politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Newark: The final day of campaigning in a battle so importa

In the past I've accused Nigel Farage of acting irrationally, but perhaps I got that wrong.

Tykejohnno said:

WATCH: Penny Mordaunt’s Loyal Address in Full

Well worth a watch if you have a few minutes spare, Penny Mordaunt had the House in stitches this afternoon:

http://order-order.com/2014/06/04/watch-penny-mordaunts-loyal-address-in-full/

She looks OK

TheScreamingEagles said:

kle4 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

kle4 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Just for TSE

I am not saying people are correct in their beliefs even if they happen to match mine. That is not the debate we are having here at the moment.

Simply that your claims that advocating uncontrolled immigration is a vote winner are clearly wrong

http://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/11/25/what-we-believe-about-immigration/

I'm saying people have a lot of misconceptions when it comes to what they think is reality, and what actually is the reality.

As per this Ipsos-Mori poll

http://image.slidesharecdn.com/perilsofperception-perceptiongaps-130710050745-phpapp02/95/slide-6-638.jpg?cb=1373492810

and

http://image.slidesharecdn.com/perilsofperception-perceptiongaps-130710050745-phpapp02/95/slide-7-638.jpg?cb=1373492810

and in general

http://image.slidesharecdn.com/perilsofperception-perceptiongaps-130710050745-phpapp02/95/slide-3-638.jpg?cb=1373492810

So I'm glad we have a politician prepared to make the case for immigration and not pander to stereotypes.

I'm not often outright stunned, but I remained shocked at how far out people are with their predictions on those. How can they be so far out? I wouldn't expect most people to be the sorts of boring farts like many of us here who might have looked up such percentages, but it's not even close most of the time (in fairness, I would have been almost as far out on the single parents guess)

Perceptions matter more than facts.

re about eastern europeans in large numbers more than any other groups.

Look at the media.

When was the last time you saw a tabloid front page story that was say positive about immigrants, single mothers, the EU or Muslims?

Now, I'm sure we won't have to go back far to find negative front pages about the above?

Certainly not, and it is of course the media effect, but do a lot of negative stories really make people think there are 4x more Muslims in the country than is the case? Well, clearly it does, but that still surprised me. I just assumed it would feed and enhance people's negative opinions of the groups in question, and lead to a certain bump in expected numbers in the UK, but not an explosion in those numbers. Clearly, I am far too naiive. Or as I live in what is the whitest region of England, I imagine my day to day perception of the actual proportions are simply closer to the reality than some others regardless of what the media implies.

ToryJim said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Boris Johnson: 'Welcome migrants or fall like Sparta’

Mayor of London Boris Johnson says that politicians including David Cameron have made a 'policy failure' by trying to control immigration

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/10876533/Boris-Johnson-Welcome-migrants-or-fall-like-Sparta.html

Boris is correct, more so in respect of integration and ensuring the competitiveness of home grown talent.

Further evidence that Boris Johnson is unqualified to lead a right-wing party.

kle4 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

kle4 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

kle4 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Just for TSE

I
http://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/11/25/what-we-believe-about-immigration/

I'm saying people have a lot of misconceptions when it comes to what they think is reality, and what actually is the reality.

As per this Ipsos-Mori poll

http://image.slidesharecdn.com/perilsofperception-perceptiongaps-130710050745-phpapp02/95/slide-6-638.jpg?cb=1373492810

and

http://image.slidesharecdn.com/perilsofperception-perceptiongaps-130710050745-phpapp02/95/slide-7-638.jpg?cb=1373492810

and in general

http://image.slidesharecdn.com/perilsofperception-perceptiongaps-130710050745-phpapp02/95/slide-3-638.jpg?cb=1373492810

So I'm glad we have a politician prepared to make the case for immigration and not pander to stereotypes.

I')

Perceptions matter more than facts.

re about eastern europeans in large numbers more than any other groups.

Look at the media.

When was the last time you saw a tabloid front page story that was say positive about immigrants, single mothers, the EU or Muslims?

Now, I'm sure we won't have to go back far to find negative front pages about the above?

