The final PB.C betting chart on the Lib Dem race
March 1st, 2006
As a matter of record here is the final betting chart on the 2006 Lib Dem leadership race. This is based on the implied probability of victory based on the best betting prices.
I like them because they do graphically illustrate changing perceptions over time.
For all but four and a half weeks since the polls closed on May 5th 2005 we have had a leadership race taking place and our traffic has increased so that on most weekdays more than 10,000 individual users have come onto the site. In that period since 10pm on election night there have been 130,431 comments on the site bringing the total to 178,835 since we started.
Thanks for your support. BTW whatever are we going to talk about next week?
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Time to turn our attention to the mid terms in the U.S. Where things are starting to look really interesting. The distancing of Republican candidates from the President is becoming a very striking feature and is a sign, surely, of the party beginning to smell trouble. The loss of the House of Representatives is not impossible and could be an interesting bet. Anyone any news on current prices? It would make a change from the Lib Dem obsession on here, understandable as that maybe, given how close the race seems to be at this stage.
Early days yet, but Tradesports has already established markets on Senate and House control, as well as all individual Senate and Governor races. Not much liquidity at this stage.
Currently Rep. probability of retaining the Senate is around 85%, House control in the low 70s.
Most interesting governor race is probably in California - Schwarzenegger a bit better than evens, despite all his problems.
Key Senate race is Pennsylvania, where Democrats needs to make a gain - probability at some 67% (and I have put money on it).
- Election in Italy in April, but interest at pb.c perhaps too thin? Prodi clear favorite.
How about - the next Cabinet Minister to have to spend more time with his or her family, after Tessa Jowell?
2. Governor Rendell of Pennsylvania (D) is seeking re-election, but he has a fight on his hands against a former Pittsburgh Steelers player
For longer term significance, keep a close eye on the gubernatorial races: we have all seen the usefulness of having a friendly governor in the State Capitol when it comes to the Presidential, and significantly Florida, Iowa and Ohio are all up for grabs in November. Ohio will probably swing Democrat; Tom Vilsack of Iowa is gearing up for ‘08 so his seat is open; if the Democrats hold on to it then it is probably going to be a bad night for the Republicans. Massachussets is probably going to be a good shot for the Dems as well, though they might lose Wisconsin.
Now, I must get on to Tradesports to check out the odds…
I can’t get into Tradesports for some reason, but if it is a binary bet I think there is value in selling Rendell at 67; I think it is going to much closer than that margin suggests.
Does anyone know how to get the Indy’s articles for free off the net? I don’t want to have to buy the whole thing, but £1 for an article seems a bit steep (gnashes teeth in a tight fisted kind of a way). Why do the Indy do this - if the Guardian and Times can have the majority of the newspaper free, why can’t they?
Mike - as a relative newcomer to the site I’m somewhere amongst some of those 130,431 posts. I’d just like to say thanks to you for hosting the site and creating the sapce where so much interesting stuff is shared. Admittedly there are some seriously deranged individuals on the site, but I guess once their leadership election is over they’ll be a bit quieter again. (joke)
I guess I should add a political slant to the sycophancy of this post and just say “Respect!” to you…
6: As an ex-Indy website freelance I can tell that it’s because the site is run on a shoestring by one man and a (very talented) dog, and it has to pay its way. The portfolio method of charging small amounts for individual stories, or packages for the lot, is working very well - readership was barely dented and it’s generating an income. The only thing that narks me is that the Bridget Jones updates don’t seem to be included in the standard package!
Or as David Cameron would put it, “Keep it real…”
Maybe Labour could do us the great service of arranging a leadership contest?
Some spread betting on the May elections ? Only 8 weeks away…
To talk about next week:-
-Next Lib Dem leader but one
-Timing of Blair’s departure
-Local elections
-American politics
-Next secretary general of UN
-Eurovision song contest (which is after all very political in voting!)
What’s the odds on a ’snap’ election within 6 months of Tone stepping down- using the honeymoon ‘bounce’ as an excuse to go for a mandate?
13: before Cameron gets a sensible set of policies and the polls really get away from GB?
14. Same old Tories, same old story.
The Chancellor is streets ahead as the NOW poll shows. Attempts by Mr. Smithson and others to criticise this poll won’t wash. It just tells you all what you don’t want to hear. How inconvenient that Brown is preferred to Cameron as PM?
Not long now until the budget - my favourite day of the year. One hour of the Chancellor without interruption!
14 . I’m not sure - its only been 9 months since an election - people will be peeved about having to get out of their armchairs twice in a short period - could backfire on a low turnout.
15. LOL
Mike - for the first time in my life I’d like to echo the words of a Tory - True Blue @ Number 7 - this is an exceptional site for political anoraks. Your missives are first class and I enjoy tremendously reading the musings - deranged or otherwise - from other posters.
One last time: Ming to winnnnnnnn
A shambles of an interview between Humphrys and DC on Radio 4 earlier. DC kept losing his rag and was very shrill at times, whilst Humphrys kept goading him more and more by asking questions and then interrupting as soon as DC opened his mouth. Although he did ask him some killer questions too. I’m afraid DC didn’t come out of it very well at all, although it was as blatantly biased an interview as you could ever wish to find, particularly compared to the recent Today interview with Brown where he was asked probably 3 questions in a 15 minute slot and basically given free rein to bore us all into submission for his allotted period of time…
Assume GB is leader after the October 2007 conference. Big poll bounce, tax breaks in March 2008, go to the polls April-June 2008.
Alternatively, big row with Tony sometime soon, GB resigns, contested leadership election. Alan Johnson comes through the middle, Poll later this year?
15 - Professor, you mean the NotW poll where 50.1% of the sample were Labour voters? The one where 46% thought GB was “arrogant”?
12. SBS, “Eurovision song contest (which is after all very political in voting!) ”
doy you mean the fact that countries for East Europe always end up voting for each other?
22 - I certainly do! There are also other alliances: Finland / Estonia; the Baltics; Scandinavia; Cyprus / Greece; France / Monaco / Belgium /Switzerland; Germany / Austria; Russia / Ukraine…
Italy have so much sense in boycotting it.
23 - and Lebanon wanted to enter last year, but were barred as they were going to schedule a commercial break during the Israeli entry… you don’t get much more political than that!
15 yawn….
Go back and check the data yourself Prof..
You don’t know what you are talking about (as usual !)
[23] Er… because there aren’t any other countries that speak Italian as a first language?
A pedant writes: Isn’t there an Italian-speaking canton in Switzerland?
Can’t help half-wishing Hughes would win and make us all look silly!
I think LibDems can look forward to a little poll bounce shortly - new leader on the back of the by-election should be good for a surgelet.
People could always debate the Education Bill revolt, though I think it’s fizzling out for Second Reading: I know numerous erstwhile rebels who say they’ll go along with it now. Probably will be more excitement at Report Stage when people pick fights on specific clauses, though. The tiny majority (4) in the Lords against the terrorism glorification clause pretty well guarantees that they’ll fold in the next ping-pong round, so we’re running a bit low on Parliamentary drama this side of Easter, unless anyone thinks the Tories will keep fighting on ID cards.
23. Italy is not boycotting it because it’s likely we’ll lose, but because RAI has no interest in producing it, no-one will watch it and the costs won’t be covered. Then they have the terror that we could win by mistake and have to organize the next edition!
26. Canton Ticino.
26 - yes it’s Ticino.
27. Nick, Ian Gibson said there’re still around 60 rebels out there.
26 - there was the Not the Nine O’Clock News joke about the Vatican entry being “I can’t get no contraception” - but the Pope told them to pull it out at the last minute…
26. Actually there’s San Marino too….but I don’t they even took part to the contest
19 Bob I have just listened to the interview and it reminded me why I don’t listen to Today anymore. Humphreys’ interviews shed more noise than light and as usual he is pushing his own agenda rather than trying to elecit information from the interviewee.
He is nowhere near as effective as Tim Russert from Meet the Press in the US. He is always polite and measured and engaged and delivers some great interviews and extraordinary admissions.
Humphreys type behaviour is one of the reasons why people become disengaged from politics. He will probably write an article on Sunday saying all politicians, except the Dour One, refuse to answer simple questions in a straight way.
If I were Dave would have been tempted to have given up and asked Humpreys to go the extra ten percernt and do all the questions and all the answers.
19 Bob, there is a growing problem is for those of us who want and are prepared to give DC benefit of the doubt about this sort of interview.
He’s already unsettled a large tranche of the party (as he’s clearly entitled to do with his mandate as the newly elected leader)with directional changes and all the touchy feely no tie stuff, but recent events are subtley different.
He’s clearly looking for ‘his’ ( ‘our’ ?)equivalent of a clause 4 moment &/or a few ‘right wing dinosaurs’ to stick their heads above the parapet to make an example of ( a la Militant tendency)
I can’t help but increasingly think he’s going to get his chance in spades at some point soon ( After May 4th !!!)
I find the announcement yesterday tactically bizzarre
Whether people agree or disagree with what appear in the document
is one thing, as is my observation (from multiple conversations with people who voted for DC but who are now ‘confused’) that whatever is produced will get a lower approval rating (if it even gets one !) than the two thirds mandate from December.
Why leave yourself hostage to fortune in this way, leave the party open to potential public ridicule for spurning ‘the new way’ and offer you opponents a power base ??
Notwithstanding Humprey’s unhelpful line, the ’shrillness’ thing is also wearing a little thin and is making him look petulant.
The way he dispatched Hilary Armstrong at his first PMQs was fantastic as a one off, but repeat performances leave him open to being seen as ‘rude’ (which I didn’t think we did any more ?)
Storm clouds brewing…………
34.”The way he dispatched Hilary Armstrong at his first PMQs was fantastic as a one off, but repeat performances leave him open to being seen as ‘rude’ (which I didn’t think we did any more ?)”
the “idea” was good, but the delivery less….he sounded angry and OTT (note that people weren’t seeing what Hilary “the Clueless” Armstrong was doing). he should said it in a calmer way (maybe with a little smile)
33 & 34
How many elections has Cameron fought when he was in charge ?
P1 W1 L0 - have some patience.
I hope that the odds are correct and that Ming will make the big speech on Saturday. They should be close because no one can be sure about the outcome.
Topics for next week? Local election results; support for “Clause Bore”; how long Blair will last; and which Conservative will be first to defect to UKIP.
And will “Oor Willie” stay in at the next GE.
36 - Does Dunfirmline not count as an election during which Cameron was in charge of the Conservative party?
37. who’s Oor Willie?
36 If were into two world wars and one world cup territory
Dunfirmline ?
p 2 w 1 l 1
re; Humphreys. Was woken up to this argument this morning by my radio alarm clock (very strange; briefly had DC is one of my dreams, thankfully he left soonafter).
Have to say although I am no fan of DC I think Humphreys could have conducted the whole thing a lot better. Just shouting at him doesn’t do anyone any favours and just makes Humphreys seem unreasonable even though he was raising some important points. IMHO he is the weakest of the Today team; they should give one the other presenters the just after 8.10 slot.
As for new things to talk about; how about the Italian election?
41 sorry, should read “DC in one of my dreams”, not yet awake…
[27] If I.D. cards are a necessary anti-terrorist measure then we all need them now. But the Government is happy for me not to have one until my passport expires in 2011 - unless of course there are secret plans to use the powers in our old friend the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill (the “Henry VIII” bill) to get round this little local difficulty.
But I have low expectations of a government that takes six years to bring in legislation requiring Public-Private Partnerships to demonstrate value for taxpayers’ money. (The cause of all those stories in the Eye about Hospital Trusts going bust, by the way - most public sector capital programmers are still in denial about the current system.)
42 Freudian slip, Tistoph?
44. :$
Nightmare, perhaps…
Tory Boy You hardly count as a dispassionate observer, having been anti since I-don’t-know-when.
But you can live in hope, I suppose. But it might be a long wait.
45
even
41 The new Tory subliminal advertising. Tomorrow you will wake up with a blue card in your hand and a donation gone from your bank account and a song in your heart. Free of all those dodgy bar charts at last.
I was in Bristol West at the weekend and interested to see that the Tory leaflet had exactly the same bar chart as the Lib Dem leaflet.
41.”As for new things to talk about; how about the Italian election? ”
Alessandra Mussolini wants to be part of the government. Someone suggested that she won’t have ministers or under-secretaries, she said Silvio promised her.
49 It might be a first! A non-dogdy bar chart…
46 Blue2win.
…. a little spat in paradise !!
Expecting a call later this morning from one of my moles in Cowley Street
………………………………..
Topics for Next week
1. The Jacobite peerages in Beaconsfield - 1701-1890
2. The Act of Union 1707 in Sutton and Cheam
3. The Battle of Torbay Chamber Pots 1745
4. The Killiekrankie Quiche Rebellion of 1689
5. Jacobite exiles underwear in Milan 1746-1806
6. Ming Dynasty Jacobite Soiree Porcelain.
…………………………………………….
Also MUCH RESPECT to Mike and family for hosting IMO the nations finest political site !!
46 Quite the reverse B2W, I’ve accepted the result from the outset and have been studiously loyal since, and indeed remain so.
These boards are though for discussing events and developments in politics within a betting context and I can’t see that by saying what I have I’ve revealed any great(or even minor)secret.
If you read what I said, rather than jumping into automatic defence mode, you’ll see that I’m actually querying the tactics of holding an election that gives those like me (who will vote against it as I believe lower taxes are key to the society I wish to see and live in)a chance to register ‘our’ point of view.
If ‘approval’ jumps from 67%, DC’s obviously weaving his magic, and those that feel like me remain marginalised.
If it falls (or even fails - which I’m not predicting)he’s in a world of “Tory splits” & “Plummeting moral” headlines in the media which frankly write themselves.
It’s so, totally unecessary to go there.
I think he has been incredibly badly advised on this.
