Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » LAB and the LDs slipping on the Commons seats spread markets –

SystemSystem Posts: 11,002
edited November 2019 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » LAB and the LDs slipping on the Commons seats spread markets – Tories powering upwards

SportingIndex

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • E pluribus unum
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 3,949
    What am I missing about the Greens? That 1.5 Sell seems amazing. Where is their credible second seat?
  • camelcamel Posts: 815
    Early Adopter,
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    camel said:

    Early Adopter,

    First 2.0.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,770
    Bugger. Should have bought at 341.
  • So esteemed denziens of pb.... Buyer or seller of the Tories at these spreads?
  • I still think a final score of Tory 40% Lab 25% Lib 15% Brexit and Green 5% and the rest to the SNP, PC and others is likely. IF Boris comes through the head to head with Corbyn relatively unscathed then a Tory majority should become a self-fulfilling prophecy.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,841
    Quincel said:

    What am I missing about the Greens? That 1.5 Sell seems amazing. Where is their credible second seat?

    They seem confident of a good run at Stroud, I fail to see why
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,770

    So esteemed denziens of pb.... Buyer or seller of the Tories at these spreads?

    I am not a spread bettor, and have missed out as a result, but I still think 349 undersells the current polling for the Tories by quite a bit. Of course you have to take the risks and uncertainties into account but to date I can't recall such a one sided election since 1997.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 11,183
    All that's as maybe. But I've just checked a few bets I made for small-ish stakes (each one less than a tenner) two or three weeks back. Somehow, back in those heady days, it was possible to get 1.5 on Labour winning Doncaster North; 1.29 on Labour winning Aberavon, 1.25 on Labour winning Barnsley Central. No longer, alas. NOM may be drifting out but the implied probability in individual seats seems to have gone the other way.
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 3,949

    Quincel said:

    What am I missing about the Greens? That 1.5 Sell seems amazing. Where is their credible second seat?

    They seem confident of a good run at Stroud, I fail to see why
    Agree, and the bookies have them at 33/1 with good reason. I hear rumours about Isle of Wight, but with no Brexit Party candidate and a solid Leave seat that seems fantasy (it needs a 17% swing from 3rd place). Indeed, many of their 'targets' are Tory seats which are going to be hugely difficult.

    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.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,770
    The more interesting one I think is the Lib Dems. If I was a spread bettor I would be selling at 29. The Tory strength probably means fewer gains than they would have hoped and there is likely to be the odd loss too. Their polling has been seriously disappointing to date.
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818
    Seller of tories here, for a small trading position. FPT I think Hodges has a point.

    I don;t see how they could have got so far in front without really firing a shot in this campaign. Feels wrong, somehow.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    A reply on that thread makes a good point - if Boris was in a big debate with all the party leaders, he'd be the only leaver there.
  • FPT
    ClippP said:

    No it doesn't. 4 member constituencies is just looking to reverse engineer a system to suit your agenda. 4x the constituency size means what can still be quite large areas with then an incentive to prioritise the larger populations within those areas.

    I think you are assuming that each elector has , say, four votes. This is what happens in local government elections with multi-member wards.

    But with STV electors have a single vote, which can be transferred if it is not needed, for whatever reason. There is no way that one party would take all four seats, unless its candidates had won more than 80% of the votes.
    Not what I'm assuming at all, you misunderstand me. Let me make it clearer with an example.

    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.
  • Harris_TweedHarris_Tweed Posts: 1,300
    edited November 2019
    DavidL said:

    So esteemed denziens of pb.... Buyer or seller of the Tories at these spreads?

    I am not a spread bettor, and have missed out as a result, but I still think 349 undersells the current polling for the Tories by quite a bit. Of course you have to take the risks and uncertainties into account but to date I can't recall such a one sided election since 1997.
    I'd agree it's a cautious estimate of current polling. But that's not what you're betting on, of course.

    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 haven't posted on here for about 5 years. I would still sell Labour at 198. I am canvassing in a knife edge seat in London (Richmond) and we are finding labour voters who would will vote con to make sure that Corbyn and his cronies are well and truly killed off
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502

    I still think a final score of Tory 40% Lab 25% Lib 15% Brexit and Green 5% and the rest to the SNP, PC and others is likely. IF Boris comes through the head to head with Corbyn relatively unscathed then a Tory majority should become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

    The Greens always get badly squeezed by Labour on Election Day , the Lib Dems are also likely to lose out .

