politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Exactly 5 years ago bullish punters pushed the betting to
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Exactly 5 years ago bullish punters pushed the betting to a CON majority of 36 completely in defiance of the polling
Last night John Rentoul asked me what had happened in the betting at this stage of the 2010 campaign and I dug up the above – an index that I created and reported regularly on here based on the spread betting and Betfair line prices.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
When he first got in the England team he is was effortlessly quick with a smooth high repeatable action. Now it is all hurf while falling over.
The power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them... To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just as long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies – all this is indispensably necessary
At the same time we hear that the Conservatives need to gain 11.4% swing to gain a majority, and simultaneously that the national swing is irrelevant and its 650 individual competitions taking places in individual constituencies. Does the national swing matter, or doesn't it ?
We hear that the Tories are a couple of points behind Labour and are going to lose their seats in droves, but at the same time the LDs are going to drop three quarters of their national vote share and yet hold on to the majority of their seats.
UKIP on 18% are going to get 2 seats, UKIP on 8% are also going to get 2 seats and yet dropping a couple of points in the polls is a disaster for them.
When we start looking at partisan issues its even more obvious, Labour Doublethink on Cuts, Labour and Conservatives have ring fences pretty much all the same things, they are both going to make similar levels of cuts, there isn't much left that isn't ring fenced, so in reality they are both going to cut the same things, and yet one parties cuts if good and one is bad.
Tory doublethink on immigration. Cameron cutting immigration to under 100k is a good thing (despite being unachievable and gratuitously favouring white Europeans) , UKIP cuts on immigration bad and possibly racist (despite probably being equally unachievable, but being colour-blind)
Up to a point, Lord Copper.
When that's broken down by VI we get:
Con: 24
Lab: 11
LibD: 3
UKIP: 6
We might expect Lib Dem & UKIP voters with no chance of having party leader PM as not being fussed - but Labour too?
Then when we look at attributes:
Cameron vs Miliband:
Trustworthy: +3
Out of touch w' ordinary people: +12 (BOTH Cameron (47)& Miliband(35) joint highest ratings)
Right policies: +5
Statesmanlike: +33 (Cameron joint highest - 46)
Someone like me: -3 (both low scores: 15 & 18)
Competent: +16
Intelligent +14 (Cameron joint highest -45)
Can get things done: +14
Weird: -26 (Miliband joint highest- 35)
Stands for what he believes in: +2
Clear vision for the country: +9
So Cameron's highest ratings are for:
- Being out of touch with ordinary people
- Intelligent
- Statemanlike
And Miliband's:
- Being out of touch with ordinary people
- Weird
On the 'out of touch metric, Farage (22%) scores best, but his highest attributes are 'Weird' (40 - beating even Ed!) and 'stands up for what he believes in (37).
Looking at Con VI attitude to Cameron, vs Lab VI attitude to Miliband:
Cameron vs Miliband:
Trustworthy: +15
Out of touch w' ordinary people: -3
Right policies: +18
Statesmanlike: +50
Someone like me: -3
Competent: +25
Intelligent +22
Can get things done: +18
Weird: -18
Stands for what he believes in: +6
Clear vision for the country: +18
The only metric where Cameron loses significantly to Ed is 'weird', whereas 'out of touch/someone like me' is a draw.....
Of course, if Labour voters are indifferent to who is PM, none of this matters.....
UKIP VI on Farage [Lab VI on Miliband]
Trustworthy: 50 [57]
Out of touch w' ordinary people: 5 [18]
Right policies: 76 [70]
Statesmanlike: 35 [35]
Someone like me: 59 [53]
Competent: 46 [62]
Intelligent 51 [65]
Can get things done: 55 [66]
Weird: 12 [19]
Stands for what he believes in: 79 [64]
Clear vision for the country: 73 [67]
Nearly 300,000 taxpayers are forecast to contribute the equivalent of £45.9 billion in income tax between them by the end of this year, equivalent to £150,000 each. The amount they have paid has risen from 25 per cent of the nation’s tax bill when Labour came to power to 27.3 per cent this year.
