont be what they want to hear but they need to be told.
Totally off topic, I am currently flying Air New Zealand from London to LA. It cost about £100 less in Business Class than flying BA Premium Economy, and it's excellent. Great wine, and terrific service
If a side leads on 1st innings by more than 75, how often do they win / lose / draw.
My impression having followed cricket for a very long time is that 1st innings is the critical determining factor. If you have a clear lead on 1st innings you win vast majority of time and lose very rarely (ignoring draws).
Obviously can debate what constitutes a clear lead but I'll go for 75.
Mr Smithson, your articles on UKIP/Brexit Party have the same sort of petulant childish tone of grown up child Cif'ers in the Guardian.
The reality is, with or without MP's Farage has more power in the current debate than your party the LibDems have ever had.
As for Brecon and Radnor, nobody expected them to do well, and most of the LibDems I have read in recent weeks were expecting knocking on a 60% share, does that mean the LibDem campaign was a failure. So you won, and yet it will have 4/5ths of feck all impact on anything.
Do us all a favour grow up, act your age at least have the courtesy of treating your opponents with respect, especially in light of the willingness of the LIbDems to embracing people like Lord Rennard on the Brecon and Radnor campaign trail.
One LibDem suggested a 60% share. The immediate response of the rest was to ask what he was smoking. They all agreed with me it was likely to be close. They were also right - which I wasn't, at least at first - in saying that while narrow their win would be decisive.
timmo is in fact a Conservative activist (in Sutton I think) but his record of political predictions makes Roger a model of perspicacity.
I must say, I do worry about the Biden nimbleness in the POTUS debates.
OGH keeps saying he is too old. But can Harris really beat Trump? It has to be between these two now surely?
No, it is between Biden and a left liberal like Warren or Sanders, Harris flopped last week and she is fishing in the same moderate and African American voter pool as Biden
The reason Farage tends to be rubbish at FPTP is you need about 20%+ to get significant numbers of seats under FPTP.
They were getting that under May and after she extended Article 50 and could thus have expected to pick up a fair number of seats in Leave areas in Kent and Essex, the North and Midlands and South Wales but under Boris they are back to 10-15% ie UKIP 2015 levels which will only see them pick up 1 or 2 seats most likely in ultra Leave areas like Clacton which they won then.
The LDs can pick up a few more eg 12 seats in 2017 on 7% but that is because they have held those seats before and have the data and campaigning experience of those seats which is more difficult for a party like the Brexit Party which is starting from scratch.
Ironically the best hope for Farage is Boris extends again or a Corbyn minority government backed by the SNP and LDs holds EUref2 which narrowly backs Remain which really would give the Brexit Party a chance of picking up lots of Tory Leave seats again as well as a few Labour Leave seats too, otherwise their triumph in the European elections under PR may be the height of their achievements and once we Leave the EU they will become largely a party of those hostile to immigration and globalisation, not much more than 10%
If we do leave on 31 October, they should definitely change their name as soon as possible.
Continuing as the Brexit Party would be rather like calling themselves the Anthrax Party or the Puppy Torture Campaign.
Perhaps the 'Stop the world I want to get off' Party?
Totally off topic, I am currently flying Air New Zealand from London to LA. It cost about £100 less in Business Class than flying BA Premium Economy, and it's excellent. Great wine, and terrific service
Highly recommended if anyone needs to fly to LA
I've heard they are very good: they are trying to compete with Emirates etc.
And I have to go to New Orleans in October. Hmm....
NO via LA is a bloody stupid routing. Did you have the same geography teacher as HYUFD?
Mr Smithson, your articles on UKIP/Brexit Party have the same sort of petulant childish tone of grown up child Cif'ers in the Guardian.
The reality is, with or without MP's Farage has more power in the current debate than your party the LibDems have ever had.
As for Brecon and Radnor, nobody expected them to do well, and most of the LibDems I have read in recent weeks were expecting knocking on a 60% share, does that mean the LibDem campaign was a failure. So you won, and yet it will have 4/5ths of feck all impact on anything.
Do us all a favour grow up, act your age at least have the courtesy of treating your opponents with respect, especially in light of the willingness of the LIbDems to embracing people like Lord Rennard on the Brecon and Radnor campaign trail.
One LibDem suggested a 60% share. The immediate response of the rest was to ask what he was smoking. They all agreed with me it was likely to be close. They were also right - which I wasn't, at least at first - in saying that while narrow their win would be decisive.
timmo is in fact a Conservative activist (in Sutton I think) but his record of political predictions makes Roger a model of perspicacity.
It's kicked off in Perpignan too. Catalans v Warrington. On the field and off it. 3 red cards (could have been another 3 at least), Warrington fans scaling the walls into the hospitality boxes to be met with RL players, local businessmen and dignitaries wielding chairs. Fun in the Sun in South of France!
The reason Farage tends to be rubbish at FPTP is you need about 20%+ to get significant numbers of seats under FPTP.
They were getting that under May and after she extended Article 50 and could thus have expected to pick up a fair number of seats in Leave areas in Kent and Essex, the North and Midlands and South Wales but under Boris they are back to 10-15% ie UKIP 2015 levels which will only see them pick up 1 or 2 seats most likely in ultra Leave areas like Clacton which they won then.
The LDs can pick up a few more eg 12 seats in 2017 on 7% but that is because they have held those seats before and have the data and campaigning experience of those seats which is more difficult for a party like the Brexit Party which is starting from scratch.
Ironically the best hope for Farage is Boris extends again or a Corbyn minority government backed by the SNP and LDs holds EUref2 which narrowly backs Remain which really would give the Brexit Party a chance of picking up lots of Tory Leave seats again as well as a few Labour Leave seats too, otherwise their triumph in the European elections under PR may be the height of their achievements and once we Leave the EU they will become largely a party of those hostile to immigration and globalisation, not much more than 10%
Well of course geographical concentration of vote helps parties under FPTP. The Conservatives have rural and suburban England while Labour has the towns and cities. Even at 15-20% Labour holds a swathe of seats but at 15-20% the Conservatives would have far fewer.
20% everywhere gets you the sum total of bugger all as the Alliance found out in 1983 and UKIP to an extent in 2015.
As for future prospects, you've been quite certain about this in the past - IF Boris fails to take the UK out of the EU on 31/10, BP will be re-energised as they were when May failed to deliver on 29/3. There is a substantial and growing minority that wants the UK out of the EU, no ifs, no buts, no maybes. The problem is whether in the event of significant economic dislocation, that coalition will remain solid or will it turn round and blame the Conservatives for making a mess of a No Deal exit (which would be unfair to a point but politics isn't fair as we know).
Boris will be damned if he doesn't deliver a 31/10 Brexit but will he be damned if he does?
I would say Labour are now the party of the inner cities, the Tories are the party of the rural areas and Labour and the Tories fight it out in the suburbs and the Tories and LDs fight it out in market and spa towns.
Boris will be certainly damned if he doesn't deliver Brexit on 31st October which would be a gift to Farage and Corbyn but provided he does commit to deliver it he will be re elected as it will almost certainly require an autumn general election for Boris to get a mandate for No Deal Brexit anyway
If a side leads on 1st innings by more than 75, how often do they win / lose / draw.
My impression having followed cricket for a very long time is that 1st innings is the critical determining factor. If you have a clear lead on 1st innings you win vast majority of time and lose very rarely (ignoring draws).
Obviously can debate what constitutes a clear lead but I'll go for 75.
It makes it more difficult but it's hardly unusual to concede a first innings lead - even a fairly big one - and still win. Just last week England won a Test having been 122 behind on first innings.
If a side leads on 1st innings by more than 75, how often do they win / lose / draw.
My impression having followed cricket for a very long time is that 1st innings is the critical determining factor. If you have a clear lead on 1st innings you win vast majority of time and lose very rarely (ignoring draws).
Obviously can debate what constitutes a clear lead but I'll go for 75.
It will also vary if its the side batting first which gets the lead of 75+ or the side batting second.
Mr Smithson, your articles on UKIP/Brexit Party have the same sort of petulant childish tone of grown up child Cif'ers in the Guardian.
The reality is, with or without MP's Farage has more power in the current debate than your party the LibDems have ever had.
As for Brecon and Radnor, nobody expected them to do well, and most of the LibDems I have read in recent weeks were expecting knocking on a 60% share, does that mean the LibDem campaign was a failure. So you won, and yet it will have 4/5ths of feck all impact on anything.
Do us all a favour grow up, act your age at least have the courtesy of treating your opponents with respect, especially in light of the willingness of the LIbDems to embracing people like Lord Rennard on the Brecon and Radnor campaign trail.
One LibDem suggested a 60% share. The immediate response of the rest was to ask what he was smoking. They all agreed with me it was likely to be close. They were also right - which I wasn't, at least at first - in saying that while narrow their win would be decisive.
I think the less said about how some interpret the by-election result the better. You have provided a clear and concise explanation, even admitting you underestimated the LDs upside. Let the believe what they want after all there was a ‘boris’ bounce, labour saved their deposit and....... well I think the LD’s won.
Mr Smithson, your articles on UKIP/Brexit Party have the same sort of petulant childish tone of grown up child Cif'ers in the Guardian.
The reality is, with or without MP's Farage has more power in the current debate than your party the LibDems have ever had.
As for Brecon and Radnor, nobody expected them to do well, and most of the LibDems I have read in recent weeks were expecting knocking on a 60% share, does that mean the LibDem campaign was a failure. So you won, and yet it will have 4/5ths of feck all impact on anything.
Do us all a favour grow up, act your age at least have the courtesy of treating your opponents with respect, especially in light of the willingness of the LIbDems to embracing people like Lord Rennard on the Brecon and Radnor campaign trail.
One LibDem suggested a 60% share. The immediate response of the rest was to ask what he was smoking. They all agreed with me it was likely to be close. They were also right - which I wasn't, at least at first - in saying that while narrow their win would be decisive.
I think the less said about how some interpret the by-election result the better. You have provided a clear and concise explanation, even admitting you underestimated the LDs upside. Let the believe what they want after all there was a ‘boris’ bounce, labour saved their deposit and....... well I think the LD’s won.
Why thank you. To quote the late, great Samuel Longhorn Clemens, I can live for two months on a good compliment.
I must say, I do worry about the Biden nimbleness in the POTUS debates.
OGH keeps saying he is too old. But can Harris really beat Trump? It has to be between these two now surely?
No, it is between Biden and a left liberal like Warren or Sanders, Harris flopped last week and she is fishing in the same moderate and African American voter pool as Biden
Which surely means that if and when Biden drops out, Harris is well-placed. On the left, Sanders probably reached his ceiling against Hillary last time so it might need to be Warren if the left is to win. Still early days, though.
It's kicked off in Perpignan too. Catalans v Warrington. On the field and off it. 3 red cards (could have been another 3 at least), Warrington fans scaling the walls into the hospitality boxes to be met with RL players, local businessmen and dignitaries wielding chairs. Fun in the Sun in South of France!
Totally off topic, I am currently flying Air New Zealand from London to LA. It cost about £100 less in Business Class than flying BA Premium Economy, and it's excellent. Great wine, and terrific service
Highly recommended if anyone needs to fly to LA
I've heard they are very good: they are trying to compete with Emirates etc.
And I have to go to New Orleans in October. Hmm....
NO via LA is a bloody stupid routing. Did you have the same geography teacher as HYUFD?
I think Air NZ go direct to NOLA from LHR. Clearly I would never go via LAX
The reason Farage tends to be rubbish at FPTP is you need about 20%+ to get significant numbers of seats under FPTP.
