Escapee • August 7, 2026 4:47 PM BST
Back to gambling talk


In 2024 Farage got 21,225 of the 45,958 votes.

Of those 24,733 people who didn't vote for Farage, how many will be motivated to vote against him next week?

In recent by-elections, turnout has increased vs general election.
This time is a complete unknown, it's assumed it will drop, but if it doesn't then an upset is possible.

I can't see turnout going up as in other recent by elections. How far down it goes is a toughie. No matter the response that Farage may be receiving on Clacton doorsteps, how motivated are folks to actually go to the ballot box to support him? He strictly should win by a mile but apathy may encroach if the result is in the bag.

There is precedent for it of course, parties with MPs never run against the speaker. But that is in a general election.

I fail to see what circumstances you wouldn't throw everything into an election you called yourself. What's the counterfactual, Farage not using resources at his disposal, then his haters would accuse him of taking his constituents for granted. It's well well worn now, but whatever Farage, Reform or Reform MPs do will be spun against them by the establishment. Hence you get a scenario like Badenoch getting into bed with Restore. Enough people can see it, and those that can't wouldn't vote for them anyway.

Is anyone thinking Farage will increase his vote from 21,000 last time?


Turnout is key, Previous turn out was 46k (58%)

If turnout drops to 30k what would the best result for Farage look like? 20k Farage 8k Binface?

Drops to 25k?

If I'm reading polymarket correctly you can

Buy Yes Farage 80%+ for 15c i.e. back Farage80+% at 6.6
Buy No Binface 10-20% for 56c i.e back Binface doesn't get 10-20% at 1.78

This will payout if the 1 or 2% of turnout who don't vote for either doesn't stradle the 80% (I think they call this sort of play a stradle in options)

Seems like a good bet, am I missing something?


Total £100 stake:
£21.24 at 6.6 returns £140.18 net profit £40.18
£78.76 at 1.78 returns £140.18 net profit £40.18

On that Survation poll there was 7% not voting for either, 2% voting for reclaim and 5% for 'other'.

The prices work out almost the same on here if you dutch the necessary brackets. Of the few markets I've seen, Poly has been sharper with Betfair following, Makerfield, Manchester Mayor, Clacton, or maybe they just back favourites more and earlier.

GB Politics
@GBPolitcs
EXCLUSIVE: Nigel Farage’s campaign in Clacton has received over 20,000 positive responses on the doorstep, according to internal party data

Count Binface has secured more than 4,500 pledges of support, while Laurence Fox and Kai Stephens have together received a combined total of 450 pledges
8:41 PM · Aug 7, 2026
·
39.1K
Views

Anyone care to suggest what the difference is between "positive responses" and "pledges of support"?

I was mulling over those figures released regarding Reform internal data of doorstep results.

Reform 20,000 positive responses
Count Binface 4500 pledges
Fox/Stephens 450 pledges
The rest negligible

Assuming this is roughly correct, in that "positive responses" means pledges,

Share of the vote..

Reform 80%
Count Binface 18%
Others 2%

However, suppose Reform "positive responses" means roughly three quarters pledges (ie 15000 votes), that equates to...

Reform 75%
Count Binface 22.5%
Others 2.5%

Both outcomes seem plausible.

Quite possibly. "Internal" polls are released/leaked for reasons, most of them not completely honest.

Closing stations and lines

In the early days of British railways, private companies constructed lines wherever there was potential for profit, even if it meant building parallel routes between the same locations. By the early 20th century, around 120 different companies were operating across the country.

During World War I, the British government took control of the railways to better coordinate transport of the war effort. After the war, the government aimed to preserve the efficiencies gained but stopped short of full nationalisation. Instead, it introduced the Railways Act of 1921, which led to ‘the grouping’ in 1923 - a major reorganisation that merged over 100 railway companies into four large regional operators. These became known as the ‘Big Four’: Southern Railway (SR), London, Midland and Scottish Railway (LMS), London and North Eastern Railway (lNER) and Great Western Railway (GWR).

