I'm pleased, by the way, to see Labour's colour scheme this election. Red and white - or sometime red, white and blue - us both more pleasing to the eye and less threatening than the red and yellow they have traditionally used. I've been making this point for years - pleased to see they've finally come to the same conclusion.
Any info about how Galloways lot are faring in the 150 or so seats they are standing in?
This is the great mystery. A 1% others vote share could, at the extreme, mean 40% in 20 constituencies. Some MRPs pick up some share for "Others" in places, but I'm not convinced they're fully across it.
Not seen a Muslim VI or a constituency VI with an Independent other than a couple of Corbyn ones.
My hunch is still that Labour lose a handful of seats to their left - not sure if Rochdale will be one of of them tbh - because I don't see how the pattern of the locals dissipates entirely given that pattern wasn't about a local issue. Of the 5 seats covering Kirklees, Dewsbury & Batley, which EC would have as the safest Labour seat, is the one I am least sure of a Labour victory in.
What I would say about WPGB, is they have selected seats by candidate volunteering, and as a result I don't think they have put up candidates in their strongest range of seats.
So today Labour have the border of the Mailonline homepage
This is from a guide on online advertising
Buying ads to take over the homepage of MailOnline is the sort of thing you do when: - Your campaign budget is very healthy indeed - You're feeling pretty confident about the result - You want to block your opponents doing it and generally annoy them for the lolz.
It’s still amazing that the MailOnline, having deliberately broken their website in so many other ways, don’t host adverts on their own servers to frustrate adblocking.
It’s a long time since I worked in online advertising (I know the person who invented the surround ad Labour have today back in the 90s, the ad was on the register but I can’t remember the client) but from memory advertising has dedicated software that doesn’t sit well with anything else - it’s a proxy server with bid engine attached
Yes it’s easier to have it as a standalone or 3rd party server with all the bidding and analytics, but I’m surprised that an operation as large as the Mail hasn’t taken it in-house to frustrate adblocking, given how much they’ve borked web standards on the rest of their site, presumably to generate more user data.
So today Labour have the border of the Mailonline homepage
This is from a guide on online advertising
Buying ads to take over the homepage of MailOnline is the sort of thing you do when: - Your campaign budget is very healthy indeed - You're feeling pretty confident about the result - You want to block your opponents doing it and generally annoy them for the lolz.
And rumour is they have if all week until Thursday - and that Labour were very surprised the Tories hadn’t booked it
I commented last Sunday that labour had the border ads on the Mails ‘This is Money’ site.
I’m sure they will tomorrow too.
I was told this morning by Heathener, having posted the Mail’s opinion piece that the Mail and other newspapers are irrelevant. Now I’m hearing that Labour are spending a fortune advertising with the Mail.
I don’t understand - are Labour stupid and haven’t realised that the Mail is irrelevant now or is it actually still a very important opinion forming opportunity?
I'm pleased, by the way, to see Labour's colour scheme this election. Red and white - or sometime red, white and blue - us both more pleasing to the eye and less threatening than the red and yellow they have traditionally used. I've been making this point for years - pleased to see they've finally come to the same conclusion.
Also good to see the flag on the MailOnline advert, something that other recent incarnations of the party would have hated with a passion.
Yes, it's featured on all leaflets and posters.
More tanks parked on Tory lawns.
The PLP is going to be very interesting next parliament, much less based around inner cities and their issues, much more on ordinary suburban and rural folk.
It will not be the same Labour Party that we are used to.
A Labour supermajority is actually better for middle England than a Labour majority. CLPs and their candidates in such places are far more moderate and a supermajority means the sundry trots in the inner cities can't hold the party to ransom by threatening to vote with the opposition.
I have made this point several times. A rebellion by 50 Momentum types can just be ignored if you have a majority of 200.
The bigger a parliamentary party, the smaller chance MPs have of becoming ministers, or even of feeling sufficiently appreciated by the prime minister for supporting him or her in the Commons. Rebelling against the government feels less risky, moreover, when it has a seemingly impregnable majority. If Labour is in power for the foreseeable future, faced with a shrunken, divided and discredited Conservative party, the discipline that Starmer’s leadership instilled in most of his MPs in more challenging times may begin to break down – as it eventually did during Tony Blair’s long premiership.
I'm pleased, by the way, to see Labour's colour scheme this election. Red and white - or sometime red, white and blue - us both more pleasing to the eye and less threatening than the red and yellow they have traditionally used. I've been making this point for years - pleased to see they've finally come to the same conclusion.
Also good to see the flag on the MailOnline advert, something that other recent incarnations of the party would have hated with a passion.
Yes, it's featured on all leaflets and posters.
More tanks parked on Tory lawns.
The PLP is going to be very interesting next parliament, much less based around inner cities and their issues, much more on ordinary suburban and rural folk.
It will not be the same Labour Party that we are used to.
Possibly. Though it's not necessarily tge case that a PLP reflects the tone of its constituency as a whole. Small memberships make it easier for Momentum types to take over.
If only the PM knew someone with several hundred million in the bank he could ask to chip in.
Some years ago, when I was active in politics, I was told that a nightmare scenario, for both main parties, was some loon zillionaire giving the other party a donation big enough to run the party in perpetuity. Then said party would haul up the drawbridge on donations for everyone….
My US relatives (New York Democrats, politically active, lawyers and teachers ) used to worry that one of the New Wave Billionaires would set up a party entirely internally funded - and end up directly controlling both houses and the Presidency. I thought the idea that lobbyists were an essential part of democracy an interesting opinion.
Of course Bloomberg blew that possibility up in some style….
Didn't Zuckerberg toy with the idea of doing this?
Sam Bankman-Fried was experimenting with trying to change outcomes. Like all his ideas, he tended to “chose poorly”
So today Labour have the border of the Mailonline homepage
This is from a guide on online advertising
Buying ads to take over the homepage of MailOnline is the sort of thing you do when: - Your campaign budget is very healthy indeed - You're feeling pretty confident about the result - You want to block your opponents doing it and generally annoy them for the lolz.
And rumour is they have if all week until Thursday - and that Labour were very surprised the Tories hadn’t booked it
How quickly we forget the whole Stop Funding Hate campaign.
If I were of a progressive bent and had donated to Labour, I’d be apoplectic that my money was going to the Daily Mail. Sure, you can make the case it’s good campaigning, but it also seems like a way to wind up a lot of your supporters. But I guess Starmer is way past that point now.
If only the PM knew someone with several hundred million in the bank he could ask to chip in.
Some years ago, when I was active in politics, I was told that a nightmare scenario, for both main parties, was some loon zillionaire giving the other party a donation big enough to run the party in perpetuity. Then said party would haul up the drawbridge on donations for everyone….
My US relatives (New York Democrats, politically active, lawyers and teachers ) used to worry that one of the New Wave Billionaires would set up a party entirely internally funded - and end up directly controlling both houses and the Presidency. I thought the idea that lobbyists were an essential part of democracy an interesting opinion.
Of course Bloomberg blew that possibility up in some style….
Didn't Zuckerberg toy with the idea of doing this?
Sam Bankman-Fried was experimenting with trying to change outcomes. Like all his ideas, he tended to “chose poorly”
Strange how any investigation into that got dropped.
If only the PM knew someone with several hundred million in the bank he could ask to chip in.
Some years ago, when I was active in politics, I was told that a nightmare scenario, for both main parties, was some loon zillionaire giving the other party a donation big enough to run the party in perpetuity. Then said party would haul up the drawbridge on donations for everyone….
My US relatives (New York Democrats, politically active, lawyers and teachers ) used to worry that one of the New Wave Billionaires would set up a party entirely internally funded - and end up directly controlling both houses and the Presidency. I thought the idea that lobbyists were an essential part of democracy an interesting opinion.
Of course Bloomberg blew that possibility up in some style….
Didn't Zuckerberg toy with the idea of doing this?
Sam Bankman-Fried was experimenting with trying to change outcomes. Like all his ideas, he tended to “chose poorly”
He was the second-largest Dem donor in the mid-terms, and one of the other FTX execs was an eight-figure Rep donor at the same election. Following the long line of large companies funding both sides of the political aisle.
Yep. It is the one they are quoting. As most people here have noted on PB some of these MRPs for some seats are bonkers. If you are a marginal all you have to do is look at who is working it. There is no doubt Guildford is not a Labour target and it is a LD target. You would have to be blind or stupid not to spot it.
I'm pleased, by the way, to see Labour's colour scheme this election. Red and white - or sometime red, white and blue - us both more pleasing to the eye and less threatening than the red and yellow they have traditionally used. I've been making this point for years - pleased to see they've finally come to the same conclusion.
Also good to see the flag on the MailOnline advert, something that other recent incarnations of the party would have hated with a passion.
The ‘flag’ on Labour ads? Strangely absent from all SLab bumf.
