politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Marf for the evening and David Herdson with the half-time P

Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick ·
Thursday's Daily Mail front page:
Voters tell Cameron to act on migration
#tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers

Mike doesn't live in Twickenham and has no right to choose the representative for that constituency.
My family family were born and grew up in Twickenham and I feel a close affinity. My vote swap is with former neighbours and long standing friends.

If you have FPTP then it is inevitable that people will seek to find a way of making their vote count.



Mike- you do not have to justify yourself. My vote Swop is with a Green I have never met who will vote in a Labour marginal I would hardly know existed.
Every vote counts comrade.

another_richard said:

MikeSmithson said:

@Pong I think that at 9/4 the LDs are good value in Montgomery. From what I can gather they've got about a 45% chance. Organisation is very strong and their candidate has been able to say that she is not Lembit Opik.

But didn't the Conservatives gain the equivalent Welsh Assembly seat in 2011 ?

Now perhaps the legacy of Lembit was still working then and has now dissipated.

I wouldn't expect a LibDems gain there but then I wouldn't be surprised if the LibDems did make a solitary gain somewhere as their history tends to be one of surprise gains.

Bosworth is a possibility for a longshot LD gain.

The LDs are in a strong second place; Hinckley council is well run, there is some kipper element splitting here and the Tory incumbent is a barking mad Old Etonian who believes Astrology is the answer to the NHS crisis. I kid you not:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/nhs/11432344/Astrology-could-solve-crisis-in-the-NHS-says-Tory-MP.html

But with the national polls as they are, I cannot see it.

Life_ina_market_town said:

rcs1000 said:

It's Mike Smithson's vote and he should be allowed to do what he likes with it.

So he should be allowed to contract to sell it to the highest bidder? That's certainly a view, albeit an extreme one, but if contracting to sell your vote for one form of consideration is prohibited, it is difficult why it should not be prohibited for all forms of consideration.

My understanding is that vote swapping has been looked at by the electoral commission after some of the vote swapping sites that appeared in 2010 and has been deemed legal.

@SunPolitics: YouGov/Sun poll tonight - Labour lead by one: CON 33%, LAB 34%, LD 7%, UKIP 14%, GRN 5%

Mike doesn't live in Twickenham and has no right to choose the representative for that constituency.

Mike hasn't voted in Twickenham.



No, he's voted Labour in Bedford. Thus doing his level best to ensure the election of Labour, and Ed Miliband as Prime Minister.



Mike used to be a member of the Labour party, so it doesn't surprise me. In his heart he probably feels like he has finally come home, back to the fold.

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/SunPolitics/status/590990970822402048

The day the polls turned

Sun Politics ‏@SunPolitics · 38 secs38 seconds ago
YouGov/Sun poll tonight - Labour lead by one: CON 33%, LAB 34%, LD 7%, UKIP 14%, GRN 5%

Casino_Royale said:

JackW said:

nigel4england said:

Stereotomy said:

Charles said:

Stereotomy said:

Charles said:

JonCisBack said:

Charles said:

MikeSmithson said:

My votes have been cast so for me the election is over.

Not for the poor people of Twickenham, who's right to choose their local representative has been sadly diminished by the self-importance of one individual.

Apols but what does this refer to?

OGH has decided that his desire to have more LibDem MPs in Parliament is more important than the rights of residents to choose their own MPs

He has therefore swapped his vote in Bedford with someone (who I assume is a Labour supporter) and, in return, that individual will vote LibDem in Twickenham.

I think it is outrageous, and a subversion of the principle of MPs representing their local constituents

Yeah, I can't think of a more egregious subversion of democracy than somebody deciding how to cast their own vote based on criteria they choose. Only votes carefully calculated from the Official List Of Valid Reasons To Vote are okay, everything else is morally reprehensible.

It's a subversion of the principle that we have a system based on local constituencies.

The right of the people of Twickenham to select their representative is paramount.

The LibDems advocated a change in the rules and the people rejected it. So they should abide by that decision not circumnavigate it.

