|
|
Post by WestCountryRadical on Jun 20, 2022 9:59:16 GMT
It's disingenuous bullshit and I fucking hate it. The Lib Dems are strong favourites to win and have been for some time. When you're a favourite, playing a 'plucky underdog' line is either a deliberate lie or abject stupidity. It's not just the LDs who are guilty of this. Chapter 16 of my forthcoming book about probability and luck goes into some detail about how Michael Gove was a massive cunt in this regard.
The LibDems are not, and never have been, strong favourites here - this is just bullshit of your own. Some objectivity would be useful here from both sides - Winning here would require the LibDems to overturn the largest majority ever in a UK by-election, in a campaign that the Tories are actually taking seriously for once (unlike North Shropshire or C&A) and also unlike Nth Shropshire a substantial minority of local voters seem to have some sympathy with the previous incumbent. Conversely, the Tories are in quite a mess (although better than six weeks ago), the LibDems are excellent in by-elections and have a history of upsets, and a chance to kick the governing party is seldom neglected by the British electorate. IMHO, putting aside party affiliations, the most likely outcome is a small (0-5%) Tory win, and I have placed a small wager accordingly... Any LibDem win is a triumph for them; that is undisputable. Any hold is a success for the Tories, and a hold by more than 5% is something for them to brag about IMHO. Considering the anger over partygate, concerns about inflation and the cost of living, the Tories' weak position in national polling, the circumstances of the by-election, a Tory candidate who is not particularly impressive, a typically intense Lib Dem campaign, and their two spectacular gains last year, it is not at all unreasonable to make the Lib Dems the favourites It's an ideal chance for anyone who is dissatisfied to give the government a good kicking, and many solid Tories will just not vote at all, further enhancing the Lib Dem performance. However, having vented their anger, more normal voting habits will resume, and if the boundary changes go ahead I think it's extremely unlikely the Lib Dems could win either of the successor constituencies to this one. |
|
Merseymike
Independent
Posts: 40,226
Member is Online
|
Post by Merseymike on Jun 20, 2022 10:21:14 GMT
The LibDems are not, and never have been, strong favourites here - this is just bullshit of your own. Some objectivity would be useful here from both sides - Winning here would require the LibDems to overturn the largest majority ever in a UK by-election, in a campaign that the Tories are actually taking seriously for once (unlike North Shropshire or C&A) and also unlike Nth Shropshire a substantial minority of local voters seem to have some sympathy with the previous incumbent. Conversely, the Tories are in quite a mess (although better than six weeks ago), the LibDems are excellent in by-elections and have a history of upsets, and a chance to kick the governing party is seldom neglected by the British electorate. IMHO, putting aside party affiliations, the most likely outcome is a small (0-5%) Tory win, and I have placed a small wager accordingly... Any LibDem win is a triumph for them; that is undisputable. Any hold is a success for the Tories, and a hold by more than 5% is something for them to brag about IMHO. Considering the anger over partygate, concerns about inflation and the cost of living, the Tories' weak position in national polling, the circumstances of the by-election, a Tory candidate who is not particularly impressive, a typically intense Lib Dem campaign, and their two spectacular gains last year, it is not at all unreasonable to make the Lib Dems the favourites It's an ideal chance for anyone who is dissatisfied to give the government a good kicking, and many solid Tories will just not vote at all, further enhancing the Lib Dem performance. However, having vented their anger, more normal voting habits will resume, and if the boundary changes go ahead I think it's extremely unlikely the Lib Dems could win either of the successor constituencies to this one. This is a seat where the LibDems came close but have never succeeded in the past, even when the west was a favourable area for them - I suppose to hold the seat this situation would need to return at a time when the Conservatives dipped in popularity. The problem is that we are really going on what the parties themselves are saying, and journalistic vox pops, as there have been no polls at all, so there is bound to be spin placed on party estimates or public statements. |
|
ricmk
Lib Dem
Posts: 2,592 
|
Post by ricmk on Jun 20, 2022 10:29:52 GMT
