politicalbetting.com

A poll for “shy Labour” as well as “shy Conservative” voters

Every General Election gambler should hope that the Independent newspaper contracts again with the US polling organisation Rasmussen which at the 2001 General Election was the most consistent pollster and the only firm that got the Tory share right.

The firm’s controversial methodology seeks to overcome the human interface issues of the conventional poll interviews without the limitations of internet surveys and could be ideal for identifying Labour supporters who at the moment are said to be reluctant to admit their allegiance

The firm used the phone to contact people to be surveyed but a computer, not an interviewer, read out the questions. Respondents then typed in a number on the phone keypad to signify their answer. The automated system conducted interviews with whoever answered, and went into the detailed questioning after checking whether they were aged 18+. After corrective weighting to deal with factors such as getting too many women and old people they produced what turned out to be incredibly consistent results.

Alas - not many people knew about the polls because the Rasmussen methodology was deemed as “not approved” by the BBC which banned all reference to the polls on all Corporation outlets. They were strongly attacked by other pollsters and news of the surveys was confined to the smallest national newspaper - the Indpendent. The fact that the Tory and Labour shares stayed so constant throughout the campaign undermines the argument by the main-stream pollsters that there was a “late swing”.

To their credit members of the UK opinion polling establishment who had been very sceptical did acknowledge Rasmussen’s success afterwards.

The Rasmussen philosophy is based on the main difference between being interviewed by a polling organisation and actually voting is the human interface. For voting is a very private act. You put your X against the candidate of your choice, fold the paper so that the printing is on the inside and then put it through the slot in the ballot box you. You can have no fear of dissapproving looks from those you are close to or even those supervising the election because the ballot has been secret.

This has been the big argument in favour of internet polling - the interviewee is dealing with a computer and not a real person so that all those human interface issues do not come into it. But only about half the population is online and this the protagonists say can distort the sample.

Let’s hope the Indy uses them again and the BBC bases its selection of “approved polls” on those with a proven record of accuracy. It will be good to have another pollster using a completely different methodology that does not have the human interface factors of the conventional pollsters and avoids the sampling issues of internet polls. Given its extraordinary record last time with the Tory share - and not too bad with Labour, it will be a good cross-check on the others.

Good value bets for Tory and Labour backers

If today’s 3% ICM poll improvement for the Tories is followed by Mori, YouGov and Populus it might just affect the betting. In recent months ICM has usually been showing bigger leads for Labour than the other firms and this might be due to the weighting it attaches to those surveyed who are not certain to vote. In July all the other pollsters had the two main parties within one percent when ICM had a 5% margin. Today that is down to 3%.

We need to focus on this because Labour’s ability to get those who support it actually to vote is likely to determine the General Election.

If today’s trend is picked up in other surveys then Michael Howard might go into September with one or two polls reporting Tory leads

Our view remains that the Conservatives will be hard-pressed to get more than 220 seats. But those who think that Michael Howard’s party might do better should check Bet365’s 5/2 on the Tories getting 245 seats or more . This is by far the best bet on the Tories that there is and would give you winnings of £250 on a £100 bet. Just compare it with the 11/4 they are offering on the party winning outright which would give you winnings of just £25 more. For that the party would need to get at least 50 more seats.

We think that Labour will struggle to recover by very much in the polls but if you think otherwise then Bet365’s price of 3/1 on Labour getting 360 seats or over offers better value and less risk than the spread markets. That seat level means the party would have a majority of 72.

Bet365 have now dropped their market on whether the Labour majority will be more or less than 51.5 seats. They’ve also sharply tightened the price in the Commons seat market on Labour getting 335 seats or less - a bet we suggested just 10 days ago when it was 2/1. Immediatly after our recommendation it tightened to 11/8 and then, on Monday, it was moved to evens.

Latest spread-betting prices.

LAB 342-350: CON 212-220: LIBD 66-70 (No change)

A November Election - surely not?

What are we to make of suggestions that Tony Blair might be conisdering calling an autumn General Election - certainly, the price on this possibility has tightened sharply on the Betfair election date market. The suggested date is November 4 - just two days after the US Presidential election.

