Has Jackie Ashley become a political betting convert?
June 11th, 2007
But what do we think of her tips on the deputy race?
Over the weekend a site regular brought to my attention Jackie Ashley’s column in the Guardian last Friday when she attempted to look at the Labour deputy race from the punters’ point of view.
We were told that Hilary Benn was the bookies favourite; John Cruddas had at one stage been at 150/1 but the price had tightened sharply while Harriet Harman was, in Jackie’s own words “worth a punt”.
The idea that one half of the Guardian’s formidable female political partnership (the other being Polly Toynbee) should be happy to look at politics in this way might come as a shock to those who read Ashley’s column on the subject last year.
For in January 2006 she launched a fierce attack on the site and the whole idea of looking at politics by watching how punters who are prepared to back up their opinions with cash are viewing political outcomes.
Her piece had a heavy whiff of resentment that oiks who were not time-served lobby correspondents should have the temerity to write about politics at all.
Writing about me and two bookmakers she noted “..It is possible that you may not have heard of these gents. You can scan all the papers you like and you won’t find them writing earnest columns from the Westminster lobby. However doggedly you channel-hop, you won’t find them standing under umbrellas on Downing Street. For they don’t work for the Telegraph or the Observer, or the BBC or Sky. They work for Ladbrokes, William Hill and politicalbetting.com. But their influence is the latest ingredient in the perpetual, accelerating loop of commentary that politicians struggle to break.”
On the impact of this she was concerned that looking at how a contest was going by examining the betting markets could help or stall momentum of, say, leadership candidates and that this was not right. Read the piece for the full flavour.
Certainly, on the latter point, there was something about what she wrote and, indeed, we have observed here on the site strange betting movements which might be put down to attempts to put traction into or detract from someone’s campaign.
But what are we to make of her new approach - using betting odds to illustrate her story? I’m delighted and wasn’t there a book published a few weeks back that she ought to buy?
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Not exactly the most flattering photo of Mrs Andrew Marr. Mike S, you wouldn’t be guilty of a smidgen of ungallantry, would you? Out of revenge for her critical column?
No, of course not.
1. Oh Sean, you should know by now that Mike never puts up a flattering photo when there’s an embarrassing one available.
I wrote to Ms Ashley a few months ago, criticising her because she continually referred to “Thatcher” instead of Mrs Thatcher or more correctly Lady Thatcher. I questioned her about how she would feel about being called “Ashley”, and she said she wouldn’t mind a bit. The trouble is, I didn’t believe her then nor do I believe her now.
Did anybody ever see Cruddas offered at 150/1? I was chuffed to get fifties and have yet to hear of anybody who did better.
Btw Mike, how many staff does PB.com have these days?
2. David. I thought the caption picture was a slim-line Bob Marshall Andrews !!
re 4. Good point Peter. This is something I do for fun and for the first three years cost my son Robert and I a fair bit of money. Now we are more than covering our costs but the main financial benefit is that my betting is more profitable
Mike Smithson
Are there still copies of that book available Mike?
O/T (ish; to the extent that there is a topic here and this is about political betting).
Edwards has suddenly shot out to 14/1 on Betfair for the Democratic nomination. After a quick scan of MSNBC (who are usually pretty good, but I admit it’s only one site), I can’t see any reason why that should have happened. Either there’s a story about to break or it looks like value.
RE. 8. There’s a less than flattering book out by one of his key staffers from the 2004 campaign.
On the picture of Jackie Ashley. Is she putting money into a fruit machine? She seems to have this gambling thing quite bad.
11. I did read the full Guardian article when you posted it recently Mike. And I felt you had every right to be offended.
I am interested that you acknowledge her one interesting argument, that political pundits can potentially influence outcomes by, for example, “calling” the favourite. I know you always say it as you see it but it does put a degree of responsibility on your shoulders.
11 Mike takes those responsibilities seriously, StJohn. It would be nice if all posters did likewise.
12. Not having yet another go at the hapless Barry, are you Peter?
Mark Senior. How can you possibly keep using 1997 as a comparator for Glyn Davies’s chances. I still expect Lembit, a toned down version to hold reasonably comfortably but I don’t think its fair to Glyn Davies to cite the year of the biggest Tory hammering in 160 years as the guid to his chances. I don’t think even you think that’ll happen next time, or maybe you do!
14 Punter , I am not particularly taking 1997 as a comparator but pointing out that the impression that is being put about that his challenge would be new is false . Take the swing in Wales from 1997 to now and double it if you think he is a formidable candidate and he would still lose heavily . You constantly assert that Lembit’s behaviour has harmed his support in Montgomery but you have not actually provided one shred of evidence for that assertion .
