politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Clegg 10% behind LAB in Sheffield Hallam according to UNITE
Comments
-
Has Socrates been banned? A pity: I enjoyed sparring with him and he had the courtesy to answer direct questions when asked. Hopefully his absence is not permanent, although I do take Mike's point about repetitive posting.
Anyhoo, I come neither to praise nor blame but to ask advice. I wish to bet against Labour getting an overall majority. Last time I placed a bet I used SPIN but their tendency to suspend betting for prolonged periods unnerved me. If one wanted to place a large bet against LOM, but retain the option to bet for if prices moved against me and thus cut my losses, which would be the best betting firm to use?0 -
It means that 1 in 8 Jews has considered leaving - that should be troubling.Pong said:
or if you want to go all daily mail,Richard_Nabavi said:The Survation website has no mention of the Sheffield Hallam poll. It does however have this weird headline: "New Poll of the Jewish Community Finds 88% Have Not Considered Leaving the UK"
HOUSE PRICE CRASH FEARED AS SURVEY SHOWS THOUSANDS OF JEWS READY TO FLEE BRITAIN0 -
You can lay them at 20s on Betfair.viewcode said:Has Socrates been banned? A pity: I enjoyed sparring with him and he had the courtesy to answer direct questions when asked. Hopefully his absence is not permanent, although I do take Mike's point about repetitive posting.
Anyhoo, I come neither to praise nor blame but to ask advice. I wish to bet against Labour getting an overall majority. Last time I placed a bet I used SPIN but their tendency to suspend betting for prolonged periods unnerved me. If one wanted to place a large bet against LOM, but retain the option to bet for if prices moved against me and thus cut my losses, which would be the best betting firm to use?
0 -
TimB Indeed, it was Levesque who set the ball rolling with Quebec's first independence referendum0
-
Westminster paedo files discovered (see what I did there?)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11391319/Four-Westminster-child-sex-abuse-files-unearthed-in-Whitehall-archives.html0 -
PoliticsHome (@politicshome)
04/02/2015 22:40
Thursday's Times front page - Rotherham: finally the truth behind the lies pic.twitter.com/vzIihPIe9w
0 -
http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/portsmouth-north/winning-party
Portsmouth North has a bizzare price when you compare it to areas with similiar size majorities.
I'm chock full of 1-2, but 2-5 still looks value to me.0 -
Mark Reckless starts sticking it to Labour re rotherham
http://markreckless.com/2015/02/04/a-cosy-cartel-closing-ranks/0 -
GIN, at one level, you are absolutely correct. However, this site is only what it is because of the posters. Without them, Mike would not have a very interesting site. So when he does something that top posters dislike, they have the right to voice their views as much or as little as they want (until Mike bans them too) or flounce. Mike has the right to ignore them, but if he consistently pisses too many posters off - particularly the informed and interested ones, his site does become diminished.GIN1138 said:OK, what's the problem with this:
Mike owns PB.com. Mike say's what we can and can't discuss on his website. We do what we're told and if we don't like it we go somewhere else.
Them's the rules and have been for as long as I've posted here in 2007.
Don't know what's so hard to understand about this.
