Of the two latest national opinion polls, both have Trump in the lead. Okay, they are both tracking polls but there's a golden rule on here about not cherry picking the polls we wish to see. Trump leads by 3% and 1% respectively:
What we can state is that there is some serious value to be had on Trump.
If anyone is tempted to bet on Trump based on this post I strongly advise that they do little research into American polling companies first - if you still want to bet on an outcome that only Rasmussen & LA Times predict then good luck to you.
Serious value? I imagine that 5.8 might be close to the actual probability; i.e., the bookies win.
I'd go 5-10% - ie >9/1
My last trade was to lay Trump @ 5.9
I'd definitely back him @ 20/1 and consider backing at 10/1.
You can effectively get odds on POTUS Trump ~9/1 on the state markets.
It has probably been said down stream but despite an absolutely massive effort and swamping Witney itself in the last week, LD's only knocked 2% out of the Labour vote. Even allowing for a strong local candidate that is disappointing and (cough) I did flag it up in the piece for PB a week or so ago.
Left wing voters have still not forgiven LD's for the Coalition I suspect. There were tweets from locals saying that the LD's are a centre right party and not an alternative to Labour
The irony is that on a policy by policy basis there was nowt but a gnat's testicle between the two candidates
With the slump in turnout at Witney what we do not know is where the LDs gained 23%? Did they just do a better GOTV and get a higher turnout from existing LD voters and some gains from Cons, Greens and Lab? The LDs certainly poured more resources in than the other parties.
Just looking at the results above, the biggest percentage vote drop was Tories, followed by UKIP, Labour and green.
Almost the safest Tory seat in England stayed Tory is the uninteresting headline result from Witney. Everything else is happening under the water. I don't think the result will change much in itself. The broader picture is that the UKIP vote is collapsing, which allows the Lib Dems to reestablish their Third Party position.
Too often a hard earned second place in a by election is dismissed as 'not good enough' or 'they should really be winning here' by journalists, so it's good to see an article praising a party for throwing everything at it and coming clear runners up.
It has probably been said down stream but despite an absolutely massive effort and swamping Witney itself in the last week, LD's only knocked 2% out of the Labour vote. Even allowing for a strong local candidate that is disappointing and (cough) I did flag it up in the piece for PB a week or so ago.
Left wing voters have still not forgiven LD's for the Coalition I suspect. There were tweets from locals saying that the LD's are a centre right party and not an alternative to Labour
The irony is that on a policy by policy basis there was nowt but a gnat's testicle between the two candidates
With the slump in turnout at Witney what we do not know is where the LDs gained 23%? Did they just do a better GOTV and get a higher turnout from existing LD voters and some gains from Cons, Greens and Lab? The LDs certainly poured more resources in than the other parties.
About 10x the resources!
But you know what? In the previous by-elections, they couldn't get their activists engaged. This time they did. That's a meaningful difference.
I think we pretty much get the message that it's all over bar the shouting for The Donald (unless we see the greatest polling disaster to end all polling disasters unfold)
Shall we talk about something else instead? How about AV? Or our best Jam making recipe's?
Personal Spin - Disappointing night for Theresa May, the Tory share of the vote is back to the 1997/2001 general election levels, when the Tories got massacred and had around 165 MPs.
Are Dave's Blue Liberals going back to the Yellow Peril? Alarming, all those seats in the South West now at risk.
Perhaps Corbyn won't lead Labour to the mother of all shellackings in 2020.
All of this makes an early election unlikely, even before we consider the awkwardness of the FTPA.
I think the SW seats are safer than the likes of the SE and Gloucestershire type seats. SW London, Bath, Cheltenham, Oxford W, Lewes etc. That's where a resurgent LibDem party will target.
2018 and London locals will be fascinating. Large parts are pro-Remain, Labour voters will have increasingly forgotten the coalition, and there's Heathrow expansion in the South West. I would expect the LibDems to make gains in Richmond, Kingston, Merton and Sutton. Twickenham, even with the local Conservative having first term incumbency, I think will be a LibDem gain. They might pick up one more.
I would be less optimistic about the LibDems prospects in the South West, ........
South East England outside London will be interesting. I would forecast a LibDem gain in Cambridge, largely because I think the Labour Party will be comfortably sub 30% and the LibDems will be on 10-14%. That's comfortably a five point swing in the Lab-LibDem gap, but only results in a single gain. Oxford West (or whatever the new seat is called) is also a possible.
I don't see a resurgence in Eastleigh, Eastbourne, Lewes, Bath, etc. I think there may be some narrowed majorities, and some increased council presence, but I think they will likely all stay Conservative in 2020.
In Scotland, the boundary reviews look to be *extremely* favourable for the LibDems (almost suspiciously so). They can reasonably expect to pick up both the Western Edinburgh seat and the Fife one.
So where does that leave them? Scotland 3 Wales 1 SW London 2-3 University Seats 1-2 Cumbria 1
9-10 + maybe they hold onto the successor seats in Southport, Sheffield, and Leeds.
I hold by my forecast of 10-14 seats in 2020.
It would be difficult for the LibDems to improve on their councillors in my neighbouring constituency of Eastleigh where they have 37 to the Tories 6, but I guess it's possible.
In Eastleigh the demise of UKIP could open up a few gains for the Conservatives.
With the invective in the POTUS race at historically unseen levels and Trump's concession debacle reverberating, it's worthy to pause to look at the gracious note left by Goerge Bush on the desk of the Oval Office the morning of Bill Clinton's inauguration :
Bush Snr was possibly the last decent President the US has seen.
The nasty Clinton "machine" ate him up and spat him out. I imagine he was pleased to be out of it by the end of the election.
The nastiness currently in the American system largely followed Newt Gingrich's "contract with America" followed by the rise of the tea party, which made an art of obstructionism. There is now an element in GOP congress that sees any compromise with the White House as almost treasonable -- and for that matter, any compromise with the mainstream Republican Party.
Be interesting to see if UKIP utterly collapses or can be brought back from the brink.
