Sir Keir Starmer: The Corbyn slayer? – politicalbetting.com
Sir Keir Starmer: The Corbyn slayer? – politicalbetting.com
Corbynista 'Stats for Lefties' commissioned Survation poll in Islington North shows Labour's @PrafulNargund 14 points ahead of Jeremy Corbyn. pic.twitter.com/JrlrGmuare
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I never thought Corbyn's suspension would last, but he's so arrogant and vain he gave Starmer all he needed.
Dear all
The poll has now been published. Here are the headline figures:
Labour 43% (-21)
Corbyn 29% (+29)
Liberal Democrats 7% (-9)
Green Party 7% (-1)
Reform UK 6% (+5)
Conservatives 6% (-4)
The results for the additional questions were as follows:
Q. How favourably or unfavourably do you feel towards Jeremy Corbyn?
Favourable 55%
Unfavourable 33%
Net rating: +21
Q. How favourably or unfavourably do you feel towards Keir Starmer?
Favourable 39%
Unfavourable 39%
Net rating: 0
Q. If you had the choice to vote between only Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour candidate, who would you vote for?
Jeremy Corbyn (Independent) 48%
Praful Nargund (Labour) 40%
Don't know 13%
Excluding undecided voters:
Jeremy Corbyn (Independent) 55%
Praful Nargund (Labour) 45%
Q. Which of the following statements comes closest to your view?
50% ~ The decision by the Labour Party to prevent Jeremy Corbyn from standing as the Labour candidate in Islington North was INCORRECT
35% ~ The decision by the Labour Party to prevent Jeremy Corbyn from standing as the Labour candidate in Islington North was CORRECT
Full data tables are available here: https://t.co/rkQS2MzgJu
Thank you again for making this possible. Further analysis can be found in an article on the Novara Media website: https://novaramedia.com/2024/06/25/shock-poll-shows-its-down-to-the-wire-for-corbyn-in-islington-north/
Kind regards
E
If they could, most would count the next day I bet.
And I joke about that, but a PM finding out their fate at 4am in a run down leisure centre next to a dude dressed as Elmo is worth any discomfort at late night counting.
I don't know why he didn't go for Mayor. When he didn't I assumed he would never run against Labour, but then he expelled himself regardless.
defeatsvictoriesInteresting article
https://www.eadt.co.uk/news/24390244.suffolk-candidates-storm-political-donations/
https://x.com/smalls2672/status/1805629483644305798
The only thing that was going to put Labour a Wapping 14 or 15 points clear of Tories on July 4th was the hope they would be different than the sleaze and incompetence we have seen in recent years, that was Labours USP for double digit leads, admit it was THE decisive perceived difference between them and the Tories in this election.
BUT, ITS GONE. That USP and reason for voting Labour has gone, it’s no more, it cannot possibly come back before polling day.
Labour candidate in election betting scandal is a huge moment in this election campaign.
Less surprising that Corbyn would be up in that question - you'd guess quite a lot of Greens in particular, but also residual supporters of other parties, would quite like to slap Labour for whatever reason.
Also, is reporting "Corbyn 29 (+29)" really right? He was, after all, the candidate for Labour last time, so didn't actually get 0. But I'm splitting hairs and don't know what the alternative is.
It’s not okay to sneakily get away with it, as you suggest becuase the “it” part of it is wrong, not just morally, but what about other punters bets, when someone has bet heavily on themselves to lose, and is throwing it. It’s fraud.
How many headlines have been written in that time? Whereas Starmer gets one whiff of impropriety and the candidate is gone and his donation returned.
Swift & decisive vs inept and bumbling. A Huuuuuge difference between the two candidates to be PM.
https://x.com/DavidHerdson/status/1801545772657147940
@DavidHerdson
No.
I don't need hypotheticals: I've seen pre-close of poll postal vote returns in the past which I could have used to place bets. I didn't.
(Yes, it would be very illegal to do so but that wouldn't stop some people; it would be hard to prove cause and event)
Jezza at 6/4 with 2 firms
Fill your boots
https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/uk-constituencies/next-uk-general-election-constituencies/islington-north
A Conservative cabinet minister claimed that he won more than £2,000 betting on a July general election.
Shortly after Prime Minister Rishi Sunak announced the election date, Scottish Secretary Alister Jack told the BBC he had made £2,100 after betting on June and July election dates. He claimed one of the bets was placed at odds of 25/1.
Last week, Mr Jack told the BBC the comments were “a joke… I was pulling your leg”.
Today, the Scottish Secretary said in a statement he “did not place any bets on the date of the general election during May”.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czkk0d19kgdo
In your constituency, witches were burnt at the stake for far less.
Can you not sense the jeopardy you are in?
“Ha ha ha, you can’t burn me at the stake, it’s so obvious I am not a witch. Someone has to be guilty of actual witchcraft to be burnt at a stake.”
My question is how this differs from over 3 goals?
nor from under 4
In the mind of the average voter, no.
They reckoned without my strategic genius.
Seriously?
Kevin Craig has been a fool and Starmer has moved quickly - the Conservatives will probably hold the seat after this. Is it some sort of election game-changer? Hardly.
Tomorrow's debate is of far greater significance to the outcome than this minor squall.
Have never done it, but is this a classic covering bet?
I don’t think it will make much difference to be honest although some people may lump it in with the insider betting when it’s not the same.
Not sure that would pass muster nowadays!
Edit: yep here we are:
Just Not Cricket: The Day Australia Bet On Themselves to Lose the Ashes
https://www.tomharris.org.uk/bookmakers/just-not-cricket-the-day-australia-bet-on-themselves-to-lose-the-ashes/
The Gambling Commission has informed Russell George, a Tory member of the Welsh parliament who represents the same constituency as Sunak’s closest parliamentary aide Craig Williams, that he is part of its inquiry.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/jun/25/election-betting-fifth-tory-investigated-in-growing-scandal
He's a bad'un
If you rise from 66/1 to win due a series of peculiar fortune, it can only be down to witchcraft. And Winning would be all the proof needed.
The Devil himself is riding through this election. Mark my words!
It’s probably an unsavoury topic because it’s one of the greatest turnarounds in English sporting history but there would have been some eyebrows raised nowadays I think.
Just Not Cricket: The Day Australia Bet On Themselves to Lose the Ashes
https://www.tomharris.org.uk/bookmakers/just-not-cricket-the-day-australia-bet-on-themselves-to-lose-the-ashes/
https://x.com/RachelReevesMP/status/1805660636376166522
Read the room. The Tory betting scandal is now jointly owned by Labour.
Labours USP as being different, is now dead.
The Tories best hope right now is that Starmer drops the ming vase, or that Farage shoots his mouth off again. Sunak's proven that his attempts to change the narrative don't work, and he's probably wise to have stopped trying over the past week and a half.
Vijay Arbitrage.
Oh just interesting to those of us who weren’t alive or old enough to watch cricket at the time! In the light of recent match fixing scandals and the idea that this Labour candidate has somehow match fixed (see above)
Just a curious situation which nowadays would have probably raised more than eyebrows.
But clearly suggesting the stunning 1981 England Headingley victory was anything other than a Botham-Willis triumph is to touch a sacred cow.
When the story originally broke, some people here were saying quite confidently that betting based on "inside information" was not illegal, unlike insider share trading.
Now it seems to be accepted that potentially it can be cheating, and therefore illegal. But does that mean that anyone who bets while taking account of information not in the public domain is cheating? And if not, where do you draw the line?
I don't think the bookies made any fuss over it when paying out, nobody really thought they'd played any differently over it, and it all blew over pretty quickly as most people felt it was no big deal really.
Funny how things change.