They were getting that under May and after sheent and Essex, the North and Midlands and South Wales
Ironically the best hope for Farage is Boris extends again or a Corbyn minority government backed by the SNP and LDs holds EUref2 which narrowly backs Remain which really would give the Brexit Party a chance of picking up lots of Tory Leave seats again as well as a few Labour Leave seats too, otherwise their triumph in the European elections under PR may be the height of their achievements and once we Leave the EU they will become largely a party of those hostile to immigration and globalisation, not much more than 10%
Well of course geographical concentration of vote helps parties under FPTP. The Conservatives have rural and suburban England while Labour has the towns and cities. Even at 15-20% Labour holds a swathe of seats but at 15-20% the Conservatives would have far fewer.
20% everywhere gets you the sum total of bugger all as the Alliance found out in 1983 and UKIP to an extent in 2015.
As for future prospects, you've been quite certain about this in the past - IF Boris fails to take the UK out of the EU on 31/10, BP will be re-energised as they were when May failed to deliver on 29/3. There is a substantial and growing minority that wants the UK out of the EU, no ifs, no buts, no maybes. The problem is whether in the event of significant economic dislocation, that coalition will remain solid or will it turn round and blame the Conservatives for making a mess of a No Deal exit (which would be unfair to a point but politics isn't fair as we know).
Boris will be damned if he doesn't deliver a 31/10 Brexit but will he be damned if he does?
I would say Labour are now the party of the inner cities, the Tories are the party of the rural areas and Labour and the Tories fight it out in the suburbs and the Tories and LDs fight it out in market and spa towns.
Boris will be certainly damned if he doesn't deliver Brexit on 31st October which would be a gift to Farage and Corbyn but provided he does commit to deliver it he will be re elected as it will almost certainly require an autumn general election for Boris to get a mandate for No Deal Brexit anyway
Despite all the BS that Welsh journalist guy was tweeting on the night, I hear that the samples from the count showed the Tories ahead in the rural polling districts with the LibDems winning most of the towns. Which is what you would expect.
His turnout figure was also way too low, and my guess remains that he had picked up an on-the-day turnout from somewhere.
The dangers of listening to journalists who know very little about elections!
Totally off topic, I am currently flying Air New Zealand from London to LA. It cost about £100 less in Business Class than flying BA Premium Economy, and it's excellent. Great wine, and terrific service
Highly recommended if anyone needs to fly to LA
I've heard they are very good: they are trying to compete with Emirates etc.
And I have to go to New Orleans in October. Hmm....
NO via LA is a bloody stupid routing. Did you have the same geography teacher as HYUFD?
I think Air NZ go direct to NOLA from LHR. Clearly I would never go via LAX
Trying to be as neutral as possible, I think it's pretty much evens now. Beautifully balanced. Insh'allah the rain stays away.
The Cricwiz odds are bizarre.
I'd say Oz have lost unless Smith gets another big century. And if he does it becomes a 50/50.
No - sorry - 45/45/10 because the draw is a player.
Therefore Eng are clear favourites right now IMO.
That must be the bookies' thinking. But Smith is the 2nd best batsman of all time, and we are without our best strike bowler.
Hmm.
I struggle to believe that Smith is the second best batsman of all time - effectively the best batsman ever if you discard the sporting freak that was Bradman.
Perhaps its just easier these days for the merely very good given the mass of general mediocrity.
Totally off topic, I am currently flying Air New Zealand from London to LA. It cost about £100 less in Business Class than flying BA Premium Economy, and it's excellent. Great wine, and terrific service
Highly recommended if anyone needs to fly to LA
I've heard they are very good: they are trying to compete with Emirates etc.
And I have to go to New Orleans in October. Hmm....
NO via LA is a bloody stupid routing. Did you have the same geography teacher as HYUFD?
I think Air NZ go direct to NOLA from LHR. Clearly I would never go via LAX
I didn't know that. I thought they just served the West Coast. Apologies for doubting your geographical capabilities.
New Orleans is the best place I've visited in the US. But also the most tragic, post-Katrina.
Trying to be as neutral as possible, I think it's pretty much evens now. Beautifully balanced. Insh'allah the rain stays away.
The Cricwiz odds are bizarre.
I'd say Oz have lost unless Smith gets another big century. And if he does it becomes a 50/50.
No - sorry - 45/45/10 because the draw is a player.
Therefore Eng are clear favourites right now IMO.
That must be the bookies' thinking. But Smith is the 2nd best batsman of all time, and we are without our best strike bowler.
Hmm.
I struggle to believe that Smith is the second best batsman of all time - effectively the best batsman ever if you discard the sporting freak that was Bradman.
Perhaps its just easier these days for the merely very good given the mass of general mediocrity.
He really is, if you go by the stats. Bradman is clearly top, by an enormous distance. But Smith has the second best average etc
I must say, I do worry about the Biden nimbleness in the POTUS debates.
OGH keeps saying he is too old. But can Harris really beat Trump? It has to be between these two now surely?
No, it is between Biden and a left liberal like Warren or Sanders, Harris flopped last week and she is fishing in the same moderate and African American voter pool as Biden
Which surely means that if and when Biden drops out, Harris is well-placed. On the left, Sanders probably reached his ceiling against Hillary last time so it might need to be Warren if the left is to win. Still early days, though.
Except it is more likely Harris drops out before Biden.
Latest Iowa poll has it Biden 23%, Warren 23%, Harris 12%, Sanders 11%
Totally off topic, I am currently flying Air New Zealand from London to LA. It cost about £100 less in Business Class than flying BA Premium Economy, and it's excellent. Great wine, and terrific service
Highly recommended if anyone needs to fly to LA
I've heard they are very good: they are trying to compete with Emirates etc.
And I have to go to New Orleans in October. Hmm....
NO via LA is a bloody stupid routing. Did you have the same geography teacher as HYUFD?
I think Air NZ go direct to NOLA from LHR. Clearly I would never go via LAX
I didn't know that. I thought they just served the West Coast. Apologies for doubting your geographical capabilities.
New Orleans is the best place I've visited in the US. But also the most tragic, post-Katrina.
Hi
Assuming ANZ1 LHR to LAX is RCS1000 flight. It is just leaving Greenland airspace and approaching NE corner of USA and about to cross Hudson Bay. with some 5300Kms to go. RCS get some sleep
Trying to be as neutral as possible, I think it's pretty much evens now. Beautifully balanced. Insh'allah the rain stays away.
The Cricwiz odds are bizarre.
I'd say Oz have lost unless Smith gets another big century. And if he does it becomes a 50/50.
No - sorry - 45/45/10 because the draw is a player.
Therefore Eng are clear favourites right now IMO.
That must be the bookies' thinking. But Smith is the 2nd best batsman of all time, and we are without our best strike bowler.
Hmm.
I struggle to believe that Smith is the second best batsman of all time - effectively the best batsman ever if you discard the sporting freak that was Bradman.
Perhaps its just easier these days for the merely very good given the mass of general mediocrity.
The reason Farage tends to be rubbish at FPTP is you need about 20%+ to get significant numbers of seats under FPTP.
They were getting that under May and after sheent and Essex, the North and Midlands and South Wales
Ironically the best hope for Farage is Boris extends again or a Corbyn minority government backed by the SNP and LDs holds EUref2 which narrowly backs Remain which really would give the Brexit Party a chance of picking up lots of Tory Leave seats again as well as a few Labour Leave seats too, otherwise their triumph in the European elections under PR may be the height of their achievements and once we Leave the EU they will become largely a party of those hostile to immigration and globalisation, not much more than 10%
Well of course geographical concentration of vote helps parties under FPTP. The Conservatives have rural and suburban England while Labour has the towns and cities. Even at 15-20% Labour holds a swathe of seats but at 15-20% the Conservatives would have far fewer.
20% everywhere gets you the sum total of bugger all as the Alliance found out in 1983 and UKIP to an extent in 2015.
As for future prospects, you've been quite certain about this in the past - IF Boris fails to take the UK out of the EU on 31/10, BP will be re-energised as they were when May failed to deliver on 29/3. There is a substantial and growing minority that wants the UK out of the EU, no ifs, no buts, no maybes. The problem is whether in the event of significant economic dislocation, that coalition will remain solid or will it turn round and blame the Conservatives for making a mess of a No Deal exit (which would be unfair to a point but politics isn't fair as we know).
Boris will be damned if he doesn't deliver a 31/10 Brexit but will he be damned if he does?
I would say Labour ndate for No Deal Brexit anyway
Despite all the BS that Welsh journalist guy was tweeting on the night, I hear that the samples from the count showed the Tories ahead in the rural polling districts with the LibDems winning most of the towns. Which is what you would expect.
His turnout figure was also way too low, and my guess remains that he had picked up an on-the-day turnout from somewhere.
The dangers of listening to journalists who know very little about elections!
Perhaps, though he did suggest it was close.
However I agree, certainly here in Epping Forest the villages and rural areas are all solid Tory but the towns like Buckhurst Hill and Epping and Waltham Abbey are mainly a Tory v LD battle with a few Greens too. Labour only really has a presence in Loughton which is basically an outer London suburb
Trying to be as neutral as possible, I think it's pretty much evens now. Beautifully balanced. Insh'allah the rain stays away.
The Cricwiz odds are bizarre.
I'd say Oz have lost unless Smith gets another big century. And if he does it becomes a 50/50.
No - sorry - 45/45/10 because the draw is a player.
Therefore Eng are clear favourites right now IMO.
That must be the bookies' thinking. But Smith is the 2nd best batsman of all time, and we are without our best strike bowler.
Hmm.
I struggle to believe that Smith is the second best batsman of all time - effectively the best batsman ever if you discard the sporting freak that was Bradman.
Perhaps its just easier these days for the merely very good given the mass of general mediocrity.
Totally off topic, I am currently flying Air New Zealand from London to LA. It cost about £100 less in Business Class than flying BA Premium Economy, and it's excellent. Great wine, and terrific service
Highly recommended if anyone needs to fly to LA
I've heard they are very good: they are trying to compete with Emirates etc.
And I have to go to New Orleans in October. Hmm....
NO via LA is a bloody stupid routing. Did you have the same geography teacher as HYUFD?
I think Air NZ go direct to NOLA from LHR. Clearly I would never go via LAX
I didn't know that. I thought they just served the West Coast. Apologies for doubting your geographical capabilities.
New Orleans is the best place I've visited in the US. But also the most tragic, post-Katrina.
Hi
Assuming ANZ1 LHR to LAX is RCS1000 flight. It is just leaving Greenland airspace and approaching NE corner of USA and about to cross Hudson Bay. with some 5300Kms to go. RCS get some sleep
Mike
It's lunchtime in LA. Time for a drink, not a kip!
Trying to be as neutral as possible, I think it's pretty much evens now. Beautifully balanced. Insh'allah the rain stays away.
The Cricwiz odds are bizarre.
I'd say Oz have lost unless Smith gets another big century. And if he does it becomes a 50/50.
No - sorry - 45/45/10 because the draw is a player.
Therefore Eng are clear favourites right now IMO.
That must be the bookies' thinking. But Smith is the 2nd best batsman of all time, and we are without our best strike bowler.
Hmm.
I struggle to believe that Smith is the second best batsman of all time - effectively the best batsman ever if you discard the sporting freak that was Bradman.
Perhaps its just easier these days for the merely very good given the mass of general mediocrity.
He really is, if you go by the stats. Bradman is clearly top, by an enormous distance. But Smith has the second best average etc
I know he's second in the averages but do they tell the whole story ?
For example Anderson and Broad have over a thousand test wickets but their bowling averages are higher than those of Mike Hendrick and John Lever.
Batting today must be about 5 runs an innings easier than it was in the 1970s - of which era there is only Greg Chappell (20), Sunny Gavaskar (36) and arguably Viv Richards (41) in the top 50.
Trying to be as neutral as possible, I think it's pretty much evens now. Beautifully balanced. Insh'allah the rain stays away.
The Cricwiz odds are bizarre.
I'd say Oz have lost unless Smith gets another big century. And if he does it becomes a 50/50.
No - sorry - 45/45/10 because the draw is a player.
Therefore Eng are clear favourites right now IMO.
