politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Applying huge governing party national poll leads has been a v

First like Labour in Winklebury

Winklebury (Basingstoke & Deane) result:

LAB: 61.6% (+31.1)
CON: 35.3% (-10.5)
LDEM: 3.1% (-2.7)

Lab GAIN from Con.

Macron FTW

MarkSenior said:

CarlottaVance said:

RobD said:

MarkSenior said:

CarlottaVance said:

MarkSenior said:

CarlottaVance said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I still think Theresa May visiting Stoke this week will ended up being bracketed in the same batshit craziness of Dick Cheney campaigning in Hawaii at the end of the 2004 election.

Personally, I wouldn't read too much into that visit in itself, because I think she's the kind of leader who will feel duty-bound to visit in order to show support for the troops on the ground.

May has spent years working with the constituency parties - unlike her predecessor - so I expect we'll see a lot more of her at bye-elections - even very long shots. The local parties won't forget.

The Conservatives used to win council by elections when Cameron was leader , it will eventually sink in that their current leader is a vote loser .

Apologies but I missed your predictions for how much Tory vote share will fall in tomorrow's bye-elections.

I have posted my predictions for Copeland and Stoke both on here and the Vote2012 website . I don't recall seeing yours though .

For everyone else:

"Copeland Lab 39 Con 34 UKIP 11 Lib Dem 8 Green 4 Others 4
"

So for a Mid-term PM losing 2% in Copeland versus the GE is not much of a "vote loser" is it?

It is when all the hype is that Corbyn is useless and the Conservatives are heading for a famous victory .

Objectively it still won't be an awful result, but they have oversold how likely it is, such that it will be seen as a major disappointment. Corbyn could teach them a thing or two about expectations management!

Interesting historical perspective on the prospect of a Conservative victory in Copeland, arguing that the last comparable upset happened in the 19th century:


"...government gains in by-elections aren’t just exceptionally rare, the examples that have occurred are mostly the product of freakish circumstances (to repeat – that means electorally, not merely politically), none of which apply to Copeland.

"The last time a governing party gained a seat in by-election by overturning a principal opposition party majority of more than 3 per cent, without a defecting incumbent, a disqualified winner or a material change in the set of parties contesting the seat, was when John Derby Allcroft took Worcester for the Tories on 28th Mar 1878, overturning a 7.6 per cent Liberal majority.

"So the Conservatives are trying to do something that hasn’t been done on a genuine like-for-like basis for 139 years, since a time when women couldn’t vote, secret ballots had only been in use for one general election and Keir Hardie wasn’t yet even a union organiser.

"Which is not to say that they won’t succeed. But if they do, and Theresa May gains an MP mid term, she won’t have done something that hasn’t been done since Thatcher. She’ll have done something that hasn’t been done since Disraeli."


More here: https://www.ncpolitics.uk/2017/02/copeland-turning-blue-would-be-more-historic-than-you-think.html/

Who can forget the Sleaze Merchant.

He's in UKIP these days isn't he?

Is Piers Gaveston the only Piers that wasn't an idiot/knob?

Piers Morgan, Merchant, and Corbyn haven't done much for Piers in recent times.

I have updated the post to include reference to Uxbridge

How long has this thread been here??

Shouldn't the title say "Applying huge *labour* party national poll leads..."... innocent face...

Freggles said:

Macron FTW

Bayrou news? Excellent for me as he was one of the Black Swans I haven't covered in my book.

TheWhiteRabbit said:

rottenborough said:

Freggles said:

Macron FTW

Bayrou news? Excellent for me as he was one of the Black Swans I haven't covered in my book.

It's all about the effect on Macron's poll numbers which were slowing.

Pau nailed on for Macron now

One thing I have learnt over years is that betting markets are not a reliable predictor of the outcome, in fact on occasions they’re as fallible as the most gormless punter*.

(*Obviously PB punters are perfect in every way. H/T MP.)

williamglenn said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

rottenborough said:

Freggles said:

Macron FTW

Bayrou news? Excellent for me as he was one of the Black Swans I haven't covered in my book.

It's all about the effect on Macron's poll numbers which were slowing.

Excellent news for Macron, and good timing as you say.

Macron has something of Pierre Trudeau about him. A real political rockstar.

He has to make the final two, I have topped up on Fillon and running a very green book on the top 3.

TheWhiteRabbit said:

rottenborough said:

Freggles said:

Macron FTW

Bayrou news? Excellent for me as he was one of the Black Swans I haven't covered in my book.

It's all about the effect on Macron's poll numbers which were slowing.

Yeah, it's good for the narrative.

foxinsoxuk said:

williamglenn said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

rottenborough said:

Freggles said:

Macron FTW

Bayrou news? Excellent for me as he was one of the Black Swans I haven't covered in my book.

It's all about the effect on Macron's poll numbers which were slowing.