Reminds me of the latter day Western Roman Empire, when the likes of Honorius knifed Stilicho (his most able general) for fear he was a rival. The Empire's later rulers destroyed what remained of its strength with their infighting (cf Boniface and Aetius).
"Leave" won with a whole bunch of 'lazy voters' who will only ever turn out for the referendum and not for a BE in a million years.
I doubt they'll show up at a GE either much,
In terms of likely actual voters, the "remainers" may well outnumber the "leavers". Particularly with UKIP in crisis.
A very good point.
So why is the increasingly useless May basing her stupid Hard Brexit strategy on a bunch of once in a lifetime voters??!
Because, like it or not, we voted out, despite all the warning about what would happen.
We voted to LEAVE THE EU, not the single market/EEA and EFTA. May's scorched earth policy makes no sense, economic - or political.
Except it was mentioned numerous times by both sides that leaving the EU would mean leaving the single market.
Had a very illuminating conversation with an "in the know" earlier this week. Word from the heart of Brexit government is that it's headless chicken territory. Hundreds of experts in search of a single clue. A very senior figure in the government is pretty certain things are going to be as bad or worse than expected - not least because no practical idea to resolve the situation can get past the nutcase ideologues who seek to make our country poorer.
A shame the civil service wasn't allowed to start planning for it earlier.
Hard to plan for something when we don't even know what kind of Brexit we want.
Some effort at planning scenarios might have illuminated that decision.
Yes. They had one scenario coming out of the Treasury (the worst) and could easily have modelled a dozen different sets of assumptions. Also ther should have been planning by the civil servants into all the legislative implications of a LEAVE vote.
Personal Spin - Disappointing night for Theresa May, the Tory share of the vote is back to the 1997/2001 general election levels, when the Tories got massacred and had around 165 MPs.
Are Dave's Blue Liberals going back to the Yellow Peril? Alarming, all those seats in the South West now at risk.
Pro Tory spin - Second by election victory in 27 years for the Tory, Dave's personal vote unwinding.
Perhaps Corbyn won't lead Labour to the mother of all shellackings in 2020.
All of this makes an early election unlikely, even before we consider the awkwardness of the FTPA.
I think the SW seats are safer than the likes of the SE and Gloucestershire type seats. SW London, Bath, Cheltenham, Oxford W, Lewes etc. That's where a resurgent LibDem party will target.
2018 and London locals will be fascinating. Large parts are pro-Remain, Labour voters will have increasingly forgotten the coalition, and there's Heathrow expansion in the South West. I would expect the LibDems to make gains in Richmond, Kingston, Merton and Sutton. Twickenham, even with the local Conservative having first term incumbency, I think will be a LibDem gain. They might pick up one more.
I would be less optimistic about the LibDems prospects in the South West, ........
South East England outside London will be interesting. I would forecast a LibDem gain in Cambridge, largely because I think the Labour Party will be comfortably sub 30% and the LibDems will be on 10-14%. That's comfortably a five point swing in the Lab-LibDem gap, but only results in a single gain. Oxford West (or whatever the new seat is called) is also a possible.
I don't see a resurgence in Eastleigh, Eastbourne, Lewes, Bath, etc. I think there may be some narrowed majorities, and some increased council presence, but I think they will likely all stay Conservative in 2020.
In Scotland, the boundary reviews look to be *extremely* favourable for the LibDems (almost suspiciously so). They can reasonably expect to pick up both the Western Edinburgh seat and the Fife one.
So where does that leave them? Scotland 3 Wales 1 SW London 2-3 University Seats 1-2 Cumbria 1
9-10 + maybe they hold onto the successor seats in Southport, Sheffield, and Leeds.
I hold by my forecast of 10-14 seats in 2020.
It would be difficult for the LibDems to improve on their councillors in my neighbouring constituency of Eastleigh where they have 37 to the Tories 6, but I guess it's possible.
In Eastleigh the demise of UKIP could open up a few gains for the Conservatives.
UKIP will lose their 3 county councillors in Eastleigh next May and it will be to the Lib Dems not the Conservatives .
With the invective in the POTUS race at historically unseen levels and Trump's concession debacle reverberating, it's worthy to pause to look at the gracious note left by Goerge Bush on the desk of the Oval Office the morning of Bill Clinton's inauguration :
Bush Snr was possibly the last decent President the US has seen.
The nasty Clinton "machine" ate him up and spat him out. I imagine he was pleased to be out of it by the end of the election.
The nastiness currently in the American system largely followed Newt Gingrich's "contract with America" followed by the rise of the tea party, which made an art of obstructionism. There is now an element in GOP congress that sees any compromise with the White House as almost treasonable -- and for that matter, any compromise with the mainstream Republican Party.
With the invective in the POTUS race at historically unseen levels and Trump's concession debacle reverberating, it's worthy to pause to look at the gracious note left by Goerge Bush on the desk of the Oval Office the morning of Bill Clinton's inauguration :
Bush Snr was possibly the last decent President the US has seen.
The nasty Clinton "machine" ate him up and spat him out. I imagine he was pleased to be out of it by the end of the election.
The nastiness currently in the American system largely followed Newt Gingrich's "contract with America" followed by the rise of the tea party, which made an art of obstructionism. There is now an element in GOP congress that sees any compromise with the White House as almost treasonable -- and for that matter, any compromise with the mainstream Republican Party.
How much was the rise of the party based on Obamas race?
Almost the safest Tory seat in England stayed Tory is the uninteresting headline result from Witney. Everything else is happening under the water. I don't think the result will change much in itself. The broader picture is that the UKIP vote is collapsing, which allows the Lib Dems to reestablish their Third Party position.
Might be easier if Farron was any good in the first place. If the LDs can't profit from Corbyn's supine politics then they don't deserve to be taken seriously.
I think we pretty much get the message that it's all over bar the shouting for The Donald (unless we see the greatest polling disaster to end all polling disasters unfold)
Shall we talk about something else instead? How about AV? Or our best Jam making recipe's?
