Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » LAB drops 4 in new YouGov Euros poll putting CON to within

Two worrying polls for LAB overnight. The latest YouGov GE 2015 poll has the gap down to 1% once again with LAB at 36% – it’s lowest for a long time.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
As will be either Labour, the Conservatives or UKIP.
It sounds as if Nick and others are pounding the pavements, but I suspect that with the party largely backing the coalition budget, spending cap and benefits cap not with much enthusiasm.
Complacency does not do it justice. The Euros are weeks away, and World cup and Indy ref will dominate most of the rest of the year. Not much time to build a campaign.
There seems to be a vacuum up top for some reason, which is odd, because when they want to they can set the narrative - for example on energy prices.
Scottish Parliament constituency vote (FPTP)
SNP 38% (-1)
Lab 35% (-2)
Con 13% (-1)
LD 7% (+2)
Scottish Parliament regional list vote (AMS)
Lab 33% (-2)
SNP 33% (n/c)
Con 13% (-1)
Grn 7% (+1)
LD 7% (+2)
No statistically significant changes there. All MoE stuff.
I'd love to meet the Scots who vote Labour in Westminster elections, SNP at Holyrood. There are a fair few about.
Con 8/13
Lab 6/5
LD 50/1
UKIP 66/1
BNP 150/1
http://www.indiana.edu/~geol105/images/gaia_chapter_4/oceancirculation.jpg
If there's debris then if you know the currents and how long the plane has been missing then you could guess where it went down which might provide a clue as to where it was going - if it was going anywhere and wasn't just a suicide / accident.
One other factor that these two debates have ensured is that the GE debates will take place even if a single participant is absent then the media will empty chair that contender, a situation that with three debates in a general election campaign no party will possibly contemplate.
As I've indicated before, the debate genie is permanently out of the bottle.
Con 4/6 (Lad)
Lab 6/5 (SJ)
LD 66/1 (SJ)
UKIP 150/1 (SJ)
You seem to have changed your tune since your put up or shut up comment last night.
Not at all.
Millhouse Capital is a Russian fund, managed from Moscow and investing in Russia and the CIS. It's only connection to London is that one of its major backors lives in Chelsea. The football club, as an aside, IMHO is an insurance policy rather than anything to do with money laundering. By giving Abramovich a public profile in the UK it makes it very difficult for Russia to agitate for his return.
As for Mr Jones's posts last night, I got home after a week of travel and chose to play with my daughter instead of replying to a paranoid conspiracy theorist. But since you ask:
- 2 links about Standard Chartered and Iran. At worst these were technical failing (to do with scrubbing of wire information). It was also related to the New York branch not London. It was also a breach of OFAC regulations, not money laundering. Effectively - and was viewed as such at the time - as a shakedown by a politically ambitious junior regulator.
- One link from the independent was basically a laundry list of different ways that people try to interpolate and layer fund. Nothing specifically to do with London.
- One link drew very heavily on US based regulators and politicians who are doing their absolute best to damn London because it is New York's main rival.
So no, no evidence to support his wild and extravagent claims.
The reality is that London is a very international market. Over the last 20 years there has been a massive accumulation of wealth by oligarchs in emerging economies. A significant portion of this has flowed to London. Clearly this is an opportunity, but also one with risks: many of these individuals gained their wealth through cronyism rather than capitalism and many of them have different views about acceptable standards of behaviour. Clearly mistakes have also been made - ENRC or Bumi are obvious examples, but there are others as well.
The short answer is the professionals and the regulators in the market need to be ever vigilant about the risks of money laundering. But in the main the banks are pretty good at this - the financial and repuations costs of getting it wrong are huge. Of course mistakes will be made, and there will be corrupt individuals. But the City is not some inquitious sink of depravity.
The most intriguing order would be UKIP top, Labour a close second and the Conservatives a close third (say 26%, 25%, 24%). It would be a fascinating insight into the relative discipline of the two main parties.
Lab 4/7
Con 5/4
LD 25/1
UKIP 200/1
Grn 500/1
BNP 500/1
Even with debris found after a couple of days, it took investigators two years to find the wreckage of AF447.
Your desire for a grand conspiracy theory is laughable, and your attempt to blame the pilot sickening.
Lab 1/2
Con 6/4
LD 50/1
UKIP 250/1
BNP 500/1
Whilst we considerably disagree on YES/NO , thank you for providing a continuing updated service on the GE constituency odds
Lab 2/7
Con 11/4
LD 16/1
UKIP 100/1
Grn 500/1
Poll narrowing not down to oldiez ?!!
Note: Stan James have now reposted their Berwick-upon-Tweed prices. Not checked, but I think they have the best LD price at 6/4.
Note: I think Berwick is the only seat to date with at least 3 bookies quoting prices (PP, SJ, Lad).
Con 4/7
Lab 5/4
LD 33/1
UKIP 100/1
BNP 500/1
An underestimated Clegg together with Cameron performed well in 2010 and even a somewhat stiff Gordon improved over time. If Ed outperforms low expectations he will earn some momentum and the punters may decide to give him a second look.
