Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » How a CON majority moved from a 31% chance to victory – the GE
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » How a CON majority moved from a 31% chance to victory – the GE2019 betting timeline
Before we move on from looking at GE19 I thought it might be useful, as with previous big political events like the referendum, to put up the betting chart.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Good chart, Mike.
>Nunu
>Just astonishing some of the Tory majorities in the East Midlands ex >coalfields.
>It's like the voters there were looking for an excuse to go wholesale >from Labour to Tory.
I'm quite interested in the role of the military in this.
Even though I am not from a military family, I still had a brother of a schoolfriend who was in the Droppin Well when the IRA murdered 17 people.
Friends of Terrorists are not Friends of Military Recruitment areas. Corbyn's known history as such will not have helped.
Never ever following the betting odds on the day again.
But people were too cautious, my self included, because of the memories of 2017.
On election day it was obvious that something was going on outside of London, there was silence beyond the M25 from Labour campaigners.
What I did know was that wherever I travelled , Corbyn was loathed but nearly everyone I chatted to, The "unbiased" press further muddied the waters because even through they knew what was going on, they could not say.
The one thing I do recall was a vox pop on the BBC WATO where 6 of the 8 if they had to choose were going to vote Tory(in fact for BORIS). I found that strong evidence and that the song "There's only one Jeremy Corbyn " song was still true, but in a different way. He was loathed.
How much he was loathed together with the unrealistic policies came out in the results.
I live in the E Mids. It really was largely about Brexit - a frustration with parliament and a strong desire to end free movement.
I don`t think they were "looking for an excuse". Reasons were much stronger than that - many people still underestimate the hatred that is out there for the EU. (I don`t agree, but there you go.)
As others have said, a very interesting graph.
Example: Gloria on GMB
https://www.express.co.uk/videos/6116976775001/Labour-De-Piero-says-party-betrayed-life-long-voters
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Droppin_Well_bombing
Said how up to exit poll, twas tad concerned about the result. He said, if only I'd asked him. He said all his normally 100% Labour family, friends, indeed anyone he knew, all backed Boris.
All thought Boris would give things a go, they were completely hacked off waiting to Brexit and all hated Corbyn.
Suspect those 3 points are replicated all over the place.
If Boris does make a go of it, they ain't going back to Labour.
Mansfield has had Independent Mayors for about 3 or 4 terms now, with a Lab squeaked mayoral victory this time.
Ashfield has Zadrozny and friends, who are relatively formidable.
Bolsover has lots of Indys, who failed to be coordinated at
Will the ex-Red Wall be Tory vs Indy next time? At least in Local Government contests? Or a patchwork quilt?
I would see Lib Dems as having burnt their boats in this immediate area.
Elsewhere?
https://www.britishelectionstudy.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/wordcloud_leave-1024x575.png
EDIT If not, God knows? Farage again?
OTOH there are many synonyms there - sovereignty, control, laws, democracy, decisions, freedom etc which means the words appear smaller depending upon which word gets chosen.
Data shows that sovereignty/control was a bigger reason than immigration.
After all the issue with immigration is never with your nice neighbour it's always the foreigners you don't know / meet.
1. Self-sorting by attitudes to foreigners
2. Self-sorting by economic vulnerability to immigration - perhaps including socio-economic category, or industry of employment
3. Something intrinsic to education or inherited family attitudes in Northern towns that doesn't exist in Manchester Sheffield etc. (seems very unlikely!)
4. Larger, thus more impactful realised numbers of evidently non-British people in small towns than in Manchester Sheffield etc. (seems very unlikely - but I could be wrong!)
That poster, FFS.
https://twitter.com/DylanSpielman/status/1208060699844468737
Immigration was used, quite deliberately, to drive down low and semi-skilled wages. Exactly in the manner that Australian Unions campaigned against when the modern Australian immigration laws were created. Why should the low and semi-skilled indigenous rush to applaud such actions?