So today Labour have the border of the Mailonline homepage
This is from a guide on online advertising
Buying ads to take over the homepage of MailOnline is the sort of thing you do when: - Your campaign budget is very healthy indeed - You're feeling pretty confident about the result - You want to block your opponents doing it and generally annoy them for the lolz.
It’s still amazing that the MailOnline, having deliberately broken their website in so many other ways, don’t host adverts on their own servers to frustrate adblocking.
It’s a long time since I worked in online advertising (I know the person who invented the surround ad Labour have today back in the 90s, the ad was on the register but I can’t remember the client) but from memory advertising has dedicated software that doesn’t sit well with anything else - it’s a proxy server with bid engine attached
Yes it’s easier to have it as a standalone or 3rd party server with all the bidding and analytics, but I’m surprised that an operation as large as the Mail hasn’t taken it in-house to frustrate adblocking, given how much they’ve borked web standards on the rest of their site, presumably to generate more user data.
Given the number of ads on that site that appear if you don’t use multiple ad blockers - I suspect if they put the ad software on their own servers it would look like a distributed denial of service attack
I'm really struggling to accept that some of the latest Survation MRP seat projections are even remotely plausible.
For example, Shropshire North. A seat currently held by LD MP Helen Morgan, with minor boundary changes only, after the 2021 by election with result LD 47, Con 32, Lab 10, Green 5, Reform 4. In those circumstances, even I have to admit that it's absolutely nailed on that the anti-Tory tactical vote will stay with the LDs. Yet Survation have the Conservatives regaining the seat with the LDs going from 1st to 4th place: Con 36, Lab 30, Reform 15, LD 10.
That's utter nonsense. Reality is reflected in the fact that you can't get better odds than 4/9 on for the LDs to win the seat.
It could be that MRP is good when voting blocs are essentially demographically binary, and based around Leave/Remain as they were in GE2017 and GE2019, but otherwise somewhat limited and unable to deal with a complex election like this.
This time, I'm taking them with a pinch of salt.
Tactical voting breaks MRPs in two separate ways.
Let's recap why MRPs previously did well - they picked up the change in support that had the Tories ahead of Labour in social class C2DE, and projected that onto relevant seats, so that we could see Sedgefield going Tory, and Canterbury going Labour.
So they work well when, say, a sandal-wearing university academic is reliably going to vote Lib Dem, a young mother in her 30s will reliably vote Labour, and a pensioner who owns their home outright will reliably vote Tory, whichever constituency they are in. See how many of each demographic are in each seat and - bingo! - you get an accurate prediction of seats won.
But, when the sandal-wearing academics are prepared to vote Labour in some seats, and Lib Dem in others, as an anti-Tory tactical vote, and the young mothers likewise, then that messes up the base data. It looks like the Lib Dems have lost support among sandal-wearers, and increased support among mothers, and so the MRP will apply those changes even to seats where the Lib Dems aren't the tactical vote option.
Now, you might try to decompose your base data on the basis of whether the seat is a Labour or Lib Dem target, but then you're assuming the voters have perfect knowledge of what the optimal tactical vote option is, and they don't.
Tactical voting breaks MRPs.
And the people doing them know this, of course, and they have various ways of trying to 'fix' it.
Yougov relies on its panel being so big, and its having so much background data on them, that it factors in the responses from the panellists who actually live in the seat. But even with a giant national panel, they will only have about a hundred people in each seat, giving an MOE of about +/- 10%. Better than nothing, and having people's past voting behaviour helps since a change of vote is an actual swing, rather than just a sampling error, but it's susceptible to both random and systemic error - one example was YouGov suggesting the East Devon Indy was running the Tories close last time.
All of them, I think, factor in actual past election results, which in a sense is 'cheating' by creating a circularity that risks normalcy bias. But clearly it helps with things like sorting Labour from LibDem targets based on campaigning history and local factors, which any demographic model would struggle with. But again there are risks - the North Shropshire issue discussed early this morning probably arises because that MRP has used the last GE results as its 'crib' and ignored the subsequent by-election.
The key is to remember that we're looking (mostly) at a national model, not a seat-by-seat poll - the trouble is that the way the data is presented, with maps and such enticing seat-by-seat data, makes it look like the latter. It would be more honest, if less fun, for them just to present the predicted national seat totals and leave out all the local data behind it. Most of us are clued up on these issues, but I know from comments about my seat in the media and social media that most ordinary folk think these predictions are some sort of local poll.
IoW East is looking to be one of the most interesting seats. It looks a 3 way between Lab, Con and Reform to me. Any thoughts?
Or four-way with the Greens, who are recommended as the tactical choice by the local primary campaign. They're working hard to give traction to their relatively late recommendation, but will probably struggle to reach many armchair voters given the focus on street stalls and the like. That said, the Greens are winning the poster war, such as it is. There's also a drive on social media for "red west, green east" with vote swapping and the like.
There's not much hard evidence of Reform gaining traction, but there's a lot of activity on social media and given the demographics and a candidate whose not a total nutjob, they will probably pull in a decent vote. But there's no ground campaign and I don't think they can win unless there's a further big move to Reform.
All the polls and models point to a Labour win, but I'd still be surprised, particularly given such a poor candidate choice, and therefore the money probably sits on a Tory hold, with a Labour gain in the west if they maintain their poll lead.
Thanks, Mrs Foxy's relatives are all in the East, in Lake, Bembridge, St Helens and Wootton Bridge, so I have an interest there, particularly as Mrs Foxy wants to move there when she can finally prise me out of Leicester.
Just be careful where you buy your house, though your local contac ts will help. One hopes it is less of a concern than Ventnor/Sandown. The climatic changes are going to mean more landslipping in areas where ground waters lubricate the slip planes of the Mesozoic and Cenozoic sediments. West Dorset too.
Climate btw being one of the (many) things barely discussed in the UK election. Unless the EW candidates are all demanding public money for restitution works and doing a Cnut?
Very localised to the Undercliff, being Europe's largest urban development on a landslip; the Victorians were so eager to sample the air recommended by Queen Vic's doctor that they just threw up houses wherever they could build them.
After the wettest winter since the 1940s we've had at least ten landslips this year so far, including the major one that has closed, for at least the medium term, the main road into town. Indeed there are four roads into the town, one permanently closed to vehicle traffic after being ruptured by the landslip of 2014, one closed for the foreseeable due to this year's landslip, one closed temporarily while Southern Water repair the cracked sewer due to land movement (re-opening is imminent), and the last remaining access road, really just a country lane, was closed yesterday morning due to an accident involving a van and a motorcycle, such that for several hours you were all cut off.
So of course all the parties are campaigning for funding to protect the town. We already have £millions being spent on coastal defence works and more on a research project hoping to reduce the risk by pumping out groundwater from deep below the town.
Thganks, interesting. I will be interested to see the situation in West Dorset when we have a hols there. I see there are also landslips in other areas such as the dinosaur coast/Military Road but those are far from habitations and only bother the sheep and the odd road engineer.
I'm going to try this question again because only one person answered last night and their answer didn't make sense, and this is after all a betting site, and the situation still exists.
Why can I back Corbyn at 2.5 at multiple bookies when I am getting my lays matched at evens on Betfair?
I have been receiving emails from Labour every day of the campaign asking for donations.
Plus the national and local emails asking me to do this, that and the other.
It is much easier to just sit back and let Sir Philip shoot himself in the foot.
Well you will be pleased to know they are wasting it. In Guildford they have paid for ads covering the local buses for their candidate. In Guildford? Why?
Their candidate is also delivering and canvassing in one very small Labour enclave. Why isn't she in Aldershot?
This stuff just muddies the water. Labour are also claiming they are the challengers in Guildford and Woking yet there is no other activity, particularly Guildford. They haven't even sent out an addressed Royal Mail leaflet. Just one per house. Yet they pay for huge ads on buses!
The LDs are flooding these places so why are Labour wasting their resources and potentially cocking up the result.
They’ve been campaigning fairly actively in the Labour enclaves of South Shropshire as well.
One explanation given is they are working the enclave for the county elections. That seems stupid to me, unless you think you have neighbouring targets like Aldershot tied up and it doesn't explain the money spent on mega bus adverts specifically for the candidate.
So today Labour have the border of the Mailonline homepage
This is from a guide on online advertising
Buying ads to take over the homepage of MailOnline is the sort of thing you do when: - Your campaign budget is very healthy indeed - You're feeling pretty confident about the result - You want to block your opponents doing it and generally annoy them for the lolz.
And rumour is they have if all week until Thursday - and that Labour were very surprised the Tories hadn’t booked it
I commented last Sunday that labour had the border ads on the Mails ‘This is Money’ site.
I’m sure they will tomorrow too.
I was told this morning by Heathener, having posted the Mail’s opinion piece that the Mail and other newspapers are irrelevant. Now I’m hearing that Labour are spending a fortune advertising with the Mail.
