Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Prize Competition: Your chance to win the definitive work on w

SystemSystem Posts: 6,389
edited October 8 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Prize Competition: Your chance to win the definitive work on what happened at GE2017

I’ve just got my copy of the Phil Cowley/Denis Kavanagh study of the 2017 general election. As well as an excellent narrative on what was going on there’s also a detailed statistical analysis of the results from John Curtice and others.

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • asjohnstoneasjohnstone Posts: 869
    46.29
  • PClippPClipp Posts: 1,710
    52.7
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 4,634
    48.14
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 21,489
    MY ENTRY
    49.01
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 1,552
    MY ENTRY

    47.42
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 23,420
    99.32
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 21,489
    rcs1000 said:

    99.32

    A bold prediction there, Mr RCS ...
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 9,260
    MY ENTRY

    47.65
  • There won't be a contest on June 6th.
  • MY ENTRY

    46.31
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 10,857
    51.01
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 19,757
    54.17
  • swing_voterswing_voter Posts: 383
    My entry
    47.30
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 19,757
    rcs1000 said:

    99.32

    Even Saddam would blush at that....
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 4,679
    rcs1000 said:

    99.32

    Methinks that you are not interested in the prize
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 7,647
    50.12
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 5,463
    MY ENTRY

    46.46
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 5,463

    rcs1000 said:

    99.32

    Even Saddam would blush at that....
    Wikipedia doesn't record whether Saddam blushed at his 100% vote share.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 23,420
    rcs1000 said:

    99.32

    A number of people have noted that my prediction may be a little high. I apologise, there was a typo. My forecast is 99.23.

    Thank you all.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 12,662
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    99.32

    A number of people have noted that my prediction may be a little high. I apologise, there was a typo. My forecast is 99.23.

    Thank you all.
    :lol:
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 22,397
    edited October 8
    MY ENTRY

    48.16 for Beto.

    Close but no cigar.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 12,662
    Interesting that everyone so far seems to be expecting O'Rourke to either win by a fair margin or by a distance. Although I hardly expect Cruz to win by a landslide, it isn't the most fertile of territory for the Dems and if Cruz doesn't win easily expect it to be close.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 12,662
    DavidL said:

    MY ENTRY

    48.16 for Beto.

    Close but no cigar.

    There are three candidates in the race, although yours is still more plausible than some!
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 22,397
    This election is interesting because Cruz is so manifestly odious but it is not currently even the closest. There are several incredibly close races. The latest poll in Missouri made it a tie and the republican is an average of 0.5% ahead. Florida is very close too. If the democratic wave is losing momentum several races where they have tiny edges may start to swing against them.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 22,397
    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    MY ENTRY

    48.16 for Beto.

    Close but no cigar.

    There are three candidates in the race, although yours is still more plausible than some!
    There are? https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2018/senate/tx/texas_senate_cruz_vs_orourke-6310.html

    He doesn't seem to be troubling the scorers much.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 46,127
    42.00, life, the universe and 1/10th of the funding secured.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 5,463
    ydoethur said:

    Interesting that everyone so far seems to be expecting O'Rourke to either win by a fair margin or by a distance. Although I hardly expect Cruz to win by a landslide, it isn't the most fertile of territory for the Dems and if Cruz doesn't win easily expect it to be close.

    The lowest predicted vote share is 46.29% which is higher than any of the last four polls.

    Differential turnout in favour of the Democrats? Third-party squeeze in a tight race?

    It's a bold consensus at present.
  • FangsyFangsy Posts: 25
    MY ENTRY - 44.33%
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 9,099
    46.12
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 30,975
    MY ENTRY

    48.52
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 30,975
    Just read the first chapter - (free sample on Kindle) - jolly good read. Bought the Kindle, as I suspect my Brexit vote estimate (as good a random number as any) may be on the high side.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 11,013
    edited October 8
    MY ENTRY:
    41.27

    I think he's being overhyped because it's an interesting story.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 22,397
    On topic a piece in Salon on Beto's chances: https://www.salon.com/2018/10/07/can-beto-orourke-really-win-in-texas-ann-richards-former-campaign-manager-has-hope/

    Main takeaway: no one likes Cruz, not even republicans.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 12,662
    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    MY ENTRY

    48.16 for Beto.

    Close but no cigar.