    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 .

  • So esteemed denziens of pb.... Buyer or seller of the Tories at these spreads?

    I'm not sure if I'm an esteemed denizen, but my take is that the mid point on the Tories is a bit less than the likely outcome, as things stand. However, the risk is assymetric as I think the upper limit on the Tories is less than the potential downside if the campaign goes pear-shaped. In other words, if you want to bet on the Tories doing better than 349 you can probably do so with less risk using other markets.

    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.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    edited November 2019
    Marcus01 said:

    I haven't posted on here for about 5 years. I would still sell Labour at 198. I am canvassing in a knife edge seat in London (Richmond) and we are finding labour voters who would will vote con to make sure that Corbyn and his cronies are well and truly killed off

    Welcome back, Marcus!
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,124
    FPT

    (((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?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,083
    edited November 2019
    Quincel said:

    Quincel said:

    What am I missing about the Greens? That 1.5 Sell seems amazing. Where is their credible second seat?

    They seem confident of a good run at Stroud, I fail to see why
    Agree, and the bookies have them at 33/1 with good reason. I hear rumours about Isle of Wight, but with no Brexit Party candidate and a solid Leave seat that seems fantasy (it needs a 17% swing from 3rd place). Indeed, many of their 'targets' are Tory seats which are going to be hugely difficult.

    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.
    The IOW is their second highest vote tally in 2017, but they start from third and, despite
    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.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    Marcus01 said:

    I haven't posted on here for about 5 years. I would still sell Labour at 198. I am canvassing in a knife edge seat in London (Richmond) and we are finding labour voters who would will vote con to make sure that Corbyn and his cronies are well and truly killed off

    In Richmond ?!
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,083

    FPT

    "No it doesn't. 4 member constituencies is just looking to reverse engineer a system to suit your agenda. 4x the constituency size means what can still be quite large areas with then an incentive to prioritise the larger populations within those areas."

    For Single Transferable Vote to work you need constituencies returning between 6 and 10 members - even in Ireland they are far too small to be proportional. Also you should not have by-elections under STV as the largest party will always hoover up seats as representatives of smaller parties die. If we did turn to STV then the electorate would move away from the centre as people voted for what they really wanted rather than what they thought they could have. Would favour hard left and Brexit at the same time. Then, like in Ireland they would all go into informal coalition and stick two fingers up at the electorate.

    And at that size, you start to lose the local link with MPs. It's not so bad in cities - a single Birmingham or South Yorkshire 'constituency' perhaps, with 6-10 people representing them.

    But out in the sticks, you'd end up with the whole of Cumbria and Northumberland in the same region - or Worcs, Herefordshire and Shropshire. That's a big ask for 'local' representation.

    (I'm in favour of a more proportional system, by the way... but I do think this will remain a key and well-principled argument against)
    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.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,083
    Pulpstar said:

    Marcus01 said:

    I haven't posted on here for about 5 years. I would still sell Labour at 198. I am canvassing in a knife edge seat in London (Richmond) and we are finding labour voters who would will vote con to make sure that Corbyn and his cronies are well and truly killed off

    In Richmond ?!
    Anecdotes of clueless Labour voters arent particularly useful. And what Labour voters might do in an unusual seat like that tells little about their national prospects, anyway.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    edited November 2019
    felix said:

    FPT

    (((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?

    Didn't we have reports of disheartened Labour canvassers early in the campaign in 2017? They probably weren't wrong, since the position in the national polls dramatically changed during the final few weeks.
  • FensterFenster Posts: 2,115
    I still think there is a good chance the polls will turn and tighten, with the narrative changing after the debates BUT, as to those who question the Tory lead, I live in the South Wales valleys and know nobody who doesn't laugh with disdain when Corbyn's name is mentioned. We have a lot of ex servicemen in the rugby club and they positively despise him.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,841
    Quincel said:

    Quincel said:

    What am I missing about the Greens? That 1.5 Sell seems amazing. Where is their credible second seat?