48. Hell would freeze over first…
Plus if the Tory party did ever manage to recruit people like me then they truly would have betrayed their core principles
Or is that DCs plan?
27/ “People could always debate the Education Bill revolt, though I think it’s fizzling out for Second Reading….The tiny majority (4) in the Lords against the terrorism glorification clause pretty well guarantees that they’ll fold in the next ping-pong round, so we’re running a bit low on Parliamentary drama this side of Easter, unless anyone thinks the Tories will keep fighting on ID cards”
Nick - as a Labour MP don’t you think it a wee bit bizarre that in each of the three issues above your well to the right. As a fully paid up orange booker Lib Dem I still have to pinch myself as to just how right wing Nu Labour will go in their relentless quest toward conservatism. I get enough grief from my activists for being too right wing sometimes but in Nu Labour I’d probably be branded as a dangerous leftie…heaven forbid!
27 - will we only get real drama when the Government tries to introduce something really controversial then? Any plans?
53. I fully agree with you. I was somewhat surprised and confused (and mildly gleeful) when I heard about this. It seems he is trying to complete a whole process of reform and a Clause 4 moment in a matter of months. This can only lead to people feeling disillusioned.
55. There’s nought wrong with being a dangerous LD leftie!
[55] SAC - so what’s new? A Liberal MP brings in a (successful) Bill to legalise abortion and in the next Parliament a (Glasgow Catholic) Labour MP brings in a bill to overturn it. Labour has an enormous number of social conservatives in its core vote - arguably, as those who actually vote age, higher as a %age than ever.
Re: # 6: Does anyone know how to get the Indy’s articles for free off the net?
Have you investigated what internet services your Public Library offers?; here in Richmond upon Thames (Tory - about to go Lib Dem again) we have a good selection, including News UK: http://www.newsuk.co.uk/about/site_map.jsp/ which provides free full access to ALL the national papers and regional dailies: ‘News articles are fully keyword-searchable and can either be printed off in a user-friendly format or e-mailed for later reference.’ I do not know what this service costs.
59 Christo
Richmond upon Thames (Tory - about to go Lib Dem again)
Perhaps in your dreams, that’s the only place it’ll happen.
2. The likelihood is that R’s will retain control of the senate; although if there is a real backlash anything could happen. To do so, they need to lose 5 senate seats, and the key races appear to be:
1. Pennsylvania - Rick Santorum looks doomed - most likely D pickup
2. Rhode Island - Liberalish R Lincoln Chafee is facing a strong primary challenge from a more typical republican. If Chafee goes down in the primary then this is a solid D pickup.
A couple of real tossups are:
3. Ohio - Mike DeWine facing a strong challenge from Sherrod Brown; DeWine is increasingly voting against Bush to shore up his position.
4. Missouri - Jim Talent facing a strong challenge from Claire McCaskill
And the live outsiders:
5. Montana - Scandal hit Conrad Burns will face a tough challenge from either Morrison or Tester
6. Virginia - Former Reagan Naval Secretary James Webb is taking on incumbent R George Allen in a state that is gradually trending D.
The Democrats should hold all their incumbent seats as the Republicans have been unable to get top-tier candidates - biggest uncertainty is possibly the open seat in Minnesota but I’d be surprised if the R’s pick it up. Overall my guess would currently be a 51-49 senate next time.
As a LibDem, I agree with some of our Tory friends above. I was appalled by the Cameron shoot-out. Cameron did make some damaging admissions of the holes in his green credentials, but most lay listeners will either be totally switched off, or more sympathetic to him because of Humphrys petulant interruptions.
There could be a cross party consensus on here breaking out soon that Today’s pack-chasing, red-top trumping mentality and incredulous voice tone as the standard mode of speech is one of the main reasons why so many people are disengaged from politics. Newsnight are almost as bad. Andrew Marr’s ‘I’m so laid back by the predictability of what I am talking about I am horizontal’ mateyness was even worse.
Nick Robinson is actually a lot better.
Instead of reporting and asking relevant questions, most BBC and sometimes ITN editorial priorities since Major’s time are always to second guess the next news, with speculation about what X barely-reported but actually important event means for Y, where Y is the pack mentality’s topic of the month, ie ‘how will this affect Gordon Brown’s chances of being PM.’
Sky are erratic, sometimes actually doing a good job of reporting the news and getting the importance of events right, ie the Dunfermline result- they made it top of the news straight away at 1am while News 24 had it down at fourth or fifth story all night after the result in a truly bizarre way.
At other times, Sky are clearly being blown off course by a fixation on things which are ‘Live’ and ongoing - eg the London whale saga. Or sometimes by what Murdoch wants them to say.
I am a sworn opponent of Ruth Kelly and Tessa Jowell, but the way the pack has moved from Kennedy, to Kelly, to Jowell etc etc is utterly unconnected with credible reporting of what really matters. It wouldn’t matter so much if it was just the red tops, it is the way the so-called serious news outlets join the feeding frenzy which is depressing.
ITN I think on the whole do a good job, but do not dominate the news perceptions of ordinary people in the way the BBC does.
As for the leadership, i always thought Ming would do it because
a) A lot of people voted early before Huhne got going
b) At least a third of the members are completely inactive and had no idea who Chris Huhne was until the election started - yet will vote (splitting between Simon and Ming with Ming doing well. Evn though this group liked Kennedy the most and are most likely to blame Ming for his removal, I don’t think they will vote for Huhne as a result - it would just tend to help Simon a little.
c) Ming’s MP supporters all come from seats with large memberships and will get their local vote out. LibDem members generally think the world of their local MPs ( look at them still backing Oaten ).
d) Chris Huhne’s literature was in my view very poor - the weakest of the three. Especially in the critical ballot / manifesto mailing which in my local party of 200 members is all that at least 160 of them have actually received! If LibDem campaigning teaches you anything, it teaches you that good literature with action photos backing up your messages and giving the sense of momentum and team do matter, but his stuff didn’t do that. This is the main reason in the end I did not vote for him, how could a LibDem leader accept such weak material as good enough? His website was ok, better than Simon’s, but not as good as Ming’s. But a lot of the armchair members won’t even have looked at the websites.
I think Ming will do it, I hope his alleged disdain for other members of the human race do not infect his judgment and let us down. Lets just see his talent and clarity at work. And he needs a tooth job, a hair cut … and to trim his eyebrows.
61 - why do you think Chafee hasn’t switched, when politically he could surely be very comfortable as a Democrat? Is it a sense of loyalty to his late father’s party?
Ye gods, I am getting so worked up I am losing me grammar.
Happy St Davids day to one and all…..
If you go to http://www.icwales.com there is an opinion poll. Does not give details of party support.
It shows an overwhelming majority in favour of further powers for the Asembly and 9/10 people favour a Bank Holiday to celebrate St Davids Day with 7/10 being prepared to exchange an existing Holiday.
16% of the electorate favour full Independence…..
63 - That seems to be the school of thought; essentially he’s part of the rump of the Republican party that was more concerned with economic than social conservatism - perhaps he’s waiting for the party to come back to him; you could equally ask why some Tories have never jumped ship; Ian Taylor springs to mind, as did George Walden.
Tristph The forecastg is for the cold weather to continue moving south creating a demand for winter fuel payments to be extended to other non-pensioner groups. A Mr Beelzebub, the deputy group leader, produced a bar chart showing his furnace temperatures were falling fast to a level he described as ‘tepid’. ‘If this trend continues’, he is is reported to have said, ‘then we shall have the first known frost down here in no time at all’.
American elections now that would be intresting. I’m not sure on the lower house but I think the republicians should hold the senate
68 et al - American Elections - any chance of getting Betfair to put up a mid-terms market in some way or another? Should be the next thing to be looking at, and I think the Senate will be very close, perhaps even 50-50…
69 - Intrade have markets on the Senate races:
http://www.intrade.com/ (click on “Politics” and then the 2006 Senate heading).
But I don’t know of anywhere where you can bet in sterling. It’s probably worth asking Betfair: they did have state-by-state markets (albeit pretty illiquid) for the 2004 presidential election.
62 - Some good points, one good example of the “guessing the news” trend has been the Education Bill. Endless speculation on its contents before publication, but once it was published, I heard nothing switching between Radios 4 and 5 this morning on the Bill.
This happens a lot on reports and other publications, by the time they actually get published and we really know what they say, the media has already moved on to something else. Media debate becomes focus on ill-informed speculation rather than the actual facts.
62 Aim Your take on the UK press makes sense to me.
It is getting to a pretty pass when the Guardian reports more accurately on the Tory party than the Telegraph does.
Mind you the Groaneers opinion pieces are still entertaining if not enlightening and they often seem untroubled by facts or reality or nasty stuff like that.
Blair is now accused of ’sub-contracting’ education policy to the Tories. How sensible of him.
Aim The BBC web report after the Today interview is much more factual and non-polemical.
67.
Alas B2W its been a mild Winter, and from now on in the temperature is only going to rise on your Young Pretender.
Lets see how the wee lad does at PMQ today after the mauling he got on his last outing…
are you sure that your betting chart could not be inversly proportional to an armchair voter’s chart??……
I heard Cameron on the radio this morning. I was in despair. The interview was not searching, but it revealed a man with a bad temper who cannot deal with a bit of verbal argy-bargy. So after swallowing the new policy direction we now have a leader who has marched into the centre to be like Bliar but is not as able to deal with the pressure.
Cmyrumark @ 65: “If you go to http://www.icwales.com there is an opinion poll. Does not give details of party support.”
Voting intention wouldn’t have been asked - it was commissioned by the BBC and their editorial guidelines are very shirty about commissioning voting intention polls.
77: Well at least young Dave was prepared to face Humpries. Didn’t the new Labour spin doctors keep old Tone away from the Today Programme for years?
Whilst on the subject of the Fourth Estate, could I put in a plug for Radio Five Live? Its early morning programme has a lightness of touch that is quite a relief after years of self-importance from the Today programme. The best political interview I have ever heard was between Nicky Campbell and Alex Salmon: I am no Scottish Nationalist, but I learned a great deal about the man, his ideas and the political baggage/inheritance he comes with. The only problem with R5Live is that there is far too much sport!
By the way, I have it on reasonably good authority that DC actually does have a bit of a temper - this was seen at both Smith Square and when he was at Carlton. Maybe Humphries was deliberately trying to goad him to see the consequences?
We should ask our bookie friends to have a market on the next cabinet member (need listing) to change (or lose) his job. There are markets all season for the next premiership manager/coach to leave his club, and they are popular. There would need to be rules dealing with more than one on the same day—ie a reshuffle of any sort.
Tessa Jowell is the current jolly, but favourites don’t always win….
….or maybe a vote on which event will happen first: a Tory MP defecting to UKIP or David Cameron defecting to the Lib Dems.
(Any views, Rik?)
Are saying that Cameron loses his temper at work????!!!!!
82 - At least DC defecting to the Lib Dems would give us all the enjoyment and potential profitablility of another Tory leadership election!
80. And in that rather odd Newsnight feature when the reporter kept following him around - he was sweetness and light for so long, and then blew up when the guy asked him about Jesus’ resurrection.
re15. I hope the professor applies more rigour to his academic work than he does to his posts here.
By all means attack my analysis but put proper arguments forward.
36 - Did I miss something? Which election has he won then?
Ahh… another Lib Dem line of attack on David Cameron! Now he’s got a temper! Great Scot!
Yes, whatever will we talk about next week after the old fart from Fife is elected tomorrow?
BTW, I think Sir Alan Haselhurst should replace Gorbals Mick as Speaker on a permanent basis. This has been the first Question Time in ages in which I have actually been able to understand what the Speaker was saying!
Hardly a line of attack, AHM! Someone had mentioned the interview (which I did not hear) and said that he was getting cross. I had heard this before - and yes, I agree, losing one’s temper at work should not always be regarded as a character fault (I hope!)
75 Tistoph. Kindly refrain from using the moniker “Young Pretender” for David Cameron. No Jacobite he.
65 cmyrumark. Celtic felicitations on St.Davids Day.
BTW inlight of recent developments are you now just plaidmark ??
…………………………………
Apologies……… still waiting on my Cowley Street mole.
89. I was thinking exactly the same thing.
90 - Good. Many a time would I have liked to give Mr Humphreys a good slap after listening to his hectoring, and I have never been interviewed by him! I can well imagine how those who have might feel.
91 - Jack, your mole is struggling to burrow his way through the vast quantity of ballot papers in the Ming pile…
61. the Dems need 6 gains because on a 50 50 tie Cheney pulls his trigger for the Republicans. Add New Jersey to your list of possible Republican gains. Its an open seat and the Republicans have a strong candidate in Tom Kean’s son.
I think I last listened to the Today programme about 15 years ago. It was self-important and uninformative back then, and it seems little has changed. I think politicians should avoid it - no one listens to it.
96. What are the viewing figures out of interest?
Didn’t see PMQs (am paying for the wages of the public sector). Did DC get humilated again?
61 -Andy C, have you been following the senate seats you speculate on?
Pennsylvania will probably be a pick up for the Dems, your right on that.
Just because there is a tough primary for Chaffe in Rhode Island doesn’t mean he won’t get the nomination, the chances are he will.
Ohio and Missouri are both states where the current Republican seantors lead in all the latest polls, both are states which have voted for Bush solidly and you might like to note, both are states with republican governors and both senate seats held by the republicans, not to mention that congessional delegations in both states are majority Republicans, for the Democrats to win with such a bad national leadership would be a miracle (and it’s not my opinion the leadership is bad, the main media outlets in the US critise Reid and Dean a lot).
Montana will be a Republican hold simply because no challenger will have amassed anywhere near as much money as the current Republican senator, so don’t even waste your time. Just as Kentucky showed last time, even when a repubican candidate goes a bit weird, he still wins through in a conservative states provided he has vast amounts more money, which was true for Bunning.
