politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If Ladbroke punters have this right CON is heading for a wi
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If Ladbroke punters have this right CON is heading for a win on votes – LAB on seats
The standard assumption is that this is mostly down to the boundaries is wrong. Yes LAB does get some benefit but the key factor is different turnout levels in CON and LAB seats. Shadsy of Ladbrokes gets this right in in his blog:-
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I'll be too busy popping the champers.
No maj 2.28
Lab maj 3.3
Con maj 3.7
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/market?marketId=1.101416490
Betfair, most seats:
Lab 1.95
Con 2.04
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/market?marketId=1.101416490#/exchange/market?marketId=1.101416473&eventTypeId=2378961
While on the subject of elections and therefore their strategists I was absolutely fascinated to discover that John McTernan (he of the Scottish Labour defeat inter aliis) was not only once a librarian but argued in favour of closing libraries (back in 2011, but I missed it at the time).
http://wingsoverscotland.com/we-need-to-talk-about-john/
Mexico 6/5
Cameroon 29/10
Draw 11/5
Spain 4/5
Netherlands 9/2
Draw 12/5
Chile 1/2
Australia 8/1
Draw 16/5
https://www.betfair.com/sport
Actually no. The Ladbrokes markets don't imply that at all.
The individual Seats/Votes markets imply that it is very finely balanced, with Con having a small advantage in expected votes and Lab in expected seats. That is not the same thing as implying that CON is heading for a win on votes, LAB on seats. In fact the Most Votes/Most Seats doubles imply that there's a greater than 83% chance that that won't be the outcome. Most of the probability space is accounted for by either Lab or Con having both most seats and most votes.
RAGreeneCNN @RAGreeneCNN · 27m
#Iran troops in #Iraq means: US and Iran are about to be military allies ... against Sunni extremists ... in Iraq. #UnintendedConsequences?
Con Votes +83
Lab Votes -100
Lab Seats +80
Con Seats -100
Con Votes, Con Seats = -17
Lab Votes, Lab Seats = -20
Con Votes, Lab Seats = +163
Giving you ~ 8-1 for your money - as the Lab Votes/Con Seats has been ruled out pretty much by the Ashcroft poll.
Or just stake £3.03 on Lab Votes/Con Seats - though this is surely > 66-1 with the Ashcroft polling.
http://www.betfair.com/exchange/football/market?id=1.112173612&exp=e
I'm still hoping for the ludicrous spectacled of a coalition of the 2nd and 4th largest vote winners with half their seats in Scotland leaving as they declare independence.
Actually, 13.4/1 looks pretty fair for a lead range of maybe 2-3%...
EDIT: I see Pulpstar has already done the maths here...
(not high hopes)
And a Labour councillor in Liverpool, Martin Cummins, has resigned from the party, suggesting Mr Miliband had "listened to unwise counsel in associating himself, and our party, with this degrading publication".
Mr Cummins said: "Seeing Ed promoting the Sun has rocked me to my core."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27829958
Seems a bizarre thing to get het up over after all those years when Labour and the Sun were bosom buddies, but there we go.
Besides when you take away the stupid spin from 'I'm not interested in facts' AveryLP, you are left with Farage having declared everything to the EU who were, after all, the authority responsible for the funds.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100276327/dont-blame-ed-milibands-advisers-for-his-sun-shambles-blame-ed/
£114.55 at Ladbrokes @ 5-6 Conservative Votes
Yields £14.55 @ 13.43-1 Labour Seats, Conservative votes.
I think the losers are going to be the Saudis/extremist Sunnis.
The US support for Saudi has always been awkward, given the source of 9/11, human rights and lack of democracy in Saudi. The only reason for US Saudi support has been US dependence on Saudi oil. But with fracking that is changing fast. The US has to decide which side it is on - Sunni or Shia. (This all goes back to Muhammad's lack of a will explaining who his successor should be - moral: leave a will). Sunnis make up nearly 90% of Muslims but Shias are the majority in Iran and Iraq and are sizable in Lebanaon and Pakistan.
I predict a covert alliance between US, Russia and Iran on the side of Shia to bring stability to the Middle East. The winners are Assad (pressure off), Iran (welcome to the club), Russia (welcome back but please behave) and the millions of innocent inhabitants of Iraq and Syria under extremist Sunni terrorist threat (and elsewhere).
Consequences are that Saudi seeks nuclear weapons (and becomes the new Iran with international sanctions) Investors in oil shares do well, but arms suppliers to Saudi do not.
Israel will need to make a quick reassessment but it has been a covert ally of Iran in the past and might welcome stability on its borders, and an Iran/US normalisation of relations will bring better predicitability.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100276242/david-cameron-has-dropped-the-idea-of-a-new-deal-the-referendum-will-be-on-the-existing-membership-terms/?fb
I wonder how many of those Tories on here who said they would wait and see what came out of the negotiations will now accept the answer to that is nothing and will therefore back BOO?
As for your second point, maybe. An alternative take on it is that either he was profiting personally - nothing wrong with that, perhaps, except it makes him a massive hypocrite - or alternatively that he was telling the truth and these funds were used as an undeclared contribution to UK political campaigning ('banks of computers').