    They seem confident of a good run at Stroud, I fail to see why
    Agree, and the bookies have them at 33/1 with good reason. I hear rumours about Isle of Wight, but with no Brexit Party candidate and a solid Leave seat that seems fantasy (it needs a 17% swing from 3rd place). Indeed, many of their 'targets' are Tory seats which are going to be hugely difficult.

    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.
    Yes agreed. Unless there is a dramatic unwind of 2017 in Bristol I just don't see it. Norwich South (my constituency) has good green support but they arent toppling Clive Lewis, even at their very best 20% here would be 'pushing it'. They also haven't got placards out yet which they are usually very very quick on. Not a good sign here for them.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    Bad news for Bozo the High Court rules tomorrow’s ITV debate can be just him and Corbyn .

    I’m sure he’d have preferred the court ruled in favour of the Lib Dems and the SNP.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,841
    felix said:

    FPT

    (((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?

    He goes on to say basically Tories in course to win, but not by 80 or 90. So, 10% lead territory which isn't a mile off the polling.
    He is an hysterical old twit
  • brokenwheelbrokenwheel Posts: 3,352
    Fenster said:

    I still think there is a good chance the polls will turn and tighten, with the narrative changing after the debates BUT, as to those who question the Tory lead, I live in the South Wales valleys and know nobody who doesn't laugh with disdain when Corbyn's name is mentioned. We have a lot of ex servicemen in the rugby club and they positively despise him.

    Well yes, but Corbyn was Labour leader in 2017 too and naff all good that did.

    Worth noting that the favoured PM poll mentioned earlier is not remarkably different from the same point in the 2017 campaign.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    nico67 said:

    Bad news for Bozo the High Court rules tomorrow’s ITV debate can be just him and Corbyn .

    I’m sure he’d have preferred the court ruled in favour of the Lib Dems and the SNP.

    Would he? Risks a repeat of 2010 with the others in there.
  • RobD said:

    A reply on that thread makes a good point - if Boris was in a big debate with all the party leaders, he'd be the only leaver there.
    PB's favourite meme for the last 3 years: Corbyn's a leaver.
  • RobD said:

    nico67 said:

    Bad news for Bozo the High Court rules tomorrow’s ITV debate can be just him and Corbyn .

    I’m sure he’d have preferred the court ruled in favour of the Lib Dems and the SNP.

    Would he? Risks a repeat of 2010 with the others in there.
    Exactly. It would have given Boris an excuse to pull out.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    RobD said:

    A reply on that thread makes a good point - if Boris was in a big debate with all the party leaders, he'd be the only leaver there.
    PB's favourite meme for the last 3 years: Corbyn's a leaver.
    True, but the bulk of his party isn't.
  • IanB2 said:


    FPT

    "No it doesn't. 4 member constituencies is just looking to reverse engineer a system to suit your agenda. 4x the constituency size means what can still be quite large areas with then an incentive to prioritise the larger populations within those areas."

    For Single Transferable Vote to work you need constituencies returning between 6 and 10 members - even in Ireland they are far too small to be proportional. Also you should not have by-elections under STV as the largest party will always hoover up seats as representatives of smaller parties die. If we did turn to STV then the electorate would move away from the centre as people voted for what they really wanted rather than what they thought they could have. Would favour hard left and Brexit at the same time. Then, like in Ireland they would all go into informal coalition and stick two fingers up at the electorate.

    And at that size, you start to lose the local link with MPs. It's not so bad in cities - a single Birmingham or South Yorkshire 'constituency' perhaps, with 6-10 people representing them.

    But out in the sticks, you'd end up with the whole of Cumbria and Northumberland in the same region - or Worcs, Herefordshire and Shropshire. That's a big ask for 'local' representation.

    (I'm in favour of a more proportional system, by the way... but I do think this will remain a key and well-principled argument against)
    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.
    You clearly live in a city to say that! How would towns be better represented by merging them with many other towns or neighbouring big cities?

    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.
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 3,949
    edited November 2019
    IanB2 said:

    Quincel said:

    Quincel said:

    What am I missing about the Greens? That 1.5 Sell seems amazing. Where is their credible second seat?