The right of the people of Twickenham who aren't Mike, you mean? Because you seem to think it's paramount that he DOESN'T get the right to choose his representative. Or at least doesn't get to choose them by means you don't approve of.

If I roll a die to choose who I vote for, does that also undermine the rights of my neighbours? What if I vote tactically? What if I try to vote for who I want but I just don't pay quite as much attention to the parties' campaigns as I should?

Mike doesn't live in Twickenham and has no right to choose the representative for that constituency.

Mike hasn't voted in Twickenham.

No, he's voted Labour in Bedford. Thus doing his level best to ensure the election of Labour, and Ed Miliband as Prime Minister.

Indeed so .... but that is unquestionably Mike's right, albeit it undermines by one single vote the inevitable fact that :

Ed Miliband Will Never Be Prime Minister

YBarddCwsc said:

another_richard said:

MikeSmithson said:

@Pong I think that at 9/4 the LDs are good value in Montgomery. From what I can gather they've got about a 45% chance. Organisation is very strong and their candidate has been able to say that she is not Lembit Opik.

But didn't the Conservatives gain the equivalent Welsh Assembly seat in 2011 ?

Now perhaps the legacy of Lembit was still working then and has now dissipated.

I wouldn't expect a LibDems gain there but then I wouldn't be surprised if the LibDems did make a solitary gain somewhere as their history tends to be one of surprise gains.

Correct, there was a huge swing against the LibDems in Montgomeryshire in the Assembly elections.

The former LibDem AM (Mick Bates) had been convicted of common assault.

The Tory candidate is a former member of Plaid Cymru, a Welsh speaking farmer.

So I think (unusually) the Tories have been quite savvy and have found someone who can appeal to both the Welsh-speaking west of the constituency and the farming vote. I don’t see Glyn Davies losing.

The LibDems have a reasonable chance of retaining Ceredigion and B&R, though.

Dear me so the people of Montgomery(shire) were represented by a pair of LibDem nutters.

Always an increased risk with it being a 'one party state' for so long.

Hmm,

Nothing worse than getting into other inter-web folks' arguments: If the target cannot defend themself no further participant should intervene. Given that; One wonders from where and whence Auntie Hortence will be released...?

:defend-yourself-and-your-views-only:

JackW said:

TGOHF said:

St George's day tomorrow - last one before our new Scotch overlords write our budgets.

Are Glenmorangie about to run the country ?

Glenmorangie were taken over by Hennessey as was Glen Moray and Ardbeg. May I suggest Hazelburn, that is like drinking raw peat water. Which is probably what you will fell like when Salmond writes that first budget

Evening all

Tom Newton Dunn Easter is it ?

Tykejohnno said:

Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick ·
Thursday's Daily Mail front page:
Voters tell Cameron to act on migration
#tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers

After I looked at tonight's news about the immigration crisis in europe, I think immigration will upstage the SNP as an issue.

roadto326 ‏@roadto326 11s12 seconds ago
Funny that The Sun and Newton Dunn don't give their polls as much build up when Labour are ahead.

Tory SNP strategy working according to TND but only for 24hrs apparently

Richard_Tyndall said:

My understanding is that vote swapping has been looked at by the electoral commission after some of the vote swapping sites that appeared in 2010 and has been deemed legal.

Vote swapping may well be legal, but that doesn't necessarily make it reasonable or justifiable. If I promise to vote a certain way or refrain from voting because a friend will do me a favour, most would agree my action to be reprehensible. It makes no difference whether the nature of that favour is paying me £5, exercising his right to vote in a certain way, or buying a third party lunch. In any event, the Electoral Commission (thankfully) has no jurisdiction to determine what is or what is not a corrupt practice. That jurisdiction belongs to the courts, and there is no authority on the matter.

volcanopete said:

Labour is now the only genuine unionist party,north and south of the border.

