politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The final poll, Ipsos MORI, has CON lead up 3 to 8% + latest b

kjohnw said:

anyone getting pre-10pm nerves. gut says tory majority nailed on. but still have that nagging doubt of uncertainty that we could get a shock result. tick tock

Jangling in waves.

DearPB said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

HOw the Tories didn't point to jezza, to his manifesto and then what is going on in Venezuela I have no idea.

Because most voters haven't heard of Venezuela

Well there are plenty of videos out there showing how the government is crushing its citizens. Speaking as someone with family in Venezuela I'm ashamed about how much under reporting is happening in this country on the situation. And to think this what Corbyn holds up as a shining example of how it should be. If any of the corbynistas had to experience what my family is going through, with no food and daily battles with the military, just to survive, they may start to take off their rose tinted glasses.

FrancisUrquhart said:

HOw the Tories didn't point to jezza, to his manifesto and then what is going on in Venezuela I have no idea.

I'd imagine it focus-grouped (if that is a word) badly. Other attacks that were tried and dropped presumably focus-grouped well but then did poorly in Jim Messina's Facebook click-through analysis, or whatever it is he does.

We've seen pb posters getting overwrought about Jezza's IRA links, which CCHQ ran with then dropped. Presumably Messina discovered that most people thought it was so long ago they no longer cared whether Gerry Adams was wearing his IRA hat or his Sinn Fein hat at the time.

Most voters couldn't find Venezuela on a map after Michael Gove's education reforms. Their problems do not resonate here.

DearPB said:

DearPB said:

rural_voter said:

Stark_Dawning said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Does anyone agree with me that we could have all kinds of strange declarations tonight throughout the whole Country

And will Nicola Sturgeon and even Theresa May survive

Theresa May's an interesting one. In Maidenhead, the Lib Dems were snapping at the Tories' heels until Dave detoxified the brand and it was heavily Remain. May has embraced hard Brexit and has turned her back on Dave's reforms. She might be toast.

Betting on the big picture, I'll be extremely happy if Alastair M or Jack W's forecasts come true.

I hope the declarations aren't 'excessively fascinating'. 10s-100s of gains and losses either way makes me nervous of some constituency bets.

I'm a bit confused why John Redwood is safe in Wokingham, a Remain seat, and TMay isn't safe in Maidenhead, a Remain seat in the same county.

Theresa May is 100% safe

DearPB said:

rural_voter said:

Stark_Dawning said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Does anyone agree with me that we could have all kinds of strange declarations tonight throughout the whole Country

And will Nicola Sturgeon and even Theresa May survive

Theresa May's an interesting one. In Maidenhead, the Lib Dems were snapping at the Tories' heels until Dave detoxified the brand and it was heavily Remain. May has embraced hard Brexit and has turned her back on Dave's reforms. She might be toast.

Betting on the big picture, I'll be extremely happy if Alastair M or Jack W's forecasts come true.

I hope the declarations aren't 'excessively fascinating'. 10s-100s of gains and losses either way makes me nervous of some constituency bets.

I'm a bit confused why John Redwood is safe in Wokingham, a Remain seat, and TMay isn't safe in Maidenhead, a Remain seat in the same county.

Theresa May is 100% safe

Somewhere on Twitter a Corbynista is tweeting that on a reputable politics site people are debating whether TMay might lose her seat.

It slightly surprises me that some odds on the favourite in those seats are 1.01. They're not all 1.00.

FrancisUrquhart said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

I've been out so you might have covered below but this is an UTTER disgrace. If I was a governor at the school, I'd be raising concerns with the FGB.

https://order-order.com/2017/06/08/hammer-and-sickle-posters-in-primary-school-polling-station-window/

This shit always seem to happen in the same places...

Ofsted should be sent in tomorrow.

DearPB said:

Chameleon said:

I can't help but feel that the rabid corbynistas have drive more shy tories underground.

How can it be socially unacceptable to share a political view with 45% of the population?

I have no idea. But it is a depressingly common thing to suggest, or outright state.