    There are three candidates in the race, although yours is still more plausible than some!
    There are? https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2018/senate/tx/texas_senate_cruz_vs_orourke-6310.html

    He doesn't seem to be troubling the scorers much.
    This is the third one:

    https://www.nealdikeman.com
  • RobCLRobCL Posts: 7
    MY ENTRY
    42.30 as there must be some point in the universe where a rolling average of polls = final result
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 45,496
    MY ENTRY

    51.21, and thanks for running this competition.

    Good morning, everyone.

    Sci-fi review: the new Doctor's hair was lovely, but Nyssa-Vex's was even more splendid.

    Anyone backing Haddad for Brazil's presidency?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 12,662

    MY ENTRY:
    41.27

    I think he's being overhyped because it's an interesting story.

    MY ENTRY

    That's closer, but I would personally be surprised to see O'Rourke get 40%. Last time it was 40.6%, with a well known and popular candidate. Admittedly that still showed consistent improvement over the decades. But I wonder if polls are overstating the Dems because, as with Trump or Corbyn, people in the right places are embarrassed to admit they're voting for Cruz.

    I'm going with 39.50%.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 22,397
    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    MY ENTRY

    48.16 for Beto.

    Close but no cigar.

    There are three candidates in the race, although yours is still more plausible than some!
    There are? https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2018/senate/tx/texas_senate_cruz_vs_orourke-6310.html

    He doesn't seem to be troubling the scorers much.
    This is the third one:

    https://www.nealdikeman.com
    Why do they bother? It must be a slightly weird hobby, like trainspotting (sorry Sunil). Probably means I am a bit high though.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 22,397
    DavidL said:

    MY ENTRY

    48.16 for Beto.

    Close but no cigar.

    Ok, now that I have found out there is a third candidate I am going down to:

    47.56
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 12,662
    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    MY ENTRY

    48.16 for Beto.

    Close but no cigar.

    There are three candidates in the race, although yours is still more plausible than some!
    There are? https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2018/senate/tx/texas_senate_cruz_vs_orourke-6310.html

    He doesn't seem to be troubling the scorers much.
    This is the third one:

    https://www.nealdikeman.com
    Why do they bother? It must be a slightly weird hobby, like trainspotting (sorry Sunil). Probably means I am a bit high though.
    Why do the Liberal Democrats field candidates in Liverpool Wavertree? Or Labour in Cornwall? Or the Conservatives in most of Manchester?
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 9,312
    edited October 8
    Deleted, on reflection.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 12,662

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    MY ENTRY

    48.16 for Beto.

    Close but no cigar.

    There are three candidates in the race, although yours is still more plausible than some!
    There are? https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2018/senate/tx/texas_senate_cruz_vs_orourke-6310.html

    He doesn't seem to be troubling the scorers much.
    This is the third one:

    https://www.nealdikeman.com
    Why do they bother? It must be a slightly weird hobby, like trainspotting (sorry Sunil). Probably means I am a bit high though.
    Sunil is not a trainspotter, is he? He seems to be collecting train routes rather than details of the trains themselves. At least he gets to see Britain, assuming he gets a window seat.
    On many of the routes, that would be tough as Class 153s are notorious for their poor layout.
  • EssexitEssexit Posts: 1,710
    MY ENTRY

    40.89
  • MY ENTRY

    44.69
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 12,662

    MY ENTRY

    44.69

    At least you haven't bet a pineapple pizza on that... :smiley:
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 45,496
    Incidentally, the head of Interpol has resigned. In a way that is not remotely dubious and seems entirely above board.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 4,675
    My Entry

    43.91
  • alex.alex. Posts: 2,957
    O/T

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/oct/08/new-zealands-degrading-abortion-ban-breaches-human-rights-say-activists

    I had no idea New Zealand's abortion laws were so tough. What are the historic reasons for this? Religious, or something else? Seems anomalous in a country which boasts of its progressive politics as regards representation of women?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 22,397
    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    MY ENTRY

    48.16 for Beto.

    Close but no cigar.

    There are three candidates in the race, although yours is still more plausible than some!
    There are? https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2018/senate/tx/texas_senate_cruz_vs_orourke-6310.html

    He doesn't seem to be troubling the scorers much.
    This is the third one:

    https://www.nealdikeman.com
    Why do they bother? It must be a slightly weird hobby, like trainspotting (sorry Sunil). Probably means I am a bit high though.
    Why do the Liberal Democrats field candidates in Liverpool Wavertree? Or Labour in Cornwall? Or the Conservatives in most of Manchester?
    Because they want to be seen as representative of and interested in the whole country. Accepting no go areas would damage them overall.

