For some time now Mike has reserved a small corner of Politicalbetting.com for recorded wagers. The idea is that if two posters can agree terms between themselves, they can actually have their bet formalized to the extent that it is recorded here for posterity and for others to view and comment on. The advantages are fairly obvious. The record makes it clear what the terms are and we can all share in the fun of applauding or mocking the judgement of others.
Unfortunately it was all set up on a rather ad hoc basis and Mike’s extensive commitment to running the Site generally meant that he wasn’t able to give this particular little section the attention it needed. The result was that some people thought they had bets they did not and people became unsure as to the right way to record them. Mike has therefore asked me to take over and run the section, which I will be doing as from next Monday.
The aim is to keep it friendly and informal and to provide a small and, I hope, entertaining service. It will work best if we can set out some ground rules though, so here’s a start, with more to follow if and when necessary.
1. Smithson’s Law - In the event of any dispute, what Mike says, goes.
2. Enforcement – There isn’t any enforcement. As punters, you should know that already. Bets are not legally enforceable, but what I can do is advise you whether the counterparty has a record - good, bad or indifferent – of compliance and cooperation. I would imagine most punters will be regular posters and there is unlikely to be much of a problem, Observergate notwithstanding, but if you are unsure, I may be able to help, or obtain advice elsewhere.
3. Record of Bets - This is where I think the Site really can help, simply by offering a place to record the precise terms that were agreed. I can even go one better and advise on the wording, if required. I have a little experience in the area, so I may be able to help iron out ambiguities and ensure the bet is truly finite and covers all reasonable contingencies.
4. Recording procedure – This is simple. When you have agreed the terms of a bet, email me at arklebar@talktalk.net and I will put the bet up on site, subject to any clarification etc which may be appropriate.
5. Fee – None.
6. Size of bets – This is entirely at the punter’s discretion with no maximum or minimum, although I’d be surprised if amounts much in excess of £20 feature regularly.
7. Arbitration – I am happy to provide a voluntary arbitration service if required, subject of course to the overriding Smithson Law at 1. above.
8. Old, existing bets – I am aware of one or two wagers knocking around that haven’t been formalized yet. Please feel free to notify me, and I will add them to the list going forward.
9. Code of Conduct – Keep it clean, legal and decent, as you would any posts on Site, and I’m sure we’ll all get along fine.
Please feel free to let me have any suggestions and of course details of any bets you may already have entered into which you’d like written up.
The news in the Telegraph blog that there’s to be a good ICM poll for Cameron tomorrow prompted me to try to get some money on in the spread markets. I’ve closed my Labour buy positions but when I tried to put money on with both IG Index and Sporting Index the prices jumped. The SI buy spread moved from 297 to 301 and IG moved from 299 to 301.
Off thread… but of course… a thread on the Euros would be interesting. I’m told we are going to drop from 87 to 73 MEPs which will presumably mean a major cull from all four of the heavily represented parties.
It could be UKIP that takes the brunt of the damage - barring miracles they will lose the one to go from the SW unless the one of the major parties makes a complete hash of the constitution debate (well really Labour or the Tories as extremly likely for the sole LD to lose his seat).
Re the previous thread and Dave’s “Full Roger”, and the question:
“But why is this against the trend of other recent surveys?”
Simple. The Tories are back home from their Xmas and New Year holidays. It was the holiday surveys that were out of trend.
When will non-Tory supporters learn that if you take polls when Tories are out of the country (Christmas, New Year, August, Easter), you’ll get results that favour Labour?
A word of advice for anyone planning to use his arbitration service, it might be a good idea to declare yourself a greyhound-loving, Leyton Orient supporter who enjoys travel to the far East at the point of making the bet Hope this gets off the ground smoothly.
9. Good point. Arguably, all polls during winter should favour Labour, very slightly, as Tories are more likely to afford sunshine winter holidays, and skiing trips.
10/13 Since we’re on the subject of footy (if you can call Forest a football team), another great win for Villa today, taking my current season’s points profits on them to around £350. Of course, there is another PBer who is making around £600 on the same bet!
by
Peter from Putney
January 12th, 2008 at 6:01 pm
9,12 re Tory holidays. Surely you have it backwards. Post-Christmas polls should favour Tories who are relaxed and well-off. Poorer, Labour voters will have been paid early in December, overspent on Christmas and are now skint.
re 8 well whoever told you was a bit behind the times because we dropped from 87 to 78 in 2004. However if we are to drop to 73 next time then it wouldn’t affect UKIP at all
Assuming the 2004 population distribution NW, EM, SW, Scotland and NI would all lose 1 seat (although this was be politically sensitive and the WM might have to sacrifice a seat to keep NI at 3).
If the votes were distributed exactly as last time this would mean the following net changes
LD -2 (NW and EM)
C -2 (SW and Scotland)
UUP -1 (NI)
Absolutely right Bob! While the wretched Labour supporters keep grinding away to keep the economy going their bosses are spending the profits on the gentle slopes of St Moritz.
But don’t worry Bob come the revolution MORI will be able to do their polls round the clock!
I think I have had a £10,000 bet with Roger that the Tories will get a 6%+ lead with ICM before the end of 2008. I’m a bit hazy on this one so Roger will need to confirm.
17 We got a seat back I think in the Reform Treaty negotiations (as a result of italy wanting parity or something) but the proposal for seat changes was for East Midlands, West Midlands, London, South West, North West and Scotland to lose 1 seat each. IIRC the returned seat was to go to Scotland which wouldn’t then lose a seat at all.
18 Thanks stjohn - i probably will hold, but will take a look at their upcoming fixture list to see if there any nasties looming.
I recall suggesting a sell bet on another Premiership side, which shall remain nameless, where the rewards have been even greater. Sadly I fear it was ignored.
by
Peter from Putney
January 12th, 2008 at 6:25 pm
24 Yes Tim and Happy New Year btw. Though I disagree with Graham about pretty much everything EU related he is an absolutely amazing MEP and the arithmetic strongly favours him anyway.
17 Thanks for the info - I think it almost certain that it will be UKIP that sheds a SW seat as I don’t expect them to do so well next time. I also think it very likely that the BNP will take some of their votes next though this won’t be a factor in the SW - presumably NW, London and Yorks and the Humber are the regions where they are a threat.
If seats were distributed proportionally by region NI should have lost 1 and West Midlands got 1 more with the extra seat going to NW rather than Scotland.
21/26 Sounds like singularly bad news for Roger. Still, unlike PtP, he didn’t “bet the house” on this and even if he had he has four homes to juggle with. Put another way, it amounts to just 1.67 days’ pay for him.
by
Peter from Putney
January 12th, 2008 at 6:42 pm
You were lucky Stjohn! If I remember my offer was that the Tories would be down to +6% or less before Feb but no-one took me up on it. I guess they must have known about the lavish holiday plans of their compatriots at this time of the year!
My only outstanding bet is with Toryboy for £200 on the London Mayor. Hopefully he’ll send PtP the details. Other than that I’m on Ken and he’s on Boris and there are two £100 bets I’ve forgotten the details.
31. Well I got some of the details right! I would have taken the bet but you baulked when I tried to double up on the Archbishop of Westminster. Another sinner saved by the Church.
22. Sorry had not seen your post when I posted 29.
If we do get a 73rd seat, per the Electoral Commission calculations it will surely go to West Midlands. But there does not appear to be any mention of this on the Electoral Commission website.
30. PfP. Why don’t you change your name to something like Peter from Pontefract? I keep reading your posts and thinking they’re from Peter the Punter and wondering how such an elegant poster can sometimes post something so vulgar!
29 Mike L - UK got a seat back in Treaty of Lisbon as the size of European Parliament was increased to 751 (750 plus President of Parliament) from 736.
France +2, Italy +1, UK +1, Spain +4,Poland +1,Netherlands+1, Sweden +2, Austria+2, Bulgaria+1, Latvia+1, Slovenia +1,Malta +1
Germany - 3
Of course if the Lisbon treaty not ratified the Treaty of Nice still stands and we would have 72 rather than 73 seats. Additional seat should go to West Midlands if NI keeps its 3 seats.
re 25 The seats last time in the SW were filled in this order
C 457371
UKIP 326784
LD 265619
C 228686
Lab 209908
UKIP 163392
C 152457
BNP got their highest vote in Y&H last time. They got 8.0 and would have won the 9th seat (there were 6 on offer), or alternatively were 67,000 (4.3%) votes off winning a seat.