I am not saying that that is the case with banning Socrates, although I do find him one of the better posters. But if the rules become too restrictive, then the site will start to bleed the more interesting and provocative posters. Mike can make the rules, but he has to keep a balance between controlling and letting rein to interesting posters. In my view, he does this admirably well for the most part, although some individual decisions baffle me.0 -
It's Labour target 94 !0
-
I used to work in those days for a Montreal based company, and thanks to the bureau de la langue francaise, all company meetings had to be in French, which few of us spoke, leading to lots of puzzled faces.HYUFD said:TimB Indeed, it was Levesque who set the ball rolling with Quebec's first independence referendum
0 -
I have seen surveys showing 1/3 Brits want to leave, so fewer than average. Czech republic for me...Tim_B said:
It means that 1 in 8 Jews has considered leaving - that should be troubling.Pong said:
or if you want to go all daily mail,Richard_Nabavi said:The Survation website has no mention of the Sheffield Hallam poll. It does however have this weird headline: "New Poll of the Jewish Community Finds 88% Have Not Considered Leaving the UK"
HOUSE PRICE CRASH FEARED AS SURVEY SHOWS THOUSANDS OF JEWS READY TO FLEE BRITAIN0 -
& Not even in London !0
-
TimB Thankfully Salmond and Sturgeon have not yet demanded all business meetings held in Edinburgh or Glasgow be conducted in Gaelic0
-
Well, TimT and I are not a statistically valid sample, but 100% of us left the UK :-)foxinsoxuk said:
I have seen surveys showing 1/3 Brits want to leave, so fewer than average. Czech republic for me...Tim_B said:
It means that 1 in 8 Jews has considered leaving - that should be troubling.Pong said:
or if you want to go all daily mail,Richard_Nabavi said:The Survation website has no mention of the Sheffield Hallam poll. It does however have this weird headline: "New Poll of the Jewish Community Finds 88% Have Not Considered Leaving the UK"
HOUSE PRICE CRASH FEARED AS SURVEY SHOWS THOUSANDS OF JEWS READY TO FLEE BRITAIN0 -
Looks like I'm restricted at Betfair Sportsbook !0
-
I've just been to betfair (https://www.betfair.com/sport/politics ) and it doesn't give you the option to bet against. I can bet on LOM at 5/1, but it won't let me bet against LOM. Given that I want to bet against LOM, this is a problem...Pulpstar said:
You can lay them at 20s on Betfair.viewcode said:Has Socrates been banned? A pity: I enjoyed sparring with him and he had the courtesy to answer direct questions when asked. Hopefully his absence is not permanent, although I do take Mike's point about repetitive posting.
Anyhoo, I come neither to praise nor blame but to ask advice. I wish to bet against Labour getting an overall majority. Last time I placed a bet I used SPIN but their tendency to suspend betting for prolonged periods unnerved me. If one wanted to place a large bet against LOM, but retain the option to bet for if prices moved against me and thus cut my losses, which would be the best betting firm to use?
0 -
TimB Didn't Montreal's English-speaking financial sector up sticks and relocated to Toronto en masse following that idiocy?Tim_B said:
I used to work in those days for a Montreal based company, and thanks to the bureau de la langue francaise, all company meetings had to be in French, which few of us spoke, leading to lots of puzzled faces.HYUFD said:TimB Indeed, it was Levesque who set the ball rolling with Quebec's first independence referendum
0 -
http://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/market?id=1.101416490viewcode said:
I've just been to betfair (https://www.betfair.com/sport/politics ) and it doesn't give you the option to bet against. I can bet on LOM at 5/1, but it won't let me bet against LOM. Given that I want to bet against LOM, this is a problem...Pulpstar said:
You can lay them at 20s on Betfair.viewcode said:Has Socrates been banned? A pity: I enjoyed sparring with him and he had the courtesy to answer direct questions when asked. Hopefully his absence is not permanent, although I do take Mike's point about repetitive posting.
Anyhoo, I come neither to praise nor blame but to ask advice. I wish to bet against Labour getting an overall majority. Last time I placed a bet I used SPIN but their tendency to suspend betting for prolonged periods unnerved me. If one wanted to place a large bet against LOM, but retain the option to bet for if prices moved against me and thus cut my losses, which would be the best betting firm to use?
Use this market.
£100 or so available to lay at 19s So for ~ £1900 liability you can win £1000 -
Labour MP John Mann trying to shift some of the blame on to the 10 UKIP Rotherham councillors. He fails to realise they were elected in 2014 because of the CSE scandal. This is the same man who screamed down Mark Reckless in the HoC earlier. It looks like they are running scared.isam said:Mark Reckless starts sticking it to Labour re rotherham
http://markreckless.com/2015/02/04/a-cosy-cartel-closing-ranks/
0 -
They did indeed - even the Bank of Montreal moved its HQ to Toronto.MTimT said:
TimB Didn't Montreal's English-speaking financial sector up sticks and relocated to Toronto en masse following that idiocy?Tim_B said:
I used to work in those days for a Montreal based company, and thanks to the bureau de la langue francaise, all company meetings had to be in French, which few of us spoke, leading to lots of puzzled faces.HYUFD said:TimB Indeed, it was Levesque who set the ball rolling with Quebec's first independence referendum
0 -
TimB Yes, if they were in Gaelic would complicate matters even more, night!0
-
Playing the Ed Miliband next PM market is going to be fun all the way till polling day - laid at 2.28 yesterday, rebacked at 2.54 and higher now0
-
Thank you for the link.Pulpstar said:
http://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/market?id=1.101416490viewcode said:
I've just been to betfair (https://www.betfair.com/sport/politics ) and it doesn't give you the option to bet against. I can bet on LOM at 5/1, but it won't let me bet against LOM. Given that I want to bet against LOM, this is a problem...Pulpstar said:
You can lay them at 20s on Betfair.viewcode said:Has Socrates been banned? A pity: I enjoyed sparring with him and he had the courtesy to answer direct questions when asked. Hopefully his absence is not permanent, although I do take Mike's point about repetitive posting.