    If I was American I would find the Libertarian viewpoint interesting but ultimately frivolous because it is a wasted vote.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 12,662
    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    MY ENTRY

    48.16 for Beto.

    Close but no cigar.

    There are three candidates in the race, although yours is still more plausible than some!
    There are? https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2018/senate/tx/texas_senate_cruz_vs_orourke-6310.html

    He doesn't seem to be troubling the scorers much.
    This is the third one:

    https://www.nealdikeman.com
    Why do they bother? It must be a slightly weird hobby, like trainspotting (sorry Sunil). Probably means I am a bit high though.
    Why do the Liberal Democrats field candidates in Liverpool Wavertree? Or Labour in Cornwall? Or the Conservatives in most of Manchester?
    Because they want to be seen as representative of and interested in the whole country. Accepting no go areas would damage them overall.

    If I was American I would find the Libertarian viewpoint interesting but ultimately frivolous because it is a wasted vote.
    And a vote for the Liberal Democrats is not (with apologies to Foxy)?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 22,397

    Incidentally, the head of Interpol has resigned. In a way that is not remotely dubious and seems entirely above board.

    Has he reappeared then? I was beginning to suspect that he had been disappeared by the Chinese.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 12,662
    DavidL said:

    Incidentally, the head of Interpol has resigned. In a way that is not remotely dubious and seems entirely above board.

    Has he reappeared then? I was beginning to suspect that he had been disappeared by the Chinese.
    He has. It's just they've now announced he's been disappeared.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 22,397
    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    MY ENTRY

    48.16 for Beto.

    Close but no cigar.

    There are three candidates in the race, although yours is still more plausible than some!
    There are? https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2018/senate/tx/texas_senate_cruz_vs_orourke-6310.html

    He doesn't seem to be troubling the scorers much.
    This is the third one:

    https://www.nealdikeman.com
    Why do they bother? It must be a slightly weird hobby, like trainspotting (sorry Sunil). Probably means I am a bit high though.
    Why do the Liberal Democrats field candidates in Liverpool Wavertree? Or Labour in Cornwall? Or the Conservatives in most of Manchester?
    Because they want to be seen as representative of and interested in the whole country. Accepting no go areas would damage them overall.

    If I was American I would find the Libertarian viewpoint interesting but ultimately frivolous because it is a wasted vote.
    And a vote for the Liberal Democrats is not (with apologies to Foxy)?
    I didn't say that.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 2,186
    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    MY ENTRY

    48.16 for Beto.

    Close but no cigar.

    There are three candidates in the race, although yours is still more plausible than some!
    There are? https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2018/senate/tx/texas_senate_cruz_vs_orourke-6310.html

    He doesn't seem to be troubling the scorers much.
    This is the third one:

    https://www.nealdikeman.com
    Why do they bother? It must be a slightly weird hobby, like trainspotting (sorry Sunil). Probably means I am a bit high though.
    Why do the Liberal Democrats field candidates in Liverpool Wavertree? Or Labour in Cornwall? Or the Conservatives in most of Manchester?
    Because they want to be seen as representative of and interested in the whole country. Accepting no go areas would damage them overall.

    If I was American I would find the Libertarian viewpoint interesting but ultimately frivolous because it is a wasted vote.
    Wasted no longer. John McAfee is going to be Libertarian candidate for 2020. He is Trump Squared.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 22,397
    Dura_Ace said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    MY ENTRY

    48.16 for Beto.

    Close but no cigar.

    There are three candidates in the race, although yours is still more plausible than some!
    There are? https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2018/senate/tx/texas_senate_cruz_vs_orourke-6310.html

    He doesn't seem to be troubling the scorers much.
    This is the third one:

    https://www.nealdikeman.com
    Why do they bother? It must be a slightly weird hobby, like trainspotting (sorry Sunil). Probably means I am a bit high though.
    Why do the Liberal Democrats field candidates in Liverpool Wavertree? Or Labour in Cornwall? Or the Conservatives in most of Manchester?
    Because they want to be seen as representative of and interested in the whole country. Accepting no go areas would damage them overall.