Virginia may have a Democrat governor but that doesn’t mean it’s a Democrat trending state, the state hasn’t voted Democrat in a general election since 1964 and in the latest opinion poll the Republican Senator leads again.
You might like to note that last time Mondale led in all the opinion polls prior to being defeated in Minnesota, so the state isn’t a big uncertainty, it’s a toss up, and there is no certainity we will know who wins till the polls close.
The actual truth is the Republicans could lose one or two seats, but they could gain a seat, or maybe make a pick up in other states which are marginal (like Michigan or Washington), but they will hold 53 seats after the election at the very least, most probably 54.
You might like to do some actual research and you might actually find that the incumbancy is a huge advantage in US Elections, look at all the senate seats which the Republicans gained last time (South Carolina, Lousiana, Florida, North Carolina & Georgia), all had one thing in common -they were all open seats.
All the seats you’ve mentioned that the Democrats could pick up have incumbants so don’t assume that those states will vote other than for their current senator, it goes against all the evidence from US Elections. Special cases can be had like in Pennslyvania, but that’s the exception rather than the rule.
97 - I don’t have any figures on hand but IIRC Today is the third most popular radio programme behind Radio 1 and 2. I would disagree with Fred, quite a lot of people listen to it, though how many of the listeners are already members of the political classes is another question. I know I personally listen to it, mainly because Radio 4 is one of the only radio stations my alarm clock can actually pick up - though I missed the DC interview as I fell asleep before it came on!
98 Robusticus. PMQs - Score draws all round.
U.S. Senate - Maryland is also a possible Republican pick-up.
For latest local polls I recommend http://www.realclearpolitics.com/congraces.html
32 - Andrea - San Marino is not, in the strict sense, an Italian speaking country - the official language is Emilio Romagnole or summat like that, ja
88. - I am Tory. I don’t like people who lose their temper at work because it indicates that they cannot cope with whatever pressure they are facing and are resorting to bullying of a sort.
David Cameron seems to be losing his temper in public as well. If he is that easy to wind up then people will, I am afraid.
101: Thanks Jack. Shame for the Cameronaphobes, though. They’d have dined on another dispatch-box disaster for the next month.
“Emilio Romagnole”
I believe he has now signed for Chelsea.
104 - I’m sure you are, your Lordship.
100. 1.75 million people in London listen to Today
“The station is still the most listened-to in London: the Today programme attracts 1.75m listeners there — equivalent to the combined breakfast listening of Capital, Kiss, Magic and Heart.”
http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/?t=article&l=talksport_defies_sceptics_to_hit_highest_listening_figure
It does have quite a large audience it would seem…
Any impartial views on PMQs for those of us stuck at a work PC?
The BBC website seems to think Cameron was quite effective in actually getting some straight answers from TB which will unsettle the Labour backbenchers.
PMQ I thought Blair was distracted. Jowell looked fraught and the Dour One looked like a Guy Fawkes happy-face mask (shudder). Summats up.
The Ming Manchu Mumbler was pretty dire. Good question but stuttering at the punchlines made it sound less important than it was.
91. My most humble apologies Jack, I will slaughter a dozen haggi as penance.
111 Tistoph. I’d prefer you slaughter a dozen Hanovarians !!
Or perhaps chain a dozen Lib Dem ….. with a months supply of quiche out of reach ….. and outsize Tory bar charts in clear view !
cameron layed the foundations today, it was unspectacular but labours silence was deafening…and blair looked rattled when a back bench tory labelled education measures as radical.
Ming is soo nervous, v.good set of questions but he lacks the neve.
the countdown is on march 15th…
86. My analysis is quite straightforward. There was only one question in the poll that mattered - who is best PM, the result was DC 33: GB 45. It is true that 50% said that they had been Labour “in the past” - this is quite representative as a higher number would have been Labour in the past (Labour was polling near 60% for much of 1997-2000). At the very least it is reasonable to assume that no more than 40% of this sample would commit to Labour now. For the Chancellor to score at 45% overall this shows that the vast majority of past Labour supporters would support him over Cameron. As for Cameron he has added just 1.5% to his support on this key question.
112. No, Please no! It would be a torture to great to bear! Next you will say that I will have to deny then sandals and jumpers and shave off their beards!
I could just sacrifice all my principles on the altar of popular opinion, oh, no…DC has already beaten me to that. LDs it is then!
Tristoph Are you sure you are out of the woods with this freezing thing? Don’t most people turn blue in the cold?
112 - what is this about quiche and Lib Dems? I hate quiche. When it comes to being a carnivore, I am no cheese-eating surrender monkey. I would have thought quiche is far more NuLabour.
Whoops. This freezing thing not the other green thing, good though it is.
114 - I thought the question was “Would Gordon Brown/David Cameron make a good PM?” - 33% said yes for DC and 45% said “yes” for GB. There wasn’t a comparison between the two, or the inclusion of a LD contender. That 33% of a sample half made up of Labour supporters think DC would be “a good PM” isn’t bad. That only 45% of that same sample thought GB would be “a good PM” is most alarming for GB supporters.
117 - I want to know about the sandals and beards myself, although I know a couple of councillors who are addicted to jumpers.
I’m more of a Fred Perry top/jeans and distinctly omnivorous type myself and I can’t remember the last time I had quiche. Had a tarte flambeé in Strasbourg a few months ago, though.
Shame I missed the merciless one.
Any more news from the mole kingdom anyone?
Sadly, loads of people listen to Today and take their cue on politics from it.
114. Hmm, the other opinion polls suggest Cameron is doing better than you give him credit.
Brown is likely to be seen making a better PM as he has held a high cabinet post for a long time. Also people expect him to be leader, which will boost him in the polls. DC in contrast has little experience to date and the public clearly don’t know him well enough to know how good a PM he would be.
I don’t think we will understand how the public will react to the Brown/Cameron battle until Blair has gone. I expect a boost for The Dour One, but not a big one, and he will need to work very hard to ensure it lasts.
SBS Surely, only a cheese eating surrender monkey would naturally use a French word for savoury egg tart.
“Thanks for your support. BTW whatever are we going to talk about next week?”
How about a competition for the London Borough elections?
114 - Do you think a grateful population will be rewarding Labour on May 4th?
117 SBS. Call youself a Lib Dem ……. you are clearly of the SDP refusenik tendency !
Betfair have swapped Huhne and Campbell around at the top of their Lib Dem leadership market.
Do I get a prize for the most mundane observation of the day?
119. You really are clutching at straws. It is obvious that GB would be a good PM, that’s why people OUT THERE say so! Have you seen the messages coming from The Sun and Mr Seltzer? Their radar is better than your’s methinks.
Betfair for those with firewalls
MC 1.93 back, 1.96 lay;
CH 2.14 - 2.20.
They have changed the order so had a slight shock at first!
120 - I bet you’ll find the vegetarian quota higher in the Labour party than in the Lib Dems. Are all members of the Green Party vegetarian in this country? Or at least all their councillors? In other countries they don’t seem to be so militant.
I had the today interview as a score draw. DC wasnt up to much but then Humphry’s aggresiveness often got in the way and created sympathy for him.
The ‘petulant’ tag that seems to be floating around DC is something to watch though. I dont see why he can’t adress it ( ala Thatchers voice coach) and suspect it may be to do with people not defering to him being a new experience.
Blair and Brown have evolved their own styles of dealing
with ‘The agressive inteview’ Cameron needs to as well.
116. Dunno, DC looks pretty green round the gills in that picture (not so sure about his environmental credentials though).
118. Up until now it has been quite mild IMO. No snow in Durham while I’ve been here, which is highly unusual.
122. “Brown is likely to be seen making a better PM as he has held a high cabinet post for a long time”
[ADD: and has done a magnificent job, best Chancellor ever etc.]
“Also people expect him to be leader, which will boost him in the polls.”
[ADD: because they want him to be PM as soon as possible]
“DC in contrast has little experience to date and the public clearly don’t know him well enough to know how good a PM he would be.”
[ADD: no change from this position by polling day]
For the record [and I can say this with absolute confidence] the Chancellor is not dour.
Just a test posting as my all my comments seem to be moderated out (and they are ok really!)
Thank you Mike for your suggestion to overcome this.
127, 132. You are Ed Balls and I claim five LD spokesmen (Laws, Cable, Huhne, Davey and Clegg) to beat you with! (not physically of course!)
99 - Luke. I feel that you are underestimating the degree of antipathy in the US towards the Bush Administration - this is a president with approval ratings in the mid 30’s and a VP below 20 - the Dems will tar every opponent with their ties to Bush. Furthermore there are a series of financial scandals brewing that have the potential to blacken the GOP in general. Yes, you are correct that incumbency is a huge advantage but it is not an insurmountable one, especially in a sea-change year - I don’t think 2006 will quite reach 1994 but I think it’ll be interesting.
Montana - yes Burns has a big war chest but he is faced with serious problems over his ties to Jack Abramoff. Also Montana is a state where the media market may not demand huge resources - and Morrison at least has a very strong financial base already. Also it is not an out and out R stronghold. It has one D senator and a very popular D governor and was carried by Clinton in recent times. I’m not saying Burns will lose but it is a definite D opportunity.
Rhode Island - Chafee has been walking a thin line. He requires D support to be elected, and this means offending the R base on occasion. Equally, if he only votes against Bush when it doesn’t matter he loses support against D’s. I guess he probably will win his primary, in which case he probably retains the seat, but with a much reduced vote percentage.
Ohio - As you probably know the state GOP is mired in funding scandals, and of all states that voted Bush, his numbers are now worst there. Although the GOP currently hold both senate seats (they have not historically done - John Glenn!)and the governorship, DeWine is vulnerable. Sherrod Brown is a top-tier challenger - it is too close to call at the moment.
Missouri - McCaskill nearly took Blunt down in the last gubernatorial election - at a time when R numbers were generally better. She is a top tier candidate, with greater name recognition now than then. Again it’ll be close.
Virginia - Allen is clearly favourite but he’s now facing a challenger who could erode some core support - as a former Reagan administration member. You are right about presidential election splits but overall VA is still trending democratic, as evidenced by the gubernatorial win in November.
If you think that that Michigan could be a Republican gain you need to do some research of your own. Stabenow has a huge warchest and is a shoo-in. I don’t think there’s a credible R challenger at the moment. You’ve not mentioned the open seat in Tennessee - I’d say R hold, but again not by much.
New Jersey - yes there’s outside potential for an R gain, but I’d be surprised. But on the whole the Republican’s problem in this cycle has been a failure to entice good candidates into the ring - does not this very fact tell you that they are worried that 2006 will be a Democratic year.
135, I would anticipate that the Democrats will again display their unerring ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
Last test worked.
Now to repeat all my posting that just disappeared over the last few weeks……..
No I really couldn’t put you all thru’ that!
132. People do not think that GB has done a magnificent job, the average person in the street will probably say he has done an okay job.
He is only wanted as PM because Blair has become such a hate figure, not because of anything GB has done.
The more time DC gets in the media, the more people will get to know and trust him, the more likely they are to vote for him.
Sorry Prof, GB is going to lose ground at the next GE to Cameron, save if the Tories implode.
I’m not saying whether this is all good or bad, I’m just suggesting how IMO things will pan out.
138. He has done a magnificent job but if the average person thinks he has done an “okay job” that will be good enough to win well. That’s what the poll really means and Tory posters had better get used to it.
Anyone else starting to think The Professor is Charlie Whelan?
140 - more like Charlie Chaplin!
I think GB can certainly defend his record at the Treasury (so far). Are his problems that he 1. comes over a dour 2. is the most factional figure in politcs anyone can think of apart from, er… Edward Leigh?
In no-one in the Uk had run up a credit card bill what would GB’s record look like ?
139. Face it prof, people are tiring of Labour and want some change. The women vote if going to go to DC more then GB, as the polls have demonstrated. As someone posted on here on a previous thread, as it stands GB might win more votes in the Labour heartland, but he does not have the appeal to Middle England.
Moreover Brown is going to have to come across a lot more conciliatory than Blair is and I just don’t think he has that kind of personality.
Politically he is trapped; move to left to shore up against LD; lose to Cameron. Move to the right to fight Cameron; risk losing safe seats to the LDs (and as we have shown, we can win them).
He was damged by the Dunfermline bi-election. He is going to be damaged by the poor showing in the Council Elections this year. And if the economy doesn’t start growing at a faster rate he will no longer be SEEN as doing an “okay” job.
Find another leader (but of course, you won’t, and you will suffer the consequences, but what do I care, its not my party…)
Jack W
Good to see someone here keeps up with all the really important news
123. “cheese eating surrender monkeys”
Did/Does anyone actually think this is funny? It’s something that a 8 year old would make up in the playground. The fact that it’s had such a long run is symptomatic of the abusive and juvenile level of the pro-Bush pro-war lobby.
(i’m a tory by the way).
re 114. The Professor. More sloppiness I’m afraid. Check the poll out - the question of who would be ‘best’ PM was not put.
I am sure that in your academic work you would not make assertions without looking at the source material which clearly you have not done.
How about “Les singes capitulards fromagistes”?
(I’m a Eurofanatic)
144 Excellent post Tistoph ! Eat that Professor !
Don’t listen to Today because they’re so tediously confrontational and know-all by turns. If Cameron was peevish with Humphries, I can’t blame him.
SAS: we could argue at length over ‘what is left-wing’ - for me, it’s providing disadvantaged people with better services and more security in life, and I’m open to suggestion how to do it. I used not to be (I was a Bennite in the 80s and further left before that), but I’ve come to feel that a rigidly ideological approach is unwise. I don’t favour ID cards or banning glorification of terrorism or facilitating parental school choice because I think they fit some model of society, but just think them good ideas - and if the Tories sometimes support them, that’s not, for me, a decisive argument against.
