Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Some pretty grim polling in London for the Tories, Labour, and

SystemSystem Posts: 6,389
edited September 10 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Some pretty grim polling in London for the Tories, Labour, and Sadiq Khan

London Westminster voting intention:

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • RobDRobD Posts: 33,611
    First!

    Cheque is in the post, TSE. :D
  • RobDRobD Posts: 33,611
    And thanks to Vanilla for the two decoy threads... :p
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 7,192
    RobD said:

    And thanks to Vanilla for the two decoy threads... :p

    I believe 'tit' is the random insult of the day ?
    :smile:
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 4,876
    edited September 10
    Cricket! WTF. Two in two. Cook Root gone. All change, please!
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 7,192
    edited September 10
    OK, time for some quick runs now.

    (Bet YJB is glad he's not facing the hat trick ball...)
  • Goodbye Chef
  • What was Root's gesture all about when he was out?

    He's not retiring as well is he?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 7,192

    Goodbye Chef

    Steady now - he still has to shell a couple in the slips first.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 44,929
    London really should vote for Shaun Bailey. It's the right thing to do.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 4,876

    What was Root's gesture all about when he was out?

    He's not retiring as well is he?

    Is he binning the captaincy?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 45,762

    London really should vote for Shaun Bailey. It's the right thing to do.

    Can we get a good Tory hype train going for Bailey so that Khan's price can stay somewhat backable ?
  • Anorak said:

    What was Root's gesture all about when he was out?

    He's not retiring as well is he?

    Is he binning the captaincy?
    Maybe, although given the events of today's Roses match and Yorkshire's inevitable relegation to Div 2 I can see Root quitting international cricket to focus on Yorkshire.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 18,996
    edited September 10
    Although well down on 2017, those are actually pretty good figures for Labour. In 2015 they got 44% in London, and in 2010 37%.

    There's no such comfort for the Conservatives: 35% in both 2015 and 2010.

    For the LibDems, it's a pretty good recovery from the annus horribilis of 2015, when they sank to a derisory 8%, down from 22% in 2010.

    Full figures for the last three GEs here:

    https://data.london.gov.uk/apps_and_analysis/the-2017-general-election-the-numbers-behind-the-result/

    https://data.london.gov.uk/dataset/general-election-results-2015
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 17,557

    New NI boundaries

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-45474526

    almost drawn to match ethnic headcount
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 21,943
    Kahn looks absolutely nailed on to me. Nearly half the electorate still Labour, the Tories not closing the gap, Brexit, a national government that is staggering forward, second preferences, I just don't see how it gets close.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 7,192

    Anorak said:

    What was Root's gesture all about when he was out?

    He's not retiring as well is he?

    Is he binning the captaincy?
    Maybe, although given the events of today's Roses match and Yorkshire's inevitable relegation to Div 2 I can see Root quitting international cricket to focus on Yorkshire.
    Kohler-Cadmore looking quite useful, though.
  • Nigelb said:

    RobD said:

    And thanks to Vanilla for the two decoy threads... :p

    I believe 'tit' is the random insult of the day ?
    :smile:
  • DavidL said:

    Kahn looks absolutely nailed on to me. Nearly half the electorate still Labour, the Tories not closing the gap, Brexit, a national government that is staggering forward, second preferences, I just don't see how it gets close.

    You are probably right, although the London mayoralty is not necessarily determined by national considerations.

    Sadiq's not doing particularly well. His response on the knife-crime crisis in particular has been lacklustre at best, and he's mismanaged the TfL finances. But he's not doing so badly that he's in danger, unless the narrative changes substantially.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 4,876


    New NI boundaries

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-45474526

    almost drawn to match ethnic headcount

    Which presumably makes them safe as houses for either a unionist or a republican.
  • England collapsing like Carthage at Zama.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 17,557
    Anorak said:


    New NI boundaries

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-45474526

    almost drawn to match ethnic headcount

    Which presumably makes them safe as houses for either a unionist or a republican.
    yup

    the controversial issue was to take one seat from Belfast. Looks like they have ducked out doing that.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 21,943

    DavidL said:

    Kahn looks absolutely nailed on to me. Nearly half the electorate still Labour, the Tories not closing the gap, Brexit, a national government that is staggering forward, second preferences, I just don't see how it gets close.

    You are probably right, although the London mayoralty is not necessarily determined by national considerations.

    Sadiq's not doing particularly well. His response on the knife-crime crisis in particular has been lacklustre at best, and he's mismanaged the TfL finances. But he's not doing so badly that he's in danger, unless the narrative changes substantially.
    Also, unless I have missed him, the Tories don't have another Boris. A Tory in London, especially post Brexit, really has to have the ability to reach out well beyond natural Tory support. Can Shaun Bailey do that? I don't think he has anything like the profile required.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 17,557
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Kahn looks absolutely nailed on to me. Nearly half the electorate still Labour, the Tories not closing the gap, Brexit, a national government that is staggering forward, second preferences, I just don't see how it gets close.

    You are probably right, although the London mayoralty is not necessarily determined by national considerations.