While the railways were consolidating, road transport was on the rise. Government investment increasingly focused on expanding road infrastructure, which drew passengers and freight away from the railways. Faced with declining demand and growing competition, rail companies began closing the least-used lines. Between 1923 and 1939 almost 1,300 miles of track were shut down.

Nationalisation

In 1948, the Labour government nationalised the railways, creating the British Transport Commission to review the network. Their aim was to streamline operations and reduce costs by closing underused routes. Between 1948 and 1962, 3,318 miles of railway closed to passengers.

This wave of closures sparked protests, led by the Railway Development Association. Among its supporters was poet and broadcaster John Betjeman, who became a passionate voice for preserving Britain’s rail heritage.

The Beeching Axe

In the early 1960s, the Conservative government appointed Dr Richard Beeching as Chairman of the British Railways Board. His report, The Reshaping of British Railways, called for the closure of over 2,300 stations and 5,000 miles of track.

These proposals were met with opposition from communities unions and even Labour opposition. However, when Labour regained power in 1964, little was done to reverse the cuts.

Traces from the past

By the mid-1970s, vast stretches of railway line lay abandoned across the country. Some tracks were dismantled for scrap, while stations were converted into homes, and farmers brought up sections of railway land. Bridges and tunnels, however, stood as a quiet reminder of a once-thriving network. Today, the outline of these old lines can be seen in footpaths, cycle routes, and winding rural roads - traces of a railway that once spread across nearly every corner of the country.

It didn't just (almost) stop immigration from Europe, especially east Europe EU, hundreds of thousands could no longer stay and went home. This lead to serious labour shortages, in the building industry particularly, and many of the lost jobs were skilled. These problems lasted many years and are not actually resolved yet - many industries, again in the building industry especially, have to make do with less.

What on earth are you talking out. No EU citizens were forced to go home.

I'm being moderately rude as I know you very well, and here you are just making stuff up. The question is, why?

Its a complete fallacy that EU workers that were here were forced to return home.


A year ago under the settlement scheme there were 4.2 million that had settled status granted and 2.9 million with pre settled status (many of whom were soon upgraded to settled status).

On Hols Donnie  ?

Statistics. East Of England, England, Clacton & Jaywick. As long as the narrative suits. Poor.

The other narrative is it is only johnny foreigner who gets and claims all this 'stuff'.

Besides, excellent thread and a credit to all.

Richer nations are much more generous

-

What income supports can asylum seekers get?

International protection applicants (also known as asylum seekers) living in direct provision can get a Daily Expenses Allowance (DEA).

You can also apply for an Additional Needs Payment, if you have essential needs that you cannot pay for from your weekly DEA payment. For example, you might get help to buy school uniforms for your children.

If you have children and you have permission to work and are in employment, you may qualify for a Working Family Payment.

You cannot get other social welfare payments such as Disability Allowance, One-Parent Family Payment or Jobseeker’s Allowance.

What is the Daily Expenses Allowance?

The Daily Expenses Allowance (DEA), is a weekly social welfare payment paid to asylum seekers living in direct provision. It is paid by the Department of Social Protection.

To get the DEA, your income must be under a certain amount – see ‘DEA income test’ below.

The maximum DEA weekly rate in 2025 is:

€38.80 for each adult
€29.80 for each child

If IPAS is unable to provide you with accommodation, you will get a temporary increase of €75 in your DEA. This means your DEA will increase from €38.80 a week to €113.80 a week.

We are wasting 0.4% of our total government expenditure on migrants,this 0.4%% is bankrupting the country,farage knows this has to stop,it can’t go on,the clever and well informed people of jaywick know this,they think it’s disgusting that these people sit around all day waiting for free hand outs,the hard working people of Clacton will vote to stop these benefits.even if it means all benefits are abolished,

Comingupthehill 9.47.  I had to read that a few times, take a bow man.

Yes cuth, 0.4% sounds such a paltry figure doesn't it .

But even if correct, it still equates to about £5 billion.  Not so paltry when you put it like that. Especially if you have to add on the factors Cider mentions.