politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why the Conservatives may fall short of their hopes

First.

Second?
Third

Depends what we think they truly expect I suppose - if they expect maj 130, probably. If they expect 60-80, as I do, probably not.

williamglenn said:

If Farage won Thanet, how big a majority would it need to be not to count as an awful result for May?

Depends how big her overall majority is I suppose.

I certainly think Justin124 merits a ban for his comments on the last thread.

The first two factors don't seemed to be back up by the polling.

Sean_F said:

I certainly think Justin124 merits a ban for his comments on the last thread.

Pure filth, the likes we haven't seem on here for a long long time.

williamglenn said:

RobD said:

williamglenn said:

If Farage won Thanet, how big a majority would it need to be not to count as an awful result for May?

Depends how big her overall majority is I suppose.

That's what I meant. If she ended up with 50 SNP, 50+ Lib Dems and Farage, then destroying Corbyn might look like a Pyrrhic victory.

Oh, I thought you mean Farage's majority in Thanet. Sorry!

Matthew Goodwin‏ @GoodwinMJ
To be clear there are 49 Lab seats with majority less than 10 pts, 42 that wd be lost to Cons on 5% swing, 81 that wd likely go on 10% swing

Matthew Goodwin‏ @GoodwinMJ
There are around 50 Lab seats that wd fall to Cons on just a 5% swing -which underlines how easy it would be for Lab to fall under 200 mark

Election Fatigue - it's fun to mock the idea given most seem to be in favour of this snap election, but I think it is still relevant to some degree. Some people will be suffering fatigue, even if they say they want one.

Violating a sense of Fair Play - not taking part in the TV debates is being frit, not anything to do with playing fair, I would think. While it has been done mostly for partisan advantage, the fact Labour agreed to do it I think will undercut any attempt to suggest this was for the Tory interest above the country - if Labour for instance say that, why did they vote for it?

The Crushing of the Saboteurs - That headline was disgusting, and I hope it cost them some votes at least. Hubris and general arrogance is a powerful potential issue for the Tories. They are trying not to be overconfident, you can tell, but someone will crack in the campaign, particularly if the locals go very well, and there will be gloating and 'rue the day' type stuff which could put some off. But overall the strong position means I don't think it can change the direction of travel.

Brexit means Brexit? - Yes, I think you've called this one right. So far she's seeking a mandate for a blank cheque.

The lack of any credible threat - Careful, 'I don't know a single person who x' is the sort of thing Milibanders said in shock after they lost! But I think it's right turnout will be down as a result - AlistairMeeks put it will when he identified two trends, the returning labour voters scared into ensuring the party survives even if they are very dispirited by Corbyn, and those who stay at home, with the latter being larger, though the first might save more seats than thought.

30-40 losses for Lab, max.

Sean_F said:

I certainly think Justin124 merits a ban for his comments on the last thread.

Disgusting comments

Nice thread... But in terms of "election fatigue" the polling is the other way. Looks like the public is really up for this one;

https://yougov.co.uk/opi/surveys/results#/survey/ac4f13f0-241b-11e7-939c-aada186fb1ac/question/105547e0-241f-11e7-939c-aada186fb1ac/toplines

It's the last time for REMAIN to stop Brexit and LEAVE to secure Brexit. Turnout will be high.

Add to that the Jezza Factor and I think we can say Theresa May is on for a big win on a high turnout.

dr_spyn said:

Recent polls would have to be overstating Tory lead, and understating Labour strength to support Harry Spencer's view.

Seems very credible since the sudden jump to 20 point leads for no explicable reason (that was not already the case) probably means that is a bit high. I expect it to dip to around 10 at some point, and being get a bit more nervous or hopeful, before settling in the low mid teens.

MikeSmithson said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Sean_F said:

I certainly think Justin124 merits a ban for his comments on the last thread.

Pure filth, the likes we haven't seem on here for a long long time.

It has been deleted

He also said she "would certainly deserve a pollonium pill in her tea".

YouGov:

Public think Theresa May right to call an early election by three to one

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2017/04/18/public-think-theresa-may-right-call-early-election/

Pong said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Sean_F said:

I certainly think Justin124 merits a ban for his comments on the last thread.

Pure filth, the likes we haven't seem on here for a long long time.

Yeah, the comment on diabetes was shitty.

There have been lots of comments from right wing posters that rival it over the last year, though.

Be nice, people. Let's stick to betting.

Agreed

That front page is tremendously unflattering. I can't shake "Bela Lugosi's Dead" from my head.

Pong said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Sean_F said:

I certainly think Justin124 merits a ban for his comments on the last thread.

Pure filth, the likes we haven't seem on here for a long long time.

Yeah, the comment on diabetes was shitty.