39 Yes - no way I can see UKIP clinging on with that kind of margin.* You could make a case for Labour’s Glyn Ford getting the boot if the economy really goes sour and UKIP stage some sort of a recovery I suppose but I think they will struggle to get twice the Labour vote. Not much chance of Greens interfering with play either so it is going to be a very dull election down here.
*Maybe they can lead on the Tories voting down an EU referendum - bet they are thinking about it.
Flicking through the last thread I read UKpaul say Clegg had stolen Cameron’s idea of getting charities to run some public services. Does anyone know what sort of public services they are suggesting charities could run?
Peter, I’m on with Morus for £100 to charity if there is a top-two tie in the US electoral college, and £50 if no-one gets 270 electors or more. £150 if both occur. Based on the legally-determined totals, faithless electors being counted as pledged.
43 Charities already run a large part of children’s welfare and animal welfare; already involved in education and health services (especially for the dying, disabled and the elderly) and of course in arts and culture. Labour suggested last year that councils become commissioners of services rather than suppliers and voluntary societies probably preferable in many cases to for profit organisations.
47. I mean new revelations. In this country if the story doesn’t keep going with a fresh direction the media and public get fed up and the whole thing fizzle’s.
49 what you mean is that he will get away with breaking the law, which he will, in true nulab tradition. he will however have brilliantly derailed GBs fightback and lost labour 1000’s of votes. so lets hope he does stay.
36 Vulgar - Ha! I think most fair minded people would consider you are the vulgar one bragging about owning four homes and how much you earn. So typical also of a champagne socialist like you to denigrate a town like Pontefract.
by
Peter from Putney
January 12th, 2008 at 7:40 pm
36 - Peter from Putney did offer to change his name to Bob from Barnes. But this might confuse with sometimes poster Barnesian.
I’m still waiting for someone to agree to my bet on the local elections in Wales this year. The terms were £1 per council correctly forecast (either in terms of majority control or largest party) with the winner being determined by most councils correctly guessed.
PFP wouldn’tIMHO associate with Barnes, only one decent Youngs pub in Barnes is (or was) on the left b4 you hit the riverfront).
by
Maggie Thatcher Fan
January 12th, 2008 at 7:50 pm
14 Hey - young man. Forest not a proper club? Remember - Martin O’Neill learnt everything he knows about management from his time under me at Forest. He paid attention to what I said. He learnt from the master. The boy will do well enough when he grows up - but maybe not well enough to win trophies. And he’ll never trouble my record at Forest… Remember that. Now, run along.
by
Ghost of Brian Clough
January 12th, 2008 at 7:54 pm
by
Peter from Putney
January 12th, 2008 at 7:58 pm
[43][45] And of course in social housing, housing associations are major players. Dunno if either the Audit Commission or some reputable academic outfit has ever done a comparative study of the performance of companies and not-for-profit outfits in delivering services - of course, if the commissioning’s competent it ought not to make much difference, but “not-for-profit”, like the drivers on the Victoria Line (who don’t actually drive the trains) does provide a “comfort factor” for most people - and a “discomfort factor” for people who read Ayn Rand at too young an age
62 Personally I don’t have a problem with the for-profit sector if they are properly commissioned and measured on real efficiency - effectiveness, quality of service rather than just cost reductions. In some areas though voluntary agencies will get better results through the personal commitment of their volunteers plus their differing approaches.
On for profit - Camelot was limited to a 5% margin on sales - lower than not for profit organisations were getting in equivalent lotteries - managed to roll out a national network of terminals, agree terms with tens of thousands of businesses and deliver on time. Doubt that the Dept of Fun could have done it as effectively.
Any odds available about Tony Blair becoming first president of the European Union ??
Blair speech kindles speculation over EU presidency
By Nick Antonovics Reuters -
Saturday, January 12 02:05 pm
PARIS (Reuters) - Former Prime Minister Tony Blair kindled speculation he was running to be the first president of the European Union by praising the bloc in a speech in Paris as France prepares to oversee the appointment process.
At the invitation of French President Nicolas Sarkozy, Blair told a conference of France’s centre-right ruling UMP party on Saturday that EU countries could achieve more in key policy areas by acting together rather than as individual nation states…./
He leaves Britain in the incapable hands of Broon, turns Catholic and gets a finance job in NY. He then sets himself up for the top job in the EU which Britain is being dragged into by Broon and the eventual merging of sterling into the Euro. . The Catholic Church is now larger than the CofE in the UK for the first time since the reign of Elizabeth and we should never, ever, underestimate the power of religion to act as an opiate in the wrong hands. Tony made the move to the winning side on this one. He is smart and has the ideal buffoon in Brown to make a mess of this country forcing it to become more dependent on Europe and the solution to all our troubles.
This is all starting to look a bit familiar. If there is a near successful assassination attempt on Tony leaving him blind in one eye and only one arm we are all in trouble! Not that I believe in any conspiracy therories though
by
Herbert Proper Jnr
January 12th, 2008 at 8:43 pm
Polls always declare in round numbers! When I used to do lots of stats. and number crunching, we always rounded up on 0.5 and down on 0.4. If polls use the same system it means a 0.1 change could produce a full 1.0% change in the headline figure.
71,
I’d imagine that Beijing have been watching with interest. I understand that the pro-independence Pan-Greens have been trounced soundly by the Pan-Blues and hurled into (deep) Opposition. Kind of like 1997 for the Tories - from just over 50% of the seats to under 24% of the seats. Ouch.
We do not think that it will be too long until the deterioration in the economic climate pushes the manufacturing sector into its fourth recession in 11 years.
LAUREN R. DORGAN
Concord Monitor
Saturday January 12, 2008
Votes cast in New Hampshire’s Democratic and Republican presidential primaries will undergo a hand recount, after two candidates who garnered little support here questioned the results.
The Democratic recount was requested by Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich, who won about 1 percent of the vote in Tuesday’s primary. In a letter to Secretary of State Bill Gardner, Kucinich cited “unexplained disparities between hand-counted ballots and machine-counted ballots” and pointed to the divergence between opinion polls leading up to the primary - which showed Barack Obama ahead by a wide margin - and the final outcome. Hillary Clinton narrowly won the Democratic contest.
On the Republican side, a Michigan chauffeur and little-known presidential candidate named Albert Howard joined forces with supporters of Rep. Ron Paul yesterday to request a full recount of the Republican ballots from Tuesday’s primary.
Howard is a 41-year-old father of eight from Ann Arbor who says he believes an angel of the Lord came to him and told him he would beat Clinton in a run for the presidency. He flew to New Hampshire on Thursday night and was at Gardner’s office at 8:30 yesterday morning with the necessary paperwork.
by
Herbert Proper Jnr
January 12th, 2008 at 9:42 pm
you stand more chance of becoming Mayor of London than I do of winning a bet against you, based on past form !! - I remain optimistic though that Ken’s Chavez hugging, financially incontinent management style and general throwback attitude will show he’s past his sell by date.
Also your track record of supporting Labour party members seeking high office isn’t exemplary - no doubt you’ll be politely requesting Peter to cough up the £16K he owes the Labour Party - you guys need all the cash you can get.
This is the BBC’s view; my persoanl one is that Hain’s non resignation is excellent news for all NuLabour’s opponents.
Peter Hain is one of the more approachable cabinet ministers, at ease in front of the camera or behind the microphone.
But not today. He read out his statement about the donations row and then turned on his heels not taking any questions.
Yes, there was the apology for failing to declare all the donations at the right time; Yes there was his dismissal as “absurd” that he had anything to hide.
But there wasn’t any explanation about the strange way his team had tried to clear his campaign debts.
Why was it that a loan for £25,000 was in effect channelled through a mysterious think tank virtually unknown at Westminster? The Progressive Policies Forum is the think-tank that hasn’t troubled itself with much thinking.
It has published no pamphlets, organised no meetings and come up with no policy suggestions.
Financial mess
Why was it that the man who made that £25,000 loan, Willie Nagel, a diamond dealer, wasn’t told about the ultimate destination of the money, though he wasn’t surprised?
These questions remain unanswered, and while they remain unanswered Mr Hain remains under pressure - despite his defiance today that he’ll be getting on with his cabinet jobs.