Certainly not, and it is of course the media effect, but do a lot of negative stories really make people think there are 4x more Muslims in the country than is the case? Well, clearly it does, but that still surprised me. I just assumed it would feed and enhance people's negative opinions of the groups in question, and lead to a certain bump in expected numbers in the UK, but not an explosion in those numbers. Clearly, I am far too naiive. Or as I live in what is the whitest region of England, I imagine my day to day perception of the actual proportions are simply closer to the reality than some others regardless of what the media implies.

A few years ago, there was an analysis of where the BNP were picking up support.

It wasn't in racially diverse areas, but in the areas near to them.

The theory was, any negative stories became amplified near by and that's how the BNP did well.

TSE But they also say what the public think, Boris is saying what the liberal elite think

From the Times about Newark

The Tories attempted to appeal to Labour and Lib Dem supporters last night, asking them to “lend your vote to the Conservatives” to keep out Ukip.

A letter to residents listed a series of allegedly racist and homophobic remarks made by Ukip councillors and candidates and warned voters that the party merely wanted to “use” the seat to get a foothold in parliament.

The Mirror story on Farage is up

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/married-nigel-farage-pictured-hand-in-hand-3646619?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed

TheScreamingEagles said:

From the Times about Newark

The Tories attempted to appeal to Labour and Lib Dem supporters last night, asking them to “lend your vote to the Conservatives” to keep out Ukip.

A letter to residents listed a series of allegedly racist and homophobic remarks made by Ukip councillors and candidates and warned voters that the party merely wanted to “use” the seat to get a foothold in parliament.

God,the tories are really desperate.

Tykejohnno said:

God,the tories are really desperate.

No, thorough. Good.

TheScreamingEagles said:

From the Times about Newark

The Tories attempted to appeal to Labour and Lib Dem supporters last night, asking them to “lend your vote to the Conservatives” to keep out Ukip.

A letter to residents listed a series of allegedly racist and homophobic remarks made by Ukip councillors and candidates and warned voters that the party merely wanted to “use” the seat to get a foothold in parliament.

Now that is interesting. This has the potential to backfire if Labour and Lib Dem supporters want to give the Conservatives a bloody nose. Clearly the calculation is that more supporters of those parties are more antipathetic towards UKIP.

Kieran Indeed, having run against Obama before on a centrist platform in 2008 she can keep her distance from him and unlike McCain in 2008 she has not attached herself to the most unpopular policies of the administration either. Negative ads won't work against Hillary, for starters she is likely to be the most well funded candidate in history and can easily more than match any negative ads with ones of her own, she is also a polarising figure and one of the most well known in American, love her or hate her you will already have made up your mind. I would also agree the circumstances of 2016 will be nowhere near as bad for her as they were in 2008 for Clinton or indeed 1968 for Humphrey or 1976 for Ford. She is also helped by the fact that she is a centrist succeeding a liberal, as Bush Snr was a centrist succeeding a conservative, Gore was a liberal succeeding a moderate, Nixon a conservative succeeding a moderate,

If Robert Jenrick owns two houses in London and a mansion near Newark as a result of his own efforts I'd be extremely impressed. But somehow, at the age of 32, it seems a bit unlikely. But apologies if I'm wrong.

Touche AndyJS-

But property rights discussions will get me heading to my philosophy books at this time of night and I'm too pissed.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Another great snippet from the Times

Jean-Claude Juncker is “waiting for a phone call” from David Cameron after declaring that Britain has all but failed to stop him becoming president of the European Commission.

The former Luxembourg prime minister is attempting to open negotiations with Mr Cameron, claiming that he is prepared to offer a “fair deal” for Britain. He has already ruled out changes to the four founding principles of the European Union, including freedom of movement, which will infuriate Tory eurosceptics.

Acting the magnanimous emperor of Europe already then.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Another great snippet from the Times

Jean-Claude Juncker is “waiting for a phone call” from David Cameron after declaring that Britain has all but failed to stop him becoming president of the European Commission.

The former Luxembourg prime minister is attempting to open negotiations with Mr Cameron, claiming that he is prepared to offer a “fair deal” for Britain. He has already ruled out changes to the four founding principles of the European Union, including freedom of movement, which will infuriate Tory eurosceptics.

