politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A worrying trend for Ed Miliband’s team: Labour’s 2010 Lib
Comments
-
TBF it was the First Ukranian Front that opened the gates, and the Soviet forces included a great number of non Russian troops.Sunil_Prasannan said:
Almost as bad as that Polish chap saying the Ukrainians liberated Auschwitz?TheScreamingEagles said:Yer what? Is Morris Dancer their historical adviser ?
French rewrite Battle of Waterloo to cast Napoleon as the victor
Re-enactment of 1815 conflict will seek to portray French military leader as a hero
The French are seeking to rewrite history by claiming that Napoleon Bonaparte was a “political virtuoso” who all but won the Battle of Waterloo.
A large-scale re-enactment to mark this year’s bicentenary of the conflict will paint Napoleon as a hero.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/11373655/French-rewrite-Battle-of-Waterloo-to-cast-Napoleon-as-the-victor.html0 -
That rather depends how many, or rather how few seats the LibDems finish up with. As I posted last night, William Hill, no slouches they, have the Yellows priced up at surprisingly short odds of only 11/4 on them winning between 11 - 20 seats.Pulpstar said:
What are these 20 gains ?audreyanne said:By the way, if my suggestions yesterday are right about 20+ Conservative gains from the yellows then they don't need to be 11.4% ahead of Labour in England …
Don't ignore the fallen LibDem share. It's one of the big game changers this time round.
I just don't see where you get anywhere near 20 gains from lib Dem.
Assuming a mid point of 16 seats, this would mean them losing approximately 40 of their existing seats. Were the SNP to win say 8 of their Scottish seats, that would mean 32 losses elsewhere. Split these equally say between Lab & Con and both parties would gain around 16 seats. Unlikely yes, but just possible if one believes the betting markets.0 -
Napoleon won the Battle of Auschwitz and The Soviets liberated Austerlitz.0
-
Sure, there were Ukrainian soldiers there. But the majority were Russian. And dozens of other nationalities, including Poles. The “Ukrainian Front” was a mere geographical/military marker that had precisely nothing to do with ethnicity.foxinsoxuk said:
TBF it was the First Ukranian Front that opened the gates, and the Soviet forces included a great number of non Russian troops.Sunil_Prasannan said:
Almost as bad as that Polish chap saying the Ukrainians liberated Auschwitz?TheScreamingEagles said:Yer what? Is Morris Dancer their historical adviser ?
French rewrite Battle of Waterloo to cast Napoleon as the victor
Re-enactment of 1815 conflict will seek to portray French military leader as a hero
The French are seeking to rewrite history by claiming that Napoleon Bonaparte was a “political virtuoso” who all but won the Battle of Waterloo.
A large-scale re-enactment to mark this year’s bicentenary of the conflict will paint Napoleon as a hero.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/11373655/French-rewrite-Battle-of-Waterloo-to-cast-Napoleon-as-the-victor.html
If one were really into beans-counting, the purely military contribution of Russians substantially outweighed that of Ukrainians – both in terms of their presence in the Red Army, and their military losses (this is, of course, after adjusting for relative population sizes). There is nothing political about this; it was just a logical consequence of Ukraine being occupied for the first half of the war, and being unable to contribute conscripts.
Incidentally, what makes this all the more ironic is that Poroshenko, as the President of the Maidan, represents many of the ideological descendents of Ukraine’s collaborationist forces – the same ones who killed and ethnically cleansed the Poles and Jews who had previously constituted a majority in West Ukraine’s cities during the antebellum period. And who are even now, as they have been these past two decades, busy rewriting Ukrainian history textbooks to whitewash the role of the UPA.
It just shows Poland in their true light really, and it is not pleasant.0 -
off thread
its not often my gob is well and truly smacked but I read today that the av serving of Crunchy nut cornflakes (kellogs ) was equivalent to eating NINE spoonful's of sugar. That's 63 spoonful's a week
Frankly I am appalled .
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2929178/The-kids-cereals-sugar-one-bowl-7-chocolate-fingers-products-contain-three-years-ago-despite-advice-cut-amounts.html0 -
I am available to be a 21st century Madame Napoleon, what with him being my 4-greats-grandfather.TheScreamingEagles said:Yer what? Is Morris Dancer their historical adviser ?
French rewrite Battle of Waterloo to cast Napoleon as the victor
Re-enactment of 1815 conflict will seek to portray French military leader as a hero
The French are seeking to rewrite history by claiming that Napoleon Bonaparte was a “political virtuoso” who all but won the Battle of Waterloo.
A large-scale re-enactment to mark this year’s bicentenary of the conflict will paint Napoleon as a hero.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/11373655/French-rewrite-Battle-of-Waterloo-to-cast-Napoleon-as-the-victor.html
The historical irony of such a person holding a British passport would, I'm sure, be much appreciated by the French.
0 -
If the yellow peril hold onto 3 Scottish seats then they'll have more than 20 nationally.peter_from_putney said:
That rather depends how many, or rather how few seats the LibDems finish up with. As I posted last night, William Hill, no slouches they, have the Yellows priced up at surprisingly short odds of ony 11/4 on them winning between 11 - 20 seats.Pulpstar said:
What are these 20 gains ?audreyanne said:By the way, if my suggestions yesterday are right about 20+ Conservative gains from the yellows then they don't need to be 11.4% ahead of Labour in England …
Don't ignore the fallen LibDem share. It's one of the big game changers this time round.
I just don't see where you get anywhere near 20 gains from lib Dem.
Assuming a mid point of 16 seats, this would mean them losing approximately 40 of their existing seats. Were the SNP to win say 8 of their Scottish seats, that would mean 32 losses elsewhere. Split these equally say between Lab & Con and both parties would gain around 16 seats. Unlikely yes, but just possible if one believes the betting markets.0 -
Absolutely right. It's quite fun contemplating the weighting to be applied to the different reasons; I said back in 2011 that Miliband's behaviour over the hacking scandal would come back to haunt him (while the media barons seethed at Cameron for caving into a public enquiry, Miliband's opportunism and glee was in their eyes unforgivable). But in truth I think the largest part is the simple realisation that Miliband is not good enough to be prime minister, his front bench is weak and his party does not have a coherent policy platform. The energy price freeze was a wake up call to political journalists on the right that the modern political consensus is not permanent, and that Miliband could inadvertently do great damage. Meanwhile Miliband's former supporters in the left wing press, never particularly vocal, have all but ceased trying to persuade themselves or their readers that Labour offers a credible alternative or an attractive vision. If the current polling trend continues (and remember, we are reading a lot into what could be a blip, as well as the long term trend) we are surely only a couple of weeks away from a Guardian-led attempt to pull together the disparate forces of the left into an anti-tory umbrella movement. Short of black swans, it may be the left's last card.Tissue_Price said:
The media - and I don't just mean the "Tory propaganda machine" side of it beloved by CiF commenters - clearly don't rate Ed (or Burnham, for that matter, whose position is nakedly opportunistic).Morris_Dancer said:Miss Cyclefree, a fair point it's hardly must-watch TV. However, amongst its declining audience are many people who write for newspapers and won't be shy pointing out how poor Burnham was.
Whether that's Leveson-related, or Syria-related, or simply contempt for his extraordinarily complacent "35% strategy", I don't know.
What I do expect is that they will act on this judgement over the next 99 days. All the more so if it looks like he's going to lose.0 -
Spain prints it own notes.MaxPB said:
I have been toying with the idea of investing in De La Rue. Close to their year low, and if Greece exit and make through to the other side, Italy and Spain won't be far behind, especially if Podemos in Spain continue to make inroads as they have done in the last few months. Could be a nice bit of business for them over the next couple of years.rcs1000 said:I think it's quite a difficult thing to keep secret!
Firstly, there are relatively few companies capable of printing large quantities of banknotes, De La Rue PLC is probably the biggest. And they don't have hundreds of bank note printing machines lying idle, ready to use.
Secondly, it's actually quite an involved process. You need to get designs made, and you need them to be difficult to forge and easy to recognise.
