politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Johnson starts debate day with punters rating his chances of a

One thing’s for sure – tonight’s debate will either confirm or raise doubts about Johnson’s chances of leading his party to an overall majority on December 12th. There will be a lot of betting on this market tonight.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I thought the last thread was all about why Boris will be the debate loser? Does nobody read these threads?
The accepted wisdom is that this is bad for Jo Swinson and Nicola Sturgeon. I disagree. I think a lot of people will be put off by two male dinosaurs grunting at each other.
Never again.
I tried to give her the benefit of the doubt but it proved all my worst fears, and underlined to me why so many agents default to “no pet” clauses.
Her two dogs pissed and weed all over the carpets, and the whole property stank of dog hair. I tried two deep cleans (she had just hoovered) but the carpet was so badly damaged in the living room I had to replace the whole thing. I only got half of that back from her deposit. I had to also replace several of the curtains which, for some reason, I could never get the smell out of.
Now, I’ve put the property on the market for sale. If you want a pet (which is a privilege, not a right) you first need to be able to afford to keep one and look after it, and I’d recommend you get your own place too.
I just wonder whether, unless he's clear and concise, he might reinforce the bumbling persona he has.
Corbyn comes across as civilised and coherent, if you accept his basic premises
However, I reckon where it falls down is in modelling regional swing differential.
Take Wales. You have it as the Tories making a net gain of 1 seat over 2017. Both their gains are from dead heats.That flies in the face of regional and by-election polling, where Labour is seriously off its historic positions. For example, I don't see how the LibDems hold Brecon and Radnorshire where the by-election was at the time of national polling highs for them, there will be no Brexit Party or UKIP this time and Labour was bled from 17.7% to 5.3% by the LibDems. There's nothing left for the LibDems to squeeze from Labour to counter the extra Brexit/UKIP votes.
I will be astonished if the Tories don't retake The Gower, which you have as a dead heat. And I will be equally astonished if the Tories don't pick up seats plural in North Wales. Labour has proved remarkably sticky with its Welsh seats, but the signs are all there that they have finally run out of road.
Any Welsh posters wish to comment?
Mr. Dickson, that's possible. Could also be the case that negative votes (ie against a specific candidate) will become stronger, helping Corbyn tactically and further reducing the attractiveness of voting for TBP.
But we could probably do with some (potentially if it proves to be genuine) good news.
https://cleantechnica.com/2019/11/18/israeli-startup-ubq-says-it-has-the-answer-to-recycling-the-circular-economy/
Or perhaps more likely,, he's simply protecting his sell of Labour seats, should they start to attract more support.
We were debating the rights and wrongs of this policy on the previous thread. It’s wholly appropriate to share anonymised experiences that might contribute to that discussion.
The trouble is you’ll be told what you want to hear about ‘well behaved dogs’, but you never know what you’re going to get.
The long, slow death of Scottish Labour began with the passing of Donald Dewar, and SLAB's inability to find politicians of comparable stature for Holyrood.
Llafur have been very, very fortunate with the choices of Rhodri Morgan and Carwyn Jones as leaders in Wales. They were both excellent politicians, with widespread appeal across Wales.
Carwyn in particular played an important role in 2017, turning round a difficult polling position and converting it into 3 Labour gains.
Llafur are now beginning to have the problems of SLAB. Drakeford himself is a poor imitation of the leaders that came before. Labour's disastrous management of Welsh health and education since 1999 is coming under increasing scrutiny.
If Labour get out of 2019 with 5 Welsh losses or less, then they will have done really well.
Nick's law is an interesting one. Would it be reasonable to require a larger cleaning deposit for pet owners for example? Or for the rules to apply only to unfurnished rentals?
I have no bets on the Tories buy or sell.
Inevitably the interviewer will try to cover too many topics with the result that even the most banal responses won't be adequately tested or challenged. Most of our interviewers seem to go out of their way to stop actual interaction between the candidates because it is so much about them.
I'd better stop now or I might change my mind and not bother.
Edit - also, even unfurnished properties would normally include at least carpets.
If i were feeling generous in future I’d want to see a reference from any previous landlord about their pets, and I’d probably want either myself or my agent to visit their current property/rental to see how they and their pets kept it and then decide accordingly.
It was excruciating. Better Together supporters had their heads in their hands and were genuinely fearful about the result the next day almost for the first time. At the end of the day I am not sure if it made a difference. It might have made it closer than it would have been but if a performance like that has a marginal effect those building their hopes of a Labour recovery from tonight are likely to be disappointed.
There are bad landlords (and property companies are amongst some of the worst) but many are just decent normal people.
So, they need 31 gains from Labour to get back up to an overall majority again.
Where (precisely) are these coming from, and how do we know the Labour vote isn’t very sticky in those seats?
Ditch the ideology.
This could be based on something very straightforward, such as the number of seats won by the Tories/ Labour, with a tie-breaker being decided on say the extent to which Boris' majority in his Uxbridge & South Ruislip seat increases or decreases.
How about it Mike?
Ditch the pretence that you did not make a decision and were forced to become a landlord.
The market is utterly failing and needs serious reform. I feel sorry for you.
It's the likes of that fat fuck Carrick Fergus and his ghastly wife along with the grasping, greedy agents that have turned it all into a hot mess.
Swinson in particular would have benefited from the notability parity her participation would have implied.