Lab 4/7 (SJ)
Con 5/2 (Lad)
Grn 66/1 (SJ)
LD 100/1 (Lad)
UKIP 100/1
Grn EVS
Lab EVS
Con 16/1 (PP)
No worries. In terms of Berwick, con are probably around or just shy of high water in terms of first choice support vs Beith, but I do expect an unwind of incumbency bonus and a drift from the Lib Dems to 'others' per polling decline. It doesn't appear to be ripe UKIP territory. The Lib Dems are up against it to retain IMHO, any waverers that 'held on for Beith' now how the chance to jump. Time will tell, and if the Tory share at GE is 34 it's neck and neck for me, any lower and Libs become favourite.
I'm expecting the Tories to poll around their 2010 figure if that clarifies my position. Rural Northumberland is what ought to be prime Tory Territory, Berwick itself much less so.
Re the Tory figure I'm quoting - turnout will be lower than 2010 I think and Labour will have a harder time getting their vote out as they are not 'in defence' - witness Hague 2001 vs Major 1997
All the bookies seem to have differing opinions...
@Stuart_Dickson Took a punt on your boys in Inverness last night. Also Fife NE looks interesting, I think the conservatives have higher than a 7% chance of taking the seat so 0.5 pts it is
1 Pt SNP Win Inverness @ 4-1
0.5 Pt Con Win Fife NE @ 16-1.
Con 8/11
Lab 11/10
LD 16/1
Grn 100/1
UKIP 100/1
http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics
It's not 100% reliable, because it doesn't always catch recent markets or recent price moves, but it's fairly close.
Edited extra bit: in weird news, my spellchecker on Open Office Writer recognises Raikkonen but not Alonso. Maybe a Finn designed it...
I don't think the correct response is to rush out policies - it would look too much like a reaction, and we need to keep our nerve. The Euro figures are interesting, though. I'm encountering a fair amount of "Hey, I've no idea what I'll do in the Euros" on the doorstep, even from people who know for a certain what they'll do in the GE. Quite hard to call them, though I still think turnout will be decent.
Con 4/6
Lab 11/10
LD 50/1
UKIP 100/1
BNP 150/1
Lab 1/3
Con 2/1
LD 50/1
UKIP 100/1
BNP 250/1
But tell me what this has to do with a) Diego Garcia, b) a 2-week old DM map, and c) your laughable interpretation of the pilot's looks, as you mentioned on the last thread.
Lab EVS (SJ)
Con EVS (PP)
LD 20/1 (PP)
UKIP 66/1 (SJ)
BNP 150/1 (SJ)
Grn 250/1 (SJ)
I'd expect the Tories to have a good shot at getting the vote out 'fear the wolves at the door' and your guys to find it harder than when you were warning of wolves at the door.
Going to be tight, acrimonious and, I feel, ultimately inconclusive with no change at number 10
Compare Sunderland to Dartford
UKIP are taking from the establishment, whatever that is locally. That could wreak havoc in marginals either way.
Nice
edit: It would still be interesting even if it was based on assumptions about the debris that might be wrong.
The other stuff is currently just concocting thriller plots for entertainment. If it turns out the plane went down somewhere between the course change and Diego Garcia I'll come back to it.
Con 8/15 (PP)
LD 4/1 (SJ)
UKIP 16/1 (Lad)
Lab 20/1 (Lad)
Lisa Dolley 100/1 (Lad)
MK 250/1 (Lad)
Lab 1/4 (Lad)
Con 4/1 (SJ)
UKIP 100/1 (SJ)
LD 100/1 (Lad)
BNP 250/1 (SJ)
Owen tried it and got swallowed up by the establishment
Farage is trying it but is wrongheaded
Kilroy-Silk tried it but he's an idiot
Edit - the only thing that matters in 2015 for me is keeping Miliband and Balls out
Labour would appoint gay rights envoy to tackle international discrimination, says Ed Miliband http://goo.gl/HLgdOU
I'm sure Uganda will be hugely welcoming to the equivalent of a modern day missionary.
Populus @PopulusPolls 1m
New Populus VI: Lab 37 (+2); Cons 35 (+1); LD 8 (-2); UKIP 12 (-1); Oth 7 (-1) Tables http://popu.lu/s_vi140328
In 2009 to 2010, with a deranged monster of a leader who'd spent literally decades stabbing his colleagues in the back while wrecking several economies worse than WW2, Broon's Labour looked mortally wounded for a generation. Alongside the freak show that was Gordon himself, the publicly-noticed face of Labour was other freaks: Ed "Prostate" Balls, Batty Hattie, Alastair "Recovering Alcoholic" Campbell, Damian McBride, Denis Macshane, and of course multimillionaire Butcher Blair*. In 2010 nobody commenting on the unheimlichkeit of Labour's team was pointing at multimillionaire Ted Miliband to make their point.
He is thus due some credit for going from unremarkable nebbisch to conspicuous freak in less than four years. If he looks weird it's because Labour looks relatively normal again. As Labour leader, this is chiefly his doing.