In fairness, I do have to apply that back around to the 35% or so who will vote Corbyn.

DecrepitJohnL said:

Most voters couldn't find Venezuela on a map after Michael Gove's education reforms. Their problems do not resonate here.

Most voters probably couldn't find it before.

DearPB said:

I'm getting worried about how many Tories are here - why aren't we out GOTV-ing

Sending the servants out to do that right after tea.

WillS.

RobD said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

Most voters couldn't find Venezuela on a map after Michael Gove's education reforms. Their problems do not resonate here.

Most voters probably couldn't find it before.

Yeah this is an odd criticism.

Chris said:

Nate Silver and Harry Enten think each of the following are [sic] roughly as likely as the others:
(1) Narrow-ish Tory majority
(2) Tory landslide
(3) Tory loss of majority

They say nobody should be surprised unless Labour gets an overall majority:
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-three-scenarios-for-the-u-k-election/

Suggests they would recommend betting on no overall majority (currently at 7.5 on Betfair).

kjohnw said:

anyone getting pre-10pm nerves. gut says tory majority nailed on. but still have that nagging doubt of uncertainty that we could get a shock result. tick tock

Absolutely, don't think you can rule anything out right now so there is naturally some nerves.

oldpolitics said:

JohnLilburne said:

FF43 said:

TOPPING said:

Andrew said:

KentRising said:

Chameleon said:

https://twitter.com/LadPolitics/status/872397001924784128

Inexplicable.

What's really silly is that Ladbrokes max politics payout is apparently 250k, so this punter basically got a 249/1 price for something that's about as likely as Elvis for next President.

Shadsy said he would have paid out the £1m.

(yes he said "would've" - WHAT DOES HE KNOW????)

As the exclusion is almost certainly unenforceable, I imagine he would pay it out. It would otherwise be, see you in court.

I thought gambling debts were unenforceable.

Not as such but given the success of Coral in the courts on refusing to pay out at similar odds on the bet "Rangers to be Relegated" (and the contortions they went through to prove that the plain English meaning of the word "Relegated" did not apply to this instance of "a technical adjustment of the club's status from a higher division to a lower division") included their defence claim that "We'd never have offered those odds if we thought there was any chance of it actually happening", one presumes the kind of event that would see the bet win would also be treated as an opportunity to palp the bet, particularly given Coral and Ladbrokes are now part of the same stable.

Rangers weren't relegated. They were liquidated. They ceased to exist.

kle4 said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

I've been out so you might have covered below but this is an UTTER disgrace. If I was a governor at the school, I'd be raising concerns with the FGB.

https://order-order.com/2017/06/08/hammer-and-sickle-posters-in-primary-school-polling-station-window/

Surely everyone knows you're not allowed to display material like that, how do they think they will get away with it?

And who is the school site manager? Is that what we used to call the caretaker?

FattyBolger said:

Can anyone suggest a good momentumy website i can lurk tonight to check their reaction, whatever the result. Im not on FB

Twitter?

Alistair said:

oldpolitics said:

JohnLilburne said:

FF43 said:

TOPPING said:

Andrew said:

KentRising said:

Chameleon said:

https://twitter.com/LadPolitics/status/872397001924784128

Inexplicable.

What's really silly is that Ladbrokes max politics payout is apparently 250k, so this punter basically got a 249/1 price for something that's about as likely as Elvis for next President.

Shadsy said he would have paid out the £1m.

(yes he said "would've" - WHAT DOES HE KNOW????)

As the exclusion is almost certainly unenforceable, I imagine he would pay it out. It would otherwise be, see you in court.

I thought gambling debts were unenforceable.

Not as such but given the success of Coral in the courts on refusing to pay out at similar odds on the bet "Rangers to be Relegated" (and the contortions they went through to prove that the plain English meaning of the word "Relegated" did not apply to this instance of "a technical adjustment of the club's status from a higher division to a lower division") included their defence claim that "We'd never have offered those odds if we thought there was any chance of it actually happening", one presumes the kind of event that would see the bet win would also be treated as an opportunity to palp the bet, particularly given Coral and Ladbrokes are now part of the same stable.