    Sadiq's not doing particularly well. His response on the knife-crime crisis in particular has been lacklustre at best, and he's mismanaged the TfL finances. But he's not doing so badly that he's in danger, unless the narrative changes substantially.
    Also, unless I have missed him, the Tories don't have another Boris. A Tory in London, especially post Brexit, really has to have the ability to reach out well beyond natural Tory support. Can Shaun Bailey do that? I don't think he has anything like the profile required.
    I should think one Boris is enough
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 14,499

    DavidL said:

    Kahn looks absolutely nailed on to me. Nearly half the electorate still Labour, the Tories not closing the gap, Brexit, a national government that is staggering forward, second preferences, I just don't see how it gets close.

    You are probably right, although the London mayoralty is not necessarily determined by national considerations.

    Sadiq's not doing particularly well. His response on the knife-crime crisis in particular has been lacklustre at best, and he's mismanaged the TfL finances. But he's not doing so badly that he's in danger, unless the narrative changes substantially.
    Yes you (and @DavidL) are right. Sadly. Thing is, Sadiq is a politician and "it" is not particularly broken, so no one will feel a need to fix it. Which is a shame because Shaun is a fantastic guy who can really communicate. Now, no doubt some of that accessibility would and will be rubbed off once he gains high office (if not as mayor then somewhere else) but he would be a real breath of fresh air.

    And Londoners might just like that.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 4,876
    Is someone from the Lib Dems moonlighting?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 21,943

    England collapsing like Carthage at Zama.

    Good. Being bowled out greatly increases their chances of winning.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 21,943
    edited September 10

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Kahn looks absolutely nailed on to me. Nearly half the electorate still Labour, the Tories not closing the gap, Brexit, a national government that is staggering forward, second preferences, I just don't see how it gets close.

    You are probably right, although the London mayoralty is not necessarily determined by national considerations.

    Sadiq's not doing particularly well. His response on the knife-crime crisis in particular has been lacklustre at best, and he's mismanaged the TfL finances. But he's not doing so badly that he's in danger, unless the narrative changes substantially.
    Also, unless I have missed him, the Tories don't have another Boris. A Tory in London, especially post Brexit, really has to have the ability to reach out well beyond natural Tory support. Can Shaun Bailey do that? I don't think he has anything like the profile required.
    I should think one Boris is enough
    He is perfectly fine for a semi-serious position like Mayor. Not for anything important though.
  • DavidL said:


    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Kahn looks absolutely nailed on to me. Nearly half the electorate still Labour, the Tories not closing the gap, Brexit, a national government that is staggering forward, second preferences, I just don't see how it gets close.

    You are probably right, although the London mayoralty is not necessarily determined by national considerations.

    Sadiq's not doing particularly well. His response on the knife-crime crisis in particular has been lacklustre at best, and he's mismanaged the TfL finances. But he's not doing so badly that he's in danger, unless the narrative changes substantially.
    Also, unless I have missed him, the Tories don't have another Boris. A Tory in London, especially post Brexit, really has to have the ability to reach out well beyond natural Tory support. Can Shaun Bailey do that? I don't think he has anything like the profile required.
    I should think one Boris is enough
    He is perfectly fine for a semi-serious position like Mayor. Not for anything important though.
    You're saying he's ideal for First Minister of Scotland?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 33,611
    Scott_P said:
    Wasn’t Boris supposed to have started his leadership campaign today?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 45,762
    DavidL said:

    England collapsing like Carthage at Zama.

    Good. Being bowled out greatly increases their chances of winning.
    Aye, the last thing India want is to try and bat out four full sessions.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 33,611
    Anorak said:

    Is someone from the Lib Dems moonlighting?

    They are underselling it. The last one should be even lower!
  • DavidL said:

    Also, unless I have missed him, the Tories don't have another Boris. A Tory in London, especially post Brexit, really has to have the ability to reach out well beyond natural Tory support. Can Shaun Bailey do that? I don't think he has anything like the profile required.

    He definitely doesn't have anything like the profile required at the moment. Assuming he's the candidate, I'm sure he'll make a good shot at it (and certainly run a better campaign than Zac did, although that's not saying much), but it's a long shot all the same.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 33,611

    DavidL said:


    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Kahn looks absolutely nailed on to me. Nearly half the electorate still Labour, the Tories not closing the gap, Brexit, a national government that is staggering forward, second preferences, I just don't see how it gets close.

    You are probably right, although the London mayoralty is not necessarily determined by national considerations.

    Sadiq's not doing particularly well. His response on the knife-crime crisis in particular has been lacklustre at best, and he's mismanaged the TfL finances. But he's not doing so badly that he's in danger, unless the narrative changes substantially.
    Also, unless I have missed him, the Tories don't have another Boris. A Tory in London, especially post Brexit, really has to have the ability to reach out well beyond natural Tory support. Can Shaun Bailey do that? I don't think he has anything like the profile required.
    I should think one Boris is enough
    He is perfectly fine for a semi-serious position like Mayor. Not for anything important though.
    You're saying he's ideal for First Minister of Scotland?
    Governor of Southern Thule is a semi-serious position. Just sayin’....
  • England collapsing like Carthage at Zama.