150 - Nick: for me, it’s providing disadvantaged people with better services and more security in life
sounds like One Nation Conservatism to me
The differentiation happens when you add an indiscriminate identification of who falls under that category and make them dependent on the state for their livelyhood, as opposed to giving the weak and needy the support they need when they need it, then providing the tools and facilities for them to become self-sufficient, and as such become net contributors to the state.
And I know that was what JSA, Tax Credits, et al were supposed to do, but they haven’t. They have failed. I have staff working less than 15 hours a week taking home more than I do as a 40 hour p/w (I wish it was that few) manager, and who basically say “where is the incentive to work more hours, I will lose my benefits”
150. Any chance of a by-election in the near future, any MP’s looking unsteady on their feet?
139: Professor, you are the most sagacious poster on this site. Gordon Brown is a formidable politician and the greatest finance minister this country, and probably the world, has ever seen. (Labour’s only problem – and it’s a small one indeed – is that such a masterly act will be all but impossible to follow; though I’m very impressed with the talent amongst Gordon’s likely successors: the excellent Ed Balls, the Miliband brothers, Yvette Cooper.)
What tories and others forget (or pretend to) is that when Gordon finally calls a general election the economy will be booming (all respected economic commentators now agree on this) and the war in Iraq, which is associated in everyone’s mind with Blair and which Gordon was sceptical of anyway, will no longer be a factor. It was only the war that prevented new Labour from enjoying another stunning landslide in 2005, and that obstacle won’t be around next time. I concur wholeheartedly – as I’m sure will the Professor - with the incisive A Baker, Spain who predicts a 250 plus majority under Gordon’s premiership:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nolpda/ukfs_news/hi/newsid_4518000/4518721.stm
“and the war in Iraq, which is associated in everyone’s mind with Blair and which Gordon was sceptical of anyway, will no longer be a factor”
an excellent post, Scholar, but Gordon Brown is so brilliant, that by the time the election is called, history will have been rewritten and the was with Iraq will never have happened.
pass the sick bag……..
146. I thought it was funny at first; of course jokes don’t tend to last so it’s lost its effect.
149. I’m not sure its healthy that we should be agreeing, but thanks anyway!
153, 154. Sirs, you are both rampers, frauds and Tories in disguise!
Bloody hell old chaps, I’ve neverseen such blatant ramping by young conservatives in my life. Professor and Scholar you should have stopped two weeks ago when there was a sembelance of credability to your stories now they look so forced like so many American sequels.
Anyone know which bookie is taking odds on jowell going before easter? I saw it mentioned on sky news but didn’t catch which bookie it was.
I’d remortgage my house for £400,000 and stick it all on her being out. Obviously, I wouldn’t tell my wife what I was doing though - nor would my wife think to ask.
No doubt the nation will be in tears to lose their esteemed Minister for Women who has been such a role model for assertive women everywhere…
I’m putting my £400,000 into an Italian Hedge Fund.
147. Mr. Smithson, you are becoming pedantic. The question (taken from your own posting)was: “most likely to make a good PM?” DC 33: GB 45 - same as best PM IMO and reliable as I explain above.
I know this is not the result that LD/Tory posters want but they can dream on (Dunfermline was no more than a gnat bite on the bum of an elephant - so to speak).
Our Scholar at 153 is absolutely right and heading for a First/Distinction/Outstanding PhD (delete as appropriate).
Would the Scholar like a job at HMT? I may be able to oblige.
It is all the same to me, Professor.
150 - Nick. Sounds like you’d feel more comforatble in the Lib Dems.
I was once a Labour activist, in my distant youth, until joining the SDP so I remember the bennite left well. Still have to shake my head with disbeleif at how many of them now are current Nu Labour ministers or past Nu Lab ministers; right wing to a man/woman, and yet they were so fierce in their left wingery in the old days.
Mind you; I stuck to my principles hence still a b…. ppc whilst if I’d swallowed hard. Why; Nick, I’d be with you in the House quietly glancing at my inernatioanlle song sheet every now and then to have a good laugh.
Probably for the best as have come to the conclusion that I’ve actually always been a gladestonian/grimond liberal - god help me!
BTW Mike you are namechecked in Andrew Gilligan’s media column in the Evening Standard today. Its in reference to the poll about who would make the best PM with Gilligan pointing out the lack of a liberal option, the lack of any comparison with the previous poll on this subject and in general slaying the media for there failure to report polls impartially.
161. You are Ed Balls! I knew it! Sir, might I suggest you attend to your constituents! Or perhaps work on coming across less annoying in the media.
Though you could be helpful and tell us whether you are going to be the next chancellor (so, if you are, I can book my plane ticket).
Im astonished by the number of people who think that the Lib Dems are going to be any kind of a factor at the next election. 2005 was their high water market and they totally blew it due to their lack of a grown up leader.
Huge amounts of Lib Dem support is the result of Tories who came over to the libs during the 90s due to Conservative splits/europe/’nasty party’ and liberal Labour supporters who were upset that New Labour wasn’t left wing enough and over the war.
Next time round, the Lib Dems are going to hemmorage votes in both directions. The Tories clearly aren’t going to come across as mean/divided/extreme as in previous elections and the fact that Blair will have gone and the (in their minds) more leftish Brown is leader will be enough to screw the Libs.
My point being that the poster who said that Labour may have to ‘move left’ to defend against the Liberals is utter madness.
166 “2005 was their high water market”
If you mean “mark”, of course you are right. This was also the case in 1997 (until 2001), and in 2001 (until 2005). It was true in 2005 until 2006.
66 - Given that the choice at the next election will be between David ‘Tory Blair’ Cameron and Gordon Brown (who has supported Tony Blair at every turn) I think the LD vote will hold up perfectly well. The days of two party politics are over - much as both Labour and Tory hanker back to the old certainties.
sorry, yes “mark”
To be more accurate, as you say, they have kept setting new high water marks.
However, it is my feeling that they will not set a new mark in 2009.
O/T - Preston from Celebrity Big Brother will edit an edition of the BBC’s Politics Show…
http://bigbrother.digitalspy.co.uk/article/ds8973.html
Adam Rickett watch out!
166. Well if they stay where they are they seem to lose bi-elections to LDs in safe areas. Brown will have a honeymoon with the left, but it won’t last because he knows he will have to fight the middle ground with Cameron. I agree we as a party will have to work hard over the next few years, but despite all the problems we have had we are back at 18/20% in the polls.
If you want to believe we LDs are out of it then go ahead. But I think you will find it won’t be the champagne that will be giving you a headache after the next GE.
166 - John, if you think the Liberals will go backwards do you envisage the number of Labour seats going up therefore? This would be bad news if so.
161. Pray Ed/Charlie, why would Lib Dems not want GB to beat Cameron in a splinter poll on being a good PM?
SAC at 163: I hesitate to pursue this as it’s pretty O/T and we could all go on at length about what motivates us. But my worst problem with the LibDems is that they are (as far as I’m concerned) fine on several idealistic issues (the environment and immigration, and others) but they seem to me to have a blind spot on poverty. The pledge to abolish the pensioners’ Minimum Income Guarantee (to help pay for restoring the link to incomes, which would instead have helped all pensioners marginally) would have tipped a lot of very desperate people back over the poverty line into the old heat vs food dilemma; the opposition to the Minimum Wage and the low-key approach to fair trade and overseas aid (my LD opponent didn’t mention either in his address) seem o m part of this general issue.
The LDs I know are nearly all nice middle-class people who worry about ’soft’ issues where they may well be right but they just don’t feel the desperation of people on the poverty line. Labour still seems to me to have better gut instincts in this area - I don’t want to get into a policy-by-policy argument so I won’t go into more detail - and it’s the key for me. But it dioesn’t stop my feeling happy to work with LDs on all the issues where I agree with them (such as PR!). Or, indeed, Cameronian Tories.
Latest Back prices from BF MC 0.86, CH 2.18 , SH 33
MC tightening all the time - next wall of resistance is 0.81
I simply think that despite a completely useless and nasty Tory party, a Labour leader hated by many in his own party and the war, the Liberals still only managed a (by their own reckoning) disappointingly small increase in seats and a total failure of their decapitation strategy.
The failure to capitalise on such a fertile political landscape is in my opinion mainly due to their lack of a ‘grown up’ leader and possibly a culture of amateurism in the party.
176 - that’s why Kennedy had to go. It was not just the drink.
176 - I could find something to agree with in that, Mr Miles. Yes, we will need to raise our game.
The decapitation strategy helped us win over Labour voters, in my view. (Doubtless you remember that we won one of the four).
166 & 176 - the landscape of 2005 was problematic for the Lib Dems in terms of easily-stolen Labour seats. Due to history and happenstance, most winnable seats were from the Tories. Coincidentally, among these were a lot of frontbench Tories - not a decapitation strategy per se, but these were just the vulnerable ones. The Lib Dems did win most Labour seats that were in their sights (and a few that weren’t!).
The difference for 2009 (or whenever) will be that the party has many more second places then ever before (150+) and that these are more evenly-split between the two other parties. This will enable a more balanced strategy.
Never forget the poll from, I think, 2001 when 49% of voters said that they would vote Lib Dem if they thought they would win in their seat. Once a Lib Dem has won, the other parties have real trouble unseating them.
Last Lib (Dem) by-election defeat was in 1957…
176, 177, 178 - so was the Liberal ‘bad’ performance because of or despite Kennedy? If Labour will regain votes lost to Libs at the last general election then they will do better and the Conservatives might lose seats to Labour where switchers to the Liberals go back to Labour?
The professor and the excellent Roger are right to point out that GB is seen to be adequate as chancellor. No more, but no less. Both the accuracy of that and our opinions are irrelevant—that is what Sun readers think.
But enough of them believe that it is time for a change, and that is 0% to do with Iraq (which has never been a vote loser for Sun readers).
The tricky question, which will determine the next GE is: will GB represent enough of a change?
Also the Zupanija of Istra in Croatia is officially bi-lingual in Croatian and Italian.
Looking at that picture of DC on the BBC website- Is David Cameron the unacknowledged love child of Willie Whitelaw??
174 Nick. Tad unfair. Our oppostion to the minimum wage was because we did not believe Nu Labour set it high enough and on the pensions issue, we (I) beleive that means testing cuts out many or the poorest as they’re least able to cope with the screeds of paperwork, and it penalises thrift which is daft in the long run. Hence our citizins pension for all, including as based on residancy many tens of thousands of women who miss out by taking time off to bring up children. Pretty crucial all of the above to assist the poor in a practical way, I’d say.
Like you I’d have no problem working with Labour so long as our key manifesto committments were met. Frankly I’d even work with DC’s lot - again so long as our core manifesto was met. Don’t tell my esteemed - soon to be Leader, the Great Ming - as he’s going to ban all talk of coalition gov from the Lib Dem dictionary once he wins tomorrow….
179 - All very good points. Although I would pick you up on:
“Last Lib (Dem) by-election defeat was in 1957…”
A misleading(ish) fact since there are relatively few Lib Dem seats, by elections in Lib Dem held seats are much rarer than Con or Lib.
“so was the Liberal ‘bad’ performance because of or despite Kennedy? If Labour will regain votes lost to Libs at the last general election then they will do better and the Conservatives might lose seats to Labour where switchers to the Liberals go back to Labour?”
I think the BAD performance was because of Kennedy - if they had had a proper politician in charge, and done some proper politics over between 1997 and 2001 they could have ended the Tory Party in 2005.
I think the Cons might lose some seats to Labour as left/liberal ex Labour voter switch back from the Libs. Although I think that the Liberals will lose votes to the Tories as well (see my first post). Its all going to depend on how the Lib vote splits.
I agree with David Kendrick that the impact of Iraq was more subtle than many people seem to believe - I suspect it helped Labour to mobilise some of its core vote.
And I agree with John Miles (implicit) suggestion that the weak period was the failure to capitalise on IDS.
I can only think of 2 by-election in Liberal/Lib Dem seats since 1957 (Truro and Cheadle). Am I missing some?
My dear Professor 161. The word ‘best’ is a comparative term and this was not put in the poll. There is a big difference between that and the actual polling question.
When a proper voing intention question is asked that does not ignore the Lib Dems or other party you can then talk in the way you do. Be assured I will cover it in the same way that I have covered earlier surveys of that nature Brown leading or not.
Nick, glad your back hope you had a good hoilday. If Labour is so wonderful for the poor why do Liberal Democrats do well in inner city areas. On pensions the increase in the basic pension would end the problem of people being entitled to claim but not claiming.
I am afraid the picture you paint of the Labour party is a little out of date. Think Precott, think Blair, think Mandelson/Robinson think £350,000 into a hedge fund!
However I think we could benefit from your obvious concern at the lack of progress by the government. Would you like me to send you a membership form?
150.”and I’m open to suggestion how to do it. I used not to be (I was a Bennite in the 80s and further left before that),”
Nick Palmer, are you suggesting that people on the Left aren’t ready to listen to others’ suggestions?
Guido has some new LD poll data..
188 That’s pretty mild comment about the Bennite left in the 80s…
“think £350,000 into a hedge fund!”
If Huhne gets the Leadership, Liberals are going to have to do something about that kneejerk wealth-bashing tendancy.
190. well, I could say that Blair has never showed any propensions to listen to others either….
192 - What about a few years ago when everyone was complaining that New Labour was ‘rule by opinion poll’
The opinion pollsters got it in the neck after 97, before anyone had even heard on spin doctors
Not new data - new analysis of data - also had impeccable source confirm that YouGov #1 leak was near enough right.
Details following.
BREAKING NEWS ……………..
Jack W calls the Lib Dem leadership for Sir Menzies Campbell.
Bob Worcester calls the Lib Dem leadership for John Kerry.
Rik W calls the Lib Dem leadership a bunch of to***rs.
………………………….
Unless all the info coming to moi is as duff as the Bruce Forsyth’s syrup then Fife’s finest will be temporary leader no more come Thursday teatime.