Rangers weren't relegated. They were liquidated. They ceased to exist.

Seems like a sound decision by the courts - the new Rangers are a legally distinct entity, aren't they? Even in plain English I wouldn't say they were relegated.

Beverley_C said:

peter_from_putney said:

Beverley_C said:

Jason said:

SandyRentool said:

Chameleon said:

madasafish said:

Chameleon said:

Jason said:

RobD said:

Jason said:

My partner inadvertently shared a pic of the 'Proud to vote for Theresa May' on FB, so of course the same ad appeared on her page.

Guess what? She's started receiving abuse from members of her own family - including her sister. It's upset her, and I'm furious.

I need to cool down before I do something I regret.

Lefties are the worst

Agreed, but you don't expect it from members of your own family. She's learnt a harsh lesson today about human nature and the pack mentality.

I posted earlier about a girl (18) that shared something.

The first response was from her *Dad*:

'Maybe one day you'll have a genuine thought of your own [name]... being influenced by new money shallow individuals is no excuse... don't be mislead! We'll get it from the magic money tree of course... take from the rich and divide it up fairly... get a conscience... there is a better way than greed.'

She's now been attacked by 5 or 6 different people and has had to post this:
'This is getting seriously out of hand. Everyone just calm down. Take a deep breath. And now fuck off and vote for whoever the hell you want! It's nobody else's business anyway!!!!!!'.

The abuse she got is no doubt from the kind of people who deprecate bullying of any sort and take up the cause of the oppressed....but when their political views are challenged..

It was just mental, seeing a Dad go in and savage his daughter's views, then her close friends joined in... on the Dad's side. Fuck me.

I imagine that there are quite a few dads who wouldn't mind their daughter's friends joining in with them...

SeanT?

Where is SeanT? Hiding behind the sofa?

Possibly still deciding whether or not to change his mind yet again as regards who to vote for?

Yes!

No!!

Maybe!!!

Can you repeat the question?

Twitter is even more of a mystery to me than FB!

kle4 said:

Alistair said:

oldpolitics said:

JohnLilburne said:

FF43 said:

TOPPING said:

Andrew said:

KentRising said:

Chameleon said:

https://twitter.com/LadPolitics/status/872397001924784128

Inexplicable.

What's really silly is that Ladbrokes max politics payout is apparently 250k, so this punter basically got a 249/1 price for something that's about as likely as Elvis for next President.

Shadsy said he would have paid out the £1m.

(yes he said "would've" - WHAT DOES HE KNOW????)

As the exclusion is almost certainly unenforceable, I imagine he would pay it out. It would otherwise be, see you in court.

I thought gambling debts were unenforceable.

Not as such but given the success of Coral in the courts on refusing to pay out at similar odds on the bet "Rangers to be Relegated" (and the contortions they went through to prove that the plain English meaning of the word "Relegated" did not apply to this instance of "a technical adjustment of the club's status from a higher division to a lower division") included their defence claim that "We'd never have offered those odds if we thought there was any chance of it actually happening", one presumes the kind of event that would see the bet win would also be treated as an opportunity to palp the bet, particularly given Coral and Ladbrokes are now part of the same stable.

Rangers weren't relegated. They were liquidated. They ceased to exist.

Seems like a sound decision by the courts - the new Rangers are a legally distinct entity, aren't they? Even in plain English I wouldn't say they were relegated.

Did the new Rangers have the same players? If so, they were relegated. If they had to buy 22 new players, it's a different club.

kle4 said:

Alistair said:

oldpolitics said:

JohnLilburne said:

FF43 said:

TOPPING said:

Andrew said:

KentRising said:

Chameleon said:

https://twitter.com/LadPolitics/status/872397001924784128

Inexplicable.

What's really silly is that Ladbrokes max politics payout is apparently 250k, so this punter basically got a 249/1 price for something that's about as likely as Elvis for next President.