Thirdly, people talk.0 -
Yes I'm PB's history man. My knowledge is unparalleled.logical_song said:
TSE, you're the history man, but wasn't Wellington saved by the Germans arriving at the last minute? (Bluecher)TheScreamingEagles said:The Battle of Waterloo should be David Cameron's template for our EU renegotiations.
A Tory Prime Minister leading a vast European Alliance to give the French a damn good thrashing.
This short 3 min video explains what happened at Waterloo.
http://youtu.be/Sj_9CiNkkn40 -
I see the chances of the Lib Dems going below 20 seats as fairly remote (and the chances of them getting above 40 likewise). Backing both 21-30 and 31-40 on the seat bands looks like a reasonably safe way of getting something like a 40% return on your money in 99 days.0
-
I'm also on Jim Murphy and I raise you David Miliband.antifrank said:
Having recently put all my betting slips into good order, I regret to say that Jim Murphy and Harriet Harman are among my preferred successors to Ed Miliband.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, I hope so, both for political and betting reasons.Tissue_Price said:
There's still time for them to do that, post-Ed.Richard_Nabavi said:Still, every cloud has a silver lining, and Labour can console themselves with the thought that at least they avoided choosing Andy B as leader.
0 -
We shouldn't forget that it was the Ukrainians wot single-handedly won the Battle of Britain for usdr_spyn said:Napoleon won the Battle of Auschwitz and The Soviets liberated Austerlitz.
0 -
The money's still coming for David Miliband. I'm at a loss as to the expected mechanism.TheScreamingEagles said:
I'm also on Jim Murphy and I raise you David Miliband.antifrank said:
Having recently put all my betting slips into good order, I regret to say that Jim Murphy and Harriet Harman are among my preferred successors to Ed Miliband.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, I hope so, both for political and betting reasons.Tissue_Price said:
There's still time for them to do that, post-Ed.Richard_Nabavi said:Still, every cloud has a silver lining, and Labour can console themselves with the thought that at least they avoided choosing Andy B as leader.
0 -
Still my Chris Huhne as next Lib Dem leader betting slip is worth holding on to isn't it ?0
-
0
-
11 to 20 is by no means impossible - and if they remain marooned in the 8-10% range, then it's a good bet.antifrank said:I see the chances of the Lib Dems going below 20 seats as fairly remote (and the chances of them getting above 40 likewise). Backing both 21-30 and 31-40 on the seat bands looks like a reasonably safe way of getting something like a 40% return on your money in 99 days.
And if the LibDems really do poll 6-8%, then fewer than 10 seats is entirely possible.
This is simple mathematics: if they poll mid single digits, then no matter how concentrated their vote, they will will struggle to win more than a few a seats.0 -
Something along the lines of Buffalo Bill in Silence of the Lambs.Tissue_Price said:
The money's still coming for David Miliband. I'm at a loss as to the expected mechanism.TheScreamingEagles said:
I'm also on Jim Murphy and I raise you David Miliband.antifrank said:
Having recently put all my betting slips into good order, I regret to say that Jim Murphy and Harriet Harman are among my preferred successors to Ed Miliband.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, I hope so, both for political and betting reasons.Tissue_Price said:
There's still time for them to do that, post-Ed.Richard_Nabavi said:Still, every cloud has a silver lining, and Labour can console themselves with the thought that at least they avoided choosing Andy B as leader.
0 -
The only way I can see it is if Ed wins a majority in May.Tissue_Price said:
The money's still coming for David Miliband. I'm at a loss as to the expected mechanism.TheScreamingEagles said:
I'm also on Jim Murphy and I raise you David Miliband.antifrank said:
Having recently put all my betting slips into good order, I regret to say that Jim Murphy and Harriet Harman are among my preferred successors to Ed Miliband.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, I hope so, both for political and betting reasons.Tissue_Price said:
There's still time for them to do that, post-Ed.Richard_Nabavi said:Still, every cloud has a silver lining, and Labour can console themselves with the thought that at least they avoided choosing Andy B as leader.
0 -
SNP also playing silly buggers over Fracking.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-31016537
Stupidity of politicians N and S of the border, but with oil at $50 who would be looking.0 -
Surely Murphy is going to have issues after not being an MP from May?TheScreamingEagles said:
I'm also on Jim Murphy and I raise you David Miliband.antifrank said:
Having recently put all my betting slips into good order, I regret to say that Jim Murphy and Harriet Harman are among my preferred successors to Ed Miliband.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, I hope so, both for political and betting reasons.Tissue_Price said:
There's still time for them to do that, post-Ed.Richard_Nabavi said:Still, every cloud has a silver lining, and Labour can console themselves with the thought that at least they avoided choosing Andy B as leader.
0 -
@Sun_Politics: New Tory poster warns of Sinn Fein/ Ed alliance: http://t.co/5Inhq3UsLj0
-
Gales and vast quantities of hail. Looks like it's been snowing, the road's entirely white. Glad I don't need to walk the hound (get lashed a bit by light hail and strong winds before, but this would be dreadful).0
-
RCS1000 thanks for your "Just a little Greece update" below.
The view we often take in guessing what people will do next is what a rational mind would decide. Unfortunately Syriza has a lot of irrational people including very left wing "Chavez" economists who seem to understand little about economics. At least one of which was an economics lecturer in this country. So our gain through them leaving is their loss in arriving in Greece.0 -
Nope sorry I'm more confused than ever. Was it really the Swedes that won Waterloo?TheScreamingEagles said:
Yes I'm PB's history man. My knowledge is unparalleled.logical_song said:
TSE, you're the history man, but wasn't Wellington saved by the Germans arriving at the last minute? (Bluecher)TheScreamingEagles said:The Battle of Waterloo should be David Cameron's template for our EU renegotiations.
A Tory Prime Minister leading a vast European Alliance to give the French a damn good thrashing.
This short 3 min video explains what happened at Waterloo.0 -
Check your inbox...antifrank said:
Something along the lines of Buffalo Bill in Silence of the Lambs.Tissue_Price said:
The money's still coming for David Miliband. I'm at a loss as to the expected mechanism.TheScreamingEagles said:
I'm also on Jim Murphy and I raise you David Miliband.antifrank said:
Having recently put all my betting slips into good order, I regret to say that Jim Murphy and Harriet Harman are among my preferred successors to Ed Miliband.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, I hope so, both for political and betting reasons.Tissue_Price said:
There's still time for them to do that, post-Ed.Richard_Nabavi said:Still, every cloud has a silver lining, and Labour can console themselves with the thought that at least they avoided choosing Andy B as leader.
0 -
I can't see Syriza being the guys to lead anyone to the other side. Greece could go all Venezuela or Argentina on us. (Not a good outcome for anyone.)MaxPB said:
I have been toying with the idea of investing in De La Rue. Close to their year low, and if Greece exit and make through to the other side, Italy and Spain won't be far behind, especially if Podemos in Spain continue to make inroads as they have done in the last few months. Could be a nice bit of business for them over the next couple of years.rcs1000 said:I think it's quite a difficult thing to keep secret!
Firstly, there are relatively few companies capable of printing large quantities of banknotes, De La Rue PLC is probably the biggest. And they don't have hundreds of bank note printing machines lying idle, ready to use.
Secondly, it's actually quite an involved process. You need to get designs made, and you need them to be difficult to forge and easy to recognise.
Thirdly, people talk.0 -
:-)TCPoliticalBetting said:RCS1000 thanks for your "Just a little Greece update" below.
The view we often take in guessing what people will do next is what a rational mind would decide. Unfortunately Syriza has a lot of irrational people including very left wing "Chavez" economists who seem to understand little about economics. At least one of which was an economics lecturer in this country. So our gain through them leaving is their loss in arriving in Greece.0 -
You keep talking about Scottish seats going blue. They won't they are going SNP a minimum of 9, possibly all 11. None are going blue.audreyanne said:The cost of coalition: how the LibDems will hand the Conservatives victory 3/3
8 other outside chances to watch:
Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine
Argyll and Bute
Eastbourne
Eastleigh
Edinburgh West
Leeds North West
Thornbury and Yate
Twickenham (shock of the night: Vince Cable to lose?)