That must be the bookies' thinking. But Smith is the 2nd best batsman of all time, and we are without our best strike bowler.
Hmm.
I struggle to believe that Smith is the second best batsman of all time - effectively the best batsman ever if you discard the sporting freak that was Bradman.
Perhaps its just easier these days for the merely very good given the mass of general mediocrity.
He really is, if you go by the stats. Bradman is clearly top, by an enormous distance. But Smith has the second best average etc
I know he's second in the averages but do they tell the whole story ?
For example Anderson and Broad have over a thousand test wickets but their bowling averages are higher than those of Mike Hendrick and John Lever.
Batting today must be about 5 runs an innings easier than it was in the 1970s - of which era there is only Greg Chappell (20), Sunny Gavaskar (36) and arguably Viv Richards (41) in the top 60.
I tend to agree. Smith is a great player, top ten ever perhaps, but number 2?
Yet the stats are the stats.
The best batsman I have ever personally seen play was Lara. Sublime. The most exciting batsman was Botham at Headingley, in 1985.
The reason Farage tends to be rubbish at FPTP is you need about 20%+ to get significant numbers of seats under FPTP.
They were getting that under May and after sheent and Essex, the North and Midlands alisation, not much more than 10%
20% everywhere gets you the sum total of bugger all as the Alliance found out in 1983 and UKIP to an extent in 2015.
As for future prospects, you've been quite certain about this in the past - IF Boris fails to take the UK out of the EU on 31/10, BP will be re-energised as they were when May failed to deliver on 29/3. There is a substantial and growing minority that wants the UK out of the EU, no ifs, no buts, no maybes. The problem is whether in the event of significant economic dislocation, that coalition will remain solid or will it turn round and blame the Conservatives for making a mess of a No Deal exit (which would be unfair to a point but politics isn't fair as we know).
Boris will be damned if he doesn't deliver a 31/10 Brexit but will he be damned if he does?
I would say Labour ndate for No Deal Brexit anyway
Despite all the BS that Welsh journalist guy was tweeting on the night, I hear that the samples from the count showed the Tories ahead in the rural polling districts with the LibDems winning most of the towns. Which is what you would expect.
His turnout figure was also way too low, and my guess remains that he had picked up an on-the-day turnout from somewhere.
The dangers of listening to journalists who know very little about elections!
Perhaps, though he did suggest it was close.
However I agree, certainly here in Epping Forest the villages and rural areas are all solid Tory but the towns like Buckhurst Hill and Epping and Waltham Abbey are mainly a Tory v LD battle with a few Greens too. Labour only really has a presence in Loughton which is basically an outer London suburb
I wouldn’t fancy running an effective GOTV operation in that seat with most of my voters in the rural wards. Indeed without phone numbers it would be pretty much impossible.
However another finding is that the turnout of identified Tory voters was significantly higher than that of LibDems. Probably this is mostly demographics - the elderly and richer being more likely to vote in the first place.
I doubt, however, that the earlier published constituency poll effectively allowed for differential likelihood to vote, in which case the result being narrower than that poll could be a flaw in the polling methodology rather than evidence of a Bozo bounce.
Trying to be as neutral as possible, I think it's pretty much evens now. Beautifully balanced. Insh'allah the rain stays away.
The Cricwiz odds are bizarre.
I'd say Oz have lost unless Smith gets another big century. And if he does it becomes a 50/50.
No - sorry - 45/45/10 because the draw is a player.
Therefore Eng are clear favourites right now IMO.
That must be the bookies' thinking. But Smith is the 2nd best batsman of all time, and we are without our best strike bowler.
Hmm.
I struggle to believe that Smith is the second best batsman of all time - effectively the best batsman ever if you discard the sporting freak that was Bradman.
Perhaps its just easier these days for the merely very good given the mass of general mediocrity.
He really is, if you go by the stats. Bradman is clearly top, by an enormous distance. But Smith has the second best average etc
I know he's second in the averages but do they tell the whole story ?
For example Anderson and Broad have over a thousand test wickets but their bowling averages are higher than those of Mike Hendrick and John Lever.
Batting today must be about 5 runs an innings easier than it was in the 1970s - of which era there is only Greg Chappell (20), Sunny Gavaskar (36) and arguably Viv Richards (41) in the top 50.
As an Essex supporter, no question whatsoever about John Lever’s credentials.
I must say, I do worry about the Biden nimbleness in the POTUS debates.
OGH keeps saying he is too old. But can Harris really beat Trump? It has to be between these two now surely?
No, it is between Biden and a left liberal like Warren or Sanders, Harris flopped last week and she is fishing in the same moderate and African American voter pool as Biden
Which surely means that if and when Biden drops out, Harris is well-placed. On the left, Sanders probably reached his ceiling against Hillary last time so it might need to be Warren if the left is to win. Still early days, though.
Except it is more likely Harris drops out before Biden.
Latest Iowa poll has it Biden 23%, Warren 23%, Harris 12%, Sanders 11%
So at the moment it looks like a Biden v Warren race
Except that Biden has a history of dropping out, and has at times looked tired. Harris and the others will keep going until they are beaten; Biden might just decide at any point in the next year that the game is not worth the candle. That doubt may explain why best prices are:
If a side leads on 1st innings by more than 75, how often do they win / lose / draw.
My impression having followed cricket for a very long time is that 1st innings is the critical determining factor. If you have a clear lead on 1st innings you win vast majority of time and lose very rarely (ignoring draws).
Obviously can debate what constitutes a clear lead but I'll go for 75.
It will also vary if its the side batting first which gets the lead of 75+ or the side batting second.
Agreed.
Hardest innings to bat in is the 4th, followed probably by the first. So if the side batting first gets a substantial lead they're well ahead, if they don't choke on the third they should get it.
If the side batting second gets a substantial lead, the opening team can more easily turn that around in the third.
The reason Farage tends to be rubbish at FPTP is you need about 20%+ to get significant numbers of seats under FPTP.
They were getting that under May and after sheent and Essex, the North and Midlands alisation, not much more than 10%
20% everywhere gets you the sum total of bugger all as the Alliance found out in 1983 and UKIP to an extent in 2015.
As for future prospects, you've been quite certain about this in the past - IF Boris fails to take the UK out of the EU on 31/10, BP will be re-energised as they were when May failed to deliver on 29/3. There is a substantial and growing minority that wants the UK out of the EU, no ifs, no buts, no maybes. The problem is whether in the event of significant economic dislocation, that coalition will remain solid or will it turn round and blame the Conservatives for making a mess of a No Deal exit (which would be unfair to a point but politics isn't fair as we know).
Boris will be damned if he doesn't deliver a 31/10 Brexit but will he be damned if he does?
I would say Labour ndate for No Deal Brexit anyway
Despite all the BS that Welsh journalist guy was tweeting on the night, I hear that the samples from the count showed the Tories ahead in the rural polling districts with the LibDems winning most of the towns. Which is what you would expect.
His turnout figure was also way too low, and my guess remains that he had picked up an on-the-day turnout from somewhere.
The dangers of listening to journalists who know very little about elections!
Perhaps, though he did suggest it was close.
However I agree, certainly here in Epping Forest the villages and rural areas are all solid Tory but the towns like Buckhurst Hill and Epping and Waltham Abbey are mainly a Tory v LD battle with a few Greens too. Labour only really has a presence in Loughton which is basically an outer London suburb
I wouldn’t fancy running an effective GOTV operation in that seat with most of my voters in the rural wards. Indeed without phone numbers it would be pretty much impossible.
However another finding is that the turnout of identified Tory voters was significantly higher than that of LibDems. Probably this is mostly demographics - the elderly and richer being more likely to vote in the first place.
I doubt, however, that the earlier published constituency poll effectively allowed for differential likelihood to vote, in which case the result being narrower than that poll could be a flaw in the polling methodology rather than evidence of a Bozo bounce.
There was a clear shift from Brexit Party to Tory in the 10 days over which Boris replaced May as Tory leader and PM
Yes, he will. Boris needs Brexit on halloween but with no economic shock, which means BINO; which means something close to Theresa May's WA but perhaps even more so. Which might be where he is heading.
Trouble is, Boris also looks like he may have an American deal in mind, as he has been softening us up with talk of GM food. If not a bluff, that will probably deliver the economic dislocation Boris means (and needs) to avoid.
I used to think that Boris was aiming for the May deal dressed up with Churchiullian rhetoric, but he seems to have deliberately painted himself into a corner by making an impossible demand and refusing to even talk unless it's conceded. So presumably he actually wants No Deal with the EU and Parliament as the pantomime villains.
The reason Farage tends to be rubbish at FPTP is you need about 20%+ to get significant numbers of seats under FPTP.
They were getting that under May and after sheent and Essex, the North and Midlands alisation, not much more than 10%
20% everywhere gets you the sum total of bugger all as the Alliance found out in 1983 and UKIP to an extent in 2015.
As for future prospects, you've been quite certain about this in the past - IF Boris fails to take the UK out of the EU on 31/10, BP will be re-energised as they were when May failed to deliver on 29/3. There is a substantial and growing minority that wants the UK out of the EU, no ifs, no buts, no maybes. The problem is whether in the event of significant economic dislocation, that coalition will remain solid or will it turn round and blame the Conservatives for making a mess of a No Deal exit (which would be unfair to a point but politics isn't fair as we know).
Boris will be damned if he doesn't deliver a 31/10 Brexit but will he be damned if he does?
I would say Labour ndate for No Deal Brexit anyway
Despite all the BS that Welsh journalist guy was tweeting on the night, I hear that the samples from the count showed the Tories ahead in the rural polling districts with the LibDems winning most of the towns. Which is what you would expect.
His turnout figure was also way too low, and my guess remains that he had picked up an on-the-day turnout from somewhere.
The dangers of listening to journalists who know very little about elections!
Perhaps, though he did suggest it was close.
However I agree, certainly here in Epping Forest the villages and rural areas are all solid Tory but the towns like Buckhurst Hill and Epping and Waltham Abbey are mainly a Tory v LD battle with a few Greens too. Labour only really has a presence in Loughton which is basically an outer London suburb
I wouldn’t fancy running an effective GOTV operation in that seat with most of my voters in the rural wards. Indeed without phone numbers it would be pretty much impossible.
However another finding is that the turnout of identified Tory voters was significantly higher than that of LibDems. Probably this is mostly demographics - the elderly and richer being more likely to vote in the first place.
I doubt, however, that the earlier published constituency poll effectively allowed for differential likelihood to vote, in which case the result being narrower than that poll could be a flaw in the polling methodology rather than evidence of a Bozo bounce.
Trying to be as neutral as possible, I think it's pretty much evens now. Beautifully balanced. Insh'allah the rain stays away.
The Cricwiz odds are bizarre.
I'd say Oz have lost unless Smith gets another big century. And if he does it becomes a 50/50.
No - sorry - 45/45/10 because the draw is a player.
Therefore Eng are clear favourites right now IMO.
That must be the bookies' thinking. But Smith is the 2nd best batsman of all time, and we are without our best strike bowler.
Hmm.
I struggle to believe that Smith is the second best batsman of all time - effectively the best batsman ever if you discard the sporting freak that was Bradman.
Perhaps its just easier these days for the merely very good given the mass of general mediocrity.
He really is, if you go by the stats. Bradman is clearly top, by an enormous distance. But Smith has the second best average etc
I know he's second in the averages but do they tell the whole story ?
For example Anderson and Broad have over a thousand test wickets but their bowling averages are higher than those of Mike Hendrick and John Lever.
Batting today must be about 5 runs an innings easier than it was in the 1970s - of which era there is only Greg Chappell (20), Sunny Gavaskar (36) and arguably Viv Richards (41) in the top 50.
As an Essex supporter, no question whatsoever about John Lever’s credentials.
OT one of the betting shop regulars sent his son to a local independent school because John Lever was their cricket coach.