A recent paper by the Tory economist , Graham Mather, argues that the “economic situation in May is unlikely to be better than in November; interest rates may rise, house prices rises may decline and March may see a difficult budget.” Also he notes that a “Holding an election in 2005 would run into Britain’s G8 presidency in the first half of the year and its European Union presidency in the second half”.

Further, Mather notes, that “the opposition is unlikely to be weaker in May than in November and a November election is well clear of any complications arising from 2005 European constitutional referendums in other countries.”

But we are not convinced. The long-expected election day of o5/05/05 fits in with the four year cycle and would co-incide with the English County Council election in which Labour is expected to do very badly.

Going to the country less than three and a half years after the last election with a massive majority would just lead to opposition charges that Tony Blair was “cutting and running”.

Betting on Hartlepool - punters will have to wait

William Hill have told us that they won’t be opening a market on the “Monkey-town” by-election until the date is fixed and all the candidates are known. This is a pity because there’s a lot of interest. If anybody hears of bookmakers taking bets then please let us know.

Meanwhile Labour’s decision to replace Tom Watson - the Labour MP who was running his party campaign - is probably the best news that the Lib Dems could have had.

His single-mindedness in Hodge Hill over the LD candidate’s job in the mobile phone mast industry allowed him to make this into the issue that saved the seat - just. His campaign style gives activists somthing to believe in and they are absolutely vital in by-elections.

This is where UKIP are weak. Winning Euro votes and seats is a totally different form of campaigning than by-elections where what’s at a premium is your on-the-ground campaigning ability to get your message over, identify your supporters and then get them to the polling station. They will be hammered by the Labour and LD machines on the ground. Domestic issues are what count and UKIP simply does not have a proposition as was shown on June 10 when it failed to make an real mark in local elections that were held at the same time.

Mike Smithson

Hartlepool - Can Labour hold on?

9am update
Campaigning has started in earnest for the Hartlepool by-election and Politicalbetting has urged William Hill to make a market available on-line ASAP. The date has yet to be fixed but already the contest is attracting more media interest than last month’s two contests and we expect this to be reflected in the betting activity. These are the ‘01 party shares together with GE predictions from Martin Baxter based on his latest “poll of polls”.

LAB 59.1 (46.2) : CON 20.9 (20.2): LIBD 15.0 (21.3) : OTH 5.9 (12.4) : MAJ 38.3 (24.9)

The vote shares from the all-postal local elections in the seat in June were:-

LAB 36: LD 27: CON 13: UKIP 8

We called Leicester South for the Lib Dems even before the markets opened with the party at 11/8 but we had reservations about their prospects in Hodge Hill. We were right on both. The following are our assessments for Hartlepool.

Labour have got off to a faltering start after having to replace controversial Midlands MP, Tom Watson, as campaign manager whose main strategy was to try to “demonise” the LD candidate for the job she does just as he did in Hodge Hill. He accused, Jody Dunn, of “ making excuses for junkies” because, as a barrister, she represented them in court. Clearly party bosses saw that denouncing a lawyer for defending a client could be taking Labour into dangerous territory. Although party “spinners” said the change was “planned all along” there’s no question from reading Watson’s blog that he was going to be in Hartlepool for the duration. Chances of winning 45%.

The Conservatives. Even though they were second to Peter Mandelson in 2001 we don’t think they’ve a chance and look certain, as in July’s contests, to slip into third place. In spite of the Labour “spinning” last month their vote mostly held up but the last time they had a by-election gain was in the rarefied political atmosphere of the Falklands war in June 1982. Since then there’ve been 5 General Elections three of which they won. They have no by-election form. Their only plus point from Hartlepool is that it’s opened up divisions in UKIP which could help their overall national rating. Chances of winning 5%.

The Lib Dems. The stakes are high because anything less than a victory will be seen as a major setback and they lost council seats there to Labour in June. The margin they are trying to overhaul is bigger than the one in Leicester but less than what they did against the Tom Watson campaign in Hodge Hill where they came within 460 votes of Labour’s 14,800 lead. The early announcement of Mandelson’s new job has given them time to plan and organise and the Watson salvo has rebounded. It’s a brave punter who bets against the Lib Dem by-election team. Chances of winning 45%.