My outside tip for THE shock of the night: Vince Cable to lose Twickenham
My apologies to those who had to endure this yesterday afternoon
0 -
I think the assumption is that the other 2 Lib Dem seats will fall to the Conservatives.Pulpstar said:
If the yellow peril hold onto 3 Scottish seats then they'll have more than 20 nationally.peter_from_putney said:
That rather depends how many, or rather how few seats the LibDems finish up with. As I posted last night, William Hill, no slouches they, have the Yellows priced up at surprisingly short odds of ony 11/4 on them winning between 11 - 20 seats.Pulpstar said:
What are these 20 gains ?audreyanne said:By the way, if my suggestions yesterday are right about 20+ Conservative gains from the yellows then they don't need to be 11.4% ahead of Labour in England …
Don't ignore the fallen LibDem share. It's one of the big game changers this time round.
I just don't see where you get anywhere near 20 gains from lib Dem.
Assuming a mid point of 16 seats, this would mean them losing approximately 40 of their existing seats. Were the SNP to win say 8 of their Scottish seats, that would mean 32 losses elsewhere. Split these equally say between Lab & Con and both parties would gain around 16 seats. Unlikely yes, but just possible if one believes the betting markets.
I am blithely assuming that Orkney&Shetlands is completely and totally safe.0 -
Interesting stuff on Greece, Mr. 1000.0
-
I think the LibDems will hold onto Orkney & Shetland.Dair said:
You keep talking about Scottish seats going blue. They won't they are going SNP a minimum of 9, possibly all 11. None are going blue.audreyanne said:The cost of coalition: how the LibDems will hand the Conservatives victory 3/3
8 other outside chances to watch:
Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine
Argyll and Bute
Eastbourne
Eastleigh
Edinburgh West
Leeds North West
Thornbury and Yate
Twickenham (shock of the night: Vince Cable to lose?)
My outside tip for THE shock of the night: Vince Cable to lose Twickenham
My apologies to those who had to endure this yesterday afternoon
And I think Charlies has a big enough personal vote in Ross, K & S.
The Borders seats could be toss-ups between Conservative and SNP. But in a split Unionist environment, I reckon the SNP is the horse to back.0 -
No, it was the Ukrainians!logical_song said:
Nope sorry I'm more confused than ever. Was it really the Swedes that won Waterloo?TheScreamingEagles said:
Yes I'm PB's history man. My knowledge is unparalleled.logical_song said:
TSE, you're the history man, but wasn't Wellington saved by the Germans arriving at the last minute? (Bluecher)TheScreamingEagles said:The Battle of Waterloo should be David Cameron's template for our EU renegotiations.
A Tory Prime Minister leading a vast European Alliance to give the French a damn good thrashing.
This short 3 min video explains what happened at Waterloo.0 -
A safe seat can always be found in England.Alistair said:
Surely Murphy is going to have issues after not being an MP from May?TheScreamingEagles said:
I'm also on Jim Murphy and I raise you David Miliband.antifrank said:
Having recently put all my betting slips into good order, I regret to say that Jim Murphy and Harriet Harman are among my preferred successors to Ed Miliband.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, I hope so, both for political and betting reasons.Tissue_Price said:
There's still time for them to do that, post-Ed.Richard_Nabavi said:Still, every cloud has a silver lining, and Labour can console themselves with the thought that at least they avoided choosing Andy B as leader.
0 -
Well one definitely won't be an MP after May and one probably won't be. Not the best value?TheScreamingEagles said:
I'm also on Jim Murphy and I raise you David Miliband.antifrank said:
Having recently put all my betting slips into good order, I regret to say that Jim Murphy and Harriet Harman are among my preferred successors to Ed Miliband.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, I hope so, both for political and betting reasons.Tissue_Price said:
There's still time for them to do that, post-Ed.Richard_Nabavi said:Still, every cloud has a silver lining, and Labour can console themselves with the thought that at least they avoided choosing Andy B as leader.
0 -
FPT:
45,000 is a ludicrous exaggeration - by a Nat. The actual Labour claim was less than half of that......Charles said:
Neither of the figures are plausible to be honest.Carnyx said:
The loss of jobs was hugely exaggerated - IIRC Labour were touting 45K jobs at the same time as MoD was giving 512 as the jobs dependent on Trident.Flightpath said:
And the loss of jobs? In a 'united Kingdom moving for no good reason is pretty costly. Wales is not ideal because of the oil terminal.Alistair said:
Given that the SNP aim is to remove Trident from Scotland then that's a win for the SNP.CarlottaVance said:Trident off to Wales?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2929226/Trident-quit-Scotland-Wales-Secret-plan-nuclear-subs-triggered-rise-SNP.html
One fewer 'trump card' in the "inevitable" (sic) Indy negotiations......
I assume that 512 is the direct employment, but does not take into account any suppliers who might move, and the impact on the local service economy of the loss of high paying jobs at the site. But 45K seems a ludicrous exaggeration.
Labour claimed: Some 6700 military and civilian jobs are at Faslane, and a further 1500 posts are due to be created by 2022.
Labour calculate a further 11,000 people are also directly and indirectly reliant on the base for their livelihoods.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/yes-vote-would-put-19000-faslane-jobs-at-risk.198604570 -
It's ok. I've backed a few other horses in this race.Dair said:
Well one definitely won't be an MP after May and one probably won't be. Not the best value?TheScreamingEagles said:
I'm also on Jim Murphy and I raise you David Miliband.antifrank said:
Having recently put all my betting slips into good order, I regret to say that Jim Murphy and Harriet Harman are among my preferred successors to Ed Miliband.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, I hope so, both for political and betting reasons.Tissue_Price said:
There's still time for them to do that, post-Ed.Richard_Nabavi said:Still, every cloud has a silver lining, and Labour can console themselves with the thought that at least they avoided choosing Andy B as leader.
I just need Mike and Henry to tip someone at 33/1 like they did in 2008 on Ed to be Lab leader after Gordon.0 -
Perhaps you should find out a little more about Varoufakis. Hardly a rabid commie, if anything he seems ideally suited to be Finance Minister given Greece's predicament.TCPoliticalBetting said:RCS1000 thanks for your "Just a little Greece update" below.
The view we often take in guessing what people will do next is what a rational mind would decide. Unfortunately Syriza has a lot of irrational people including very left wing "Chavez" economists who seem to understand little about economics. At least one of which was an economics lecturer in this country. So our gain through them leaving is their loss in arriving in Greece.0 -
I can see there may be quite a few people hedging with Kennedy and Carmichael. I suspect that may not be a very good idea.rcs1000 said:
I think the LibDems will hold onto Orkney & Shetland.Dair said:
You keep talking about Scottish seats going blue. They won't they are going SNP a minimum of 9, possibly all 11. None are going blue.audreyanne said:The cost of coalition: how the LibDems will hand the Conservatives victory 3/3
8 other outside chances to watch:
Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine
Argyll and Bute
Eastbourne
Eastleigh
Edinburgh West
Leeds North West
Thornbury and Yate
Twickenham (shock of the night: Vince Cable to lose?)
My outside tip for THE shock of the night: Vince Cable to lose Twickenham
My apologies to those who had to endure this yesterday afternoon
And I think Charlies has a big enough personal vote in Ross, K & S.
The Borders seats could be toss-ups between Conservative and SNP. But in a split Unionist environment, I reckon the SNP is the horse to back.0 -
Antifrank, where do you think the Lib Dems need to be, in terms of seats and vote share, to be willing to enter a coalition? And do you think it depends on who the largest party is and the largest party's vote and seat position?antifrank said:I see the chances of the Lib Dems going below 20 seats as fairly remote (and the chances of them getting above 40 likewise). Backing both 21-30 and 31-40 on the seat bands looks like a reasonably safe way of getting something like a 40% return on your money in 99 days.
My gut instinct is there a point at which the Lib Dems' performance is so bad that they cannot contemplate going into a coalition at all, because they will conclude that they are better served trying to rebuild in opposition than propping up a wafer thin majority. Certainly if they end up with 7% of the vote and <20 seats (not my expectation), I think that would be the case.