    Throwing the bat at this stage is the right thing to do - lead 400
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 14,499
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Kahn looks absolutely nailed on to me. Nearly half the electorate still Labour, the Tories not closing the gap, Brexit, a national government that is staggering forward, second preferences, I just don't see how it gets close.

    You are probably right, although the London mayoralty is not necessarily determined by national considerations.

    Sadiq's not doing particularly well. His response on the knife-crime crisis in particular has been lacklustre at best, and he's mismanaged the TfL finances. But he's not doing so badly that he's in danger, unless the narrative changes substantially.
    Also, unless I have missed him, the Tories don't have another Boris. A Tory in London, especially post Brexit, really has to have the ability to reach out well beyond natural Tory support. Can Shaun Bailey do that? I don't think he has anything like the profile required.
    Didn't see this - yes, Shaun can do that.
  • The boundary changes are helpful to the LibDems in St Albans.

    London Colney (the ward with the smallest LD vote) is transferred to Hertsmere, whilst Woodside is gained from Watford and Leavesden and Abbots Langley & Bedmond are gained from Three Rivers district (Bedmond was already part of St Albans constituency).

    All three additional wards have LD councillors.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 33,611
    Scott_P said:
    Excellent gerryman... er, unbiased work by the Commission. :smiley:
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 45,762
    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:
    Excellent gerryman... er, unbiased work by the Commission. :smiley:
    Arlene will like the DUP numbers :D
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 9,120
    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:
    Excellent gerryman... er, unbiased work by the Commission. :smiley:
    Impressive that they managed to get the Lib Dems down to seven seats!
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 4,876
    tlg86 said:

    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:
    Excellent gerryman... er, unbiased work by the Commission. :smiley:
    Impressive that they managed to get the Lib Dems down to seven seats!
    Paddy would have to eat *another* hat.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 17,557
    Pulpstar said:

    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:
    Excellent gerryman... er, unbiased work by the Commission. :smiley:
    Arlene will like the DUP numbers :D
    usula DUP\ SF stitch up - assumes Sylvia Hermon is toast
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 44,929
    Mr. Anorak, I wonder if Ashdown's useful as a false prophet on election nights.

    "I'll eat my hat", "We must respect the vote" etc.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 45,762
    118 overs for India to survive if we declare at tea.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 23,038

    DavidL said:

    Kahn looks absolutely nailed on to me. Nearly half the electorate still Labour, the Tories not closing the gap, Brexit, a national government that is staggering forward, second preferences, I just don't see how it gets close.

    You are probably right, although the London mayoralty is not necessarily determined by national considerations.

    Sadiq's not doing particularly well. His response on the knife-crime crisis in particular has been lacklustre at best, and he's mismanaged the TfL finances. But he's not doing so badly that he's in danger, unless the narrative changes substantially.
    Unless the LD and Green second choices are going to go Conservative (which they're not), then Kahn looks nailed on to me.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 23,038
    tlg86 said:

    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:
    Excellent gerryman... er, unbiased work by the Commission. :smiley:
    Impressive that they managed to get the Lib Dems down to seven seats!
    The fewer seats you have, the greater the proportion that will be won by the "top two".
  • rcs1000 said:

    DavidL said:

    Kahn looks absolutely nailed on to me. Nearly half the electorate still Labour, the Tories not closing the gap, Brexit, a national government that is staggering forward, second preferences, I just don't see how it gets close.

    You are probably right, although the London mayoralty is not necessarily determined by national considerations.

    Sadiq's not doing particularly well. His response on the knife-crime crisis in particular has been lacklustre at best, and he's mismanaged the TfL finances. But he's not doing so badly that he's in danger, unless the narrative changes substantially.
    Unless the LD and Green second choices are going to go Conservative (which they're not), then Kahn looks nailed on to me.
    I'll take the 10,000 to 1 that you're offering!
  • stodgestodge Posts: 4,215
    Afternoon all :)

    Excellent London poll for the minor parties especially the LDs but with the Greens and UKIP also picking themselves off the floor.

    Very early days in terms of 2020 but Sadiq is in a very strong position. Labour are entrenched in Inner London and in truth the Conservatives have been driven back to a few heartlands in the suburbs. The numbers don't stack well for a non-Labour candidate.

    Sadiq's tenure so far hasn't been without its problems - the damage done to police numbers and the closure of stations was perpetrated by Boris and the reduction in beat policing in favour of a more mobile approach stems from the Home Secretary in the Coalition years whose name escapes me - but I've heard little positive in response from Sadiq or his advisers.

    I do think on housing Sadiq has been woeful - some Boroughs are trying to crank up the house building programme but overall too little has been done to meet the ever-growing demand.