The United Kingdom Independence Party could just be the joker in the pack but it is a very long-shot made even longer by Robert Kilroy-Silk not being allowed to be the candidate. The machinations in the party that saw this decision showed that it is lacking in robustness because, conceivably, the former TV star could have made a huge impact there and kept the UKIP band-wagon rolling. Chances of winning 5%.

General Election
Even though our call that Labour will get most seats remains our ongoing view that the pundits are overstating the Labour position was given strong support in Nick Cohen’s column in the Observer yesterday. There might be a debate on detailed numbers but Labour are going to get nowhere near the number of MPs that almost all the pundits are predicting. This is part of Cohen’s piece:-

If you search for politicalbetting.com, you will see how advisers to spread betters are taking the conventional wisdom apart. ‘The “experts” are calling it wrong,’ when they predict a three-figure Labour majority. They are applying ‘the swings to the parties’ vote shares in pre-election opinion polls on a uniform national basis’ when it’s far from clear the country will behave in a uniform manner next time.

Complacent Blairites are taking no account of a potential collapse in tactical voting. Last time Labour won about 40 seats as a result of Liberal Democrat supporters voting tactically for Labour. Although the high-rollers predict that Labour supporters will happily vote Lib Dem to keep the Tories out, they doubt that Lib Dem supporters, and there will be a lot more Lib Dem supporters, will vote Labour. Because of Iraq, because of tuition fees, because of David Blunkett.

Without tactical voting, the Tories will be able to come through the middle in many seats. The gamblers also note that the Tories are in slightly better shape than they were and that the collapse in Labour Party membership will make it harder to get the vote out. Put these together and, they say, there’s only one conclusion: ’sell Labour’.

I know quite a few of the Westminster pundits, and in the rare moments when they’re not drunk or in the grip of an egotistical mania, they’re a fine bunch of men and women. But I would trust a punter over a pundit any day. At least the gambler puts his money where his mouth is.

The current spread sell level on Labour has been declining and is the equivalent of an overall majority of 36, which is not the 100+ that many pundits are talking about and does not represent a comfortable margin.

Our favourite GE punt is combining bets on the Bet365 seat market for Tories to get 220 seats or less at 7/4 with one on Labour at 11/8 to get 335 seats or less. Unless there is a collapse by the LDs and/or the nationalist parties at least one and quite likely both are bound to come in. If Labour do better then you will win your Tory bet and vice versa. You can only lose on both bets if the Speaker, the Scottish and Welsh Nationalists ,the Northern Ireland parties, the LDs and any other party fail between them to get more than 89 seats and the main two parties are both very close to 221 and 336.

Latest spread-betting prices.

LAB 342-350: CON 212-220: LIBD 66-70 (No change)

HOLIDAYS: Site updated Monday, Wednesday and Fridays until next Monday - then next update on Wednesday September 8.

Mike Smithson

Picture http://www.compuserve.co.uk/channels/news/election/img/latestpix7.jpg

Charter 88

What are the prospects for the “Ginger Alliance”?

Judging by the state of the General Election betting markets and the scores of comments on the site this week the big divide amongst political gamblers is between those who believe that the Iraq War and its aftermath has permanently damaged Tony Blair and Labour and those who think there will be a recovery. Only time will tell which view is correct.

The “recoverers” believe Labour will get back with a substantial majority - the “permanent damage” group think that we are heading for a hung parliament and both sides place their bets accordingly. Almost everybody agrees that the Tories are static and won’t move much from their current position.

Both factions will looking with great interest at DumpBlair - an organisation that had its origins in the anti-war movement - that plans to target 200 swing seats with a tactical voting message. They want a Robin Cook-Charles Kennedy government - which has been unkindly dubbed the “Ginger Alliance” - and say they will be supporting anti-war Labour MPs, Libdems and Scottish and Welsh Nationalists.

They will be opposing Blair loyalists and most Conservatives but they emphasise that they do not want to help the Tories. It is hard to see how they can succeed hurting Blair without giving some benefit to Michael Howard. We expect them to have the support of the Independent newspaper.