Shadsy said he would have paid out the £1m.

(yes he said "would've" - WHAT DOES HE KNOW????)

As the exclusion is almost certainly unenforceable, I imagine he would pay it out. It would otherwise be, see you in court.

I thought gambling debts were unenforceable.

Not as such but given the success of Coral in the courts on refusing to pay out at similar odds on the bet "Rangers to be Relegated" (and the contortions they went through to prove that the plain English meaning of the word "Relegated" did not apply to this instance of "a technical adjustment of the club's status from a higher division to a lower division") included their defence claim that "We'd never have offered those odds if we thought there was any chance of it actually happening", one presumes the kind of event that would see the bet win would also be treated as an opportunity to palp the bet, particularly given Coral and Ladbrokes are now part of the same stable.

Rangers weren't relegated. They were liquidated. They ceased to exist.

Seems like a sound decision by the courts - the new Rangers are a legally distinct entity, aren't they? Even in plain English I wouldn't say they were relegated.

Wikipedia (fount of all knowledge) still maintains they were formed 145 years ago.

JosiasJessop said:

I despair when an intelligent person I know, like and respect posts a big banner on FB saying: "Vote Labour if you have the faintest grasp on sanity."

FFS.

No. That's accurate. You are likely to vote Labour if you only have the faintest grasp on sanity...

Beverley_C said:

Electronic voting would be the least secure system ever. Paper is hard to hack and our current system is efficient at counting it and is well scrutinised.

The day we go electronic, the UK will truly be sunk.

I've ranted many times about the technical problems, but more than anything anecdotes like the one I commented on show just how vital secrecy is, and internet voting at home does not offer that at all.

TravelJunkie said:

Anyone not voted yet? Voting with the wife - she and voted Tory since 1997 and she's a conservative party member. She doesn't listen to one word I say.

she is not alone

TravelJunkie said:

Anyone not voted yet? Voting with the wife - she and voted Tory since 1997 and she's a conservative party member. She doesn't listen to one word I say.

I always vote at about 9pm. Makes it feel more exciting for some reason (!). And I haven't decided who to vote for yet, although I've got it down to two candidates. Doesn't matter much since I live in a very safe seat.

RobD said:

kle4 said:

Alistair said:

oldpolitics said:

JohnLilburne said:

FF43 said:

TOPPING said:

Andrew said:

KentRising said:

Chameleon said:

https://twitter.com/LadPolitics/status/872397001924784128

Inexplicable.

What's really silly is that Ladbrokes max politics payout is apparently 250k, so this punter basically got a 249/1 price for something that's about as likely as Elvis for next President.

Shadsy said he would have paid out the £1m.

(yes he said "would've" - WHAT DOES HE KNOW????)

As the exclusion is almost certainly unenforceable, I imagine he would pay it out. It would otherwise be, see you in court.

I thought gambling debts were unenforceable.

Not as such but given the success of Coral in the courts on refusing to pay out at similar odds on the bet "Rangers to be Relegated" (and the contortions they went through to prove that the plain English meaning of the word "Relegated" did not apply to this instance of "a technical adjustment of the club's status from a higher division to a lower division") included their defence claim that "We'd never have offered those odds if we thought there was any chance of it actually happening", one presumes the kind of event that would see the bet win would also be treated as an opportunity to palp the bet, particularly given Coral and Ladbrokes are now part of the same stable.

Rangers weren't relegated. They were liquidated. They ceased to exist.

Seems like a sound decision by the courts - the new Rangers are a legally distinct entity, aren't they? Even in plain English I wouldn't say they were relegated.

Wikipedia (fount of all knowledge) still maintains they were formed 145 years ago.

And yet 'With a new corporate identity, the club gained admittance to the fourth tier of Scottish league football in time for the start of the following season, and were promoted three times in four years to return to the top flight'

'Gained admittance to', not 'were relegated to'.

foxinsoxuk said:

TravelJunkie said:

Anyone not voted yet? Voting with the wife - she and voted Tory since 1997 and she's a conservative party member. She doesn't listen to one word I say.