It may not be a big deal in the overall scheme of things, and it may be entirely innocent. That doesn't mean it's not exceptionally embarrassing for a party which pretends to be cleaner than the others.
http://observers.france24.com/content/20140613-hollywood-fim-jihadist-propaganda-isis
Although I'm a great fan of Dan Hannan - the thinking man's BOOer - I was puzzled by that particular article, because he didn't explain what he thought had actually changed.
Obama said that Iraq needs to have political reform first before any military aid, but will give full diplomatic support to them and opened the door for Iran to help.
....Plus, obviously, he [Cameron] represents our one chance of a referendum on leaving the EU.
What is the value of full diplomatic support when your capital is attacked by the enemy?
This is essentially Obama's statement:
pic.twitter.com/aurWkgc0YH
Makes you realise just how skinny the average cyclist is !
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/liverpool-labour-councillor-martin-cummins-7266443#.U5skvvBTAKI.twitter
It's 2014: US and #Iran are discussing how to best protect #Baghdad - if Tom Clancy had written this we would have strung him up.
Many in the party (including myself) felt it was not money well spent no matter what the source and it led to the resignation of a number of senior members who had challenged Farage over it and fell foul of his rather unique management style (and yes I am using a polite way of saying he behaved like a dictatorial git).
So the question of whether or not they existed was settled a decade ago.
Much as I would like to see Farage replaced as head of UKIP I can't see how this will change anyone's mind given that the Electoral Commission is already seen by many as anti-UKIP and incompetent to boot. Those who dislike UKIP will see their bias confirmed and those who dislike the Electoral Commission in its current form and who think there is an ongoing establishment witch-hunt against UKIP will see their own bias confirmed.
Electorally it will make no difference unless it is used internally to dump Farage in which case it will probably help UKIP in the long run.
Contrast with you - gagging to foist Ed on us for 5 years "for the greater good" - no thanks !
Indeed I have had this very conversation with Dan Hannan. He is under no illusion that the Out side will have to make a strong case - and to my mind, he personally does make a strong case - and that it won't necessarily be easy for them to win. But he also accepts that if voters don't accept that case, then that is their decision. He's a democrat, and would accept that. He just wants the chance to put the case, and he wants the voters to decide. That's an entirely honourable position.
Mr. kle4, done a post about stuff we learnt about Inquisition at E3. Not sure if you're too fussed (it's light on spoilers) but in case you're interested, it's here: http://thaddeusthesixth.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/dragon-age-inquisition-e3-news.html
Lab 35
Con 32
UKIP 15
LibDem 8
Green 5
squirrelsfootball. Bobafett says so.*Checks beeb website to see which is the most read story of the day*
3 DISALLOWED GOALS?: It's 6/1 for Dos Santos to have another one ruled out! D
pic.twitter.com/wGMzpOQsSF
There is a simple answer to all of this.
Can you envisage any way in which Cameron will come back from his 'negotiations' and say "we didn't get enough, I recommend we leave the EU".
Alternatively can you envisage him coming back and saying "we didn't get enough but I recommend we stay in".
If you cannot see Cameron adopting either of those positions (and I certainly cannot) then the referendum is a sham. Cameron along with Labour and the Lib Dems will campaign for us to stay in no matter what the result of the negotiations and will make sure that the message is we got a good deal to back up their position.
The real question the is what you and the rest of the Cameroon loyalists will do.
Beckenbanned MT @itvnews Ex-Germany coach Franz Beckenbauer banned from 'all football activity' for 90 days by Fifa http://bit.ly/UzB9oA
The former France coach Raymond Domenech has said the current Les Bleus side is “partially responsible” for the bloodshed in Ukraine.
France beat Ukraine 3-0 in the second leg of the World Cup play-off in November last year to pull off a thrilling 3-2 aggregate victory and qualify for the World Cup in Brazil. According to Domenech, the turnaround was such a shock to the Ukrainian people that it paved the way for the crisis situation currently engulfing the country.
http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/jun/13/france-world-cup-playoff-ukraine-crisis-raymond-domenech
I've backed the draw at 28/1.
Iraq? If no one had invaded and Saddam had had a heart attack last week this is just about where we would be by now. Except without the US heavy weaponry.
There was a little more to the Iron Bull, but I deleted it as it was a bit more spoilerish [not huge, but I prefer to err on the side of caution].
Quite glad of the Inquisitor voice choices. Have to see who the Yankee doodles are.
At least one area is bigger than the whole of Origins, which is rather enormous. I tend to quite like crafting, but we'll see how it works.
LD 2/9 (from 1/5)
Con 3/1 (from 7/2)
UKIP 33/1 (from 66/1)
Lab 50/1 (n/c)
LD 4/5 (from 4/6)
Con EVS (from 11/10)
UKIP 25/1 (from 33/1)
100 bar
I also believe he once said that if the bonus cap went through on the financial sector he'd support leaving. I asked him once about this, and I think his response was that he's waiting to see if it will be repatriated by Cameron.
Con 1/8 (n/c)
LD 11/2 (from 9/2)
UKIP 20/1 (from 25/1)
100 bar
The game is essentially all about the follow on. If Sri Lanka avoid it, they draw.
twitter.com/WingsScotland/status/477400576675041280/photo/1