Sorry, loads more pointing, laughing and sneering at the Donald to be done.
With the invective in the POTUS race at historically unseen levels and Trump's concession debacle reverberating, it's worthy to pause to look at the gracious note left by Goerge Bush on the desk of the Oval Office the morning of Bill Clinton's inauguration :
Bush Snr was possibly the last decent President the US has seen.
The nasty Clinton "machine" ate him up and spat him out. I imagine he was pleased to be out of it by the end of the election.
The nastiness currently in the American system largely followed Newt Gingrich's "contract with America" followed by the rise of the tea party, which made an art of obstructionism. There is now an element in GOP congress that sees any compromise with the White House as almost treasonable -- and for that matter, any compromise with the mainstream Republican Party.
It's not all one sided though. The Clinton's are (and always have been) very shady, nasty people. I remember the 1992 campaign and Bill Clinton's "machine" was like steam-roller against an essentially decent (if rather weak) HW.
Personal Spin - Disappointing night for Theresa May, the Tory share of the vote is back to the 1997/2001 general election levels, when the Tories got massacred and had around 165 MPs.
Perhaps Corbyn won't lead Labour to the mother of all shellackings in 2020.
All of this makes an early election unlikely, even before we consider the awkwardness of the FTPA.
I think the SW seats are safer than the likes of the SE and Gloucestershire type seats. SW London, Bath, Cheltenham, Oxford W, Lewes etc. That's where a resurgent LibDem party will target.
2n the coalition, and there's Heathrow expansion in the South West. I would expect the LibDems to make gains in Richmond, Kingston, Merton and Sutton. Twickenham, even with the local Conservative having first term incumbency, I think will be a LibDem gain. They might pick up one more.
I would be less optimistic about the LibDems prospects in the South West, ........
South East England outside London will be interesting. I would forecast a LibDem gain in Cambridge, largely because I think the Labour Party will be comfortably sub 30% and the LibDems will be on 10-14%. That's comfortably a five point swing in the Lab-LibDem gap, but only results in a single gain. Oxford West (or whatever the new seat is called) is also a possible.
I don't see a resurgence in Eastleigh, Eastbourne, Lewes, Bath, etc. I think there may be some narrowed majorities, and some increased council presence, but I think they will likely all stay Conservative in 2020.
In Scotland, the boundary reviews look to be *extremely* favourable for the LibDems (almost suspiciously so). They can reasonably expect to pick up both the Western Edinburgh seat and the Fife one.
So where does that leave them? Scotland 3 Wales 1 SW London 2-3 University Seats 1-2 Cumbria 1
9-10 + maybe they hold onto the successor seats in Southport, Sheffield, and Leeds.
I hold by my forecast of 10-14 seats in 2020.
It would be difficult for the LibDems to improve on their councillors in my neighbouring constituency of Eastleigh where they have 37 to the Tories 6, but I guess it's possible.
In Eastleigh the demise of UKIP could open up a few gains for the Conservatives.
UKIP will lose their 3 county councillors in Eastleigh next May and it will be to the Lib Dems not the Conservatives .
I've just been looking at the North Yorkshire results from last time around, and was shocked to see that UKIP won a seat in Harrogate! Ought to be another area for a LD bounce-back?
LDs have proven they are competitive, but need to drill into Labour support if they want to deliver a comeback. As it is, TMay should not worry about losing 5 or so seats to them when she is likely to gain many more from Labour.
Good to see UKIP collapsing and I presume this vote either didn't turn out or has now crossed to the Tories. It's over for them. Their only purpose from now on will be to split the Labour vote in the North and East Midlands.
One last thing. This result has no implications for Remain vs Leave or Hard vs Soft. Not the right seat to make this a salient issue. A London seat would be different.
Personal Spin - Disappointing night for Theresa May, the Tory share of the vote is back to the 1997/2001 general election levels, when the Tories got massacred and had around 165 MPs.
Are Dave's Blue Liberals going back to the Yellow Peril? Alarming, all those seats in the South West now at risk.
Pro Tory spin - Second by election victory in 27 years for the Tory, Dave's personal vote unwinding.
Perhaps Corbyn won't lead Labour to the mother of all shellackings in 2020.
All of this makes an early election unlikely, even before we consider the awkwardness of the FTPA.
I think the SW seats are safer than the likes of the SE and Gloucestershire type seats. SW London, Bath, Cheltenham, Oxford W, Lewes etc. That's where a resurgent LibDem party will target.
2018 and London locals will be fascinating. Large parts are pro-Remain, Labour voters will have increasingly forgotten the coalition, and there's Heathrow expansion in the South West. I would expect the LibDems to make gains in Richmond, Kingston, Merton and Sutton. Twickenham, even with the local Conservative having first term incumbency, I think will be a LibDem gain. They might pick up one more.
I would be less optimistic about the LibDems prospects in the South West, outside a (very) few seats. Next year's local elections in Cornwall and Devon will indicate whether they have any hope of picking up seats down there, but I suspect they will struggle, and maybe even go backwards, in 2020.
South East England outside London will be interesting. I would forecast a LibDem gain in Cambridge, largely because I think the Labour Party will be comfortably sub 30% and the LibDems will be on 10-14%. That's comfortably a five point swing in the Lab-LibDem gap, but only results in a single gain. Oxford West (or whatever the new seat is called) is also a possible.
I don't see a resurgence in Eastleigh, Eastbourne, Lewes, Bath, etc. I think there may be some narrowed majorities, and some increased council presence, but I think they will likely all stay Conservative in 2020.
In Scotland, the boundary reviews look to be *extremely* favourable for the LibDems (almost suspiciously so). They can reasonably expect to pick up both the Western Edinburgh seat and the Fife one.
So where does that leave them? Scotland 3 Wales 1 SW London 2-3 University Seats 1-2 Cumbria 1
9-10 + maybe they hold onto the successor seats in Southport, Sheffield, and Leeds.
I hold by my forecast of 10-14 seats in 2020.