I've just got in from work. Tea first then walk the pooch to the polling.

Which way do you think the pooch with vote?

FrancisUrquhart said:

foxinsoxuk said:

TravelJunkie said:

Anyone not voted yet? Voting with the wife - she and voted Tory since 1997 and she's a conservative party member. She doesn't listen to one word I say.

I've just got in from work. Tea first then walk the pooch to the polling.

Which way do you think the pooch with vote?

Is there still a Dog Lovers' Party?

FattyBolger said:

Can anyone suggest a good momentumy website i can lurk tonight to check their reaction, whatever the result. Im not on FB

The Canary is always good:

https://www.thecanary.co/2017/06/08/former-ukip-voter-gives-frank-opinion-theresa-may-leaving-thousands-people-stitches-video/

nrs3079 said:

DearPB said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

HOw the Tories didn't point to jezza, to his manifesto and then what is going on in Venezuela I have no idea.

Because most voters haven't heard of Venezuela

Well there are plenty of videos out there showing how the government is crushing its citizens. Speaking as someone with family in Venezuela I'm ashamed about how much under reporting is happening in this country on the situation. And to think this what Corbyn holds up as a shining example of how it should be. If any of the Corbynistas had to experience what my family is going through, with no food and daily battles with the military, just to survive, they may start to take off their rose tinted glasses.

I entirely agree, and I think if May and the con leadership had made a bit thing about it, insted off the IRA links, then as more journalists hear about Venezuela, the the protests out there and government repression of those protests might have got a lot more TV coverage that would then have had a fed back loop of publicity. It would have also cut to the hart of what Corbyn is about and his appeal to idealistic mostly young people.

When you go on about the IRA it is easy to dismiss as 30 year ago...... but when you show video of the Venezuelan government 'expropriating' company after company. only for them to be so badly run by the government that the people are now staving and loosing wait.

Hear is a goodish but long video of Corbnys support and the stat of Venezuela now:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSIQAKpaR20

Or if you like your politics musical and funny hear is the Venezuelan Diet:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBf66wAMpVQ&t=3s

Anecdata. The 2 labour voters who had sworn off whilst Corbyn was leader have voted Labour in the end. Am surprised with one of them after what they said about Corbyn.

FattyBolger said:

Twitter is even more of a mystery to me than FB!

Just use this and pick a search term. You should be able to find what you want to read easily enough.

https://twitter.com/search-home

kle4 said:

RobD said:

kle4 said:

Alistair said:

oldpolitics said:

JohnLilburne said:

FF43 said:

TOPPING said:

Andrew said:

KentRising said:

Chameleon said:

https://twitter.com/LadPolitics/status/872397001924784128

Inexplicable.

What's really silly is that Ladbrokes max politics payout is apparently 250k, so this punter basically got a 249/1 price for something that's about as likely as Elvis for next President.

Shadsy said he would have paid out the £1m.

(yes he said "would've" - WHAT DOES HE KNOW????)

As the exclusion is almost certainly unenforceable, I imagine he would pay it out. It would otherwise be, see you in court.

I thought gambling debts were unenforceable.

Not as such but given the success of Coral in the courts on refusing to pay out at similar odds on the bet "Rangers to be Relegated" (and the contortions they went through to prove that the plain English meaning of the word "Relegated" did not apply to this instance of "a technical adjustment of the club's status from a higher division to a lower division") included their defence claim that "We'd never have offered those odds if we thought there was any chance of it actually happening", one presumes the kind of event that would see the bet win would also be treated as an opportunity to palp the bet, particularly given Coral and Ladbrokes are now part of the same stable.

Rangers weren't relegated. They were liquidated. They ceased to exist.

Seems like a sound decision by the courts - the new Rangers are a legally distinct entity, aren't they? Even in plain English I wouldn't say they were relegated.

Wikipedia (fount of all knowledge) still maintains they were formed 145 years ago.