    The Conservative Mayoral candidate is going to have to acknowledge the flaws of the Johnson years if he or she is going to reach beyond the core vote.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 23,038

    rcs1000 said:

    DavidL said:

    Kahn looks absolutely nailed on to me. Nearly half the electorate still Labour, the Tories not closing the gap, Brexit, a national government that is staggering forward, second preferences, I just don't see how it gets close.

    You are probably right, although the London mayoralty is not necessarily determined by national considerations.

    Sadiq's not doing particularly well. His response on the knife-crime crisis in particular has been lacklustre at best, and he's mismanaged the TfL finances. But he's not doing so badly that he's in danger, unless the narrative changes substantially.
    Unless the LD and Green second choices are going to go Conservative (which they're not), then Kahn looks nailed on to me.
    I'll take the 10,000 to 1 that you're offering!
    Oh come, "nailed on" does not mean 10,000-1.

    In fact PBers, what would you reckon the odds or implied percentage for "nailed on" is?
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 7,812
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    DavidL said:

    Kahn looks absolutely nailed on to me. Nearly half the electorate still Labour, the Tories not closing the gap, Brexit, a national government that is staggering forward, second preferences, I just don't see how it gets close.

    You are probably right, although the London mayoralty is not necessarily determined by national considerations.

    Sadiq's not doing particularly well. His response on the knife-crime crisis in particular has been lacklustre at best, and he's mismanaged the TfL finances. But he's not doing so badly that he's in danger, unless the narrative changes substantially.
    Unless the LD and Green second choices are going to go Conservative (which they're not), then Kahn looks nailed on to me.
    I'll take the 10,000 to 1 that you're offering!
    Oh come, "nailed on" does not mean 10,000-1.

    In fact PBers, what would you reckon the odds or implied percentage for "nailed on" is?
    97%+
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 23,038

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    DavidL said:

    Kahn looks absolutely nailed on to me. Nearly half the electorate still Labour, the Tories not closing the gap, Brexit, a national government that is staggering forward, second preferences, I just don't see how it gets close.

    You are probably right, although the London mayoralty is not necessarily determined by national considerations.

    Sadiq's not doing particularly well. His response on the knife-crime crisis in particular has been lacklustre at best, and he's mismanaged the TfL finances. But he's not doing so badly that he's in danger, unless the narrative changes substantially.
    Unless the LD and Green second choices are going to go Conservative (which they're not), then Kahn looks nailed on to me.
    I'll take the 10,000 to 1 that you're offering!
    Oh come, "nailed on" does not mean 10,000-1.

    In fact PBers, what would you reckon the odds or implied percentage for "nailed on" is?
    97%+
    I would have said 95%+, but at least we're at the same order of magnitude.
  • rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    DavidL said:

    Kahn looks absolutely nailed on to me. Nearly half the electorate still Labour, the Tories not closing the gap, Brexit, a national government that is staggering forward, second preferences, I just don't see how it gets close.

    You are probably right, although the London mayoralty is not necessarily determined by national considerations.

    Sadiq's not doing particularly well. His response on the knife-crime crisis in particular has been lacklustre at best, and he's mismanaged the TfL finances. But he's not doing so badly that he's in danger, unless the narrative changes substantially.
    Unless the LD and Green second choices are going to go Conservative (which they're not), then Kahn looks nailed on to me.
    I'll take the 10,000 to 1 that you're offering!
    Oh come, "nailed on" does not mean 10,000-1.

    In fact PBers, what would you reckon the odds or implied percentage for "nailed on" is?
    I believe that the accepted definition of 'nailed on' is that you'll be happy to streak down Whitehall if you're wrong!
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 23,038

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    DavidL said:

    Kahn looks absolutely nailed on to me. Nearly half the electorate still Labour, the Tories not closing the gap, Brexit, a national government that is staggering forward, second preferences, I just don't see how it gets close.

    You are probably right, although the London mayoralty is not necessarily determined by national considerations.

    Sadiq's not doing particularly well. His response on the knife-crime crisis in particular has been lacklustre at best, and he's mismanaged the TfL finances. But he's not doing so badly that he's in danger, unless the narrative changes substantially.
    Unless the LD and Green second choices are going to go Conservative (which they're not), then Kahn looks nailed on to me.
    I'll take the 10,000 to 1 that you're offering!
    Oh come, "nailed on" does not mean 10,000-1.

    In fact PBers, what would you reckon the odds or implied percentage for "nailed on" is?
    I believe that the accepted definition of 'nailed on' is that you'll be happy to streak down Whitehall if you're wrong!
    Oh, so just a 75% IP then.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 21,943

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    DavidL said:

    Kahn looks absolutely nailed on to me. Nearly half the electorate still Labour, the Tories not closing the gap, Brexit, a national government that is staggering forward, second preferences, I just don't see how it gets close.

    You are probably right, although the London mayoralty is not necessarily determined by national considerations.

    Sadiq's not doing particularly well. His response on the knife-crime crisis in particular has been lacklustre at best, and he's mismanaged the TfL finances. But he's not doing so badly that he's in danger, unless the narrative changes substantially.
    Unless the LD and Green second choices are going to go Conservative (which they're not), then Kahn looks nailed on to me.
    I'll take the 10,000 to 1 that you're offering!
    Oh come, "nailed on" does not mean 10,000-1.