I will stick my neck out and say the Lib Dems will take overall control of Cornwall next May . A tough ask with the number of Independents but the Conservative vote has collapsed in the county in the last 18 months although it is unclear why .
"Leave" won with a whole bunch of 'lazy voters' who will only ever turn out for the referendum and not for a BE in a million years.
I doubt they'll show up at a GE either much,
In terms of likely actual voters, the "remainers" may well outnumber the "leavers". Particularly with UKIP in crisis.
A very good point.
So why is the increasingly useless May basing her stupid Hard Brexit strategy on a bunch of once in a lifetime voters??!
Because, like it or not, we voted out, despite all the warning about what would happen.
We voted to LEAVE THE EU, not the single market/EEA and EFTA. May's scorched earth policy makes no sense, economic - or political.
Except it was mentioned numerous times by both sides that leaving the EU would mean leaving the single market.
Had a very illuminating conversation with an "in the know" earlier this week. Word from the heart of Brexit government is that it's headless chicken territory. Hundreds of experts in search of a single clue. A very senior figure in the government is pretty certain things are going to be as bad or worse than expected - not least because no practical idea to resolve the situation can get past the nutcase ideologues who seek to make our country poorer.
A shame the civil service wasn't allowed to start planning for it earlier.
Hard to plan for something when we don't even know what kind of Brexit we want.
Some effort at planning scenarios might have illuminated that decision.
Yes. They had one scenario coming out of the Treasury (the worst) and could easily have modelled a dozen different sets of assumptions. Also ther should have been planning by the civil servants into all the legislative implications of a LEAVE vote.
"Leave" won with a whole bunch of 'lazy voters' who will only ever turn out for the referendum and not for a BE in a million years.
I doubt they'll show up at a GE either much,
In terms of likely actual voters, the "remainers" may well outnumber the "leavers". Particularly with UKIP in crisis.
A very good point.
So why is the increasingly useless May basing her stupid Hard Brexit strategy on a bunch of once in a lifetime voters??!
Because, like it or not, we voted out, despite all the warning about what would happen.
We voted to LEAVE THE EU, not the single market/EEA and EFTA. May's scorched earth policy makes no sense, economic - or political.
Except it was mentioned numerous times by both sides that leaving the EU would mean leaving the single market.
Had a very illuminating conversation with an "in the know" earlier this week. Word from the heart of Brexit government is that it's headless chicken territory. Hundreds of experts in search of a single clue. A very senior figure in the government is pretty certain things are going to be as bad or worse than expected - not least because no practical idea to resolve the situation can get past the nutcase ideologues who seek to make our country poorer.
A shame the civil service wasn't allowed to start planning for it earlier.
Hard to plan for something when we don't even know what kind of Brexit we want.
Some effort at planning scenarios might have illuminated that decision.
Yes. They had one scenario coming out of the Treasury (the worst) and could easily have modelled a dozen different sets of assumptions. Also ther should have been planning by the civil servants into all the legislative implications of a LEAVE vote.
The Treasury modelled more than one scenario.
To modify Ronald Reagan's dictum: the most frightening words in the language are "I am from the Treasury and Brexit is under control".
All of this makes an early election unlikely, even before we consider the awkwardness of the FTPA.
I think the SW seats are safer than the likes of the SE and Gloucestershire type seats. SW London, Bath, Cheltenham, Oxford W, Lewes etc. That's where a resurgent LibDem party will target.
2018 and London locals will be fascinating. Large parts are pro-Remain, Labour voters will have increasingly forgotten the coalition, and there's Heathrow expansion in the South West. I would expect the LibDems to make gains in Richmond, Kingston, Merton and Sutton. Twickenham, even with the local Conservative having first term incumbency, I think will be a LibDem gain. They might pick up one more.
I would be less optimistic about the LibDems prospects in the South West, outside a (very) few seats. Next year's local elections in Cornwall and Devon will indicate whether they have any hope of picking up seats down there, but I suspect they will struggle, and maybe even go backwards, in 2020.
South East England outside London will be interesting. I would forecast a LibDem gain in Cambridge, largely because I think the Labour Party will be comfortably sub 30% and the LibDems will be on 10-14%. That's comfortably a five point swing in the Lab-LibDem gap, but only results in a single gain. Oxford West (or whatever the new seat is called) is also a possible.
I don't see a resurgence in Eastleigh, Eastbourne, Lewes, Bath, etc. I think there may be some narrowed majorities, and some increased council presence, but I think they will likely all stay Conservative in 2020.
In Scotland, the boundary reviews look to be *extremely* favourable for the LibDems (almost suspiciously so). They can reasonably expect to pick up both the Western Edinburgh seat and the Fife one.
So where does that leave them? Scotland 3 Wales 1 SW London 2-3 University Seats 1-2 Cumbria 1
9-10 + maybe they hold onto the successor seats in Southport, Sheffield, and Leeds.
I hold by my forecast of 10-14 seats in 2020.
I will stick my neck out and say the Lib Dems will take overall control of Cornwall next May . A tough ask with the number of Independents but the Conservative vote has collapsed in the county in the last 18 months although it is unclear why .
Sounds believable. Cornwall is not really in the SW psephologically. It is a land unto itself, similar to the Scottish Highlands.
But you know what? In the previous by-elections, they couldn't get their activists engaged. This time they did. That's a meaningful difference.
Even I went up there once and the enthusiasm and the energy was like being back in the 80s and 90s. In a sense, the party has gone back to some tried and trusted methods of campaigning and in traditionally strong areas it will work to some degree. The well appointed leaflet and individual voter contact still has resonance.
However, I certainly didn't appreciate the skill with which the Conservatives fought the GE campaign on social media - it was impressive - but as with all other advances, other parties are learning and improving on these techniques.
It's very unusual for governments to put on support in by-elections, however good the polling is.
I think the anti-Brexit stance of the Lib Dems did help them build support, although as others have pointed out, the vote for pro-Brexit parties was slightly up on the referendum.
Sean, may I ask if you're still in the UKIP fold or are you looking for a new home in the Popular Front for the Liberation of Judea (Luton Branch) ?