I don’t understand - are Labour stupid and haven’t realised that the Mail is irrelevant now or is it actually still a very important opinion forming opportunity?
It's almost as if people on the left have different opinions.
I think the press has far less influence than a couple of decades back, but still not negligible. It's the casual reader online that these ads are aimed at rather than the hard-core print edition subscribers.
I'm going to try this question again because only one person answered last night and their answer didn't make sense, and this is after all a betting site, and the situation still exists.
Why can I back Corbyn at 2.5 at multiple bookies when I am getting my lays match at evens on Betfair?
Because the Corbynites are all on Betfair rather than the trad bookies? Congratulations on finding the arb.
The Mail’s editorial comment is saying what many of us thought it would. Don’t allow a “Starmageddon”, seriously don't vote reform, the Tories have actually done well under the circumstances. Labour will win but vote Tory to ensure a proper opposition to stop the worst of Starmer is a summary.
The Sun will likely say exactly the same and I’m guessing the Times, Telegraph and Express too. “Its lost but you need to still vote Tory to rein in Labour”.
Interesting that those Tory Papers so openly admit their current irrelevance. Be interesting to see which of them are no longer around in their current form when the next election happens
I was in London at the beginning of the week and was surprised how much puff stuff for Sunak there was in the Standard. Based on a sample of one day's issue.
They're fighting for their lives. I think we'll see a very different landscxape in Newspaper editorialising in the coming months if as expected The Tories are eviscerated. Poor old Paul Dacre came back just in time to put all his political capital into another loser. The Lords will be breathing a sigh of relief
Our local newspaper’s site has a big Reform banner. Can’t see the same in South Essex newspaper sites.
Little evidence of Reform activity otherwise; one leaflet, focused on immigration, which doesn’t seem to be an issue locally. No canvassers at home so far.
I'm going to try this question again because only one person answered last night and their answer didn't make sense, and this is after all a betting site, and the situation still exists.
Why can I back Corbyn at 2.5 at multiple bookies when I am getting my lays match at evens on Betfair?
Because the Corbynites are all on Betfair rather than the trad bookies? Congratulations on finding the arb.
Fill your boots, I'm three figures in, going to have to move money out of my instant access savings if I want to take more
I'm pleased, by the way, to see Labour's colour scheme this election. Red and white - or sometime red, white and blue - us both more pleasing to the eye and less threatening than the red and yellow they have traditionally used. I've been making this point for years - pleased to see they've finally come to the same conclusion.
Also good to see the flag on the MailOnline advert, something that other recent incarnations of the party would have hated with a passion.
Yes, it's featured on all leaflets and posters.
More tanks parked on Tory lawns.
The PLP is going to be very interesting next parliament, much less based around inner cities and their issues, much more on ordinary suburban and rural folk.
It will not be the same Labour Party that we are used to.
Possibly. Though it's not necessarily tge case that a PLP reflects the tone of its constituency as a whole. Small memberships make it easier for Momentum types to take over.
A lot of them have either returned to the SWP, infiltrated the Green Party or just been expelled. The membership has quite a different complexion to 5 years ago.
I would also just note that there is a huge difference between membership numbers and active membership numbers. It only takes a dozen like minded people to win a vote at a branch meeting in a branch with hundreds of members who never turn up.
I'm going to try this question again because only one person answered last night and their answer didn't make sense, and this is after all a betting site, and the situation still exists.
Why can I back Corbyn at 2.5 at multiple bookies when I am getting my lays match at evens on Betfair?
Because the Corbynites are all on Betfair rather than the trad bookies? Congratulations on finding the arb.
Fill your boots, I'm three figures in, going to have to move money out of my instant access savings if I want to take more
Now that you’ve mentioned it here, there will probably be lots of boots filled, and the arb will quickly disappear!
I have been receiving emails from Labour every day of the campaign asking for donations.
Plus the national and local emails asking me to do this, that and the other.
It is much easier to just sit back and let Sir Philip shoot himself in the foot.
Well you will be pleased to know they are wasting it. In Guildford they have paid for ads covering the local buses for their candidate. In Guildford? Why?
Their candidate is also delivering and canvassing in one very small Labour enclave. Why isn't she in Aldershot?
This stuff just muddies the water. Labour are also claiming they are the challengers in Guildford and Woking yet there is no other activity, particularly Guildford. They haven't even sent out an addressed Royal Mail leaflet. Just one per house. Yet they pay for huge ads on buses!
The LDs are flooding these places so why are Labour wasting their resources and potentially cocking up the result.
They’ve been campaigning fairly actively in the Labour enclaves of South Shropshire as well.
One explanation given is they are working the enclave for the county elections. That seems stupid to me, unless you think you have neighbouring targets like Aldershot tied up and it doesn't explain the money spent on mega bus adverts specifically for the candidate.
Many activists are parochial, and only want to work their own patch. And even though it is useless, it gives them a sense of self worth and a feeling of importance.
I'm going to try this question again because only one person answered last night and their answer didn't make sense, and this is after all a betting site, and the situation still exists.
Why can I back Corbyn at 2.5 at multiple bookies when I am getting my lays match at evens on Betfair?
Because the Corbynites are all on Betfair rather than the trad bookies? Congratulations on finding the arb.
Fill your boots, I'm three figures in, going to have to move money out of my instant access savings if I want to take more
Now that you’ve mentioned it here, there will probably be lots of boots filled, and the arb will quickly disappear!
I mentioned it last night though and it's still there! At the point I mentioned it last night there was an arb within the Betfair market itself! Bookies currently going 6/4: SpIn, Ladbrokes, Coral, Spreadex. Current available lay (but I'm getting matched lower) 2.18.
I'm pleased, by the way, to see Labour's colour scheme this election. Red and white - or sometime red, white and blue - us both more pleasing to the eye and less threatening than the red and yellow they have traditionally used. I've been making this point for years - pleased to see they've finally come to the same conclusion.
But, don't be fooled by it.
Sadly CR it appears that a plurality of the rest of the country will been “fooled” by it. We are clearly all idiots. You are the savant who can see through the lies. Problem is, though, that your campaign, latterly, that has suggested that the electorate are idiots for believing Labour hasn’t gone well. Still, your threat to leave the country if people don’t vote Tory will, I am sure, save at least a few seats.
I have been receiving emails from Labour every day of the campaign asking for donations.
Plus the national and local emails asking me to do this, that and the other.
It is much easier to just sit back and let Sir Philip shoot himself in the foot.
Well you will be pleased to know they are wasting it. In Guildford they have paid for ads covering the local buses for their candidate. In Guildford? Why?
Their candidate is also delivering and canvassing in one very small Labour enclave. Why isn't she in Aldershot?
This stuff just muddies the water. Labour are also claiming they are the challengers in Guildford and Woking yet there is no other activity, particularly Guildford. They haven't even sent out an addressed Royal Mail leaflet. Just one per house. Yet they pay for huge ads on buses!
The LDs are flooding these places so why are Labour wasting their resources and potentially cocking up the result.
They’ve been campaigning fairly actively in the Labour enclaves of South Shropshire as well.
One explanation given is they are working the enclave for the county elections. That seems stupid to me, unless you think you have neighbouring targets like Aldershot tied up and it doesn't explain the money spent on mega bus adverts specifically for the candidate.
Many activists are parochial, and only want to work their own patch. And even though it is useless, it gives them a sense of self worth and a feeling of importance.
Yes but the parachuted in candidate shouldn't be and is. I thought Labour had instructed them to go to targets.
And the ads? Money down the drain unless they are trying to screw around with the result here.
A big debate on Twitter - often amongst Democrats - about Biden’s alleged dementia. As they are discussing it - and using the D word - surely we can
Lots of them are desperate for him to step aside. One argument they are making is that dementia is not just about mumbling and slowing, which can indeed be handled by good advisors taking over most tasks. Some dementias turn you paranoid, angry, aggressive - they can make you hallucinate
Someone in that state simply cannot be POTUS. Not anywhere near it. Logically, Biden either has to prove he’s not got dementia or he has to go. If he doesn’t do either of these he is absolutely going to lose as Americans absorb this logic
I'm going to try this question again because only one person answered last night and their answer didn't make sense, and this is after all a betting site, and the situation still exists.
Why can I back Corbyn at 2.5 at multiple bookies when I am getting my lays matched at evens on Betfair?
Your counterparty on betfair may have already maxed out what the 2.5 bookie is prepared to allow them. I've only maxed out on a constituency bet once and that was letting me win £250.
The Mail’s editorial comment is saying what many of us thought it would. Don’t allow a “Starmageddon”, seriously don't vote reform, the Tories have actually done well under the circumstances. Labour will win but vote Tory to ensure a proper opposition to stop the worst of Starmer is a summary.
The Sun will likely say exactly the same and I’m guessing the Times, Telegraph and Express too. “Its lost but you need to still vote Tory to rein in Labour”.