Congratulations Mike, remember, ‘There are tears of joy in heaven when a sinner repenteth’
15. Mr Senior. His profile is new. The respect he has won in 8 years in the Assembly is new. The fact that the national Tory party is no longer like a concrete block wrapped around his feet as he tries to swim is new. As for Lembit I cite the unhappiness of his local Party. They really regarded abandoning a crucial coaltion discussion meeting for HIGNFY as a real insult I promise you. Not that Lembit mean’t it like that, but his blindness was amazing. And yes while de-selection was never seriously on, trhere was enough disgruntlement for a few people to brief against Lembit like that for the first time, that’s how unhappy things got. As for Glyn Davies yes I have said Lembit should hold comfortablyish, but at the very least he’ll put a big dent in his bumper Majority.
I think this site is a lot better when the posts aren’t about settling scores.
I think this site is a lot better when the posts aren’t about settling scores…this is twice in one week we’ve seen one like this.
As belief and politics has been discussed on here a bit in the last week…the Lab DL candidates have responded to set of questions on belief and politics, HoL reform, faith welfare etc for the Labour Humanist Group
link here
http://www.labourhumanists.org.uk/
20 - that’s NOT my site by the way
furthermore, Mr Smithson, you should be pleased when you are given coverage at all - helps draw attention to your site, bringing you advertising revenue and increasing sales of your book.
How would you like it if mainstream journalists simply ignored you?
19: “But that is the spirit of Westminster, Stonch; and has spread to every corner of it. Politicians have always behaved like that, or so all tales say, when they are on their own. But you can’t get much hope out of it. They hate us far more, altogether and all of the time. If those two had seen us, they would have dropped all their quarrel until we were voteless.”
22 - the site not getting many hits then?
8. Bugger that may not be good. Instinctively it smells of definite bad news but I’ll have to look at the patterns and volumes. It might not take too much to send Edwards out. I’d be interested to see what a certain Al Gore’s odds are doing and find out any polls due. Otherwise theres nothing on the reporting front that I can see.
12. You been quiet recently. Secret training for the dog in old East Germany?
Lembit 15 has just committed his first mistake. Instead of killing Davies with kindness welcoming him to the fray but still he’s a Tory etc, he has taken swipes at beating Glyn Davies on his beating him past. If he was wise he would have concentrated on the Tories generically and his own record. If he makes this all about Glyn, as Labour initially made it all about Cameron this is like that isa whopping mistake. Brand Davies in Montgomeryshire is like Brand Cameron nationwide far stronger than the Conservative Party Itself.
13 No, not particularly, Scally. In fact for all my criticism, I never suspected him of deliberately misleading anybody. Some of the posts during the Scottish Parliament elections had a strong whiff of ramping about them. It’s unprovable, of course, so I cannot put it any stronger.
25 Yes, I’ve been suffering from a nasty dose of work, Yokel. There was a wedding at the weekend too - fortunately not mine but close to home nevertheless.
Fella is also busy, training for his return to the track. He hears that the site has been leaning dangerously towards Catism recently and intends to raise this with the site manager as soon as he is free to do so.
I like this site when it settles scores.
I’m new to this blog. Have to admit it’s a bit boring…but then again not sure where you’re really coming from.
Why are you talking about Jackie Ashley? There has been news today, yes Tories and Brown. Never mind, will check in again eventually.
I’m new to this blog. Have to admit it’s a bit boring…but then again not sure where you’re really coming from.
Why are you talking about Jackie Ashley? There has been news today, yes Tories and Brown. Never mind, will check in again eventually.
4 - I asked on the phone for Cruddas odds and got quoted 150s, but that was before he’d announced he’d stand. It went to 100/1 after he said he was running.
Boring - The Deputy Leadership of the Great British Labour Party! Debbie wait until Cameron brings out his new EU policy!
27. As a dog person myself I’ll back that case.
I can’t find a bean on Edwards other than a comment that the people who least want him are the Democrat grandees and that his big support in Labor may be on the wane a tyouch, not because he doesnt fit their bill but because some fear he may not be nominated. These, however, I’m already aware of so hsi drift worries me.
Aha wait, the answer may lie in the most recent polls. Edwards seems to have consistently dropped 3-4 points across a number.
29 - I have to say, as a lurker of many, many months, I find this blog one of the most interesting on the internet, certainly it is not boring. But I guess it depends what you are looking for…
As for this Jackie Ashley woman, she is probably just upset that more people pay attention to what is posted on pb.com than whatever she writes.
11 “I am interested that you acknowledge her one interesting argument, that political pundits can potentially influence outcomes”
stjohn - not very likely IMO so far as this this contest is concerned. Interest has been so minimal that to date matched bets on Betfair total a measly £53K, roughly one tenth of the money that has been wagered so far with the same firm on the next manager of Manchester City (where incidentally Billy Davies looks good value at 25s). With such a miserable level of interest please, please spare us from any notion of a Question Time special.
