Politics
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 817 comments are related to the topic:
General election betting
General election betting
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 817
|
By:
I think you are mistaken with the prices. A conservative majority is 1/4. No overall majority is 5/1.
|
|
By:
As I don't want Labour under enemy of the state (JC) or a coalition with Tim but dim and wee Jimmy Cranky in charge (fu cking up) this country I've chucked a few quid at the situation hoping I lose which would be a good investment on my part. Bets as follows
Most seats laid the Tories for £23.90 with £251.62 to come if Labour etc win. Laid Conservative majority for £70........£356.96 no overall majority and £463.04 Labour majority. Next PM after election laid Theresa May for £20 with £284.30 if enemy of the state becomes PM. Labour over 218.5 seats backed overs for £20 to win £37.57 Few other bets on some more dislikes. Not much money about laid the Tories in Brighton Kempton for £40 with £70.47 if Labour/communist party (momentum) get in. Also had a few bob on Richmond Park, can't stand that Lib Dem MP |
|
By:
See anxious even in adversity us capitalists will always turn a few bob
 do hope I do lose though  |
|
By:
I haven't totalled all my election betting stabs recently but think I have got around 2.5K staked. A lot of it I have layed off.
|
|
By:
I'm not into that kind of money meadow as I want to lose, I hate Labour but not that much
|
|
By:
Meadow - apologies. Have a look at 'Size of Con maj'.
It's assuming Lab won't win so.. |
|
By:
Ipsos Mori
Con 45 (-4) Labour 40 (+6) LibDem 7 (nc) UKIP 2 (nc) Lead down to 5 from 15 Without weighting Labour are ahead 43-40. |
|
By:
Ipsos Mori
I found myself backing Corbyn for next PM yesterday and nobody was more surprised at that than myself, I also had conservative majority 1-25 both to very small money, about 10% of what I had on Trump and 5% of what I had on Brexit. The crucial thing for me was that Trump was about to pull out of Paris and I suspect that the anger that has generated across the political spectrum could be directed at May, who is seen proxy of Trump. This may not filter into polling in time for voting but you would expect it to further energise the normally apathetic yoof vote. |
|
By:
Good point and she is bound to be under pressure in the debate tonight on the subject. She is seen now as incredibly weak and Trumps lapdog. If the Tory party felt they could remove her before the election and get away with it they would do so.
She has the anti-Midas touch. |
|
By:
If the Tories get home with a similar majority to that which they started the campaign, Teresa could be for the high jump so anybody intending to take a position right into the election would be better off (pardon the expression) laying her, instead of backing Corbyn. She better start praying that iceberg thingy that some calculate may even be bigger than Wales and nearly the size of her arse, doesn't break off Antarctica before the vote.
|
|
By:
opinion..
Con 43 (-2) Labour 37 (+2) LibDem 6 (-2) UKIP 4 (-1) Lead down to 6 from 10. |
|
By:
'Prime Minister after election' is interesting imo
If The Tories are the largest party but fall short of a majority then surely neither May or Corbyn will emerge as PM The sole purpose of the election was May stating that she requires a larger majority to lead Brexit, and if , due to her own action in calling the election and basically losing it , they have a smaller number of MPs , then i'd have thought she will have to resign . |
|
By:
Comres
Con 47 (+1) Labour 35 (+1) Libdem 8 (nc) UKIP 4 (nc) Lead stays at 12. Remember Comres (and ICM) nave polling methodology that greatly favours the Tories. |
|
By:
|
|
By:
Her days have always been numbered,a complete disaster..
|
|
By:
would think 50 majority is the bare minimum to justify having the election. unlike labour tories aren't slow to get rid of the leader if it's clear they aren't up to it
|
|
By:
Survation...