I can't see any real reason to renew my subscription next year. The only reason would be if Theresa May were to renege on Brexit.
Of the two latest national opinion polls, both have Trump in the lead. Okay, they are both tracking polls but there's a golden rule on here about not cherry picking the polls we wish to see. Trump leads by 3% and 1% respectively:
What we can state is that there is some serious value to be had on Trump.
If anyone is tempted to bet on Trump based on this post I strongly advise that they do little research into American polling companies first - if you still want to bet on an outcome that only Rasmussen & LA Times predict then good luck to you.
Serious value? I imagine that 5.8 might be close to the actual probability; i.e., the bookies win.
I'd go 5-10% - ie >9/1
My last trade was to lay Trump @ 5.9
I'd definitely back him @ 20/1 and consider backing at 10/1.
You can effectively get odds on POTUS Trump ~9/1 on the state markets.
I'm trying to work out if Clinton is going to win with a big popular vote victory but come up fractions of a percent short in lots of "running up the score" states or not.
Personal Spin - Disappointing night for Theresa May, the Tory share of the vote is back to the 1997/2001 general election levels, when the Tories got massacred and had around 165 MPs.
Are Dave's Blue Liberals going back to the Yellow Peril? Alarming, all those seats in the South West now at risk.
Pro Tory spin - Second by election victory in 27 years for the Tory, Dave's personal vote unwinding.
Perhaps Corbyn won't lead Labour to the mother of all shellackings in 2020.
All of this makes an early election unlikely, even before we consider the awkwardness of the FTPA.
Apart from Bath, I don't think the Tory MPs are in much danger in the South West.
It's very unusual for governments to put on support in by-elections, however good the polling is.
I think the anti-Brexit stance of the Lib Dems did help them build support, although as others have pointed out, the vote for pro-Brexit parties was slightly up on the referendum.
The Conservative vote share is at the 1997/2001 core number. There was no shattering of that glass ceiling as there was at Newbury or Christchurch. The result is more like the South West Surrey by election in 1984 when the Alliance (as it then was) simply couldn't break down the core Conservative vote in that seat at that time.
The more I look at Witney, the more it looks like a typical 80s by election in a solid Conservative seat.
I agree. Many UKIP voters won't go Conservative, but enough will to enable the Conservatives to enjoy 1980's type support.
There was a discussion about China yesterday. This popped into my email today from ACM:
"The Top500 list of the fastest high-performance computers (HPCs) places China at the head of the race toward exascale. China also has 167 supercomputers on the list, more than any other country, including the U.S, which has 165. Gartner analyst Chirag Dekate says the Chinese "believe that to dominate the economies of tomorrow they need to control the supply chains of emerging technologies." "
It's very unusual for governments to put on support in by-elections, however good the polling is.
I think the anti-Brexit stance of the Lib Dems did help them build support, although as others have pointed out, the vote for pro-Brexit parties was slightly up on the referendum.
Sean, may I ask if you're still in the UKIP fold or are you looking for a new home in the Popular Front for the Liberation of Judea (Luton Branch) ?
I can't see any real reason to renew my subscription next year. The only reason would be if Theresa May were to renege on Brexit.
Since we're told Brexit is Brexit and we're deffo getting it, what form of Brexit would you consider a renegement?
It's very unusual for governments to put on support in by-elections, however good the polling is.
I think the anti-Brexit stance of the Lib Dems did help them build support, although as others have pointed out, the vote for pro-Brexit parties was slightly up on the referendum.
Sean, may I ask if you're still in the UKIP fold or are you looking for a new home in the Popular Front for the Liberation of Judea (Luton Branch) ?
I can't see any real reason to renew my subscription next year. The only reason would be if Theresa May were to renege on Brexit.
Since we're told Brexit is Brexit and we're deffo getting it, what form of Brexit would you consider a renegement?
Not a bad result for Labour, all things considered.
On the US election, there's an interesting divergence of opinion in the spreads markets for the Clinton ECV totals:
SPIN 319-329 Spreadex 330-342
As I posted last night, I think that's a Buy on SPIN.
Usual caveats apply, spread betting is risky...
Staying well away from ECV spreads personally. There's a tipping point where a couple of percent in vote share runs half a dozen states one way or the other very quickly.
I'm on Shadsy's 7/2 of 0-5% Hillary win and have the Donald at current prices but from a year ago (!), am red on a landslide.
Of the two latest national opinion polls, both have Trump in the lead. Okay, they are both tracking polls but there's a golden rule on here about not cherry picking the polls we wish to see. Trump leads by 3% and 1% respectively:
What we can state is that there is some serious value to be had on Trump.
If anyone is tempted to bet on Trump based on this post I strongly advise that they do little research into American polling companies first - if you still want to bet on an outcome that only Rasmussen & LA Times predict then good luck to you.
Serious value? I imagine that 5.8 might be close to the actual probability; i.e., the bookies win.
I'd go 5-10% - ie >9/1
My last trade was to lay Trump @ 5.9
I'd definitely back him @ 20/1 and consider backing at 10/1.
You can effectively get odds on POTUS Trump ~9/1 on the state markets.
I'm trying to work out if Clinton is going to win with a big popular vote victory but come up fractions of a percent short in lots of "running up the score" states or not.
There was a discussion about China yesterday. This popped into my email today from ACM:
"The Top500 list of the fastest high-performance computers (HPCs) places China at the head of the race toward exascale. China also has 167 supercomputers on the list, more than any other country, including the U.S, which has 165. Gartner analyst Chirag Dekate says the Chinese "believe that to dominate the economies of tomorrow they need to control the supply chains of emerging technologies." "
Yes, there's a lot going on under the radar in China. Saw a statistic yesterday that China has now overtaken the US as the biggest country for Apple App Store revenues. That's a remarkable statistic, given that most rural Chinese wouldn't know what an iPhone was if they were hit over the head with it.