He does have Gordon Brown’s backing. Number 10 has reiterated that Mr Hain continues to enjoy the prime minister’s “full support”.
However, that cannot be guaranteed if things get worse.
“Full confidence” is often a prime minister’s default setting when a member of the government gets into hot water (it’s the F9 key on Downing Street keyboards).
Those close to Mr Brown believe that Mr Hain hasn’t acted dishonestly but there’s bafflement as to how his campaign could get into such an awful financial mess.
For the moment Mr Hain clearly has no intention of resigning from either of his two jobs in cabinet. But it all depends on Gordon Brown’s view.
Peter Hain has been in tighter spots before - after all how many other cabinet ministers have stood trial for bank robbery?
Would Mr Brown’s patience begin to thin if there are more stories and the government gets bogged down in another donations row?
This mess has landed on Number 10’s doorstep just as Gordon Brown starts 2008 with a flurry of announcements - an attempt to get back on the front foot after the all the problems at the fag end of 2007.
Plaid Cymru’s leader at Westminster, Elfin Llwyd, says Mr Hain should have resigned. The Conservative back bencher David Davies (MP for Monmouth) has reported Mr Hain to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards.
But so far the Conservative front bench haven’t bayed for his blood and are waiting to see what any inquiry throws up.
Peter Hain has been in tighter spots before. After all how many other cabinet ministers have stood trial for bank robbery? (When he was an anti-apartheid campaigner in the 1970s the South African security services tried to frame him for a bank robbery)
But in the past, ministers have had to go not because the burden of proof is against them but because they have become too much of a burden for the prime minister of the day to bear.
McCain’s best argument has always been his electability. Stil, just released CNN numbers are just staggering. Mc is essentially even with Hillary and Obama in this poll (he has been leading them in several recent ones), whereas the other Republicans are trailing by 13-22 percent.
Many Republicans dislike him a lot, but they will not be sitting home and watch him lose to Hillary, nor support a third party candidate.
The 6/4 for nomination and 11/2 for president are now gone.
By contrast, this is the view of Postman Patel from his blog:
Saturday, January 12, 2008
Peter Hain and the dosh wash - PPF, McEwen Parkinson and Steve Morgan et al
Channel 4 report that McEwen Parkinson solicitors whose Gregory McEwan is the sole director of the company are the lawyers in question who created Progressive Policies Forum Ltd 83 Wimpole Street , London W1G 9RQ - Company No. 06019490 on 05/12/2006 - No Accounts filed . The registered Offices have a sign as required under the Companies Act.
A search of the Electoral Commission records shows that the firm, Gregory McEwan and PPF have never donated funds to Nu Labour.
Peter Hain’s campaign manager was , Steve Morgan, now of Morgan Allen Moore - whose registered office is Registered Office : 83 Wimpole Street, London, W1G 9RQ Company Registration 3665285 see company website ) they are also said to have launched a consultancy called Net Trap, which is registered at the same address as PPF although Companies House have no record of such an outfit.
Apparently money would arrive and be despatched the same day at PPF (better organised than the rest of Hain’s accounting ?) - proof (if required) that as Lord Patel pointed out PPF was simply a money laundering agency. One wonders how their bankers acted under their statutory duty to report suspicious financial activities ?
Late News Sat 6.00 Guradian Hain blinking tears away ‘fesses up and blames everyone …”administrative failings ” …”unpaid invoices coming to light ” .. Statement . Amazingly he is still (as we write) in the cabinet in charge of Pensions … (personal interest declared Lord Patel’s State Pension kicks in a week on Thursday).
“Any odds available about Tony Blair becoming first president of the European Union ??”
Well one notes that the tight-fisted *** has suddenly dropped the need for chemical tinting of the coif. Might this be because no decent German will vote for a Herr Dyer? (whoops, I forgot Strauss ‘n’ Kohl)
Can you bet on the number of by-elections in 2008? They seem to be rare as hens teeth these days. Obviously the strategy by Labour and the Tories of appointing 22 year old candidates everywhere seems to be working - in robbing the LibDems of their life blood (ie winning by-elections after the sitting eighty year old Bufton-Tufton type indulged in one too many Porterhouse Blues….)
97/98 £30/20 was my recollection but I am happy to go with £20/10 if Nick prefers. It’s a charity bet so I don’t think either of us see it as a money making venture
(104 O/T - Thank you for your reply yesterday to my question about how your model correctly predicted the 1992 election, based on the by-elections since 1987.
Did you reach your conclusions about the average Con-Lab swing of around 5.6%, based on ALL the by-elections that took place in that period? If so, they would include such nonsenses as a 11.66% Lab-Con swing in Glasgow Govan (when the SNP took the seat from Labour, and the Tories polled a pitiful 7.6%). Ditto the 2% ’swing’ to the Tories in Glasgow Central!! Etc.
These ludicrous figures would thus dilute the impact of the very substantial Con-Lab swings in Mid Staffs (21%), Bradford North (15%), Vale of Glamorgan (12%), Monmouth (12.5%)which resulted in Labour gaining the seats, only be disappointed by losing most of them in 1992.
That YOUGOV poll is a real kick in the teeth. For the Tories to be back on 43% after Labour have had a reasonable Xmas period is an absolute disaster for Brown.
It seems that more Gordon on the telly has the equivalent effect to more Dave, except its downwards for Gordo and vice versa for Dave!
by
Maggie Thatcher Fan
January 12th, 2008 at 10:30 pm
125 - Nick, Why don’t you leap to Hain’s defence by stating the demonstrably obvious, namely that the PPF is actually the Progressive Pu$$ies Foundation and is merely a vehicle for you to collect on your varied feline-friendly wagers.
124 But it is Yougov and Yougov polls responses are heavily overrepresented by those from over 55 ABC1s . This was clearly demonstrated by the recent Ken/Boris poll . The sameple size of 995 should have had 220 over 55’s , the poll had 498 responses from this age group .
127 Doesn’t look good for Gordon - especially when it comes to the thought of him fronting a general election campaign. After three weeks of seeing Gordon on the telly every night, even Nick Palmer might have doubts about the wisdom of voting Labour! Perhaps Brown could be replaced for three weeks by a fluffy glove puppet*?
114 - In addition, governments are less likely to deliberately cause them by granting an MP a peerage or a senior public post of some sort. In the past, with elder sons inheriting, and MPs frequently being made judges, colonial governors or similar posts, you could rely on at least 10 in a non-election year, going down to 6-7 by the 1980s, and 1-2 now.
131. Mark why do you think that group is so over-represented in their polls? I’d have thought Yougov would be able to focus their polls better than that.
122. Why, thanks for pointing that out. I’ve tried to avoid filtering the data as much as possible, but if you must know, removing the two by-elections you mention from the dataset, INCREASES the predictive quality of the model in forecasting the 1992 election. It increases the 1987-92 Labour BE swing from 5.2% to 6.3%. Applying the 1950 baseline model predicts a 2.3% swing to Labour in 1992. Applying a 1974F baseline gives a figure of 2.1%, precisely what Labour obtained…
One thing on here makes me laugh. Last week the polls were down for the Tories which we predicted because polls always go down in holiday periods for us. We were shouted down and told this marks the end for Cameron. It turns out we may well have been right and suddenly we are told the polls are rogue now because too many people over 55 are surveyed!!
131. Its not far away from what we’ve seen from IPSOS/MORI. Whichever way you look at it, things really are bad for Labour now.
The position of the Lib-Dem’s is also looking increasingly dodgy. You would have expected more of a Bounce from Clegg. It looks to me like these polls are showing the public are basically shrugging their shoulders at Nick Clegg. Can’t blame them, really. Three leaders in two years will stretch the credibility of any party.
re 106 has Rinka gone down in the annals of LimDemmery, or do the callow youths on here have no idea of the pivotal part he played in Lib politics in the 70s?
139. Yes just like Peter Hitchens post on his blog, Armageddon was just around the corner…… To me it seems that New Labour are damned if they do, and damned if they dont, and I think thats a damned good thing too.
by
Maggie Thatcher Fan
January 12th, 2008 at 10:44 pm
136 A further thought - does the opinion poll sampling take account of all those Torremolinos Tories who live abroad? How do they get contacted by MORI or YouGov or whoever (cuz sure as apples is apples they will still find a way to vote in their masses at the GE - they are still very much Brits).
