politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Final Survation poll on Newark

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Eagles, at least your becrazed utterances don't earn you his fate.

Mr Dancer isn't he the one who had molten gold poured down his throat?

ToryJim said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Eagles, at least your becrazed utterances don't earn you his fate.

Mr Dancer isn't he the one who had molten gold poured down his throat?

He was

MarqueeMark said:

I am still struggling to figure out what was Labour's strategy in Newark. Was it really soft-pedalling in the hope that UKIP would hoover up enough Labour voters to embarrass the Tories? So it was really hoping that enough teachers, trade unionists etc etc etc would vote for UKIP? Really?

To the truly tribal, the most important thing would be to secure the most long term harm to the real enemy, the Tories. That could be achieved by UKIP doing well, as a UKIP win would show it was not a wasted vote and would encourage even more of its current vote to stick with it in 2015. As whoever wins today could be kicked out in a year, a calmly rational Labour supporter with duly appropriate fiery hatred for the Tories in their belly, could consider voting UKIP to be an acceptable option if it meant beating the true opponent.

They may have overestimated how many Labour supporters in Newark are that tribal and dedicated, vs how many would consider sticking with Labour or even voting Tory to keep Helmer out, particular given how steep a challenge UKIP were facing anyway, which could put off plenty of tactically minded voters, polls or no poll.

isam said:

Isabel Hardman is very attractive, a beautiful woman IMO

How old is she?

HurstLlama said:

I have no expectation that they will, or even should, but I really would laugh myself sick if UKIP has won in Newark. The screams of outraged entitlement would be wonderful to hear. It would probably be the biggest, and most deserved, shock to the ruling classes since 1381.

Take the 100/1 with Betfair in that case.

A lot of English accents for a Welsh Question Time.

Adam Boulton ‏@adamboultonSKY 5m

#newarkbyelection Lots of talk about exceptionally high turnout - as much as 60% says one Labour source

kle4 said:

Tricky skill, cartooning. I find it hard to quantify what makes one good and what doesn't, but the first didn't get any reaction from me at all, not even dislike, just no reaction, whereas the latter definitely raised a chuckle.

Part of it is definitely combining two or more concepts in some unexpected way. Matt is brilliant at this, as was the late lamented Jak.

Its all over!

Political Scrapbook ‏@PSbook 1m
This photo of Farage out clubbing last night (from tomorrow's Sun) could hurt him when UKIP lose #Newark pic.twitter.com/uURSiCN2Zv

1381 ended with the rebel leaders head on a pike. Not a very good example of a successful revolt.

AveryLP said:

HurstLlama said:

I have no expectation that they will, or even should, but I really would laugh myself sick if UKIP has won in Newark. The screams of outraged entitlement would be wonderful to hear. It would probably be the biggest, and most deserved, shock to the ruling classes since 1381.

You can't start a Peasants' Revolt in Hurstpierpoint, Mr. Llama.

West Sussex is a place to play village cricket and drink warm beer.

Luckyguy1983 said:

I still think (hope?) that it's going to be very close in Newark, far too close for a post mortem. But should we be looking for the candidate we perhaps should have had, I think Suzanne Evans is worth looking at. I'm really impressed with her. www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQXWUmagwm8

Sorry I didn't mean that to come up as a big screen. Can it be made into a link?

You need to omit the "Http://" bit

ie:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQXWUmagwm8

HurstLlama said:

I have no expectation that they will, or even should, but I really would laugh myself sick if UKIP has won in Newark. The screams of outraged entitlement would be wonderful to hear. It would probably be the biggest, and most deserved, shock to the ruling classes since 1381.

I would enjoy it as a great bit of fun, there's no question.

It's been a long time since I read anything to do with the Peasant's Revolt of 1381, so I was amused to see this sentence in the wikipedia page for it:

London chroniclers were also unwilling to admit the role of ordinary Londoners in the revolt, preferring to place the blame entirely on rural peasants from the south-east.

Rural folk in the south east causing trouble for the established order? I see no connection to UKIP there.

kle4 said:

They may have overestimated how many Labour supporters in Newark are that tribal and dedicated, vs how many would consider sticking with Labour or even voting Tory to keep Helmer out, particular given how steep a challenge UKIP were facing anyway, which could put off plenty of tactically minded voters, polls or no poll.

I take it as a given that no Labour voter would vote BNP tactically, even to cause the Tories pain.