Your use of the phrase "The Blob" itself highlights a problematic aspect of the argument that we have to drill down into: Conservative advisors and a friendly media like to propagate arguments that sympathetic potential voters are under attack, perhaps even literal attack, by people who are similar to the Labour Party, because this rhetoric has crippled support for left parties among white people in other English-speaking countries before it happened in the UK. It's a problematic aspect because that rhetoric always goes hand-in-hand with racial appeals and is broadcast at white voters, so even if this is the true mechanism, it can't be used to dispose of the question of attitudes toward foreigners. But in any case it means it's a question, at least in part, of what makes rhetoric effective, rather than what literally happened.
https://twitter.com/DylanSpielman/status/1208060771659386880?s=20
The choice was fundamental to the beliefs of those involved.
As to the use of immigration to hold down wages - read some of the statements from business and politicians from the Blair era.
Not helped by the fact stories are STILL emerging: Sheffield today, for instance.
Remain 48%
And why not? The British working classes, without their permission, were subjected to an historic and unprecedented influx of foreigners - at one stage 600,000 a year - and just told to tolerate it. And this went on for a decade. And one of the reasons it happened was because the Left simply wanted to "rub the noses of the right in diversity".
Shaming.
The marvel of it is that the British voters, in their essential decency, just became slightly ethnocentric, and voted for Brexit and One Nation Tories.
Lesser nations might have voted full on hard right or Far Right. See Sweden right now, where the Swedish Democrats are way ahead in the polls, and they have recent roots in overt Fascism.
Actually holding the officials in question to account would be nice - it would indeed, as you suggest, have gone someway to undoing the damage.
Trust is a funny thing. Takes a long time to build. Can be blown away in a single minute. Demanding it as a moral right is foolish.
Young people 18-24 have an energy and curiosity denied everyone else, they are the market everyone wants, because they drive big change and new fashions. People over 55 are entirely set in their ways. Etc.
Proven to work.
Brexit is a political view on one issue. No more, no less.
I couldn't care less that 600k foreigners a year were coming. I don't give a damn about that.
So there is no level of migration which might influence your vote? 1m a year? 2m? 10m?
I don't believe you.
Brexiteers who claim Brexit had NOTHING to do with immigration are as absurd as Remainers who claim Free Movement and Mass Immigration are wholly brilliant and any anxiety is racist
They may be right. Also maybe just laziness
Con - lose 13 seats
Lab - lose 29 seats
LD - lose 4 seats
SNP - lose 1 seat
Plaid lose - 2 seats
DUP - lose 1 seat
This would give a Con majority of 104.
That said there are a couple of things that might make the Cons hesitate:
1) Major boundary changes in areas like Teesside, the Black Country and North Wales would make it harder for the new Con MPs to build up incumbancy.
2) The situation would be bad for the Unionists in Scotland with LDs losing 3, Lab there only seat, Con 1, and SNP only losing 1.
The Cons should definitely get new boundaries through but it might be better to start again with 640 or 650 MPs.
Not that it makes any difference. Brexit is not a cause, it is a view on a binary issue.
If there was a referendum on whether we should have the Death Penalty and an unofficial anti-Death Penalty group made a vile poster would that make me wrong for still voting against us having the Death Penalty? Should every anti-Death Penalty voter be scorned because one unofficial anti-Death Penalty group was repugnant?
So some Brexiteers were worried about immigration in an unevolved way, who cares. Most ultra Remainers are c*nts, Also they are surprisingly stupid, which is why they lost. And would, I think, have lost again.
Also saw on Saturday that the new Metrolink extension to Trafford Centre is to all intents and purposes finished, at least at the Media City end. 15th April I believe is the slated start date.
Due to a collision in my hashtables, I am now picturing Millwall fans practising with G36s behind the church at Sutton Courtney....
The other issue I have with the boundary commission is that right now we have seats that vary in size from 25,000 to 100,000. That's a ridiculously broad spread.
But the proposal to have seats being just +/- 2.5% is equally too tight. It means that there can be little recognition of natural geographic boundaries. You end up with seats that contain a bit of three different towns just to make everything fit such a narrow spread.
Better to recognise natural boundaries and make the range +/- 10%. It would mean that the range of constituency sizes was dramatically reduced, while avoiding splitting natural boundaries up too much.
MPs will have less time for individual constituents and have to represent the interests of a wider area.
If anything, there should be more MPs not less. It would also have the side effect of government and opposition having a wider pool of talent to draw from.