Above the no coalition point (which may well be higher than 7%/<20 but I suspect peaks at about 10%/25 seats) I think there is probably a window in which they would contemplate a coalition with Labour - Clegg falling on sword if not felled in battle - but not the Conservatives. And then there is a point at which they might consider that they have emerged relatively unscathed by their time in government and could enter another coalition with the Tories (say 15%/35-40 seats) (again unlikely). It may be the case that below that range there is a window for a Tory coalition if the Tories make massive concessions to the Lib Dems, so the Lib Dems can show their party it is worthwhile, but I find it hard to envisage a situation where the Conservatives are able to form a government (which implies their vote held up pretty robustly) but would be minded to offer big concessions to the Lib Dems whose own vote had dissipated. In other words I find it difficult to see reconciliation between the price the Lib Dems must insist on to make another coalition worthwhile and the price the Conservatives will be willing to pay, absent a very strong Lib Dem recovery.0 -
I was looking at SNP nags to see if any of them are still available at attractive odds, and I did wonder about Dumfries & Galloway. William Hill go 9/2 on the SNP, which might not be a bad bet, but what about Shadsy's 7/1 on the Conservatives here? The raw figures here make this look like a three-way contest if a reasonable chunk of the Labour vote splits off to the SNP.rcs1000 said:
I think the LibDems will hold onto Orkney & Shetland.
And I think Charlies has a big enough personal vote in Ross, K & S.
The Borders seats could be toss-ups between Conservative and SNP. But in a split Unionist environment, I reckon the SNP is the horse to back.0 -
Wouldn't Jim Murphy be in with a good shout if (a) Miliband did not become PM and (b) Murphy manages to stop the SNP juggernaut?antifrank said:
Having recently put all my betting slips into good order, I regret to say that Jim Murphy and Harriet Harman are among my preferred successors to Ed Miliband.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, I hope so, both for political and betting reasons.Tissue_Price said:
There's still time for them to do that, post-Ed.Richard_Nabavi said:Still, every cloud has a silver lining, and Labour can console themselves with the thought that at least they avoided choosing Andy B as leader.
0 -
According to my Twitter timeline Burnham just had another meltdown against that political behemoth, Kay Burley0
-
That was my logic for backing MurphyOblitusSumMe said:
Wouldn't Jim Murphy be in with a good shout if (a) Miliband did not become PM and (b) Murphy manages to stop the SNP juggernaut?antifrank said:
Having recently put all my betting slips into good order, I regret to say that Jim Murphy and Harriet Harman are among my preferred successors to Ed Miliband.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, I hope so, both for political and betting reasons.Tissue_Price said:
There's still time for them to do that, post-Ed.Richard_Nabavi said:Still, every cloud has a silver lining, and Labour can console themselves with the thought that at least they avoided choosing Andy B as leader.
0 -
I'd be astonished if Orkney and Shetland went SNP, as it had a big No vote, Labour has no votes to give to the SNP here and the SNP couldn't gain it in the Scots Elections.0
-
And I say that as someone who has backed SNP in Ross, Skye, Lochaber.0
-
People in the still dilapidated and run down schemes of Dumfries, Newton Stewart and Stranrear are very unlikely to go near the Tories. If they leave Labour they will go SNP.Richard_Nabavi said:
I was looking at SNP nags to see if any of them are still available at attractive odds, and I did wonder about Dumfries & Galloway. William Hill go 9/2 on the SNP, which might not be a bad bet, but what about Shadsy's 7/1 on the Conservatives here? The raw figures here make this look like a three-way contest if a reasonable chunk of the Labour vote splits off to the SNP.rcs1000 said:
I think the LibDems will hold onto Orkney & Shetland.
And I think Charlies has a big enough personal vote in Ross, K & S.
The Borders seats could be toss-ups between Conservative and SNP. But in a split Unionist environment, I reckon the SNP is the horse to back.0 -
They don't need to for the Tories to win. What they need to do is go to the SNP in sufficient but not excessive numbers.Dair said:People in the still dilapidated and run down schemes of Dumfries, Newton Steward and Stranrear are very unlikely to go near the Tories. If they leave Labour they will go SNP.
2010 was:
Lab 45.9%
Con 31.6%
SNP 12.3%
LD 8.8%
UKIP 1.3%0 -
They aren't mutually exclusive events. If Ed becomes PM it may be because the likes of Jim Murphy hold on to their seat.OblitusSumMe said:
Wouldn't Jim Murphy be in with a good shout if (a) Miliband did not become PM and (b) Murphy manages to stop the SNP juggernaut?antifrank said:
Having recently put all my betting slips into good order, I regret to say that Jim Murphy and Harriet Harman are among my preferred successors to Ed Miliband.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, I hope so, both for political and betting reasons.Tissue_Price said:
There's still time for them to do that, post-Ed.Richard_Nabavi said:Still, every cloud has a silver lining, and Labour can console themselves with the thought that at least they avoided choosing Andy B as leader.
0 -
Given that Orkney & Shetland was among the weakest - if not the weakest - part of Scotland in the independence vote, that the LibDems won the constituent seats in the last Holyrood election, and that Carmichael presumably has at least some personal vote, I don't find the SNP prices in O&S interesting.Dair said:
I can see there may be quite a few people hedging with Kennedy and Carmichael. I suspect that may not be a very good idea.rcs1000 said:
I think the LibDems will hold onto Orkney & Shetland.Dair said:
You keep talking about Scottish seats going blue. They won't they are going SNP a minimum of 9, possibly all 11. None are going blue.audreyanne said:The cost of coalition: how the LibDems will hand the Conservatives victory 3/3
8 other outside chances to watch:
Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine
Argyll and Bute
Eastbourne
Eastleigh
Edinburgh West
Leeds North West
Thornbury and Yate
Twickenham (shock of the night: Vince Cable to lose?)
My outside tip for THE shock of the night: Vince Cable to lose Twickenham
My apologies to those who had to endure this yesterday afternoon
And I think Charlies has a big enough personal vote in Ross, K & S.
The Borders seats could be toss-ups between Conservative and SNP. But in a split Unionist environment, I reckon the SNP is the horse to back.
RK&S might be different. Charlie is not the man he was, and the SNP is much stronger there. Charlie, as yesterday's man, might be a loser and the odds make it interesting to maybe play. But I'd still reckon its 55% LD, 45% SNP as far as likely outcome.0 -
I largely agree with you.Flockers_pb said:
Antifrank, where do you think the Lib Dems need to be, in terms of seats and vote share, to be willing to enter a coalition? And do you think it depends on who the largest party is and the largest party's vote and seat position?
For the purpose of this question, there is no single entity called the Lib Dems. To enter into a coalition, first their negotiating team need to negotiate terms, then the MPs need to approve it, then it needs to be approved by the membership.
The current leadership of the party would, I think, by and large be happy enough to continue with the Conservatives in coalition, where they have a reasonably good working relationship. They would find working with Labour more problematic, owing to personality differences (it seems from the outside), but if push comes to a shove they would be willing to go for that too - whether Labour would be willing to enter coalition with the current Lib Dem leadership is a quite different matter.
The MPs who returned in May would be much less willing to be in coalition with the Conservatives. They would have seen comrades shot down for their role in the last five years and another five years would leave them looking like an agency for the Conservative party. They would much rather assist the Labour party, but only so long as they were not going to be kicked all over the place.
The party membership are still further down the line than the MPs. With no personal ambitions tied up in the decision, they will be much more open to refreshing the party on the backbenches or in opposition.
To avoid that fate, that requires numbers. Fewer than 30 would make it hard to secure adequate Cabinet representation. Labour are in no mood to be kind to the Lib Dems, while the Conservatives in 2010 were pretty open-handed in their offer of five seats at the table to the Lib Dems. They might be again.