CON: 40% (-6) LAB: 39% (+5) LDEM: 8% (-) UKIP: 5% (+2) Lead cut to 1 from 12. |
|
By:
rock piper
02 Jun 17 16:27 Joined: 16 May 02 | Topic/replies: 212 | Blogger: rock piper's blog If the Tories get home with a similar majority to that which they started the campaign, Teresa could be for the high jump so anybody intending to take a position right into the election would be better off (pardon the expression) laying her, instead of backing Corbyn. She better start praying that iceberg thingy that some calculate may even be bigger than Wales and nearly the size of her arse, doesn't break off Antarctica before the vote. ... Just shows how uneducated the public are on this whole climate change situation. According to NASA: https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/nasa-study-mass-gains-of-antarctic-ice-sheet-greater-than-losses the Antarctic ice sheet showed a net gain of 112 billion tons of ice a year from 1992 to 2001. That net gain slowed to 82 billion tons of ice per year between 2003 and 2008. This is all during the time we are supposed to all be paying hundreds of pounds a year in green levies because we are told the icecaps are melting! Why do people who claim to be 'educated' believe this whole ice cap is melting and it is all our fault nonsense? Just because it is politically correct I guess. |
|
By:
the earth is getting hotter
i think it has been hotter in the past ! is it our fault ? maybe, maybe not, do greenhouse gasses cause warming, are they neutral, or cooling? they cause warming ! |
|
By:
Being an ex computer programmer this requires a truth table
The World is warming - It's NOT our fault - we do nothing - NO Problem The World is warming - It's IS our fault - we do nothing - We're Fooked The World is NOT warming - It's NOT our fault - we do nothing - NO problemn The World is NOT warming - It's IS our fault - we do nothing - NO Problemn The World is warming - It's NOT our fault - we do something - NO Problem The World is warming - It's IS our fault - we do something - Maybe our Grandchildren are OK The World is NOT warming - It's NOT our fault - we do something - NO problemn The World is NOT warming - It's IS our fault - we do something - NO Problemn We have two choices - Do Nothing - or - Do something. If we do nothing there is a risk that "we're fooked". If we do something there is a chance that we're "not fooked" For me it's a no brainer |
|
By:
Can you put some probabilities or those options Martin?
|
|
By:
Yes of course I can - they're all my percentages of course - yours might be different
The World is warming - 75% - It's NOT our fault - 40% - we do nothing - 50% - NO Problem - 15% The World is warming - 75% - It's IS our fault - 60% - we do nothing - 50% - We're Fooked - 22.5% The World is NOT warming - 25% - It's NOT our fault - 40% - we do nothing - 50% - NO problem - 5% The World is NOT warming - 25%- It's IS our fault - 60% - we do nothing - 50% - NO Problem - 5% The World is warming - 75%- It's NOT our fault - 40% - we do something - 50% - NO Problem - 15% The World is warming - 75%- It's IS our fault - 60% - we do something - 50% - Maybe our Grandchildren are OK - 22.5% The World is NOT warming - 25%- It's NOT our fault - 40% - we do something - 50% - NO problem - 5% The World is NOT warming - 25%- It's IS our fault - 60% - we do something - 50% - NO Problem - 5% |
|
By:
Tw0 of the 5% should be 7.5% - hence the missing 5% from the above calcs!
|
|
By:
No science behind your conclusions Martin.
Remember when they claimed CFC's were causing a hole in the Ozone layer? Well we stopped using CFCs decades ago and the hole is still growing. All the predictions far for global warning have not come true. The science behind the link between CO2 and massive heating of the earth are unproven. The only thing we know for certain that 1000s of old people die from cold as they cannot heat their houses due to the Green levy we are all being charged. |
|
By:
there is plenty of science should you choose to read it.
1000s more will die if winter heating allowance is withdrawn by may |
|
By:
Whether or not we are causing global warming, we are certainly polluting the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels and sooner or later we will run out of it so another way to produce energy will be required. What I find crazy is the use of good agricultural land for solar farms when there are enough roofs on warehouses and factories, brownfield sites, barren heathland etc. to satisfy the demand without decimating our ability to feed ourselves without ever increasing food imports and using fossil fuel to bring it here. There is a big fuss about reducing the subsidy for solar farms but I think it should only be paid for panels sited on non-agricultural land. It is bizarre that a farmer can make more money by leasing land to a solar farm than by producing food and then we import the food from 2000 miles away.
|
|
By:
There are two types of climate change denier, those with a bolthole ranch in New Zealand and those without. Anybody want to price up a market whether InsiderTrader belongs to the former or latter group.
