politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » CON hold Witney with a much reduced majority & the LDs coming

TCPoliticalBetting said:

JohnWheatley said:

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.

JackW said:

Steven Shepard and Charlie Mahtesian of "Politico" look at the state of play in the battleground states. It's not comfortable reading for Trump :

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/trumps-incredible-shrinking-map-230135

GIN1138 said:

JackW said:

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 :

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/read-this-letter-george-h-w-bush-sent-to-bill-clinton-after-losing-1992-election/

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.

Nigelb said:

rcs1000 said:

RobD said:

Jobabob said:

RobD said:

Jobabob said:

RobD said:

Jobabob said:

Pulpstar said:

"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.

TCPoliticalBetting said:

logical_song said:

rcs1000 said:

Monksfield said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

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.

FF43 said:

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.

GIN1138 said:

JackW said:

Steven Shepard and Charlie Mahtesian of "Politico" look at the state of play in the battleground states. It's not comfortable reading for Trump :

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/trumps-incredible-shrinking-map-230135

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?

JonathanD said:

Looks like all the painful work of the last 6 years has been for naught.

"UK public finances for September really horrible. Tax revenues - a count not a survey - very weak."

https://twitter.com/ChrisGiles_/status/789392291970502656

MarkSenior said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

logical_song said:

rcs1000 said:

Monksfield said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

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 .

rcs1000 said:

Monksfield said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

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.

MarkSenior said:

rcs1000 said:

Monksfield said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Personal Spin -

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 .

Theuniondivvie said:

'That experts line worked for Brexit, perhaps it can resuscitate my career!'

https://twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/status/789378006980653056

Pong said:

rural_voter said:

OllyT said:

JennyFreeman said:

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:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2016/white_house_watch_oct20
http://www.investors.com/politics/trump-holds-on-to-1-point-lead-as-debate-sparks-fly/

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.

stodge said:

Sean_F said:

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.

Sean_F said:

JackW said:

Sean_F said:

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.

Richard_Nabavi said:

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...

rottenborough said:

I put the Witney result into Electoral Calculas predictor for a bit of fun. Labour lose 115 seats on new boundaries, Liberals gain 46.

rottenborough said:

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." "

rottenborough said:

T-shirts with "Nasty women vote" on them are selling well apparently.

Sean_F said:

stodge said:

Sean_F said:

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.

dr_spyn said:

https://twitter.com/election_data/status/789407638056337410

Corbyn brings Tory lead down to 16 points.

RobD said:

rottenborough said:

T-shirts with "Nasty women vote" on them are selling well apparently.

Still waiting on my 'Tory Scum' shirt.

dr_spyn said:

https://twitter.com/election_data/status/789407638056337410

Corbyn brings Tory lead down to 16 points.

Richard_Nabavi said:

Sandpit said:

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.

Mortimer said:

Mortimer said:

What bloody right does any politician in Europe have to call for anyone's resignation - especially the Foreign Sec.

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.

Anyone in this country, I mean!

rcs1000 said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

JohnWheatley said:

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.

williamglenn said:

Mortimer said:

Mortimer said:

What bloody right does any politician in Europe have to call for anyone's resignation - especially the Foreign Sec.

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.

Anyone in this country, I mean!

Of course no Brit has ever called for the resignation of Juncker or Merkel?

dr_spyn said:

https://twitter.com/election_data/status/789407638056337410

Corbyn brings Tory lead down to 16 points.

FrancisUrquhart said:

dr_spyn said:

https://twitter.com/election_data/status/789407638056337410

Corbyn brings Tory lead down to 16 points.

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.

Sean_F said:

O/T the buyer of a property my client is selling is called Ferhat Anus.

Richard_Nabavi said:

Sandpit said:

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.

MarqueeMark said:

rcs1000 said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

JohnWheatley said:

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....

Morris_Dancer said:

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.

Theuniondivvie said:

Fake sheik, real porridge.

https://twitter.com/jamesdoleman/status/789413229042601984

Sean_F said:

O/T the buyer of a property my client is selling is called Ferhat Anus.

TCPoliticalBetting said:

MarqueeMark said:

rcs1000 said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

JohnWheatley said:

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?

Alistair said:

Trump campaign promised a $100million as buy over the last month, actual spend $23million according to campaign finance filings.

Sean_F said:

O/T the buyer of a property my client is selling is called Ferhat Anus.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Alistair said:

Trump campaign promised a $100million as buy over the last month, actual spend $23million according to campaign finance filings.

Why spend money on ad buys when Wikileaks/John Podesta's emails are going to win you the Presidency