How so? I've yet to hear how the Tories attacking the SNP shows they are not unionist. From what I can gather it's because by attacking a SNP-Lab pact of some kind so much, it undermines the union, but the fact is the SNP winning a landslide does that on its own, and how does the Tories attacking a SNP-Lab pack make it worse? The only thing that would the union stronger, in theory, is Labour not losing dozens of seats to the SNP, but that's not the Tories fault, and given the spread of Tories in Scotland, tactical voting won't save many Lab MPs if SLAB cannot save themselves. Moreover, how could parties seeking to win majorities openly advocate tactical voting to save their chief opponents in another party of the country?

Alistair said:

Constitutional crisis? I feel someone is regretting the vow they made.

We haven't had a constitutional crisis since probably the abdication crisis.

So we should have one now, just so we know what one is.

Pulpstar said:

OTHERS 7% or so, Plaid on the rise Imo.

Or else you know who have gone into Ork&Shet

GIN1138 said:

tyson said:

Mike hasn't voted in Twickenham.



No, he's voted Labour in Bedford. Thus doing his level best to ensure the election of Labour, and Ed Miliband as Prime Minister.



Mike used to be a member of the Labour party, so it doesn't surprise me. In his heart he probably feels like he has finally come home, back to the fold.

I give it six months before OGH is very bitter about what Ed and Nicola have done to his savings...

Just wait until those two miserable puritans pile up taxes on gambling...

another_richard said:

Scott_P said:

@SunPolitics: YouGov/Sun poll tonight - Labour lead by one: CON 33%, LAB 34%, LD 7%, UKIP 14%, GRN 5%

What's the change from two days ago ?

Nothing of consequence. YouGov is the polling equivalent of Dave, it just shows repeats.

Jonathan said:

Tories crying wolf again about yet another crisis that will follow if people don't happen to vote for them.

A crisis?

You mean, like, "100 days to save the NHS"?

Jonathan said:

Tories crying wolf again about yet another crisis that will follow if people don't happen to vote for them.

Desperate

surbiton said:

As I understand it, Mike has voted in Bedford and his friend has voted in Twickenham - both in their own constituencies. I cannot see how the law was broken. I am not aware that you have to vote for the party you support.

But isn't tactical voting exactly that ? Vote not for the party you support.

Yeah but when you tactically vote in agreement with somebody else rather than on your own, quantum action-at-a-distance effects are induced which TAKE AWAY THE RIGHTS OF THE GOOD MEN AND PEOPLE OF THIS COUNTRY TO CHOOSE THEIR OWN GODDAMN REPRESENTATIVES.

It's all pretty complex physics, you probably wouldn't understand.

RodCrosby said:

Sophistry. He's not selling it to anyone.

It is the right of everyone, within reason, to persuade another elector to change their vote.

Two people can therefore persuade each other that it is in their collective best interest to vote for each other's party...

Persuasion does not involve making promises to the private benefit of an individual voter. That is a species of corruption.

Life_ina_market_town said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

My understanding is that vote swapping has been looked at by the electoral commission after some of the vote swapping sites that appeared in 2010 and has been deemed legal.

Vote swapping may well be legal, but that doesn't necessarily make it reasonable or justifiable. If I promise to vote a certain way or refrain from voting because a friend will do me a favour, most would agree my action to be reprehensible. It makes no difference whether the nature of that favour is paying me £5, exercising his right to vote in a certain way, or buying a third party lunch. In any event, the Electoral Commission (thankfully) has no jurisdiction to determine what is or what is not a corrupt practice. That jurisdiction belongs to the courts, and there is no authority on the matter.

Hopefully they will settle the matter, as the problem seems to me that some are characterising it as the exchange of favours equivalent to accepting money, whereas to my mind it is nothing more than the person in the other constituency, from all the factors that could influence their vote, deciding the opinion of person X in the other constituency to be the biggest factor. I think that is the wrong factor to hinge their decision upon on, but it's not a real favour as neither is actually getting the ability to vote in the other constituency, they are not receiving anything at all.

Nevertheless, until such time as it is determined to be illegal or a corrupt practice, I think while it can be criticised the level of criticism from some has been unfair, treating the matter as if it were obviously corrupt when apparently that has not been settled yet and so it is not so obvious after all.

