Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » LAB and the LDs slipping on the Commons seats spread markets –
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » LAB and the LDs slipping on the Commons seats spread markets – Tories powering upwards
SportingIndex
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
They weren't far off in Bristol West in 2015 (under 10% behind Labour) but it relies on them reversing a huge 2017 swing to Labour.
I don;t see how they could have got so far in front without really firing a shot in this campaign. Feels wrong, somehow.
https://twitter.com/prospect_clark/status/1196431975755780096?s=21
I used to live in a constituency called Newcastle-under-Lyme which coincidentally has a PBer standing this year for election. It is the most Northwesternly constituency within Stafford. On the North and West is another county, on its East it is bordered by 3 constituencies: Stoke on Trent South, Stoke on Trent Central and Stoke on Trent North. South of Stoke and Newcastle is the large rural constituency of Stone.
Logically if you were to merge constituencies so you had a quarter as many constituencies each with 4 MPs then you will likely find the 3 Stoke constituencies and the Newcastle-under-Lyme constituency merged to one constituency which should logically simply be called Stoke on Trent.
Currently whoever is elected for the Newcastle-under-Lyme constituency is responsible for representing the population of Newcastle-under-Lyme. Newcastle despite being a smaller town has its own distinct voice. If however you were to merge the constituencies into one voted by STV then as it stands you'd probably have 2 Stoke on Trent Labour MPs and 2 Stoke on Trent Tory MPs and none of them would be specifically responsible for Newcastle-under-Lyme.
Under your model all 4 MPs would likely end up based in Stoke, all 4 MPs would likely do most of their campaigning in Stoke, all 4 MPs would likely do most of the constituency casework in Stoke and Newcastle would get relatively ignored compared to now. The Tories and Labour Party would both find many more voters in Stoke than in Newcastle.
I still think there are similar undercurrents as 2017 in terms of potential Labour growth/Tory weakening, and as far as a general mood can be applied to N million individual voters, one of not wanting to give either main party a whacking majority.
I think the 50-seat margin this implies is at the realistic-to-upper end of the range when it comes to polling day. But I'd concede if the polls remain as they are or widen in favour of the Tories I'd be wrong. And Corbyn could implode as easily as Johnson.
I’d add 3% to any current Labour polling to reflect that . At the moment Labour voters are less enthused to vote , the Tories have on one poll a 6 point lead there .
There are more variables surrounding the Labour vote than that of the Tories. The BP pull out in over 350 seats inflates the Tories , more so because in most of their seats the natural home for BP voters is the Tories not Labour .
Disclaimer: I bought at 336 (slightly late to the show) and I effectively closed out a couple of days ago by selling at 47 on the 300-up market. I'm still therefore taking some risk at below 300, but I'm safe down to that point.
I've still got an open Sell on the LibDems at 45. I'm getting tempted to close out, but the trend still seems to be downwards for now.
(((Dan Hodges)))
✔
@DPJHodges
Spoke to a number of candidates today. None of them think the polls reflect what they’re currently experiencing on the ground. With possible exception of LD squeeze, which seems real.
2017 redux?
LibDem support, both their and the LD organisation on the ground is patchy, and it is a difficult seat to fight effectively being large and varied in its geography. I’d fancy the Greens for second place but don’t see it as a good prospect for a win, given that the island leans leave.
A former BXP/UKIP guy is standing there as an independent, but I can’t see that making much difference.
FPT The counter arguments are that the boundaries of such seats would be easier to match up with natural communities - cities or local government areas - and avoid the highly artificial nature of many current single member seats, with towns or villages tacked onto seats, or artificially divided, just to ‘balance the numbers’. Boundary reviews would be easier as the opportunity to adjust the number of members rather than the boundaries would enable more stable representational geography. People within those seats would be able to pick a person or political party to deal with their casework who they feel best represents them, rather than be forced to contact someone they don’t respect or agree with as now.
I’m sure he’d have preferred the court ruled in favour of the Lib Dems and the SNP.
https://twitter.com/oneofthosefaces/status/1196349760409624576
He is an hysterical old twit
Worth noting that the favoured PM poll mentioned earlier is not remarkably different from the same point in the 2017 campaign.
Many, many small to medium sized towns across the country currently have their constituency and their local government largely aligned. EG my above example of Newcastle-under-Lyme. It is large towns and cities that are divided and fair enough for them. I fail to see how large cities gobbling up nearby towns, or whole swathes of rural areas being merged together to create massive constituencies improves local representation.
IoW: Fair enough, a plausible target for now or at least the future.
Brighton Pavilion: No brainer.
Bristol West: Probably their best hope after BP, imho.
But then:
Exeter: A seat the Greens have only once even held their deposit in recent years.
Forest of Dean: See above.
Cannock Chase: A seat they've never held their deposit and didn't even run prior to 2015.
Dulwich and West Norwood: They have held their deposit a few times but never beaten 4th place. Actually the LDs should probably have been given the 'free run' here.
Bury St Edmunds: Held their deposit once but still came 4th. LDs were a fairly strong 2nd in 2010, so they really should have had this one.
Stroud: As discussed.
The party that promises to abolish the parasite Royal Family gets my vote.
New ICM poll for @Reuters:
Conservatives 42% (+3)
Labour 32% (+1)
Lib Dems 13% (-2)
Brexit Party 5% (-3)
The SNP made a big stink then and lost.
Are labour now actively trying to lose?
There is something worse in politics than being attacked and that is being ignored. Now the two main parties can frankly ignore her and fire on each other and any time she tries to get attention the media quite reasonably make her defend again this proposal
What is the LibDems excuse?
I think we need to see the fieldwork dates . Have they changed their methodology to reflect the BP standing down in over 350 seats .
It is a two page decision. Even if ITV had been exercising a public function the Lib Dems and SNP would have lost.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-election-poll-icm/uk-pm-johnsons-conservatives-extend-lead-over-labour-icm-poll-idUSKBN1XS22L
Seriously though this looks a bit silly but perhaps is aimed at ethnic minorities . Not forgetting that Labours firewall in quite a few marginals in the Midlands and nw is the Muslim vote .
2017 was meant to be the Brexit Election, but it turned into a referendum on the leadership of Theresa May.
2019 was meant to be the Brexit Election, but is it going to turn into a referendum on the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn?
EDIT: just read about that 32% with ICM down thread. Oh dear...
(Still seems a world out of whack that had Kenny Everett as a Tory cheer-leader!)
Perhaps they should offer free beer to all or any other loon policy that they might think populist.
Muslims make up fewer than 5% of the population.