He may have a long wait

HYUFD said:

TSE With the PMs of Italy, Denmark, the Netherlands, Sweden and the UK against him and Hollande less than enthusiastic I don't think Juncker can declare anything

He can declare whatever he likes, it just doesn't necessarily make it true

TheScreamingEagles said:

antifrank said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

From the Times about Newark

The Tories attempted to appeal to Labour and Lib Dem supporters last night, asking them to “lend your vote to the Conservatives” to keep out Ukip.

A letter to residents listed a series of allegedly racist and homophobic remarks made by Ukip councillors and candidates and warned voters that the party merely wanted to “use” the seat to get a foothold in parliament.

Now that is interesting. This has the potential to backfire if Labour and Lib Dem supporters want to give the Conservatives a bloody nose. Clearly the calculation is that more supporters of those parties are more antipathetic towards UKIP.

It is.

I think it is the situation we've seen on PB from our left leaning friends.

IIRC neither SouthamObserver or Bobbafett would vote for Helmer because of his views on gays and rape etc, but the likes of Surbiton would vote for Helmer to give the Tories a bloody nose.

Proper lefties would vote for neither and support Labour in the distant hope that the right splits to let us through the middle. An outside bet but its happened in interesting places in local government including Witney.

TheScreamingEagles said:

AndyJS said:

If Robert Jenrick owns two houses in London and a mansion near Newark as a result of his own efforts I'd be extremely impressed. But somehow, at the age of 32, it seems a bit unlikely. But apologies if I'm wrong.

He says, about his property portfolio

"I was lucky, I had a great family background, access to a good education, and my wife and I have worked hard and been successful."

Me: I was lucky, and fortunate, I left university in 2000, got a job in London, my parents and grandmother, thanks to their own years of hard work and savings, gave me the money/took out a mortgage to buy a house in London, rather than let me rent.

I sold the place in 2007, and moved oop North, where I got a better, larger property for about half the cost of the house I sold in London.

Had I been born 5 to 10 years later, I wouldn't have been so lucky.

Yeah yeah yeah - What's the obsession with the mortgages???

It's unhealthy. I feel. Anway - 7 days till the world cup

RochdalePioneers said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

antifrank said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

From the Times about Newark

The Tories attempted to appeal to Labour and Lib Dem supporters last night, asking them to “lend your vote to the Conservatives” to keep out Ukip.

A letter to residents listed a series of allegedly racist and homophobic remarks made by Ukip councillors and candidates and warned voters that the party merely wanted to “use” the seat to get a foothold in parliament.

Now that is interesting. This has the potential to backfire if Labour and Lib Dem supporters want to give the Conservatives a bloody nose. Clearly the calculation is that more supporters of those parties are more antipathetic towards UKIP.

It is.

I think it is the situation we've seen on PB from our left leaning friends.

IIRC neither SouthamObserver or Bobbafett would vote for Helmer because of his views on gays and rape etc, but the likes of Surbiton would vote for Helmer to give the Tories a bloody nose.

Proper lefties would vote for neither and support Labour in the distant hope that the right splits to let us through the middle. An outside bet but its happened in interesting places in local government including Witney.

I admire you Pioneers. Unfortunately we've got Catholics and now Muslims to deal with. You're not helping.

ToryJim said:

JBriskin said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

AndyJS said:

If Robert Jenrick owns two houses in London and a mansion near Newark as a result of his own efforts I'd be extremely impressed. But somehow, at the age of 32, it seems a bit unlikely. But apologies if I'm wrong.

He says, about his property portfolio

"I was lucky, I had a great family background, access to a good education, and my wife and I have worked hard and been successful."

Me: I was lucky, and fortunate, I left university in 2000, got a job in London, my parents and grandmother, thanks to their own years of hard work and savings, gave me the money/took out a mortgage to buy a house in London, rather than let me rent.

I sold the place in 2007, and moved oop North, where I got a better, larger property for about half the cost of the house I sold in London.

Had I been born 5 to 10 years later, I wouldn't have been so lucky.

Yeah yeah yeah - What's the obsession with the mortgages???