There have been lots of comments from right wing posters that rival it over the last year, though.

Be nice, people. Let's stick to betting.

There is nothing wrong with a bit of mocking, but there is a line and there is way way way over it. Anyway to the thread.

CarlottaVance said:

YouGov:

Public think Theresa May right to call an early election by three to one

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2017/04/18/public-think-theresa-may-right-call-early-election/

Doesn't mean there won't be some fatigue in the actuality though. People say they want things all the time and still moan about them later.

SimonStClare said:

Thanks and welcome Mr Spencer – I keep seeing that the blues ‘may not get the margin they expect’ but no one appears to state the figure they expect. Does anyone know ?

Key question indeed - May wouldn't have done this unless she expected to win big, but how big? I'd suggest anything that left Labour under 200, and the further below it the better.

RobD said:

MikeSmithson said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Sean_F said:

I certainly think Justin124 merits a ban for his comments on the last thread.

Pure filth, the likes we haven't seem on here for a long long time.

It has been deleted

He also said she "would certainly deserve a pollonium pill in her tea".

It would be wise for Justin to go and have a nice nap. He seems to be overly tetchy.

Straight away yesterday the media were hooked on this idea of voters not wanting a GE and voter fatigue. Now when have we seen the media being totally out of step with the rest of the country...innocent face..

AlastairMeeks said:

That front page is tremendously unflattering. I can't shake "Bela Lugosi's Dead" from my head.

I'm not sure you're supposed to find it flattering, more "respect" her. The leavers are the family, she's the matriarch and the remainers must pay Jizya, or else.

Corbyn about to speak in Croydon in his first campaign event. Good choice: Croydon Central is one of the few seats Labour might gain from the Tories.

AlastairMeeks said:

That front page is tremendously unflattering. I can't shake "Bela Lugosi's Dead" from my head.

Agreed. And, at the risk of going all Beverley C/Cyclefree, the current haircut seems like a mistake.

sounds like corbyn has ruled out any progressive alliance at NEC this pm.

FrancisUrquhart said:

AndreaParma_82 said:

It seems Letwin is unretiring himself according to local paper

https://www.wessexfm.com/news/dorset-news/2271845/oliver-letwin-to-stand-again-in-june-general-election/

You can hear the collective groan from across the country.

I met a senior Tory back in 2015 and discussed Oliver Letwin, and why every Tory leader from Thatcher onwards has employed him in some role.

1) I was told Letwin knows his stuff, and can analyse new stuff straight away.
2) He doesn't mind being the fall guy when something does go wrong, even when it isn't his fault
3) He's a very nice man

If he was as bad as people think he is, do you think Mrs Thatcher would have kept him on as her Policy Unit Chief for three years?

kle4 said:

Arron Banks, who will stand against Douglas Carswell in Clacton, has admitted in an interview with BBC Radio Essex that he “knows nothing about Clacton at all".

For god's sake man, you're both out of UKIP now, let it go!

https://order-order.com/2017/04/19/arron-banks-know-nothing-clacton/

Definitely one of the more amusing sideshows of the election.

Repeated from last threat because I feel like Labour deserve some credit for decent local organisation

kle4 said:

Back in the real world of local election fever, I'm impressed with my labour leaflet delivery today (still nothing from the Tories, 2 weeks behind the initial LD leaflet). It has:

A two side A5 sheet on the unitary candidate for the ward (albeit filled with triteness about 'being different' and not much else
An two side A4 glossy of all the Labour unitary candidates for the town with little bios, and a list of 'local issues' on the back, some of which really are local issues, and talking up how they are for the first time in a long time standing in all wards
A 4 page A5 leaflet, 3 pages of which lambasts Theresa May over the state of the NHS, and the last of which talks of how a 'Labour Government will deliver the real change Britain needs' after 'six years' of the Tories' policies, so either they are amazingly quick of the mark, or they were going to hammer the NHS message come what may for the locals.

Mostly platitudes, issues that are not locally relevant and endless whining about the NHS, but I'm impressed with the organisation and presentation to try and focus town wide issues with wider labour values.

rottenborough said:

sounds like corbyn has ruled out any progressive alliance at NEC this pm.

Good, the evil Tory baby-eating alliance will surely prevail.

Richard_Tyndall said:

Got caught by the New Thread trap so FPT:

The 0.7% of GDP for overseas aid is something we can and should be very proud of.

There will always be issues about how these things are administered and who gets the money but that is a question of reviewing and revising our criteria for overseas aid, not getting rid of or reducing it. I hope that leaving the EU might help this as significant amounts of overseas aid was channelled through them and the convoluted way in which it was administered made the whole thing rather opaque.

But the basic principle that rich countries should help poor ones for the long term benefit of everyone seems very sensible and admirable to me.