136 Because their detailed data shows that it is usually by 15-20% , the Boris/Ken poll was overrepresented by an exceptionally high amount . I would hazard a guess that over 55’s respond to the surveys at a far higher rate than the other age group , perhaps because they have more time to do so .
137 - OK, so now we add (or take away) Paisley North and South that showed pro Tory ’swings of 5.3% and 4.4%, Neath with 2.15 and Liverpool Walton with no swing. No what’s the outcome….?
Gordon’s latest “Popular” idea is to nationalise our bodies so that the NHS can harvest organs assuming consent - so lets get his NHS policy right. Anyone who doesn’t lead a good Presbyterian life will be refused treatment because they are sinners; if they die and haven’t destroyed their organs through their sinful vices and gluttony then these can be taken and used for the preservation of the Elect (Ok might be a bit emotive in choice of words there).
With Abraham’s Donorgate popping up at regular intervals, Peter Hain prolonging his agony and whizzbang ideas like that I’m sure Labour MPs are an overjoyed bunch.
Phew! Hope it’s not always going to be this hard work.
by
Peter the Punter
January 12th, 2008 at 10:48 pm
139 LOL Woody , remind us to which of the polls the result of last weeks Leics NW byelection indicates are correct .
144 If they have internet connection in Spain ,then Yougov can still contact them .
148. Ted, yeah, that sounds about right. Who the hell thinl they are to start depriivng health care from British citizens, I don’t know. If these barmy idea’s ever do come to fruition (personally I’ve got my doubts) and we start seeing people dying because the NHS is refusing them care, I think there will be a rapid clamour from the public to scrap the NHS…. Just think, Labour created it, and Labour end up destroying it!
148. Ted, yeah, that sounds about right. Who the hell do this government think they are to start depriving health care from British citizens? If these barmy idea’s ever do come to fruition (personally I’ve got my doubts) and we start seeing people dying because the NHS is refusing them care, I think there will be a rapid clamour from the public to scrap the NHS…. Just think, Labour created it, and Labour end up destroying it!
147. I don’t think the Paisleys were anomalous. They took place the day after Thatcher left Downing Street, and correctly presaged the 1992 Scottish result…
150. Somehow I doubt the BNP will have 50 activists in every ward, The Lib dems will get away with 2 horse race, and the sitting MP will be knocking on every single come the general election. Reading too much into by elections is a bit of a mugs game punting wise. Like comparing all weather and turf horse racing form.
I was born in 1980 but I know all about Rinka. That is in part due, though, to being brought up not far from where the noble hound met her end. And, indeed, meeting Norman Scot a couple of times (although I didnt bring Rinka up!).
147. The outcome would be the opposition does WORSE than the model predicts, which is the important point. The outliers in the data, 1959, 1970, 1987 (and if you insist on massaging 1992) all had the Opposition doing WORSE than the model predicts. There are no outliers showing them doing much better (outside 1% better.)
150 Mark, there were 275,000 Brits registered as living in Spain at the end of 2005. Generally they’d be go-getters out to improve their quality of life or the elderly (both groups who’d be expected to be disprortionately Tory)- and maybe just a few villains (we’ll put them down as BNP!). Then there is France and Italy and Portugal - my guess being that Brits who have left but still consider themselves Brits and so want to vote in an election may be 600,000 - 750,000 by the next election.
With 27 million folks voting in 2005, this block could represent a sizeable vote (2-3% of all those who vote) lurking under the polling radar. Do you know if YouGov does make any attempts to specifically contact them?
155 - How so? In both the Tories also declined from a very low base to an even lower one. Of course they are anomalous on a UK overall basis.
The inescapable fact is that in UK Lab-Con competitive seats, Labour scored resounding by-election victories and gains from the Tories. They should have thus fared much better in 1992.
Theoretically YouGov could contact ex-pats who vote as overseas electors, but I don’t they do. I think they are excluded in all polls. British forces posted overseas are also missed out in polls and I’m sure there are various other groups people can think of who are missed out of most polls (people without land lines are normally missed out for starters!).
The question is whether those groups are large enough, vote in large enough numbers, and are different enough in their viewpoints for it to actually matter.
just being nosey, but did Observer ever pay up?
Nope.
I have my own little blacklist with just one name on it. Guess what it is?
Btw, I have to pop out for a couple of hours, but if anybody has any queries, I’ll try to answer them when I get back.
The news in the Telegraph blog that there’s to be a good ICM poll for Cameron tomorrow prompted me to try to get some money on in the spread markets. I’ve closed my Labour buy positions but when I tried to put money on with both IG Index and Sporting Index the prices jumped. The SI buy spread moved from 297 to 301 and IG moved from 299 to 301.
Hell - this is how I try to earn a living.
4 Was it on ConservativeHome earlier than in the Telegraph Blog? Perhaps Tim’s mention cost you a few bob?
IDSHome gets its revenge?
2. Vladimir Putin?
Ps - I had a bet with Jack W. Ten guineas or something.
But I can’t for the life of me remember what it was!
I might have won! Can you remember what it was?
Apologies for stupidity.
Off thread… but of course… a thread on the Euros would be interesting. I’m told we are going to drop from 87 to 73 MEPs which will presumably mean a major cull from all four of the heavily represented parties.
It could be UKIP that takes the brunt of the damage - barring miracles they will lose the one to go from the SW unless the one of the major parties makes a complete hash of the constitution debate (well really Labour or the Tories as extremly likely for the sole LD to lose his seat).
Anyone care to comment on other regions?
Re the previous thread and Dave’s “Full Roger”, and the question:
“But why is this against the trend of other recent surveys?”
Simple. The Tories are back home from their Xmas and New Year holidays. It was the holiday surveys that were out of trend.
When will non-Tory supporters learn that if you take polls when Tories are out of the country (Christmas, New Year, August, Easter), you’ll get results that favour Labour?
I can see this going global from these small beginnings, and one day we could be logging onto http://www.ptpfair.com (not to be confused with http://www.pfpfair.com of course)
A word of advice for anyone planning to use his arbitration service, it might be a good idea to declare yourself a greyhound-loving, Leyton Orient supporter who enjoys travel to the far East at the point of making the bet
Hope this gets off the ground smoothly.
9 Obviously the loyalty of Tories to their country doesn’t stretch to living in it. Or does that only apply during periods of Labour “government”
?
9. Good point. Arguably, all polls during winter should favour Labour, very slightly, as Tories are more likely to afford sunshine winter holidays, and skiing trips.
I’d say Cammo’s true lead is about, ooh, 23%.
10 “declare yourself a greyhound-loving, Leyton Orient supporter…”
Better keep it to myself that I’m a Forest fan then, after Orient’s 4-0 drubbing this afternoon!
10/13 Since we’re on the subject of footy (if you can call Forest a football team), another great win for Villa today, taking my current season’s points profits on them to around £350. Of course, there is another PBer who is making around £600 on the same bet!
9,12 re Tory holidays. Surely you have it backwards. Post-Christmas polls should favour Tories who are relaxed and well-off. Poorer, Labour voters will have been paid early in December, overspent on Christmas and are now skint.
I thought that there was a newish gambling act that made the settlement of bets legally enforceable?
re 8 well whoever told you was a bit behind the times because we dropped from 87 to 78 in 2004. However if we are to drop to 73 next time then it wouldn’t affect UKIP at all
Assuming the 2004 population distribution NW, EM, SW, Scotland and NI would all lose 1 seat (although this was be politically sensitive and the WM might have to sacrifice a seat to keep NI at 3).
If the votes were distributed exactly as last time this would mean the following net changes
LD -2 (NW and EM)
C -2 (SW and Scotland)
UUP -1 (NI)
14. Peter. I think that bet of yours has the potential to deliver evem nore profit. HOLD Villa on the spread premiership points.
15 No its us Tories who are overspent and skint..
Absolutely right Bob! While the wretched Labour supporters keep grinding away to keep the economy going their bosses are spending the profits on the gentle slopes of St Moritz.
But don’t worry Bob come the revolution MORI will be able to do their polls round the clock!
I think I have had a £10,000 bet with Roger that the Tories will get a 6%+ lead with ICM before the end of 2008. I’m a bit hazy on this one so Roger will need to confirm.