Personal Spin - Disappointing night for Theresa May, the Tory share of the vote is back to the 1997/2001 general election levels, when the Tories got massacred and had around 165 MPs.
Are Dave's Blue Liberals going back to the Yellow Peril? Alarming, all those seats in the South West now at risk.
Pro Tory spin - Second by election victory in 27 years for the Tory, Dave's personal vote unwinding.
Perhaps Corbyn won't lead Labour to the mother of all shellackings in 2020.
All of this makes an early election unlikely, even before we consider the awkwardness of the FTPA.
Apart from Bath, I don't think the Tory MPs are in much danger in the South West.
Scott Mann in Cornwall North seems particularly unpopular again I don't know why
It's very unusual for governments to put on support in by-elections, however good the polling is.
I think the anti-Brexit stance of the Lib Dems did help them build support, although as others have pointed out, the vote for pro-Brexit parties was slightly up on the referendum.
The Conservative vote share is at the 1997/2001 core number. There was no shattering of that glass ceiling as there was at Newbury or Christchurch. The result is more like the South West Surrey by election in 1984 when the Alliance (as it then was) simply couldn't break down the core Conservative vote in that seat at that time.
The more I look at Witney, the more it looks like a typical 80s by election in a solid Conservative seat.
I agree. Many UKIP voters won't go Conservative, but enough will to enable the Conservatives to enjoy 1980's type support.
As the Tories move to the right and nationalistic they will lose some voters to the Lib Dems but win others from UKIP. The net balance is yet to be determined.
The biggest threat to TM still comes from the business community. The public sector borrowing figures were poor today and sterling continues to be weak.
Yesterday I had 2 nice ladies from Sottish Enterprise come to visit me to help try and understand why the business community does not get on with the Scottish Government. For 10 years our politicans in Scotland have been running a low level war with the business community. Start ups in Scotland are at an all time low and Glasgow has stopped making almost anything. The SNP on one level has won in that dissent no longer exists. On the other hand the country is stone cold broke. TM beware.
It's very unusual for governments to put on support in by-elections, however good the polling is.
I think the anti-Brexit stance of the Lib Dems did help them build support, although as others have pointed out, the vote for pro-Brexit parties was slightly up on the referendum.
Sean, may I ask if you're still in the UKIP fold or are you looking for a new home in the Popular Front for the Liberation of Judea (Luton Branch) ?
I can't see any real reason to renew my subscription next year. The only reason would be if Theresa May were to renege on Brexit.
As in she decides Britain will not leave the EU after all? Zero chance of that happening I'd suggest.
Staying well away from ECV spreads personally. There's a tipping point where a couple of percent in vote share runs half a dozen states one way or the other very quickly.
Indeed, you have to be well aware of the risks.
However, in this case the risk looks asymmetric to me at SPIN's Buy price of 329. If (as seems likely) Clinton wins FL NV NC and NE2, she's up to 323. If that's as far as she gets, you've lost 6 points. On the other hand, if things go a bit better for her, then next on her list is OH which takes you up to 341 straight away, and therefore a 12-point profit, with ME2 (1) IA (6) and AZ (11) all potentially within reach.
In other words, I think the most likely final values are 323, 341, 347, and 358 (plus or minus one or two for NE2 and ME2 where the polling information is scant).
As always, DYOR, you can lose your shirt on the spreads, etc etc.
Staying well away from ECV spreads personally. There's a tipping point where a couple of percent in vote share runs half a dozen states one way or the other very quickly.
Indeed, you have to be well aware of the risks.
However, in this case the risk looks asymmetric to me at SPIN's Buy price of 329. If (as seems likely) Clinton wins FL NV NC and NE2, she's up to 323. If that's as far as she gets, you've lost 6 points. On the other hand, if things go a bit better for her, then next on her list is OH which takes you up to 341 straight away, and therefore a 12-point profit, with ME2 (1) IA (6) and AZ (11) all potentially within reach.
In other words, I think the most likely final values are 323, 341, 347, and 358 (plus or minus one or two for NE2 and ME2 where the polling information is scant).
As always, DYOR, you can lose your shirt on the spreads, etc etc.
King of Langley, zero chance she'd go for it voluntarily, but there is a chance the Lords, courts, and Cleggian Brusselophiles might lead to us not leaving.
Mr. Glenn, Tor Yscum is a wonderful Welsh hill fort.
It has probably been said down stream but despite an absolutely massive effort and swamping Witney itself in the last week, LD's only knocked 2% out of the Labour vote. Even allowing for a strong local candidate that is disappointing and (cough) I did flag it up in the piece for PB a week or so ago.
Left wing voters have still not forgiven LD's for the Coalition I suspect. There were tweets from locals saying that the LD's are a centre right party and not an alternative to Labour
The irony is that on a policy by policy basis there was nowt but a gnat's testicle between the two candidates
With the slump in turnout at Witney what we do not know is where the LDs gained 23%? Did they just do a better GOTV and get a higher turnout from existing LD voters and some gains from Cons, Greens and Lab? The LDs certainly poured more resources in than the other parties.
About 10x the resources!
But you know what? In the previous by-elections, they couldn't get their activists engaged. This time they did. That's a meaningful difference.
Well, if they want to piss their scarce cash resources up a wall to no effect....
Yes, plus a potential further 6 from IA which he rates a toss-up. He's generally quite cautious, so it's interesting that he's sticking his neck out that far.
Other forecasts:
RCP 'no-toss-up': 333 (they have OH just in the Trump camp) 538 mean of polls-only distribution: 343
It has probably been said down stream but despite an absolutely massive effort and swamping Witney itself in the last week, LD's only knocked 2% out of the Labour vote. Even allowing for a strong local candidate that is disappointing and (cough) I did flag it up in the piece for PB a week or so ago.
Left wing voters have still not forgiven LD's for the Coalition I suspect. There were tweets from locals saying that the LD's are a centre right party and not an alternative to Labour
The irony is that on a policy by policy basis there was nowt but a gnat's testicle between the two candidates
With the slump in turnout at Witney what we do not know is where the LDs gained 23%? Did they just do a better GOTV and get a higher turnout from existing LD voters and some gains from Cons, Greens and Lab? The LDs certainly poured more resources in than the other parties.