The word from a variety of sources - MP’s, constituency Chairman, all 3 campaign teams, canvass returns, the steam room of the Electoral Services and Mystic Meg is of one opinion ……….. An invite to Lady Elspeth Friday Soiree is the hottest ticket in the world of Lib Demmery.
……………………………….
I add only one cautionary note
1948 US Presidential Election
….. but then this is 2006 !!
If the £350,000 was a legal payment with the correct taxes paid on then there is no problem. But the Deputy Prime Minister forgetting to pay his council tax and the Mandelson /Robinson saga seems to me to indicate that the current crop of Labour politicians have other priorities than helping the poor.
BF has ground to a near halt at
MC 0.84 , CH 1.22, SH 33
I can’t believe anyone would think the DPMs council tax thing was anything sinister.
As for Mandelson - he didn’t do anything wrong.
This is exactly what I mean about kneejerk reactions. Throw any sh*t about politicians and money and, in the minds of many on the left, ALL of it sticks.
This comment on Tessa Jowell from a number 10 spokesman sounds like something from the Professor: “It is only thanks to having the cheapest interest rates in history that people have been able to raise money by remortgaging so often.”
If I paid £350,000 into my bank account my bank manager, once he had recovered from the shock, then he might feel obliged to ask where it came from. If I had raised a mortgage on my property then I would be able to give a honest and acceptable reason for coming into the money.
If I then paid off the mortgage with my Ming winnings (I ejoyed your latest post Jack - until the last line!), I am unlikely to be asked where the money came from. Whilst I do not expect that this was the motivation in the Jowell case. The paying off of a mortgage is less visible than paying a cheque into your current account.
186. I am more than happy to wait for the next series of polls Mr. Smithson and then we shall see - the “real” polls after Mr. Brown becomes PM will be of more interest.
Thanks again for the excellent service provided by this website. Would you like a tax break to keep up the good work?
The fact that most LDs prefer G. Brown over Mr. Cameron is good news. Some marginals lost in the Blair/Iraq election will be won back due to tactical rewind.
Professor, I suspect the loss of Worcester Woman to that Cameronian Quiff is going to negate any of that tactical rewind.
135 In Response:
If you think 2006 is a the Democrat’s year, it would be useful to show us certain gains the Democrats will make. At this stage in 2004, everyone knew the Republicans would gain Georgia and South Carolina, most people had conceded the Republicans were more than likely to retain control of the Senate than lose it -this was when they had 51 seats, not 55 like now.
Furthermore, you point out Clinton winning Montana, he won it because there was a third party candidate, no such candidate exists nows, Montana will vote for the Republican senator. If your going to say a state with a Democrat Governor means they got a chance of beating an incumbant senator, next Kansas will eventually become a target in the future (simply because they got a Democrat Governor, it’s just wishful thinking).
Bush’s approval numbers average is actually 40%, use ‘RealClearPoltics’ which predicted many of the last election results very accurately, including the winner overall, George Bush. Approval numbers don’t indicate anything about how the the party performs in individual senate and congressional seats. People in America know Bush isn’t up for election, therefore your point about Bush affecting the race is highly unlikely.
There is nothing to actually indicate this is a take over like in 1994, which was in a totally different context, what have the Democrats got in comparison to the ‘Contract with America’? Erm, the answer is nothing. I remember reading wildly hopeful posts during the 2004 elections about the Democrats taking the Senate and Presidency, the day after the election they seemed surprised they lost! Look at the polls. Missouri, Ohio and Virginia, three seats you tip for potential pick up for the Democrats all have the Republican Senator LEADING in the latest opinion polls. Polls can change true, but these incumbants, by the very nature of being incumbants have more money and resources than their rivals, the most likely result is all three will win re-election. One thing is for sure as you correctly seem to realise -if the Democrats can’t pick up even one of these seats they are doomed to re-gaining the senate. Nothing so far suggests they will regain it, so carry on dreaming…or link me with a more recent poll which shows the Republicans trailing in any of those three states..?
95. Another word of caution - the only officially published professionally sampled poll we have is the Yougov poll which gives it to CH. Mike Smithson’s advice in yesterday’s lead blog should be heeded.
I have spoken to a lot of LD ordinary members in my local area in the SE and CH is ahead here by a significant margin. I telephoned LD councillors in the NE and I am sure it was 50/50 there.
Huhne HQ is not downhearted and thinks it is too close to call. Neither they nor Ming’s campaign were allowed official access to the LD membership list and canvassing was initially restricted to known party members in office. I don’t think either side can regard their own canvassing results with a high degree of confidence. Mingons - don’t plan what you are going to do with your winnings yet!
104 - I agree, Gouplillon!
198 John Miles, I agree about DPM and Council Tax. It does sometimes get confusing - and I daresay that it was a Government residence DPM might well have been at sixes and sevens. We are referring to John Prescott here!
Yes so do I. If Huhne does win I will not be as unhappy as someone whose Betfair screen is shown on Guido’s Blog showing £5805 green for Ming and £4252 red against Huhne. Is it Guido’s? Does his wife read his blog?
I think thats David Mill’s Betfair screen.
107 - Well I’m neutral on Huhne (financially that is) and Hughes (following my head not my heart :-() but with a nice three figure profit on Campbell. We shall see………
The Betfair market isnt completely dead yet £1100 matched in the past hour.
I am annoyed that IG keep closing their market, though I notice the price has moved up 10 to make Ming 54 (mid price), I could get out now at profit if I wanted to. I think I prefer it at the betting shop once you’ve handed over the cash and got your ticket you are stuck with your decision!
199
I just wanted to make a correction point to the bogus ‘opinion poll’ you quote with Bush having a score in the ‘mid 30s’.
This apparently by CBS is weighted in the break down to the Democrats by 381, Republicans by 281, Independents by 348. This apparent ‘reliable’ poll doesn’t seem to understand that according to excit polls in the last election exactly the same % of people indentified themselves as Republicans and Democrats at 37% each. This poll is weighted by 92 extra to the Democrats, with no explanation why. The reason for no explanation is to get a cheap and mendacious headline with a political agenda.
Maybe if they weight the poll I might take notice of this ‘poll’ it tells you virtually nothing about his approval rating! If this is the basis of a Democrat take over, you will be very disappointed on election night and if your brave enough to bet money on it too, also massively out of pocket.
204 Goupillon. I don’t discount that Huhne might win. Stranger things in politics have happened - I understand there was once an accurate Lib Dem bar chart and also a socialist in the Labour party.
However and not withstanding any recent reliable professional polling all the mood music made available to me from a variety of informed sources is that Ming has won. It’s possible they are all wrong …. possible, but I suggest unlikely. And if they are wrong, I will be the first among equals with a rather substantial omelette around my chops ! (Rik cheering of stage)
For myself I closed all my positions some time back and have no financial axe to grind, as indeed I didn’t have at the Dunfermline by-election.
We have just a little time to wait ….. and what an interminable wait it has been !
203 - Luke: Polls this far out can be unreliable; often the challenger’s primary has not been completed; the air war is not really joined, and there are large numbers of undecideds. It is how these moderate and independent voters break that will determine the fate of some of the swing senate seats. An incumbent polling less than 50% at this stage of the cycle is potentially in trouble - if there is a viable challenger. Talent and DeWine are in this zone and both have viable challengers - I do recognise your point that latest polling favours them. However, going by your criteria, Burns is in trouble in Montana, mired as he is in the Abramoff scandal. The latest Rasmussen has him down 7 to Morrison. See http://www.rasmussenreports.com/2006/State%20Polls/February%202006/Montana%20Senate%20February.htm
The message I suspect the Democrats will try to hang around Republicans is a ‘Culture of Corruption’ and there is much fertile ground to be ploughed. Indeed, is this not the same seam that was mined by Gingrich? The challenge will be to put this into a coherent message and get it across via a media that varies from the openly hostile (Fox) to the fairly disconnected. If the Democrats can do this they will pick up seats - but you are right that I am not predicting that Democrats will retake the senate. I do however predict that they will pick up Pennsylvania and two or three of Rhode Island, Ohio, Missouri and Montana. Yes, Virginia is probably too difficult. But they should also hold the open seats in Minnesota and New Jersey and will probably lose in Tennessee.
The Democrats continue their strategy: (via the Onion)
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/45793
What time will the result be declared tomorrow?
115 3.00p.m
215- Count and declaration: 2nd March at 3.00pm
211 - I grant you the CBS poll seemed low and you have provided an explanation why. But SUSA have him at 40% which is still toxic for a US President: http://www.surveyusa.com/50State2006/50StateBushApproval060216State.htm
Looking at this other interesting figures include Ohio (37%), Iowa (38%) and Missouri (39%)
215-7. Thks.
The move to Ming is strange. It’s sole cause appears to be the Ming camp ‘announcing’ preparations for his leadership.
But the envelopes are still sealed! No counting has taken place. So leaks from the count are impossible, and inside betting is NOT taking place.
We remain in a situation where most recent polls have given Huhne victory by a slim-to-moderate margin. This could make it too close to call, but certainly does not make it an obvious Menzies win!
Circumstantial reports that Huhne is ahead in the south and Scotland, and voting evenly split in the north, have not been denied by the Menzies camp. Their sole claim has been that they have enough of Hughes second preferences. But this is contradicted by the YouGov poll which showed not enough Hughes second preferences going to Menzies for him to win.
I suspect alot of non-professional bets have swung the market. And that these have been influenced solely by the Menzies name-recognition factor and a desire to back the incumbent.
They don’t seem to realise that incumbents cease to be so, when there is an open election to determine the post. In such a situation all that matters is who gets more votes. The current evidence is that this is Huhne rather than Menzies.
Well, we have only 20 hours or so to we find out if this analysis is correct. Bare one prediction in mind - there will be no Menzies win by a big margin, if at all.
P.S. Huhne looks very good at the current odds. You’d be strongly advised to take a punt.
I think there is clear evidence that this could be a Democratic year, and I’m often pesemistic on their chances. Tracking polling on Rasmussen, a fantasic resources which polls every major race each month, shows a move back to the Democrats, firstly in their vital open seats, MN and NJ, but also leading in PA, and also running close to neck-and-neck in RI and MO. Ohio will be a key battleground.
The big gains will be in the Governorships. OH, MN, NY, MA and AR are all likely to see pick-ups, with Calafornia neck and neck and Maryland too close to call. Sadly, these are the results which will make the least impact on the political scene, but even the head of the RGA has said his party is going down in 2006.
I don’t see a retaking of the senate, I see it being razor-close in the house, and a massive Democratic swing in the Governors mansions.
“We remain in a situation where most recent polls have given Huhne victory by a slim-to-moderate margin.”
Erm, polls plural…?
220 Phil. What exactly do you mean by “….and inside betting is NOT taking place.” ?
There has been a Times poll and a Guardian poll as well as the YouGov poll. The former two gave Huhne larger leads than the YouGov poll.
An ‘insider’ is someone that has direct access to the outcome, such as a ballot counter. Inside betting is impossible, becuase there is no actual counting of votes taking place yet. The envelopes are sealed.
Having data checked and re-checked - do not want egg on my face. It will be posted tonight.
But I notice that Ros Taylor (she does the Guardian’s Backbencher column) has reading difficulties. She says Mike has called for Ming.
But, correct me if I am wrong Mike, he has called it for Huhne.
So one of us faces a proper Ruth Kellying tomorrow.
224 - there has been only one published poll of Lib Dem **members** during the contest.
203. Luke, if you believe that Bush is not a factor in the elections in November then you really have your head in the sand.
24 - You seem to have found two more polls than the rest of us! Maybe it was just a bad dream?
224 Phil. Thank you for your clarification. I thought you might have meant a wider meaning of “insider”.
Certainly there has been much betting by those in the inner circle.
….. or should that be magic circle !
220 - and, anyway, as any fule kno, the move to Ming was not caused by “the Ming camp ‘announcing’ preparations for his leadership.” …
… It was Jack W wot swung it.
225 Guido. Mike has said in terms that the balance of the race lies in a narrow Huhne win.
230 Joe Fairw. And if Ming loses it’ll be :
…..Punters want Jack W swung by his wot sits …. Gulp
230 - The swing occurred because there was no longer a blocking effort going on, thus the market noved more naturally reflecting the betting taking place.
Ming now at 0.76 - hot favourite!
So Ming’s deputy - I would say Susan Kramer is favourite. Huhne will get to chair a dozen policy forums; Clegg will take Foreign Affairs.
Very O/T, but I am watching the Daily Politics now, and their discussion on Iraq…
Put me in mind of a discussion they were having on Fox News the other day, which was captioned at the bottom of the screen:
“ALL OUT CIVIL WAR IN IRAQ
COULD IT BE A GOOD THING?”
The mood I am sensing is that Ming will win. The evidence? Talking to ordinary members, many of whom still don’t feel they know much about Huhne and so will either not vote or will vote for Ming or Simon. Members of the Huhne camp are starting to sound far less upbeat than they were. Some friends who have canvassed for different candidates say that Ming is seen as a safe pair of hands and that is swinging for him with Simon doing better than expected as ordinary members have known of him for years and so have forgiven him for his early problems - these make up a large percentage of the party.
233 ukpaul. How dare you demolish an urban legend with boring facts!
…… I shall commission a senior Lib Dem to bar chart away such shallow arguements !
………………………………..
All available markets moving to Ming.
Yes - Ming will probably win. Huhne will do well. As a Huhne supporter from day 1, I am fairly happy with the result. It could be so much worse.
236 Andy. Agreed ….. but, just in case have you a suitable supply of eggs for face painting ?!?!
The personal ‘mood’ someone are described is flatly contradicted by repeated published polls of members - these were conducted comptemporaneously with the voting itself.
Personal ‘mood’ is a very strange commodity to be betting on, when it contradicts facts.
Mood is subjective, whereas published polls are objective. Facts are what professionals bet on, subjective ‘mood’ is what an amateur bets on.