Interesting that those Tory Papers so openly admit their current irrelevance. Be interesting to see which of them are no longer around in their current form when the next election happens
Telegraph and Mail are profitable for starters, successfully moving to subscription model. Times is profitable as well.
I would say the biggest liability is Reach group i.e. Mirror. Mirror is irrelevant, and they bought all those regional newspapers that are failing.
The raverage age of the readership of the Telegraph must be close to 100. Its rumoured Sheikh Mansour wants to turn it into a City fanzine
A big debate on Twitter - often amongst Democrats - about Biden’s alleged dementia. As they are discussing it - and using the D word - surely we can
Lots of them are desperate for him to step aside. One argument they are making is that dementia is not just about mumbling and slowing, which can indeed be handled by good advisors taking over most tasks. Some dementias turn you paranoid, angry, aggressive - they can make you hallucinate
Someone in that state simply cannot be POTUS. Not anywhere near it. Logically, Biden either has to prove he’s not got dementia or he has to go. If he doesn’t do either of these he is absolutely going to lose as Americans absorb this logic
Jon Stewart said Biden had 'Resting 25th Amendment face'.
A big debate on Twitter - often amongst Democrats - about Biden’s alleged dementia. As they are discussing it - and using the D word - surely we can
Lots of them are desperate for him to step aside. One argument they are making is that dementia is not just about mumbling and slowing, which can indeed be handled by good advisors taking over most tasks. Some dementias turn you paranoid, angry, aggressive - they can make you hallucinate
Someone in that state simply cannot be POTUS. Not anywhere near it. Logically, Biden either has to prove he’s not got dementia or he has to go. If he doesn’t do either of these he is absolutely going to lose as Americans absorb this logic
A big debate on Twitter - often amongst Democrats - about Biden’s alleged dementia. As they are discussing it - and using the D word - surely we can
Lots of them are desperate for him to step aside. One argument they are making is that dementia is not just about mumbling and slowing, which can indeed be handled by good advisors taking over most tasks. Some dementias turn you paranoid, angry, aggressive - they can make you hallucinate
Someone in that state simply cannot be POTUS. Not anywhere near it. Logically, Biden either has to prove he’s not got dementia or he has to go. If he doesn’t do either of these he is absolutely going to lose as Americans absorb this logic
This is the best argument against Biden having dementia. A key element of spotting dementia is usually that when someone exhibits a symptom, and it's pointed out, they get angry and defensive. Biden usually laughs it off, e.g. when he fell over a sandbag he immediately made a joke about "being sandbagged".
I have been receiving emails from Labour every day of the campaign asking for donations.
Plus the national and local emails asking me to do this, that and the other.
It is much easier to just sit back and let Sir Philip shoot himself in the foot.
Well you will be pleased to know they are wasting it. In Guildford they have paid for ads covering the local buses for their candidate. In Guildford? Why?
Their candidate is also delivering and canvassing in one very small Labour enclave. Why isn't she in Aldershot?
This stuff just muddies the water. Labour are also claiming they are the challengers in Guildford and Woking yet there is no other activity, particularly Guildford. They haven't even sent out an addressed Royal Mail leaflet. Just one per house. Yet they pay for huge ads on buses!
The LDs are flooding these places so why are Labour wasting their resources and potentially cocking up the result.
They’ve been campaigning fairly actively in the Labour enclaves of South Shropshire as well.
One explanation given is they are working the enclave for the county elections. That seems stupid to me, unless you think you have neighbouring targets like Aldershot tied up and it doesn't explain the money spent on mega bus adverts specifically for the candidate.
Many activists are parochial, and only want to work their own patch. And even though it is useless, it gives them a sense of self worth and a feeling of importance.
It's a great feature of parties at election time that action is intensely local, impossible to control from the centre, and at the local level it is not only Reform people that are blinkered and not very bright.
Take out: all the people who have a life, Swifties, everyone in the pub, and those following the Euros and 43 other major sporting matters, and ask who exactly is left to run the LD campaign in Bootle or Reform in Cambridge?
So today Labour have the border of the Mailonline homepage
This is from a guide on online advertising
Buying ads to take over the homepage of MailOnline is the sort of thing you do when: - Your campaign budget is very healthy indeed - You're feeling pretty confident about the result - You want to block your opponents doing it and generally annoy them for the lolz.
And rumour is they have if all week until Thursday - and that Labour were very surprised the Tories hadn’t booked it
I commented last Sunday that labour had the border ads on the Mails ‘This is Money’ site.
I’m sure they will tomorrow too.
I was told this morning by Heathener, having posted the Mail’s opinion piece that the Mail and other newspapers are irrelevant. Now I’m hearing that Labour are spending a fortune advertising with the Mail.
I don’t understand - are Labour stupid and haven’t realised that the Mail is irrelevant now or is it actually still a very important opinion forming opportunity?
The dead tree version of the Mail and its opinion pages and editorial line is largely irrelevant. It sells a fraction of what it once did, far fewer than that buy it for its politics coverage as opposed to the crossword and supplement stuff. Plus are very unrepresentative.
MailOnline is, however, one of the most read websites in the world as people love clicking on its odd and showbiz stories, which it publishes loads and loads of each day. So it's well worth booking up as you're reaching a much wider group of people than who read its editorial fulminations on the awfulness of Labour.
Any info about how Galloways lot are faring in the 150 or so seats they are standing in?
This is the great mystery. A 1% others vote share could, at the extreme, mean 40% in 20 constituencies. Some MRPs pick up some share for "Others" in places, but I'm not convinced they're fully across it.
Not seen a Muslim VI or a constituency VI with an Independent other than a couple of Corbyn ones.
My hunch is still that Labour lose a handful of seats to their left - not sure if Rochdale will be one of of them tbh - because I don't see how the pattern of the locals dissipates entirely given that pattern wasn't about a local issue. Of the 5 seats covering Kirklees, Dewsbury & Batley, which EC would have as the safest Labour seat, is the one I am least sure of a Labour victory in.
What I would say about WPGB, is they have selected seats by candidate volunteering, and as a result I don't think they have put up candidates in their strongest range of seats.
The polling yesterday on how different ethnic minorities are planning to vote seems to tell a story.
The various "left wing" parties that Galloway has started over the years have never done particularly well apart from the odd high profile seat. This time round I think they were hoping that Gaza would be a way in to a strong base of Muslim voters, but it doesn't look like it's worked.
YouGov instead found a huge spike in support for the Green party amongst people from Pakistan and Bangladesh.
The vote for 'others' is a little higher, but it was:
Labour 44 Green 29
And everyone else 10 or below.
The main reason people gave to the switch to Green, was Gaza. So Galloway was right, that Gaza could be a difference maker, but it's not looking like he's the one to benefit.
Wonder if this affects the Green vote significantly in any constituencies?
(p.s. Slight warning. There was polling in February of Muslim voters, which won't be a perfect match, but will be similar. That showed a much smaller switch to other parties and hardly any switch to Green. https://swingometer.substack.com/p/labour-and-muslim-voters)
I'm pleased, by the way, to see Labour's colour scheme this election. Red and white - or sometime red, white and blue - us both more pleasing to the eye and less threatening than the red and yellow they have traditionally used. I've been making this point for years - pleased to see they've finally come to the same conclusion.
But, don't be fooled by it.
I'm under no illusion that Labour won't be awful in multiple ways. But I am actually quite pleased that the significant numbers in their party who three years ago regarded any image of the British flag as horrific have been told to shush.
I'm really struggling to accept that some of the latest Survation MRP seat projections are even remotely plausible.
For example, Shropshire North. A seat currently held by LD MP Helen Morgan, with minor boundary changes only, after the 2021 by election with result LD 47, Con 32, Lab 10, Green 5, Reform 4. In those circumstances, even I have to admit that it's absolutely nailed on that the anti-Tory tactical vote will stay with the LDs. Yet Survation have the Conservatives regaining the seat with the LDs going from 1st to 4th place: Con 36, Lab 30, Reform 15, LD 10.
That's utter nonsense. Reality is reflected in the fact that you can't get better odds than 4/9 on for the LDs to win the seat.
Yes, MRPs can't take account of by-elections, tactical voting, etc. In reality the seat will be neck-and-neck between LD and Con.
I'm going to try this question again because only one person answered last night and their answer didn't make sense, and this is after all a betting site, and the situation still exists.
Why can I back Corbyn at 2.5 at multiple bookies when I am getting my lays matched at evens on Betfair?
Your counterparty on betfair may have already maxed out what the 2.5 bookie is prepared to allow them. I've only maxed out on a constituency bet once and that was letting me win £250.
The only bet I've ever maxed out on is the my bet on Aberdeenshire North and Moray East - think that costs Bet365 £660 if @RochdalePioneers pulls it off.