    They seem confident of a good run at Stroud, I fail to see why
    Agree, and the bookies have them at 33/1 with good reason. I hear rumours about Isle of Wight, but with no Brexit Party candidate and a solid Leave seat that seems fantasy (it needs a 17% swing from 3rd place). Indeed, many of their 'targets' are Tory seats which are going to be hugely difficult.

    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.
    The IOW is their second highest vote tally in 2017, but they start from third and, despite
    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.
    Yes, I reckon the IoW was the only real win for the Greens in the Remain Alliance seats (Bristol West too, in fairness), but with BXP standing down it's surely a huge ask. Actually, looking at the other seats it's even more bizarre than I thought at the time what they chose/got.

    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.
  • FensterFenster Posts: 2,115

    Fenster said:

    I still think there is a good chance the polls will turn and tighten, with the narrative changing after the debates BUT, as to those who question the Tory lead, I live in the South Wales valleys and know nobody who doesn't laugh with disdain when Corbyn's name is mentioned. We have a lot of ex servicemen in the rugby club and they positively despise him.

    Well yes, but Corbyn was Labour leader in 2017 too and naff all good that did.

    Worth noting that the favoured PM poll mentioned earlier is not remarkably different from the same point in the 2017 campaign.
    Yes, and I still think the hardcore will hold their noses, but he'll have a lot of stay-at-homes this time.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    A bit OT. Is there really going to be six debates with Johnson and Corbyn as listed in the table on the wikipedia page for the election? While I do enjoy a good debate, that does seem a bit excessive.
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 3,949
    RobD said:

    A bit OT. Is there really going to be six debates with Johnson and Corbyn as listed in the table on the wikipedia page for the election? While I do enjoy a good debate, that does seem a bit excessive.

    In a short campaign too. There will be nothing else on!
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,958
    Pulpstar said:

    Marcus01 said:

    I haven't posted on here for about 5 years. I would still sell Labour at 198. I am canvassing in a knife edge seat in London (Richmond) and we are finding labour voters who would will vote con to make sure that Corbyn and his cronies are well and truly killed off

    In Richmond ?!
    Maybe that £10k bet on Zac wasn't quite so dumb.....
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074
    felix said:

    FPT

    (((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?

    What does that mean? What are they experiencing?
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 3,949

    Pulpstar said:

    Marcus01 said:

    I haven't posted on here for about 5 years. I would still sell Labour at 198. I am canvassing in a knife edge seat in London (Richmond) and we are finding labour voters who would will vote con to make sure that Corbyn and his cronies are well and truly killed off

    In Richmond ?!
    Maybe that £10k bet on Zac wasn't quite so dumb.....
    I had a small fortune on him winning in 2017. My God was that nailbiting. But given how big the swing was at the by-election and how the national picture looked it should have been nailed on!
  • I see Randy Andy is in more trouble.

    The party that promises to abolish the parasite Royal Family gets my vote.
  • https://twitter.com/Reuters

    New ICM poll for @Reuters:
    Conservatives 42% (+3)
    Labour 32% (+1)
    Lib Dems 13% (-2)
    Brexit Party 5% (-3)
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    jaichind said:

    https://twitter.com/Reuters

    New ICM poll for @Reuters:
    Conservatives 42% (+3)
    Labour 32% (+1)
    Lib Dems 13% (-2)
    Brexit Party 5% (-3)

    :o
  • jaichind said:

    https://twitter.com/Reuters

    New ICM poll for @Reuters:
    Conservatives 42% (+3)
    Labour 32% (+1)
    Lib Dems 13% (-2)
    Brexit Party 5% (-3)

    Gold Standard 😎
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    RobD said:

    nico67 said:

    Bad news for Bozo the High Court rules tomorrow’s ITV debate can be just him and Corbyn .

    I’m sure he’d have preferred the court ruled in favour of the Lib Dems and the SNP.

    Would he? Risks a repeat of 2010 with the others in there.
    The risks are much greater for Bozo in a one on one debate . Corbyn has very little to lose .
  • Swinson must so far be proving something of a disappointment to the LibDems. After the tedium that was Cable, they must have hoped that she would prove a breath of fresh air. However her crass naivety in declaring that if successful the party would simply revoke Article 50 and thereby scrap any prospect of Brrexit taking effect (against the wishes of the majority in the referendum) is proving to have done for her. I can only imagine this problem will exacerbate during the GE campaign as the other parties focus on this faux pas.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,398
    nico67 said:

    I still think a final score of Tory 40% Lab 25% Lib 15% Brexit and Green 5% and the rest to the SNP, PC and others is likely. IF Boris comes through the head to head with Corbyn relatively unscathed then a Tory majority should become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

    The Greens always get badly squeezed by Labour on Election Day...