    In fact PBers, what would you reckon the odds or implied percentage for "nailed on" is?
    I believe that the accepted definition of 'nailed on' is that you'll be happy to streak down Whitehall if you're wrong!
    That sounds a lot less expensive.
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 7,731
    edited September 10
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    DavidL said:

    Kahn looks absolutely nailed on to me. Nearly half the electorate still Labour, the Tories not closing the gap, Brexit, a national government that is staggering forward, second preferences, I just don't see how it gets close.

    You are probably right, although the London mayoralty is not necessarily determined by national considerations.

    Sadiq's not doing particularly well. His response on the knife-crime crisis in particular has been lacklustre at best, and he's mismanaged the TfL finances. But he's not doing so badly that he's in danger, unless the narrative changes substantially.
    Unless the LD and Green second choices are going to go Conservative (which they're not), then Kahn looks nailed on to me.
    I'll take the 10,000 to 1 that you're offering!
    Oh come, "nailed on" does not mean 10,000-1.

    In fact PBers, what would you reckon the odds or implied percentage for "nailed on" is?
    97%+
    I would have said 95%+, but at least we're at the same order of magnitude.
    Unless it's preceded with the words "Tory majority", in which case, 50% exactly.
  • rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    DavidL said:

    Kahn looks absolutely nailed on to me. Nearly half the electorate still Labour, the Tories not closing the gap, Brexit, a national government that is staggering forward, second preferences, I just don't see how it gets close.

    You are probably right, although the London mayoralty is not necessarily determined by national considerations.

    Sadiq's not doing particularly well. His response on the knife-crime crisis in particular has been lacklustre at best, and he's mismanaged the TfL finances. But he's not doing so badly that he's in danger, unless the narrative changes substantially.
    Unless the LD and Green second choices are going to go Conservative (which they're not), then Kahn looks nailed on to me.
    I'll take the 10,000 to 1 that you're offering!
    Oh come, "nailed on" does not mean 10,000-1.

    In fact PBers, what would you reckon the odds or implied percentage for "nailed on" is?
    I believe that the accepted definition of 'nailed on' is that you'll be happy to streak down Whitehall if you're wrong!
    More seriously, does Khan really have only a 3% or 5% chance of losing? The election's not for nearly two years, he's lacklustre at best, TfL is in crisis, London knife crime is becoming a national scandal, and the entirely objective and non-partisan editor of the Standard seems to have decided to start laying in to him pretty seriously.

    Against that, yes of course he has a massive structural advantage. He's clearly odds-on favourite. On checking the odds I was surprised to see I could get 1.41 on Betfair, which seemed excellent value so I took some. I'd say fair odds would be about 1.15 as things stand.
  • Having taken a look at the new boundaries, surely it's time to simply abandon any pretence that they all (or even most) signify any meaningful natural communities? Just start at Lands End and cut off constituencies at exactly the right number and name them 1,2,3,4,5 and so on.

    I've moved from "The Leftover Bits Of South Oxfordshire That Don't Fit In With Any Cities Or Big Towns" to "A Long Random Squiggle From Drayton To Bicester That Skims Oxford Just Because"

    Yes, well. I nearly managed to move to Henley, apparently. Somehow.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 44,929
    Mr. 1000, nice graphic here on the subject:
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 2,891

    Having taken a look at the new boundaries, surely it's time to simply abandon any pretence that they all (or even most) signify any meaningful natural communities? Just start at Lands End and cut off constituencies at exactly the right number and name them 1,2,3,4,5 and so on.

    I've moved from "The Leftover Bits Of South Oxfordshire That Don't Fit In With Any Cities Or Big Towns" to "A Long Random Squiggle From Drayton To Bicester That Skims Oxford Just Because"

    Yes, well. I nearly managed to move to Henley, apparently. Somehow.

    I've been in Hitchin and Harpenden for years. That is two disjointed disconnected blobs in Hertfordshire. No reason except to make use of the leftover bits didn't fit anywhere.

    Oddly, it hasn't had a negative effect on anyone or damaged their feeling of belonging or self esteem, as far as I am aware.
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 7,812

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    DavidL said:

    Kahn looks absolutely nailed on to me. Nearly half the electorate still Labour, the Tories not closing the gap, Brexit, a national government that is staggering forward, second preferences, I just don't see how it gets close.

    You are probably right, although the London mayoralty is not necessarily determined by national considerations.

    Sadiq's not doing particularly well. His response on the knife-crime crisis in particular has been lacklustre at best, and he's mismanaged the TfL finances. But he's not doing so badly that he's in danger, unless the narrative changes substantially.
    Unless the LD and Green second choices are going to go Conservative (which they're not), then Kahn looks nailed on to me.
    I'll take the 10,000 to 1 that you're offering!
    Oh come, "nailed on" does not mean 10,000-1.

