politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Macron’s first big decision – choosing his Prime Minister. Chr
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Macron’s first big decision – choosing his Prime Minister. Chris from Paris looks at the betting
On the previous thread Chris from Paris gave his views on who Macron is going to choose as his first Prime Minister. Betffair has just got a market up. These are Chris’s views with the numbers being the Betfair price when he posted.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
CON 47%, LAB 30%, LD 7%, UKIP 5%, SNP 5%, GRE 3%, OTH 4%
- Fieldwork 5/6 May
- First poll of new series for ITV GMB
- Telephone
http://survation.com/con-lead-lab-17-points-amid-ukip-decline-new-polling-series-good-morning-britain/
CON 387, Lab 180, LD 5. Majority 124
When questioned on that subject before he never answers and instead just says "he's not campaigning on that subject".
If he does that again the audience will go crazy and it'll knock another 2% off Labour's final figure.
And I think this one may have a different methodology.
'Evidence behind reports of new baldness cure is a little thin'
Overall, 47 - 30 is about right for now. Telephone poll.
http://survation.com/con-lead-lab-17-points-amid-ukip-decline-new-polling-series-good-morning-britain/
Labour Party factionalism, trade union in-fighting, a lack of enthusiasm from councillors and MPs and a poor support from the London party are all being blamed for the shock defeat by less than one per cent of the vote.
http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/how-jeremy-corbyn-feud-lost-13005320
Not a fan of markets where the outcome is one person's choice, (and I screwed up the vote share markets and lost money) so sitting this one out.
Better than that, there's a whole load of people in the West Midlands who are now happy putting a cross in the box marked Conservative. That's probably worth a couple of seats by itself.
For England alone this gives the following
ICM poll compared with 2010 election
CON 53% 39.6% (+13.4%)
LAB 27% 28.1% (-1.1%)
LD 10% 24.2% (-14.2%)
UKIP 6% 3.5% (+2.5%)
Green 3% 1% (+2%)
Which swings applied to the 2010 data would result in the LibDems being in low single digits, and Labour being around 120 seats in England, and the Tories having just over 400 English seats.
There are many rumors but nobody knows anything yet.
Some information will necessarily come out at some point during the weekend as the chosen person is told and begins to assemble a team. The prices could be very volatile on Sunday in particular.
Early monday morning there will probably be also a small window between the unofficial announcement and the official confirmation.
2) Simon is not personally popular with people who have met him and his Labour rival, a significant local councillor, is. If there is a motivational problem maybe he should look closer to home for that. He won't, because he's always blamed everyone but himself for his failures, but he should.
3) Most people pay no attention to union politics, so McCluskey's decision to expel his rival from the union during a ballot on the leadership will have caused scarcely a ripple. That's especially true in the WM where the public sector is comparatively small. And would the £10,000 he is said to have refused to stay out of it have made a difference? It seems unlikely given Street's resources.
4) I don't think bussing in a load of Londoners to the West Midlands to tell them how wonderful things are in Islington would exactly have helped matters given how unpopular Londoners are with the rest of the country right now. As for Corbyn's foreign policy, that was already priced in.
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/861726711238590467
Tanks. Lawn.
A Conservative candidate for Prime Minister leading on questions regarding public trust over Brexit and Economy would not necessarily be seen as particularly surprising, a Labour Leader not leading on protecting the NHS and to “promote a fairer society” should be of concern given Labour’s policy platform and campigning on these issues.
May lead vs Corbyn:
Brexit: +42
Economy: +41
NHS: +3
Fairer Society: +9
http://survation.com/con-lead-lab-17-points-amid-ukip-decline-new-polling-series-good-morning-britain/
An interesting range of candidates, but hard to see much value.
'Should be inducing panic and terror' would be a better locution.
The fairer society question - bearing in mind this is the whole reason Labour committed mass suicide by electing Corbyn in the first place - isn't even close. That's a disaster.
The NHS one is MoE but that's still pretty poor given that the record of the government on healthcare has been to put it mildly rather mixed.
We're about to find out where Labour's true floor is, and it will not be pretty.
http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Final-GMB-GE2017-Poll-I-050517TOCH-1c0d0h5.pdf
https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/861776491142676480
Signed :
JackW
Supreme Leader for Life TOTY.
Angus
SNP 12,349
Con 10,771
Lab 2,178
LibD 1,873
UKIP 0
Ind: 10,075
The Ayrshire result stands out for a possible Westminster seat gain.
But I'm wondering how many Independents might be closet SNP, or think their demand for a second referendum is just too conservative and they should go for UDI.
http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2017/05/08/the-state-of-labour-post-anger-pre-recrimination/
The former PM Manuel Valls just announced he will not run as a socialist for the parliamentary election but as a candidate for "La Republique en marche" (new name of En marche since yesterday).
This is significant as Valls was PM for most of the last 3 years, was a minister before that and has been the most well-known representative of the right-wing of the socialist party during the last few years.