About 10x the resources!
But you know what? In the previous by-elections, they couldn't get their activists engaged. This time they did. That's a meaningful difference.
Well, if they want to piss their scarce cash resources up a wall to no effect....
The great british public don't seem to be taking to this idea of 21st century socialism aka corbynism. I am sure his Twitter army will blame it on the Jews or something.
Yes, plus a potential further 6 from IA which he rates a toss-up. He's generally quite cautious, so it's interesting that he's sticking his neck out that far.
Other forecasts:
RCP 'no-toss-up': 333 (they have OH just in the Trump camp) 538 mean of polls-only distribution: 343
I think the results will be less predictable than four years ago. Of course if Clinton leads comfortably across the board, then those variations won't change states.
The great british public don't seem to be taking this idea of 21st century socialism aka corbynism. I am sure his Twitter army will blame it on the Jews or something.
It's clearly much more popular than Kipperism, unless of course you add the Tory vote to UKIP.
King of Langley, zero chance she'd go for it voluntarily, but there is a chance the Lords, courts, and Cleggian Brusselophiles might lead to us not leaving.
Mr. Glenn, Tor Yscum is a wonderful Welsh hill fort.
Staying well away from ECV spreads personally. There's a tipping point where a couple of percent in vote share runs half a dozen states one way or the other very quickly.
Indeed, you have to be well aware of the risks.
However, in this case the risk looks asymmetric to me at SPIN's Buy price of 329. If (as seems likely) Clinton wins FL NV NC and NE2, she's up to 323. If that's as far as she gets, you've lost 6 points. On the other hand, if things go a bit better for her, then next on her list is OH which takes you up to 341 straight away, and therefore a 12-point profit, with ME2 (1) IA (6) and AZ (11) all potentially within reach.
In other words, I think the most likely final values are 323, 341, 347, and 358 (plus or minus one or two for NE2 and ME2 where the polling information is scant).
As always, DYOR, you can lose your shirt on the spreads, etc etc.
I can see your logic there, but nothing about the morning of November 9th will surprise me after all that's gone before.
My betting total so far is the grand sum of £42 (as opposed to several hundred last time), scared that the complete political shakeup and the efficiency of Trump's vote (as noted by 538 in the link below) could still throw the sort of shock that will make the Brexit vote shock seem like the odds-on favourite winning a by-election in comparison!
It has probably been said down stream but despite an absolutely massive effort and swamping Witney itself in the last week, LD's only knocked 2% out of the Labour vote. Even allowing for a strong local candidate that is disappointing and (cough) I did flag it up in the piece for PB a week or so ago.
Left wing voters have still not forgiven LD's for the Coalition I suspect. There were tweets from locals saying that the LD's are a centre right party and not an alternative to Labour
The irony is that on a policy by policy basis there was nowt but a gnat's testicle between the two candidates
With the slump in turnout at Witney what we do not know is where the LDs gained 23%? Did they just do a better GOTV and get a higher turnout from existing LD voters and some gains from Cons, Greens and Lab? The LDs certainly poured more resources in than the other parties.
About 10x the resources!
But you know what? In the previous by-elections, they couldn't get their activists engaged. This time they did. That's a meaningful difference.
Well, if they want to piss their scarce cash resources up a wall to no effect....
More like the LD election spending is the equivalent of p***ing into their own clothes and they got a brief warm feeling from it?
King of Langley, zero chance she'd go for it voluntarily, but there is a chance the Lords, courts, and Cleggian Brusselophiles might lead to us not leaving.
Mr. Glenn, Tor Yscum is a wonderful Welsh hill fort.
My friend's parents lived in a lovely place called Gay's Lees. It was universally known as Gay Sleaze.....
It has probably been said down stream but despite an absolutely massive effort and swamping Witney itself in the last week, LD's only knocked 2% out of the Labour vote. Even allowing for a strong local candidate that is disappointing and (cough) I did flag it up in the piece for PB a week or so ago.
Left wing voters have still not forgiven LD's for the Coalition I suspect. There were tweets from locals saying that the LD's are a centre right party and not an alternative to Labour
The irony is that on a policy by policy basis there was nowt but a gnat's testicle between the two candidates
With the slump in turnout at Witney what we do not know is where the LDs gained 23%? Did they just do a better GOTV and get a higher turnout from existing LD voters and some gains from Cons, Greens and Lab? The LDs certainly poured more resources in than the other parties.
About 10x the resources!
But you know what? In the previous by-elections, they couldn't get their activists engaged. This time they did. That's a meaningful difference.
Well, if they want to piss their scarce cash resources up a wall to no effect....
More like the LD election spending is the equivalent of p***ing into their own clothes and they got a brief warm feeling from it?
Of the two latest national opinion polls, both have Trump in the lead. Okay, they are both tracking polls but there's a golden rule on here about not cherry picking the polls we wish to see. Trump leads by 3% and 1% respectively:
What we can state is that there is some serious value to be had on Trump.
If anyone is tempted to bet on Trump based on this post I strongly advise that they do little research into American polling companies first - if you still want to bet on an outcome that only Rasmussen & LA Times predict then good luck to you.
Serious value? I imagine that 5.8 might be close to the actual probability; i.e., the bookies win.
I'd go 5-10% - ie >9/1
My last trade was to lay Trump @ 5.9
I'd definitely back him @ 20/1 and consider backing at 10/1.
You can effectively get odds on POTUS Trump ~9/1 on the state markets.
I'm trying to work out if Clinton is going to win with a big popular vote victory but come up fractions of a percent short in lots of "running up the score" states or not.
That's my general though as well. Trump's vote is very efficient but as soon as the first one goes then it's a blow out as they all go.
At the moment I have a pause on betting. I'm okay with my state bets and I chucked a bit more on Hilary as thr markets must surely catch up with reality soon and 1.19 is too long. but that is that.