I'm pleased, by the way, to see Labour's colour scheme this election. Red and white - or sometime red, white and blue - us both more pleasing to the eye and less threatening than the red and yellow they have traditionally used. I've been making this point for years - pleased to see they've finally come to the same conclusion.
But, don't be fooled by it.
I'm under no illusion that Labour won't be awful in multiple ways. But I am actually quite pleased that the significant numbers in their party who three years ago regarded any image of the British flag as horrific have been told to shush.
And most of them, possibly with some swallowed grumbling, have shusshed. Because compromising to win gets you some of what you want. Purity generally gets you nothing.
Partly that's cause and effect. No party in the UK has enough intrinsic support to win without persuading at least some others on board. They have to reach out to get over the line.
But it also reflects the state of mind of a party. Winners are open and confident, because they're winning. For quite a while, the Conservatives have clearly carved opposition. It will give them the freedom to say what they like, because what they say won't matter.
They've had years when it's been quite apparent he's not up to the job when they could have quite happily lined up a successor, saying it's not unreasonable to elect a 78yo for four years but an 82yo might be pushing it. I don't understand why they've left it so late. Possibly it was fear of someone worse?
I'm going to try this question again because only one person answered last night and their answer didn't make sense, and this is after all a betting site, and the situation still exists.
Why can I back Corbyn at 2.5 at multiple bookies when I am getting my lays matched at evens on Betfair?
Your counterparty on betfair may have already maxed out what the 2.5 bookie is prepared to allow them. I've only maxed out on a constituency bet once and that was letting me win £250.
The only bet I've ever maxed out on is the my bet on Aberdeenshire North and Moray East - think that costs Bet365 £660 if @RochdalePioneers pulls it off.
A big debate on Twitter - often amongst Democrats - about Biden’s alleged dementia. As they are discussing it - and using the D word - surely we can
Lots of them are desperate for him to step aside. One argument they are making is that dementia is not just about mumbling and slowing, which can indeed be handled by good advisors taking over most tasks. Some dementias turn you paranoid, angry, aggressive - they can make you hallucinate
Someone in that state simply cannot be POTUS. Not anywhere near it. Logically, Biden either has to prove he’s not got dementia or he has to go. If he doesn’t do either of these he is absolutely going to lose as Americans absorb this logic
Jon Stewart said Biden had 'Resting 25th Amendment face'.
A big debate on Twitter - often amongst Democrats - about Biden’s alleged dementia. As they are discussing it - and using the D word - surely we can
Lots of them are desperate for him to step aside. One argument they are making is that dementia is not just about mumbling and slowing, which can indeed be handled by good advisors taking over most tasks. Some dementias turn you paranoid, angry, aggressive - they can make you hallucinate
Someone in that state simply cannot be POTUS. Not anywhere near it. Logically, Biden either has to prove he’s not got dementia or he has to go. If he doesn’t do either of these he is absolutely going to lose as Americans absorb this logic
But Biden has not shown any of those symptoms.
Trump however...
(No doubt something is wrong with Biden but there are plenty of other options. My partner reckons she knows what it is, and she works in old age psych)
Any info about how Galloways lot are faring in the 150 or so seats they are standing in?
This is the great mystery. A 1% others vote share could, at the extreme, mean 40% in 20 constituencies. Some MRPs pick up some share for "Others" in places, but I'm not convinced they're fully across it.
Not seen a Muslim VI or a constituency VI with an Independent other than a couple of Corbyn ones.
My hunch is still that Labour lose a handful of seats to their left - not sure if Rochdale will be one of of them tbh - because I don't see how the pattern of the locals dissipates entirely given that pattern wasn't about a local issue. Of the 5 seats covering Kirklees, Dewsbury & Batley, which EC would have as the safest Labour seat, is the one I am least sure of a Labour victory in.
What I would say about WPGB, is they have selected seats by candidate volunteering, and as a result I don't think they have put up candidates in their strongest range of seats.
The polling yesterday on how different ethnic minorities are planning to vote seems to tell a story.
The various "left wing" parties that Galloway has started over the years have never done particularly well apart from the odd high profile seat. This time round I think they were hoping that Gaza would be a way in to a strong base of Muslim voters, but it doesn't look like it's worked.
YouGov instead found a huge spike in support for the Green party amongst people from Pakistan and Bangladesh.
The vote for 'others' is a little higher, but it was:
Labour 44 Green 29
And everyone else 10 or below.
The main reason people gave to the switch to Green, was Gaza. So Galloway was right, that Gaza could be a difference maker, but it's not looking like he's the one to benefit.
Wonder if this affects the Green vote significantly in any constituencies?
(p.s. Slight warning. There was polling in February of Muslim voters, which won't be a perfect match, but will be similar. That showed a much smaller switch to other parties and hardly any switch to Green. https://swingometer.substack.com/p/labour-and-muslim-voters)
Maybe they're misunderstanding the sense of "Green". Or maybe the rest of us are.
On topic, I've had more Reform ads on Facebook than from the Conservatives.
And they don't come for free.
Are they targeted at people like you? I've not seen any.
I've only been getting Green and Labour ones on FB.
I have been getting Reform ones while shopping for some new binoculars* online and keeping up with football gossip in the Leicester Mercury. It's about the only political advertising that I have seen.
*I am toying with some image stabilised ones for birdwatching, the Canon 12x36 is perhaps, or something similar. Anyone on PB with any thoughts?
A big debate on Twitter - often amongst Democrats - about Biden’s alleged dementia. As they are discussing it - and using the D word - surely we can
Lots of them are desperate for him to step aside. One argument they are making is that dementia is not just about mumbling and slowing, which can indeed be handled by good advisors taking over most tasks. Some dementias turn you paranoid, angry, aggressive - they can make you hallucinate
Someone in that state simply cannot be POTUS. Not anywhere near it. Logically, Biden either has to prove he’s not got dementia or he has to go. If he doesn’t do either of these he is absolutely going to lose as Americans absorb this logic
This is the best argument against Biden having dementia. A key element of spotting dementia is usually that when someone exhibits a symptom, and it's pointed out, they get angry and defensive. Biden usually laughs it off, e.g. when he fell over a sandbag he immediately made a joke about "being sandbagged".
Why do people have to say he's got dementia when he's probably just fairly normal for someone approaching their mid 80s?
Any info about how Galloways lot are faring in the 150 or so seats they are standing in?
This is the great mystery. A 1% others vote share could, at the extreme, mean 40% in 20 constituencies. Some MRPs pick up some share for "Others" in places, but I'm not convinced they're fully across it.
Not seen a Muslim VI or a constituency VI with an Independent other than a couple of Corbyn ones.
My hunch is still that Labour lose a handful of seats to their left - not sure if Rochdale will be one of of them tbh - because I don't see how the pattern of the locals dissipates entirely given that pattern wasn't about a local issue. Of the 5 seats covering Kirklees, Dewsbury & Batley, which EC would have as the safest Labour seat, is the one I am least sure of a Labour victory in.
What I would say about WPGB, is they have selected seats by candidate volunteering, and as a result I don't think they have put up candidates in their strongest range of seats.
The polling yesterday on how different ethnic minorities are planning to vote seems to tell a story.
The various "left wing" parties that Galloway has started over the years have never done particularly well apart from the odd high profile seat. This time round I think they were hoping that Gaza would be a way in to a strong base of Muslim voters, but it doesn't look like it's worked.
YouGov instead found a huge spike in support for the Green party amongst people from Pakistan and Bangladesh.
The vote for 'others' is a little higher, but it was:
Labour 44 Green 29
And everyone else 10 or below.
The main reason people gave to the switch to Green, was Gaza. So Galloway was right, that Gaza could be a difference maker, but it's not looking like he's the one to benefit.
Wonder if this affects the Green vote significantly in any constituencies?
(p.s. Slight warning. There was polling in February of Muslim voters, which won't be a perfect match, but will be similar. That showed a much smaller switch to other parties and hardly any switch to Green. https://swingometer.substack.com/p/labour-and-muslim-voters)
Maybe they're misunderstanding the sense of "Green". Or maybe the rest of us are.
In some areas Greens did well in the Locals on a Gaza platform, I expect it starts there.
On topic, I've had more Reform ads on Facebook than from the Conservatives.
And they don't come for free.
Are they targeted at people like you? I've not seen any.
I've only been getting Green and Labour ones on FB.
I have been getting Reform ones while shopping for some new binoculars* online and keeping up with football gossip in the Leicester Mercury. It's about the only political advertising that I have seen.
*I am toying with some image stabilised ones for birdwatching, the Canon 12x36 is perhaps, or something similar. Anyone on PB with any thoughts?
There are about 5 people on here who set moth traps. A binocular discussion thread could take us all the way up to election day.