His departure, that will no doubt be followed by many others, is a very bad sign for the Socialist Party's survival as a dominant force.
Between 1981 and 2017 the socialists have clearly dominated the left and held power for 20 years in total. As recently as 2014 the socialists controlled the presidency, the senate, the national assembly, almost all regions, the vast majority of big cities and a majority of departements. Sic transit gloria mundi...
That former success was based on the union in a single party of traditional socialists and pure social-democrats (Mitterand/Rocard, Jospin/Fabius, Montebourg/Valls...).
The socialists now seem to have chosen the Corbyn path... After all Hamon said during the campaign that he saw Corbyn as "a model of success".
Now the trouble for Macron is that he does not want his party to become only the new centre-left party. To get a majority he needs centre-right voters. In my opinion, this reinforces the need for Macron to name a PM from the right.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/jimwaterson/the-sound-of-leamington-spa
Speaking to BuzzFeed News in Tory-held Leamington Spa, an upbeat Corbyn said he would continue as Labour leader no matter what happens on 8 June.
If translated into general election votes that would be enough for the Tories to eject the former first minister even though he has an apparently solid lead over the Conservatives.
The list of new Tory targets includes a number of seats where the Tories are in third place but where they now believe they can win. These include Ayr, Carrick & Cumnock, where they have 15,000 votes to make up if they are to beat Corri Wilson, who is defending the seat for the SNP, and in Stirling, where the party is 11,500 votes behind the SNP’s Steven Paterson.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/scotland/confident-tories-will-target-snp-big-names-3kjs9cz23
However, fun though that would be the national interest must come first.
More seriously, that's significant. Isn't Mandelson the first big Labour figure to suggest a split might be beneficial? Hard to believe that isn't linked to Corbyn's expressed desire to stay on.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/it-s-time-for-labour-moderates-to-jump-ship-jtnvp5r8l
Right now, Corbyn seems only interested in vote share, he's campaigning in safe Lab seats and safe Tory seats.
Longer term the direction of travel may be significant but that depends on many things, not least what happens to Sturgeon if the results are a bit disappointing or the vote share is lower than anticipated. Also of course how big a mess Brexit turns out to be.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2017/may/08/general-election-2017-poll-tracker-who-is-in-the-lead
Are there any recent cases where a party has held a primary and it's worked out well for them?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4485212/Ready-use-tough-negotiating-skills-Monsieur-Macron.html
Fwiw. I think the key motivators for Londoners are:
1) Housing costs and availability
2) Remainer fury
3) Pollution
Ostensibly, none of those issues plays well for the Tories, but I am far from sure. It really depends on how the parties pitch their message to Londoners. One thing to note is that Labour have much further to fall in London than the rest of the country, so I wouldn't be totally surprised if the swing against Labour actually ends up being higher than elsewhere.
But then they were in government. If Corbyn can keep the Tories to a majority of 43, or even a swing of 5%, he'll have far exceeded all expectations.
There might only be 120mps left, a lot of which will be loony left..
Or we could mention Castro. Or Mao. Or Chavez.
An astute politician exploits the openings they have. Right now, in Scotland independence can be associated with leftism becuase we look set to have right wing UK Government for the foreseeable future. If that changed and the left became toxic, the SNP will tack again, because they care about independence, not about how they get there.
Whether Sturgeon has the ability to fully exploit this opportunity is a different question. She may not. But if she doesn't even try she can't succeed.
Have a good morning.
It's basically been gerrymandered against a tory win, the boundaries cut across communities and makes no sense at all.
He added that Valls still had a day to do so, as official candidates will be announced on Thursday but this does not sound like a very warm welcome...
Lab - Brexit, what's that? Let's talk about the NHS and Tory cuts.
Lib - Tim will personally come and collect your bins every week, wait every two weeks because of Tory cuts.
I think that about sums up the main ones
Brian HanrahanUKIP manifesto: "I counted them all out and I counted them all back."Anecdotage, but friends and family in Scotland have said they'll vote Conservative for the first time in three decades. They smiled at Rutherglen having a Tory councillor, my dearly departed Gran (who lived there) probably turned in her grave.
But I had no idea that Michael Foot was going to lose quite so badly.
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/theresa-may-margaret-thatcher-conservatives-general-election-a7718666.html
So pollution has deteriorated in the capital? Are you sure?
I am also not sure that primaries made a worse choice than party machines would have in the examples you raise. The Republican machine would have chosen someone other than Trump, but that person might very well have lost... and you need to decide whether your objection is that primaries choose awful people, or that they choose losers. The Democrat machine would have gone for Clinton over Sanders anyway so the primaries made no difference (and I suspect they went for the least worst electorally by doing so, whatever the zealots say). The French Socialists were doomed to defeat whatever they did. The French Republicans did obviously choose the wrong man - but only really because of a scandal that broke after the primaries; with hindsight it was wrong, but at the time it was him versus a rather unpopular ex-President and a yesterday's man, so wasn't some kind of out there, crazy choice.