Anyhoo, I come neither to praise nor blame but to ask advice. I wish to bet against Labour getting an overall majority. Last time I placed a bet I used SPIN but their tendency to suspend betting for prolonged periods unnerved me. If one wanted to place a large bet against LOM, but retain the option to bet for if prices moved against me and thus cut my losses, which would be the best betting firm to use?
Use this market.
£100 or so available to lay at 19s So for ~ £1900 liability you can win £100
0 -
Not really, the Aliyah is part of Jewish culture. That so few have considered is very surprising. I would have expected it to be very high but not because of anti-semitism but purely due to cultural pull.Tim_B said:
It means that 1 in 8 Jews has considered leaving - that should be troubling.Pong said:
or if you want to go all daily mail,Richard_Nabavi said:The Survation website has no mention of the Sheffield Hallam poll. It does however have this weird headline: "New Poll of the Jewish Community Finds 88% Have Not Considered Leaving the UK"
HOUSE PRICE CRASH FEARED AS SURVEY SHOWS THOUSANDS OF JEWS READY TO FLEE BRITAIN0 -
English is the best language in the world! (don't tell Mum!)MTimT said:
TimB Didn't Montreal's English-speaking financial sector up sticks and relocated to Toronto en masse following that idiocy?Tim_B said:
I used to work in those days for a Montreal based company, and thanks to the bureau de la langue francaise, all company meetings had to be in French, which few of us spoke, leading to lots of puzzled faces.HYUFD said:TimB Indeed, it was Levesque who set the ball rolling with Quebec's first independence referendum
0 -
No worries,viewcode said:
Thank you for the link.Pulpstar said:
http://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/market?id=1.101416490viewcode said:
I've just been to betfair (https://www.betfair.com/sport/politics ) and it doesn't give you the option to bet against. I can bet on LOM at 5/1, but it won't let me bet against LOM. Given that I want to bet against LOM, this is a problem...Pulpstar said:
You can lay them at 20s on Betfair.viewcode said:Has Socrates been banned? A pity: I enjoyed sparring with him and he had the courtesy to answer direct questions when asked. Hopefully his absence is not permanent, although I do take Mike's point about repetitive posting.
Anyhoo, I come neither to praise nor blame but to ask advice. I wish to bet against Labour getting an overall majority. Last time I placed a bet I used SPIN but their tendency to suspend betting for prolonged periods unnerved me. If one wanted to place a large bet against LOM, but retain the option to bet for if prices moved against me and thus cut my losses, which would be the best betting firm to use?
Use this market.
£100 or so available to lay at 19s So for ~ £1900 liability you can win £100
It isn't a bet I'd lay personally at 19.0 though.0 -
After 35 years, American isn't bad either :-)Sunil_Prasannan said:
English is the best language in the world! (don't tell Mum!)MTimT said:
TimB Didn't Montreal's English-speaking financial sector up sticks and relocated to Toronto en masse following that idiocy?Tim_B said:
I used to work in those days for a Montreal based company, and thanks to the bureau de la langue francaise, all company meetings had to be in French, which few of us spoke, leading to lots of puzzled faces.HYUFD said:TimB Indeed, it was Levesque who set the ball rolling with Quebec's first independence referendum
0 -
Ilford North should be close!foxinsoxuk said:
According to AndyJS's spreadsheet it is Ilford North or Aberconway, with Watford being a bell wether.Pulpstar said:What is Labour's 83rd target seat ?
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/lv?key=0At91c3wX1Wu5dDRiT1FSRTF2bjVYRThSTnRaNzFXMlE#gid=00 -
DNA testing revealed him to be Horse meat!GIN1138 said:
Whatever happened to Mick Pork?Stark_Dawning said:
Are you sure you want to go down that route?SeanT said:If it is not, this site is very seriously diminished, and I will happily blog to that effect, even if Mike bans me. Who cares.
http://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/free-pork.html0 -
It's in London, Labour's strongest areaSunil_Prasannan said:
Ilford North should be close!foxinsoxuk said:
According to AndyJS's spreadsheet it is Ilford North or Aberconway, with Watford being a bell wether.Pulpstar said:What is Labour's 83rd target seat ?