I find it very hard to believe that credence is given in senior Labour circles to the idea of enough of their supporters voting UKIP to hurt the Tories. UKIP are the distilled essence of everything that causes Labour folks to hate Tories.

isam said:

MarqueeMark said:

I am still struggling to figure out what was Labour's strategy in Newark. Was it really soft-pedalling in the hope that UKIP would hoover up enough Labour voters to embarrass the Tories? So it was really hoping that enough teachers, trade unionists etc etc etc would vote for UKIP? Really?

The latest over analysis seems to be saying that Labour soft pedalled to allow the Conservatives to win!

Nothing that subtle. We felt we had a choice of spending £100K, trying really hard, raising expectations and coming third - because of the type of seat and the interest in the UKIP challenge - or making a modest effort, saving resources and still coming third. I'd liked us to have tried a bit harder, but not convinced that ending up will 18% or whatever will matter a hoot nationally.

NickPalmer said:

isam said:

MarqueeMark said:

I am still struggling to figure out what was Labour's strategy in Newark. Was it really soft-pedalling in the hope that UKIP would hoover up enough Labour voters to embarrass the Tories? So it was really hoping that enough teachers, trade unionists etc etc etc would vote for UKIP? Really?

The latest over analysis seems to be saying that Labour soft pedalled to allow the Conservatives to win!

Nothing that subtle. We felt we had a choice of spending £100K, trying really hard, raising expectations and coming third - because of the type of seat and the interest in the UKIP challenge - or making a modest effort, saving resources and still coming third. I'd liked us to have tried a bit harder, but not convinced that ending up will 18% or whatever will matter a hoot nationally.

Nick

Say Anna Soubry was appointed EU Commissioner.

Would you advocate Labour follow the same strategy in a Broxtowe by election?

Harry Cole ‏@MrHarryCole · 4 mins
To contrast with the 2012 Manchester Central by-election, Labour won then on a turn out of just 18% http://bit.ly/1kNRbQy

NickPalmer said:

isam said:

MarqueeMark said:

I am still struggling to figure out what was Labour's strategy in Newark. Was it really soft-pedalling in the hope that UKIP would hoover up enough Labour voters to embarrass the Tories? So it was really hoping that enough teachers, trade unionists etc etc etc would vote for UKIP? Really?

The latest over analysis seems to be saying that Labour soft pedalled to allow the Conservatives to win!

Nothing that subtle. We felt we had a choice of spending £100K, trying really hard, raising expectations and coming third - because of the type of seat and the interest in the UKIP challenge - or making a modest effort, saving resources and still coming third. I'd liked us to have tried a bit harder, but not convinced that ending up will 18% or whatever will matter a hoot nationally.

Oh I agree with you.

Sunil_Prasannan said:

foxinsoxuk said:

The excellent Liz Kendall has Welsh links as she mentioned earlier, grandparents I believe.

A good scrapper she is too, with the right degree of passion and compassion.

AndyJS said:

A lot of English accents for a Welsh Question Time.

Oh I'm watching Die Hard 4.0 instead.

Yippee Ki Yay, Mother [moderated]

TheScreamingEagles said:

Adam Boulton ‏@adamboultonSKY 5m

#newarkbyelection Lots of talk about exceptionally high turnout - as much as 60% says one Labour source

But to believe that you need to credit a Labour source with the ability to do numbers, percentages, numeric literacy and competence.

When did that last happen?

MarqueeMark said:

kle4 said:

They may have overestimated how many Labour supporters in Newark are that tribal and dedicated, vs how many would consider sticking with Labour or even voting Tory to keep Helmer out, particular given how steep a challenge UKIP were facing anyway, which could put off plenty of tactically minded voters, polls or no poll.

I take it as a given that no Labour voter would vote BNP tactically, even to cause the Tories pain.

I find it very hard to believe that credence is given in senior Labour circles to the idea of enough of their supporters voting UKIP to hurt the Tories. UKIP are the distilled essence of everything that causes Labour folks to hate Tories.

There are limits, even to tribalists, but I don't see that it is that absurd to think if they softpedalled a significant enough number of their supporters could consider voting UKIP - UKIP have just demonsrated the ability to cut into the Labour vote somewhat, UKIP are making a considerable effort to present as anti-politics even more strongly than they had before, rather than being harder right than the Tories, and even if UKIP are more detestable to them than the Tories, UKIP will help provide Labour a majority, a temporary looking the other way or holding one's nose while voting for them in Newark could really help that larger goal.