In 1997 and 2001 the tactical voting element was simple. The prevailing mood was against the Tories which lost many more seats than the national swing because LDs went with Labour where they were best positioned to beat Conservatives and vice versa where the LDs were the main challenger. This time sections of the public have “fallen out of love” with New Labour as well but have not rushed to embrace the Conservatives again. They might want to have an impact by tactical voting.

Switching to a different party to stop another party only works if electors know what the position is in their constituency and there’s evidence that many “switchers” only make up their minds at the last minute. This puts a premium on local campaigning and how the message is put over on the door-step.

As well as the new “Dump Blair” move there are three other elements to consider.

Whether anti-Tory tactical voting will continue?. We believe that it will with Labour supporters more than ready again to vote LD the party will be able to hang on to most of the gains from the Conservatives of the past two elections and, perhaps, to pick up a few more seats.

Whether the Labour gains of 1997 and 2001 from tactical switching could be vulnerable? Many supporters of Charles Kennedy’s party are less likely to give their vote to New Labour again because of the war, issues like tuition fees, and the Home Secretary’s less than liberal law and order policies. There are perhaps 30-40 seats in this category and the scale of any “tactical unwind” could determine the outcome of the whole election.

Whether there will be anti-Labour tactical voting from the right? In the by-elections a proportion of Tories have shown themselves willing to vote LD to get Labour out where their party is not the main challenger. Fortunately for Tony Blair the number of LD 2nd place seats to Labour last time was fairly limited. But perceptions of which party is the main challenger are likely to be affected by recent LD local election successes, particularly in some of the cities.

From all of this the main beneficiaries will be the LDs, the Scottish and Welsh Nationalists, and to some extent the Tories. The big losers will be Labour.

We are solidly in the “Labour’s been permanently damaged camp” and this is reflected in our calls. Even with the recent shift in the number of Labour seats on the spread markets we still think the levels are too high and represent a good SELL opportunity. The Gerneral Election spread markets remain unchanged. LAB 342-350: CON 212-220: LIBD 66-70

We like Bet365’s Labour to get 335 seats or less - try this link - which even at 11/8 looks good value, as does the 7/4 on the Tories for 220 seats or less. In the bookmaker’s size of Labour majority market its 4/7 on 51 or less and 7/4 on above 52 seats. If you are a “Labour will recover” supporter then that price looks less risky than spread betting. It works out at a Labour seat total of 349.

OTHER BETTING MARKETS UPDATE
Peter Mandelson at the EU. William Hill have emailed us about their market on the former Labour minister not lasting the course in Brussels following his confirmation as EU Trade Commissioner yesterday. The price of 3/1 looks quite tempting.

The US Presidential Election markets still have Kerry and Bush at the same price.

[NEXT PLANNED UPDATE - MONDAY]

Mike Smithson

[next planned update - Friday]

Would Blair’s scalp be offered as the price for a coalition?

A big feature of the Election run-up will be the questioning of the Lib Dems about whether in a hung parliament they would prop up a defeated Blair Government or do a deal with Michael Howard - probing that could expose deep ideological differences in the party.

Unlike his predecessor, Paddy Ashdown, Kennedy has been much more detached from Labour and if his party picks up significant gains, as we think, it will be in large measure because of the divergance of Lib Dem policy on Iraq with Tony Blair’s. Siding with the current occupant of Number 10 is not a foregone conclusion. In the event of a hung parliament - and other parties like the SNP, PC and the various Northern Ireland bodies also have an interest - the big questions would be over the Prime Minister.

For Kennedy the pre-election questioning could provide a big opportunity to raise issues about “trust” in Tony Blair and keep Iraq and its aftermath on the political agenda.

Could the party leadership develop a vote-winning rhetoric that gets over, without saying so explicitly, that the Lib Dems provide a way getting rid of Tony Blair without letting the Tories back? That could be powerful.