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/lv?key=0At91c3wX1Wu5dDRiT1FSRTF2bjVYRThSTnRaNzFXMlE#gid=00 -
I must have misheard - I thought it was whore's meat.Sunil_Prasannan said:
DNA testing revealed him to be Horse meat!GIN1138 said:
Whatever happened to Mick Pork?Stark_Dawning said:
Are you sure you want to go down that route?SeanT said:If it is not, this site is very seriously diminished, and I will happily blog to that effect, even if Mike bans me. Who cares.
http://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/free-pork.html0 -
I need the YG tables to work out the ELBOW so far this week, but the simple average of this week's six polls so far gives a Lab lead of 1.8% and the LDs and Greens both on 7%.TheScreamingEagles said:Two crossovers
YouGov/Sun poll tonight - Tories ahead by one: CON 34%, LAB 33%, LD 6%, UKIP 13%, GRN 7%0 -
"Labour most seats" now doing the same hockey-stick thing as "Labour majority" did a few weeks ago....
2.46 on BF0 -
Survation must surely be seriously concerned about their credibility when, despite this poll showing Labour having a 10% lead over the LibDems in Sheffield Hallam, the Reds can still be readily backed with several bookmakers at odds of 3/10
-
Betting post
Having dinner last night in London and got a very hot tip. I haven't really looked into this much to be frank as London isn't an area I know well but apparently Sarah Sackman is going to win Finchley/Golders Green for Labour.
She has the backing of the Tory Evening Standard (shock!!!!) and even the right wing editor Sarah Sands like her and is supporting her. She is receiving lots of backing from across the constituency and has cross party support.
The reason I'm posting this, is because its the first significant seat where everyone concerned seems to want her to win. If you look at the betting, her price is huge.
0 -
The Conservative incumbent has a 12.3% majority. Are you sure you haven't bet already on the spreads and you're trying to get your money back? A Labour win in such a Jewish seat seems extremely unlikely. And you admit you don't know the area. Hmmmm.PokerSNGpro said:Betting post
Having dinner last night in London and got a very hot tip. I haven't really looked into this much to be frank as London isn't an area I know well but apparently Sarah Sackman is going to win Finchley/Golders Green for Labour.
She has the backing of the Tory Evening Standard (shock!!!!) and even the right wing editor Sarah Sands like her and is supporting her. She is receiving lots of backing from across the constituency and has cross party support.
The reason I'm posting this, is because its the first significant seat where everyone concerned seems to want her to win. If you look at the betting, her price is huge.
It's good to join a betting site for the election. A lot of liquidity starting to flow which is good to see.
0 -
Re uguv last night. St Valentines Day Swingback Massacre long foretold by me still on then....
Labour being revealed as rotten to the core isn't helping them south of the border either now.
OGH seems a bit out of sorts over Cleegies misfortune, however I suspect Socrates ban has more to do with fear of Messers Sue Grabbit and Runne. I suspect the problem is that if someone starts a case against you it can cost you a fortune (not to mention the hassle amd stress), even if the allegation is true and they turn up and and you win.-1 -
Not Guilty .... this time ....foxinsoxuk said:
Sausages?GIN1138 said:
Whatever happened to Mick Pork?Stark_Dawning said:
Are you sure you want to go down that route?SeanT said:If it is not, this site is very seriously diminished, and I will happily blog to that effect, even if Mike bans me. Who cares.
http://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/free-pork.html
0 -
I.for one can believe that Clegg is in trouble..For women voters he in particular he is a complete. turn off these days. Of front rank politicians only Jim Murphy gives me more negative vibrations0
-
So they recover one seat. Wow. At least he is standing unlike Brown and other Labour cowards who have decided to cut and run. Meanwhile probably 10 good reasons why those in Sheffield and elsewhere should avoid Labour like the plague
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2940470/Mr-Balls-amnesia-couldn-t-recall-Labour-supporting-boss-Ed-Balls-forgotten-role-Britain-s-worst-financial-disasters.html0 -
Regarding Rotherham, the likelihood of full council election in May increases the chances of Labour holding on to all the seats.