It may not have happened that way, it may just be that Labour didn't think it sensible to pour the kind of desperate effort into the seat that the Tories did on the slim chance of a win, with no further motivation beyond letting the other two have a good scrap, but parties supposedly on the left will tack right, and those on the right tack left, without a second's hesitation if they think it will win them votes, so while they may not think enough of their supporters would vote UKIP to hurt the Tories in this example, I don't think UKIP are so detestable to Labour supporters - and the high command know that - to rule it out without due consideration.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

foxinsoxuk said:

The excellent Liz Kendall has Welsh links as she mentioned earlier, grandparents I believe.

A good scrapper she is too, with the right degree of passion and compassion.

AndyJS said:

A lot of English accents for a Welsh Question Time.

Oh I'm watching Die Hard 4.0 instead.

Yippee Ki Yay, Mother [moderated]

Yippee Ki Yay, Mother-frackers?

TSE, I had dinner last night with the guy who wrote the 25th Anniversary Doctor Who episode (for Sylvester McCoy).

He needed some work - and admitted he had bugger all knowledge about Doctor Who at that point...

MarqueeMark said:

TSE, I had dinner last night with the guy who wrote the 25th Anniversary Doctor Who episode (for Sylvester McCoy).

He needed some work - and admitted he had bugger all knowledge about Doctor Who at that point...

Wow - The chap who wrote and directed The Wrath of Khan, had a similar experience.

AveryLP said:

Nick

Say Anna Soubry was appointed EU Commissioner.

Would you advocate Labour follow the same strategy in a Broxtowe by election?

The strategy is a trifle different in seats that we expect to win than seats where we expect to come third. :-)

And, as I said the other day, favouring one nation policies doesn't mean we should delude ourselves that we will win every seat.

But there's no need for us to argue about it. Labour will (I predict) come third tonight. Let's have a look at the polls in a week and see if it's done us any harm. Perhaps it will, perhaps not, who knows?

Newark Advertiser @advertisergroup

Returning officer Andrew Muter says he believes turn-out could be close to 58 per cent http://ow.ly/xGoLP

RodCrosby said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Adam Boulton ‏@adamboultonSKY 5m

#newarkbyelection Lots of talk about exceptionally high turnout - as much as 60% says one Labour source

Would be the highest this parliament, and a long while before that...

First sign something odd is happening in Newark?

Maybe, but just as likely it's a sign that rumours of high turnout often fly around during by-election days. Add a bit of credence that they've continued into the count, but I'm off to bed and don't expect to wake up to an earthquake - in turnout or result.

kle4 said:

There are limits, even to tribalists, but I don't see that it is that absurd to think if they softpedalled a significant enough number of their supporters could consider voting UKIP - UKIP have just demonsrated the ability to cut into the Labour vote somewhat, UKIP are making a considerable effort to present as anti-politics even more strongly than they had before, rather than being harder right than the Tories, and even if UKIP are more detestable to them than the Tories, UKIP will help provide Labour a majority, a temporary looking the other way or holding one's nose while voting for them in Newark could really help that larger goal.

It may not have happened that way, it may just be that Labour didn't think it sensible to pour the kind of desperate effort into the seat that the Tories did on the slim chance of a win, with no further motivation beyond letting the other two have a good scrap, but parties supposedly on the left will tack right, and those on the right tack left, without a second's hesitation if they think it will win them votes, so while they may not think enough of their supporters would vote UKIP to hurt the Tories in this example, I don't think UKIP are so detestable to Labour supporters - and the high command know that - to rule it out without due consideration.

Labour are within a year of a General Election. The likely outcome of this by-election will be UKIP = not doing enough to win Westminster seats. Labour = not doing well enough to win enough Westminster seats. Which is then a short step to Ed is Crap....

Self-inficted wound.

TheScreamingEagles said:

OblitusSumMe said:

After the 2010 general election Labour were first or second in 417 seats, of which Newark was one. There were 213 seats in which they came third or lower, with Newark likely to increase that by one more.

How much of the country are they prepared to abandon?

65%

The succinctness of that response compared to my own attempt, makes me think I'm the Brookes to the Matt in this scenario.

kle4 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

OblitusSumMe said:

After the 2010 general election Labour were first or second in 417 seats, of which Newark was one. There were 213 seats in which they came third or lower, with Newark likely to increase that by one more.