Yes, he will. Boris needs Brexit on halloween but with no economic shock, which means BINO; which means something close to Theresa May's WA but perhaps even more so. Which might be where he is heading.
Trouble is, Boris also looks like he may have an American deal in mind, as he has been softening us up with talk of GM food. If not a bluff, that will probably deliver the economic dislocation Boris means (and needs) to avoid.
I used to think that Boris was aiming for the May deal dressed up with Churchiullian rhetoric, but he seems to have deliberately painted himself into a corner by making an impossible demand and refusing to even talk unless it's conceded. So presumably he actually wants No Deal with the EU and Parliament as the pantomime villains.
It's Farage tactics. It's not an impossible demand. But if the EU don't want to negotiate then so bit.
Mr Smithson, your articles on UKIP/Brexit Party have the same sort of petulant childish tone of grown up child Cif'ers in the Guardian.
The reality is, with or without MP's Farage has more power in the current debate than your party the LibDems have ever had.
As for Brecon and Radnor, nobody expected them to do well, and most of the LibDems I have read in recent weeks were expecting knocking on a 60% share, does that mean the LibDem campaign was a failure. So you won, and yet it will have 4/5ths of feck all impact on anything.
Do us all a favour grow up, act your age at least have the courtesy of treating your opponents with respect, especially in light of the willingness of the LIbDems to embracing people like Lord Rennard on the Brecon and Radnor campaign trail.
One LibDem suggested a 60% share. The immediate response of the rest was to ask what he was smoking. They all agreed with me it was likely to be close. They were also right - which I wasn't, at least at first - in saying that while narrow their win would be decisive.
Underwhelming though - the LibDems will get very little momentum from their win.
I must say, I do worry about the Biden nimbleness in the POTUS debates.
OGH keeps saying he is too old. But can Harris really beat Trump? It has to be between these two now surely?
No, it is between Biden and a left liberal like Warren or Sanders, Harris flopped last week and she is fishing in the same moderate and African American voter pool as Biden
Which surely means that if and when Biden drops out, Harris is well-placed. On the left, Sanders probably reached his ceiling against Hillary last time so it might need to be Warren if the left is to win. Still early days, though.
Except it is more likely Harris drops out before Biden.
Latest Iowa poll has it Biden 23%, Warren 23%, Harris 12%, Sanders 11%
So at the moment it looks like a Biden v Warren race
Except that Biden has a history of dropping out, and has at times looked tired. Harris and the others will keep going until they are beaten; Biden might just decide at any point in the next year that the game is not worth the candle. That doubt may explain why best prices are:
11/4 Biden 7/2 Harris 7/2 Warren 8/1 Sanders
Even going on second placed choices, Warren is the clear preferred second choice of Democratic voters in New Hampshire and just 1% behind Harris as preferred second choice in Iowa (where Warren ties Biden for the lead anyway on first preferences, 11% ahead of Harris). Only in South Carolina is Harris the clear second choice.
If Biden drops out Warren is still likely nominee, not Harris.
However without Biden as his opponent Trump is very likely to be re elected
Trying to be as neutral as possible, I think it's pretty much evens now. Beautifully balanced. Insh'allah the rain stays away.
The Cricwiz odds are bizarre.
I'd say Oz have lost unless Smith gets another big century. And if he does it becomes a 50/50.
No - sorry - 45/45/10 because the draw is a player.
Therefore Eng are clear favourites right now IMO.
That must be the bookies' thinking. But Smith is the 2nd best batsman of all time, and we are without our best strike bowler.
Hmm.
I struggle to believe that Smith is the second best batsman of all time - effectively the best batsman ever if you discard the sporting freak that was Bradman.
Perhaps its just easier these days for the merely very good given the mass of general mediocrity.
Better than Ponting? Gower? May? Gooch?
It's quite tough to compare across different eras, but one way to do it is to compare the average of the top batsmen with the average of the standout.
In Bradman's day, you had Bradman averaging 100+ until his memorable final duck, and the next highest was Sutcliffe at 60, plus Hammond, Hobbs, Hutton averaging nearly 60 and then the other Aussie batsmen - Ponsford, Woodfull, Hassett - averaging just shy of 50. So he was about 60% better than the next best batsman and twice as good as the next best Aussie.
Or you might comment on Grace. Grace averaged under 40 in first class cricket, which today is about the average for a good county batsman. Yet that was still about twice as much as anyone else, playing on things we wouldn't recognise as pitches, and also included scores he made playing until he was 58. To put it in context, he averaged 17 as a bowler.
Today you have Smith averaging 62 and then Williamson and Kohli averaging about 53. So about 18% better. But actually, because 10% of his tests were played as a legspinner batting in the tail, he's probably quite a bit better than that.
So he does have a case to be the second or third best batsman of all time. Whether he can sustain it for another eight years is another rather terrifying question.
There's something here that may interest you (Australians only, unfortunately).
Yes, he will. Boris needs Brexit on halloween but with no economic shock, which means BINO; which means something close to Theresa May's WA but perhaps even more so. Which might be where he is heading.
Trouble is, Boris also looks like he may have an American deal in mind, as he has been softening us up with talk of GM food. If not a bluff, that will probably deliver the economic dislocation Boris means (and needs) to avoid.
I used to think that Boris was aiming for the May deal dressed up with Churchiullian rhetoric, but he seems to have deliberately painted himself into a corner by making an impossible demand and refusing to even talk unless it's conceded. So presumably he actually wants No Deal with the EU and Parliament as the pantomime villains.
It's Farage tactics. It's not an impossible demand. But if the EU don't want to negotiate then so bit.
We're gonna end up getting the punishment beating that Boris himself warned of. But as someone who's been on the end of a fair few punches I know there's not a lot you can do about them other than to pick yourself up afterwards.
Yes, he will. Boris needs Brexit on halloween but with no economic shock, which means BINO; which means something close to Theresa May's WA but perhaps even more so. Which might be where he is heading.
Trouble is, Boris also looks like he may have an American deal in mind, as he has been softening us up with talk of GM food. If not a bluff, that will probably deliver the economic dislocation Boris means (and needs) to avoid.
I used to think that Boris was aiming for the May deal dressed up with Churchiullian rhetoric, but he seems to have deliberately painted himself into a corner by making an impossible demand and refusing to even talk unless it's conceded. So presumably he actually wants No Deal with the EU and Parliament as the pantomime villains.
It's Farage tactics. It's not an impossible demand. But if the EU don't want to negotiate then so bit.
We're gonna end up getting the punishment beating that Boris himself warned of. But as someone who's been on the end of a fair few punches I know there's not a lot you can do about them other than to pick yourself up afterwards.
LOL and I know that sounds like a bit from the Adjustment Bureau (great film) - but people should stop punching me
The reason Farage tends to be rubbish at FPTP is you need about 20%+ to get significant numbers of seats under FPTP.
They were getting that under May and after sheent and Essex, the North and Midlands and South Wales
Ironically the best hope for Farage is Boris extends again or a Corbyn minority government backed by the SNP and LDs holds EUref2 which narrowly backs Remain which really would give the Brexit Party a chance of picking up lots of Tory Leave seats again as well as a few Labour Leave seats too, otherwise their triumph in the European elections under PR may be the height of their achievements and once we Leave the EU they will become largely a party of those hostile to immigration and globalisation, not much more than 10%
Well of course geographical concentration of vote helps parties under FPTP. The Conservatives have rural and suburban England while Labour has the towns and cities. Even at 15-20% Labour holds a swathe of seats but at 15-20% the Conservatives would have far fewer.
20% everywhere gets you the sum total of bugger all as the Alliance found out in 1983 and UKIP to an extent in 2015.
As for future prospects, you've been quite certain about this in the past - IF Boris fails to take the UK out of the EU on 31/10, BP will be re-energised as they were when May failed to deliver on 29/3. There is a substantial and growing minority that wants the UK out of the EU, no ifs, no buts, no maybes. The problem is whether in the event of significant economic dislocation, that coalition will remain solid or will it turn round and blame the Conservatives for making a mess of a No Deal exit (which would be unfair to a point but politics isn't fair as we know).
Boris will be damned if he doesn't deliver a 31/10 Brexit but will he be damned if he does?
Despite all the BS that Welsh journalist guy was tweeting on the night, I hear that the samples from the count showed the Tories ahead in the rural polling districts with the LibDems winning most of the towns. Which is what you would expect.
His turnout figure was also way too low, and my guess remains that he had picked up an on-the-day turnout from somewhere.
The dangers of listening to journalists who know very little about elections!
Indeed so. I am also irritated by the constant repitition of the nonsense that the Government's majority is now just one - with DUP support. Do these reporters really believe that Elphicke is now going to sit on the Opposition benches and vote against the Government?
The reason Farage tends to be rubbish at FPTP is you need about 20%+ to get significant numbers of seats under FPTP.
They were getting that under May and after sheent and Essex, the North and Midlands alisation, not much more than 10%
20% everywhere gets you the sum total of bugger all as the Alliance found out in 1983 and UKIP to an extent in 2015.
As or making a mess of a No Deal exit (which would be unfair to a point but politics isn't fair as we know).
Boris will be damned if he doesn't deliver a 31/10 Brexit but will he be damned if he does?
I would say Labour ndate for No Deal Brexit anyway
Despite all the BS that Welsh journalist guy was tweeting on the night, I hear that the samples from the count showed the Tories ahead in the rural polling districts with the LibDems winning most of the towns. Which is what you would expect.
His turnout figure was also way too low, and my guess remains that he had picked up an on-the-day turnout from somewhere.
The dangers of listening to journalists who know very little about elections!
Perhaps, though he did suggest it was close.
However I agree, certainly here in Epping Forest the villages and rural areas are all solid Tory but the towns like Buckhurst Hill and Epping and Waltham Abbey are mainly a Tory v LD battle with a few Greens too. Labour only really has a presence in Loughton which is basically an outer London suburb
I wouldn’t fancy running an effective GOTV operation in that seat with most of my voters in the rural wards. Indeed without phone numbers it would be pretty much impossible.
However another finding is that the turnout of identified Tory voters was significantly higher than that of LibDems. Probably this is mostly demographics - the elderly and richer being more likely to vote in the first place.
I doubt, however, that the earlier published constituency poll effectively allowed for differential likelihood to vote, in which case the result being narrower than that poll could be a flaw in the polling methodology rather than evidence of a Bozo bounce.
There was a clear shift from Brexit Party to Tory in the 10 days over which Boris replaced May as Tory leader and PM
Certainly the LD campaign picked this up, but also a shift from Tory to LibDem by Conservative remain voters. What evidence, other than comparing the poll with the result, is there for a net increase in Tory vote? If the poll didn’t allow for the greater propensity of the elderly to vote, there’s your explanation for the difference.
Mr Smithson, your articles on UKIP/Brexit Party have the same sort of petulant childish tone of grown up child Cif'ers in the Guardian.
The reality is, with or without MP's Farage has more power in the current debate than your party the LibDems have ever had.
As for Brecon and Radnor, nobody expected them to do well, and most of the LibDems I have read in recent weeks were expecting knocking on a 60% share, does that mean the LibDem campaign was a failure. So you won, and yet it will have 4/5ths of feck all impact on anything.
Do us all a favour grow up, act your age at least have the courtesy of treating your opponents with respect, especially in light of the willingness of the LIbDems to embracing people like Lord Rennard on the Brecon and Radnor campaign trail.
One LibDem suggested a 60% share. The immediate response of the rest was to ask what he was smoking. They all agreed with me it was likely to be close. They were also right - which I wasn't, at least at first - in saying that while narrow their win would be decisive.
Underwhelming though - the LibDems will get very little momentum from their win.
You're entitled to your opinion. I think this was an impressive win. They did make a number of avoidable mistakes, but this was a much wider gap than I expected.
And the simple fact is as well, a win is a win. Even allowing for all the local factors of this seat, they still have an extra MP. To quote Geoffrey Boycott, it's not how, it's how many.