Historically polls have tended to be far more accurate than one’s own ‘mood’, which can vary as wildly as the weather, and are subject to biases based on assocation.
I’ll stick to the facts thank you, and reject your ‘mood’ betting.
So you’re heavily into Huhne then Phil?
I bet on Huhne very early, and then covered. I now have a significant win regardless of the outcome. The sole basis for my judgements is the facts, and the facts alone.
But very early on there was nothing to indicate that Huhne was going to put up a good show: he was an outsider, new MP, with a tiny majority. I guess you just must have had a feeling he was going to do well…
Phil - 222 - Non-professional bets? Wouldn’t it be fair to say that 95% of any market is comprised of non-professionals? Can we mere amateurs never call the market right? I’d call myself an amateur (it’s not my day job), and thanks to this site I’m up thousands overall on political bets - with Ming it’s the wisdom of crowds thing - on the competition thread 60% of pb’ers reckon
Ming’s the winner and that’s good enough for me. It’s like “Ask the audience” on Millionaire. Tch! Bloody amateurs!!
240 - Phil, you again refer to polls plural. I repeat: there has been only one published poll of Lib Dem members in this campaign. Where are these “repeated published polls” you mention?
(For the record the one published poll showed Chris narrowly ahead, and was well within the margin of error.)
Whenever an opinion poll of party voting preference is commented on on this site, the more respected posters always say no one poll should be taken in isolation - they should be viewed as a trend, alongside others.
We don’t have that luxury this time. But the same caveat should apply…
… caveat emptor.
Was Piara Khabra’s question at PMQs just designed to show that he is still alive?
240 - there was only one proper poll published, and the questions were perhaps designed to put the participants in a certain “mood”. And it was close. And a small sample. The others were samples of people attending hustings; who knows if these were all members? and if they were, since such a small proportion of members went to hustings, they were atypical members. Also largely urban members. There has been no conclusive evidence to show Huhne or Ming clearly in the lead.
I think Ming will win. I am sure Simon will come last. Huhne has done remarkably well to come from nowhere (and I would like him to win). Perhaps you can call it “mood” saying Ming to win - but I can see no clear evidence, or “facts” to the contrary.
40 /Phil Stewart - You are misinterpreting Jack.
He is talking abouy the “moods” of people who know a lot more than most about whats going on - detailed canvassing, counting of votes, knowledge of second preferences, reports from the regions. Its called the “second derivative”
1)VOTES
2)Canvass Returns, knowledge of second preferences, reports from the regions (First Derivative)
3)Mood resulting from above. Mood is therefore a valid second derivative.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivative
246 - he is the oldest MP in the house by some way, and was pretty aged when he first got elected. (Andrea….!) What was the point of his question “Do you know where Osama is?” (or summat like that)
‘Very early there was nothing to indicate that Huhne was going to put up a good show’.
In fact in a four horse race, the implied odds indicated that Huhne was heavily underpriced, given his background and the fact that Menzies had been humiliated in the media, Simon Hughes was in the lead, and Mark Oaten had just been outed. These are all facts.
An analysis of these facts at the time, indicated that Huhne was heavily underpriced, and his odds were likley to strengthen significantly. This is precisely what then happened.
240 Phil. Dangerous things “facts”. If punters bet on “facts” alone bookies would be richer than they are!
Personally I never bet on “facts” alone. I assess balance of probabilities with facts, form, intelligence and “mood music” and only then determine if the odds favour an investment. I’m not complaining over the results and neither is Mrs Jack W !! ….. fortunately.
Additionally I’ve already turned a handsome profit before a single envelope has been steamed open……. sorry counted.
He’s officially 81, but I heard a rumour has it he’s actually older…
Facts - eg canvass returns not in the public domain.
Mood - morale in each camp having seen said canvass returns.
In the absence of conclusive facts in the public domain - mood is as good a guide as you can get.
Hey what’s all this stuff about only one published YouGov poll?
I’ve seen one Yougov poll on yougov.com and another one on here… Surely posting on a website is the same as publishing?!
252 - first elected in 1992 aged 67
In fact, in the history of professional betting - broadly defined to include the markets and other forms of betting - there is no surer way to lose money than to bet on ‘mood’ contradicted by the facts.
The rather awkward attempt to redefine ‘mood’ so that it is equivalent to facts is not valid, if not utterly ubsurd.
The overwhelming facts from secondary sources, that have been published, rather than ‘rumoured’, are that Huhne is ahead. Cite a single independent source claiming Menzies is ahead.
I cite my sources, where as the ‘mood contradicting facts’ betters refuse. This is what I find so strange.
Canvass returns from the regions are not showing Menzies ahead, but Huhne ahead - this is precisely what was published by newspapers that proved their claims with clear sources.
The second derivative, redefined to include such ‘facts’, shows Huhne ahead, and not Menzies.
Phil - I’m up there at 1.77 if you’d like to lay some Ming?
As a Minger, I tend to agree with Phil. I won’t bet any more on Ming at these prices. I am considering placing some money on Huhne. (Would this make me a Green Book Liberal?) I have champagne on ice for a Ming victory, and gin available in case anything else happens.
are you in the MOOD to put your money where you mouth is?
Mike, you asked what we’re going to talk about next week. Leaving aside the locals and labour leadership questions, I asked Betfair to put up a market on the overall majority at the next election. They’ve obliged, so we now have odds on a hung parliament, Labour majority and tory majority to keep ourselves amused.
Lib Dems might like to speculate on who gets what posts in the new Lib Dem shadow cabinet, if he gives us more than a day or two. Ming for Shadow Foreign Secretary I say!
256 - I think you’ve just declined a new irregular verb:
I have facts;
you spread rumours;
he’s pointlessly ramping.
There were two exit polls from the hustings in London, though. One gave it massively to Ming.
It is nice to see all the Menzies ramping finally brought to an end.
And the other poll, four times larger than the one you cite, gave it overwhelmingly to Huhne.
Lib Dem council group meeting Monday night. We did a poll. Huhne 6 Hughes 2 Campbell 1
Local branch meeting Tuesday night. We did a poll. Campbell 6 Huhne 2 Hughes 2
All was a ’secret ballot’ folded bits of paper etc etc. Last night was the first time I had met a fellow Lib Dem backing Ming. The weight of the local branch (on a very very small sample I admit) indicates to me that the armchair members (our branch is generally elderly, they’ll stuff envelopes and do cream teas but that’s it) are voting for Ming.
Ming, I feel, will win. He is my third choice but hey, that’s democracy!
Further info BTW, we are a group and branch in the South East.
Ok, ok, give it up boys - not long to wait now…
264 - it was *not* a poll! If you’re going to keep quoting ‘facts’, Gradgrind-style, get ‘em right!
It was a random survey of people hanging around outside a Lib Dem hustings.
Some FACTS for Mingers to be cheerful;
1)Ming’s 2000 Canvass returns http://specialbets.blogspot.com/2006/02/hearing-results-of-largest-lib-dem.html
2)Huhne’s Canvass returns… only 1-2% ahead? tut tut!
http://specialbets.blogspot.com/2006/02/team-huhnes-phone-canvass-shows-they.html
3)Yougov Poll #1 - The biggest poll of Lib Dem Members.
http://specialbets.blogspot.com/2006/02/yougov-liberal-democrat-leadership.html
4) The £1249 Trying to be matched on Betfair for Ming…
One factor that is forgotton, is that a much smaller proportion of the armchair membership vote, compared with the active membership.
The evidence is that Huhne has the lead amongst the activists, and Menzies amongst the arm-chair members. This is why the overall result may be too close to call. It is also why at the current odds, Huhne is a very good bet.
269 - depends how you’re defining activist, I guess.
For argument’s sake, let’s say 1 in 5 members are activists.
And then let’s say turnout is 60%. This means 3 in 5 members have voted.
This means 2 in 5 voting members are armchair members.
Ie, twice as many armchair members will vote as activist members.
Sorry to spoil the party, but the ‘Ming canvass returns’ are bogus, old news - no actual sources or data published to support the claims, just a vague claim about the outcome, which even then is effectively too close to call!
If this is the sole basis for the ‘canvass returns for Menzies’ story influencing Menzies backers, than they will lose alot of money tomorrow!
Tut tut.
69 - could those people who are so desperate to get the profit they imagine dangling in front of them please kick the cat or something rather than making endless justifications on here please?
The battle’s over, the votes are in, you’re not going to change a thing now.
Have a few drinks or an early night or something, we can enthuse/complain about the result when we know it!
Phil Stewart - What about Huhne’s Canvass returns “1-2% ahead”? Are they bogus too? How come team Huhne haven’t told us about 2nd pref estimates? Do you think they would have told us about them if they were positive?!!
They were keen to tell us about the Populous poll, the guardian’s euston poll (but not the Indie’s), The Yougov poll (but not ICM’s) etc etc…
Phil. If it’s any comfort. I think this ‘mood music’ thing is all a bit silly too. I don’t know who’s won, none of my contacts in the party know who has won, and neither does anoyone else.
Realistically the best thing that supporters (or even betters) for either side should do is keep schtum and not risk egg on their faces.
One interesting point was that the betting changed after the competition on here - is it that that swung the money behind Ming?
Special Bets aren’t you the one who was claiming that Menzies had it big!
Yet you’ve just acknowledged half-a-dozen polls that put him behind, and not denied the Menzies canvass returns story is bogus.
Lets just compromise - it’s too close to call. That’s very different from the ‘mood’ of some.
75 - Is this some sort of Huhne-bot?
I just wanted to comment on what an excellent performance Cameron put in against Humprheys this morning. He sounded confident, relaxed, on top of his brief, authoritative and humorous. JH wasn’t able to land a punch on DC at all. By contrast, DC made many excellent points, especailly about how the “we” in “We must trust people more” was, naturally, PLU. Well done!
[Marcus filter off]
I have a sneaky suspicion, that the reason for the huge swing to Menzies is simply that massive Huhne backers are covering their original bets for guaranteed profit.
To support this notice the extremely small betting volumes associated with the swing to Ming over the last day or so. Most punters seem to be abstaining, perhaps because it is ‘too close to call’.
Perhaps this is the hypothesis that makes the most sense.
[177] That is irony, right? I am desperate for a reason to vote for Cameron, but I didn’t hear one this morning more’s the pity.
Tabman - PLU?
Sorry
- worked it out - People Like Us
281 - indeed, indeed. Godpseed back home on Sunday, I trust?
82 I wrote you a note earlier - at work. Were you swanning off again?
My tuppen’orth, if I may gentlemen, as a neutral non-Lib Dem healthily green on all three contenders - I think Campbell will *probably* just nick it, but I’ve had a small dabble on Huhne at 3.3 because I think consider that he has a better than 10-in-33 chance of winning. That’s not ramping or anything (the volumes are too small to make it worthwhile) and I think we’re all entrenched in our various positions now, nor as a Tory do I have any real preference over who wins as they both have strengths and they both have weaknesses, it’s just my honest opinion as an interesting day draws to a close.
Has anything happened? Betfair’s going crazy. Wondering if it’’s worth putting a few on Huhne just in case or if he’s as dead a duck as the market suggests?
214 - Kudos re: Bringing the Onion to PB.com….
Last price matched Campbell 1.20, Huhne 5.60.
Hmmmm……..
So who will depart first? Blair or Berlusconi? I was wondering if the Jowell affair might spill over to taint Tory Tony but since the Daily Mail is saying he is dead in the water from yesterday it makes me think this is a wild thought and that Blair will bumble on, regardless of which set of rag tag and bobtails he gets to support his ‘radical’ education bill which is about as radical as an egg sandwich.
285/287 ukpaul. I’ve just checked and Mrs Jack’s gin money is still in the spill vase.
Big movement though in the past hour …..around £18K traded.
289 - Well I thought a few quid on Huhne with odds over 5.0 wouldn’t harm the old Ming profit much and, on the off chance he does win, I’ve got something to drown my sorrows with.
290 ukpaul. Exactly. I think quite a few punters are watching the footie ….. Scotland and England losing at home !!
I unaware of any fresh info …… unless it’s because Lord Rennard’s bought a new kettle !!
One would suspect that someone must be extremely confident about the result or we wouldn’t see such a big move. What on earth could their information be? Nothing has been mentioned on this site to justify it.
Has someone sneaked a peek at the ballots? If so, then the election could be deemed unfair. No one should have access to the ballots until the formal beginning of the count. If the envelopes are supposed to stay sealed until the count, so it should be.
Yet the move in the markets implies that someone knows the result with vitual certainty! What a strange election this is?
Then again you could get odds of 10-1 on the Lib Dems winning Dunfermline the day before, and 20-1 when the count was actually in progress! The Lib Dems won! Thats a 2,000% profit in minutes if you bet at the last minute.
So the betting markets can sometimes be extremely inefficient and of course badly wrong. Which of these scenarios is the correct one, we shall shortly see revealed.
283 - no, just doing some work for a change
293 Tabman. Blackleg !!
What says the Notts KGB on the betting front ??
Inefficient - not sure what you mean. Wrong… well if 20 markets show something at 19-1 on on average one will come home. It is a measure of probability not certainty, and the probability is Ming has won.
292. Perhaps Phil for some people the mood music is becoming a cacophany.
294 - I was going to mention that my disappointment at Saturday’s result was hugely tempered by the satisfaction of watching the mighty Bath monster Glos from the “comfort” of the Shed! Methinks that perhaps events from Murrayfield portend for our own little contest - Scots win!
So is Simon Hughes going to win then
An inefficient market is one that generates an incorrect price for a product, or an incorrect probability for an outcome.
Thus if the probability ‘price’ of an outcome is less than evens in a two horse race the market is inefficient. The odds (prices) before the outcome were incorrect valuations. Supply and demand of betting funds were not equilibrating to generate a ‘true’ price, and an ‘incorrect’ price prevailed.