17 We got a seat back I think in the Reform Treaty negotiations (as a result of italy wanting parity or something) but the proposal for seat changes was for East Midlands, West Midlands, London, South West, North West and Scotland to lose 1 seat each. IIRC the returned seat was to go to Scotland which wouldn’t then lose a seat at all.
Jon
I hope and assume you meant extremely unlikely that the sole Lib Dem would lose his seat!!
18 Thanks stjohn - i probably will hold, but will take a look at their upcoming fixture list to see if there any nasties looming.
I recall suggesting a sell bet on another Premiership side, which shall remain nameless, where the rewards have been even greater. Sadly I fear it was ignored.
24 Yes Tim and Happy New Year btw. Though I disagree with Graham about pretty much everything EU related he is an absolutely amazing MEP and the arithmetic strongly favours him anyway.
17 Thanks for the info - I think it almost certain that it will be UKIP that sheds a SW seat as I don’t expect them to do so well next time. I also think it very likely that the BNP will take some of their votes next though this won’t be a factor in the SW - presumably NW, London and Yorks and the Humber are the regions where they are a threat.
21 - stjohn; I seem to recall Roger offered you 1,000-1 but I may have the number of zeros wrong.
Further on seats - looked at Electoral Commission site and they have the proposal
http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/templates/search/document.cfm/19644
If seats were distributed proportionally by region NI should have lost 1 and West Midlands got 1 more with the extra seat going to NW rather than Scotland.
26. SBS. Yes that sounds right. Once Roger confirms Peter can put it up on the board.
17. We’re actually going from 78 to 72 seats at the next Euro elections.
The Electoral Commission has already done the calculations. The 6 seats to be lost are as follows:
East Midlands -1
London -1
Nort West -1
South West -1
West Midlands -1
Scotland -1
http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/media-centre/newsreleasereviews.cfm/news/650
21/26 Sounds like singularly bad news for Roger. Still, unlike PtP, he didn’t “bet the house” on this and even if he had he has four homes to juggle with. Put another way, it amounts to just 1.67 days’ pay for him.
You were lucky Stjohn! If I remember my offer was that the Tories would be down to +6% or less before Feb but no-one took me up on it. I guess they must have known about the lavish holiday plans of their compatriots at this time of the year!
My only outstanding bet is with Toryboy for £200 on the London Mayor. Hopefully he’ll send PtP the details. Other than that I’m on Ken and he’s on Boris and there are two £100 bets I’ve forgotten the details.
28/31 Time for you both to start burrowing through the archives,I fancy.
re 22/27 well in that case then with the same vote distribution as last time, the score would be:
LD -2 (NW, EM)
C -2 (SW, WM)
Lab -1 (London)
31. Well I got some of the details right! I would have taken the bet but you baulked when I tried to double up on the Archbishop of Westminster. Another sinner saved by the Church.
22. Sorry had not seen your post when I posted 29.
If we do get a 73rd seat, per the Electoral Commission calculations it will surely go to West Midlands. But there does not appear to be any mention of this on the Electoral Commission website.
30. PfP. Why don’t you change your name to something like Peter from Pontefract? I keep reading your posts and thinking they’re from Peter the Punter and wondering how such an elegant poster can sometimes post something so vulgar!
I have one with Aaron at 5-1 that there will be at least 2 ICM polls in 2008 that put the 3 parties within 10%- my stake is 20 notes.
I might well do a Paddy Power on NH and pay out now because it ain’t goin happen, but no, you just never know.
I had one with someone not naming and shaming on the Ealing by election for a tenner- I am still waiting for the cheque in the post.
29 Mike L - UK got a seat back in Treaty of Lisbon as the size of European Parliament was increased to 751 (750 plus President of Parliament) from 736.
France +2, Italy +1, UK +1, Spain +4,Poland +1,Netherlands+1, Sweden +2, Austria+2, Bulgaria+1, Latvia+1, Slovenia +1,Malta +1
Germany - 3
Of course if the Lisbon treaty not ratified the Treaty of Nice still stands and we would have 72 rather than 73 seats. Additional seat should go to West Midlands if NI keeps its 3 seats.
re 25 The seats last time in the SW were filled in this order
C 457371
UKIP 326784
LD 265619
C 228686
Lab 209908
UKIP 163392
C 152457
BNP got their highest vote in Y&H last time. They got 8.0 and would have won the 9th seat (there were 6 on offer), or alternatively were 67,000 (4.3%) votes off winning a seat.
38. Thanks. That probably explains why the Electoral Commission has remained silent so far as ratification may take some time!
39 Yes - no way I can see UKIP clinging on with that kind of margin.* You could make a case for Labour’s Glyn Ford getting the boot if the economy really goes sour and UKIP stage some sort of a recovery I suppose but I think they will struggle to get twice the Labour vote. Not much chance of Greens interfering with play either so it is going to be a very dull election down here.
*Maybe they can lead on the Tories voting down an EU referendum - bet they are thinking about it.
OK, back now, and dealing with the (sensible) posts in order….
6 SeanT - Have a care, man. His goons trawl the internet for signs of opposition. No doubt I’m on *his* list now.
7 Same Idiot - If you’re serious, JackW is contactable. Please confirm.
10 Tpfkar - The Arbitration Service is utterly impartial, even for Villa supporters.
13 Mark Marquee - You are perfectly safe. I backed Forest for promotion.
16 David Kendrick - I’m a bit off the pace with this one. I didn’t know the Act was in force yet. Can you advise?
21 StJohn - Nice try, but not even Roger is going to buy that one.
31 Roger - Can you email me the precise details? I may be able to contact Toryboy for you.
37 Tyson - Again, can I have an email please? You should be OK. We know where he works.
Thanks for all your comments and I do hope the service is of some assistance.
Flicking through the last thread I read UKpaul say Clegg had stolen Cameron’s idea of getting charities to run some public services. Does anyone know what sort of public services they are suggesting charities could run?
Peter, I’m on with Morus for £100 to charity if there is a top-two tie in the US electoral college, and £50 if no-one gets 270 electors or more. £150 if both occur. Based on the legally-determined totals, faithless electors being counted as pledged.
43 Charities already run a large part of children’s welfare and animal welfare; already involved in education and health services (especially for the dying, disabled and the elderly) and of course in arts and culture. Labour suggested last year that councils become commissioners of services rather than suppliers and voluntary societies probably preferable in many cases to for profit organisations.
Can we now assume that the Sunday’s haven’t got anything too damaging on Hain?
46 more damaging than breaking the law?
42 - PtP/Tyson - the bet is on the recorded wagers page already
Don’t give up hope, Tyson - think of those Hillary backers the other night…
47. I mean new revelations. In this country if the story doesn’t keep going with a fresh direction the media and public get fed up and the whole thing fizzle’s.
46 i doubt you can assume that…..yet
Bob Sykes at 9: ah! We just have to hold the next election on December 25 and it’s sorted, then. Ta!
PtP - congratulations on your elevation to power - couldn’t be in better hands.
51 Today PB.com, tomorrow the entire internet!
49 what you mean is that he will get away with breaking the law, which he will, in true nulab tradition. he will however have brilliantly derailed GBs fightback and lost labour 1000’s of votes. so lets hope he does stay.
36 Vulgar - Ha! I think most fair minded people would consider you are the vulgar one bragging about owning four homes and how much you earn. So typical also of a champagne socialist like you to denigrate a town like Pontefract.
36 - Peter from Putney did offer to change his name to Bob from Barnes. But this might confuse with sometimes poster Barnesian.
I’m still waiting for someone to agree to my bet on the local elections in Wales this year. The terms were £1 per council correctly forecast (either in terms of majority control or largest party) with the winner being determined by most councils correctly guessed.
PFP wouldn’tIMHO associate with Barnes, only one decent Youngs pub in Barnes is (or was) on the left b4 you hit the riverfront).
14 Hey - young man. Forest not a proper club? Remember - Martin O’Neill learnt everything he knows about management from his time under me at Forest. He paid attention to what I said. He learnt from the master. The boy will do well enough when he grows up - but maybe not well enough to win trophies. And he’ll never trouble my record at Forest… Remember that. Now, run along.
Jon And happy New Year to you also!
PtP - as ever your altruism on this site is an example to us all… thanks.