The risk is that they will do as too many have and draw national lessons from this very local seat. That can be done - I've done it myself - but it needs to be done carefully. So far, that doesn't seem to be happening and too many bandwagons are being jumped on instead.
Yes, he will. Boris needs Brexit on halloween but with no economic shock, which means BINO; which means something close to Theresa May's WA but perhaps even more so. Which might be where he is heading.
Trouble is, Boris also looks like he may have an American deal in mind, as he has been softening us up with talk of GM food. If not a bluff, that will probably deliver the economic dislocation Boris means (and needs) to avoid.
I used to think that Boris was aiming for the May deal dressed up with Churchiullian rhetoric, but he seems to have deliberately painted himself into a corner by making an impossible demand and refusing to even talk unless it's conceded. So presumably he actually wants No Deal with the EU and Parliament as the pantomime villains.
It's not an impossible demand. We should have quite clearly said all along that the backstop was an impossible demand and we would never agree to it.
Mr Smithson, your articles on UKIP/Brexit Party have the same sort of petulant childish tone of grown up child Cif'ers in the Guardian.
The reality is, with or without MP's Farage has more power in the current debate than your party the LibDems have ever had.
As for Brecon and Radnor, nobody expected them to do well, and most of the LibDems I have read in recent weeks were expecting knocking on a 60% share, does that mean the LibDem campaign was a failure. So you won, and yet it will have 4/5ths of feck all impact on anything.
Do us all a favour grow up, act your age at least have the courtesy of treating your opponents with respect, especially in light of the willingness of the LIbDems to embracing people like Lord Rennard on the Brecon and Radnor campaign trail.
One LibDem suggested a 60% share. The immediate response of the rest was to ask what he was smoking. They all agreed with me it was likely to be close. They were also right - which I wasn't, at least at first - in saying that while narrow their win would be decisive.
Underwhelming though - the LibDems will get very little momentum from their win.
You're entitled to your opinion. I think this was an impressive win. They did make a number of avoidable mistakes, but this was a much wider gap than I expected.
And the simple fact is as well, a win is a win. Even allowing for all the local factors of this seat, they still have an extra MP. To quote Geoffrey Boycott, it's not how, it's how many.
The risk is that they will do as too many have and draw national lessons from this very local seat. That can be done - I've done it myself - but it needs to be done carefully. So far, that doesn't seem to be happening and too many bandwagons are being jumped on instead.
I accept its significance in terms of the very tight parliamentary arithmetic, but I will be very surprised if it sets any kind of bandwaggon rolling comparable to what we saw post- the EU elections for both the LibDems and the Brexit Party. Indeed I am increasingly confident we have seen peak Brexit Party and peak LibDem vote share in respect of this Parliament. A circa 12% vote share for both at the GE strikes me as probable.
Trying to be as neutral as possible, I think it's pretty much evens now. Beautifully balanced. Insh'allah the rain stays away.
The Cricwiz odds are bizarre.
I'd say Oz have lost unless Smith gets another big century. And if he does it becomes a 50/50.
No - sorry - 45/45/10 because the draw is a player.
Therefore Eng are clear favourites right now IMO.
That must be the bookies' thinking. But Smith is the 2nd best batsman of all time, and we are without our best strike bowler.
Hmm.
I struggle to believe that Smith is the second best batsman of all time - effectively the best batsman ever if you discard the sporting freak that was Bradman.
Perhaps its just easier these days for the merely very good given the mass of general mediocrity.
Better than Ponting? Gower? May? Gooch?
It's quite tough to compare across different eras, but one way to do it is to compare the average of the top batsmen with the average of the standout.
In Bradman's day, you had Bradman averaging 100+ until his memorable final duck, and the next highest was Sutcliffe at 60, plus Hammond, Hobbs, Hutton averaging nearly 60 and then the other Aussie batsmen - Ponsford, Woodfull, Hassett - averaging just shy of 50. So he was about 60% better than the next best batsman and twice as good as the next best Aussie.
Or you might comment on Grace. Grace averaged under 40 in first class cricket, which today is about the average for a good county batsman. Yet that was still about twice as much as anyone else, playing on things we wouldn't recognise as pitches, and also included scores he made playing until he was 58. To put it in context, he averaged 17 as a bowler.
Today you have Smith averaging 62 and then Williamson and Kohli averaging about 53. So about 18% better. But actually, because 10% of his tests were played as a legspinner batting in the tail, he's probably quite a bit better than that.
So he does have a case to be the second or third best batsman of all time. Whether he can sustain it for another eight years is another rather terrifying question.
There's something here that may interest you (Australians only, unfortunately).
The reason Farage tends to be rubbish at FPTP is you need about 20%+ to get significant numbers of seats under FPTP.
They were getting that under May and after sheent and Essex, the North and Midlands alisation, not much more than 10%
20% everywhere gets you the sum total of bugger all as the Alliance found out in 1983 and UKIP to an extent in 2015.
As or making a mess of a No Deal exit (which would be unfair to a point but politics isn't fair as we know).
Boris will be damned if he doesn't deliver a 31/10 Brexit but will he be damned if he does?
I would say Labour ndate for No Deal Brexit anyway
Despite all the BS that Welsh journalist guy was tweeting on the night, I hear that the samples from the count showed the Tories ahead in the rural polling districts with the LibDems winning most of the towns. Which is what you would expect.
His turnout figure was also way too low, and my guess remains that he had picked up an on-the-day turnout from somewhere.
The dangers of listening to journalists who know very little about elections!
Perhaps, though he did suggest it was close.
However I agree, certainly here in Epping Forest the villages and rural areas are all solid Tory but the towns like Buckhurst Hill and Epping and Waltham Abbey are mainly a Tory v LD battle with a few Greens too. Labour only really has a presence in Loughton which is basically an outer London suburb
I wouldn’t fancy running an effective GOTV operation in that seat with most of my voters in the rural wards. Indeed without phone numbers it would be pretty much impossible.
However anoce.
There was a clear shift from Brexit Party to Tory in the 10 days over which Boris replaced May as Tory leader and PM
Certainly the LD campaign picked this up, but also a shift from Tory to LibDem by Conservative remain voters. What evidence, other than comparing the poll with the result, is there for a net increase in Tory vote? If the poll didn’t allow for the greater propensity of the elderly to vote, there’s your explanation for the difference.
Turnout in the by election was 59.72%, very high for a by election.
The result was LDs 43%, Tories 39%, Brexit party 10%.
So there was a 10% swing from Brexit Party to Tory over the 10 day period Boris became Tory leader and replaced May as PM and no swing over that period from Tory to LD at all
I accept its significance in terms of the very tight parliamentary arithmetic, but I will be very surprised if it sets any kind of bandwaggon rolling comparable to what we saw post- the EU elections for both the LibDems and the Brexit Party. Indeed I am increasingly confident we have seen peak Brexit Party and peak LibDem vote share in respect of this Parliament. A circa 12% vote share for both at the GE strikes me as probable.
Meanwhile, the returns from this by-election in an area which despite your unconvincing attempts to argue otherwise, has no history of tactical voting, make me very far from certain we have seen peak LibDem.
We may have done, but there are a number of places that seem to be unexpectedly turning to them that are traditionally solidly Labour, while they continue to pick up votes from the Conservatives elsewhere. The evidence is admittedly patchy and circumstantial so far, but it's becoming too substantial to be ignored entirely.
That's not to say the trend will be sustained. Many things can change, and will. But certainly they have a golden chance with both parties run by incompetent headbangers, government paralysed and the economy under pressure to come through the middle.
Mr Smithson, your articles on UKIP/Brexit Party have the same sort of petulant childish tone of grown up child Cif'ers in the Guardian.
The reality is, with or without MP's Farage has more power in the current debate than your party the LibDems have ever had.
As for Brecon and Radnor, nobody expected them to do well, and most of the LibDems I have read in recent weeks were expecting knocking on a 60% share, does that mean the LibDem campaign was a failure. So you won, and yet it will have 4/5ths of feck all impact on anything.
Do us all a favour grow up, act your age at least have the courtesy of treating your opponents with respect, especially in light of the willingness of the LIbDems to embracing people like Lord Rennard on the Brecon and Radnor campaign trail.
One LibDem suggested a 60% share. The immediate response of the rest was to ask what he was smoking. They all agreed with me it was likely to be close. They were also right - which I wasn't, at least at first - in saying that while narrow their win would be decisive.
Underwhelming though - the LibDems will get very little momentum from their win.
You're entitled to your opinion. I think this was an impressive win. They did make a number of avoidable mistakes, but this was a much wider gap than I expected.
And the simple fact is as well, a win is a win. Even allowing for all the local factors of this seat, they still have an extra MP. To quote Geoffrey Boycott, it's not how, it's how many.
The risk is that they will do as too many have and draw national lessons from this very local seat. That can be done - I've done it myself - but it needs to be done carefully. So far, that doesn't seem to be happening and too many bandwagons are being jumped on instead.
I accept its significance in terms of the very tight parliamentary arithmetic, but I will be very surprised if it sets any kind of bandwaggon rolling comparable to what we saw post- the EU elections for both the LibDems and the Brexit Party. Indeed I am increasingly confident we have seen peak Brexit Party and peak LibDem vote share in respect of this Parliament. A circa 12% vote share for both at the GE strikes me as probable.
I think this is correct even the latest polling has them not far away-
The result was LDs 43%, Tories 39%, Brexit party 10%.
So there was a 10% swing from Brexit Party to Tory over the 10 day period Boris became Tory leader and replaced May as PM and no swing over that period from Tory to LD at all
Given the closeness of the result its entirely possible votes cast while May was PM was the deciding factor.
Do we know what proportion of votes were postal votes? And of those any estimate what proportion would have been cast while May was PM?
Trying to be as neutral as possible, I think it's pretty much evens now. Beautifully balanced. Insh'allah the rain stays away.
The Cricwiz odds are bizarre.
I'd say Oz have lost unless Smith gets another big century. And if he does it becomes a 50/50.
No - sorry - 45/45/10 because the draw is a player.
Therefore Eng are clear favourites right now IMO.
That must be the bookies' thinking. But Smith is the 2nd best batsman of all time, and we are without our best strike bowler.
Hmm.
I struggle to believe that Smith is the second best batsman of all time - effectively the best batsman ever if you discard the sporting freak that was Bradman.
Perhaps its just easier these days for the merely very good given the mass of general mediocrity.
Better than Ponting? Gower? May? Gooch?
It's quite tough to compare across different eras, but one way to do it is to compare the average of the top batsmen with the average of the standout.
In Bradman's day, you had Bradman averaging 100+ until his memorable final duck, and the next highest was Sutcliffe at 60, plus Hammond, Hobbs, Hutton averaging nearly 60 and then the other Aussie batsmen - Ponsford, Woodfull, Hassett - averaging just shy of 50. So he was about 60% better than the next best batsman and twice as good as the next best Aussie.
Or you might comment on Grace. Grace averaged under 40 in first class cricket, which today is about the average for a good county batsman. Yet that was still about twice as much as anyone else, playing on things we wouldn't recognise as pitches, and also included scores he made playing until he was 58. To put it in context, he averaged 17 as a bowler.
Today you have Smith averaging 62 and then Williamson and Kohli averaging about 53. So about 18% better. But actually, because 10% of his tests were played as a legspinner batting in the tail, he's probably quite a bit better than that.
So he does have a case to be the second or third best batsman of all time. Whether he can sustain it for another eight years is another rather terrifying question.
There's something here that may interest you (Australians only, unfortunately).
The reason Farage tends to be rubbish at FPTP is you need about 20%+ to get significant numbers of seats under FPTP.
They were getting that under May and after sheent and Essex, the North and Midlands alisation, not much more than 10%
20% everywhere gets you the sum total of bugger all as the Alliance found out in 1983 and UKIP to an extent in 2015.