    In fact PBers, what would you reckon the odds or implied percentage for "nailed on" is?
    I believe that the accepted definition of 'nailed on' is that you'll be happy to streak down Whitehall if you're wrong!
    More seriously, does Khan really have only a 3% or 5% chance of losing? The election's not for nearly two years, he's lacklustre at best, TfL is in crisis, London knife crime is becoming a national scandal, and the entirely objective and non-partisan editor of the Standard seems to have decided to start laying in to him pretty seriously.

    Against that, yes of course he has a massive structural advantage. He's clearly odds-on favourite. On checking the odds I was surprised to see I could get 1.41 on Betfair, which seemed excellent value so I took some. I'd say fair odds would be about 1.15 as things stand.
    A fair part of the doubt in Khan's price must be attributed to national Labour outcomes. Which party would he stand for if Labour split? And might he decide he needs to get back into the HoC asap in some scenarios?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 16,513
    Have we covered the loss of Jezza's seat under boundary review?

  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 2,492

    Having taken a look at the new boundaries, surely it's time to simply abandon any pretence that they all (or even most) signify any meaningful natural communities? Just start at Lands End and cut off constituencies at exactly the right number and name them 1,2,3,4,5 and so on.

    I've moved from "The Leftover Bits Of South Oxfordshire That Don't Fit In With Any Cities Or Big Towns" to "A Long Random Squiggle From Drayton To Bicester That Skims Oxford Just Because"

    Yes, well. I nearly managed to move to Henley, apparently. Somehow.

    Have you considered a job at the Boundary Commission?

    You might have more fun in the local government version.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 18,996
    edited September 10

    A fair part of the doubt in Khan's price must be attributed to national Labour outcomes. Which party would he stand for if Labour split? And might he decide he needs to get back into the HoC asap in some scenarios?

    Yes, those certainly need to be considered. The first one is a very interesting question.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 21,943

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    DavidL said:

    Kahn looks absolutely nailed on to me. Nearly half the electorate still Labour, the Tories not closing the gap, Brexit, a national government that is staggering forward, second preferences, I just don't see how it gets close.

    You are probably right, although the London mayoralty is not necessarily determined by national considerations.

    Sadiq's not doing particularly well. His response on the knife-crime crisis in particular has been lacklustre at best, and he's mismanaged the TfL finances. But he's not doing so badly that he's in danger, unless the narrative changes substantially.
    Unless the LD and Green second choices are going to go Conservative (which they're not), then Kahn looks nailed on to me.
    I'll take the 10,000 to 1 that you're offering!
    Oh come, "nailed on" does not mean 10,000-1.

    In fact PBers, what would you reckon the odds or implied percentage for "nailed on" is?
    I believe that the accepted definition of 'nailed on' is that you'll be happy to streak down Whitehall if you're wrong!
    More seriously, does Khan really have only a 3% or 5% chance of losing? The election's not for nearly two years, he's lacklustre at best, TfL is in crisis, London knife crime is becoming a national scandal, and the entirely objective and non-partisan editor of the Standard seems to have decided to start laying in to him pretty seriously.

    Against that, yes of course he has a massive structural advantage. He's clearly odds-on favourite. On checking the odds I was surprised to see I could get 1.41 on Betfair, which seemed excellent value so I took some. I'd say fair odds would be about 1.15 as things stand.
    A fair part of the doubt in Khan's price must be attributed to national Labour outcomes. Which party would he stand for if Labour split? And might he decide he needs to get back into the HoC asap in some scenarios?
    Now that's a good point. That would change the odds materially.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 45,762
    Surely Root should declare right now
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 21,943
    Pulpstar said:

    Surely Root should declare right now

    He has.
  • philiph said:

    Having taken a look at the new boundaries, surely it's time to simply abandon any pretence that they all (or even most) signify any meaningful natural communities? Just start at Lands End and cut off constituencies at exactly the right number and name them 1,2,3,4,5 and so on.

    I've moved from "The Leftover Bits Of South Oxfordshire That Don't Fit In With Any Cities Or Big Towns" to "A Long Random Squiggle From Drayton To Bicester That Skims Oxford Just Because"

    Yes, well. I nearly managed to move to Henley, apparently. Somehow.

    I've been in Hitchin and Harpenden for years. That is two disjointed disconnected blobs in Hertfordshire. No reason except to make use of the leftover bits didn't fit anywhere.

    Oddly, it hasn't had a negative effect on anyone or damaged their feeling of belonging or self esteem, as far as I am aware.
    I think the constituency boundaries have been so disconnected from any sense of natural communities for so long that people don't care anymore. Quite a few have no idea what constituency they actually live in, anyway.

    To be fair to the Boundaries Commission, the idea of exactly 600 single-seat constituencies of very close electorates is always going to cause this, unless we just happen to have exactly 600 natural communities in the country and all of those with very similar populations.

    The entire putative link between parliamentary constituencies and any natural community has long become a fiction; this just exaggerates something that was already strongly there. Thus the only-partly-tongue-in-cheek suggestion that they stop paying even lip service to it and just redraw from left to right based purely on population. Forget counties, regions, towns, whatever. If the border runs down a road in the middle of a village, so be it. As you say, few people care.