58 LOL - that’s good, very good.
[43][45] And of course in social housing, housing associations are major players. Dunno if either the Audit Commission or some reputable academic outfit has ever done a comparative study of the performance of companies and not-for-profit outfits in delivering services - of course, if the commissioning’s competent it ought not to make much difference, but “not-for-profit”, like the drivers on the Victoria Line (who don’t actually drive the trains) does provide a “comfort factor” for most people - and a “discomfort factor” for people who read Ayn Rand at too young an age
62 Personally I don’t have a problem with the for-profit sector if they are properly commissioned and measured on real efficiency - effectiveness, quality of service rather than just cost reductions. In some areas though voluntary agencies will get better results through the personal commitment of their volunteers plus their differing approaches.
On for profit - Camelot was limited to a 5% margin on sales - lower than not for profit organisations were getting in equivalent lotteries - managed to roll out a national network of terminals, agree terms with tens of thousands of businesses and deliver on time. Doubt that the Dept of Fun could have done it as effectively.
60. What? He gets a commission! It’s called Betfare….
Only messing now…
Any odds available about Tony Blair becoming first president of the European Union ??
Blair speech kindles speculation over EU presidency
By Nick Antonovics Reuters -
Saturday, January 12 02:05 pm
PARIS (Reuters) - Former Prime Minister Tony Blair kindled speculation he was running to be the first president of the European Union by praising the bloc in a speech in Paris as France prepares to oversee the appointment process.
At the invitation of French President Nicolas Sarkozy, Blair told a conference of France’s centre-right ruling UMP party on Saturday that EU countries could achieve more in key policy areas by acting together rather than as individual nation states…./
He leaves Britain in the incapable hands of Broon, turns Catholic and gets a finance job in NY. He then sets himself up for the top job in the EU which Britain is being dragged into by Broon and the eventual merging of sterling into the Euro. . The Catholic Church is now larger than the CofE in the UK for the first time since the reign of Elizabeth and we should never, ever, underestimate the power of religion to act as an opiate in the wrong hands. Tony made the move to the winning side on this one. He is smart and has the ideal buffoon in Brown to make a mess of this country forcing it to become more dependent on Europe and the solution to all our troubles.
This is all starting to look a bit familiar. If there is a near successful assassination attempt on Tony leaving him blind in one eye and only one arm we are all in trouble! Not that I believe in any conspiracy therories though
ICM Daily Telegraph - tore lead widens to 7%
Con 40 Lab 33 LD - who cares?
Per Real Clear Politics - Latest Michigan poll completed yesterday by American Research Group has McCain leading by 7%.
Overall Real Clear Politics average of last 5 Michigan polls has McCain leading by 3.4% from Romney. Huckabee well back and appears to be falling.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/mi/michigan_republican_primary-237.html
66. Compared to last ICM that is Con +1, Lab -1.
66 - Dec was
Conservative 39%
Labour 34%
Liberal Democrat 18%
Other 9%
67. McCain should win in fact its a must win.
There was an election in Taiwan if anyone cares!
So we guess the LD standing is 17-19%?
71 I expect Ave It is analysing the results for us right this minute.
Polls always declare in round numbers! When I used to do lots of stats. and number crunching, we always rounded up on 0.5 and down on 0.4. If polls use the same system it means a 0.1 change could produce a full 1.0% change in the headline figure.
71,
I’d imagine that Beijing have been watching with interest. I understand that the pro-independence Pan-Greens have been trounced soundly by the Pan-Blues and hurled into (deep) Opposition. Kind of like 1997 for the Tories - from just over 50% of the seats to under 24% of the seats. Ouch.
Existing Bets
I should have checked this before but as mentioned above, there are indeed two existing bets carried forward from 2007, between:
1. Rod Crosby/Morus - Regarding the US elections
2. Tyson/Aaron - ICM Polls
I take it that all parties are happy with the bets and I’ll just carry the details forward to the new spreadsheet on Monday.
I also have particulars of a bet between Palmer/Albury concerning the London Mayor elections, and again I’ll post that up on Monday.
As regards the other bets mentioned in this thread, I will need the emails. Sorry to be a stickler, but I’m trying to set up a regular procedure here.
Cheers.
76 Peter , don’t forget my wager with Disraeli/Gladstone on Hornsey/Wood Green .
We do not think that it will be too long until the deterioration in the economic climate pushes the manufacturing sector into its fourth recession in 11 years.
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/economics/article3174651.ece
I’ve got a bet with kingbongo - if Boris wins, I pay his charity £20, if I win, he pays £10 to the Broxtowe cats.
The poll looks about what we’d have expected - higher than YouGov, lower than Mori.
79: er, I mean if Ken wins, kingbongo pays £10. I don’t think I’ll be elected London mayor.
18% for the Lib Dems.
O/T I hold no brief for Hillary Clinton, but the claim that she made a racially derogatory remark is absurd - based on entirely synthetic outrage.
79, 80,
I thought kingbongo had got good odds there …
Hold on to your NH betting slips !
Primary votes to be recounted
LAUREN R. DORGAN
Concord Monitor
Saturday January 12, 2008
Votes cast in New Hampshire’s Democratic and Republican presidential primaries will undergo a hand recount, after two candidates who garnered little support here questioned the results.
The Democratic recount was requested by Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich, who won about 1 percent of the vote in Tuesday’s primary. In a letter to Secretary of State Bill Gardner, Kucinich cited “unexplained disparities between hand-counted ballots and machine-counted ballots” and pointed to the divergence between opinion polls leading up to the primary - which showed Barack Obama ahead by a wide margin - and the final outcome. Hillary Clinton narrowly won the Democratic contest.
On the Republican side, a Michigan chauffeur and little-known presidential candidate named Albert Howard joined forces with supporters of Rep. Ron Paul yesterday to request a full recount of the Republican ballots from Tuesday’s primary.
Howard is a 41-year-old father of eight from Ann Arbor who says he believes an angel of the Lord came to him and told him he would beat Clinton in a run for the presidency. He flew to New Hampshire on Thursday night and was at Gardner’s office at 8:30 yesterday morning with the necessary paperwork.
you stand more chance of becoming Mayor of London than I do of winning a bet against you, based on past form !! - I remain optimistic though that Ken’s Chavez hugging, financially incontinent management style and general throwback attitude will show he’s past his sell by date.
Also your track record of supporting Labour party members seeking high office isn’t exemplary - no doubt you’ll be politely requesting Peter to cough up the £16K he owes the Labour Party - you guys need all the cash you can get.
77 Sorry Mark, I overlooked that one. It will be added to the list to be posted on Monday.
This is the BBC’s view; my persoanl one is that Hain’s non resignation is excellent news for all NuLabour’s opponents.
Peter Hain is one of the more approachable cabinet ministers, at ease in front of the camera or behind the microphone.
But not today. He read out his statement about the donations row and then turned on his heels not taking any questions.
Yes, there was the apology for failing to declare all the donations at the right time; Yes there was his dismissal as “absurd” that he had anything to hide.
But there wasn’t any explanation about the strange way his team had tried to clear his campaign debts.
Why was it that a loan for £25,000 was in effect channelled through a mysterious think tank virtually unknown at Westminster? The Progressive Policies Forum is the think-tank that hasn’t troubled itself with much thinking.
It has published no pamphlets, organised no meetings and come up with no policy suggestions.
Financial mess
Why was it that the man who made that £25,000 loan, Willie Nagel, a diamond dealer, wasn’t told about the ultimate destination of the money, though he wasn’t surprised?
These questions remain unanswered, and while they remain unanswered Mr Hain remains under pressure - despite his defiance today that he’ll be getting on with his cabinet jobs.
He does have Gordon Brown’s backing. Number 10 has reiterated that Mr Hain continues to enjoy the prime minister’s “full support”.
However, that cannot be guaranteed if things get worse.
“Full confidence” is often a prime minister’s default setting when a member of the government gets into hot water (it’s the F9 key on Downing Street keyboards).
Those close to Mr Brown believe that Mr Hain hasn’t acted dishonestly but there’s bafflement as to how his campaign could get into such an awful financial mess.
For the moment Mr Hain clearly has no intention of resigning from either of his two jobs in cabinet. But it all depends on Gordon Brown’s view.
Peter Hain has been in tighter spots before - after all how many other cabinet ministers have stood trial for bank robbery?