It's unhealthy. I feel. Anway - 7 days till the world cup

What's the latest times matches kick off? I know Brazil is several hours behind just want to know which days I'm likely to not get much sleep.

Well they had to make sure the pubs are open.... so... 11 or 12? Fairly sure it's 12ish.

To say I was getting excited months ago would be an understanment.

HYUFD said:

ToryJim Indeed we shall see

Kle4 But it is still national heads who appoint the international bureaucrats and indeed Christine Lagarde could well swap one international bureaucracy for another

I confess I was attempting to embody the mind of an international bureucrat with that bit, not my own view. National heads appointing the Commission head is one inconvenience of them that they probably want to get rid of (without actually letting the people choose either)

Sunil_Prasannan said:

kle4 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Another great snippet from the Times

Jean-Claude Juncker is “waiting for a phone call” from David Cameron after declaring that Britain has all but failed to stop him becoming president of the European Commission.

The former Luxembourg prime minister is attempting to open negotiations with Mr Cameron, claiming that he is prepared to offer a “fair deal” for Britain. He has already ruled out changes to the four founding principles of the European Union, including freedom of movement, which will infuriate Tory eurosceptics.

Acting the magnanimous emperor of Europe already then.

Juncker = Xerxes?

But will Merkel act as Artabanus

AndyJS said:

If Robert Jenrick owns two houses in London and a mansion near Newark as a result of his own efforts I'd be extremely impressed. But somehow, at the age of 32, it seems a bit unlikely. But apologies if I'm wrong.

Andy

Michal Berkner, Jenrick's wife, is a Mergers & Aquisitions solicitor and partner of the London Branch of the New York based legal firm of Skadden. She is eight years older than her husband and has been with Skadden for near on twenty five years, moving to London in 2001.

She states her major work accomplishment as follows:

Proudest professional moment?

Leading the Skadden team representing the consortium of Alfa-Access-Renova (AAR) on the $56bn (£36.5bn) sale of the TNK-BP joint venture to Russian state-owned oil company Rosneft. This was the largest M&A transaction in the world in 2012 – indeed, the largest for more than three years – but the deal was fraught with practical difficulties and political controversy.

Just the bonus from that deal alone would have enabled her to buy her Ludlow Grade I listed country house. I am not up to date on current salaries for M&A Partners at city solicitors firms but I would be very surprised if they were under seven figures a year with bonuses and a partner's share of profits (if she is an equity partner).

So that is her flat in London and the country house accounted for. I doubt Robert Jenrick will be earning anything like the amount his wife does, even as a senior manager at Christies. But it is still likely to be around or just above six figures a year. In other words, enough with help on a deposit from his family to buy a small central London flat.

Any or all of their properties are likely to be mortgaged, so their equity in the properties is quite probably much lower than the full property value. I would also guess the second London flat was rented out after they married.

It all seems quite possible to me.

ToryJim said:

@AveryLP‌
If the wife is only 8 years older that makes her 40 I'm not sure she'd have been practicing her profession as a 15 year old. Somewhere one of your numbers is wrong.

The only source I had was that she was at a NYC Law School in 1988 and joined Skadden immediately after graduation. I assumed that was 1990, so it may be a couple of years below 25 years.

The 8 year difference in age is from the Mail article. I guess that is the dubious figure.

While off for the night, I cannot help but note the headline regarding Ed M's response to the Queen's speech is 'Coalition: more of the same', which I had thought was also the Coalition's pitch to voters. That is it's Labour: Coalition is offering same bad stuff. Tories: Coalition is offering the same good, steady hand*. They could save money and use the same poster design, just in appropriate party colours.

*Im imagine the others are picthing:
LDs: Look, we're sorry ok, now can you start voting for us again please?!
UKIP: LibLabCon. You need more than that?
Green: We're here too, you know.

Honk Kong remembers Tiananmen

Twitter.com/TimMontgomerie/status/474310700777893889/photo/1

AveryLP said:

ToryJim said:

@AveryLP‌
If the wife is only 8 years older that makes her 40 I'm not sure she'd have been practicing her profession as a 15 year old. Somewhere one of your numbers is wrong.