    (Alternatively, have multi-member constituencies based on, say, counties. Change the number of members for a given county when populations change or the total number of MPs is supposed to change. Job done, actual community link sustained)
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 44,929
    Mr. Price/Mr. L, when would the definitive votes on boundaries occur?

    Doubt the PLP will split at all, but if it does, that could be the key moment.
  • Have we covered the loss of Jezza's seat under boundary review?

    It's not really disappearing as most of it goes into the new Finsbury Park and Stoke Newington seat.
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 4,213
    MP for Canterbury is facing a vote of censure for her recent behaviour

    #purgecontinues

  • felixfelix Posts: 7,899
    Of course the bad polling in London means that the Tories must be done pretty well everywhere else if the national figures are accurate. All depends where the important marginals are.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 16,513
    Ken Clarke's is interesting. Seems to have been cut in half and the Clifton estate added.

    Not that he'll stand again.
  • felixfelix Posts: 7,899

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    DavidL said:

    Kahn looks absolutely nailed on to me. Nearly half the electorate still Labour, the Tories not closing the gap, Brexit, a national government that is staggering forward, second preferences, I just don't see how it gets close.

    You are probably right, although the London mayoralty is not necessarily determined by national considerations.

    Sadiq's not doing particularly well. His response on the knife-crime crisis in particular has been lacklustre at best, and he's mismanaged the TfL finances. But he's not doing so badly that he's in danger, unless the narrative changes substantially.
    Unless the LD and Green second choices are going to go Conservative (which they're not), then Kahn looks nailed on to me.
    I'll take the 10,000 to 1 that you're offering!
    Oh come, "nailed on" does not mean 10,000-1.

    In fact PBers, what would you reckon the odds or implied percentage for "nailed on" is?
    I believe that the accepted definition of 'nailed on' is that you'll be happy to streak down Whitehall if you're wrong!
    More seriously, does Khan really have only a 3% or 5% chance of losing? The election's not for nearly two years, he's lacklustre at best, TfL is in crisis, London knife crime is becoming a national scandal, and the entirely objective and non-partisan editor of the Standard seems to have decided to start laying in to him pretty seriously.

    Against that, yes of course he has a massive structural advantage. He's clearly odds-on favourite. On checking the odds I was surprised to see I could get 1.41 on Betfair, which seemed excellent value so I took some. I'd say fair odds would be about 1.15 as things stand.
    At some point m/c Londoners will wake up and smell the coffee. A big switch to a centre party is probably more likely here than most other places
  • felixfelix Posts: 7,899

    Have we covered the loss of Jezza's seat under boundary review?

    Yup - various alternatives suggested - my favourite would be Jerusalem NW.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 19,350

    Mr. 1000, nice graphic here on the subject:

    Still no nailed on though.....

    I would think "nailed on" must equate to a 40/1 chance of it not happening. So 50/1 chance of Obama becoming US President would be super-nailed on not going to happen.

    Oh.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 19,350

    MP for Canterbury is facing a vote of censure for her recent behaviour

    #purgecontinues

    Re-selection!
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 10,730
    Another article that doesn't really align with the results of the poll.
  • MP for Canterbury is facing a vote of censure for her recent behaviour

    #purgecontinues

    Re-selection!
    Seems daft to go after a new MP with a majority of less than 200
  • Massacre India 2 for 3 Kholi out
  • England will be claiming the extra half tonight.

    I'll eat a pizza with pineapple and banana on it if India pull this off.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 23,038
    I have a lot of sympathy with Andy Cooke's view. Yes, the previous system was far too loose, with some seats almost three times the size of others. But the new system seems to be too tight, and means that other boundaries - rivers, settlements, councils, etc. - are completely ignored.

    I would have gone for 650 seats, with each one +/- 10% of the average. I would also ensure that boundaries are updated on a five year cycle using the electoral roll, which would hopefully mean they wouldn't need periodic big changes.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 16,513
    rcs1000 said:

    I have a lot of sympathy with Andy Cooke's view. Yes, the previous system was far too loose, with some seats almost three times the size of others. But the new system seems to be too tight, and means that other boundaries - rivers, settlements, councils, etc. - are completely ignored.

    I would have gone for 650 seats, with each one +/- 10% of the average. I would also ensure that boundaries are updated on a five year cycle using the electoral roll, which would hopefully mean they wouldn't need periodic big changes.

    I don't agree with the reduction.

    I doubt it will pass to be honest.
  • rcs1000 said:

    I have a lot of sympathy with Andy Cooke's view. Yes, the previous system was far too loose, with some seats almost three times the size of others. But the new system seems to be too tight, and means that other boundaries - rivers, settlements, councils, etc. - are completely ignored.

    I would have gone for 650 seats, with each one +/- 10% of the average. I would also ensure that boundaries are updated on a five year cycle using the electoral roll, which would hopefully mean they wouldn't need periodic big changes.

    I don't agree with the reduction.