Tomorrow's campaign strategy:

We hate SNP!
Watch out! SNP's about!
There's a SNP everywhere you go (in Scotland!)
You take the high road and I take the low road and we shall see some SNP together!

Life_ina_market_town said:

RodCrosby said:

Sophistry. He's not selling it to anyone.

It is the right of everyone, within reason, to persuade another elector to change their vote.

Two people can therefore persuade each other that it is in their collective best interest to vote for each other's party...

Persuasion does not involve making promises to the private benefit of an individual voter. That is a species of corruption.

How is someone personally benefiting from a vote in another constituency which they have not themselves cast, out of interest? Genuine question - I can see how, if it helps return an MP they would prefer win they would like that, but as they don't live in that constituency, how would they 'personally' benefit?

EICIPM Crossover on Betfair now only 1.7 time to take profit methinks

NickPalmer said:

What is the national share of votes being cast by post? We haven't got the final figures yet in my patch, but estimate that it's around 25%.

So a non-partisan point reinforcing what David says: if that's typical, and if that 25% are reepresentative, then it becomes one third harder to change the picture after the next day or two (most PVs are returned at once or not at all), especially as postal voters are more liable to vote. So if X needs, say, a 5% swing to capture a seat, and X is currently only on, say, 1%, then X is going to need a swing of about 7% in the remaining votes cast by polling day. Major changes from the current position (either way) should therefore be taken with a degree of caution, if they were to happen.

Possibly. It is quite possible that those with postal votes are more rigid in their voting habits, so they may well be much less inclined to waver. I think your sums are only true if postal voters behave in the same way as non postal.

The day the polls changed back (again)?

foxinsoxuk said:

another_richard said:

Scott_P said:

@SunPolitics: YouGov/Sun poll tonight - Labour lead by one: CON 33%, LAB 34%, LD 7%, UKIP 14%, GRN 5%

What's the change from two days ago ?

Nothing of consequence. YouGov is the polling equivalent of Dave, it just shows repeats.

Well we have learnt that Tom Newton Dunn is a bit of a nob - that is if people didn't already know that.

Sun Politics retweeted
Tom Newton Dunn ‏@tnewtondunn 13m13 minutes ago
For those enjoying @MarinaHyde's column tonight, worth knowing, for balance, #Labour have excluded The Sun from Miliband events for a month.

Today The Sun tomorrow Putin taken on!!

Cyclefree said:

This whole SNP stuff feels a bit like the Cleggasm. Flavour of the month; everyone gets v excited and thinks this will be a game-changer etc etc.

And yet when the results are in we will probably find that, other than in Scotland, it won't have made a damn difference, that for all the frothing by some, we end up with some sort of hung Parliament, which has been on the cards for ages and ages.

I don't think even the Tories are thinking it will alter the outcome from a hung parliament, just that it might change the balance of that hung parliament. No sign of that happening yet, but it's filled plenty of airtime away from potentially more troublesome topics for a bit.

I'm increasingly convinced that nothing short of an armed invasion will shift the polls significantly, and even then that would probably only be for a day or two.

NickPalmer said:

What is the national share of votes being cast by post? We haven't got the final figures yet in my patch, but estimate that it's around 25%.

So a non-partisan point reinforcing what David says: if that's typical, and if that 25% are reepresentative, then it becomes one third harder to change the picture after the next day or two (most PVs are returned at once or not at all), especially as postal voters are more liable to vote. So if X needs, say, a 5% swing to capture a seat, and X is currently only on, say, 1%, then X is going to need a swing of about 7% in the remaining votes cast by polling day. Major changes from the current position (either way) should therefore be taken with a degree of caution, if they were to happen.

Wouldn't the people most likely to vote immediately by postal vote be the people who always vote one particular way ?

Cyclefree said:

This whole SNP stuff feels a bit like the Cleggasm. Flavour of the month; everyone gets v excited and thinks this will be a game-changer etc etc.