So today Labour have the border of the Mailonline homepage
This is from a guide on online advertising
Buying ads to take over the homepage of MailOnline is the sort of thing you do when: - Your campaign budget is very healthy indeed - You're feeling pretty confident about the result - You want to block your opponents doing it and generally annoy them for the lolz.
I'm going to try this question again because only one person answered last night and their answer didn't make sense, and this is after all a betting site, and the situation still exists.
Why can I back Corbyn at 2.5 at multiple bookies when I am getting my lays match at evens on Betfair?
Because the Corbynites are all on Betfair rather than the trad bookies? Congratulations on finding the arb.
Fill your boots, I'm three figures in, going to have to move money out of my instant access savings if I want to take more
Now that you’ve mentioned it here, there will probably be lots of boots filled, and the arb will quickly disappear!
I mentioned it last night though and it's still there! At the point I mentioned it last night there was an arb within the Betfair market itself! Bookies currently going 6/4: SpIn, Ladbrokes, Coral, Spreadex. Current available lay (but I'm getting matched lower) 2.18.
A big debate on Twitter - often amongst Democrats - about Biden’s alleged dementia. As they are discussing it - and using the D word - surely we can
Lots of them are desperate for him to step aside. One argument they are making is that dementia is not just about mumbling and slowing, which can indeed be handled by good advisors taking over most tasks. Some dementias turn you paranoid, angry, aggressive - they can make you hallucinate
Someone in that state simply cannot be POTUS. Not anywhere near it. Logically, Biden either has to prove he’s not got dementia or he has to go. If he doesn’t do either of these he is absolutely going to lose as Americans absorb this logic
This is the best argument against Biden having dementia. A key element of spotting dementia is usually that when someone exhibits a symptom, and it's pointed out, they get angry and defensive. Biden usually laughs it off, e.g. when he fell over a sandbag he immediately made a joke about "being sandbagged".
Why do people have to say he's got dementia when he's probably just fairly normal for someone approaching their mid 80s?
Because he isn't. That's a huge slur on all 80-something year olds, many of whom are sharp as a tack.
The Mail’s editorial comment is saying what many of us thought it would. Don’t allow a “Starmageddon”, seriously don't vote reform, the Tories have actually done well under the circumstances. Labour will win but vote Tory to ensure a proper opposition to stop the worst of Starmer is a summary.
The Sun will likely say exactly the same and I’m guessing the Times, Telegraph and Express too. “Its lost but you need to still vote Tory to rein in Labour”.
Interesting that those Tory Papers so openly admit their current irrelevance. Be interesting to see which of them are no longer around in their current form when the next election happens
I was in London at the beginning of the week and was surprised how much puff stuff for Sunak there was in the Standard. Based on a sample of one day's issue.
Isn't it still owned by the Tories Russian friends?
The Mail’s editorial comment is saying what many of us thought it would. Don’t allow a “Starmageddon”, seriously don't vote reform, the Tories have actually done well under the circumstances. Labour will win but vote Tory to ensure a proper opposition to stop the worst of Starmer is a summary.
The Sun will likely say exactly the same and I’m guessing the Times, Telegraph and Express too. “Its lost but you need to still vote Tory to rein in Labour”.
Interesting that those Tory Papers so openly admit their current irrelevance. Be interesting to see which of them are no longer around in their current form when the next election happens
Telegraph and Mail are profitable for starters, successfully moving to subscription model. Times is profitable as well.
I would say the biggest liability is Reach group i.e. Mirror. Mirror is irrelevant, and they bought all those regional newspapers that are failing.
The raverage age of the readership of the Telegraph must be close to 100. Its rumoured Sheikh Mansour wants to turn it into a City fanzine
I thought it was stuffed and has definitely gone downhill, but when we have discussed this previously have on here, have been reliably informed their move to paywall has gone surprisingly well and making money. 100 year olds don't generally know how to use ipads, so i think they have attracted those over who a tad younger than than that are capable of ipad usage.
On topic, I've had more Reform ads on Facebook than from the Conservatives.
And they don't come for free.
Are they targeted at people like you? I've not seen any.
I've only been getting Green and Labour ones on FB.
I have been getting Reform ones while shopping for some new binoculars* online and keeping up with football gossip in the Leicester Mercury. It's about the only political advertising that I have seen.
*I am toying with some image stabilised ones for birdwatching, the Canon 12x36 is perhaps, or something similar. Anyone on PB with any thoughts?
My personal hunch is that the Greens might get one of the IoW seats, with perhaps East being more likely.
A big debate on Twitter - often amongst Democrats - about Biden’s alleged dementia. As they are discussing it - and using the D word - surely we can
Lots of them are desperate for him to step aside. One argument they are making is that dementia is not just about mumbling and slowing, which can indeed be handled by good advisors taking over most tasks. Some dementias turn you paranoid, angry, aggressive - they can make you hallucinate
Someone in that state simply cannot be POTUS. Not anywhere near it. Logically, Biden either has to prove he’s not got dementia or he has to go. If he doesn’t do either of these he is absolutely going to lose as Americans absorb this logic
This is the best argument against Biden having dementia. A key element of spotting dementia is usually that when someone exhibits a symptom, and it's pointed out, they get angry and defensive. Biden usually laughs it off, e.g. when he fell over a sandbag he immediately made a joke about "being sandbagged".
Why do people have to say he's got dementia when he's probably just fairly normal for someone approaching their mid 80s?
Please record my objection to this ageist comment.
I'm really struggling to accept that some of the latest Survation MRP seat projections are even remotely plausible.
For example, Shropshire North. A seat currently held by LD MP Helen Morgan, with minor boundary changes only, after the 2021 by election with result LD 47, Con 32, Lab 10, Green 5, Reform 4. In those circumstances, even I have to admit that it's absolutely nailed on that the anti-Tory tactical vote will stay with the LDs. Yet Survation have the Conservatives regaining the seat with the LDs going from 1st to 4th place: Con 36, Lab 30, Reform 15, LD 10.
That's utter nonsense. Reality is reflected in the fact that you can't get better odds than 4/9 on for the LDs to win the seat.
It could be that MRP is good when voting blocs are essentially demographically binary, and based around Leave/Remain as they were in GE2017 and GE2019, but otherwise somewhat limited and unable to deal with a complex election like this.
This time, I'm taking them with a pinch of salt.
Tactical voting breaks MRPs in two separate ways.
Let's recap why MRPs previously did well - they picked up the change in support that had the Tories ahead of Labour in social class C2DE, and projected that onto relevant seats, so that we could see Sedgefield going Tory, and Canterbury going Labour.
So they work well when, say, a sandal-wearing university academic is reliably going to vote Lib Dem, a young mother in her 30s will reliably vote Labour, and a pensioner who owns their home outright will reliably vote Tory, whichever constituency they are in. See how many of each demographic are in each seat and - bingo! - you get an accurate prediction of seats won.
But, when the sandal-wearing academics are prepared to vote Labour in some seats, and Lib Dem in others, as an anti-Tory tactical vote, and the young mothers likewise, then that messes up the base data. It looks like the Lib Dems have lost support among sandal-wearers, and increased support among mothers, and so the MRP will apply those changes even to seats where the Lib Dems aren't the tactical vote option.
Now, you might try to decompose your base data on the basis of whether the seat is a Labour or Lib Dem target, but then you're assuming the voters have perfect knowledge of what the optimal tactical vote option is, and they don't.
Tactical voting breaks MRPs.
And the people doing them know this, of course, and they have various ways of trying to 'fix' it.
Yougov relies on its panel being so big, and its having so much background data on them, that it factors in the responses from the panellists who actually live in the seat. But even with a giant national panel, they will only have about a hundred people in each seat, giving an MOE of about +/- 10%. Better than nothing, and having people's past voting behaviour helps since a change of vote is an actual swing, rather than just a sampling error, but it's susceptible to both random and systemic error - one example was YouGov suggesting the East Devon Indy was running the Tories close last time.
All of them, I think, factor in actual past election results, which in a sense is 'cheating' by creating a circularity that risks normalcy bias. But clearly it helps with things like sorting Labour from LibDem targets based on campaigning history and local factors, which any demographic model would struggle with. But again there are risks - the North Shropshire issue discussed early this morning probably arises because that MRP has used the last GE results as its 'crib' and ignored the subsequent by-election.
The key is to remember that we're looking (mostly) at a national model, not a seat-by-seat poll - the trouble is that the way the data is presented, with maps and such enticing seat-by-seat data, makes it look like the latter. It would be more honest, if less fun, for them just to present the predicted national seat totals and leave out all the local data behind it. Most of us are clued up on these issues, but I know from comments about my seat in the media and social media that most ordinary folk think these predictions are some sort of local poll.
IoW East is looking to be one of the most interesting seats. It looks a 3 way between Lab, Con and Reform to me. Any thoughts?