As or making a mess of a No Deal exit (which would be unfair to a point but politics isn't fair as we know).
Boris will be damned if he doesn't deliver a 31/10 Brexit but will he be damned if he does?
I would say Labour ndate for No Deal Brexit anyway
Despite all the BS that Welsh journalist guy was tweeting on the night, I hear that the samples from the count showed the Tories ahead in the rural polling districts with the LibDems winning most of the towns. Which is what you would expect.
His turnout figure was also way too low, and my guess remains that he had picked up an on-the-day turnout from somewhere.
The dangers of listening to journalists who know very little about elections!
I wouldn’t fancy running an effective GOTV operation in that seat with most of my voters in the rural wards. Indeed without phone numbers it would be pretty much impossible.
However anoce.
There was a clear shift from Brexit Party to Tory in the 10 days over which Boris replaced May as Tory leader and PM
Certainly the LD campaign picked this up, but also a shift from Tory to LibDem by Conservative remain voters. What evidence, other than comparing the poll with the result, is there for a net increase in Tory vote? If the poll didn’t allow for the greater propensity of the elderly to vote, there’s your explanation for the difference.
Turnout in the by election was 59.72%, very high for a by election.
The result was LDs 43%, Tories 39%, Brexit party 10%.
So there was a 10% swing from Brexit Party to Tory over the 10 day period Boris became Tory leader and replaced May as PM and no swing over that period from Tory to LD at all
Turnot was 20% lower than at the previous by election held in mid-July 1985.
The reason Farage tends to be rubbish at FPTP is you need about 20%+ to get significant numbers of seats under FPTP.
They were getting that under May and after sheent and Essex, the North and Midlands alisation, not much more than 10%
20% everywhere gets you the sum total of bugger all as the Alliance found out in 1983 and UKIP to an extent in 2015.
As or making a mess of a No Deal exit (which would be unfair to a point but politics isn't fair as we know).
Boris will be damned if he doesn't deliver a 31/10 Brexit but will he be damned if he does?
I would say Labour ndate for No Deal Brexit anyway
Despite all the BS that Welsh journalist guy was tweeting on the night, I hear that the samples from the count showed the Tories ahead in the rural polling districts with the LibDems winning most of the towns. Which is what you would expect.
His turnout figure was also way too low, and my guess remains that he had picked up an on-the-day turnout from somewhere.
The dangers of listening to journalists who know very little about elections!
I wouldn’t fancy running an effective GOTV operation in that seat with most of my voters in the rural wards. Indeed without phone numbers it would be pretty much impossible.
However anoce.
There was a clear shift from Brexit Party to Tory in the 10 days over which Boris replaced May as Tory leader and PM
Certainly the LD campaign picked this up, but also a shift from Tory to LibDem by Conservative remain voters. What evidence, other than comparing the poll with the result, is there for a net increase in Tory vote? If the poll didn’t allow for the greater propensity of the elderly to vote, there’s your explanation for the difference.
Turnout in the by election was 59.72%, very high for a by election.
The result was LDs 43%, Tories 39%, Brexit party 10%.
So there was a 10% swing from Brexit Party to Tory over the 10 day period Boris became Tory leader and replaced May as PM and no swing over that period from Tory to LD at all
Turnot was 20% lower than at the previous by election held in mid-July 1985.
Friendly tip Justin. When he gets on like this it's easier just to ignore him.
I accept its significance in terms of the very tight parliamentary arithmetic, but I will be very surprised if it sets any kind of bandwaggon rolling comparable to what we saw post- the EU elections for both the LibDems and the Brexit Party. Indeed I am increasingly confident we have seen peak Brexit Party and peak LibDem vote share in respect of this Parliament. A circa 12% vote share for both at the GE strikes me as probable.
Meanwhile, the returns from this by-election in an area which despite your unconvincing attempts to argue otherwise, has no history of tactical voting, make me very far from certain we have seen peak LibDem.
We may have done, but there are a number of places that seem to be unexpectedly turning to them that are traditionally solidly Labour, while they continue to pick up votes from the Conservatives elsewhere. The evidence is admittedly patchy and circumstantial so far, but it's becoming too substantial to be ignored entirely.
That's not to say the trend will be sustained. Many things can change, and will. But certainly they have a golden chance with both parties run by incompetent headbangers, government paralysed and the economy under pressure to come through the middle.
My arguments re-tactical voting may fail to convince you, but I have no doubt at all that my views are shared by objective psephologists.
I accept its significance in terms of the very tight parliamentary arithmetic, but I will be very surprised if it sets any kind of bandwaggon rolling comparable to what we saw post- the EU elections for both the LibDems and the Brexit Party. Indeed I am increasingly confident we have seen peak Brexit Party and peak LibDem vote share in respect of this Parliament. A circa 12% vote share for both at the GE strikes me as probable.
Meanwhile, the returns from this by-election in an area which despite your unconvincing attempts to argue otherwise, has no history of tactical voting, make me very far from certain we have seen peak LibDem.
We may have done, but there are a number of places that seem to be unexpectedly turning to them that are traditionally solidly Labour, while they continue to pick up votes from the Conservatives elsewhere. The evidence is admittedly patchy and circumstantial so far, but it's becoming too substantial to be ignored entirely.
That's not to say the trend will be sustained. Many things can change, and will. But certainly they have a golden chance with both parties run by incompetent headbangers, government paralysed and the economy under pressure to come through the middle.
My arguments re-tactical voting may fail to convince you, but I have no doubt at all that my views are shared by objective psehologists.
Then name them. Show me the studies, of this seat, that demonstrate tactical voting is a thing.
Until then, forgive me for being politely sceptical based on the actual evidence available.
The reason Farage tends to be rubbish at FPTP is you need about 20%+ to get significant numbers of seats under FPTP.
They were getting that under May and after sheent and Essex, the North and Midlands alisation, not much more than 10%
20% everywhere gets you the sum total of bugger all as the Alliance found out in 1983 and UKIP to an extent in 2015.
As or making a mess of a No Deal exit (which would be unfair to a point but politics isn't fair as we know).
Boris will be damned if he doesn't deliver a 31/10 Brexit but will he be damned if he does?
I would say Labour ndate for No Deal Brexit anyway
Despite all the BS that Welsh journalist guy was tweeting on the night, I hear that the samples from the count showed the Tories ahead in the rural polling districts with the LibDems winning most of the towns. Which is what you would expect.
His turnout figure was also way too low, and my guess remains that he had picked up an on-the-day turnout from somewhere.
The dangers of listening to journalists who know very little about elections!
I wouldn’t fancy running an effective GOTV operation in that seat with most of my voters in the rural wards. Indeed without phone numbers it would be pretty much impossible.
However anoce.
There was a clear shift from Brexit Party to Tory in the 10 days over which Boris replaced May as Tory leader and PM
Certainly the LD campaign picked this up, but also a shift from Tory to LibDem by Conservative remain voters. What evidence, other than comparing the poll with the result, is there for a net increase in Tory vote? If the poll didn’t allow for the greater propensity of the elderly to vote, there’s your explanation for the difference.
Turnout in the by election was 59.72%, very high for a by election.
The result was LDs 43%, Tories 39%, Brexit party 10%.
So there was a 10% swing from Brexit Party to Tory over the 10 day period Boris became Tory leader and replaced May as PM and no swing over that period from Tory to LD at all
Turnot was 20% lower than at the previous by election held in mid-July 1985.
Turnout in 1980s and turnout in 2010s is completely different in general though.
I accept its significance in terms of the very tight parliamentary arithmetic, but I will be very surprised if it sets any kind of bandwaggon rolling comparable to what we saw post- the EU elections for both the LibDems and the Brexit Party. Indeed I am increasingly confident we have seen peak Brexit Party and peak LibDem vote share in respect of this Parliament. A circa 12% vote share for both at the GE strikes me as probable.
Meanwhile, the returns from this by-election in an area which despite your unconvincing attempts to argue otherwise, has no history of tactical voting, make me very far from certain we have seen peak LibDem.
We may have done, but there are a number of places that seem to be unexpectedly turning to them that are traditionally solidly Labour, while they continue to pick up votes from the Conservatives elsewhere. The evidence is admittedly patchy and circumstantial so far, but it's becoming too substantial to be ignored entirely.
That's not to say the trend will be sustained. Many things can change, and will. But certainly they have a golden chance with both parties run by incompetent headbangers, government paralysed and the economy under pressure to come through the middle.
My arguments re-tactical voting may fail to convince you, but I have no doubt at all that my views are shared by objective psehologists.
Then name them. Show me the studies, of this seat, that demonstrate tactical voting is a thing.
Until then, forgive me for being politely sceptical based on the actual evidence available.
I'm a objective psehologist - The Lab vote share collapsed
I accept its significance in terms of the very tight parliamentary arithmetic, but I will be very surprised if it sets any kind of bandwaggon rolling comparable to what we saw post- the EU elections for both the LibDems and the Brexit Party. Indeed I am increasingly confident we have seen peak Brexit Party and peak LibDem vote share in respect of this Parliament. A circa 12% vote share for both at the GE strikes me as probable.
Meanwhile, the returns from this by-election in an area which despite your unconvincing attempts to argue otherwise, has no history of tactical voting, make me very far from certain we have seen peak LibDem.
We may have done, but there are a number of places that seem to be unexpectedly turning to them that are traditionally solidly Labour, while they continue to pick up votes from the Conservatives elsewhere. The evidence is admittedly patchy and circumstantial so far, but it's becoming too substantial to be ignored entirely.
That's not to say the trend will be sustained. Many things can change, and will. But certainly they have a golden chance with both parties run by incompetent headbangers, government paralysed and the economy under pressure to come through the middle.
My arguments re-tactical voting may fail to convince you, but I have no doubt at all that my views are shared by objective psephologists.
The reason Farage tends to be rubbish at FPTP is you need about 20%+ to get significant numbers of seats under FPTP.
?
I
Despite most of the towns. Which is what you would expect.
His turnout figure was also way too low, and my guess remains that he had picked up an on-the-day turnout from somewhere.
The dangers of listening to journalists who know very little about elections!
Perhaps, though he did suggest it was close.
However I agree, certainly here in Epping Forest the villages and rural areas are all solid Tory but the towns like Buckhurst Hill and Epping and Waltham Abbey are mainly a Tory v LD battle with a few Greens too. Labour only really has a presence in Loughton which is basically an outer London suburb
I wouldn’t fancy running an effective GOTV operation in that seat with most of my voters in the rural wards. Indeed without phone numbers it would be pretty much impossible.
However anoce.
There was a clear shift from Brexit Party to Tory in the 10 days over which Boris replaced May as Tory leader and PM
Certainly the LD campaign picked this up, but also a shift from Tory to LibDem by Conservative remain voters. What evidence, other than comparing the poll with the result, is there for a net increase in Tory vote? If the poll didn’t allow for the greater propensity of the elderly to vote, there’s your explanation for the difference.
Turnout in the by election was 59.72%, very high for a by election.
The result was LDs 43%, Tories 39%, Brexit party 10%.
So there was a 10% swing from Brexit Party to Tory over the 10 day period Boris became Tory leader and replaced May as PM and no swing over that period from Tory to LD at all
It remains possible that the BXP to Tory shift was more or less matched by a Tory to LibDem remainer shift, but that the turnout of the LDs identified by that poll was significantly lower than that of the Tories (which appears to be the case from the data the LDs have). There is nothing in the data that conflicts with such an interpretation; we would need to know what adjustments if any the constituency poll made for likelihood to vote.
I accept its significance in terms of the very tight parliamentary arithmetic, but I will be very surprised if it sets any kind of bandwaggon rolling comparable to what we saw post- the EU elections for both the LibDems and the Brexit Party. Indeed I am increasingly confident we have seen peak Brexit Party and peak LibDem vote share in respect of this Parliament. A circa 12% vote share for both at the GE strikes me as probable.