Would Mr Brown’s patience begin to thin if there are more stories and the government gets bogged down in another donations row?
This mess has landed on Number 10’s doorstep just as Gordon Brown starts 2008 with a flurry of announcements - an attempt to get back on the front foot after the all the problems at the fag end of 2007.
Plaid Cymru’s leader at Westminster, Elfin Llwyd, says Mr Hain should have resigned. The Conservative back bencher David Davies (MP for Monmouth) has reported Mr Hain to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards.
But so far the Conservative front bench haven’t bayed for his blood and are waiting to see what any inquiry throws up.
Peter Hain has been in tighter spots before. After all how many other cabinet ministers have stood trial for bank robbery? (When he was an anti-apartheid campaigner in the 1970s the South African security services tried to frame him for a bank robbery)
But in the past, ministers have had to go not because the burden of proof is against them but because they have become too much of a burden for the prime minister of the day to bear.
71,73 Conservatives win Jhongli City!!!!
(I wonder if important civic visiors there get asked to sign the Jhongli Book???)
73 he is and the outcome is:
TOTAL LAB WIPEOUT, LDS TO DISAPPEAR!
Ave it GE forecast
Con 400 seats others not many
PS saw clegg on tv tonight (news) and thought: why is he on?
According to Anthony Wells, Yougov in the Sunday Times gives the Conservatives a double-digit lead, although there he gives no further details.
76 well there goes my anonymity (yet again) the Palmer/Albury bet is the Palmer/kingbongo bet - just in case Nick thinks he’s got multiple bets.
79 Sorry Nick, that’s not on my radar. Next time he’s on Site, can you just ask him toi confirm. I’m sure it’s OK.
McCain’s best argument has always been his electability. Stil, just released CNN numbers are just staggering. Mc is essentially even with Hillary and Obama in this poll (he has been leading them in several recent ones), whereas the other Republicans are trailing by 13-22 percent.
Many Republicans dislike him a lot, but they will not be sitting home and watch him lose to Hillary, nor support a third party candidate.
The 6/4 for nomination and 11/2 for president are now gone.
89. Please can you give a link.
I can’t see anything on Anthony’s site.
By contrast, this is the view of Postman Patel from his blog:
Saturday, January 12, 2008
Peter Hain and the dosh wash - PPF, McEwen Parkinson and Steve Morgan et al
Channel 4 report that McEwen Parkinson solicitors whose Gregory McEwan is the sole director of the company are the lawyers in question who created Progressive Policies Forum Ltd 83 Wimpole Street , London W1G 9RQ - Company No. 06019490 on 05/12/2006 - No Accounts filed . The registered Offices have a sign as required under the Companies Act.
A search of the Electoral Commission records shows that the firm, Gregory McEwan and PPF have never donated funds to Nu Labour.
Peter Hain’s campaign manager was , Steve Morgan, now of Morgan Allen Moore - whose registered office is Registered Office : 83 Wimpole Street, London, W1G 9RQ Company Registration 3665285 see company website ) they are also said to have launched a consultancy called Net Trap, which is registered at the same address as PPF although Companies House have no record of such an outfit.
Apparently money would arrive and be despatched the same day at PPF (better organised than the rest of Hain’s accounting ?) - proof (if required) that as Lord Patel pointed out PPF was simply a money laundering agency. One wonders how their bankers acted under their statutory duty to report suspicious financial activities ?
Late News Sat 6.00 Guradian Hain blinking tears away ‘fesses up and blames everyone …”administrative failings ” …”unpaid invoices coming to light ” .. Statement . Amazingly he is still (as we write) in the cabinet in charge of Pensions … (personal interest declared Lord Patel’s State Pension kicks in a week on Thursday).
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/
New YouGov poll:
COns 43% + 3
Lab 33 -2
LD 14 -1
http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_2679625.html?menu=
84 Lo and behold, the Genie appears!
Kingbongo, I take it you are OK with that bet? I’ll just add it to the list going up Monday. Check it and let me know if there’s a problem.
OK?
90 But hold on, Kingbongo, the bet which was subject to our email correspondence a while back was £30/£20. No?
95. Thanks - my page hadn’t refreshed!
96 LibDems on 14%??????
Clegg has got to go!!!!
Bring back Cable!!!!!
L to the O to etc etc
100 - Surely, bring back Ming
65.
“Any odds available about Tony Blair becoming first president of the European Union ??”
Well one notes that the tight-fisted *** has suddenly dropped the need for chemical tinting of the coif. Might this be because no decent German will vote for a Herr Dyer? (whoops, I forgot Strauss ‘n’ Kohl)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mYkGThMYmbk
101. Bring back Ashdown!!!
ICM central probabilistic forecast
Con 298
Lab 268
LD 44
Nats 19
Oth 3
NI 13 (SF abstain)
assumes average LD incumbency and 15% SNP rise…
103 Bring me back!
103, 105 - If only we could bring back Rinka
Woof, woof…bang!
105 lol
Clegg is *nsync (i think you all know now that is bye bye bye)
LDs = 0%
107-LOL!
Bring back Gladstone
YouGov central probabilistic forecast
Con 333
Lab 249
LD 28
Nats 19
Oth 3
NI 13 (SF abstain)
assumes average LD incumbency and 15% SNP rise…
Con majority 21
106 lololololololololololololololololololol
110 yes we’ve won!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I love yougov
Ipso-Mori central probabilistic forecast
Con 329
Lab 247
LD 32
Nats 20
Oth 3
NI 13 (SF abstain)
assumes average LD incumbency and 15% SNP rise…
Con majority 13
Can you bet on the number of by-elections in 2008? They seem to be rare as hens teeth these days. Obviously the strategy by Labour and the Tories of appointing 22 year old candidates everywhere seems to be working - in robbing the LibDems of their life blood (ie winning by-elections after the sitting eighty year old Bufton-Tufton type indulged in one too many Porterhouse Blues….)
The longer Hain tries to hand on the lower Nulab will go, wouldnt be suprised to see
113. We’ve won again. Easy this is!!
..less than 30% if he hangs on for a fortnight
114 Parliamentary by-elections, of course….
90/91 - see kingbongo’s sporting post, ptp - I missed the reference to the shadowy Mr Allbury in yours, probably one of those shy Labour donors
83 - is Kucinich the one who married a British lass? 5live interviewed a British girl last week who was the wife of a Democrat candidate
97/98 £30/20 was my recollection but I am happy to go with £20/10 if Nick prefers. It’s a charity bet so I don’t think either of us see it as a money making venture
(104 O/T - Thank you for your reply yesterday to my question about how your model correctly predicted the 1992 election, based on the by-elections since 1987.
Did you reach your conclusions about the average Con-Lab swing of around 5.6%, based on ALL the by-elections that took place in that period? If so, they would include such nonsenses as a 11.66% Lab-Con swing in Glasgow Govan (when the SNP took the seat from Labour, and the Tories polled a pitiful 7.6%). Ditto the 2% ’swing’ to the Tories in Glasgow Central!! Etc.
These ludicrous figures would thus dilute the impact of the very substantial Con-Lab swings in Mid Staffs (21%), Bradford North (15%), Vale of Glamorgan (12%), Monmouth (12.5%)which resulted in Labour gaining the seats, only be disappointed by losing most of them in 1992.
Or is the model based on other calculations?
119 HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
That YOUGOV poll is a real kick in the teeth. For the Tories to be back on 43% after Labour have had a reasonable Xmas period is an absolute disaster for Brown.
YouGov: ouch! (Er, I mean “Tory lead falls 3% from last month, poor Cameron”)
121: sure, 30/20 is fine. Boris wins=30, Ken wins=20.
It seems that more Gordon on the telly has the equivalent effect to more Dave, except its downwards for Gordo and vice versa for Dave!
125 - Nick, Why don’t you leap to Hain’s defence by stating the demonstrably obvious, namely that the PPF is actually the Progressive Pu$$ies Foundation and is merely a vehicle for you to collect on your varied feline-friendly wagers.
End of story.
Nick Palmer Your maths is surely better than Hain’s yet ………
127. Come the general election, will Brown have to go into hiding?
124 But it is Yougov and Yougov polls responses are heavily overrepresented by those from over 55 ABC1s . This was clearly demonstrated by the recent Ken/Boris poll . The sameple size of 995 should have had 220 over 55’s , the poll had 498 responses from this age group .