The LibDems are not, and never have been, strong favourites here - this is just bullshit of your own. Some objectivity would be useful here from both sides - Winning here would require the LibDems to overturn the largest majority ever in a UK by-election, in a campaign that the Tories are actually taking seriously for once (unlike North Shropshire or C&A) and also unlike Nth Shropshire a substantial minority of local voters seem to have some sympathy with the previous incumbent. Conversely, the Tories are in quite a mess (although better than six weeks ago), the LibDems are excellent in by-elections and have a history of upsets, and a chance to kick the governing party is seldom neglected by the British electorate. IMHO, putting aside party affiliations, the most likely outcome is a small (0-5%) Tory win, and I have placed a small wager accordingly... Any LibDem win is a triumph for them; that is undisputable. Any hold is a success for the Tories, and a hold by more than 5% is something for them to brag about IMHO. Considering the anger over partygate, concerns about inflation and the cost of living, the Tories' weak position in national polling, the circumstances of the by-election, a Tory candidate who is not particularly impressive, a typically intense Lib Dem campaign, and their two spectacular gains last year, it is not at all unreasonable to make the Lib Dems the favourites It's an ideal chance for anyone who is dissatisfied to give the government a good kicking, and many solid Tories will just not vote at all, further enhancing the Lib Dem performance. However, having vented their anger, more normal voting habits will resume, and if the boundary changes go ahead I think it's extremely unlikely the Lib Dems could win either of the successor constituencies to this one. That feels about right to me. The other issue about holding the seat at the next General Election is that it's surrounded by a number of better prospects. Right now, activists are flooding in from the whole country. But in a General Election would you really take people out of North Devon, Somerton and Frome, Taunton, Wells etc. into Tiverton and Honiton? I can't see it myself. It's one reason I think a Lib Dem hold in North Shropshire at the GE is underpriced; a by-election pickup that would never have been targetted in general elections, but now it's been won it's a long way from existing Lib Dem held/target seats so may well be able to attract a greater number of activists in a General Election. Especially if Montgomeryshire seen as a worse prospect. |
|
graham
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,317
|
Post by graham on Jun 20, 2022 10:32:37 GMT
It's disingenuous bullshit and I fucking hate it.
The Lib Dems are strong favourites to win and have been for some time. When you're a favourite, playing a 'plucky underdog' line is either a deliberate lie or abject stupidity.
It's not just the LDs who are guilty of this. Chapter 16 of my forthcoming book about probability and luck goes into some detail about how Michael Gove was a massive cunt in this regard.
The LibDems are not, and never have been, strong favourites here - this is just bullshit of your own. Some objectivity would be useful here from both sides - Winning here would require the LibDems to overturn the largest majority ever in a UK by-election, in a campaign that the Tories are actually taking seriously for once (unlike North Shropshire or C&A) and also unlike Nth Shropshire a substantial minority of local voters seem to have some sympathy with the previous incumbent. Conversely, the Tories are in quite a mess (although better than six weeks ago), the LibDems are excellent in by-elections and have a history of upsets, and a chance to kick the governing party is seldom neglected by the British electorate. IMHO, putting aside party affiliations, the most likely outcome is a small (0-5%) Tory win, and I have placed a small wager accordingly... Any LibDem win is a triumph for them; that is undisputable. Any hold is a success for the Tories, and a hold by more than 5% is something for them to brag about IMHO. But the swing required is well below what the LDs achieved in Shropshire North, Chesham & Amersham - and in earlier by-elections such as Christchurch- Newbury - Sutton & Cheam - and Orpington. The party also came within 1,700 votes of winning here in 1997. |
|
|
|
Post by olympian95 on Jun 20, 2022 10:33:42 GMT
Have just spent the weekend in Devon - a quite astonishing poster/stakeboard display from the Lib Dems in Seaton on the coast. Not a single Tory board up in that town. Driving along some motorways and farmers fields, we saw a smattering of Tory boards but more LD ones. It was certainly a surprise to see Lib Dem signs up in so many farmers fields.