How much of the country are they prepared to abandon?

65%

The succinctness of that response compared to my own attempt, makes me think I'm the Brookes to the Matt in this scenario.

I've always been a believer in brevity.

AveryLP said:

HurstLlama said:

I have no expectation that they will, or even should, but I really would laugh myself sick if UKIP has won in Newark. The screams of outraged entitlement would be wonderful to hear. It would probably be the biggest, and most deserved, shock to the ruling classes since 1381.

You can't start a Peasants' Revolt in Hurstpierpoint, Mr. Llama.

West Sussex is a place to play village cricket and drink warm beer.

I can start a Peasants Revolt if I like, thank you very much. Might not get too far, because well, to be honest not too many peasants around these days and Sussex has never been a place for all that showy nonsense - leave that to the people from Essex and Kent is the normal view.

However, whilst we do rather enjoy our cricket, I take exception to the fact that our beer is warm. The correct temperature for proper beer is a around 55 degrees. At the bar of the New Inn is a device which shows the temperature in the cellar - never moves from 54 degrees. Faulty device? Nope, I put a lit cigarette under the gizmo in the cellar one day that made it move. Its just that in 1400, when the New Inn was built, they knew about keeping beer at the right temperature and how to do it without electricity.

I live I Wythenshawe and Sale East, the Tories didn't turn up here at the by election before this one and came third.

hold zero seats on Manchester city council.

Would it be fair to say that they've abandoned this part of country?

NickPalmer said:

AveryLP said:

Nick

Say Anna Soubry was appointed EU Commissioner.

Would you advocate Labour follow the same strategy in a Broxtowe by election?

The strategy is a trifle different in seats that we expect to win than seats where we expect to come third. :-)

And, as I said the other day, favouring one nation policies doesn't mean we should delude ourselves that we will win every seat.

But there's no need for us to argue about it. Labour will (I predict) come third tonight. Let's have a look at the polls in a week and see if it's done us any harm. Perhaps it will, perhaps not, who knows?

Labour strategy should have been Lab + Lib Dem = 40%. Tory vote divided between UKIP and Conservatives = 30% each. Result = landmark by-election victory for Labour; clear sign that Miliband will enter Number 10.

At the very least they could have put a decent fight in towards that result and retained more credibility. Instead they are going to look like pathetic losers.

In 1992 Newark declared at 2:29am with an 82.2% turnout.

See 2:34 below:

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=h7Q10sWwolI

ManchesterKurt said:

I live I Wythenshawe and Sale East, the Tories didn't turn up here at the by election before this one and came third.

hold zero seats on Manchester city council.

Would it be fair to say that they've abandoned this part of country?

For real.

OblitusSumMe said:

NickPalmer said:

AveryLP said:

Nick

Say Anna Soubry was appointed EU Commissioner.

Would you advocate Labour follow the same strategy in a Broxtowe by election?

The strategy is a trifle different in seats that we expect to win than seats where we expect to come third. :-)

And, as I said the other day, favouring one nation policies doesn't mean we should delude ourselves that we will win every seat.

But there's no need for us to argue about it. Labour will (I predict) come third tonight. Let's have a look at the polls in a week and see if it's done us any harm. Perhaps it will, perhaps not, who knows?

Labour strategy should have been Lab + Lib Dem = 40%. Tory vote divided between UKIP and Conservatives = 30% each. Result = landmark by-election victory for Labour; clear sign that Miliband will enter Number 10.

At the very least they could have put a decent fight in towards that result and retained more credibility. Instead they are going to look like pathetic losers.

Like the Tories looked like pathetic losers Wythenshawe and Sale East?

Sunil_Prasannan said:

MikeK said:

Newark result differential between 1st and 2nd will be hundreds rather than thousands = Rumour.

I predicted Tory lead by 667

That doesn't fit the narrative of the betting markets, Comrade.

If true, it is going to be a very big surprise.

I've got a last scoop.
http://www.newark-sherwooddc.gov.uk/newarkbyelection/newarkby-electionresults/
At the bottom of the page you can see the how the count is progressing (now about 1/5 has been counted).
Also a picture from ITV gives me a clue that the 1st party is leading the 2nd by about 1/3 of the 1st party's vote.

twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/474662478430089216/photo/1

OblitusSumMe said:

kle4 said:

manofkent2014 said:

NickPalmer said:

isam said:

MarqueeMark said:

I am still struggling to figure out what was Labour's strategy in Newark. Was it really soft-pedalling in the hope that UKIP would hoover up enough Labour voters to embarrass the Tories? So it was really hoping that enough teachers, trade unionists etc etc etc would vote for UKIP? Really?