Or four-way with the Greens, who are recommended as the tactical choice by the local primary campaign. They're working hard to give traction to their relatively late recommendation, but will probably struggle to reach many armchair voters given the focus on street stalls and the like. That said, the Greens are winning the poster war, such as it is. There's also a drive on social media for "red west, green east" with vote swapping and the like.
There's not much hard evidence of Reform gaining traction, but there's a lot of activity on social media and given the demographics and a candidate whose not a total nutjob, they will probably pull in a decent vote. But there's no ground campaign and I don't think they can win unless there's a further big move to Reform.
All the polls and models point to a Labour win, but I'd still be surprised, particularly given such a poor candidate choice, and therefore the money probably sits on a Tory hold, with a Labour gain in the west if they maintain their poll lead.
Thanks, Mrs Foxy's relatives are all in the East, in Lake, Bembridge, St Helens and Wootton Bridge, so I have an interest there, particularly as Mrs Foxy wants to move there when she can finally prise me out of Leicester.
Just be careful where you buy your house, though your local contac ts will help. One hopes it is less of a concern than Ventnor/Sandown. The climatic changes are going to mean more landslipping in areas where ground waters lubricate the slip planes of the Mesozoic and Cenozoic sediments. West Dorset too.
Climate btw being one of the (many) things barely discussed in the UK election. Unless the EW candidates are all demanding public money for restitution works and doing a Cnut?
Mrs Foxy loves Bembridge, and I like it too. Lovely harbour for my dayboat would swing it for me.
A shame its very Tory
Foxy is someone who secretly desperately to be a Tory.
I could vote Tory again if it reverted to being socially liberal, pro-europe and keen on sound money, as it was in 2010, the only time I have voted Tory in a GE.
A big debate on Twitter - often amongst Democrats - about Biden’s alleged dementia. As they are discussing it - and using the D word - surely we can
Lots of them are desperate for him to step aside. One argument they are making is that dementia is not just about mumbling and slowing, which can indeed be handled by good advisors taking over most tasks. Some dementias turn you paranoid, angry, aggressive - they can make you hallucinate
Someone in that state simply cannot be POTUS. Not anywhere near it. Logically, Biden either has to prove he’s not got dementia or he has to go. If he doesn’t do either of these he is absolutely going to lose as Americans absorb this logic
This is the best argument against Biden having dementia. A key element of spotting dementia is usually that when someone exhibits a symptom, and it's pointed out, they get angry and defensive. Biden usually laughs it off, e.g. when he fell over a sandbag he immediately made a joke about "being sandbagged".
Why do people have to say he's got dementia when he's probably just fairly normal for someone approaching their mid 80s?
Please record my objection to this ageist comment.
Yes quite. We are all conditioned to think dementia inevitable. Of the aged 85+ people I know well enough to have an opinion about the large majority show no symptoms whatsoever.
Supporters of Reform on here. Assuming you want your “party” to control the executive and legislature does not the simple statement in the below link worry you about the democratic credentials of your man?
If a man controls a “party” (in this case a limited company of said man who owns 8 out of its 13 shares) which has a majority in the Commons I would imagine that the principle of pleasing the leader is becomes the imperative.
A big debate on Twitter - often amongst Democrats - about Biden’s alleged dementia. As they are discussing it - and using the D word - surely we can
Lots of them are desperate for him to step aside. One argument they are making is that dementia is not just about mumbling and slowing, which can indeed be handled by good advisors taking over most tasks. Some dementias turn you paranoid, angry, aggressive - they can make you hallucinate
Someone in that state simply cannot be POTUS. Not anywhere near it. Logically, Biden either has to prove he’s not got dementia or he has to go. If he doesn’t do either of these he is absolutely going to lose as Americans absorb this logic
But Biden has not shown any of those symptoms.
Trump however...
(No doubt something is wrong with Biden but there are plenty of other options. My partner reckons she knows what it is, and she works in old age psych)
Apart from Matt, the only regular part of the Telegraph i enjoy these days is the comedy column.... otherwise known as that weird money column where people on £100k a year with an expense account claim poverty, driving instructors claim to spend £25k on motor racing, etc.
I could vote Tory again if it reverted to being socially liberal, pro-europe and keen on sound money, as it was in 2010, the only time I have voted Tory in a GE.
I reckon that is a never again.
I could vote Tory again too if they decide to appeal to younger voters.
So that would mean giving up their silly pro-NIMBY approach to house building, accepting railways being publicly owned, supporting actual planning reform and not thinking that every young voter is a thick leftie snowflake.
But based on the comments here that party seems dead. And the people left don't seem to want to come back to me. This is why I am more confident the Tories be be out for a decade.
It's fascinating how this Farage /actor story is leading the news. It obvious that the man was not employed as an actor but was an activist for the Party. The only extraordinary thing is Farage's ineptitude which has kept the story bubbling for three days.
It could be that he knows his voters and believes all publicity is good publicity but I doubt it.
The thing about Reform voters is that they won't see themselves as nasty racists and won't like themselves to be painted that way. This I would guess will lose him votes. Maybe bigtime.
Apart from Matt, the only regular part of the Telegraph i enjoy these days if the comedy column.... otherwise known as that weird money column where people on £100k a year with an expense account claim poverty, driving instructors claim to spend £25k on motor racing, etc.
Its genius parody stuff.
I think the Times does a similar one and it's always rich people complaining about having to cut back to fewer holidays a year.
Supporters of Reform on here. Assuming you want your “party” to control the executive and legislature does not the simple statement in the below link worry you about the democratic credentials of your man?
If a man controls a “party” (in this case a limited company of said man who owns 8 out of its 13 shares) which has a majority in the Commons I would imagine that the principle of pleasing the leader is becomes the imperative.
Would a limited company be allowed to act as a 'party' in the Commons? If they win seats might it be the case that they are forced to change their party structure?
This is why the Tories are where they are. The worst thing they can suggest Labour will do, is what they themselves have already done!
If the Tories are going to go in this direction SKS will get a decade.
It is not too late to go back to the centre but the Tories will have to accept things that Labour are going to do, e.g. spending more and not privatising things. We've had enough of that.
Apart from Matt, the only regular part of the Telegraph i enjoy these days if the comedy column.... otherwise known as that weird money column where people on £100k a year with an expense account claim poverty, driving instructors claim to spend £25k on motor racing, etc.
Its genius parody stuff.
I think the Times does a similar one and it's always rich people complaining about having to cut back to fewer holidays a year.
The Telegraph one is funny because the idea is every day tales of regular people jobs / lives over the course of a week...yeah totally normal that a bloke is by day teaching 17 year olds clutch control, by night international racing driver.... definitely not bank of mum and dad.
Supporters of Reform on here. Assuming you want your “party” to control the executive and legislature does not the simple statement in the below link worry you about the democratic credentials of your man?
If a man controls a “party” (in this case a limited company of said man who owns 8 out of its 13 shares) which has a majority in the Commons I would imagine that the principle of pleasing the leader is becomes the imperative.
Would a limited company be allowed to act as a 'party' in the Commons? If they win seats might it be the case that they are forced to change their party structure?
Are the Tories still pleased that Cameron saw off Nick Clegg's AV voting proposals?
LOL.
My expectation is that they'd do even worse under AV. It would ensure tactical voting against them is maximised, and I don't buy the line that those voting Reform are going to put the Tories 2nd preference.
A big debate on Twitter - often amongst Democrats - about Biden’s alleged dementia. As they are discussing it - and using the D word - surely we can
Lots of them are desperate for him to step aside. One argument they are making is that dementia is not just about mumbling and slowing, which can indeed be handled by good advisors taking over most tasks. Some dementias turn you paranoid, angry, aggressive - they can make you hallucinate
Someone in that state simply cannot be POTUS. Not anywhere near it. Logically, Biden either has to prove he’s not got dementia or he has to go. If he doesn’t do either of these he is absolutely going to lose as Americans absorb this logic
But Biden has not shown any of those symptoms.
Trump however...
(No doubt something is wrong with Biden but there are plenty of other options. My partner reckons she knows what it is, and she works in old age psych)
Biden is just old, I'm not really sure where this analysis of dementia has come from, he doesn't show any of the signs I am familiar with at all.
I am not trying to be partisan - although I do think Trump is an awful candidate - but Trump genuinely does show signs that I am familiar with.
I may well be wrong - but I do think people are overlooking Trump's actual decline in the last two years and how remarkable that is.
A big debate on Twitter - often amongst Democrats - about Biden’s alleged dementia. As they are discussing it - and using the D word - surely we can
Lots of them are desperate for him to step aside. One argument they are making is that dementia is not just about mumbling and slowing, which can indeed be handled by good advisors taking over most tasks. Some dementias turn you paranoid, angry, aggressive - they can make you hallucinate
Someone in that state simply cannot be POTUS. Not anywhere near it. Logically, Biden either has to prove he’s not got dementia or he has to go. If he doesn’t do either of these he is absolutely going to lose as Americans absorb this logic
But Biden has not shown any of those symptoms.