I would add that I have never understood the antipathy amongst some Tory politicians towards overseas aid. It seems a very old fashioned Conservative thing to do to help those les fortunate than oneself.

Me too. I agree that DfID spends money better than EU and this is a positive of leaving.

Not sure i agree on it being an old fashioned conservative thing to do!
Generally I think conservatives would say they prefer private charity?

felix said:

AndyJS said:

Corbyn about to speak in Croydon in his first campaign event. Good choice: Croydon Central is one of the few seats Labour might gain from the Tories.

So why on earth is Corbyn going to speak there?

Good point.

TheScreamingEagles said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

AndreaParma_82 said:

It seems Letwin is unretiring himself according to local paper

https://www.wessexfm.com/news/dorset-news/2271845/oliver-letwin-to-stand-again-in-june-general-election/

You can hear the collective groan from across the country.

I met a senior Tory back in 2015 and discussed Oliver Letwin, and why every Tory leader from Thatcher onwards has employed him in some role.

1) I was told Letwin knows his stuff, and can analyse new stuff straight away.
2) He doesn't mind being the fall guy when something does go wrong, even when it isn't his fault
3) He's a very nice man

If he was as bad as people think he is, do you think Mrs Thatcher would have kept him on as her Policy Unit Chief for three years?

He is a classic academic...I deal with them all the time....you need to lock them away and employ a filter between them and the real world.

On a random related note, Freakonomics had two guys from the nudge unit on the other week. Very interesting. One of Team Cameron's good things and UK government should be doing more of it.

How does the (majority of the) public thinking she was right to call an election mean that they will be interested in it?

MarkSenior said:

Re approval of May's early election , when Chamberlain returned from Munich in 1938 he was acclaimed by cheering crowds and would undoubtedly have won an early election . Within a year the country was at war and a few months later was no longer PM .

Project fear in overdrive?

Remember Phillip Hammond after the omNICshambles budget in his letter dated 15 March 2017 "There will be no increases in NICs rates in this Parliament."

That, along with Cameron's no tax rises promise and the triple lock on pensions promises has just flown out of the window.

Taxes to go up, pensioners to be hit...any opposition with an ounce of sense will jump on that. ..of course we don't have one

Are any of the manifestos out yet by the way ?

Not that they'll particularly matter.

Pulpstar said:

Are any of the manifestos out yet by the way ?

Not that they'll particularly matter.

I think they can probably be summarized as...

Tories - Brexit means Brexit

Lib Dem - No we don't have to Brexit

Labour - NHS NHS NHS NHS NHS NHS NHS NHS NHS

SNP - IndyRef2

UKIP - Brexit means rock hard Brexit.

IFG on washup:

https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/what-snap-election-means-existing-major-bills-and-policies

MarkSenior said:

Re approval of May's early election , when Chamberlain returned from Munich in 1938 he was acclaimed by cheering crowds and would undoubtedly have won an early election . Within a year the country was at war and a few months later was no longer PM .

Slightly OTT?

TheScreamingEagles said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

AndreaParma_82 said:

It seems Letwin is unretiring himself according to local paper

https://www.wessexfm.com/news/dorset-news/2271845/oliver-letwin-to-stand-again-in-june-general-election/

You can hear the collective groan from across the country.

I met a senior Tory back in 2015 and discussed Oliver Letwin, and why every Tory leader from Thatcher onwards has employed him in some role.

1) I was told Letwin knows his stuff, and can analyse new stuff straight away.
2) He doesn't mind being the fall guy when something does go wrong, even when it isn't his fault
3) He's a very nice man

If he was as bad as people think he is, do you think Mrs Thatcher would have kept him on as her Policy Unit Chief for three years?

Anecdote - the very unimportant policy my colleague was working on got pounced upon by Letwin.
He read everything. Everything they sent them and when they briefed had loads of questions that showed he had really got to grips with it. Colleague hated it but said it was bloody impressive.

Artist said:

How does the (majority of the) public thinking she was right to call an election mean that they will be interested in it?

Indeed - it's the old Radio 3 argument, about liking that something is there(or happening) without necessarily caring about it yourself. We shall see, but turnout will be down, I'll put money on that if the odds make it worth my while.

kle4 said:

Alanbrooke said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Straight away yesterday the media were hooked on this idea of voters not wanting a GE and voter fatigue. Now when have we seen the media being totally out of step with the rest of the country...innocent face..

the pundits are a lttle out of touch atm

they said there couldnt be an early election and Mrs May was indecisive - wrong on both accounts it seems

If they said there couldn't be one they were factually wrong, if they said there wouldn't be one they just called it wrong (if someone merely said she had no power to call one they were right and still are, she did not call one, parliament did, albeit at her urging).