    Well this Labourite will be giving one Green a squeeze on election day, but that won't stop her votong Green Party!
  • sarissasarissa Posts: 1,749
    According to the BBC report, "Lord Justice Davis and Mr Justice Warby said ITV was not carrying out a "public function" with the debate, so the challenge was dismissed."
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    nico67 said:

    RobD said:

    nico67 said:

    Bad news for Bozo the High Court rules tomorrow’s ITV debate can be just him and Corbyn .

    I’m sure he’d have preferred the court ruled in favour of the Lib Dems and the SNP.

    Would he? Risks a repeat of 2010 with the others in there.
    The risks are much greater for Bozo in a one on one debate . Corbyn has very little to lose .
    Have to say that I disagree. There are downsides for both formats, and not many upsides. To say the risks are much greater for one is over-egging it somewhat.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,279

    Swinson must so far be proving something of a disappointment to the LibDems. After the tedium that was Cable, they must have hoped that she would prove a breath of fresh air. However her crass naivety in declaring that if successful the party would simply revoke Article 50 and thereby scrap any prospect of Brrexit taking effect (against the wishes of the majority in the referendum) is proving to have done for her. I can only imagine this problem will exacerbate during the GE campaign as the other parties focus on this faux pas.

    Layla Moran would have been a better choice for leader IMO.
  • sarissa said:

    According to the BBC report, "Lord Justice Davis and Mr Justice Warby said ITV was not carrying out a "public function" with the debate, so the challenge was dismissed."
    It was always 2010 redux.

    The SNP made a big stink then and lost.
  • RobD said:

    jaichind said:

    https://twitter.com/Reuters

    New ICM poll for @Reuters:
    Conservatives 42% (+3)
    Labour 32% (+1)
    Lib Dems 13% (-2)
    Brexit Party 5% (-3)

    :o
    Got your poll for the day :smile:
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    BluerBlue said:

    RobD said:

    jaichind said:

    https://twitter.com/Reuters

    New ICM poll for @Reuters:
    Conservatives 42% (+3)
    Labour 32% (+1)
    Lib Dems 13% (-2)
    Brexit Party 5% (-3)

    :o
    Got your poll for the day :smile:
    And only about nine hours after the last one.
  • https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1196471156972412934

    Are labour now actively trying to lose?
  • Hmm. In recent history, haven't the betting markets been mostly iffy at predicting actual results?
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    The ICM is pretty good for Labour given some of the other polling .

  • I see Randy Andy is in more trouble.

    The party that promises to abolish the parasite Royal Family gets my vote.

    The party that promises to skip a royal generation and go straight from HMQ to King William the howevermany will get everyone's vote.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,083
    Quincel said:

    IanB2 said:

    Quincel said:

    Quincel said:

    What am I missing about the Greens? That 1.5 Sell seems amazing. Where is their credible second seat?

    They seem confident of a good run at Stroud, I fail to see why
    Agree, and the bookies have them at 33/1 with good reason. I hear rumours about Isle of Wight, but with no Brexit Party candidate and a solid Leave seat that seems fantasy (it needs a 17% swing from 3rd place). Indeed, many of their 'targets' are Tory seats which are going to be hugely difficult.

    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.
    The IOW is their second highest vote tally in 2017, but they start from third and, despite
    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.
    Yes, I reckon the IoW was the only real win for the Greens in the Remain Alliance seats (Bristol West too, in fairness), but with BXP standing down it's surely a huge ask. Actually, looking at the other seats it's even more bizarre than I thought at the time what they chose/got.

    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.
    For a real outside chance, maybe Dulwich? Bartley is a capable guy and co-leader. Helen Hayes as MP hasn’t made much of an impact, and an area like Dulwich might throw up a Remain Alliance surprise? The LibDems and Greens poll reasonably well in the borough at local level. I don’t know how much help and finance Bartley can pull in from across London?
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818
    nico67 said:

    The ICM is pretty good for Labour given some of the other polling .