|
|
andrewp
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,511
Member is Online
|
Post by andrewp on Jun 20, 2022 10:56:34 GMT
Considering the anger over partygate, concerns about inflation and the cost of living, the Tories' weak position in national polling, the circumstances of the by-election, a Tory candidate who is not particularly impressive, a typically intense Lib Dem campaign, and their two spectacular gains last year, it is not at all unreasonable to make the Lib Dems the favourites It's an ideal chance for anyone who is dissatisfied to give the government a good kicking, and many solid Tories will just not vote at all, further enhancing the Lib Dem performance. However, having vented their anger, more normal voting habits will resume, and if the boundary changes go ahead I think it's extremely unlikely the Lib Dems could win either of the successor constituencies to this one. That feels about right to me. The other issue about holding the seat at the next General Election is that it's surrounded by a number of better prospects. Right now, activists are flooding in from the whole country. But in a General Election would you really take people out of North Devon, Somerton and Frome, Taunton, Wells etc. into Tiverton and Honiton? I can't see it myself. It's one reason I think a Lib Dem hold in North Shropshire at the GE is underpriced; a by-election pickup that would never have been targetted in general elections, but now it's been won it's a long way from existing Lib Dem held/target seats so may well be able to attract a greater number of activists in a General Election. Especially if Montgomeryshire seen as a worse prospect. My local Lib Dem councillor in Taunton posted a picture of himself door knocking in Cullompton at the weekend. He presumably won’t be doing that in 2024 even if it is a Lib Dem defence. As you say I don’t think the Tories would be disappointed if the Lib Dems focussed on Tiverton and Honiton rather than Taunton. |
|
graham
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,317
|
Post by graham on Jun 20, 2022 11:03:29 GMT
That feels about right to me. The other issue about holding the seat at the next General Election is that it's surrounded by a number of better prospects. Right now, activists are flooding in from the whole country. But in a General Election would you really take people out of North Devon, Somerton and Frome, Taunton, Wells etc. into Tiverton and Honiton? I can't see it myself. It's one reason I think a Lib Dem hold in North Shropshire at the GE is underpriced; a by-election pickup that would never have been targetted in general elections, but now it's been won it's a long way from existing Lib Dem held/target seats so may well be able to attract a greater number of activists in a General Election. Especially if Montgomeryshire seen as a worse prospect. My local Lib Dem councillor in Taunton posted a picture of himself door knocking in Cullompton at the weekend. He presumably won’t be doing that in 2024 even if it is a Lib Dem defence. As you say I don’t think the Tories would be disappointed if the Lib Dems focussed on Tiverton and Honiton rather than Taunton. Th3 1997 result here might give the LDs some hope of surviving here with the help of a first term incumbency bonus. |
|
bsjmcr
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,590
|
Post by bsjmcr on Jun 20, 2022 12:02:08 GMT
. It was certainly a surprise to see Lib Dem signs up in so many farmers fields. That must be Parish’s personal vote melting away right there… |
|
sirbenjamin
IFP
True fame is reading your name written in graffiti, but without the words 'is a wanker' after it.
Posts: 4,979
|
Post by sirbenjamin on Jun 20, 2022 12:14:44 GMT
It's disingenuous bullshit and I fucking hate it.
The Lib Dems are strong favourites to win and have been for some time. When you're a favourite, playing a 'plucky underdog' line is either a deliberate lie or abject stupidity.
It's not just the LDs who are guilty of this. Chapter 16 of my forthcoming book about probability and luck goes into some detail about how Michael Gove was a massive cunt in this regard.
The LibDems are not, and never have been, strong favourites here - this is just bullshit of your own.
They are 1.31 on Betfair. Heavily odds-on.
|
|
|
|
Post by tonyhill on Jun 20, 2022 12:28:12 GMT
See my point previously about people betting on things they don't understand. The actual probability of the LibDems winning is not determined by people putting money on it but on a myriad of other factors which the campaigners on the ground are more likely to be in a position to assess than punters, or come to that yourself, so that it is not necessarily disingenuous bullshit, a deliberate lie, or abject stupidity.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ron Swanson on Jun 20, 2022 12:59:35 GMT
Weren't Brexit 1.01 to win when the polls closed in Peterborough?
I wish I'd have gone on Betfair and laid a tenner against them... would have had £500 back whether Labour or the Tories won, laying at 1.02.
|
|
|
|
Post by kevinf on Jun 20, 2022 13:08:02 GMT
. It was certainly a surprise to see Lib Dem signs up in so many farmers fields. That must be Parish’s personal vote melting away right there… Also, and I’m sure you’re right in this case, but sometimes it’s just one or two farmers with lots of fields! |
|
peterl
Green
Monarchic Technocratic Localist
Posts: 8,466
|
Post by peterl on Jun 20, 2022 13:17:46 GMT
At least at the next election, the Lib Dems can make a barchart of the respective number of signs up in farmer's fields.
|
|
nodealbrexiteer
Forum Regular
non aligned favour no deal brexit!