Excellent news for Macron, and good timing as you say.

Macron has something of Pierre Trudeau about him. A real political rockstar.

He has to make the final two, I have topped up on Fillon and running a very green book on the top 3.

Likewise. This is looking a good election!!

williamglenn said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

rottenborough said:

Freggles said:

Macron FTW

Bayrou news? Excellent for me as he was one of the Black Swans I haven't covered in my book.

It's all about the effect on Macron's poll numbers which were slowing.

Excellent news for Macron, and good timing as you say.

Macron has something of Pierre Trudeau about him. A real political rockstar.

Something of a retired PM about him?

Unlikely to help his winning the French presidency....

Casino_Royale said:

I think Stoke could be a very tight race between Labour and another, or anothers, I don't think the betting markets reflect that.

I'm not expecting that another to be UKIP.

Of course, I could be wrong, and Labour romp home.

Lay Labour?

I think a low turnout Labour win.

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

rottenborough said:

Freggles said:

Macron FTW

Bayrou news? Excellent for me as he was one of the Black Swans I haven't covered in my book.

It's all about the effect on Macron's poll numbers which were slowing.

Excellent news for Macron, and good timing as you say.

Macron has something of Pierre Trudeau about him. A real political rockstar.

Does he have a visible tattoo? I don't think I could ever vote for a candidate without a tattoo.

To be clear I'm talking about the father, not the son.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeTsQQ22Uwc

AndyJS said:

Casino_Royale said:

I think Stoke could be a very tight race between Labour and another, or anothers, I don't think the betting markets reflect that.

I'm not expecting that another to be UKIP.

Of course, I could be wrong, and Labour romp home.

The thing I'm most confident about predicting is that UKIP will probably get 25-30% in Stoke. That most likely won't be enough to win but if Lab and Con are more evenly divided than expected it could be, combined with a good LD showing.

Kippers under 20% was my top tip for this one with Shadsy at 8/1.

williamglenn said:

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

rottenborough said:

Freggles said:

Macron FTW

Bayrou news? Excellent for me as he was one of the Black Swans I haven't covered in my book.

It's all about the effect on Macron's poll numbers which were slowing.

Excellent news for Macron, and good timing as you say.

Macron has something of Pierre Trudeau about him. A real political rockstar.

Does he have a visible tattoo? I don't think I could ever vote for a candidate without a tattoo.

To be clear I'm talking about the father, not the son.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeTsQQ22Uwc

Holy Ghost by the look of it

Pulpstar said:

Insightful analysis from Mike here.

Indeed.

I, on the other hand, continue to be wholly devoid of insight in relation to the by elections. I've not had a bet - I have no idea what is going to happen.

All I can predict with confidence is that tomorrow is Thursday and the day after will probably be Friday but as Shadsy hasn't priced that one, I've not had a bet there either.

Pulpstar said:

Insightful analysis from Mike here.

The fact that people are contemplating anything other than two Labour holds is telling in itself.

The Greens to be fourth place in Stoke seems big at 25/1 - just had a fiver on it

Casino_Royale said:

Pulpstar said:

Insightful analysis from Mike here.

A bit, but tinged with an element of frustration that it's not the LDs strongly challenging for those seats rather than the Tories.

Where ?

TheScreamingEagles said:

Who can forget the Sleaze Merchant.

He's in UKIP these days isn't he?

Is Piers Gaveston the only Piers that wasn't an idiot/knob?

Piers Morgan, Merchant, and Corbyn haven't done much for Piers in recent times.

Piers Gaveston was also a knob. He liked insulting the English barons so much that they cut his head off.

foxinsoxuk said:

AndyJS said:

Casino_Royale said:

I think Stoke could be a very tight race between Labour and another, or anothers, I don't think the betting markets reflect that.

I'm not expecting that another to be UKIP.

Of course, I could be wrong, and Labour romp home.

The thing I'm most confident about predicting is that UKIP will probably get 25-30% in Stoke. That most likely won't be enough to win but if Lab and Con are more evenly divided than expected it could be, combined with a good LD showing.

Kippers under 20% was my top tip for this one with Shadsy at 8/1.

Not on this particular one myself, but that is a stonker.

state_go_away said:

For Copeland Labour must have a better chance than 9/4 ish

Definitely.

I've got a fiver on Labour to win Copeland, so I hope you are right. Labour should hold Stoke as well, but I have my doubts about that contest so I am steering clear of it.

I've got £100 on Labour holding Copeland and £25 on their holding Stoke. If they do, I make a profit of £237.50.

It's remarkable how the received wisdom on this site all along has been that Labour are definitely value if not favourites in Copeland yet the market has never agreed. Good luck to anyone seeking a profit tomorrow.

foxinsoxuk said:

Casino_Royale said:

I think Stoke could be a very tight race between Labour and another, or anothers, I don't think the betting markets reflect that.