And yet when the results are in we will probably find that, other than in Scotland, it won't have made a damn difference, that for all the frothing by some, we end up with some sort of hung Parliament, which has been on the cards for ages and ages.

The Cleggasm did effect the polls, just not the actual election.

The Lab/SNP business is not even noticeably affecting the polls. It could be insignificant; or it could be the inverse Cleggasm afecting votes but not polls.

Nice cartoon, Marf!

As for the so-called "PB Polling Average", remember - there is only one genuine ELBOW; beware imitations!

SeanT said:

asjohnstone said:

The Tory SNP thing has been running hard for 72 hours now.

If it had legs I'd expect to see it being reflected in polling numbers by now. The yougov suggests otherwise. It probably plays well with the base but not much beyond.

End clearly isn't aiming for Worcester Woman, a Blairite landslide isn't on the agenda, its a 35% strategy. Looks like working 2 weeks out.

The Tory base is Tories plus most-of-UKIP. If the Tories can win back maybe 1/3 or 1/2 of the UKIP vote by the GE, by scaring them about Salmond, then the Tories will be the biggest party with most seats and most votes and will very likely form the next government.

Cameron is not going to win an overall maj. We all know that. But this Scottish stuff *could* just squeeze enough kippers back into the fold, to maintain him in Number 10.

By contrast, I fail to see any Labour policies/attack lines that might further squeeze any one. They are simply intent on retaining their core vote, keeping their LD switchers, while resigning themselves to Hoots Apocalypse in Scotland.

In short, the only major party with a potential upside is the Tories. People should bet accordingly (tho I stand by my prediction of a small Miliband plurality).

If you have noticed nobody is actually putting the SNP as a priority.
This is the No.1 story these days on TV and the most read on the BBC:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-32420900
"Mediterranean migrants crisis: Italy 'at war' with people smugglers"

Do you really think UKIP voters or Tory voters leaning UKIP, will ignore that story in favour of the SNP ones?

Moses_ said:

MarkSenior said:

Charles said:

JonCisBack said:

Charles said:

MikeSmithson said:

My votes have been cast so for me the election is over.

Not for the poor people of Twickenham, who's right to choose their local representative has been sadly diminished by the self-importance of one individual.

Apols but what does this refer to?

OGH has decided that his desire to have more LibDem MPs in Parliament is more important than the rights of residents to choose their own MPs

He has therefore swapped his vote in Bedford with someone (who I assume is a Labour supporter) and, in return, that individual will vote LibDem in Twickenham.

I think it is outrageous, and a subversion of the principle of MPs representing their local constituents

But , of course , it is quite ok for people with a 2nd home in Cornwall and live there 2 or 3 weeks a year to use their vote to subvert the local constituents' wishes

Do they own property there .....tick
Do they own land there ... Tick
Do they pay local taxes there ....tick


Don't get your point.

they might not be voting Lib Dem?

We really need some more telephone polls. It is quite clear that the change in Yougov's methodology (using January as a base and trying to measure change from there) simply has not worked. It was a perfectly sound idea but the nature of their panel seems to mean they have far fewer undecided and uncommitted than the average.

It may be the case that simply nothing is happening but I would like to see some telephone polls before I take it as gospel.

Speedy said:

SeanT said:

Neil said:

SeanT said:

it's fecking clear that the Miliband=Sturgeon meme is working for Tories

Is it? Christ, how far behind would they be if they didnt have this to rely on?

Oh, I entirely agree. I think the Tory campaign has been bloody dismal. It should have been far more aggressive and ferocious on the last Labour government's terrible, terrible failures (on all fronts). They could, for instance, have used my Telegraph blog to that point.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/seanthomas/100240679/exclusive-labour-1997-2010-was-the-worst-government-ever-and-this-is-why/

.. which I modestly think is the most articulate demolition of New Labour ever written, ever, by anyone, in the universe.

Instead they've been mincing around going on about stuff I can't even remember.