Posts: 4,411
|
Post by nodealbrexiteer on Jun 20, 2022 14:51:26 GMT
Why can't they be narrowly behind at the same point in each by-election they fight seriously? The last week is clearly critical in applying a squeeze message to the wavering supporters of other opposition parties. Just because the LibDems have been successful in persuading Labour and Green voters in the final week to support them doesn't mean that a two percent deficit at this point is 'bullshit'.
It's disingenuous bullshit and I fucking hate it.
The Lib Dems are strong favourites to win and have been for some time. When you're a favourite, playing a 'plucky underdog' line is either a deliberate lie or abject stupidity.
It's not just the LDs who are guilty of this. Chapter 16 of my forthcoming book about probability and luck goes into some detail about how Michael Gove was a massive cunt in this regard.
this made me laugh out loud |
|
batman
Labour
Posts: 12,097
Member is Online
|
Post by batman on Jun 20, 2022 16:14:26 GMT
It's disingenuous bullshit and I fucking hate it.
The Lib Dems are strong favourites to win and have been for some time. When you're a favourite, playing a 'plucky underdog' line is either a deliberate lie or abject stupidity.
It's not just the LDs who are guilty of this. Chapter 16 of my forthcoming book about probability and luck goes into some detail about how Michael Gove was a massive cunt in this regard.
The LibDems are not, and never have been, strong favourites here - this is just bullshit of your own. Some objectivity would be useful here from both sides - Winning here would require the LibDems to overturn the largest majority ever in a UK by-election, in a campaign that the Tories are actually taking seriously for once (unlike North Shropshire or C&A) and also unlike Nth Shropshire a substantial minority of local voters seem to have some sympathy with the previous incumbent. Conversely, the Tories are in quite a mess (although better than six weeks ago), the LibDems are excellent in by-elections and have a history of upsets, and a chance to kick the governing party is seldom neglected by thethe British electorate. IMHO, putting aside party affiliations, the most likely outcome is a small (0-5%) Tory win, and I have placed a small wager accordingly... Any LibDem win is a triumph for them; that is undisputable. Any hold is a success for the Tories, and a hold by more than 5% is something for them to brag about IMHO. the bookmakers have found otherwise. Come on orange team, this is getting silly now. |
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Jun 20, 2022 16:25:56 GMT
The LibDems are not, and never have been, strong favourites here - this is just bullshit of your own. Some objectivity would be useful here from both sides - Winning here would require the LibDems to overturn the largest majority ever in a UK by-election, in a campaign that the Tories are actually taking seriously for once (unlike North Shropshire or C&A) and also unlike Nth Shropshire a substantial minority of local voters seem to have some sympathy with the previous incumbent. Conversely, the Tories are in quite a mess (although better than six weeks ago), the LibDems are excellent in by-elections and have a history of upsets, and a chance to kick the governing party is seldom neglected by thethe British electorate. IMHO, putting aside party affiliations, the most likely outcome is a small (0-5%) Tory win, and I have placed a small wager accordingly... Any LibDem win is a triumph for them; that is undisputable. Any hold is a success for the Tories, and a hold by more than 5% is something for them to brag about IMHO. the bookmakers have found otherwise. Come on orange team, this is getting silly now. It's a valid point that bookmakers' odds reflect the money bet, rather than the actual odds. I honestly don't know whether to expect a Lib Dem win or a Tory one, but I wouldn't trust the bookies to tell me.
|
|
johnloony
Conservative
Posts: 24,277
Member is Online
|
Post by johnloony on Jun 20, 2022 16:32:29 GMT
the bookmakers have found otherwise. Come on orange team, this is getting silly now. It's a valid point that bookmakers' odds reflect the money bet, rather than the actual odds. I honestly don't know whether to expect a Lib Dem win or a Tory one, but I wouldn't trust the bookies to tell me.