The figures will be welcomed by the Conservatives, after repeated accusations from Labour that the party has given tax breaks to the rich.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/tax/11411790/Britains-highest-earners-pay-a-quarter-of-nations-income-tax.html
NOM looks pretty certain, with no obvious coalition in sight, meaning confidence and supply.
I forsee Miliband as PM, but not for long, the Tories in civil war over Europe and a second election within a year.
Ed Miliband has the negative Midas touch, but the real problem for Labour is that the entire front bench is a talent free zone. If ever there was a team capable of blowing it, it is this one!
Whoever comes in next will have to follow current Conservative financial plans, like it or not. Prospective coalition Partners have no incentive to play ball.
Could be a very short-lived Government.
No danger of that from the SNP.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/11412399/We-need-more-City-firms-to-speak-out-on-Labours-economics.html
The only way that circle gets squared away is if Ed is so weak he caves in to extra cash for Scotland, with the rest of the UK having to take even deeper cuts / austerity to compensate.
Who would want to be Ed Miliband? He loses, his career is over in May. He wins, his career is over in October, remembered only as the most vilified Prime Minister since at least Chamberlain and probably for centuries before that. And his Party with him.
A situation where they are king makers is a nightmare for them, they have to go with Labour, anything is political suicide.
He will follow through with his promises, won't he?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-31456161
But on the face of it, it does appear symptomatic of self-interested council management (this case is the SNP but I'm sure there are equally bad cases in all parties).
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2952646/Senior-teacher-redundant-councillors-refuse-cut-drinks-budget-44-000.html
People also seem to really underestimating how well an unpopular government could do to hang on, especially with the Fixed Terms Act. Would the current Labour party, even when really unpopular due to a terrible PM, cooperate in going to the polls again when they have a full five years to try to turn things around. They'll think something will come up that will allow them to turn things around, politicians always do, it's why they say and spend for today and worry about bigger issues tomorrow. Well, I certainly don't much like the rise of the SNP, but without question one good thing to come out of this is someone's safe seats finally being challenged or at least challengeable. The unchanging nature of far far too many seats after generations of ups and many many downs, is something that needed to end, the parties take too much for granted and normally it never comes back to hurt them. At least now it has.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-31359021
Looks like Kiev (and their US backers) are no more likely to implement Minsk II than they were Minsk I. Ukrainian media cited Foreign Minister Pavlo Klimkin as saying that the amnesty agreed at the latest Minsk peace talks would not be applicable to the leaders of the Donbass militia contrary to the agreement. Ukraine’s Right Sector leader Dmitry Yarosh said his radical movement rejects the Minsk peace deal and that their paramilitary units in eastern Ukraine will continue “active fighting" according to their "own plans." The Kiev regime and the US look like they will be even more isolated from Europe and the Ukrainian people.
One great snippet was about his colleague who got so much shit for THAT sexist shirt? Turns out his wife had bought it for him, so he'd have something smart to wear on the telly....
I'm very willing to accept that it is misleadingly presented (possibly leading to erroneous conclusions) but, on the face of it, it does appear to be a misallocation of scarce resources
There are a good number of capable Lib Dems, and while I am no fan of the Tories there are some pretty capable front benchers.
I expect malcolmg would have been equally dismissive of the story if it was a Tory council prioritising its drinks budget over pregnant teens.......
Derek Scott, the Conservative member for Broughty Ferry, proposed slashing food and refreshment for councillors, alcohol purchases and hospitality budgets.
He said that by saving £44,000 in the entertainment allowance, the council could afford to keep the principal teacher at the YMU while still balancing the books.
However, his motion was defeated by SNP members who pushed ahead with their proposals — and Labour councillors who declined to vote.
http://www.thecourier.co.uk/news/local/dundee/dundee-budget-vital-teacher-post-axed-to-save-drinks-allowance-1.838278
Most of the talented activists and councillors have left the LD in my part of the world.
http://www.thecourier.co.uk/news/local/dundee/dundee-budget-vital-teacher-post-axed-to-save-drinks-allowance-1.838278
Honestly, what part of my, as a unionist, seeing positives from the rise of the SNP despite not liking them, does not suggest I am being reasonable, or that I see the rise as wrong? I presume on rare occasions a Westminster party does something you can accept as reasonable, but that does not mean for one minute you would like them?