    Yep. And in line with Hodges' observations
  • nico67 said:

    RobD said:

    nico67 said:

    Bad news for Bozo the High Court rules tomorrow’s ITV debate can be just him and Corbyn .

    I’m sure he’d have preferred the court ruled in favour of the Lib Dems and the SNP.

    Would he? Risks a repeat of 2010 with the others in there.
    The risks are much greater for Bozo in a one on one debate . Corbyn has very little to lose .
    Except if Boris does well tomorrow - against the expectations of those who consider him a bumbler - he could put Corbyn away right now. Exciting times.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,958
    DavidL said:

    The more interesting one I think is the Lib Dems. If I was a spread bettor I would be selling at 29. The Tory strength probably means fewer gains than they would have hoped and there is likely to be the odd loss too. Their polling has been seriously disappointing to date.

    As I pointed out at 6.44am, with Con 45% and LD 13%, that represents only a 1.6% swing Con to LD.
  • sarissa said:

    According to the BBC report, "Lord Justice Davis and Mr Justice Warby said ITV was not carrying out a "public function" with the debate, so the challenge was dismissed."
    Isn't that the motto on the BBC's coat of arms?
  • nico67 said:

    The ICM is pretty good for Labour given some of the other polling .

    When 10 down is a good poll for a party that has been in opposition for almost ten years...
  • Swinson must so far be proving something of a disappointment to the LibDems. After the tedium that was Cable, they must have hoped that she would prove a breath of fresh air. However her crass naivety in declaring that if successful the party would simply revoke Article 50 and thereby scrap any prospect of Brrexit taking effect (against the wishes of the majority in the referendum) is proving to have done for her. I can only imagine this problem will exacerbate during the GE campaign as the other parties focus on this faux pas.

    I don't think the other parties need to bother with her now, she has so made a mockery of the Lib Dems. How a leader of the party with the name Democrats in it could make such an obviously undemocratic pledge is beyond me, she shot herself in the foot royally. The big parties don't need to focus on that, the media is content to do it themselves in any interview.

    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
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,958
    jaichind said:

    https://twitter.com/Reuters

    New ICM poll for @Reuters:
    Conservatives 42% (+3)
    Labour 32% (+1)
    Lib Dems 13% (-2)
    Brexit Party 5% (-3)

    Libdems and Brexit Party in a squeezy race to the bottom....
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    sarissa said:

    According to the BBC report, "Lord Justice Davis and Mr Justice Warby said ITV was not carrying out a "public function" with the debate, so the challenge was dismissed."
    Isn't that the motto on the BBC's coat of arms?
    Given that the case was about ITV's debate, that doesn't seem relevant. ;)
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,124

    https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1196471156972412934

    Are labour now actively trying to lose?

    Good lord - what are they on?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,958
    BluerBlue said:

    nico67 said:

    The ICM is pretty good for Labour given some of the other polling .

    When 10 down is a good poll for a party that has been in opposition for almost ten years...
    ICM also represents a net 1% swing Lab to Con.....(and a 2.5% swing LibDem to Con). Which in the non-Barnesian Universe = more Tory seats gained/saved.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,398

    jaichind said:

    https://twitter.com/Reuters

    New ICM poll for @Reuters:
    Conservatives 42% (+3)
    Labour 32% (+1)
    Lib Dems 13% (-2)
    Brexit Party 5% (-3)

    Libdems and Brexit Party in a squeezy race to the bottom....
    Brexit Party have withdrawn half their candidates, so you would expect their national vote share to drop.

    What is the LibDems excuse?
  • BluerBlue said:

    nico67 said:

    RobD said:

    nico67 said:

    Bad news for Bozo the High Court rules tomorrow’s ITV debate can be just him and Corbyn .

    I’m sure he’d have preferred the court ruled in favour of the Lib Dems and the SNP.