Hilary Armstrong has announced that she will stand down from Cabinet when Brown takes over to give “space in his Cabinet to renew”. Translation: “I’m standing down before being sacked for being useless”
So? We already knew Bill Deedes looks silly in a wig.
38. Who will GB next offer the political equivalent of a revolver and a glass of whisky you think. BTW On Swan East. Thanks. Hardly surprising given Swan West is overwhelmingly the number one target and perhaps tantalisingly in view at GE. I imagine Swan East was neglected in May for West right. Stil, their GE score in 2005 looked alright. In fact it looks alright throughout the M4 corridor, but apart from Swan West they not so far ahead in others as to know clearly wher they can target
i agree with 18(Stonch’s Beer Blog)
36. Hi Peter. Surely the opposite is the case. If the market is thin then the potential influence of opinion formers like Mike is greater when we his acolytes back his opinions and shift the market.
I’ll look at your Man City tip. I have some money saved from NOT following your Derby tip.
Mike, I am pleased people are coming around to your point of view!
Re 1, SeanT, I have to say my old trainers are better looking!
43. I think the Glyn Davies V Lembit Opik showdown is worthy of a mention cough on your blog. It promises to be right up there in the big league of personal political showdowns
Michael Fabricant, (Iraq motion) brought the result to the speakers chair, how many of you were hoping his wig would fall off when he did the bow?
Re 37, Andrea, “Hilary Armstrong has announced that she will stand down from Cabinet when Brown takes over to give “space in his Cabinet to renew”. Translation: “I’m standing down before being sacked for being useless”
I heard that too, but I don’t think useless is the correct term. I don’t think she is that good.
Re 41, StJohn,”I’ll look at your Man City tip. I have some money saved from NOT following your Derby tip.”
Sir, I fear you are being unkind!
Re 43, Punter, I don’t know enough about the situation, perhaps there are some links you can post?
Strange story for previous thread. It states that Lib Dem switchers will require the Conservatives to CHANGE their policies. The only problem with this is that these are people who have ALREADY switched! So not a very logical argument. This proves the general public is now losing confidence with the left, and moving to the right, just as we saw prior to the 1979 general election, and we have seen right now in France - giving Sarkozy a landslide win.
Thus if anything changing the party through a shift to the left might lose the Conservatives these new supporters. We have to remember that in most surveys over the last 15 years, the main reason the Conservatives lost support was Tory voters switching to the Lib Dems or abstaining. Hence the fall in turnout that coincided with the Labour wins.
Only in a few seats was there Conservative switching to Labour, and this was almost exclusively due to the personal vote of Tony Blair (who much of the public thought of as a closet Conservative!). This personal vote is now back with the Conservatives, as are many Lib Dem Tories.
The remainder Lib Dems Tories and abstainers will drift back gradually over the next 2 years putting the Conservatives between 38% and 41%, prior to the next election. During the campaign the gap will close slightly leaving us with a hung Parliament, with the Conservatives as largest party.
This is a very good performance for the Conservatives, building on the significant win of the popular vote in England in the 2005 general election, and massive local elections wins in every year since 2004. Together with a vast local councillor base by the next election, the Conservatives will have restored their status as the natural party of government in the UK, and Labour will have restored itself as the natural opposition.
There seems to be a lot of spinning going on, by various individuals who seem to have been intensively lobbied by the Brownites to ‘manipulate’ for them. Ultimately these attempts are unpersuasive. I certainly haven’t fallen for them, and judging by the latest opinion polls, local elections and general elections in Scotland and Wales, neither has the electorate!
The main goal for the Conservatives must be to consolidate their position. Of course the Conservatives must be moderate, and they must be compassionate. I would be the first to agree. The Conservatives must also be genuine. There is a happy coincidence of popularity and core belief in many Conservatives policies - from home ownership, to moderate taxation, efficient public spending, high quality schooling, and low crime. In each area the Conservatives need to look at where Labour is weak and why they are weak and unpopular. Labour is unpopular on high crime, poor quality schools, inefficient public spending, anti-democratic tendencies and the housing crisis (for which Labour holds exclusive blame).
The Conservatives need to capitalise on this Labour unpopularity, by advocating policies that appeal to the public, and where Labours hard left will keep it left and unpopular.
France has now elected its own Reagon - Sarkozy. Cameron is very bright and a powerful speaker. With the vision of a Reagon or Sarkozy, he will lead the Conservative to two consecutive terms of government. Kepp up the good work.
44 - Michael Fabricant wears a wig? Really? What does his wife make of it?
46. Benedict. It was said affectionately.
Will L you are a strange person. Sometimes you sound like you are broadcasting from Pluto. Totally insane but mildly entertaining. Other times you seem fairly sensible, even well-informed, but a tad boring.