The only source I had was that she was at a NYC Law School in 1988 and joined Skadden immediately after graduation. I assumed that was 1990, so it may be a couple of years below 25 years.

The 8 year difference in age is from the Mail article. I guess that is the dubious figure.

She graduated in 1994, so guessing a birth year of 1972-3 working the appropriate number of years back. If he's 32 that would imply a birth year of 1981-2 depending on how 32 he is. So it all adds up.

kle4 said:

While off for the night, I cannot help but note the headline regarding Ed M's response to the Queen's speech is 'Coalition: more of the same', which I had thought was also the Coalition's pitch to voters. They could save money and use the same poster design, just in appropriate party colours.

Good night kle - I hope you don't bother to read this because my words are worthless.

However-

You are correct.

Coalition: More of the Same - is exactly the right message to send.

Me (coalitionistas) give society more money, more productivity and more column inches than anyone could ever hope for.

And what's more - we predict your Distain. From far far away.

Let the blonde labour girl slip in her star wars references while the tru boy and girl fans try and sort out this mess.

JBriskin said:

kle4 said:

While off for the night, I cannot help but note the headline regarding Ed M's response to the Queen's speech is 'Coalition: more of the same', which I had thought was also the Coalition's pitch to voters. They could save money and use the same poster design, just in appropriate party colours.

Good night kle - I hope you don't bother to read this because my words are worthless.

That's a shame, as I had to keep my computer on for a few more minutes to download an update, but for the record I probably qualify as a coalitionista - I voted LD in 2010 but wanted a LD/CON coalition, and I prefer the idea of a coalition in general, even in practice can be disappointing. Perhaps a former coalitionista.

It's not that much of a shame kle!!! Good night when you get there

AndyJS said:

Bob Worcester's "look at the share, not the lead" mantra didn't really work out in 2005 and 2010. Labour won a majority with 36% in 2005 and the Tories fell well short in 2010 with 37%.

The Conservatives need a lead, Labour needs a certain share.

MikeSmithson said:

I'm getting sick of this I'm anti UKIP crap. Read what I've been saying.

My big thing this week has been an argument with Lord Ashcroft over his polling methodology that I believe understates UKIP. I've gone out on a limb to make these points and if I'm wrong tomorrow night I'll be eating humble pie.

I've also reminded everybody about how UKIP has been understated in every by-election poll since GE10.

This hardly represents a bias against UKIP.

So the unthinking crap on this and other thread is not based on reality. Get a life.

Mike - If Lord Ashcroft is underestimating UKIP then what on God's Green earth are Populus doing.

I accept some weighting is probably neccesary (Labour voters don't get out of bed for one ^_~) but the Populus UKIP weighting is quite staggering. Its in this graph:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1roY-VuzAUre3K5Tp74sf-sknXmfRPXaIoqtoPc7HMaA/edit#gid=0

Weighted from 21 -> 13% !

Someone is putting shifty polls out tonight.

Grant French @SteelvalleyUKIP · 13m
Guido's poll has UKIP 33%, Cons 31%. Reasons to be cheerful...

A J ELDER-BROWN UKIP ‏@theblindblogger 1h
BREAKNG POLL NEWS:
Newark Poll:
2,100 voters polled by Loughborough University
#UKIP 31%
Con 30%
Lab 21%
LibDem 7%

http://nblo.gs/XrHfJ

HYUFD said:

Honk Kong remembers Tiananmen

Twitter.com/TimMontgomerie/status/474310700777893889/photo/1

Bet that no one wants to remember it for money reasons, the EU is still kicking itself for those sanctions on China.

Speedy Indeed, but at least it was a commemoration led by the people

kle4 Indeed, but a directly elected President might at least force them to acknowledge the voters

corporeal said:

Pulpstar said:

Speedy said:

Someone is putting shifty polls out tonight.

Grant French @SteelvalleyUKIP · 13m
Guido's poll has UKIP 33%, Cons 31%. Reasons to be cheerful...

A J ELDER-BROWN UKIP ‏@theblindblogger 1h
BREAKNG POLL NEWS:
Newark Poll:
2,100 voters polled by Loughborough University
#UKIP 31%
Con 30%
Lab 21%
LibDem 7%

http://nblo.gs/XrHfJ

That poll looks doubtful to me.