So I am not expecting a further coalition, because I don't expect the three different interested groups to agree.0 -
Yes, I quite agree with this analysis.rcs1000 said:
Given that Orkney & Shetland was among the weakest - if not the weakest - part of Scotland in the independence vote, that the LibDems won the constituent seats in the last Holyrood election, and that Carmichael presumably has at least some personal vote, I don't find the SNP prices in O&S interesting.Dair said:
I can see there may be quite a few people hedging with Kennedy and Carmichael. I suspect that may not be a very good idea.rcs1000 said:
I think the LibDems will hold onto Orkney & Shetland.Dair said:
You keep talking about Scottish seats going blue. They won't they are going SNP a minimum of 9, possibly all 11. None are going blue.audreyanne said:The cost of coalition: how the LibDems will hand the Conservatives victory 3/3
8 other outside chances to watch:
Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine
Argyll and Bute
Eastbourne
Eastleigh
Edinburgh West
Leeds North West
Thornbury and Yate
Twickenham (shock of the night: Vince Cable to lose?)
My outside tip for THE shock of the night: Vince Cable to lose Twickenham
My apologies to those who had to endure this yesterday afternoon
And I think Charlies has a big enough personal vote in Ross, K & S.
The Borders seats could be toss-ups between Conservative and SNP. But in a split Unionist environment, I reckon the SNP is the horse to back.
RK&S might be different. Charlie is not the man he was, and the SNP is much stronger there. Charlie, as yesterday's man, might be a loser and the odds make it interesting to maybe play. But I'd still reckon its 55% LD, 45% SNP as far as likely outcome.0 -
Thirded. I've bet on the SNP against Charles Kennedy, but I don't expect to collect.Pulpstar said:
Yes, I quite agree with this analysis.rcs1000 said:
Given that Orkney & Shetland was among the weakest - if not the weakest - part of Scotland in the independence vote, that the LibDems won the constituent seats in the last Holyrood election, and that Carmichael presumably has at least some personal vote, I don't find the SNP prices in O&S interesting.Dair said:
I can see there may be quite a few people hedging with Kennedy and Carmichael. I suspect that may not be a very good idea.rcs1000 said:
I think the LibDems will hold onto Orkney & Shetland.Dair said:
You keep talking about Scottish seats going blue. They won't they are going SNP a minimum of 9, possibly all 11. None are going blue.audreyanne said:The cost of coalition: how the LibDems will hand the Conservatives victory 3/3
8 other outside chances to watch:
Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine
Argyll and Bute
Eastbourne
Eastleigh
Edinburgh West
Leeds North West
Thornbury and Yate
Twickenham (shock of the night: Vince Cable to lose?)
My outside tip for THE shock of the night: Vince Cable to lose Twickenham
My apologies to those who had to endure this yesterday afternoon
And I think Charlies has a big enough personal vote in Ross, K & S.
The Borders seats could be toss-ups between Conservative and SNP. But in a split Unionist environment, I reckon the SNP is the horse to back.
RK&S might be different. Charlie is not the man he was, and the SNP is much stronger there. Charlie, as yesterday's man, might be a loser and the odds make it interesting to maybe play. But I'd still reckon its 55% LD, 45% SNP as far as likely outcome.0 -
In fact I don't think its a 45% SNP chance, but I rated 7-2 there as a very backable price a few days back, 10-3 is still fine I think.0
-
Scott P..I watched that Burley interview...another very weak effort
.. he looked as though he was going to burst into tears0 -
I don't claim to be close enough to Orkney and Shetland to have an ear to the ground but it does strike me as if the Liberal hangover in the North of Scotland was weakened by the Liberal/SDP merger, it's still obviously strong but not as much as it was.rcs1000 said:
Given that Orkney & Shetland was among the weakest - if not the weakest - part of Scotland in the independence vote, that the LibDems won the constituent seats in the last Holyrood election, and that Carmichael presumably has at least some personal vote, I don't find the SNP prices in O&S interesting.Dair said:
I can see there may be quite a few people hedging with Kennedy and Carmichael. I suspect that may not be a very good idea.rcs1000 said:
I think the LibDems will hold onto Orkney & Shetland.Dair said:
You keep talking about Scottish seats going blue. They won't they are going SNP a minimum of 9, possibly all 11. None are going blue.audreyanne said:The cost of coalition: how the LibDems will hand the Conservatives victory 3/3
8 other outside chances to watch:
Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine
Argyll and Bute
Eastbourne
Eastleigh
Edinburgh West
Leeds North West
Thornbury and Yate
Twickenham (shock of the night: Vince Cable to lose?)
My outside tip for THE shock of the night: Vince Cable to lose Twickenham
My apologies to those who had to endure this yesterday afternoon
And I think Charlies has a big enough personal vote in Ross, K & S.
The Borders seats could be toss-ups between Conservative and SNP. But in a split Unionist environment, I reckon the SNP is the horse to back.
RK&S might be different. Charlie is not the man he was, and the SNP is much stronger there. Charlie, as yesterday's man, might be a loser and the odds make it interesting to maybe play. But I'd still reckon its 55% LD, 45% SNP as far as likely outcome.
It seems to lie in the small c conservative nature of the area being a natural Liberal worldview. With that, Carmichael being an Incomer strikes me as his personal vote being much weaker than you might think from the outside.
On the other hand John Thurso's personal vote as Viscount Thurso, the area clinging on to the old fashioned Aristrocratic values (as evidenced by the high No in the high North probably means he has the largest personal vote of any Liberal maybe of anyone in Scotland.0 -
We can look forward to another 3 months of Burnham tying himself up in knots. Will he even make it until May?Scott_P said:According to my Twitter timeline Burnham just had another meltdown against that political behemoth, Kay Burley
0 -
You mean...TheScreamingEagles said:
Yes I'm PB's history man. My knowledge is unparalleled.logical_song said:
TSE, you're the history man, but wasn't Wellington saved by the Germans arriving at the last minute? (Bluecher)TheScreamingEagles said:The Battle of Waterloo should be David Cameron's template for our EU renegotiations.
A Tory Prime Minister leading a vast European Alliance to give the French a damn good thrashing.
This short 3 min video explains what happened at Waterloo.
http://youtu.be/Sj_9CiNkkn4
A B...Belle Alliance
(pardon my stutter)0 -
Antifrank,
Thanks, I agree. I like your articulation of the three constituencies and agree that is key to the analysis. It is the members' reticence, primarily, that makes me think a deal with the Conservatives is unlikely at almost any price. I think the Labour and Lib Dem leadership's mutual dislike could be overcome; the rose garden marriage in 2010 demonstrated that politicians have much thicker skins and are much more pragmatic than we give them credit for. And Ed Balls is a sweetheart, really. I also think that Labour and the Lib Dems could quickly find enough to agree on to make a coalition work in policy terms (principally pursuing constitutional reform, which the Lib Dems would largely own). But I struggle to see it happening if Labour is behind in votes and seats, except as part of a broader rainbow coalition. And if Labour are head on votes and seats the Lib Dems are probably reduced to a rump and possibly not strong enough to deliver a workable majority.
0 -
That's interesting, I'm hedged on Thurso and you've reassured me that the 6-4 on the Lib Dems there wasn't as daft a move as I thought perhaps immediately after doing so.Dair said:
I don't claim to be close enough to Orkney and Shetland to have an ear to the ground but it does strike me as if the Liberal hangover in the North of Scotland was weakened by the Liberal/SDP merger, it's still obviously strong but not as much as it was.rcs1000 said:
Given that Orkney & Shetland was among the weakest - if not the weakest - part of Scotland in the independence vote, that the LibDems won the constituent seats in the last Holyrood election, and that Carmichael presumably has at least some personal vote, I don't find the SNP prices in O&S interesting.Dair said:
I can see there may be quite a few people hedging with Kennedy and Carmichael. I suspect that may not be a very good idea.rcs1000 said:
I think the LibDems will hold onto Orkney & Shetland.Dair said:
You keep talking about Scottish seats going blue. They won't they are going SNP a minimum of 9, possibly all 11. None are going blue.audreyanne said:The cost of coalition: how the LibDems will hand the Conservatives victory 3/3
8 other outside chances to watch:
Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine
Argyll and Bute
Eastbourne
Eastleigh
Edinburgh West
Leeds North West
Thornbury and Yate
Twickenham (shock of the night: Vince Cable to lose?)
My outside tip for THE shock of the night: Vince Cable to lose Twickenham
My apologies to those who had to endure this yesterday afternoon
And I think Charlies has a big enough personal vote in Ross, K & S.