Trump however...
(No doubt something is wrong with Biden but there are plenty of other options. My partner reckons she knows what it is, and she works in old age psych)
So what is it?
Parkinson's (but with no tremor), but they aren't giving him the full whack of medication because the side effects would be too obvious. Would explain the on/off days.
Anyone know what polls we can expect this weekend?
Usually it's a quiet time for them but I imagine the papers will want a last shot at it.
Opinium and Savanta tonight at least, probably some others. MRP wise, Focaldata and YouGov update Monday, Survation Tuesday but I guess the others will also at some point before Tues/Weds so perhaps this weekend? YouGov will have run a normal Times poll that wasn't reported yesterday so that will emerge at some point, likely today given Mondays MRP update
A big debate on Twitter - often amongst Democrats - about Biden’s alleged dementia. As they are discussing it - and using the D word - surely we can
Lots of them are desperate for him to step aside. One argument they are making is that dementia is not just about mumbling and slowing, which can indeed be handled by good advisors taking over most tasks. Some dementias turn you paranoid, angry, aggressive - they can make you hallucinate
Someone in that state simply cannot be POTUS. Not anywhere near it. Logically, Biden either has to prove he’s not got dementia or he has to go. If he doesn’t do either of these he is absolutely going to lose as Americans absorb this logic
But Biden has not shown any of those symptoms.
Trump however...
(No doubt something is wrong with Biden but there are plenty of other options. My partner reckons she knows what it is, and she works in old age psych)
So what is it?
Parkinson's (but with no tremor), but they aren't giving him the full whack of medication because the side effects would be too obvious. Would explain the on/off days.
Comments
Not seen a Muslim VI or a constituency VI with an Independent other than a couple of Corbyn ones.
My hunch is still that Labour lose a handful of seats to their left - not sure if Rochdale will be one of of them tbh - because I don't see how the pattern of the locals dissipates entirely given that pattern wasn't about a local issue. Of the 5 seats covering Kirklees, Dewsbury & Batley, which EC would have as the safest Labour seat, is the one I am least sure of a Labour victory in.
What I would say about WPGB, is they have selected seats by candidate volunteering, and as a result I don't think they have put up candidates in their strongest range of seats.
I've not seen any.
I don’t understand - are Labour stupid and haven’t realised that the Mail is irrelevant now or is it actually still a very important opinion forming opportunity?
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/jun/27/tories-terrified-labour-supermajority-labour-wary
The bigger a parliamentary party, the smaller chance MPs have of becoming ministers, or even of feeling sufficiently appreciated by the prime minister for supporting him or her in the Commons. Rebelling against the government feels less risky, moreover, when it has a seemingly impregnable majority. If Labour is in power for the foreseeable future, faced with a shrunken, divided and discredited Conservative party, the discipline that Starmer’s leadership instilled in most of his MPs in more challenging times may begin to break down – as it eventually did during Tony Blair’s long premiership.
If I were of a progressive bent and had donated to Labour, I’d be apoplectic that my money was going to the Daily Mail. Sure, you can make the case it’s good campaigning, but it also seems like a way to wind up a lot of your supporters. But I guess Starmer is way past that point now.
https://x.com/wesstreeting/status/1806962752725954849
Vested interests in Big Tobacco might have a stranglehold on the Conservative Party, but they won’t choke off Labour’s Smoking Bill.
If you vote for change on Thursday, you’ll be voting for our first ever smoke-free generation.
Vote Labour.
Why can I back Corbyn at 2.5 at multiple bookies when I am getting my lays matched at evens on Betfair?
I'd want much better than 100/1, quite frankly.
I think the press has far less influence than a couple of decades back, but still not negligible. It's the casual reader online that these ads are aimed at rather than the hard-core print edition subscribers.
Our local newspaper’s site has a big Reform banner. Can’t see the same in South Essex newspaper sites.
Little evidence of Reform activity otherwise; one leaflet, focused on immigration, which doesn’t seem to be an issue locally. No canvassers at home so far.
She went for Reform, as I instructed her
I would also just note that there is a huge difference between membership numbers and active membership numbers. It only takes a dozen like minded people to win a vote at a branch meeting in a branch with hundreds of members who never turn up.
I can't wait to see how the plot subsequently unfolds.
And the ads? Money down the drain unless they are trying to screw around with the result here.
Lots of them are desperate for him to step aside. One argument they are making is that dementia is not just about mumbling and slowing, which can indeed be handled by good advisors taking over most tasks. Some dementias turn you paranoid, angry, aggressive - they can make you hallucinate
Someone in that state simply cannot be POTUS. Not anywhere near it. Logically, Biden either has to prove he’s not got dementia or he has to go. If he doesn’t do either of these he is absolutely going to lose as Americans absorb this logic
Take out: all the people who have a life, Swifties, everyone in the pub, and those following the Euros and 43 other major sporting matters, and ask who exactly is left to run the LD campaign in Bootle or Reform in Cambridge?
MailOnline is, however, one of the most read websites in the world as people love clicking on its odd and showbiz stories, which it publishes loads and loads of each day. So it's well worth booking up as you're reaching a much wider group of people than who read its editorial fulminations on the awfulness of Labour.
The various "left wing" parties that Galloway has started over the years have never done particularly well apart from the odd high profile seat. This time round I think they were hoping that Gaza would be a way in to a strong base of Muslim voters, but it doesn't look like it's worked.
YouGov instead found a huge spike in support for the Green party amongst people from Pakistan and Bangladesh.
The vote for 'others' is a little higher, but it was:
Labour 44
Green 29
And everyone else 10 or below.
The main reason people gave to the switch to Green, was Gaza. So Galloway was right, that Gaza could be a difference maker, but it's not looking like he's the one to benefit.
https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/49877-ethnic-minority-britons-at-the-2024-general-election
Wonder if this affects the Green vote significantly in any constituencies?
(p.s. Slight warning. There was polling in February of Muslim voters, which won't be a perfect match, but will be similar. That showed a much smaller switch to other parties and hardly any switch to Green. https://swingometer.substack.com/p/labour-and-muslim-voters)
Partly that's cause and effect. No party in the UK has enough intrinsic support to win without persuading at least some others on board. They have to reach out to get over the line.
But it also reflects the state of mind of a party. Winners are open and confident, because they're winning. For quite a while, the Conservatives have clearly carved opposition. It will give them the freedom to say what they like, because what they say won't matter.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/us/politics/2024/06/28/democrats-urge-joe-biden-drop-out-election/
They've had years when it's been quite apparent he's not up to the job when they could have quite happily lined up a successor, saying it's not unreasonable to elect a 78yo for four years but an 82yo might be pushing it. I don't understand why they've left it so late.
Possibly it was fear of someone worse?
Stewart roasting the pair of them for 15 minutes, now has more than 7m views in 24 hours.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SJr44m-w1Y
Trump however...
(No doubt something is wrong with Biden but there are plenty of other options. My partner reckons she knows what it is, and she works in old age psych)
Or maybe the rest of us are.
*I am toying with some image stabilised ones for birdwatching, the Canon 12x36 is perhaps, or something similar. Anyone on PB with any thoughts?
Oh, the conservative Supreme Court did away with campaign finance restrictions.
Money = free speech, apparently.
I reckon that is a never again.
This is why the Tories are where they are. The worst thing they can suggest Labour will do, is what they themselves have already done!
https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/11694875/persons-with-significant-control
If a man controls a “party” (in this case a limited company of said man who owns 8 out of its 13 shares) which has a majority in the Commons I would imagine that the principle of pleasing the leader is becomes the imperative.
Its genius parody stuff.
So that would mean giving up their silly pro-NIMBY approach to house building, accepting railways being publicly owned, supporting actual planning reform and not thinking that every young voter is a thick leftie snowflake.
But based on the comments here that party seems dead. And the people left don't seem to want to come back to me. This is why I am more confident the Tories be be out for a decade.
It could be that he knows his voters and believes all publicity is good publicity but I doubt it.
The thing about Reform voters is that they won't see themselves as nasty racists and won't like themselves to be painted that way. This I would guess will lose him votes. Maybe bigtime.
Usually it's a quiet time for them but I imagine the papers will want a last shot at it.
It is not too late to go back to the centre but the Tories will have to accept things that Labour are going to do, e.g. spending more and not privatising things. We've had enough of that.
LOL.
I am not trying to be partisan - although I do think Trump is an awful candidate - but Trump genuinely does show signs that I am familiar with.
I may well be wrong - but I do think people are overlooking Trump's actual decline in the last two years and how remarkable that is.
MRP wise, Focaldata and YouGov update Monday, Survation Tuesday but I guess the others will also at some point before Tues/Weds so perhaps this weekend? YouGov will have run a normal Times poll that wasn't reported yesterday so that will emerge at some point, likely today given Mondays MRP update