I expect significant levels of differential voting, allows voters to have it both ways - "I want a Labour govt but I hate the Labour Council" - Pickles intervention may have saved the seats for Labour!0 -
If Labour win Finchley & Golders Green, they'll have won an overall majority.PokerSNGpro said:Betting post
Having dinner last night in London and got a very hot tip. I haven't really looked into this much to be frank as London isn't an area I know well but apparently Sarah Sackman is going to win Finchley/Golders Green for Labour.
She has the backing of the Tory Evening Standard (shock!!!!) and even the right wing editor Sarah Sands like her and is supporting her. She is receiving lots of backing from across the constituency and has cross party support.
The reason I'm posting this, is because its the first significant seat where everyone concerned seems to want her to win. If you look at the betting, her price is huge.
0 -
You're the first person I'm aware of who's suggested Labour might win Finchley.PokerSNGpro said:Betting post
Having dinner last night in London and got a very hot tip. I haven't really looked into this much to be frank as London isn't an area I know well but apparently Sarah Sackman is going to win Finchley/Golders Green for Labour.
She has the backing of the Tory Evening Standard (shock!!!!) and even the right wing editor Sarah Sands like her and is supporting her. She is receiving lots of backing from across the constituency and has cross party support.
The reason I'm posting this, is because its the first significant seat where everyone concerned seems to want her to win. If you look at the betting, her price is huge.0 -
I think you'll find your hot tip is either an STD or cystitis, either way you should see your doctor asap./PokerSNGpro said:Betting post
Having dinner last night in London and got a very hot tip. I haven't really looked into this much to be frank as London isn't an area I know well but apparently Sarah Sackman is going to win Finchley/Golders Green for Labour.
She has the backing of the Tory Evening Standard (shock!!!!) and even the right wing editor Sarah Sands like her and is supporting her. She is receiving lots of backing from across the constituency and has cross party support.
The reason I'm posting this, is because its the first significant seat where everyone concerned seems to want her to win. If you look at the betting, her price is huge.0 -
On the train to work - the only time I read newspapers off line. It seems that it is finally dawning on the Scottish branch of the press (Daily Record a part) that Murphy is a man with no plan.0
-
The BBC say the council elections will be "early 2016"......michaelcollins10 said:Regarding Rotherham, the likelihood of full council election in May increases the chances of Labour holding on to all the seats.
I expect significant levels of differential voting, allows voters to have it both ways - "I want a Labour govt but I hate the Labour Council" - Pickles intervention may have saved the seats for Labour!0 -
No chance of Labour winning Finchley but an outside chance in Southgate.Sean_F said:
If Labour win Finchley & Golders Green, they'll have won an overall majority.PokerSNGpro said:Betting post
Having dinner last night in London and got a very hot tip. I haven't really looked into this much to be frank as London isn't an area I know well but apparently Sarah Sackman is going to win Finchley/Golders Green for Labour.
She has the backing of the Tory Evening Standard (shock!!!!) and even the right wing editor Sarah Sands like her and is supporting her. She is receiving lots of backing from across the constituency and has cross party support.
The reason I'm posting this, is because its the first significant seat where everyone concerned seems to want her to win. If you look at the betting, her price is huge.
0 -
3/1 isn't that big, Poker.PokerSNGpro said:Betting post
Having dinner last night in London and got a very hot tip. I haven't really looked into this much to be frank as London isn't an area I know well but apparently Sarah Sackman is going to win Finchley/Golders Green for Labour.
She has the backing of the Tory Evening Standard (shock!!!!) and even the right wing editor Sarah Sands like her and is supporting her. She is receiving lots of backing from across the constituency and has cross party support.
The reason I'm posting this, is because its the first significant seat where everyone concerned seems to want her to win. If you look at the betting, her price is huge.
The seat is a semi-marginal and London is polling a bit stronger for Labour than most parts, so not a major upset if they take this one. The Standard is a give-away and I doubt it has much political influence these days. The Jewish vote is not a block vote. I would say it splits roughly the same as the non-Jewish vote. The area is fairly mixed - I know it well - and it really doesn't surprise me that it is kind of marginal. I accept the Labour candidate is strong, but the incumbent is popular. The price looks about right.
Btw, I noticed you sounding off the other day about Site bias, or too many Tory posters, or something like that. The problem here is not too many blues - or reds, or yellows, or purples - but too few punters. It's the betting angle that gives the Site its USP, and without a vibrant contribution from regular serious punters, it would become just another dull, biased political blog.