In the Dunfermline outcome we have an extreme example of an inefficient betting market. It gave odds of less than 5% to the winner in a two horse race, and odds of 95% to the loser. Thus the 2,000% profit if you bet on the outsider. We could consider the causes of the inefficiencies. Perhaps that would be appropriate elsewhere - a doctorate perhaps!
The simple point is though, betters can get things badly wrong.
Unless someone has sneaked a peak at the ballots, the current odds are fantastically inefficient - the actual information available to us is that Huhne has a slim lead.
Its hypnotic watch betfair refreshing its self. it could have its own TV channel.
huhne has recovered a bit and ming drifted a bit but still the clear favourite. I’ve tried polling our members and concluded that reading the tea leaves is as good as but am calling it for ming purely on the fact that our arm chair memebers have never heard of huhne. however its so close i’d have taken that 3.5 on huhne that was available half an hour ago. grrr.
£929,944 matched on betfair. What are the odds on this hitting a million before the end?
297 Tabman.
So we’ll soon have two Scottish leaders and a third with a Scottish name ! …… The Tartan Raj marches on …… a very cunning plan indeed !
Do you clever people think we will see 1.6 again or is it all over for the gambling now?
All through the Lib Dem leadership contest no-one has known.
I have always thought that Campbell would win because of the non active membership vote, which is usually quite judgemental. However all the reports I have received from hustings outside London have been that Huhne has done well to very well, and from activists I know he has their support. BUT WE DO NOT KNOW AND I THINK THAT IS GREAT. What I do not understand are these comments like the one on Guido’s blog, suggesting that all the sources including from the votes room point to something. Unless someone wants to rig the betting a certain way, we know it is rubbish. So why print it. Quite ridiculous.
It is really nice to go into a result not knowing anything and even better the media do not know.
That isn’t what an inefficient market means.
There is a philosophical point about the meaning of probability in a system where the trial cannot be repeated though - perhaps in 19 other parallel universes Labour did win in DWF. The logical extension of your definition would be that all binary markets which did not have the eventual winner at 100% probability were “wrong”.
What this market is saying is based on the weight of information available to punters it is 75% likely that Ming has won - which is right for all you or I know. (actually long odds results should always be more unlikely than the market would suggest so really Ming’s likelihood of winning is more than 75% and Simon’s rather less than 3%).
I assure you that an efficient market is one that generates ‘correct’ prices which are supposed to maximise welfare.
In a probability context, an efficient market is one that generates probabilities reflecting the outcome.
You mention of ‘parallel universes’ is irrelevant. It is the actual univserse that the probabilities describe. I would suggest a more careful study of the problem of induction! Statistical theory is based on the actual universe, not parallel ones!
298. Completely O/T - I’m sure I heard a newsreader the other night say “and fast bowler Simon HUGHES has been sent home with an injury”.
Remember also it is the deviation from the ‘evens probability’ that determines the ‘on balance’ winner, in a two horse race.
This means we equate the ‘on balance’ winner to the actual winner. Otherwise what would be the point of a probability! or a betting market!
As soon as Menzies odds move beyond evens, to favourite the betting market is assuming he is the winner with the relevant degree of probability. The market has been inefficient if he then loses.
Furthermore if we consider ‘available information’ from which the odds prior to the outcome differ, than the market has been extremely inefficient, if the relevant outcome does not arise. E.g. Labour the extreme favourite (1-20) in Dunfermline, Labour lose! Lib Dems the extreme outsider (20-1), Lib Dems win.
Data summary is up.
306 - “an efficient market is one that generates ‘correct’ prices which are supposed to maximise welfare”
never read that definition of a market before. An efficient market generates a price agreeable to both buyer and seller.
Is this Guido chap not the most blatant ramper I have ever come across? His data has been denied by Kelner as he himself admits. Why do so many take him seriously? The guy is a quack.
Guido, the earliest date any LD member could have had a ballot paper is Feb 7th. The Huhne momentum was well underway by then.
I suggest you sneak a peak at Varian’s ‘Microeconomic Analysis’ - the bible of postgraduate microeconomics (the relevant branch for market theory’), where on page 94, he equates ‘correct’ consumer prices to those which maximise welfare.
I have no idea where you studied economics, but at the LSE this is what we are taught!
311 - but at least Guido hasn’t acclaimed as ‘facts’ unscientific newspaper surveys of activists taken outside hustings…
Also have a look at Walrasian equlibrium - the foundation of welfare economics
Phil you have the wrong end of the stick. Most of that data was CONFIRMED by Kellner not denied… have you been paying attention? *goes back to opening envelopes*
Actually even Guido himself admits that Kellner is denying his data. Read it for yourself.
What I don’t understand is why Guido publishes figures based on a YouGov poll, when the founder of YouGov, has flatly stated they are wrong! He knows this, but goes on to ignore Kellner and publish his bogus figures anyway!
The guy has no credibility whatsoever.
Assuming I accept the guido figures as correct..
1. the period polled is partially but not entirely before the biggest round of voting.
2. the huhne surge was well under way then
3. polls taken before big campaign events ( question time, dumfermaline, lots of big hustings
all i’m saying is that a 6% ming lead is well within margin of error and all the more so given its timming. my gut instinct is ming to win by a wisker but I will not be at all surprised if chris sneaks it. looks very very close.
anyone know how close it would have to be to trigger a recount?
116 - Good folks at the ERS mail room, you did follow the advice to lose anything postmarked ‘Eastleigh’ down the back of the coffee machine didn’t you?
119 - I hope not, we need all the Ming votes to be counted
319 - would only be fair - I heard that the Dandy Huhnewayman had intercepted the Scottish LD votes as they attempted to cross the border…
So in your world which pretty clearly exists in a parallel universe every time the favourite doesn’t win it was inefficient?
So if I throw two dice, a roomful of people converge on the price for no doubles as 5/6 (slightly less is what actually happens) but I do in fact throw once only and get a double the market was inefficient and wrong?
The Observer - it is the first preferences that Kellner has rejected. Do keep up!
318 - the earliest date any vote could be returned was the 7th therefore second Yougov poll was about time of first wave of voting. First Yougov was nearly a week before ballot papers were sent out.
Newsnight BBC2 on Lib Dem leadership race now.
politicalbetting getting articled on Newsnight right now
arhhhh! we are on newsnight!
326 - did I just see Mike’s graph???
pb.com mentioned on Newsnight
Phil you said quite clearly ALL the data was wrong. The 1st prefs added up up 98% so clearly even if the numbers before the decimal point were right they could be said to be wrong…
Newsnight just bigged up PoliticalBetting.com in a big way. I imagine Jackie Ashley will be thrilled.
Mike, you are now the man, in the Gospel according to Newsnight - champagne cocktails all round, with the Jereboam to the Family Smithson for setting up whatis now an institution!!!!
332 - bless… should we send her a condolence card?
and again!
Also Radio 4 now !
Wow, pb.com now being bigged up for our investigative powers on Newsnight!
Radio and BBC for this august organisation simultaneously? It is official, PB.com is now an institution….
sorry, for Radio and BBC, read radio and TV… my brain is somewhat fried tonight….
The Clegg ‘09 campaign is just engaging first gear I see.
339 - right first time, Milky
If Clegg had been serious, then he’d have stood this time!
and Susan Kramer already touting for jobs
Mike, take a bow. surely theres a Lib Dem peerage in the post now?
342 - JJ, although superficially similar to Cameron (39, young family), I would venture Clegg has got his priorities right.
Actually as you well know, the example of rolling dice ‘once only’ is not valid.
The argument becomes ‘if I throw dice once the improbable could happen, in which case odds determined by mathematically even distributions must be wrong’.
No one that understood your argument would agree with you. Outliars are compatible with ‘true odds’ prices precisely because they are unrepresentative outliars. The point is that taking a series of dice rolls, the mathematical odds converge with the actual ones - and the mathematical prices are correct. Remember that the law of averages is the powerful force giving correct price odds their power. There should never be incorrect on balance odds where the law of averages can operate! If there are the betting market is inefficient.
A betting market is inefficient when it gives ‘averaging odds’ that are incorrect. In other words the ‘on balnnce’ odds for the loser in a two horse race, are that he is the favourite. E.g. Lab. 1-20 in Dunfermline, they lose, Lib Dems 20-1, Lib Dems win.
The is an outcome based on the votes of tens of thousands of individuals, not a single individual.
The outcome is based on the ‘averaging of individual votes’. There should be no outliars, as the law of averages operates.
Outliars can affect individual instances only, and if for large groups of individuals - the probability becomes so small it can be treated as zero.
In summary if the market odds are wrong the betting market is inefficient.
Lembit is a twerp.
Krammer should be deputy leader
Clegg must be furious he didn’t stand.
347 - RONJ, no he isn’t.
342, 345. I disagree. If Huhne does pull off an unlikely victory, Clegg will be kicking himself for years to come. As it is, the excellent campaign Huhne has run this time has made a Clegg succession to Campbell a lot less certain. When will the market open on the next ‘next Liberal Democrat leader’?
Lord Smithson of Betfair
341 - shurely shume mishtake???? you could not possibly be suggesting that BBC TV and BBC Radio have completely different political agendas, could you?????
Lord Smithson of Peebles, surely.
ok. lets assume its the guido figures.
campbell last 5 years. hughes can’t plausibly stand a third time. so the next election ,just 5 years away is between..?
well the clegg,laws,davey camps must be spitting blood. they can’t inherit after a ming regency because huhne now has 47% of the vote, a network, contacts and will be everyones rubber chicken guest of choice. hes also proved you can do this from a standing start. why shouldn’t a mavarick from the 2005 intake “do a huhne” in 2010
349 - if Clegg had stood I suspect he would have won. But why become an inexperienced leader at 39, when you can become an experienced leader in your 40s?
And as leaders last c.10 years, why would he want his frontline political career to be over before he’s 50?
(It’s different for Tories - they may want to set aside their 50s to make their money in the city
Lib Dems, natch, don’t have such motivations.)
Has anyone got the full data emailed from Guido yet? still waiting… Guido?
Huhne is a none of the above candidate at best, voted for because of who he isn’t and someone to project wishes onto. Clegg would wipe the floor with him and would be ten times the electoral asset. Davey and Laws seems a bit dull in that Huhne-like wonkish, monotonous way.
349, 353. Ok, let’s assume Huhne does win. He’s unlikely to last more than a decade, which makes NC a “mere” 49. Blair is only just 50 - 15 years short of retirement age. WTF does he do now? Look at Clinton …
No, NC gets a shot in ten years time, just in time to reap his reward in the 2018 landslide as PM Clegg (
)
In the meantime he actually gets to see his kids grow up.
352 - Why Peebles, Chrisco? I went to school their - lovely place.
358 - Ah, think I just got it! Bit slow tonight it’s been a long day at work,
I’m sure Mike would be very welcome down here in the Borders!
I’m probably the only one who doesn’t like Clegg. As much as I detest Tony and Dave, they admittedly have a certain “something” (more TB than DC so far). but I don’t see anything in Clegg better than many other LD MPs.
354 - “It’s different for Tories - they may want to set aside their 50s to make their money in the city Lib Dems, natch, don’t have such motivations.”
I suppose then your admiting David Laws is a Tory then
Can somebody explain to me a couple of things about igsport.
1) Why is it acceptable for them to close the market four or five days in advance of the result becoming known
2) Even though the market is closed, why do they continue to update the prices (btw, Ming midprice now at 60)
3) Why do they insist in putting the ‘England World Cup 100′ in my ‘My Prices’ section? I don’t care and I can’t get rid of the damn thing!
354 - Stephen, great minds
Besides, Cameron isn’t a great advert for the 39 year-old party leader
357 Tabman. What a vivid 2018 imagination you have !! ….. especially as you don’t know who’ll be your leader in less than 24 hours !!
……. even if I do. 
It’s the closest I could get to ‘peebies’, Max.
361 - not in their fifties; that’s what their twenties are for
357. Tabman, in 10 years everything could happen. If we’ve to believe some of our tory friends, there coul be a Tory MP in Hallam in 2018!
363 - Rather that than a 93 year old leader I assure you Tabbers.
And as admirable as your defence of young (and how on earth is 39 young - it seems pretty old to me) Clegg is, he looks pretty gutless. I wonder if he would have stood had he seen in retrospect how things would turn out.
364 - Jack, I forgot to add that in a spirit of magnanimity, and in return for services rendered, he will offer a Cabinet post as Minister of Gambling to Lord W of St Albans
346 - I don’t think this is right. There is not just a distribution over the behaviour of voters, there is a distribution over the possible outcomes of all the variables that affect voting behaviour. The relevant analogy with 10,000 dice rolls isn’t 10,000 individual votes. It’s 10,000 scenarios (parallel universes if you like) where you set the clock running now and measure the eventual result at some future point. In that context, 10,000 people voting in one scenario is still only one trial - and the analogy to rolling a die once, which you disparage, does in a sense hold.
What specific odds a week (say) before the Dunfermline by-election would have constituted an efficient market?
361 - David Laws set aside his 20s to make his modest pile. Thrusting ambition = Lib Dem. Ageing avarice = Tory.
363 - anyone would think we’d both tried to rationalise Cleggy’s decision
368 - Max, in 15 year’s time when Max Jr is bouncing on your lap you’ll understand.
366 - okay, Tabman, our synchronicity is starting to freak me out…
371 - Stephen - we’ve done it again re Laws … this is freaking me out!!!
373,4 - ARGHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
372 - Tabman - if spending time with his kids is so important to him he wouldn’t have become an MP at all. The HoC is hardly family friendly.
I was toying with Max II for my firstborn - sounds so much more regal!
375 - I think we’ve blown our cover… time to ‘fess up to the lovely ladies and gentlepeebies that we are clearly the same person.
OK you two, stop it…
376 - will you nickname him the Road Warrior? And then your grandson can be Thunderdrome.
374/75. Invasion of Orange Bookers with their love for Clegg! Call the NHS for disintoxication…..before they’ll get rid of it!