But they definitely were not wrong on her being indecisive - if she is not indecisive and changed her mind in a month on seeking an early GE, then she lied about wanting to seek one before! So is she a liar, or is she indecisive?

And no, I don't expect her to face electoral consequences either way, but she was not decisive on this issue, she said repeatedly we were not having one, now we are.

Didn't the Trump visit get rescheduled a month or two ago? It does not ring true that she suddenly changed her mind. I suspect they shifted Trump to the autumn to ensure none of his negativity brushed off on her should she call an election.

aschamberlain said:

HYUFD said:

AramintaMoonbeamQC said:

HYUFD said:

AramintaMoonbeamQC said:

kle4 said:

Tissue_Price said:

kle4 said:

AndyJS said:

Edinburgh South: 2015 result — Lab 39%, SNP 34%, Con 17.5%. Applying latest Scottish polls gives something like SNP 31%, Con 30%, Lab 29%. But the SNP are probably not doing as well in this constituency as the average across Scotland.

Tasty. Please please let there be an atypical LD surge there too, for a juicy four way.

But the SNP had a very deflated 2015 result because of their unsuitable candidate (I forget the details, but Ian Murray was a very lucky man).

I recall chatter to that effect. Oh well. Any ideas where the tightest contests are expected to be? Presumably somewhere that was traditionally a Lab/LD contest with a solid Tory finish.

The SNP candidate had disgraced himself on social media and was disowned by NS. I doubt SNP vetting will be so slack this time.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/13214140.Edinburgh_South__why_Labour_held_on_against_the_SNP_tide/

Plus, the genteel retirees like Ruth D and are unlikely to vote for Mr. Corbyn's Red Labour, even tactically, leaving Ian Murray well exposed.

Scottish Labour will pile resources into Edinburgh South with leaflets and barcharts from 2015 and 2016 saying 'only Murray can beat the SNP here' (Labour in tiny writing down the bottom) while SNP resources will have to be shared more elsewhere, I expect it to still be the only Labour seat in Scotland with the LDs getting 2 MPs and the Tories 4 or 5

As they've got little else on the go, I agree - they gave it their all to win Edinburgh Southern at the Holyrood election. However, they did rely on activist help from down south in 2016, which won't be available this time around.

Edin South, Edin West and Mundell's seat will be the most interesting contests in Scotland.

The first 2 certainly (I think the SNP could fail to win either) but Mundell's seat should be a solid Tory hold

I think it will depend on the campaigns on the ground. If the Tories are targeting resources at Edinburgh South then it might end up as an SNP gain. At the same time you could end up seeing Labour picking up somewhere like East Lothian.

I'd expect the Lib Dems to win in Edinburgh West, North East Fife & Orkney & Shetland. Jo Swinson should be favourite in East Dunbartonshire and a Highland constituency isn't beyond the realms of possibility if the air war goes well for the party

Is it confirmed Swinson is restanding? Her husband was the MP down near me, and I wondered if they will both seek to retread.

IanB2 said:

Gallowgate said:

We (Lib Dems) could really have done with Clegg as leader for this election. Next to T May and especially Corbyn, he looks like a giant.

Times come, and times go. Nothing good ever came from wanting to turn back the clock.

Clegg is the past, present and future! He hasn't gone anywhere. I think his time will come again.

Mr. Gate, I agree. Lamb would also be better than Farron.

justin124 said:

GIN1138 said:

MarkSenior said:

Re approval of May's early election , when Chamberlain returned from Munich in 1938 he was acclaimed by cheering crowds and would undoubtedly have won an early election . Within a year the country was at war and a few months later was no longer PM .

Slightly OTT?

And by November 1940 was dead!

Are you trying to get yourself banned?

Alanbrooke said:

kle4 said:

Alanbrooke said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Straight away yesterday the media were hooked on this idea of voters not wanting a GE and voter fatigue. Now when have we seen the media being totally out of step with the rest of the country...innocent face..

the pundits are a lttle out of touch atm

they said there couldnt be an early election and Mrs May was indecisive - wrong on both accounts it seems

If they said there couldn't be one they were factually wrong, if they said there wouldn't be one they just called it wrong (if someone merely said she had no power to call one they were right and still are, she did not call one, parliament did, albeit at her urging).

But they definitely were not wrong on her being indecisive - if she is not indecisive and changed her mind in a month on seeking an early GE, then she lied about wanting to seek one before! So is she a liar, or is she indecisive?

And no, I don't expect her to face electoral consequences either way, but she was not decisive on this issue, she said repeatedly we were not having one, now we are.

ROFL

shes a politician

I find it little short of amazing that people on a politics site expect politicians to be archbishops.

Perhaps they are thinking of the Archbishop of Bath & Wells from Blackadder