Welcome aboard. Keep posting, keep punting.0 -
Lets spare a thought for our old friend tim.
Who made constituency bets on the basis of the equation:
Labour 2010 + 50% LibDem 2010 = Labour 2015
0 -
Some of those targets in the 85th-95th range for Labour look easier for Labour than you'd think, because they held them in 2005: Watford, Finchley, Reading West and a swathe of Kent marginals.
But the political landscape has changed massively since then. It's very hard to see how Miliband could appeal to the electorate in these constituencies to pick them up in the same way Blair did.0 -
Very close. No more than a couple of miles from me in fact.Sunil_Prasannan said:
Ilford North should be close!foxinsoxuk said:
According to AndyJS's spreadsheet it is Ilford North or Aberconway, with Watford being a bell wether.Pulpstar said:What is Labour's 83rd target seat ?
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/lv?key=0At91c3wX1Wu5dDRiT1FSRTF2bjVYRThSTnRaNzFXMlE#gid=0
OK, it's early.
0 -
To be frank whether Labour win the seats in Rotherham isn't really the point and party considerations simply should not figure in this.
The point surely is that Labour will have a clean slate and all of the Councillors who let this happen on their watch will be out of public office for good. It is sad that our political classes have to be incentivised in this way but surely absolutely essential.
0 -
The Mail has been great on this.SeanT said:Credit where credit is due. When the Daily Mail wants to nail an issue down, they do it. Rotherham.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2939129/Two-local-councillors-corrupt-police-officer-accused-having-sex-victims-Rotherham-abuse-scandal.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490
0 -
New thread.0
-
I don't think that is quite fair. He has lots of plans and considerable energy. He is getting the Labour party working harder than it probably ever has in the vast majority of these seats for life.scotslass said:On the train to work - the only time I read newspapers off line. It seems that it is finally dawning on the Scottish branch of the press (Daily Record a part) that Murphy is a man with no plan.
A better analogy might perhaps be the Captain of the Titanic after it had hit the iceberg. Sometimes there are simply no good options no matter what you try.0 -
That's good to know, Isam.isam said:Westminster paedo files discovered (see what I did there?)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11391319/Four-Westminster-child-sex-abuse-files-unearthed-in-Whitehall-archives.html
However the killer is the snuff film. I understand this has been seen by many journalists, including some household names, and that the police have a copy. I expect inquiries to take a while but am more sure than ever that the matter will not be swept under the carpet.0 -
If there is a seat where Ed's rather geekish roots are popular, it may well be this one. Even so 3/1 does not seem very good value. I may keep it in my watchlist though.Peter_the_Punter said:
3/1 isn't that big, Poker.PokerSNGpro said:Betting post
Having dinner last night in London and got a very hot tip. I haven't really looked into this much to be frank as London isn't an area I know well but apparently Sarah Sackman is going to win Finchley/Golders Green for Labour.
She has the backing of the Tory Evening Standard (shock!!!!) and even the right wing editor Sarah Sands like her and is supporting her. She is receiving lots of backing from across the constituency and has cross party support.
The reason I'm posting this, is because its the first significant seat where everyone concerned seems to want her to win. If you look at the betting, her price is huge.
The seat is a semi-marginal and London is polling a bit stronger for Labour than most parts, so not a major upset if they take this one. The Standard is a give-away and I doubt it has much political influence these days. The Jewish vote is not a block vote. I would say it splits roughly the same as the non-Jewish vote. The area is fairly mixed - I know it well - and it really doesn't surprise me that it is kind of marginal. I accept the Labour candidate is strong, but the incumbent is popular. The price looks about right.
Btw, I noticed you sounding off the other day about Site bias, or too many Tory posters, or something like that. The problem here is not too many blues - or reds, or yellows, or purples - but too few punters. It's the betting angle that gives the Site its USP, and without a vibrant contribution from regular serious punters, it would become just another dull, biased political blog.
Welcome aboard. Keep posting, keep punting.
Yet another Lab/Con fight, where the LD's are yet to select, despite 17% at the last election. Morley and Outwood is the same. I note that the Tories have been rather sluggish selecting in LD marginals like Burnley or Caithness. Coincidence or Conspiracy? Certainly it shows a lack of organisation and intent.
0