The only meme to hit home is this Scottish angle. Presumably their focus groups are confirming this, so they are now dutifully repeating it.

I totally agree that New Labour was the worst government this country ever had.
But Ed Miliband has killed it, it's Old Labour now, the only thing left from New Labour is Umunna.

Worse than that. Ed Milliband has preserved the worst bits of New Labour: its authoritarianism, its dismal embrace of identity politics and its contempt for civil liberties and free speech.

The polls are only ever moving about within the confines of margin of error. Until a few days ago, I was trading profitable ticks on most seats markets based on times I knew various opinion polls would be announced. Even that is almost impossible now to turn a profit, everything that is being announced is anticipated in advance.

NOM is virtually certain.
Tories Most Seats is confidently anticipated.
Ed Miliband prime minister after election growing confidence by the day.

Personally I think Tories most seats is too short. Move to Ed PM not surprising having been overpriced for weeks.

The comeback from Labour surely is that a vote for Cameron after hammering at this meme is effectively a vote for ending the UK - and the chaos that would ensue, especially with the EU referendum to contend with and a narrow majority reliant on the bar steward wing of the Tory party. I can't stand the SNP and their fantasies, but after effectively disenfranchising Scottish voters and insulting those they have voted for as 'pickpockets' the answer from Scotland is likely to be that we'll see youse later then. If the Tory party is perceived to have won the election by demonising the Scots it's 300 years up in smoke because people didn't hate Ed Miliband as much as they were supposed to and got bored of hearing nonsensical catch phrases droned on about.

It also helps things turn round the other way and expose the farcical nature of the Tory argument - which is that no government is likely to provide rock solid stability and strong handed government because the country is to divided and the result will be inconclusive. Even a fairly large swing to the Tories from now will result in Cameron holding the kind of majority which ruined Major.

The whole Rotherham scandal has shown the inadequacy of the official regulatory agencies.

It was not the public services who uncovered the scandal or the official regulatory bodies which uncovered the misconduct of the public services but outsiders.

First Norfolk, then Jay and finally Casey.

But their investigations were focused on Rotherham council and have led to the government finally taking some action there - credit to Eric Pickles.

While Norfolk, Jay and Casey have all alluded to misconduct in the South Yorkshire Police there has been no outside investigation into them.

An IPCC investigation into the SYP is likely to be as worthless as all the HMIC reports there or the OFSTED reports into Rotherham council. Or indeed the IPCC investigation into the Rochdale police which took four years and concluded that nothing needed to be done.

The IPCC is part of the system - a system which has repeatedly and massively failed.

THE SOUTH YORKSHIRE POLICE NEED TO BE INVESTIGATED BY AN OUTSIDER

And that is what either Home Secretary Theresa May or Policing Minister Mike Penning should have organised.

SeanT said:

asjohnstone said:

The Tory SNP thing has been running hard for 72 hours now.

If it had legs I'd expect to see it being reflected in polling numbers by now. The yougov suggests otherwise. It probably plays well with the base but not much beyond.

End clearly isn't aiming for Worcester Woman, a Blairite landslide isn't on the agenda, its a 35% strategy. Looks like working 2 weeks out.

The Tory base is Tories plus most-of-UKIP. If the Tories can win back maybe 1/3 or 1/2 of the UKIP vote by the GE, by scaring them about Salmond, then the Tories will be the biggest party with most seats and most votes and will very likely form the next government.

Cameron is not going to win an overall maj. We all know that. But this Scottish stuff *could* just squeeze enough kippers back into the fold, to maintain him in Number 10.

By contrast, I fail to see any Labour policies/attack lines that might further squeeze any one. They are simply intent on retaining their core vote, keeping their LD switchers, while resigning themselves to Hoots Apocalypse in Scotland.

In short, the only major party with a potential upside is the Tories. People should bet accordingly (tho I stand by my prediction of a small Miliband plurality).

All very true, except its not being reflected in the polling. If it was going to move votes, you'd expect to see an impact by now. If we don't see a big move by the weekend we can safely conclude it's failed.