But Shirley the “actual odds” are determined by the money bet, which is the whole point (i.e. that the bookmaker aims to win a slight profit). Presumably what you meant was “…rather than the actual probabilities of winning”. |
|
|
|
Post by aargauer on Jun 20, 2022 16:36:59 GMT
When's the last time the bookies favourite (on Election Day) didn't win a by election?
|
|
0oh
Non-Aligned
Posts: 130
|
Post by 0oh on Jun 20, 2022 16:52:08 GMT
When's the last time the bookies favourite (on Election Day) didn't win a by election? Chesham and Amersham? |
|
sirbenjamin
IFP
True fame is reading your name written in graffiti, but without the words 'is a wanker' after it.
Posts: 4,979
|
Post by sirbenjamin on Jun 20, 2022 16:56:14 GMT
It's disingenuous bullshit and I fucking hate it.
The Lib Dems are strong favourites to win and have been for some time. When you're a favourite, playing a 'plucky underdog' line is either a deliberate lie or abject stupidity.
It's not just the LDs who are guilty of this. Chapter 16 of my forthcoming book about probability and luck goes into some detail about how Michael Gove was a massive cunt in this regard.
this made me laugh out loud
This is the extract in question.
In 2019 when Conservative politician Michael Gove stood to be leader of the party, and by extension, Prime Minister of the UK, a story emerged in the news that Gove had taken cocaine on several occasions in his youth. Cue the predictable media furore.
The prevailing view may change in the future, but this is still considered something of a minor scandal. There is a fairly mainstream view that taking drugs is bad, that people who do so might not be the best of characters, and that politicians who do something illegal must be hypocrites of the highest order – regardless of their personal views on specific laws or whether they were actually involved in making them.
Meat and drink for the newspapers, of course. But that’s not what this is about.
Now, personally I don’t care what politicians get up to in their personal lives and take a far more Libertarian view on drugs than most, in that I don’t believe consumption should be illegal at all. So while Mr. Gove’s snorting habits are unlikely to trouble me, I do have a really hard time getting behind politicians who are disingenuous about (or ignorant of) the concept of probability.
And in his confess-everything-the-day-before-the-tabloids-were-going-to-reveal-it speech, Mr. Gove revealed that ‘he had been fortunate to avoid jail’ for snorting coke.
OK, you can fuck right off now, Michael. This is where you lost me.
It’s not ‘fortunate’ in the slightest72. It’s essentially the expected result. An outcome highly typical for the situation and, by some considerable distance, the most likely thing to have happened.
The truth is that most people in this country who have snorted cocaine - or indeed used any other drugs – weren’t arrested, let alone prosecuted and jailed. The vast majority of casual drug use goes on completely unknown to and, in all honesty, largely uncared about by the law. And this is probably as it should be.
So, this might seem like an odd thing for me be riled by, especially given my general views on drugs, but it illustrates perfectly how not getting terribly unlucky is easily conflated with being lucky.
“Michael Gove admits he was lucky to avoid jail over cocaine use” said the headlines. They can fuck off too, wilfully mispresenting the concept of luck like that. That’s not an admission by any stretch. Admit your actions, by all means, but don’t use it as an opportunity to propagate rubbish.
Middle class low-level recreational drug users don’t go to prison. The select few who are jailed for drugs offences tend to be suppliers and/or those who commit other, arguably more serious crimes than the occasional personal ingestion of a few white lines.
But this is an example of where we as a society play fast and loose with the concept of luck in order to shape a given narrative that takes precedence over logic, reason and accuracy.
Avoiding having bad luck is not the same thing as having good luck.
This cannot be emphasised enough: If you buy a single Lottery ticket and fail to win the massive quadruple rollover jackpot that week, you are not an unlucky person.
If, like almost everyone else, you weren’t on a plane that crashed or a boat that capsized, you are not ‘lucky to be alive’ not indeed must there have been ‘Guardian Angels looking out for you’ that day.
If this was the case, and the division of good and bad luck was effectively a 50/50 split, they wouldn’t be good and bad luck, merely a coinflip.
By definition, luck needs to be extreme; it needs to be improbable.
72 Technically it is very, very, very, very slightly fortunate, in that he could’ve been one of the very, very, very, very few people who were jailed solely for personal use of recreational drugs. But if that had happened, how likely is it that he’d have been the sort of person that commits no other offenses? And how likely is it that such a person would’ve subsequently enjoyed a successful career in National politics?
|
|