    I doubt it will pass to be honest.
    If it doesn't the mps will be seen as self serving - mind you, they are anyway
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 45,762
    When do the boundaries actually get voted on ?
  • rcs1000 said:

    I have a lot of sympathy with Andy Cooke's view. Yes, the previous system was far too loose, with some seats almost three times the size of others. But the new system seems to be too tight, and means that other boundaries - rivers, settlements, councils, etc. - are completely ignored.

    I would have gone for 650 seats, with each one +/- 10% of the average. I would also ensure that boundaries are updated on a five year cycle using the electoral roll, which would hopefully mean they wouldn't need periodic big changes.

    I don't agree with the reduction.

    I doubt it will pass to be honest.
    The reduction was to force every seat to be re-drawn based on the artificially pro-Conservative registers, as part of the blue team's gerrymandering programme.

    Now the interesting thing is that if the reduction does go ahead, it will be welcomed by Labour's entryist trots as forcing reselection in every seat.
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 4,213

    rcs1000 said:

    I have a lot of sympathy with Andy Cooke's view. Yes, the previous system was far too loose, with some seats almost three times the size of others. But the new system seems to be too tight, and means that other boundaries - rivers, settlements, councils, etc. - are completely ignored.

    I would have gone for 650 seats, with each one +/- 10% of the average. I would also ensure that boundaries are updated on a five year cycle using the electoral roll, which would hopefully mean they wouldn't need periodic big changes.

    I don't agree with the reduction.

    I doubt it will pass to be honest.
    600 MPs for a nation of our size is perfectly adequate representation, it really is.

    We could manage perfectly well with 500 or even 450.

    It would require a reduction in the number of ministers to reduce the payroll vote. But we are over-represented at the moment.
  • rcs1000 said:

    I have a lot of sympathy with Andy Cooke's view. Yes, the previous system was far too loose, with some seats almost three times the size of others. But the new system seems to be too tight, and means that other boundaries - rivers, settlements, councils, etc. - are completely ignored.

    I would have gone for 650 seats, with each one +/- 10% of the average. I would also ensure that boundaries are updated on a five year cycle using the electoral roll, which would hopefully mean they wouldn't need periodic big changes.

    I did once suggest (rather tongue-in-cheek, I must admit) a system of having each MPs vote weighted by the size of their electorates.
    We could have had the previous system, and even loosened it further to align more closely with natural communities.
    As a fringe benefit, it would encourage arithmetic among the whips.
  • England will be claiming the extra half tonight.

    I'll eat a pizza with pineapple and banana on it if India pull this off.

    Will they need the half hour?
  • You can see the ERG voting against the boundary changes in a fit of pique if they don't get exactly what they want from Brexit.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 16,513
    Looks dead as a dodo to me.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 44,929
    Mr. JohnL, were the boundaries not drawn up by a neutral body?
  • not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 2,450
    I’m perfectly happy with the principle of making consituencies equal. But I’m very opposed to reducing the number of MPs, which only serves to entrench the position of the larger parties. If we must have FPTP then the number of MPs should be increased.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 16,513
    Pulpstar said:

    When do the boundaries actually get voted on ?

    Not for months says HuffPo.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 45,762
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 16,513

    rcs1000 said:

    I have a lot of sympathy with Andy Cooke's view. Yes, the previous system was far too loose, with some seats almost three times the size of others. But the new system seems to be too tight, and means that other boundaries - rivers, settlements, councils, etc. - are completely ignored.

    I would have gone for 650 seats, with each one +/- 10% of the average. I would also ensure that boundaries are updated on a five year cycle using the electoral roll, which would hopefully mean they wouldn't need periodic big changes.

    I don't agree with the reduction.

    I doubt it will pass to be honest.
    The reduction was to force every seat to be re-drawn based on the artificially pro-Conservative registers, as part of the blue team's gerrymandering programme.

    Now the interesting thing is that if the reduction does go ahead, it will be welcomed by Labour's entryist trots as forcing reselection in every seat.
    The trots don't have the ERG votes though.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 21,574

    rcs1000 said:

    I have a lot of sympathy with Andy Cooke's view. Yes, the previous system was far too loose, with some seats almost three times the size of others. But the new system seems to be too tight, and means that other boundaries - rivers, settlements, councils, etc. - are completely ignored.

    I would have gone for 650 seats, with each one +/- 10% of the average. I would also ensure that boundaries are updated on a five year cycle using the electoral roll, which would hopefully mean they wouldn't need periodic big changes.

    I don't agree with the reduction.

    I doubt it will pass to be honest.
    600 MPs for a nation of our size is perfectly adequate representation, it really is.

    We could manage perfectly well with 500 or even 450.

    It would require a reduction in the number of ministers to reduce the payroll vote. But we are over-represented at the moment.
    Perhaps we could reduce the number of FPTP seats to 500 or so and then make up the numbers with seats allocated by PR, a bit like the system of leveling seats. That would allow more natural looking constituencies but still give parties with broad but shallow support a chance.
This discussion has been closed.