377 - I’ve never seen you in the same room…
374/5 - You are Twins Seperated at Birth and I claim 5 quiches
376 - Beyond the Thunderdome???
Re the HoC being not family-friendly; surprisingly it can be so if you arrange things properly. The most unfriendly bit is being away from your family during the week. If they live with you then its like any other job. Perhaps better given the recesses.
376 Or Mad Max !! … beyond the Thatcherdome !
Book value, I’m not sure what text book you’ve got that from. The bell curve is the fundamental probability distribution for physical things, be they lightbulbs, dice or human beings. And you most certainly do equate a dice throw outcome with an individual human vote outcome in probability theory - have you ever heard of opinion polls!
The point though is that if we do the mathematics - the probability of an outliar becomes smaller the larger the sample in comparison to the population, until we reach the limit. The probability of an outliar in a large group of tens of thousands is close to zero. The law of averages swamps the unrepresentative individuals, which cancel out each other out. Do the mathematics! If you don’t have access to a textbook I’ll post it up.
379 - That is possibly the best idea I’ve ever heard - no one would ever pick on some one called Road Warrior - he’ll love me for it one day.
379 - this synchronicity lark is catching … and its true we’ve never been seen in the same room. Fear not, though, Mr Tall hangs out in the Place that shall not be Named. Clearly he can;t be me
L.P. Stewart?
384 - or even [insert bald politician here]: Thatch over the dome???
386. If you really want to make a man out of him, you should call him Sue.
Phil Stewart - its OutliEr.. your spelling is as bad as your betting!
And to think people accuse Lib Dems of saying different things to different audiences…
“Major tells Party: back Cameron
Ex-PM urges right wing to back David Cameron, saying he is the Conservatives best chance of winning power.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4764776.stm
Yep, they’ll listen to him, those b@st@ards, won’t they?
392 - anyone would think we’re all co-ordinating this in our secret bunker
292. Stephen Tall, they say different things to different audiences, but same things to the same audience. so in the end, you’re not breaking any supposed category of LD behaviour.
395 - put your claws in, Andrea
385 - you’re neglecting (a) the question over the accuracy (as opposed to precision) of opinion polls, and (b) the change in vote-determining factors over time.
I could do an opinion poll tomorrow, asking 1000 people in the streets of London who they’ll vote for in the next general election. The results would be pretty replicable - within about 3%, I should think, if I repeated the methodology the next day. But you can’t take that distribution and use it to predict the behaviour of voters in general in the next election. After all, my poll is inaccurate (even though reasonably precise) because the sample is unrepresentative. And lots of things could happen in the next 5 years to change votes.
I’m not sure how relevant the time issue is to the point you made, since you did refer at one point to odds immediately before the poll. But I don’t think the idea of an efficient market maximising welfare can work if you interpret “welfare” in terms of final payoffs when the result is known: the market is of course zero-sum. The sense in which the market is efficient is in terms of trades that are mutually beneficial at the time they are made, because different actors have different preferences for holding different bets - and this can only be accounted for in terms of their different subjective assessments of future probabilities.
You could of course claim that since none of us polled 20,000 voters in Dunfermline the night before the election, the market was inefficient because it didn’t reflect the distribution you would have got from doing that poll. But that seems pretty much a given in any discussion of political betting - after all we expend much time on here discussing the systematic inaccuracies in various polls.
396 Tabman, we all know you co-ordinate your followers! They’re like the Blair’s ba*es…..Tabman’s XXXXX
Liberal Democrats wouldn’t give a XXXXX for any other shadowy puppetmaster
To what extent will the new leader get a honeymoon bounce in the polls and what effect will this have on the locals in May. Have been following http://www.vote-2006 an there’s some great stuff on there for us political anoraks.
It’s about time some speads were opened on the locals anyway.
394 Tabman. Yes …. perhaps someone will nip next door and fill the kettle … I having a bugger of a job steaming these envelopes open ….. and the shredder isn’t handling too well all the post from Eastleigh … ta very much …..
That should read http://www.vote-2006.co.uk
The Efficient Market Hypothesis states that at any given time, prices fully reflect all publically available information. That is, they are not distorted by insider trading or trading to artifically distort the market for reasons other than maximising expected financial gain. The publically available information may be wrong and therefore the odds not reflect the underlying reality - nothing to do with outliers or tossing dice.
296. Tabman, I wanted to see how much you would resisted before complaining about my claws against your Nick
That’s publicly
do you think Stewart Lewis could pull a surprise tomorrow? Jack, what are you hearing about it?
398
I think people sort of assume that Nick Clegg is annointed by god. its perfectly possible he can win again in 5 /10 years time. but perhaps not. If he would have won this time (which he might have) then you have to go for goal.
404 Andrea. You leave Tabman’s nick alone(dion)!! … saucy minx !!
Tabman, who’s Brian? Stephen is now your main follower!
410 - Brian - “He’s not the Messiah; he’s a very naughty boy!”
404 - you’ve been taking petulance tips from DC
I think you’re in denial about your true feelings for him, as he’s taken 
411 - no, that’s David Cameron
413 - or Mark Oaten…
406 Andrea. Forget Stewart ….. the write-in vote for our Viscount has been massive …… almost 43,000 votes from Birmingham alone …….. but putting the Great Seal of Scotland on each vote was tricky !! …… a landslide.
410 - please, Andrea, this is the Lib Dems. We are co-followers.
415 - does that mean your staff have all got RSI from writing out all those letters?
312. Tabman, no, I’ve being taking them from you and your comments about a man who is less important than the most stupid of Labour rebels (someone is probably on TV in this moment on a sofa…)!
Andrea … I forgot to admonish you for your daytime absence ….. if you’d have done your duty this thread would be nearer 700 !!
G’nite all …..Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
398. Andrea, no-one in the Liberal Democrats follows anyone’s orders - more’s the shame sometimes - the phrase most often used is ‘like herding cats’.
OTOH - if you ever met Tabman, he is far too nice to be the puller of strings. Perhaps you should look in other - more unassuming - directions for the ‘Blofeld’ in our motley crew…
420. Oh, Jack, yes, my daytime presence was limited in those days. But I promise that I’ll be more present tomorrow (if Tabman won’t manage to annoy me again
)
421 - Andrea, any posting that combines the words “Nick” and “Clegg” managesn to get you in a tizz
423. Tabman, any posting that contains the word petulant got on my nerves.
420 - Paul, you’re too modest. Your company East Devon Systems wrote the book on herding cats
424 - it’s Brokeback Tabby.
420. Paul Lloyd, don’t tell I should look to some of your other identities?
How many identies do you think I have, Andrea?
I have been concerned that you are the opposite - i.e 1 name, many people. That can be the only explanation for your ability to know everything about British politics, post on here 18 hours a day, and keep up with your coursework
328. Paul, actually just 2.
Tabman. East Devon Systems is only one of my portfolio of interesting technology companies. One of them teaches old dogs new tricks, and another specialises in changing leopard’s spots for them. Guess which one works for New Labour and which one is currently employed by David Cameron
Andrea. Have you been talking to that nice Mr Matlock again … Jack will be unhappy
430. Paul, Jack is busy to try to bring Max to Bromley. You should know, didn’t you receive the invitation?
Clegg looked and sounded very much like A Campbell tonight. What a fate.
431. Andrea. ????
I’ve just noticed that almost the entire swing to Menzies over the last two days has been due to unprecedented levels of ‘ramping’ on the part of Guido, who published a bogus ‘Yougov’ poll reversing the Huhne win which the published one actually showed, and who stands to lose $4,200+ if Huhne wins.
What blatant bias! Rather than stay neutral and objective, he makes his ‘facts’ fit his prejudices, rather than his conclusion fit his facts!
He even refers to one of his ‘wealthy friends’ responsible for ‘one third’ of ‘betting volume’ who tried to rig the betting markets to make Menzies favourite, getting upset when Huhne remained favourite.
The upshot of all this is, if Huhne does have the narrow victory the genuine YouGov poll predicted, what alot of money Guido will lose and his no longer quite so welathy friend.
Isn’t he a Labour party activist anyway?
No Phil, Guido is a Lib Dem, and one who does not want Ming Campbell to become leader.
Well, there is disinformation of all kinds isn’t there. Do we necessarily take all things at face value.
403. Ian - spot on - well done for posting such an accurate and clear definition.
Regardless Guido’s huge betting on Menzies has coloured his facts to fit his betting figures! Very sloppy.
We’ll find out tomorrow!
35 - I heard he was a Tory. Thought Cowley Street wouldn’t let him join?
If anyone’s still up - will they announce the result of 1st preferences once that is available or will they wait and announce both 1st preferences and the final result at the same time?
441 - I believe that they announce the winner, and then provide details of how the winner was elected. Not 100% sure though.
442. Thanks - I thought they would probably do as you say.
Bit of a shame though - if they announced the 1st preference result when known there would then be an opportunity for a final round of betting and speculation before the final result!
This betting market is mad!
Latest prices matched:
Campbell 1.83
Huhne 2.42
Has any market ever gone back and forth this much so many times?
I think I know what happened over the last two days. Guido put £4200 on Menzies. He then ramped Menzies heavily using his bogus YouGov poll data, until the odds on Huhne became crazy - e.g. 5-1 at one stage on Wednesday.
He then bet on Huhne big and established a huge all green profit regardless of who wins, pocketing over a guranateed £2,500 in the process.
Although what he did isn’t illegal it is certainly extremely disreputable. There may be a legal case for gaining ‘a pecuniary advantage through deception’. This is actually a criminal offence.
Phil, Guido’s info also squares with that of Jack W, who on past evidence receives reasonably credible info.
I also doubt your theory - for starters he would never be able to show his face at another PB.com party again!
What’s more, it appears that less than £500 has been put on Huhne in the past 2 days.
Although actually, someone was laying Ming yesterday for £2000 - maybe you are on to something…
The morning newspapers seem to confirm what we’ve been saying. Huhne claims a ’slim victory’, while Menzies allies ‘are more circumspect’. See this morning’s Guardian.
Who was saying canvass returns indicated a Menzies win?!! I think this Guido guy, and Jack W, have a lot of explaining to do!
The full, quote, Phil is
“”I think we have just won - but if we haven’t, then Chris is obviously very close,” said Lord Oakeshott, an adviser to Mr Huhne. Sir Menzies’ allies were more circumspect but said they believed he had held off his rival.”
All it tells us is that it is very close and the Ming camp are less willing to have egg on their face. Even if Huhne comes a close second, given his handicap from the start, they can still claim a sort of moral victory. That luxury is not available to Ming.
Although I have to admit that in the Times write-up the Honies sounds more confident.
Todays Times - ‘Sir Menzies’ supporters admitted that they had no way accurately to forecast the outcome, although some senior backers of Mr Huhne expressed quiet confidence that he might yet win.’
What a contrast!
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, Bush’s troubles mount The impact of this story all depends though on how the media play it. This is, in effect, not news at all. Bush or his people didn’t need a briefing from the National Hurricane Centre to find out there was concern that the levees might be topped: all he had to do was watch CNN. I was in the States the night Katrina hit and that’s all they were talking about on the news channels: will the levees be topped. This is the key difference, however: the levees were breached, not topped. And so in this sense Bush’s statement that people didn’t anticipate them being breached is correct, in a pedantic sort of a way.
Nonetheless, Bush doesn’t exactly come out great either way.
To Ian by the way, the ‘efficient markets hypothesis’. You do seem to have a poor understanding of probability theory!
You mention ‘odds’, and then say they have nothing to do with ‘outliers’ or ‘tossing dice’. I suggest you look up the definition of odds in a dictionary. Odd are a ‘probability price’ attached to a particular possible outcome. Markets price these odds in order maximise gain from all available information.
Betting markets become inefficient when available information is ignored and ‘mood’ and other subjective factors affect probability assignment. Hence I am right.
It is agreed that ‘inside betting’ is impossible when no counting has taken place. I suggest that you have lifted the definition of EMH from an encyclopedia without fully understanding what it means!
The indie has a “poll of polls” for february by john curtice with Cons 37 -1 Lab 36 -2 and LD 19 + 3 (comparrison with january)
its says there was february populus poll which i must have missed but generally what weight can you put on these poll of polls?
Like all polls - only useful for spotting trends, and only if you compare it to similar polls of polls.
Phil, what do you think, on the basis of the available evidence, efficient odds should be?
oh well thats encouraging then. its a comparison with a similar poll last month and it seems to reflect the general trend of a modest LD recovery. I’d like to see some detailed figures on trust,unity,party image etc. I suspect it will take time for the debacle of january to completely heal but at least we haven’t gone down the swanny as was predicted in january. I see the campbell/huhne prices are moving towards each other again.
I agree the huhne people sound slightly more confident in the press and i rate any comment made by matthew oakenshaw. however with no ballots counted and no accurate canvassing possible they must just be guessing.
As I said much earlier in the day, I think it is too close to call. I think correct prices would be virtually even odds between the two, simply because the genuine information available to us, is that Huhne has a slim lead within the margin of error in the only true poll - YouGov published several week ago. YouGov have an extremely high level of accuracy in previous poll predictions of leadership elections.
The gap in time between this poll and the outcome creates a degree of uncertainty as some of the ballots will have been cast quite late. So we can attach an even probability, with a wide margin of error - perhaps 3/4% in either direction.
Ladbrokes - the Lib Dem MPS bookie of Choice?
http://news.scotsman.com/uk.cfm?id=316982006
“Robin Hutchison, a spokesman for the Ladbrokes, said: “The worm has turned and Campbell has his nose in front again. It still looks very close, but he would appear to have the edge going into the final furlong. At least three sitting MPs have had a good few quid on with us - and not all of them will be celebrating when the announcement is made.”
54. “Odds” in betting means the price not the probability. It has a totally different meaning from the odds of an unbiased coin coming up heads. That’s probably what is confusing you.