    Would he? Risks a repeat of 2010 with the others in there.
    The risks are much greater for Bozo in a one on one debate . Corbyn has very little to lose .
    Except if Boris does well tomorrow - against the expectations of those who consider him a bumbler - he could put Corbyn away right now. Exciting times.
    Get on iplayer and watch Corbyn on Marr. That is the problem for both of them -- Corbyn seems to have a cold and can barely talk. This means he risks coming across as an impotent old duffer, and Boris risks appearing to bully an invalid.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    BluerBlue said:

    nico67 said:

    The ICM is pretty good for Labour given some of the other polling .

    When 10 down is a good poll for a party that has been in opposition for almost ten years...
    Well compared to the 17 point lead in the YouGov poll Labour will happily take the ICM poll .

    I think we need to see the fieldwork dates . Have they changed their methodology to reflect the BP standing down in over 350 seats .
  • ArthurArthur Posts: 63

    Quincel said:

    What am I missing about the Greens? That 1.5 Sell seems amazing. Where is their credible second seat?

    They seem confident of a good run at Stroud, I fail to see why
    The Steinerite and Extinction Rebellion vote? Self-delusion is their stock in trade, but they do have a big presence in the area.



  • VerulamiusVerulamius Posts: 1,429
    https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Lib-Dems-v-ITV-decision.pdf

    It is a two page decision. Even if ITV had been exercising a public function the Lib Dems and SNP would have lost.
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818
    Labour still has a massive card to play in student fees.
  • RobD said:

    sarissa said:

    According to the BBC report, "Lord Justice Davis and Mr Justice Warby said ITV was not carrying out a "public function" with the debate, so the challenge was dismissed."
    Isn't that the motto on the BBC's coat of arms?
    Given that the case was about ITV's debate, that doesn't seem relevant. ;)
    The joke referred to ITV not carrying out a public function being the BBC's new motto. You can see why I never made it as a comedian (or as much else, unfortunately).
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    edited November 2019
    nico67 said:

    BluerBlue said:

    nico67 said:

    The ICM is pretty good for Labour given some of the other polling .

    When 10 down is a good poll for a party that has been in opposition for almost ten years...
    Well compared to the 17 point lead in the YouGov poll Labour will happily take the ICM poll .

    I think we need to see the fieldwork dates . Have they changed their methodology to reflect the BP standing down in over 350 seats .
    Fieldwork 15-18th Nov, and they account for BXP not standing.

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-election-poll-icm/uk-pm-johnsons-conservatives-extend-lead-over-labour-icm-poll-idUSKBN1XS22L
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    RobD said:

    sarissa said:

    According to the BBC report, "Lord Justice Davis and Mr Justice Warby said ITV was not carrying out a "public function" with the debate, so the challenge was dismissed."
    Isn't that the motto on the BBC's coat of arms?
    Given that the case was about ITV's debate, that doesn't seem relevant. ;)
    The joke referred to ITV not carrying out a public function being the BBC's new motto. You can see why I never made it as a comedian (or as much else, unfortunately).
    Ah, my apologies :D
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    Labour still has a massive card to play in student fees.

    Except that's already their policy, isn't it?
  • https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1196471156972412934

    Are labour now actively trying to lose?

    Yes.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    felix said:

    https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1196471156972412934

    Are labour now actively trying to lose?

    Good lord - what are they on?
    Have they legalized marijuana yet because a lot seems to be going around at Labour HQ !

    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 .

  • BluerBlue said:

    nico67 said:

    RobD said:

    nico67 said:

    Bad news for Bozo the High Court rules tomorrow’s ITV debate can be just him and Corbyn .

    I’m sure he’d have preferred the court ruled in favour of the Lib Dems and the SNP.

    Would he? Risks a repeat of 2010 with the others in there.
    The risks are much greater for Bozo in a one on one debate . Corbyn has very little to lose .
    Except if Boris does well tomorrow - against the expectations of those who consider him a bumbler - he could put Corbyn away right now. Exciting times.
    Get on iplayer and watch Corbyn on Marr. That is the problem for both of them -- Corbyn seems to have a cold and can barely talk. This means he risks coming across as an impotent old duffer, and Boris risks appearing to bully an invalid.
    Tory strategists iirc wanted Boris vs Corbyn, head to head, in order to help frame this election as being a choice between the two leaders.
  • ArthurArthur Posts: 63
    edited November 2019
    felix said:

    https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1196471156972412934

    Are labour now actively trying to lose?