King of Langley, zero chance she'd go for it voluntarily, but there is a chance the Lords, courts, and Cleggian Brusselophiles might lead to us not leaving.
Mr. Glenn, Tor Yscum is a wonderful Welsh hill fort.
My friend's parents lived in a lovely place called Gay's Lees. It was universally known as Gay Sleaze.....
A village nr me is called Blackboys. Another is Dicker. And Nomansland. And Worlds End.
An alternative low-risk strategy on the spreads is to Buy Clinton at 329 with SPIN and sell the Clinton 250- Ups with Spreadex at 91. That locks in a fixed 12-point profit provided Clinton gets anything from 250 upwards (which is very likely indeed), and doesn't hit a loss until she's as low as 238. That corresponds to her losing all of NC NV FL CO NH and PA.
Comments
My last trade was to lay Trump @ 5.9
I'd definitely back him @ 20/1 and consider backing at 10/1.
You can effectively get odds on POTUS Trump ~9/1 on the state markets.
It is clear that the LDs are capable of providing some more.
But you know what? In the previous by-elections, they couldn't get their activists engaged. This time they did. That's a meaningful difference.
Shall we talk about something else instead? How about AV? Or our best Jam making recipe's?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastleigh_Borough_Council_election,_2016
Be interesting to see if UKIP utterly collapses or can be brought back from the brink.
Reminds me of the latter day Western Roman Empire, when the likes of Honorius knifed Stilicho (his most able general) for fear he was a rival. The Empire's later rulers destroyed what remained of its strength with their infighting (cf Boniface and Aetius).
On the US election, there's an interesting divergence of opinion in the spreads markets for the Clinton ECV totals:
SPIN 319-329
Spreadex 330-342
As I posted last night, I think that's a Buy on SPIN.
Usual caveats apply, spread betting is risky...
"UK public finances for September really horrible. Tax revenues - a count not a survey - very weak."
https://twitter.com/ChrisGiles_/status/789392291970502656
LDs have proven they are competitive, but need to drill into Labour support if they want to deliver a comeback. As it is, TMay should not worry about losing 5 or so seats to them when she is likely to gain many more from Labour.
Good to see UKIP collapsing and I presume this vote either didn't turn out or has now crossed to the Tories. It's over for them. Their only purpose from now on will be to split the Labour vote in the North and East Midlands.
One last thing. This result has no implications for Remain vs Leave or Hard vs Soft. Not the right seat to make this a salient issue. A London seat would be different.
"I'm sorry," he told her. "But I've crash-landed on an isolated island. We could be here some time..."
However, I certainly didn't appreciate the skill with which the Conservatives fought the GE campaign on social media - it was impressive - but as with all other advances, other parties are learning and improving on these techniques.
"The Top500 list of the fastest high-performance computers (HPCs) places China at the head of the race toward exascale. China also has 167 supercomputers on the list, more than any other country, including the U.S, which has 165. Gartner analyst Chirag Dekate says the Chinese "believe that to dominate the economies of tomorrow they need to control the supply chains of emerging technologies." "
I'm on Shadsy's 7/2 of 0-5% Hillary win and have the Donald at current prices but from a year ago (!), am red on a landslide.
btw, I'm sure you've already seen it, but this;
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/clinton-trump-vote-maps-2016/
Is a really important map/article for punters.
Corbyn brings Tory lead down to 16 points.
As the Tories move to the right and nationalistic they will lose some voters to the Lib Dems but win others from UKIP. The net balance is yet to be determined.
The biggest threat to TM still comes from the business community. The public sector borrowing figures were poor today and sterling continues to be weak.
Yesterday I had 2 nice ladies from Sottish Enterprise come to visit me to help try and understand why the business community does not get on with the Scottish Government. For 10 years our politicans in Scotland have been running a low level war with the business community. Start ups in Scotland are at an all time low and Glasgow has stopped making almost anything. The SNP on one level has won in that dissent no longer exists. On the other hand the country is stone cold broke. TM beware.
Perhaps Richmond with a Zac Goldsmith re-run. Any others?
However, in this case the risk looks asymmetric to me at SPIN's Buy price of 329. If (as seems likely) Clinton wins FL NV NC and NE2, she's up to 323. If that's as far as she gets, you've lost 6 points. On the other hand, if things go a bit better for her, then next on her list is OH which takes you up to 341 straight away, and therefore a 12-point profit, with ME2 (1) IA (6) and AZ (11) all potentially within reach.
In other words, I think the most likely final values are 323, 341, 347, and 358 (plus or minus one or two for NE2 and ME2 where the polling information is scant).
As always, DYOR, you can lose your shirt on the spreads, etc etc.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/oct/21/theresa-may-uk-centre-of-european-decision-making-until-brexit
As time goes on, the happier I am with the result in June.
O/T the buyer of a property my client is selling is called Ferhat Anus.
I still cherish WH spokesbod Larry Speaks.
Or hasn't he made his mind up yet?
Mr. Glenn, Tor Yscum is a wonderful Welsh hill fort.
Nor does he need to of course, might as well keep drawing a public salary until another one turns up, hey?
Of course, they've lost a lot of the tithing that happened from elected representatives.
Other forecasts:
RCP 'no-toss-up': 333 (they have OH just in the Trump camp)
538 mean of polls-only distribution: 343
That Junker didn't resign on June 24th says all one needs to know about the unelected and unaccountable EU hierarchy.
That would be an awesome client/solicitor combo
My betting total so far is the grand sum of £42 (as opposed to several hundred last time), scared that the complete political shakeup and the efficiency of Trump's vote (as noted by 538 in the link below) could still throw the sort of shock that will make the Brexit vote shock seem like the odds-on favourite winning a by-election in comparison!
https://twitter.com/jamesdoleman/status/789413229042601984
Could have sworn there were 2 Parliamentary By Elections
At the moment I have a pause on betting. I'm okay with my state bets and I chucked a bit more on Hilary as thr markets must surely catch up with reality soon and 1.19 is too long. but that is that.