And yet 'With a new corporate identity, the club gained admittance to the fourth tier of Scottish league football in time for the start of the following season, and were promoted three times in four years to return to the top flight'

'Gained admittance to', not 'were relegated to'.

I'm sorry but Rangers are quite clearly not a new club. To suggest otherwise is just being sad and pedantic.

As a Newcastle United fan, I have much sympathy for fans having to endure bad owners.

Has anyone heard that the Lib Dems are in a lot of trouble. Chap who told me that Norman Baker and Stephen Lloyd were losing about this time of day in 2015 reckons they're praying for 5 MPs. (He worked for Baker).
Farron losing, Clegg ok. Don't know how true it is.

numbertwelve said:

I just want it to be over now. I don't think I've ever been as nervous for an election in my life.

Same on both counts.

Mimus said:

Desmond_Glazebrook said:

Anecdatum: turnout in a Con-leaning ward of Stockton South (5k Con maj over Labour) is reported as higher already than for the entire day in 2015.

From an intermittent lurker, a vote of thanks to the posters of this site for all your wit and wisdom.

69% turnout last time. Turned Con in 2010, in 2015 the LD gave up and those votes went CON. In 2015 there were over 5k UKIP votes.

Yup. It was near the top of Labour's target list in 2015 (the majority in 2010 was only 332). Labour have actually been making an effort this time - a new candidate (local GP), and I've had more communications from them than the Conservatives, despite this being a Con-leaning area. Nothing from any of the others.

The Labour candidate asked for my vote so he can hold the government to account. The Conservative asked for my vote so he can be a voice in the government. So neither seem to be in much doubt about what the nationwide result will be...

First post on here for a while after just lurking for a few years.

I will miss reading the Facebook/twitter postings from many, especially those supporting Corbyn, once the election is finished. I suppose I should be worried about the appalling level of public debate, but I've chosen to just laugh at it for now.

Anyway, a story involving my son, who has just turned 12. He and some friends recently fell out with another kid at school, after they chose to go to a local scooter park rather than a skateboard one. The other kid feels so strongly about the scooter/skateboard debate that he will have nothing to do with anyone who has chosen differently to them.

Anyway, it came as no surprise to me to hear that this same kid, whose parents are extremely vocal Corbyn supporters, has spent this week taking that argument to the classroom. Anyone who doesn't agree with his opinion of the great man is apparently being treated like scooter loving lowlife.

I suppose he has an excuse. He is only 12 years old. I'm not sure what excuse the facebook/twitter warriors have.

JosiasJessop said:

I despair when an intelligent person I know, like and respect posts a big banner on FB saying: "Vote Labour if you have the faintest grasp on sanity."

FFS.

I think politics would be a lot healthier if neither side threw around the accusation that you had to be crazy to vote for the other side. But, alas.

midwinter said:

Has anyone heard that the Lib Dems are in a lot of trouble. Chap who told me that Norman Baker and Stephen Lloyd were losing about this time of day in 2015 reckons they're praying for 5 MPs. (He worked for Baker).
Farron losing, Clegg ok. Don't know how true it is.

There were in a tough position even before any news filtering through today came in.

Well, as has been noted before if the polls are right, then with Lab and Con both up on last time and the LDs static, several of the ones they held last time, most of them even, could be under threat, especially ones where UKIP are not standing, if in those seats most UKIP voters go Tory. It's a question of whether they can cluster their remaining support into those target seats to save them, and even pick up some gains, to offset what will probably be several losses at least (models seem to be ranging from 2-15).

Farron was expected to be safe, he has the only decent sized majority, but who knows.
Clegg is in for a fight, but the Mail want Tories to vote for him and Mark Senior reckons the Lab campaign has not been as good and he should be safe.
Williams' biggest opponent last time was PC, and some are having that one as a four way marginal, who knows what will happen but most models seem to think he is going to make it.
Brake is widely predicted to lose in Carshalton, but some models have him holding on.
Mulholland is vulnerable to Labour surges apparently, but I have no idea.
Pugh isn't standing in Southport and most seem to think that seat is vulnerable.
Lamb has been written off as a loss in many, but not all, models, a bit like Brake.
Olney does not seem expected to win again in Richmond, but if the LDs are outperforming in places, London might be the place?
Carmichael should be safe, Orkney and Shetland still gave big LD votes in 2016.