The Lib Dems are never on 7% !

No data or methodology available alas.

The key thing is of course - is their sample random.

Even if it is, the other polls that have been taken suggest that the Conservative share must almost by definition be on the low end of their confidence interval

So

32.1 Con

28.9 UKIP

is perfectly possible and not an outlier.

Of course that doesn't square with Ashcroft, or Survation. Neither of which square with each other.

The Conservative vote share will show us which pollster was correct, all the other tallies are fairly similiar.

If they've been asking people in Newark proper then that might be the reason for their numbers. But I have no idea.

ToryJim said:

Speedy said:

Someone is putting shifty polls out tonight.

Grant French @SteelvalleyUKIP · 13m
Guido's poll has UKIP 33%, Cons 31%. Reasons to be cheerful...

A J ELDER-BROWN UKIP ‏@theblindblogger 1h
BREAKNG POLL NEWS:
Newark Poll:
2,100 voters polled by Loughborough University
#UKIP 31%
Con 30%
Lab 21%
LibDem 7%

http://nblo.gs/XrHfJ

That's almost certainly an unweighted sample. It's almost certainly an unweightable sample because I doubt they've asked more than the voting intention. It's interesting in as far as it backs up the nature of the fight but we can't really read anything more into it.

A truly unweighted sample is fine providing you can get a truly random sample of voters. Getting a properly random sample is tough though.

Pulpstar said:

corporeal said:

Pulpstar said:

Speedy said:

Someone is putting shifty polls out tonight.

Grant French @SteelvalleyUKIP · 13m
Guido's poll has UKIP 33%, Cons 31%. Reasons to be cheerful...

A J ELDER-BROWN UKIP ‏@theblindblogger 1h
BREAKNG POLL NEWS:
Newark Poll:
2,100 voters polled by Loughborough University
#UKIP 31%
Con 30%
Lab 21%
LibDem 7%

http://nblo.gs/XrHfJ

That poll looks doubtful to me.

The Lib Dems are never on 7% !

No data or methodology available alas.

The key thing is of course - is their sample random.

That'd be the big thing. Of course there's enough other moving parts for it to go wrong there as well.

Pulpstar said:

@Corporeal Maybe they've asked in a Newark boozer ? If so then the Conservatives are going to romp home.

I would've gone for the "Farage's core constituency" joke.

@Pulpstar‌
I'm not an expert but I would hazard that truly random sampling in respect of a specific constituency might not be ideal anyway because you'd want to account for different demographics which wouldn't follow a standard distribution pattern necessarily. I'm not saying this poll/survey has no merit I just think there's a limit to the value. We don't even know the structure of the question asked or anything about the time period of responses.

MikeL said:

Pulpstar said:

Also remarkable that of 2100 voters asked they got 0 don't know/refused. The inference must be that they asked far more than 2100 voters - a pretty mammoth task !

The numbers are also a bit too round to 30, 31% etc...

All 4 parties and others all have numbers that round exactly to whole percentage numbers.

ie 5 numbers all had to be a factor of 21.

Can't be bothered to think how to calculate the chances of that but the odds of it must be absolutely miniscule - probably something like one in 100,000 or one in a million.

Or they back-calculated the number of voters from the percentages for that table? Whoever "they" are...

Speedy said:

Pulpstar said:

Also remarkable that of 2100 voters asked they got 0 don't know/refused. The inference must be that they asked far more than 2100 voters - a pretty mammoth task !

The numbers are also a bit too round to 30, 31% etc...

I think the DK/refused are in the 11% of other.
However someone (TSE?, OGH?)has to contact Loughborough University tommorow morning and ask them about this shifty poll before people start betting money on it.
I don't like it when there is a chance that people might lose a fortune because someone is publicly releasing opinion polls that might not even exist.

Here's the thing that really puzzles me.

Why does the tweeter quoted call it Guido's poll?

Where is this coming from, alli I can find is some UKIP members tweeting about it?

New thread is up!

Is it just me that sees Roger Helmer and thinks of Alan Whicker?

Nick Palmer Indeed and many Tories are also trying to attract AfD too