130 he always does when it matters!
131 no under 55s will be voting next time so that is the future of polling!
So LDs = 0 seats at next GE
PS how’s the housing in worthing?
127 Doesn’t look good for Gordon - especially when it comes to the thought of him fronting a general election campaign. After three weeks of seeing Gordon on the telly every night, even Nick Palmer might have doubts about the wisdom of voting Labour! Perhaps Brown could be replaced for three weeks by a fluffy glove puppet*?
(*To be called Gordon the Goofer, maybe?)
114 - In addition, governments are less likely to deliberately cause them by granting an MP a peerage or a senior public post of some sort. In the past, with elder sons inheriting, and MPs frequently being made judges, colonial governors or similar posts, you could rely on at least 10 in a non-election year, going down to 6-7 by the 1980s, and 1-2 now.
131. Mark why do you think that group is so over-represented in their polls? I’d have thought Yougov would be able to focus their polls better than that.
122. Why, thanks for pointing that out. I’ve tried to avoid filtering the data as much as possible, but if you must know, removing the two by-elections you mention from the dataset, INCREASES the predictive quality of the model in forecasting the 1992 election. It increases the 1987-92 Labour BE swing from 5.2% to 6.3%. Applying the 1950 baseline model predicts a 2.3% swing to Labour in 1992. Applying a 1974F baseline gives a figure of 2.1%, precisely what Labour obtained…
Your call!
re 74 and a 0.1% swing a whole 2% change in the lead.
131. lol Mark.
One thing on here makes me laugh. Last week the polls were down for the Tories which we predicted because polls always go down in holiday periods for us. We were shouted down and told this marks the end for Cameron. It turns out we may well have been right and suddenly we are told the polls are rogue now because too many people over 55 are surveyed!!
131. Its not far away from what we’ve seen from IPSOS/MORI. Whichever way you look at it, things really are bad for Labour now.
The position of the Lib-Dem’s is also looking increasingly dodgy. You would have expected more of a Bounce from Clegg. It looks to me like these polls are showing the public are basically shrugging their shoulders at Nick Clegg. Can’t blame them, really. Three leaders in two years will stretch the credibility of any party.
139 its always lol with mark.
Hope he is coming as entertainer on 25 january……
re 106 has Rinka gone down in the annals of LimDemmery, or do the callow youths on here have no idea of the pivotal part he played in Lib politics in the 70s?
139. Yes just like Peter Hitchens post on his blog, Armageddon was just around the corner…… To me it seems that New Labour are damned if they do, and damned if they dont, and I think thats a damned good thing too.
http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2007/12/tory-lead-colla.html
136 A further thought - does the opinion poll sampling take account of all those Torremolinos Tories who live abroad? How do they get contacted by MORI or YouGov or whoever (cuz sure as apples is apples they will still find a way to vote in their masses at the GE - they are still very much Brits).
136 Because their detailed data shows that it is usually by 15-20% , the Boris/Ken poll was overrepresented by an exceptionally high amount . I would hazard a guess that over 55’s respond to the surveys at a far higher rate than the other age group , perhaps because they have more time to do so .
140. Sorry, its actually 4 leaders in 2 years.
Kennedy - 2006.
Ming - 2006-2007.
Vince - 2007.
Clegg - 2007.
137 - OK, so now we add (or take away) Paisley North and South that showed pro Tory ’swings of 5.3% and 4.4%, Neath with 2.15 and Liverpool Walton with no swing. No what’s the outcome….?
Gordon’s latest “Popular” idea is to nationalise our bodies so that the NHS can harvest organs assuming consent - so lets get his NHS policy right. Anyone who doesn’t lead a good Presbyterian life will be refused treatment because they are sinners; if they die and haven’t destroyed their organs through their sinful vices and gluttony then these can be taken and used for the preservation of the Elect (Ok might be a bit emotive in choice of words there).
With Abraham’s Donorgate popping up at regular intervals, Peter Hain prolonging his agony and whizzbang ideas like that I’m sure Labour MPs are an overjoyed bunch.
121/126 Nick/Kingbongo
Right - 30/20 - that’s that sorted then.
Phew! Hope it’s not always going to be this hard work.
139 LOL Woody , remind us to which of the polls the result of last weeks Leics NW byelection indicates are correct .
144 If they have internet connection in Spain ,then Yougov can still contact them .
148. Ted, yeah, that sounds about right. Who the hell thinl they are to start depriivng health care from British citizens, I don’t know. If these barmy idea’s ever do come to fruition (personally I’ve got my doubts) and we start seeing people dying because the NHS is refusing them care, I think there will be a rapid clamour from the public to scrap the NHS…. Just think, Labour created it, and Labour end up destroying it!
148 Ted, I’m still running to catch up on DonorGate - and you are already pushing Organ Donorgate! Give us a chance….
148. Ted, yeah, that sounds about right. Who the hell do this government think they are to start depriving health care from British citizens? If these barmy idea’s ever do come to fruition (personally I’ve got my doubts) and we start seeing people dying because the NHS is refusing them care, I think there will be a rapid clamour from the public to scrap the NHS…. Just think, Labour created it, and Labour end up destroying it!
*reposted due to spelling*
142 - Who can tell, but we oldies must keep the flame alive. That noble, loyal, courageous but doomed Hound must never be forgotten.
147. I don’t think the Paisleys were anomalous. They took place the day after Thatcher left Downing Street, and correctly presaged the 1992 Scottish result…
Re by-elections. 1992 and 1998 are the only calendar years in history without a by-election, although there are a couple of other periods in excess of 365 days…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_by-election_records#Longest_period_without_a_by-election
150. Somehow I doubt the BNP will have 50 activists in every ward, The Lib dems will get away with 2 horse race, and the sitting MP will be knocking on every single come the general election. Reading too much into by elections is a bit of a mugs game punting wise. Like comparing all weather and turf horse racing form.
150 LOLOLOLOL. Who cares about bye elections only LDs.
We Cons look forward to the big one = Con overall majority
156 Not as big a mugs game as writing off real elections and only taking note of opinion polls 9 and then only the ones that suit you best .
I was born in 1980 but I know all about Rinka. That is in part due, though, to being brought up not far from where the noble hound met her end. And, indeed, meeting Norman Scot a couple of times (although I didnt bring Rinka up!).
158 lol think you are referring to me
Go back to your constituencies and prepare for (local) government!
Hows the worthing council housing strategy?
160 No I was referring to Woody , I usually ignore you Ave It LOL . Don’t know anything about Worthing council housing strategy .
140 re bounce for Clegg.
Is it a “dead parrot” bounce for the Lib Dems?
“he has gone to meet his maker…”
We should be told!
147. The outcome would be the opposition does WORSE than the model predicts, which is the important point. The outliers in the data, 1959, 1970, 1987 (and if you insist on massaging 1992) all had the Opposition doing WORSE than the model predicts. There are no outliers showing them doing much better (outside 1% better.)
150 Mark, there were 275,000 Brits registered as living in Spain at the end of 2005. Generally they’d be go-getters out to improve their quality of life or the elderly (both groups who’d be expected to be disprortionately Tory)- and maybe just a few villains (we’ll put them down as BNP!). Then there is France and Italy and Portugal - my guess being that Brits who have left but still consider themselves Brits and so want to vote in an election may be 600,000 - 750,000 by the next election.
With 27 million folks voting in 2005, this block could represent a sizeable vote (2-3% of all those who vote) lurking under the polling radar. Do you know if YouGov does make any attempts to specifically contact them?
155 - How so? In both the Tories also declined from a very low base to an even lower one. Of course they are anomalous on a UK overall basis.
The inescapable fact is that in UK Lab-Con competitive seats, Labour scored resounding by-election victories and gains from the Tories. They should have thus fared much better in 1992.
Theoretically YouGov could contact ex-pats who vote as overseas electors, but I don’t they do. I think they are excluded in all polls. British forces posted overseas are also missed out in polls and I’m sure there are various other groups people can think of who are missed out of most polls (people without land lines are normally missed out for starters!).
The question is whether those groups are large enough, vote in large enough numbers, and are different enough in their viewpoints for it to actually matter.
LD humour page:
161 ‘I usually ignore you Ave It LOL’