The Borders seats could be toss-ups between Conservative and SNP. But in a split Unionist environment, I reckon the SNP is the horse to back.
RK&S might be different. Charlie is not the man he was, and the SNP is much stronger there. Charlie, as yesterday's man, might be a loser and the odds make it interesting to maybe play. But I'd still reckon its 55% LD, 45% SNP as far as likely outcome.
It seems to lie in the small c conservative nature of the area being a natural Liberal worldview. With that, Carmichael being an Incomer strikes me as his personal vote being much weaker than you might think from the outside.
On the other hand John Thurso's personal vote as Viscount Thurso, the area clinging on to the old fashioned Aristrocratic values (as evidenced by the high No in the high North probably means he has the largest personal vote of any Liberal maybe of anyone in Scotland.0 -
Clever joke from the Lib Dems
David Cameron Debate Excuse Generator
"Your party name is The Upminster Popular People's Front. If you ask, David Cameron will probably insist you get included in the #leadersdebates"
http://www.libdems.org.uk/askcameron0 -
Yes, I'd favour the SNP to take Dumfries and Galloway rather than the Blues, but I cannot see the remotest chance of them taking Berwickshire, Roxborough and Selkirk. The referendum suggests the borders, in general, will be reasonably profitable for the ToriesDair said:
People in the still dilapidated and run down schemes of Dumfries, Newton Stewart and Stranrear are very unlikely to go near the Tories. If they leave Labour they will go SNP.Richard_Nabavi said:
I was looking at SNP nags to see if any of them are still available at attractive odds, and I did wonder about Dumfries & Galloway. William Hill go 9/2 on the SNP, which might not be a bad bet, but what about Shadsy's 7/1 on the Conservatives here? The raw figures here make this look like a three-way contest if a reasonable chunk of the Labour vote splits off to the SNP.rcs1000 said:
I think the LibDems will hold onto Orkney & Shetland.
And I think Charlies has a big enough personal vote in Ross, K & S.
The Borders seats could be toss-ups between Conservative and SNP. But in a split Unionist environment, I reckon the SNP is the horse to back.
Edit - in most of the seats the Tories are chasing Libs, they will now find themselves chasing the SNP, Berwickshire aside.
Their seconds to Labour they will fade in, D and G aside and they will be first amongst also rans in the Angus/Buchan/Moray and Perthshire set0 -
Current odds on John Thurso to hold Caithness are 15/8 at Ladbrokes and Betfair. Smaller than normal constituency, huge personal vote.0
-
Lord Ashcroft @LordAshcroft · 2m2 minutes ago
My my these Scottish constituency polls are looking interesting.......
I'm not amused.0 -
Just seen this Andrew Neil tweet about the Greek election;
"A few of the comments on Greek elections tonight have been somewhat ultracrepidarian"
So I had to look it up..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultracrepidarianism
I'm quite sure that I regularly give opinions that are outside my sandals 0 -
Well he might need some time to cover his position.antifrank said:Lord Ashcroft @LordAshcroft · 2m2 minutes ago
My my these Scottish constituency polls are looking interesting.......
I'm not amused.
Perhaps his work is not as pro bono as believed....0 -
Bradford West - someone put me off taking 3/1 on Galloway0
-
Lab majority on BF heading for the stars...Scott_P said:@Sun_Politics: New Tory poster warns of Sinn Fein/ Ed alliance: http://t.co/5Inhq3UsLj
11.50 -
Why is #AskGalloway trending?0
-
Lots of speculation here without looking at the polling numbers.
The last two waves of Ashcroft CON-LD battlegrounds each had average swings to CON of just 2%. Now there was an awful lot of variation between the seats but they don't, as some on here are suggesting, point to big gains. Possibly 7 but maybe 10 max.
In most of these defences the LDs are far better organised with more skilled ground troops and far better databases.
Clearly where an incumbent MP like Alan Beith is standing down then it will be a harder. But the Ashcroft polling had the yellows ahead amongst alll those expressing a preference in his seat.
0 -
20,000 voters "vanished". Not that I would allege any postal vote irregularities could possibly occur.Tissue_Price said:Bradford West - someone put me off taking 3/1 on Galloway
0 -
If he wasn't spending vast sums of his own money to do these I would be annoyed with this teasing. As it is I am agog with anticipation. I would very much like him to show a big SNP lead in Aberdeenshire West as I accidentally double betted on the constituency.antifrank said:Lord Ashcroft @LordAshcroft · 2m2 minutes ago
My my these Scottish constituency polls are looking interesting.......
I'm not amused.0 -
Th NS article on the last thread is fascinating.
http://may2015.com/featured/may-2015-and-the-art-of-political-betting/
I remain of the view that bookies will struggle to make money out of political betting / current affairs. It is one of the few market areas where informed, shrewd punters have a substantial edge over the bookies.
As part of a general (much overdue) bookkeeping exercise, I listed every one of my fixed odds political bets on a spreadsheet last night (not including my substantial betfair positions/trades).
In total, I've staked £1044 on 52 bets. If all the bets won at the odds that I took, I'd be £12351 in profit. Bear in mind, this is profit, not including the return of the stake. Also, It would be impossible for all of the bets to come in - but for the purpose of this exercise, that doesn't matter. The odds have since lengthened on 2 bets, remained the same on 9 and have shortened on all the others.
The key point here is - If I were to place those exact same bets now (for the same stakes) at the best odds currently available, my profit would be only £5816. If there were a cashout option on my bets, i'd be able to double my money and walk away.
That's quite an edge I have on the bookies.
I'm not willy-waving here. I'm just wondering if there are enough heart-over-head mug-punters, betting enough cash at poor odds for the bookies to offset their losses to the sharps.
I hope so, but I'm sceptical.0 -
Yes, that's a possible concern [though I believe the 20k figure is across Bradford as a whole?]. But, 3/1...Dair said:
20,000 voters "vanished". Not that I would allege any postal vote irregularities could possibly occur.Tissue_Price said:Bradford West - someone put me off taking 3/1 on Galloway
0 -
I've got way more than that stacked and my potential winnings are alot lower.Pong said:Th NS article on the last thread is fascinating.
http://may2015.com/featured/may-2015-and-the-art-of-political-betting/
I remain of the view that bookies will struggle to make money out of political betting / current affairs. It is one of the few market areas where informed, shrewd punters have a substantial edge over the bookies.
As part of a general (much overdue) bookkeeping exercise, I listed every one of my fixed odds political bets on a spreadsheet last night (not including my substantial betfair positions/trades).
In total, I've staked £1044 on 52 bets. If all the bets won at the odds that I took, I'd be £12351 in profit. Bear in mind, this is profit, not including the return of the stake. Also, It would be impossible for all of the bets to come in - but for the purpose of this exercise, that doesn't matter. The odds have since lengthened on 2 bets, remained the same on 9 and have shortened on all the others.
The key point here is - If I were to place those exact same bets now (for the same stakes) at the best odds currently available, my profit would be only £5816. If there were a cashout option on my bets, i'd be able to double my money and walk away.
That's quite an edge I have on the bookies.
I'm not willy-waving here. I'm just wondering if there are enough heart-over-head mug-punters, betting enough cash at poor odds for the bookies to offset their losses to the sharps.
I hope so, but I'm sceptical.0 -
Half of his local party have decamped from him. Why are you thinking of backing him?Tissue_Price said:Bradford West - someone put me off taking 3/1 on Galloway
0 -
Most of the time there aren't. At the election there will (or may) be.Pong said:I'm not willy-waving here. I'm just wondering if there are enough heart-over-head mug-punters, betting enough cash at poor odds for the bookies to offset their losses to the sharps.
0 -
@Mikesmithson 6-10MikeSmithson said:Lots of speculation here without looking at the polling numbers.
The last two waves of Ashcroft CON-LD battlegrounds each had average swings to CON of just 2%. Now there was an awful lot of variation between the seats but they don't, as some on here are suggesting, point to big gains. Possibly 7 but maybe 10 max.
In most of these defences the LDs are far better organised with more skilled ground troops and far better databases.