To maintain balance this needs to be compensated for: higher returns (rents) ir reduced risk (higher deposits) would both achieve this. Limiting the new rights to unfurnished rentals would limit the increased risk but doesn’t change the fundamental balance.
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/conservative
Here's expecting an overreaction to the debate, whatever happens. I expect corbyn will land some blows and Boris will bluster, and people will say he looks terrible and corbynites will share many vital clips. But the tory share will probably stay the same and the labour one increase only a little.
At least those overpriced shitty Persimmon newbuilds (with all their issues) start to solve the rental nightmare the UK has become.
There are (at least) two flaws with my model. It doesn't use regional swings (it excludes Scotland) and it doesn't have local knowledge.
It provides a basic framework that then needs the application of local knowledge to fine tune it. It is not intentionally biased and I would expect the lack of local knowledge to even out in terms of total seats but produce anomalies in individual seats.
Good question. If I assume the answer is "No" then the tactical votes would be based on the 2017 position. If the answer is "Yes" then the tactical votes are based on the potential swing to the LibDems. It depends on how successful the LDs are in using MRP, Euroelections, constituency pols etc in their barcharts in individuial constituencies. Again local knowledge is helpful. I don't know about Southport.
dyor is not a mindless exhortation particularly if betting on individual constituencies. My model is just the starting point.
Those kind of millionaires, guess one or two might be billionaires, paid for within a decade of state subsidy, are the ones Corbyn should be targetting, not the ones who have started genuine transformative businesses.
'Accidental landlords' aren't victims but rather people who view the application of supply and demand of property in a certain way.
Ultimately I think the debates, barring an absolute clanger from someone, will do little to swing the vote. People will vote how they want to and if they see the debates are probably already politically engaged and will see what they want to see primarily.
The two 'big moments' from debates that struck me as symbolising what later happened in the actual election were in 2015 Ed Miliband being asked did the last Labour government overspend and he started his reply with "No" and there was an audible intake of breath from the audience at that . . . and in 2017 the nurse speaking to May and she dismissed her with a reply of "there's no magic money tree". But how much did those actual influence votes and how much was it that May was deemed unlikeable the more people saw of her through the campaign and Ed Miliband simply wasn't that liked anyway?
Its a lot easier to find the 31 Conservative gains from Labour.
Eliminating help to buy would not cause prices to drop 20% and if fewer homes got built as a result would likely send prices up not down. That's basic economics!
» show previous quotes
The private rental market is a cesspit and wherever possible best avoided.
Yet the evidence that satisfaction with their amongst private tenants is in the 80-90% range, and is as high or higher than the social sector. See English Housing Survey. Don't believe everything that Shelter tells you.
OnlyLivingBoy>There are just too many information asymmetries involved. We rented for a year after moving back from the US. We had been renting out our London flat while we were away, and were looking to sell it in order to buy a house, so for about six month as we were landlords and tenants at the same time, and also dealing with incompetent and dishonest agents in the middle. The whole experience was awful, and we were screwed at both ends - blamed for things that weren't our fault by the landlord and had our flat destroyed by the tenants. The whole experience made me thankful to own our own home and never have to deal with this shit ever again. The private rental market is a bad place - both home ownership and social housing should grow at its expense.
I honestly don't think you can generalise one anecdote.
Why should social housing help that? Ask some tenants to see how poor Councils can be at managing their properties. I have a couple of Ts who are essentially refugees from the social sector as they do not like being micromanaged by bureaucrats.
I think a lot of people have some kind of mythical belief in the goodness and beauty of local councils and council houses, who have never lived in one or been controlled by one, where they are not able to choose their neighbours.
One of my Ts had the local council used as a harassment channel, as they did not have good enough procedures to screen out malicious complaints.
Not sure what "this shit" is - but there's a good deal more shit involved than there used to be. They have been salami slicing landlord rights for years and years. Time was when their was only 600 pages of regs from the OFT and 120 Acts of Parliament.
There are just too many information asymmetries involved.
The specifics of this interests me. Could you elucidate?
The govt provides ultra cheap subsidised loans to the purchaser on top of (not replacing) what the banks are loaning. With an undersupply of new homes, buyers are forced to spend this additional credit to compete with other potential buyers. It just moves up the price by the amount of the government builder subsidy (aka help to buy). Buyers have to eventually pay this extra 20-40% back (along with their student loans and forced pensions which no previous generations have been asked to do).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fergus_and_Judith_Wilson
This shows 15 Conservative losses to the LibDems and 25 Conservative gains from Labour. There could be another 9 gains in Wales making 34 in total and a Tory majority of 8.
Casino - Surely with the LD share dropping and the Con share rising in the polls, 15 LD gains from Con look a lot less likely now? Electoral Calculus now only has 2 LD gains from Con (Richmond Park and Cheltenham). If this is the case the Conservative baseline is a lot higher.
The market is a cesspit.
Casino’s dog issue is relatively minor. Don’t rent!
Yes, new homes are expensive, but you can buy a 40% share at say £100k and rent the rest. Unfortunately builders restrict the supply to only a few per development.
There have always been bad landlords and bad tenants - since time began. Renting is a managed risk l, I think, by both parties.
Unfortunately government can never legislate away human nature, or indeed personal living habits.
More realistically an evens money bet on them winning between 300-349 seats looks pretty good value to me.
* = incl. Ladbrokes' daily boost