Admittedly he's done this chiefly by hiding this ghastliness away rather than purging it. They haven't gone away. Batty Hattie's still working on a white paper outlawing the white penis. They're still the same wrecking ball they always were.
The question that arises is what will happen when the public are being reminded - every day - of who Labour is and what Labour actually does in office. This will tell us whether multimillionaire Ted Miliband is Konrad Adenauer, or merely fellow multimillionaire Neil Kinnock.
* there's also Sion "fretful mazurka" Simon, but I don't think anyone outside his own family ever noticed or remembers him.
'Cause I'm mature like that.
Lab 37 (+2); Cons 35 (+1); LD 8 (-2); UKIP 12 (-1); Oth 7 (-1)
No idea what their accuracy would be three weeks after a crash, but ocean currents are considerably slower than the winds, so you would probably get something useful out of it.
As for guessing where the plane went down: we cannot do that until we have confirmed debris. We don't even have that yet.
As I've said before, the least-worst cause for Boeing, RR, Malaysian airlines and the Malaysian government is a rogue pilot. Pilots have been blamed before in 'inexplicable' crashes, only for mechanical failure to be found after other crashes at the cost of a great many lives.
Pollsters, such as today's Populus and last night's YouGov have the Tories on 35%, 2% down from their GE score, and the Kippers on 11/12%.
Now given that the Kippers have hurt the Tories more than most, how is it possible for the Tories to be only 2% down and UKIP 7/8% up on their GE score?
Labour just prefer to keep quiet on europe, the LibDems are the only party to actively campaign as pro european, a large part of the reason that I support them.
Perm any two from that three or many of the other reasons you can think of.
UKIP and Tory are not simply conflatable
Or....but for UKIP the Tories would be on 43?
Time time time will tell
That would be interesting.
I clarified this with Paddy Power last summer, when I did the thread on it.
They are using when the fieldwork was completed.
If anyone has bet purely on Q1, they may end up kicking themselves if the poll that ends on the 1st April shows a Tory lead, as part of the fieldwork was carried out in Q1.
Nope, nothing happening here.
There was pretty good positional information on where the US and Japanese carriers sank at Midway in 1942. It took years to find the US carrier. All that's been found of any IJN carrier is a chunk of a gun tub, which you'd think would imply the rest was nearby. But it's not and these were vessels displacing 43,000 tons.
Being much bigger than airliners - and usually in one big piece - you'd think ships would be relatively simple to find. They are very hard to find though. Ships that sink often hit the seabed miles from where they left the surface.
Why do black boxes not have a thing like an airbag to make them float? Anyone know?
UKIP gained 3% from the Tories, 1% from Labour, 2% from the Lib Dems and 1-2% from BNP/non-voters. Thus UKIP are up 7-8%. Easy.
Also, at times in this Parliament the Tories have been making net gains of voters from Labour. The Tory-Labour swing voters are still out there. Thus in the example above if the Tories pick up 1% from Labour then they could have lost 4% to UKIP, and still only be a net 2% down.
And just how big is the protest vote aspect of UKIP's current support?
twitter.com/ChrisGiles_/status/449483888315076608/photo/1
Could all be rubbish. But labour are not setting any hearts aflame (as Cameron didn't in 2010), and something has to give somewhere. UKIP won't poll double figures in a GE, 8 tops for me, more like 6.
If those really are mainly Tories....... Those odds look tasty that keep popping up.
However. We will see. Maybe Ed will crack it and move away, but that would defy swing back..
Of those expressing a Voting Intention,
2% of 2010 Tories are planning to vote Lib Dem, but 10% of 2010 Lib Dems are planning to vote Tory.
6% of 2010 Tories are planning to vote Labour, but 7% of 2010 Lab supporters are planning to vote Tory.
Labour still are, as you rightly point out, a freak show. Which is a shame because every government needs a credible opposition.
All political parties are menageries with some unsavoury or low grade dross on the payroll - but I think one good point about the coalition is that for the most part their ministerial team is not that shabby. I rate Ozzy, Gove, Alexander, Hammond, Webb, May and several others. We're a reasonably well governed country for the first time since the 1990s. (and yes there are still some deeply unimpressive fu<kwits on the tam - such as Ed Davey).
But Labour? Is there no beginning to their talent? I know I'm biased, but I genuinely struggle to identify a single shadow cabinet member that is not a complete knobber. I may not have liked the politics of Blair or Healey or Smith or many others - but I could respect them. This lot? I fart in their general direction. It is a truly frightening prospect that they are quite likely to be running the country in 18 months' time.
I would guess that means it can't be perfectly designed to be easily locatable in case of a crash into the ocean, because of all the other scenarios it has to be able to survive.
You do not surprise me. A lot of these published prices are "pretend prices". As soon as a serious punter comes along they chicken out.
The worst are Victor Chandler. The best are Ladbrokes, followed by Hills. PP in the middle.
Unless you expect it to be one Populus' most noticed stories this week?
Edit: This response appears to be a bit surly, it wasn't meant to appear like that.