    Good lord - what are they on?
    The same as Cambridge University? But it's hard to see how Labour wins any votes with this, and easy to see how they lose some.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,958
    Arthur said:

    Quincel said:

    What am I missing about the Greens? That 1.5 Sell seems amazing. Where is their credible second seat?

    They seem confident of a good run at Stroud, I fail to see why
    The Steinerite and Extinction Rebellion vote? Self-delusion is their stock in trade, but they do have a big presence in the area.
    I wouldn't want to rely on the ER vote when they've gone on hunger strike three weeks before polling day.....
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    edited November 2019
    Well, it's too early to be sure BUT it looks like I may (hallelujah!) have been wrong about the inevitable upwards climb of Labour a la 2017. Though - just throwing this one out there - maybe this election isn't entirely unlike 2017 nonetheless...

    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...
  • Labour still has a massive card to play in student fees.

    If students don't already know that Labour wants to give them every bribe under the sun, they hardly merit their place at a university...
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    edited November 2019
    BluerBlue said:

    Labour still has a massive card to play in student fees.

    If students don't already know that Labour wants to give them every bribe under the sun, they hardly merit their place at a university...
    Nor do they merit a place if they don't realise that they would be the ones paying for the bribe to themselves.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,958

    BluerBlue said:

    nico67 said:

    RobD said:

    nico67 said:

    Bad news for Bozo the High Court rules tomorrow’s ITV debate can be just him and Corbyn .

    I’m sure he’d have preferred the court ruled in favour of the Lib Dems and the SNP.

    Would he? Risks a repeat of 2010 with the others in there.
    The risks are much greater for Bozo in a one on one debate . Corbyn has very little to lose .
    Except if Boris does well tomorrow - against the expectations of those who consider him a bumbler - he could put Corbyn away right now. Exciting times.
    Get on iplayer and watch Corbyn on Marr. That is the problem for both of them -- Corbyn seems to have a cold and can barely talk. This means he risks coming across as an impotent old duffer, and Boris risks appearing to bully an invalid.
    Oh I don't know. "Let's kick Michael Foot's stick away!" still got a cheer....

    (Still seems a world out of whack that had Kenny Everett as a Tory cheer-leader!)
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,287

    Labour still has a massive card to play in student fees.

    ..amd its irrelevant because no one believes Labour can win..

    Perhaps they should offer free beer to all or any other loon policy that they might think populist.
  • nico67 said:

    felix said:

    https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1196471156972412934

    Are labour now actively trying to lose?

    Good lord - what are they on?
    Have they legalized marijuana yet because a lot seems to be going around at Labour HQ !

    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 .

    I thought the idea that "the Muslim vote" is a key firewall for Labour to be a rather racist and not really practical stereotype.

    Muslims make up fewer than 5% of the population.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,958

    Well, it's too early to be sure BUT it looks like I may (hallelujah!) have been wrong about the inevitable upwards climb of Labour a la 2017. Though - just throwing this one out there - maybe this election isn't entirely unlike 2017 nonetheless...

    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 a swing of 1% TO THE BLUES! Chill, friend......
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    Well, it's too early to be sure BUT it looks like I may (hallelujah!) have been wrong about the inevitable upwards climb of Labour a la 2017. Though - just throwing this one out there - maybe this election isn't entirely unlike 2017 nonetheless...

    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...

    They actually seem to be tracking their 2017 progress quite nicely at the moment. Unfortunately for them, the Tories are improving rather than simply staying static. Next week or so will tell us if the trend continues to match 2017, or if it starts to plateau.


  • I don't think the other parties need to bother with her now, she has so made a mockery of the Lib Dems. How a leader of the party with the name Democrats in it could make such an obviously undemocratic pledge is beyond me, she shot herself in the foot royally. The big parties don't need to focus on that, the media is content to do it themselves in any interview.

    The policy belongs to the whole party - not just Jo Swinson. It was overwhelmingly passed by vote of members at conference. I wasn't there and I wouldn't have voted for it myself but we are where we are. I don't think it's had any bearings on the polling situation though as we didn't go down in the polls when it was announced. There are other factors at play squeezing our vote - and I don't really mind being squeezed so long as it's where it doesn't matter (which is what I suspect to be the case).

This discussion has been closed.