Meanwhile, the returns from this by-election in an area which despite your unconvincing attempts to argue otherwise, has no history of tactical voting, make me very far from certain we have seen peak LibDem.
We may have done, but there are a number of places that seem to be unexpectedly turning to them that are traditionally solidly Labour, while they continue to pick up votes from the Conservatives elsewhere. The evidence is admittedly patchy and circumstantial so far, but it's becoming too substantial to be ignored entirely.
That's not to say the trend will be sustained. Many things can change, and will. But certainly they have a golden chance with both parties run by incompetent headbangers, government paralysed and the economy under pressure to come through the middle.
My arguments re-tactical voting may fail to convince you, but I have no doubt at all that my views are shared by objective psehologists.
Then name them. Show me the studies, of this seat, that demonstrate tactical voting is a thing.
Until then, forgive me for being politely sceptical based on the actual evidence available.
I am not going to refer to discussions I have had with others, but you are an historian - and clearly not a psephologist despite having interest in electoral behaviour.
I accept its significance in terms of the very tight parliamentary arithmetic, but I will be very surprised if it sets any kind of bandwaggon rolling comparable to what we saw post- the EU elections for both the LibDems and the Brexit Party. Indeed I am increasingly confident we have seen peak Brexit Party and peak LibDem vote share in respect of this Parliament. A circa 12% vote share for both at the GE strikes me as probable.
Meanwhile, the returns from this by-election in an area which despite your unconvincing attempts to argue otherwise, has no history of tactical voting, make me very far from certain we have seen peak LibDem.
We may have done, but there are a number of places that seem to be unexpectedly turning to them that are traditionally solidly Labour, while they continue to pick up votes from the Conservatives elsewhere. The evidence is admittedly patchy and circumstantial so far, but it's becoming too substantial to be ignored entirely.
That's not to say the trend will be sustained. Many things can change, and will. But certainly they have a golden chance with both parties run by incompetent headbangers, government paralysed and the economy under pressure to come through the middle.
My arguments re-tactical voting may fail to convince you, but I have no doubt at all that my views are shared by objective psephologists.
How have you no doubt?
He has no doubt - perhaps an "objective psephologist" wouldn't bother with PB so none our opinions count
I must say, I do worry about the Biden nimbleness in the POTUS debates.
OGH keeps saying he is too old. But can Harris really beat Trump? It has to be between these two now surely?
What's the reasoning for discounting Warren and Sanders ?
The Dems would have to be mad to nominate Sanders. He might make the progressive core left feel good for a while, but he would be slaughtered in the main event.
20% everywhere gets you the sum total of bugger all as the Alliance found out in 1983 and UKIP to an extent in 2015.
As or making a mess of a No Deal exit (which would be unfair to a point but politics isn't fair as we know).
Boris will be damned if he doesn't deliver a 31/10 Brexit but will he be damned if he does?
I would say Labour ndate for No Deal Brexit anyway
Despite all the BS that Welsh journalist guy was tweeting on the night, I hear that the samples from the count showed the Tories ahead in the rural polling districts with the LibDems winning most of the towns. Which is what you would expect.
His turnout figure was also way too low, and my guess remains that he had picked up an on-the-day turnout from somewhere.
The dangers of listening to journalists who know very little about elections!
I wouldn’t fancy running an effective GOTV operation in that seat with most of my voters in the rural wards. Indeed without phone numbers it would be pretty much impossible.
However anoce.
There was a clear shift from Brexit Party to Tory in the 10 days over which Boris replaced May as Tory leader and PM
Certainly the LD campaign picked this up, but also a shift from Tory to LibDem by Conservative remain voters. What evidence, other than comparing the poll with the result, is there for a net increase in Tory vote? If the poll didn’t allow for the greater propensity of the elderly to vote, there’s your explanation for the difference.
Turnout in the by election was 59.72%, very high for a by election.
The result was LDs 43%, Tories 39%, Brexit party 10%.
So there was a 10% swing from Brexit Party to Tory over the 10 day period Boris became Tory leader and replaced May as PM and no swing over that period from Tory to LD at all
Turnot was 20% lower than at the previous by election held in mid-July 1985.
More to the point it was a lot lower than the last two GEs. A lot of normal voters didn’t turn out for the by-election; the campaign data suggest many of these were identified LDs. Just because HY would like the explanation to trace back to the magic of Bozo doesn’t mean that magic really exists.
The reason Farage tends to be rubbish at FPTP is you need about 20%+ to get significant numbers of seats under FPTP.
They were getting that under May and after sheent and Essex, the North and Midlands alisation, not much more than 10%
20% everywhere gets you the sum total of bugger all as the Alliance found out in 1983 and UKIP to an extent in 2015.
As or making a mess of a No Deal exit (which would be unfair to a point but politics isn't fair as we know).
Boris will be damned if he doesn't deliver a 31/10 Brexit but will he be damned if he does?
I would say Labour ndate for No Deal Brexit anyway
I wouldn’t fancy running an effective GOTV operation in that seat with most of my voters in the rural wards. Indeed without phone numbers it would be pretty much impossible.
However anoce.
There was a clear shift from Brexit Party to Tory in the 10 days over which Boris replaced May as Tory leader and PM
Certainly the LD campaign picked this up, but also a shift from Tory to LibDem by Conservative remain voters. What evidence, other than comparing the poll with the result, is there for a net increase in Tory vote? If the poll didn’t allow for the greater propensity of the elderly to vote, there’s your explanation for the difference.
Turnout in the by election was 59.72%, very high for a by election.
The result was LDs 43%, Tories 39%, Brexit party 10%.
So there was a 10% swing from Brexit Party to Tory over the 10 day period Boris became Tory leader and replaced May as PM and no swing over that period from Tory to LD at all
Turnot was 20% lower than at the previous by election held in mid-July 1985.
Turnout in 1980s and turnout in 2010s is completely different in general though.
Oh there has certainly been a decline - though turnout has been recovering over the last 15 years. Back in the 1960s and 1970s a by election turnout below 65% was not impressive at all.
The reason Farage tends to be rubbish at FPTP is you need about 20%+ to get significant numbers of seats under FPTP.
?
I
Despite most of the towns. Which is what you would expect.
His turnout figure was also way too low, and my guess remains that he had picked up an on-the-day turnout from somewhere.
The dangers of listening to journalists who know very little about elections!
Perhaps, though he did suggest it was close.
However I agree, certainly here in Epping Forest the villages and rural areas are all solid Tory but the towns like Buckhurst Hill and Epping and Waltham Abbey are mainly a Tory v LD battle with a few Greens too. Labour only really has a presence in Loughton which is basically an outer London suburb
I wouldn’t fancy running an effective GOTV operation in that seat with most of my voters in the rural wards. Indeed without phone numbers it would be pretty much impossible.
However anoce.
There was a clear shift from Brexit Party to Tory in the 10 days over which Boris replaced May as Tory leader and PM
Certainly the LD campaign picked this up, but also a shift from Tory to LibDem by Consrence.
Turnout in the by election was 59.72%, very high for a by election.
The result was LDs 43%, Tories 39%, Brexit party 10%.
So there was a 10% swing from Brexit Party to Tory over the 10 day period Boris became Tory leader and replaced May as PM and no swing over that period from Tory to LD at all
It remains possible that the BXP to Tory shift was more or less matched by a Tory to LibDem remainer shift, but that the turnout of the LDs identified by that poll was significantly lower than that of the Tories (which appears to be the case from the data the LDs have). There is nothing in the data that conflicts with such an interpretation; we would need to know what adjustments if any the constituency poll made for likelihood to vote.
No there is not apart from your absurd claim that there was a vastly lower turnout for LDs than Tories for which you have no evidence at all, especially when LDs tend to be middle class ABC1 voters with a higher propensity to vote anyway.
There was a clear shift from BXP to Tory when Boris became PM and no further movement to the LDs at all than that which had already happened under May
I accept its significance in terms of the very tight parliamentary arithmetic, but I will be very surprised if it sets any kind of bandwaggon rolling comparable to what we saw post- the EU elections for both the LibDems and the Brexit Party. Indeed I am increasingly confident we have seen peak Brexit Party and peak LibDem vote share in respect of this Parliament. A circa 12% vote share for both at the GE strikes me as probable.
Meanwhile, the returns from this by-election in an area which despite your unconvincing attempts to argue otherwise, has no history of tactical voting, make me very far from certain we have seen peak LibDem.
We may have done, but there are a number of places that seem to be unexpectedly turning to them that are traditionally solidly Labour, while they continue to pick up votes from the Conservatives elsewhere. The evidence is admittedly patchy and circumstantial so far, but it's becoming too substantial to be ignored entirely.
That's not to say the trend will be sustained. Many things can change, and will. But certainly they have a golden chance with both parties run by incompetent headbangers, government paralysed and the economy under pressure to come through the middle.
My arguments re-tactical voting may fail to convince you, but I have no doubt at all that my views are shared by objective psehologists.
Then name them. Show me the studies, of this seat, that demonstrate tactical voting is a thing.
Until then, forgive me for being politely sceptical based on the actual evidence available.
I am not going to refer to discussions I have had with others, but you are an historian - and clearly not a psephologist despite having interest in electoral behaviour.
I accept its significance in terms of the very tight parliamentary arithmetic, but I will be very surprised if it sets any kind of bandwaggon rolling comparable to what we saw post- the EU elections for both the LibDems and the Brexit Party. Indeed I am increasingly confident we have seen peak Brexit Party and peak LibDem vote share in respect of this Parliament. A circa 12% vote share for both at the GE strikes me as probable.
Meanwhile, the returns from this by-election in an area which despite your unconvincing attempts to argue otherwise, has no history of tactical voting, make me very far from certain we have seen peak LibDem.
We may have done, but there are a number of places that seem to be unexpectedly turning to them that are traditionally solidly Labour, while they continue to pick up votes from the Conservatives elsewhere. The evidence is admittedly patchy and circumstantial so far, but it's becoming too substantial to be ignored entirely.
That's not to say the trend will be sustained. Many things can change, and will. But certainly they have a golden chance with both parties run by incompetent headbangers, government paralysed and the economy under pressure to come through the middle.
My arguments re-tactical voting may fail to convince you, but I have no doubt at all that my views are shared by objective psehologists.
Then name them. Show me the studies, of this seat, that demonstrate tactical voting is a thing.
Until then, forgive me for being politely sceptical based on the actual evidence available.
I'm a objective psehologist - The Lab vote share collapsed
Nobody is doubting that - it was not the point at issue! Rather we had been discussing the extent to which Labour voters in this seat have switched on a large scale to the LibDems since the late 1980s as the perceived stronger anti- Tory option here.
Mr Smithson, your articles on UKIP/Brexit Party have the same sort of petulant childish tone of grown up child Cif'ers in the Guardian.
The reality is, with or without MP's Farage has more power in the current debate than your party the LibDems have ever had.
As for Brecon and Radnor, nobody expected them to do well, and most of the LibDems I have read in recent weeks were expecting knocking on a 60% share, does that mean the LibDem campaign was a failure. So you won, and yet it will have 4/5ths of feck all impact on anything.
Do us all a favour grow up, act your age at least have the courtesy of treating your opponents with respect, especially in light of the willingness of the LIbDems to embracing people like Lord Rennard on the Brecon and Radnor campaign trail.
One LibDem suggested a 60% share. The immediate response of the rest was to ask what he was smoking. They all agreed with me it was likely to be close. They were also right - which I wasn't, at least at first - in saying that while narrow their win would be decisive.
Underwhelming though - the LibDems will get very little momentum from their win.
You're entitled to your opinion. I think this was an impressive win. They did make a number of avoidable mistakes, but this was a much wider gap than I expected.
And the simple fact is as well, a win is a win. Even allowing for all the local factors of this seat, they still have an extra MP. To quote Geoffrey Boycott, it's not how, it's how many.