Clearly where an incumbent MP like Alan Beith is standing down then it will be a harder. But the Ashcroft polling had the yellows ahead amongst alll those expressing a preference in his seat.
https://www.betfair.com/sport/politics?eventId=27348569&bssId=9183071&action=addAffiliateSelection&bsmId=924.20665745&modules=betslip&clkID=63_03089E7584D1417ABD011C9A9616E707&rfr=63&ttp=111&pid=746970&bid=8189
6 -10 Tory gains from Lib Dems, fill your boots @ 11-2.0 -
6-8% overall is compatible with say, an average of 30% in 60 seats.rcs1000 said:
11 to 20 is by no means impossible - and if they remain marooned in the 8-10% range, then it's a good bet.antifrank said:I see the chances of the Lib Dems going below 20 seats as fairly remote (and the chances of them getting above 40 likewise). Backing both 21-30 and 31-40 on the seat bands looks like a reasonably safe way of getting something like a 40% return on your money in 99 days.
And if the LibDems really do poll 6-8%, then fewer than 10 seats is entirely possible.
This is simple mathematics: if they poll mid single digits, then no matter how concentrated their vote, they will will struggle to win more than a few a seats.
0 -
I was just going through the seats and it struck me as a big price for a man who wouldn't be standing if he didn't think he could win. I don't know the ins and outs of the whole saga.antifrank said:
Half of his local party have decamped from him. Why are you thinking of backing him?Tissue_Price said:Bradford West - someone put me off taking 3/1 on Galloway
0 -
Israel v. Hezbollah today?dr_spyn said:Why is #AskGalloway trending?
0 -
I've got lots of other, more complicated positions on betfair which I haven't included because they mess up the calculation.Pulpstar said:
I've got way more than that stacked and my potential winnings are alot lower.Pong said:Th NS article on the last thread is fascinating.
http://may2015.com/featured/may-2015-and-the-art-of-political-betting/
I remain of the view that bookies will struggle to make money out of political betting / current affairs. It is one of the few market areas where informed, shrewd punters have a substantial edge over the bookies.
As part of a general (much overdue) bookkeeping exercise, I listed every one of my fixed odds political bets on a spreadsheet last night (not including my substantial betfair positions/trades).
In total, I've staked £1044 on 52 bets. If all the bets won at the odds that I took, I'd be £12351 in profit. Bear in mind, this is profit, not including the return of the stake. Also, It would be impossible for all of the bets to come in - but for the purpose of this exercise, that doesn't matter. The odds have since lengthened on 2 bets, remained the same on 9 and have shortened on all the others.
The key point here is - If I were to place those exact same bets now (for the same stakes) at the best odds currently available, my profit would be only £5816. If there were a cashout option on my bets, i'd be able to double my money and walk away.
That's quite an edge I have on the bookies.
I'm not willy-waving here. I'm just wondering if there are enough heart-over-head mug-punters, betting enough cash at poor odds for the bookies to offset their losses to the sharps.
I hope so, but I'm sceptical.
My overall exposure is about £3500, and my expected profit, about £6000.0 -
Ah yes I've got some of those, like the £960 I've got that turns to £0.67 profit if Labour get most votes and seats.Pong said:
I've got lots of other, more complicated positions on betfair which I haven't included because they mess up the calculation.Pulpstar said:
I've got way more than that stacked and my potential winnings are alot lower.Pong said:Th NS article on the last thread is fascinating.
http://may2015.com/featured/may-2015-and-the-art-of-political-betting/
I remain of the view that bookies will struggle to make money out of political betting / current affairs. It is one of the few market areas where informed, shrewd punters have a substantial edge over the bookies.
As part of a general (much overdue) bookkeeping exercise, I listed every one of my fixed odds political bets on a spreadsheet last night (not including my substantial betfair positions/trades).
In total, I've staked £1044 on 52 bets. If all the bets won at the odds that I took, I'd be £12351 in profit. Bear in mind, this is profit, not including the return of the stake. Also, It would be impossible for all of the bets to come in - but for the purpose of this exercise, that doesn't matter. The odds have since lengthened on 2 bets, remained the same on 9 and have shortened on all the others.
The key point here is - If I were to place those exact same bets now (for the same stakes) at the best odds currently available, my profit would be only £5816. If there were a cashout option on my bets, i'd be able to double my money and walk away.
That's quite an edge I have on the bookies.
I'm not willy-waving here. I'm just wondering if there are enough heart-over-head mug-punters, betting enough cash at poor odds for the bookies to offset their losses to the sharps.
I hope so, but I'm sceptical.
My overall exposure is about £3500, and my expected profit, about £6000.0 -
The way I look at it, the LibDems start with 6.8 million votes, and will probably shed c. 4m of them (and maybe nearer 4.5m).Sean_F said:
6-8% overall is compatible with say, an average of 30% in 60 seats.rcs1000 said:
11 to 20 is by no means impossible - and if they remain marooned in the 8-10% range, then it's a good bet.antifrank said:I see the chances of the Lib Dems going below 20 seats as fairly remote (and the chances of them getting above 40 likewise). Backing both 21-30 and 31-40 on the seat bands looks like a reasonably safe way of getting something like a 40% return on your money in 99 days.
And if the LibDems really do poll 6-8%, then fewer than 10 seats is entirely possible.
This is simple mathematics: if they poll mid single digits, then no matter how concentrated their vote, they will will struggle to win more than a few a seats.
It is possible that the bulk of these 4 million are lost in seats where the LibDems have no real chance. But it is not likely.0 -
After Newsnight last night and Andy Burnham with Kay Burley this afternoon it is difficult not to conclude that labour really need a new health secretary with immediate effect if they hope to gain any political points out of the NHS. Also my wife who is not interested in politics commented this afternoon that every time she hears David Cameron he seems to get better and better and that Ed Miliband just gets worse and worse.0
-
Have you seen their by-election results in seats where they aren't competitive ?!rcs1000 said:
The way I look at it, the LibDems start with 6.8 million votes, and will probably shed c. 4m of them (and maybe nearer 4.5m).Sean_F said:
6-8% overall is compatible with say, an average of 30% in 60 seats.rcs1000 said:
11 to 20 is by no means impossible - and if they remain marooned in the 8-10% range, then it's a good bet.antifrank said:I see the chances of the Lib Dems going below 20 seats as fairly remote (and the chances of them getting above 40 likewise). Backing both 21-30 and 31-40 on the seat bands looks like a reasonably safe way of getting something like a 40% return on your money in 99 days.
And if the LibDems really do poll 6-8%, then fewer than 10 seats is entirely possible.
This is simple mathematics: if they poll mid single digits, then no matter how concentrated their vote, they will will struggle to win more than a few a seats.
It is possible that the bulk of these 4 million are lost in seats where the LibDems have no real chance. But it is not likely.0 -
He came third in Poplar & Limehouse last time. He can crash and burn.Tissue_Price said:
I was just going through the seats and it struck me as a big price for a man who wouldn't be standing if he didn't think he could win. I don't know the ins and outs of the whole saga.antifrank said:
Half of his local party have decamped from him. Why are you thinking of backing him?Tissue_Price said:Bradford West - someone put me off taking 3/1 on Galloway
0 -
The Lib Dem vote distribution is going to be a pshelogical piece of wonderment.0
-
Mirror Mirror on the wall, who is the shrewdest of them all?Pong said:Th NS article on the last thread is fascinating.
http://may2015.com/featured/may-2015-and-the-art-of-political-betting/
I remain of the view that bookies will struggle to make money out of political betting / current affairs. It is one of the few market areas where informed, shrewd punters have a substantial edge over the bookies.
As part of a general (much overdue) bookkeeping exercise, I listed every one of my fixed odds political bets on a spreadsheet last night (not including my substantial betfair positions/trades).
In total, I've staked £1044 on 52 bets. If all the bets won at the odds that I took, I'd be £12351 in profit. Bear in mind, this is profit, not including the return of the stake. Also, It would be impossible for all of the bets to come in - but for the purpose of this exercise, that doesn't matter. The odds have since lengthened on 2 bets, remained the same on 9 and have shortened on all the others.
The key point here is - If I were to place those exact same bets now (for the same stakes) at the best odds currently available, my profit would be only £5816. If there were a cashout option on my bets, i'd be able to double my money and walk away.