Edit - actually, scratch that. I am sure no unionist politician or party has ever done anything reasonable or even non-nefarious.
SNP pols love their treats and freebies.
Time to clamp down on taxpayer funded obesity.
You expect malcolm to engage with facts?
You haven't been paying attention.....
And it looks from the Courier that an amendment was proposed to fund the teaching place from cutting the hospitality budget - but was voted down, so in this case, the 'drinks or a teacher?' comparison appears fair.....
Pathetic attempt to smear the SNP and nothing else. What next , do not use fuel in council vehicles to keep a teacher in employment. As a business they will have to do some entertaining / functions in a yea rand they will not get much for £44K.
A Conservative proposed a motion cutting the hospitality budget to save the position.
The SNP voted it down (Labour abstained).
So one was a consequence of the other.
Seems like the right decision, the need for a principal teacher to be involved in a YMU when it is a support unit and not a teaching unit seems very wasteful.
As one of the comments has it 'at least we know what the SNP stands for 'Sherry, Nips & Pints'......
A record-breaking number of people are now in work, averaging over 13,000 more people in jobs every single week over the last year.
Since 2010 two-thirds of the rise in employment has been in managerial, professional or associate professional occupations.
The figures from the Office for National Statistics show that 694,000 more people are in jobs compared to this time last year. Employment increased by 112,000 over the last 3 months alone, with the vast majority of the increase coming from people in full-time jobs.
There are now a record 30.8 million people in work, with the employment rate (73.0%) now back to pre-recession levels.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/record-breaking-number-of-people-in-jobs
The problem is that Dundee has far more places at its schools than children and some rationalisation is inevitable. Dundee schools also have some of the worst academic records in the country. There are a lot of reasons for this but one of them is arguably that too many resources are being wasted on half full schools.
Being fair to the SNP is something I find difficult but the truth is that this part of the story is being isolated and distorted by looking at a single post in isolation.
Menzieshill is one of the state schools my kids could have gone to so we are pretty local to this.
Under Labour, a decision was made that a support unit should be headed by a principal teacher on £44k per annum. The need for a teacher in such a role is non-existent. The cost of employing someone so overqualified for a social support role is far higher than it should be.
However a Tory amendment describes it, the Hospitality Budget is not a slush fund for councillors, this isn't a Labour council where it's all for them, it's the SNP who have a substantially positive record in local government and have already abolished most of the perks Labour set up under the Great Embezzlement.
Beyond that, we don't know if a review has already taken place and deemed the need for a principal teacher in such an administrative role as redundant. We don't know how bare the Hospitality Budget is for Dundee Council.
We are certainly not in a position to jump the the sort of conclusions either paper is making but can be certain, from the facts, that it is not "teaching post sacrificed to save drinks budget".
- best get back to your Sherry Nips & Pints
The number of people forced to work part-time because they have not been able to find full-time work is at its highest level since records began
"He added that another aim was "to reassure investors that agreement remains strong across current leaders on emissions reduction, and that we're unlikely to see a major change in direction whichever party forms the next government"."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-31456161
As the population is generally rising, then there will always be a "record number of people in work" (outside of specific short term incidents like the Labour Crash of 2008).
All that has happened is that, as the recession has faded the employment rate has returned to its normal, consistent level, which generally seems to be outside the control of government in the long term (unsurprisingly almost all of the Economy is outside the control of government).
2015 - are the forecasters, having learned from 2010, now correctly accounting for change versus continuity? Or is it a party thing - forecasters are still inherently optimistic about the Tories? Let's face it - none of us knows!
"We know that Scotland's economy has returned to pre-recession levels and these figures show that our recovery is continuing to gain momentum, with unemployment down and employment at its highest level ever.
"These figures show that Scotland has the economic potential to be an independent country."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-28770707
In general I would still question whether a principal teacher is a better lead for a support unit than a decent administrative social worker heading it up, especially as the social worker will cost a lot less. I am sure there is some teaching requirement for remedial courses and studies but I don't see why a good administrative social worker can't co-ordinate teachers from general classwork to run such courses.