I'm not expecting that another to be UKIP.

Of course, I could be wrong, and Labour romp home.

Lay Labour?

I think a low turnout Labour win.

Probably, but then Labour is led by an utter idiot and has a local candidate who's called Brexit a bucketful of shit, in one of the most heavily Leave areas in the whole country.

If they still score a clear win, then donkeys is a label many of their voters will not unjustly be tagged with.

Sean_F said:

I've got £100 on Labour holding Copeland and £25 on their holding Stoke. If they do, I make a profit of £237.50.

Congratulations! I think you'll collect. I wish that weren't the case...

When are you going to rejoin the Tories? We need more sound people in the Conservative and Unionist (Brexit) Party.

Sean_F said:

state_go_away said:

For Copeland Labour must have a better chance than 9/4 ish

They'd better.

Jason said:

The bar set by Labour is now so low (and seemingly getting lower and lower), winning (retaining) these two seats will be perceived as a triumph by Labour. When the dust has settled, if they win, it will be seen as what it is by objective observers - the absolute bare minimum an Opposition party should be achieving. There's no triumph in retaining safe seats, there really isn't, and all this 'expectation management' stuff is a pile of crap. A sitting government taking a seat off the Opposition IS a big deal, though.

The Tories have nothing to lose from either of these by-elections and everything to gain. Labour have nothing to gain but a whole lot to lose.

UKIP have much to lose too. If they don't win in Stoke with the leader standing against a less than stellar Labour candidate, then bang goes their plan of replacing Labour in the North and Midlands. If not here and now, then when and where?

Sean_F said:

RoyalBlue said:

Sean_F said:

I've got £100 on Labour holding Copeland and £25 on their holding Stoke. If they do, I make a profit of £237.50.

Congratulations! I think you'll collect. I wish that weren't the case...

When are you going to rejoin the Tories? We need more sound people in the Conservative and Unionist (Brexit) Party.

I won't renew my UKIP subscription when it runs out, as UKIP's job is done. I'll probably join Islington Conservatives, whose Chairman is a friend.

...and then there were three?

IanB2 said:

Sean_F said:

RoyalBlue said:

Sean_F said:

I've got £100 on Labour holding Copeland and £25 on their holding Stoke. If they do, I make a profit of £237.50.

Congratulations! I think you'll collect. I wish that weren't the case...

When are you going to rejoin the Tories? We need more sound people in the Conservative and Unionist (Brexit) Party.

I won't renew my UKIP subscription when it runs out, as UKIP's job is done. I'll probably join Islington Conservatives, whose Chairman is a friend.

...and then there were three?

From a very low base, the Tories have markedly improved in Islington South. In a few wards, they've got into four figures (in the past, they frequently polled in double figures).

Casino_Royale said:

Pulpstar said:

Insightful analysis from Mike here.

A bit, but tinged with an element of frustration that it's not the LDs strongly challenging for those seats rather than the Tories.

Lib Dems taking votes off Labour in Copeland and Stoke could let Conservatives in at both.

CD13 said:

Mr Senior,

FPT, "The Lib Dem decline started in 2011 and we all know the reason for that."

The decline started when you lost Charlie. At least, he had something about him, even if some of it was 70 degree proof.

There was no way Charles Kennedy could have carried on in his state. It was for his own good and to avoid bringing the party into disrepute.

David_Evershed said:

Casino_Royale said:

Pulpstar said:

Insightful analysis from Mike here.

A bit, but tinged with an element of frustration that it's not the LDs strongly challenging for those seats rather than the Tories.

Lib Dems taking votes off Labour in Copeland and Stoke could let Conservatives in at both.

If the Leave vote is split evenly 3 ways in Stoke the Lib Dems have a better chance than the odds imply.

Dixie said:

dixiedean said:

Jason said:

The bar set by Labour is now so low (and seemingly getting lower and lower), winning (retaining) these two seats will be perceived as a triumph by Labour. When the dust has settled, if they win, it will be seen as what it is by objective observers - the absolute bare minimum an Opposition party should be achieving. There's no triumph in retaining safe seats, there really isn't, and all this 'expectation management' stuff is a pile of crap. A sitting government taking a seat off the Opposition IS a big deal, though.

The Tories have nothing to lose from either of these by-elections and everything to gain. Labour have nothing to gain but a whole lot to lose.

UKIP have much to lose too. If they don't win in Stoke with the leader standing against a less than stellar Labour candidate, then bang goes their plan of replacing Labour in the North and Midlands. If not here and now, then when and where?

Of course Farage never won a constituency and tried 7 times. UKIP predicting Labour in Stoke and too close to call in Copeland. That's me paraphrasing their emails to me.