The latest over analysis seems to be saying that Labour soft pedalled to allow the Conservatives to win!

Nothing that subtle. We felt we had a choice of spending £100K, trying really hard, raising expectations and coming third - because of the type of seat and the interest in the UKIP challenge - or making a modest effort, saving resources and still coming third. I'd liked us to have tried a bit harder, but not convinced that ending up will 18% or whatever will matter a hoot nationally.

Surely when Ed's 'one word' is 'One Nation' coming third in a Midlands by election having come a poor third in large parts of the country (most southern and eastern coastal counties for a start) in the Euros doesn't really bode well. Milibnd's. 'One Nation' mantra is becoming as much of an illusion as Cameron's 'Big Society'

The strength of the mantra of course, for all it is not catching on as these things rarely seem to, is that Labour can be pretty weak in several large areas with high populations and still have a better claim to be 'one nation' than any of the others, given the likely LD wipeout in many areas and Con weakness being worse than labour's in their own weak areas . Although I suppose technically UKIP are the only ones with representation at some level in all four constituent countries of the UK?

At the 2010 GE Labour were third or lower in 213 seats and the Conservatives were third or lower in 135 seats ..

An interesting statistic I was not aware of, though I suppose it fits the oft lamented Labour electoral 'bias' that results in them winning more seats on less of the vote by simply not turning out in areas they have no chance in.

Did the numbers they came third or lower in increase in 2010? I would hazard a guess that will change in 2015 and they might restore some seconds in what are currently Tory-LD seats (though not ones which are marginal perhaps).

ManchesterKurt said:

OblitusSumMe said:

NickPalmer said:

AveryLP said:

Nick

Say Anna Soubry was appointed EU Commissioner.

Would you advocate Labour follow the same strategy in a Broxtowe by election?

The strategy is a trifle different in seats that we expect to win than seats where we expect to come third. :-)

And, as I said the other day, favouring one nation policies doesn't mean we should delude ourselves that we will win every seat.

But there's no need for us to argue about it. Labour will (I predict) come third tonight. Let's have a look at the polls in a week and see if it's done us any harm. Perhaps it will, perhaps not, who knows?

Labour strategy should have been Lab + Lib Dem = 40%. Tory vote divided between UKIP and Conservatives = 30% each. Result = landmark by-election victory for Labour; clear sign that Miliband will enter Number 10.

At the very least they could have put a decent fight in towards that result and retained more credibility. Instead they are going to look like pathetic losers.

Like the Tories looked like pathetic losers Wythenshawe and Sale East?

There is a very obvious difference between a party of government and a party of opposition in terms of losing vote share in by-elections.

When the Tories lost Romsey in the 2000 by-election they certainly did look like pathetic losers. For Labour to lose vote share in a seat where they came second on a nationwide vote of less than 30% would indeed be pathetic.

MikeL said:

Why is UKIP 100 on Betfair if it's close?

Polling always trumps anecdote.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Sam Macrory ‏@sammacrory 3m

Farage now said to be appearing at the count in an hour or so. Suggests result will be close enough for UKIP to crow about #newarkbyelection

TheScreamingEagles said:

Sam Macrory ‏@sammacrory 3m

Farage now said to be appearing at the count in an hour or so. Suggests result will be close enough for UKIP to crow about #newarkbyelection

Is he bringing the band too?

Richard_Nabavi said:

@HurstLlama - Do you enjoy the blessing of Harvey's in said local?

Oh, yes and it is usually well kept. However, I must confess these days it is a pretty awful pub. The fabric is there, medieval cellars (with a bricked up 18th century smugglers tunnel leading we are not too sure where), Tudor walls, a Georgian Front and much, much more). Sounds great except for the last and current owners who completely buggered up the interior so as to make it "family friendly" and destroyed the character. Now its one of those pubs that charge nearly seven quid for a sandwich, dogs aren't welcome (hygiene when food is being served, you know) but screaming kids running around the bars are.

Oh one suggesting attention is shifting to Labour winning.

I always get that Kate girl confused with that Mosse girl.

Ban Page 3!!!!

TheScreamingEagles said:

Well I've just taken a tenner at 99/1 at UKIP winning

That's worth throwing your tenner away on.