Do you have a split personality?
51. Sean T you are a strange person. Sometimes you sound like you are broadcasting from Pluto. Totally insane but mildly entertaining. Other times you seem fairly sensible, even well-informed, but a tad boring.
Do you have a split personality?
Now as to that Will L, where do I start?
Re 50, StJohn, “46. Benedict. It was said affectionately.”
I know!
Wow, the next visitor will be my 35,000th!
Who will it be?
54 - Moi? We Tories should stick together
Re 55, John O. I could lie, but alas the 35,000 visitor was some random person via a google search!
52. You are welcome stjohn.
Perhaps that which is ’strange’ is that which is new. That which is ’sensible’ is that which is familiar.
41 stjohn - you have a very cutting tongue! The point I was trying to make was that this totally inconsequential election is so boring that Labour voters are less likely to take the trouble to visit opinion forming sites such as this. Credit where credit is due though, thanks to you, I’m very green on the postman and mini green on everyone else.
By the way, if you don’t fancy Billy Davies, how about laying Sven ….surely he’s not got a chance in hell of this job?
24. The site could well be getting hits due to media coverage such as the above. Anyway, isn’t the capacity for political betting to influence the ourcome of a race a significant part of its popularity?
24. The site could well be getting hits due to media coverage such as the above. Anyway, isn’t the capacity for political betting to influence the outcome of a race a significant part of its popularity?
59 / 60
Yes, but the influence is limited at the moment, as the odds seem fairly stuck for the last few days.
52 stjohn - I agree to some extent. SeanT is one of the reasons I visit this site - whether you agree with him or not, he’s usually good value. Recently I’ve been surprised by his almost unconditional praise for the nose picker/eater. So much so that I now accept his oft-repeated claim of not being a Tory.
In my experience most Tories have a grudging respect for Blair, but a total loathing for Brown, especially so in the case of female Tories.
I don’t want to be disloyal but I’ve just read through Jacky Ashleys article and found it really interesting. The best mini-resume I’ve read on all the candidates. They’ve all got interesting back stories-much more interesting than the average. They’ve all got a reasonable claim. Johnson’s story is the most interesting. Father left when he was 8. His mother a cleaner died when he was 14 so effectively an orphan he left school and was married with three children by 21.
Hain founded the ANL which as a student was my protest vehicle of choice and then there’s all the South African stuff-parents imprisoned etc.
Cruddas sounds a touch suspect and he’s only been an MP since 2000 so perhaps he should put in the time first.
The Benn family have a really interesting history but of course Hilary had to live his father’s dream…..
Even Hazel-’I got my 11+ and became a Cabinet minister my brother didn’t and drives a bus in Salford’…….
Hariet seems to have been campaigning all her life for worthwhile causes…..
A difficult choice but If i had a vote I’d probably go for either Johnson Hain or Benn. They’d all be good
Roger - in my book the least appealing candidate by some distance has to be Blears. In any number of interviews I have seen her simply trot out stock answers often 5 or 6 times - embarrassing! She simply seems incapable of ever arguing her own case. This, plus her boastful “my brother’s a bus driver” would put her bottom of the poll if I were a Labour voter.
58 and 62. Agreed Peter. When on form Sean T is worth the PBC licence fee alone. And yes I’m hoping The Postman is going to make us rich.
63. Roger. What do you mean,”If I had a vote?” Are you not a fully paid up member of the Labour Party?
Re 64, Peter, I do agree SeanT’s language, and his use of it is fantastic, if the subject matter can be a little repetitive sometimes.
However I disagree with you on Blears. Personally I like her! But as a Conservative I really would like Cruddas!
May I add my voice to the chorus of praise for SeanT and his posts. Love him or loathe, he never fails to give value.
Ms Ashley - chip of the father’s block if you look at the picture
SeanT - but he does go on!! He is also one man global warming machine with all this travel
Hazel - She’s wonderful. It’s the trench question. You are stuck in one, and who would you prefer to have by your side. My answer is usually Dean Richards, the rugby player, if you get my drift. Of these 6 - Benn, Harman,Hain Cruddas - would you trust them? So its Johnson or Blears. Blears, without exception, when called upon, fronts up. She’d get my vote for both the job and the trench.
SeanT has all the allure of the pub bore. Having worked in advertising for the last zillion years if I wanted to listen to someone with an occasionally interesting turn of phrase wheeling out their prejudices I wouldn’t tune into a political betting site I’d go to one of several bars in Central London where you can hear them spouting every day of the week and at least I’d get a drink for my attention!
PS that was in response to the eulogies of the previous thread!!
69. spot on
alternatively - the battle bus test - who is the one that you could most easily see rallying the labour troops?
70 - spot on.