Meanwhile back in the world of people interested in betting, any opinions on the GE? |
|
By:
There are two types of climate change denier, those with a bolt hole ranch in New Zealand and those without, which group do you think Insider Trader belongs to? Hint, the first group do not constantly derail betting threads with various stupidities they imagine to be opinions.
|
|
By:
The thing about polls is they are a tiny snapshot--- and guesswork.
votes count and it will be a Tory win and majority number of seats who can tell--that's all guesswork as well. |
|
By:
Last night I counted up how much I have laid out so far betting on the results. It's £5411 so far. I hope I've got one or two correct!
|
|
By:
Big amount --but you layed some off so less risk?? I Hope.
how many seats will SNP win? ta |
|
By:
Interesting read here from Nate Silvah, https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/are-the-u-k-polls-skewed/
|
|
By:
The Yougov experimental rolling poll of some 53,000 voters has been updated.
They updated 8,000 of the 53,000 votes so it would take a full 7 days to roll over the sample, so there's no surprise that there is no change (they should have it to two decimal ... say ... 41.84 and 38.2). But the number of forecast seats have changed. It was Tory 308 Lab 261, and now it's Tory 305 Lab 268. This could still be fantasy polling (ICM still give the Tories an 11% lead), but it moving in Labour's direction. |
|
By:
Thanks for the https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/are-the-u-k-polls-skewed/ link. There was an excellent comment which essentially said we shouldn't be looking at the average, but at the extremes. Here it is -
My only doubt is about your very last observation: you suggest we focus on the average of recent polls. (An average of recent polls gives a 7% or so lead for Conservative over Labour as individual polls give leads between 1% and 12%.) But is focusing on the average appropriate here? Consider: the divergence between polls is not due to typical variations in polling samples. If this were so, we might expect Ipsos MORI to give the highest lead one week but then one of the lower leads the next week; we might expect Yougov to show one of the lower leads and then, when it next polls, to be give, perhaps, the highest polling lead for the Conservatives. But that’s not what we see. One pollster gives a consistently higher lead; another produces a consistently lower lead. The divergence, then, is due, as you have explained, to systemic differences in the pollsters’ models. Averaging only makes sense if we imagine that models are like populations: the bigger they are (in the case of populations) and the more we have (in the case of models) the more accurate the average. Or to put it another way, averaging of the results from different models only makes sense if we have reasons to believe that each pollster has, essentially, an equal likelihood of hitting on the perfect model – and that when a pollster’s model diverges from our imagined perfect model that that divergence is as likely to be too generous to the Conservatives as too parsimonious. But, given that models are not like populations, it may be that all the models being used by polling companies are too generous to Conservative or too generous to Labour. Or, it may be that one company has found the right model and others haven’t. My humble suggestion for the appropriate conclusion to draw from your brilliant analysis is this. On the basis of available polling information, we simply do not know which pollster to credit with the better model. An average of recent polls (a poll of polls, if you like) is no better a guide to current voting intentions than any individual poll. (Of course, it is possible that the Conservatives will end up with a 7% lead but the average is not a predictor of that.) It is just as likely that one pollster is right – so that the actual election produces a 1% lead for the Conservatives or, if a different pollster is right, a 12% lead (subject of course to polling margins of error) – as it is that all the pollsters err from the perfect model and that the average of the polls just happens to give the same lead as would be produced by the perfect model. Going with a pollster who predicts that the Conservatives will end up with only the smallest of leads is just as sensible as believing that the Tories will end up with an (“average”) 7% lead. |
|
By:
Excellent Martin. I presume also that even though the highest prediction has gone down; 20 to 12; we could still get the same landslide.
However the bookies odds represent a very large sample of sentiment sqewed to middle aged males who will have heard a lot from millions of people. AS the consensus is Corbyn 7/2 I will be very very very surprise if its a landslide. IMO 7/2 says Corbyn has a definite chance of being the next PM. Also in the light of flag waving law and order terror and other right wing strong holds and appealing to middle aged male minds it is amazing that his odds continue to come in. |
|
By:
Or there could just be a bit of laying off on Labour of course, nothing to do with the polls, and everything to do with having a win/win election?
|
|
By:
The polls were miles out last time and over estimated labours vote as per usual,just seems like common sense they win by 7-8% there's even a possibility it could be a landslide yet if anything like the previous election..
 7-8% for me.. |
|
By:
A majority of 12 was hardly a landslide , in 2010 it was a hung parliament
|
|
By:
I think the biggest problem with taking an average poll as an indicator is that the population of polls in the UK elections is too small, the more information feeds into a market, the more efficient it is.
|