The risk is that they will do as too many have and draw national lessons from this very local seat. That can be done - I've done it myself - but it needs to be done carefully. So far, that doesn't seem to be happening and too many bandwagons are being jumped on instead.
I accept its significance in terms of the very tight parliamentary arithmetic, but I will be very surprised if it sets any kind of bandwaggon rolling comparable to what we saw post- the EU elections for both the LibDems and the Brexit Party. Indeed I am increasingly confident we have seen peak Brexit Party and peak LibDem vote share in respect of this Parliament. A circa 12% vote share for both at the GE strikes me as probable.
I accept its significance in terms of the very tight parliamentary arithmetic, but I will be very surprised if it sets any kind of bandwaggon rolling comparable to what we saw post- the EU elections for both the LibDems and the Brexit Party. Indeed I am increasingly confident we have seen peak Brexit Party and peak LibDem vote share in respect of this Parliament. A circa 12% vote share for both at the GE strikes me as probable.
Meanwhile, the returns from this by-election in an area which despite your unconvincing attempts to argue otherwise, has no history of tactical voting, make me very far from certain we have seen peak LibDem.
We may have done, but there are a number of places that seem to be unexpectedly turning to them that are traditionally solidly Labour, while they continue to pick up votes from the Conservatives elsewhere. The evidence is admittedly patchy and circumstantial so far, but it's becoming too substantial to be ignored entirely.
That's not to say the trend will be sustained. Many things can change, and will. But certainly they have a golden chance with both parties run by incompetent headbangers, government paralysed and the economy under pressure to come through the middle.
My arguments re-tactical voting may fail to convince you, but I have no doubt at all that my views are shared by objective psephologists.
I must say, I do worry about the Biden nimbleness in the POTUS debates.
OGH keeps saying he is too old. But can Harris really beat Trump? It has to be between these two now surely?
What's the reasoning for discounting Warren and Sanders ?
The Dems would have to be mad to nominate Sanders. He might make the progressive core left feel good for a while, but he would be slaughtered in the main event.
Sanders actually polls better than Warren and Harris against Trump even if not as well as Biden does
I would say Labour ndate for No Deal Brexit anyway
Despite all the BS that Welsh journalist guy was tweeting on the night, I hear that the samples from the count showed the Tories ahead in the rural polling districts with the LibDems winning most of the towns. Which is what you would expect.
His turnout figure was also way too low, and my guess remains that he had picked up an on-the-day turnout from somewhere.
The dangers of listening to journalists who know very little about elections!
Perhaps, though he did suggest it was close.
However I agree, certainly here in Epping Forest the villages and rural areas are all solid Tory but the towns like Buckhurst Hill and Epping and Waltham Abbey are mainly a Tory v LD battle with a few Greens too. Labour only really has a presence in Loughton which is basically an outer London suburb
I wouldn’t fancy running an effective GOTV operation in that seat with most of my voters in the rural wards. Indeed without phone numbers it would be pretty much impossible.
However anoce.
There was a clear shift from Brexit Party to Tory in the 10 days over which Boris replaced May as Tory leader and PM
Certainly the LD campaign picked this up, but also a shift from Tory to LibDem by Conservative remain voters. What evidence, other than comparing the poll with the result, is there for a net increase in Tory vote? If the poll didn’t allow for the greater propensity of the elderly to vote, there’s your explanation for the difference.
Turnout in the by election was 59.72%, very high for a by election.
The result was LDs 43%, Tories 39%, Brexit party 10%.
So there was a 10% swing from Brexit Party to Tory over the 10 day period Boris became Tory leader and replaced May as PM and no swing over that period from Tory to LD at all
And now there's been a whopping swing back to Labour!
"My name is Ozymandboris, King of Kings, Look on my Works, ye Mighty and despair ..."
Comments
No - sorry - 45/45/10 because the draw is a player.
Therefore Eng are clear favourites right now IMO.
It is a monumentally idiotic policy, which they could have stepped away from at any point.
There will be no blame strong enough to do it justice.
How about a bit of #F1 ?
BFE
Hamilton 3.85
Verstappen 2.02
Bottas 6.8
I'm thinking of backing Lewis and Max at equal stakes and hoping slow coach (starting in 2nd) Bottas doesn't really feature. Any Thoughts ?
The other big topic was redundancies. 2 of their spouses have just been served notice of redundancy, one in retail, and another in commercial construction. A third has a son working for an airline and fearing redundancy too. None are in industries where other companies are likely to be taking on.
Rather depressing anecdata, but perhaps I should have cheered them up by pointing out what great bargains there are for the Chinese.
Trouble is, Boris also looks like he may have an American deal in mind, as he has been softening us up with talk of GM food. If not a bluff, that will probably deliver the economic dislocation Boris means (and needs) to avoid.
I think this tells us more about the faults of the system than it does about Farage's ability.
I've gone for it. C'mon Lewis!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9648132/active-shooter-ak47-texas-walmart/
And explain that's because China creates more wealth than it consumes whereas this country does the opposite.
It wont be what they want to hear but they need to be told.
If a side leads on 1st innings by more than 75, how often do they win / lose / draw.
My impression having followed cricket for a very long time is that 1st innings is the critical determining factor. If you have a clear lead on 1st innings you win vast majority of time and lose very rarely (ignoring draws).
Obviously can debate what constitutes a clear lead but I'll go for 75.
Fun in the Sun in South of France!
Boris will be certainly damned if he doesn't deliver Brexit on 31st October which would be a gift to Farage and Corbyn but provided he does commit to deliver it he will be re elected as it will almost certainly require an autumn general election for Boris to get a mandate for No Deal Brexit anyway
Hmm.
His turnout figure was also way too low, and my guess remains that he had picked up an on-the-day turnout from somewhere.
The dangers of listening to journalists who know very little about elections!
Perhaps its just easier these days for the merely very good given the mass of general mediocrity.
New Orleans is the best place I've visited in the US. But also the most tragic, post-Katrina.
https://www.cricket.com.au/news/steve-smith-australia-captain-century-ashes-mcg-record-player-rankings-ratings-win-bradman-hutton/2017-12-31
http://www.howstat.com/cricket/Statistics/Batting/BattingAverages.asp?Stat=1
I'm amazed Lara isn't higher. 25th best??!!
Latest Iowa poll has it Biden 23%, Warren 23%, Harris 12%, Sanders 11%
https://github.com/optimus-forecasting-and-polling/Firehouse-0ptimus-Dem-Primary-July-2019/blob/master/Crosstabs_IA_July2019.pdf
Latest New Hampshire poll has it Biden 21%, Warren 16%, Sanders 13%, Harris 13%
https://github.com/optimus-forecasting-and-polling/Firehouse-0ptimus-Dem-Primary-July-2019/blob/master/Crosstabs_NH_July2019.pdf
Latest South Carolina poll has it Biden 31%, Warren 12%, Harris 10%, Sanders 9%
https://github.com/optimus-forecasting-and-polling/Firehouse-0ptimus-Dem-Primary-July-2019/blob/master/Crosstabs_SC_July2019.pdf
So at the moment it looks like a Biden v Warren race
Assuming ANZ1 LHR to LAX is RCS1000 flight. It is just leaving Greenland airspace and approaching NE corner of USA and about to cross Hudson Bay. with some 5300Kms to go. RCS get some sleep
Mike
However I agree, certainly here in Epping Forest the villages and rural areas are all solid Tory but the towns like Buckhurst Hill and Epping and Waltham Abbey are mainly a Tory v LD battle with a few Greens too. Labour only really has a presence in Loughton which is basically an outer London suburb
For example Anderson and Broad have over a thousand test wickets but their bowling averages are higher than those of Mike Hendrick and John Lever.
Batting today must be about 5 runs an innings easier than it was in the 1970s - of which era there is only Greg Chappell (20), Sunny Gavaskar (36) and arguably Viv Richards (41) in the top 50.
Yet the stats are the stats.
The best batsman I have ever personally seen play was Lara. Sublime. The most exciting batsman was Botham at Headingley, in 1985.
However another finding is that the turnout of identified Tory voters was significantly higher than that of LibDems. Probably this is mostly demographics - the elderly and richer being more likely to vote in the first place.
I doubt, however, that the earlier published constituency poll effectively allowed for differential likelihood to vote, in which case the result being narrower than that poll could be a flaw in the polling methodology rather than evidence of a Bozo bounce.
11/4 Biden
7/2 Harris
7/2 Warren
8/1 Sanders
Hardest innings to bat in is the 4th, followed probably by the first. So if the side batting first gets a substantial lead they're well ahead, if they don't choke on the third they should get it.
If the side batting second gets a substantial lead, the opening team can more easily turn that around in the third.
If Biden drops out Warren is still likely nominee, not Harris.
However without Biden as his opponent Trump is very likely to be re elected
In Bradman's day, you had Bradman averaging 100+ until his memorable final duck, and the next highest was Sutcliffe at 60, plus Hammond, Hobbs, Hutton averaging nearly 60 and then the other Aussie batsmen - Ponsford, Woodfull, Hassett - averaging just shy of 50. So he was about 60% better than the next best batsman and twice as good as the next best Aussie.
Or you might comment on Grace. Grace averaged under 40 in first class cricket, which today is about the average for a good county batsman. Yet that was still about twice as much as anyone else, playing on things we wouldn't recognise as pitches, and also included scores he made playing until he was 58. To put it in context, he averaged 17 as a bowler.
Today you have Smith averaging 62 and then Williamson and Kohli averaging about 53. So about 18% better. But actually, because 10% of his tests were played as a legspinner batting in the tail, he's probably quite a bit better than that.
So he does have a case to be the second or third best batsman of all time. Whether he can sustain it for another eight years is another rather terrifying question.
There's something here that may interest you (Australians only, unfortunately).
http://www.australasianscience.com.au/article/science-and-technology/what-stats-say-steve-smith-second-best-australian-cricket-batsman-eve
https://youtu.be/89tb2rjJ3-0
https://twitter.com/leiamurr/status/1157657592484847616?s=20
And the simple fact is as well, a win is a win. Even allowing for all the local factors of this seat, they still have an extra MP. To quote Geoffrey Boycott, it's not how, it's how many.
The risk is that they will do as too many have and draw national lessons from this very local seat. That can be done - I've done it myself - but it needs to be done carefully. So far, that doesn't seem to be happening and too many bandwagons are being jumped on instead.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/aug/03/priti-patel-home-secretary-wants-criminals-to-literally-feel-terror
10 days before the by election the poll had LDs 43%, Tories 28%, Brexit Party 20%.
https://www.markpack.org.uk/159332/brecon-radnorshire-byelection-opinion-poll/
The result was LDs 43%, Tories 39%, Brexit party 10%.
So there was a 10% swing from Brexit Party to Tory over the 10 day period Boris became Tory leader and replaced May as PM and no swing over that period from Tory to LD at all
We may have done, but there are a number of places that seem to be unexpectedly turning to them that are traditionally solidly Labour, while they continue to pick up votes from the Conservatives elsewhere. The evidence is admittedly patchy and circumstantial so far, but it's becoming too substantial to be ignored entirely.
That's not to say the trend will be sustained. Many things can change, and will. But certainly they have a golden chance with both parties run by incompetent headbangers, government paralysed and the economy under pressure to come through the middle.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/08/02/new-comres-poll-with-lab-in-lead-might-put-the-mockers-on-an-early-election/
Do we know what proportion of votes were postal votes? And of those any estimate what proportion would have been cast while May was PM?
Yes, I'll hold my hands up to that. Careless oversight.
Until then, forgive me for being politely sceptical based on the actual evidence available.
Adlai Stevenson.
In fact the echoes are uncanny.
There was a clear shift from BXP to Tory when Boris became PM and no further movement to the LDs at all than that which had already happened under May
Tops. Maybe 3%.
"My name is Ozymandboris, King of Kings, Look on my Works, ye Mighty and despair ..."