That Farage statistic, while true, is so misleading it may as well not be. On at least 5 of the occasions he stood UKIP would have been 100/1 to win the seat, the exceptions being Bucks in 2010 and Thanet South in 2015 (and that's a bit fishy)

Mortimer said:

Today is a good day to be an antiquarian bookseller political nerd - I bought a good number of books from Robert Peel's library!

Excellent news Mr Mortimer. At a guess I’d say the Ex PM was not a great Mills & Boon fan.

Interesting report on Copeland on ITV News tonight. It looks like a battle between Jeremy Corbyn's opposition to nuclear power and Gillian Troughton's support for it and Theresa May's refusal to outright oppose the downgrading of maternity services at the local hospital and Trudy Harrison's clear opposition to it

HYUFD said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

rottenborough said:

Freggles said:

Macron FTW

Bayrou news? Excellent for me as he was one of the Black Swans I haven't covered in my book.

It's all about the effect on Macron's poll numbers which were slowing.

Bayrou's support (with conditions) might give Macron a minor boost but the latest Elabe had Fillon still reaching the runoff even without Bayrou, Bayrou failing to run boosted Macron by 1.5% and Fillon by 1% so not that much difference. Macron also needs to ensure Macron's conditions do not lead to him losing any support to Hamon given Bayrou used to be Education Minister in Balladur's and Juppe's centre right governments
http://elabe.fr/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/21022017bfmtv_lexpress_intentions-de-vote-presidentielles-vague-2.pdf

Polling without Bayrou is going to be different now he's (a) ruled himself out affirmatively and (b) endorsed Macron.

HYUFD said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

rottenborough said:

Freggles said:

Macron FTW

Bayrou news? Excellent for me as he was one of the Black Swans I haven't covered in my book.

It's all about the effect on Macron's poll numbers which were slowing.

Bayrou's support (with conditions) might give Macron a minor boost but the latest Elabe had Fillon still reaching the runoff even without Bayrou, Bayrou failing to run boosted Macron by 1.5% and Fillon by 1% so not that much difference. Macron also needs to ensure Macron's conditions do not lead to him losing any support to Hamon given Bayrou used to be Education Minister in Balladur's and Juppe's centre right governments
http://elabe.fr/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/21022017bfmtv_lexpress_intentions-de-vote-presidentielles-vague-2.pdf

Albeit that didn't include Bayrou actually endorsing Macron.

It will be interesting to see if this catalyses Melanchon and Hamon getting together.

Sean_F said:

RoyalBlue said:

Sean_F said:

I've got £100 on Labour holding Copeland and £25 on their holding Stoke. If they do, I make a profit of £237.50.

Congratulations! I think you'll collect. I wish that weren't the case...

When are you going to rejoin the Tories? We need more sound people in the Conservative and Unionist (Brexit) Party.

I won't renew my UKIP subscription when it runs out, as UKIP's job is done. I'll probably join Islington Conservatives, whose Chairman is a friend.

Very sound.

SouthamObserver said:

Casino_Royale said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Casino_Royale said:

I think Stoke could be a very tight race between Labour and another, or anothers, I don't think the betting markets reflect that.

I'm not expecting that another to be UKIP.

Of course, I could be wrong, and Labour romp home.

Lay Labour?

I think a low turnout Labour win.

Probably, but then Labour is led by an utter idiot and has a local candidate who's called Brexit a bucketful of shit, in one of the most heavily Leave areas in the whole country.

If they still score a clear win, then donkeys is a label many of their voters will not unjustly be tagged with.

Imagine the reaction if a metropolitan liberal leftie had posted that about white working class voters. Should Labour win in Stoke it's because the other options were not appealling enough.

My point is just how bad and unappealing do Labour have to be to put their own core voters off?

We are told that the whole of the Northern core area is up for grabs now because it voted overwhelmingly for Brexit, Corbyn is viewed as an atrocious leader and the candidates are non-local and of poor calibre. This would lead to much of that being questioned.

The language in my post was deliberately provocative.

@PaulBrandITV: Both Labour and Tories are very nervy, which suggests their canvassing reports that it's tight. UKIP say they're taking more from Labour.

Scott_P said:

@PaulBrandITV: Both Labour and Tories are very nervy, which suggests their canvassing reports that it's tight. UKIP say they're taking more from Labour.

... Copeland or Stoke?

Sean_F said:

Casino_Royale said:

Sean_F said:

state_go_away said:

For Copeland Labour must have a better chance than 9/4 ish

They'd better.

Oi.

If the Conservatives win Copeland, I'll still be pleased, even if I lose £100. It's win win.

Just teasing.

TheWhiteRabbit said:

Scott_P said:

@PaulBrandITV: Both Labour and Tories are very nervy, which suggests their canvassing reports that it's tight. UKIP say they're taking more from Labour.

... Copeland or Stoke?

Copeland, in my view it could go to a recount but we shall see