That's quite an edge I have on the bookies.
I'm not willy-waving here. I'm just wondering if there are enough heart-over-head mug-punters, betting enough cash at poor odds for the bookies to offset their losses to the sharps.
I hope so, but I'm sceptical. 0 -
Trabant could have the most skilled ground troops and best database in Germany - doesn't mean anyone would buy what they were selling.MikeSmithson said:Lots of speculation here without looking at the polling numbers.
The last two waves of Ashcroft CON-LD battlegrounds each had average swings to CON of just 2%. Now there was an awful lot of variation between the seats but they don't, as some on here are suggesting, point to big gains. Possibly 7 but maybe 10 max.
In most of these defences the LDs are far better organised with more skilled ground troops and far better databases.
Clearly where an incumbent MP like Alan Beith is standing down then it will be a harder. But the Ashcroft polling had the yellows ahead amongst alll those expressing a preference in his seat.
And Nick Clegg is not going to win any awards as Salesman of the Year. He is voter repellent. He has been found out. The LibDems are certifiable for going into an election campaign with him as their leader.
0 -
It's too close to the GE now. Burnham's only get out could be 'health reasons', either himself or a family member.Big_G_NorthWales said:After Newsnight last night and Andy Burnham with Kay Burley this afternoon it is difficult not to conclude that labour really need a new health secretary with immediate effect if they hope to gain any political points out of the NHS. Also my wife who is not interested in politics commented this afternoon that every time she hears David Cameron he seems to get better and better and that Ed Miliband just gets worse and worse.
0 -
A brief web search finds no evidence that Labour have yet selected a candidate for Bradford West. Not the best basis from which to campaign to regain a seat lost in a by-election.antifrank said:
He came third in Poplar & Limehouse last time. He can crash and burn.Tissue_Price said:
I was just going through the seats and it struck me as a big price for a man who wouldn't be standing if he didn't think he could win. I don't know the ins and outs of the whole saga.antifrank said:
Half of his local party have decamped from him. Why are you thinking of backing him?Tissue_Price said:Bradford West - someone put me off taking 3/1 on Galloway
0 -
Of course the bulk of their votes will be lost in seats where they have little chance - that's 600 out of 630 seats! I agree with the comment about by elections - they clear have next to no core support now. What they do still provide is an anti Tory tacical vote in certain places where Labour or indeed anyone else bar the blues aren't competitive.rcs1000 said:
The way I look at it, the LibDems start with 6.8 million votes, and will probably shed c. 4m of them (and maybe nearer 4.5m).Sean_F said:
6-8% overall is compatible with say, an average of 30% in 60 seats.rcs1000 said:
11 to 20 is by no means impossible - and if they remain marooned in the 8-10% range, then it's a good bet.antifrank said:I see the chances of the Lib Dems going below 20 seats as fairly remote (and the chances of them getting above 40 likewise). Backing both 21-30 and 31-40 on the seat bands looks like a reasonably safe way of getting something like a 40% return on your money in 99 days.
And if the LibDems really do poll 6-8%, then fewer than 10 seats is entirely possible.
This is simple mathematics: if they poll mid single digits, then no matter how concentrated their vote, they will will struggle to win more than a few a seats.
It is possible that the bulk of these 4 million are lost in seats where the LibDems have no real chance. But it is not likely.
From a UNS standpoint, if they are down 15% nationally then they might hope to be down only 8% in the Tory facing seats. If the Tories are down 5% in those sets as well then they shouldn't lose too many.0 -
I'm on Galloway at 9-4 for £20, I've pretty much mentally filed that one under 'b' for bin.OblitusSumMe said:
A brief web search finds no evidence that Labour have yet selected a candidate for Bradford West. Not the best basis from which to campaign to regain a seat lost in a by-election.antifrank said:
He came third in Poplar & Limehouse last time. He can crash and burn.Tissue_Price said:
I was just going through the seats and it struck me as a big price for a man who wouldn't be standing if he didn't think he could win. I don't know the ins and outs of the whole saga.antifrank said:
Half of his local party have decamped from him. Why are you thinking of backing him?Tissue_Price said:Bradford West - someone put me off taking 3/1 on Galloway
0 -
Raphael Behr on 'whither Labour?'
The perpetually betrayed left craves Syriza-style Marxist revivalism and the aristocracy of New Labour complain that their legacy has been traduced. Miliband tried to steer a middle way – a “third way” – but one of the positions it was positioning itself against was already a “Third Way”, so Milibandism became a third of a third … so a ninth way, which was too refined for most people to understand.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/2015/jan/28/labour-interesting-alliances-forming-to-plot-partys-future0 -
No, you wouldn't. Cash out is based on taking the "other side" of the price. If you back something at 4/1 and it shortens to 2/1, you only make about 33% (because you have to back the other side at 4/11).Pong said:If there were a cashout option on my bets, i'd be able to double my money and walk away.
If you back something at 25/1, and it shortens to 12/1, you just get your money back on a cash out (because bookies usually bet 1/25 v 12/1).
Many of these selections have shortened precisely because you backed them. Chances are, they're good bets, but chances also are that the bookies have over-reacted to your money.0 -
Muslim Association of Canada - one of the biggest Muslim organizations in the country - turns out to be raising money for Hamas:
http://www.torontosun.com/2015/01/28/canadian-muslim-group-funnelled-300k-to-hamas-linked-charity-documents0 -
Only Kennedy and Carmichael ! That's it. A whole history written off due to helping the Tories !antifrank said:
Thirded. I've bet on the SNP against Charles Kennedy, but I don't expect to collect.Pulpstar said:
Yes, I quite agree with this analysis.rcs1000 said:
Given that Orkney & Shetland was among the weakest - if not the weakest - part of Scotland in the independence vote, that the LibDems won the constituent seats in the last Holyrood election, and that Carmichael presumably has at least some personal vote, I don't find the SNP prices in O&S interesting.Dair said:
I can see there may be quite a few people hedging with Kennedy and Carmichael. I suspect that may not be a very good idea.rcs1000 said:
I think the LibDems will hold onto Orkney & Shetland.Dair said:
You keep talking about Scottish seats going blue. They won't they are going SNP a minimum of 9, possibly all 11. None are going blue.audreyanne said:The cost of coalition: how the LibDems will hand the Conservatives victory 3/3
8 other outside chances to watch:
Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine
Argyll and Bute
Eastbourne
Eastleigh
Edinburgh West
Leeds North West
Thornbury and Yate
Twickenham (shock of the night: Vince Cable to lose?)
My outside tip for THE shock of the night: Vince Cable to lose Twickenham
My apologies to those who had to endure this yesterday afternoon
And I think Charlies has a big enough personal vote in Ross, K & S.
The Borders seats could be toss-ups between Conservative and SNP. But in a split Unionist environment, I reckon the SNP is the horse to back.
RK&S might be different. Charlie is not the man he was, and the SNP is much stronger there. Charlie, as yesterday's man, might be a loser and the odds make it interesting to maybe play. But I'd still reckon its 55% LD, 45% SNP as far as likely outcome.0 -
Hence my toying with the idea rather than going ahead with it. Mrs Max wouldn't be too happy if I had to explain why we're not going on holiday this year because my money is tied up in an unproductive investment in De La Rue waiting for the dividend payout.rcs1000 said:
I can't see Syriza being the guys to lead anyone to the other side. Greece could go all Venezuela or Argentina on us. (Not a good outcome for anyone.)MaxPB said:
I have been toying with the idea of investing in De La Rue. Close to their year low, and if Greece exit and make through to the other side, Italy and Spain won't be far behind, especially if Podemos in Spain continue to make inroads as they have done in the last few months. Could be a nice bit of business for them over the next couple of years.rcs1000 said:I think it's quite a difficult thing to keep secret!
Firstly, there are relatively few companies capable of printing large quantities of banknotes, De La Rue PLC is probably the biggest. And they don't have hundreds of bank note printing machines lying idle, ready to use.
Secondly, it's actually quite an involved process. You need to get designs made, and you need them to be difficult to forge and easy to recognise.
Thirdly, people talk.0