All these factors come into play when assessing a market on post-election outcomes with “binary betting” from IG which they say combines elements of spread betting with the flexibility of the betting exchanges. Punters are asked to bet for or against who will be PM after the next election, which has been defined, after representations from Politicalbetting, as “who is asked by the monarch to form a government“. The prices are:

Blair 67 – 71: Howard 14 - 18: Brown 10 – 14: Others 2 – 5: Kennedy 0 – 2
Winner = 100 Everyone else = 0

A possible bet might be against Tony Blair which would also cover you if , as seems less likely now, he steps down before the election. As a long-shot we quite like the “others” option but the pricing is crazy. If you bet for AN Other you get the equivalent of 20-1 and of you bet against then its 50-1. That is a bookmaker being greedy and it’s no wonder that the person who created IG is the Tory party’s biggest donor! A spread of 2-2.75 would be more reasonable.

The other “hung parliament” punt - Labour to get 335 seats or less - has become considerably less attractive since Monday when we said it was good value at 2/1. As so often happens prices change quite quickly after they are mentioned on the site and the bookmaker, Bet365, link from here, has tightened the price to 11/8.

Mike Smithson

Picture http://www.learn.co.uk/citizenship/onlinelessons/government/contentimages/blair_argles.jpg

How the pundits will get the next General Election wrong

We believe that the result of the next General Election will be seen as one of the great upsets of modern times to rank alongside 1970, February 1974 and 1992 when Edward Heath, Harold Wilson and John Major respectively defied the pundits, and to a large extent the opinion polls, to gain unexpected victories. A Guardian feature by two Labour thinkers today notes “..Given the volatility of contemporary politics, it is by no means impossible that Labour will lose in a reverse landslide.”

We believe that the “experts” will call it wrongly because they will apply the swings to the partys’ vote shares in pre-election opinion polls on a uniform national basis that will produce seat projections for Labour that are far in excess of what they actually get.

We believe that there is an inherent “fault” in the seat totals from last time because Labour won upto 40 extra Tory seats as a result of Lib Dems voting for them and not their own party - something they are much less likey to do now creating the real possibility of serious seat losses over and above the national swing.

We believe that the pundits and the pollsters always seriously underestimate the roles that local party machines have in getting their votes out. This will be particularly diffifcult for Labour this time because of the collapse in the number of party members, councillors and other activists - factors that will aid Lib Dem targeting and create new possibilities for seats to change hands outside the national swing. We also think that many local Tory organisations are in better shape than they were.

We cannot yet predict what the unexpected outcome will be but we stick by our call on Labour to win most General Election seats because this market is NOT about gaining a majority.

But we say BUY Lib Dem in the General Election spread markets because we believe the party will get more than the 70 seats - the current spread position. When we first made this call on June 16 the BUY level was 58 seats so those who took the advice have already chalked up some nice profits.

We said SELL Labour at 346 - it’s now down four and we still say sell. It went up to that high level after the media bought Downing Street’s spin that the 27% swing against Labour at Birmingham Hodge Hill and the loss of Leicester South meant that the two by-elections on on July 15 had ended in a “score draw“.

LAB 342-350 (-4): CON 212-220 (+3): LIBD 66-70 (+2)

With the boundary changes north of the border the total of MPs required for a majority will be 324 seats. If you don’t like the risks of spread betting take the Labour to get 335 seats or less at 2/1 with Bet365 in a market that they do not make available through the betting odds search engines - but link from here.

Even though there’s renewed criticism of the Prime Minister today from within the Labour establishment we think it’s too late now to see any any changes in the position of Tony Blair, Michael Howard or Charles Kennedy in the various party leader markets. We believe that they will all be the leaders of their parties on election day.

We believe that the election will be held on the first Thursday in May 2005 - 05/05/05. The pricing starts to look quite attractive.

WAIT for prices to move out before you BET on John Kerry to be the next US President. The latest round of polls almost all show comfortable leads for the Democrat ticket..

SUMMER SITE UPDATE SCHEDULE Planned updates will be on Mondays, Wednesday and Fridays until we go on holiday in the last week in August and the first week in September.

Mike Smithson

Picture http://www.people.virginia.edu/~bdg2j/photos/UK/parliament.jpg