Some good chances of a few wins in Scotland, with some shots in London (Twickenham etc) and a sprinkling of other targets.

I think 4-10 is their range, in the end I went for 8.

jonny83 said:

numbertwelve said:

I just want it to be over now. I don't think I've ever been as nervous for an election in my life.

Same on both counts.

Relax. I'm sure I have seen many more elections than you and normally I'm stressed out of my brains but this time I have no great concerns whatever the outcome.

The years ahead are mainly about Brexit, and the economy, and I really don't see there's much room to manouevre on either, so why worry?

Trump's twitter finally falls silent !

kle4 said:

FattyBolger said:

Can anyone suggest a good momentumy website i can lurk tonight to check their reaction, whatever the result. Im not on FB

I've haven't been keeping track during the campaign, but Labour list comments always used to be good for looking at the civil war in Labour unfold below the line or articles. Similarly ConHome is bound to be good if the Tories mess up.

But really we want proper forum type reactions.

What about on reddit? It's great fun checking in to The_Donald subreddit when Trump does something against his campaign promises, like attacking Syria, and watching as the alt-righters tear themselves apart. I'm sure momentum/far left have a similar group on there.

See Spreads still tightening Spread Ex now down to 356-362

Paristonda said:

kle4 said:

FattyBolger said:

Can anyone suggest a good momentumy website i can lurk tonight to check their reaction, whatever the result. Im not on FB

I've haven't been keeping track during the campaign, but Labour list comments always used to be good for looking at the civil war in Labour unfold below the line or articles. Similarly ConHome is bound to be good if the Tories mess up.

But really we want proper forum type reactions.

What about on reddit? It's great fun checking in to The_Donald subreddit when Trump does something against his campaign promises, like attacking Syria, and watching as the alt-righters tear themselves apart. I'm sure momentum/far left have a similar group on there.

A chunk of LabourList has been Guido Fawkes regulars trolling for ages though, not sure anybody goes there for the comments.

Winstanley said:

Paristonda said:

kle4 said:

FattyBolger said:

Can anyone suggest a good momentumy website i can lurk tonight to check their reaction, whatever the result. Im not on FB

I've haven't been keeping track during the campaign, but Labour list comments always used to be good for looking at the civil war in Labour unfold below the line or articles. Similarly ConHome is bound to be good if the Tories mess up.

But really we want proper forum type reactions.

What about on reddit? It's great fun checking in to The_Donald subreddit when Trump does something against his campaign promises, like attacking Syria, and watching as the alt-righters tear themselves apart. I'm sure momentum/far left have a similar group on there.

A chunk of LabourList has been Guido Fawkes regulars trolling for ages though.

That does not surprise me in the least.

Any decent last minute bets to be had? Tempted to put some money on Lib Dems winning Argyll and Bute.

Bought myself some Gentleman's Jacks for tonight. Not a big fan of American Whiskey, but this stuff is so good. Will down a measure in celebration if any of the below happens.

~ Salmond loses his seat
~ Robertson loses his seat
~ Jess Phillips loses her seat
~ Caroline Lucas loses her seat
~ Tories win Wales
~ Tories get an MP in Northern Ireland

100% turnout in our house now; 80% vote for Labour.

Pong said:

Paristonda said:

I am going to stick my neck out and predict turnout of 70%. Numerous people have commented to me about unusually high turnout at their polling stations - anecdotal of course but I can believe it. Higher youth turnout for Corbyn coupled with higher old turnout against Corbyn, I don't think the whole election fatigue idea really took hold with people.

My bets are on higher-than-expected turnout - mainly through a spreadbet on over 62.75%, but also I've been laying the <65% bands;

https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.131104264

70.00001%+ would make me very happy.

We'll see.</p>

Chance of 70%+ must be zero.