"Nearly 300,000 taxpayers are forecast to contribute the equivalent of £45.9 billion in income tax between them by the end of this year, equivalent to £150,000 each. The amount they have paid has risen from 25 per cent of the nation’s tax bill when Labour came to power to 27.3 per cent this year.
The figures will be welcomed by the Conservatives, after repeated accusations from Labour that the party has given tax breaks to the rich."
A meaningless statistic. The rich are considerably richer than they were five years ago. The poor poorer. It also takes no account of the hike in VAT which disproportionately hits the poor
Good to see you provide more support for Scottish Independence.
Pounds are currency. Percentages aren't.
Meanwhile the PB tory commenters put their fingers in their ears and say lalalalala "he dosen't really exist except in your imagination" every time someone mentions UKIP or Farage.
And the Labour commentators say nothing because they seem to have all been banned......
Sadly its getting rather boring.
My own view. We have seen the most extraordinary shift in political allegances in generations over the last two years. Political opinion polls can only take a tiny sample of the electorate. Inevitably they have refined those techniques over the years based on a stable two party system where in simple terms the council estate votes Labour and the large houses on the edge of town vote tory with a few of both voting Liberal.
Now. The council estate is split randomly between Labour, Green and UKIP, the big house owners are as likely to vote UKIP as Tory (and their kids might vote Green too), No ones says they are voting Liberal and all the Scots are saying they are voting SNP. Plus millions of people who haven't voted for years will be voting this time and millions more who normally vote for the big two parties won't bother as they think they are crap but think UKIP, Green etc are crapper.
The chances of any pollster getting this election right with anything like the accuracy seen in elections since '97 are, I would say minimal. So I'm not taking too much notice of the polls.
To put this achievement in context only Germany has managed anything similar in Europe and they did not really suffer a major recession at all.
How have they done this? Well the demand generated by our frightenly large defict has helped. So has policies that make the UK a cheap place to employ and dismiss people. So has quite aggressive social security policies that have driven the poorly motivated to find work. So have the continuation of the policies of subsidising low value work with generous in work benefits and housing costs.
It is something of an economic miracle and it has the unemployed of Europe beating a path to our door.
https://twitter.com/EdConwaySky/status/238666223066439680
I blame the feral fat.
They need to get people thinking about "benefit scroungers" again, as Dave wants to reprise his last campaign.
Unhelpful idiots like Guido and others need to be brought into line and told to STFU about tax before it becomes too dominant an issue.
You don't need to be a socialist to note the massive disparity in the treatment between tax and social security offenders.
And then I look at the real world. A local election in Shropshire where there is a swing to the conservatives.
Whenever there has been a real election since 2014, the polling has been a shockingly poor indicator of the result.
And that is why the betting markets aren't enabling certain backers of the left to be in clover
Wrong Peter, check through the back catalogue of this august organ and look at those who deem tax avoidance not only as "moral" but almost a duty?
Scroungers are bad, tax avoiders are heroes of libertarianism.
Whilst the Government's record on employment is by no means perfect, and whilst it is legitimate to question how much of Britain's current prosperity is attributable to the government and how much to other factors, there is no doubt that the overall employment picture is very good indeed, particularly when contrasted with the position of other European countries (particularly those that have historically favoured high central government spending). We should recognise that, and recognise that the Government deserves some credit for that. Instead, we have you and others desperately looking for a some tenuous reason to criticise. Ironically, your predecessors on here used to decry Conservatives for "talking down the economy" at a time when it was in fact performing badly. Now you talk down an economy that is manifestly performing well.
Unfortunately this trend is increasing. BenM is the other main culprit, although he does have the redeeming and endearing feature of acknowledging when he is wrong. Recently it has manifested itself in laboured faux intellectualism. Just this week we have had a sudden outburst of headshaking concern about the risks of deflation, from people who only 12 months ago were deeply worried about the cost of living crisis. Before that it was the effects of unemployment, then youth unemployment, then long-term unemployment, then flat growth. Interspersed with that is occasional concern about the deficit, although most Labour-leaning commentators try to avoid discussing it because, understandably, they haven't a clue what their party intends to do about it.
The irony is there are no shortage of economic problems you could focus on. But you just randomly projectile vomit on good data.