    If I was American I would find the Libertarian viewpoint interesting but ultimately frivolous because it is a wasted vote.
    Wasted no longer. John McAfee is going to be Libertarian candidate for 2020. He is Trump Squared.
    At last, a candidate who will take cyber security seriously.
  • felixfelix Posts: 8,004
    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    MY ENTRY

    48.16 for Beto.

    Close but no cigar.

    There are three candidates in the race, although yours is still more plausible than some!
    There are? https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2018/senate/tx/texas_senate_cruz_vs_orourke-6310.html

    He doesn't seem to be troubling the scorers much.
    This is the third one:

    https://www.nealdikeman.com
    Why do they bother? It must be a slightly weird hobby, like trainspotting (sorry Sunil). Probably means I am a bit high though.
    Why do the Liberal Democrats field candidates in Liverpool Wavertree? Or Labour in Cornwall? Or the Conservatives in most of Manchester?
    Because they want to be seen as representative of and interested in the whole country. Accepting no go areas would damage them overall.

    If I was American I would find the Libertarian viewpoint interesting but ultimately frivolous because it is a wasted vote.
    Aren't Labour a close second on some Cornwall seats?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 45,496
    Mr. L, no no, he's enjoying a free state-sponsored holiday in one of their luxurious and remote locations.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 12,662
    Dura_Ace said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    MY ENTRY

    48.16 for Beto.

    Close but no cigar.

    There are three candidates in the race, although yours is still more plausible than some!
    There are? https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2018/senate/tx/texas_senate_cruz_vs_orourke-6310.html

    He doesn't seem to be troubling the scorers much.
    This is the third one:

    https://www.nealdikeman.com
    Why do they bother? It must be a slightly weird hobby, like trainspotting (sorry Sunil). Probably means I am a bit high though.
    Why do the Liberal Democrats field candidates in Liverpool Wavertree? Or Labour in Cornwall? Or the Conservatives in most of Manchester?
    Because they want to be seen as representative of and interested in the whole country. Accepting no go areas would damage them overall.

    If I was American I would find the Libertarian viewpoint interesting but ultimately frivolous because it is a wasted vote.
    Wasted no longer. John McAfee is going to be Libertarian candidate for 2020. He is Trump Squared.
    Does he count as a natural born citizen? I mean, I was also born in the Forest of Dean and I could have sworn it was in the UK.
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 883
    MY ENTRY

    45.46

    Which is fairly boring as predictions go, I guess.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 22,397
    felix said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    MY ENTRY

    48.16 for Beto.

    Close but no cigar.

    There are three candidates in the race, although yours is still more plausible than some!
    There are? https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2018/senate/tx/texas_senate_cruz_vs_orourke-6310.html

    He doesn't seem to be troubling the scorers much.
    This is the third one:

    https://www.nealdikeman.com
    Why do they bother? It must be a slightly weird hobby, like trainspotting (sorry Sunil). Probably means I am a bit high though.
    Why do the Liberal Democrats field candidates in Liverpool Wavertree? Or Labour in Cornwall? Or the Conservatives in most of Manchester?
    Because they want to be seen as representative of and interested in the whole country. Accepting no go areas would damage them overall.

    If I was American I would find the Libertarian viewpoint interesting but ultimately frivolous because it is a wasted vote.
    Aren't Labour a close second on some Cornwall seats?
    One better than that in Exeter ( I know its really Devon) . I think they gained quite a lot of ground at the Lib Dem expense last time out. Whether that was a temporary weakness for the Yellow Peril remains to be seen.
  • JohnOJohnO Posts: 3,255
    MY ENTRY

    43.08
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 12,662
    felix said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    MY ENTRY

    48.16 for Beto.

    Close but no cigar.

    There are three candidates in the race, although yours is still more plausible than some!
    There are? https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2018/senate/tx/texas_senate_cruz_vs_orourke-6310.html

    He doesn't seem to be troubling the scorers much.
    This is the third one:

    https://www.nealdikeman.com
    Why do they bother? It must be a slightly weird hobby, like trainspotting (sorry Sunil). Probably means I am a bit high though.
    Why do the Liberal Democrats field candidates in Liverpool Wavertree? Or Labour in Cornwall? Or the Conservatives in most of Manchester?
    Because they want to be seen as representative of and interested in the whole country. Accepting no go areas would damage them overall.

    If I was American I would find the Libertarian viewpoint interesting but ultimately frivolous because it is a wasted vote.
    Aren't Labour a close second on some Cornwall seats?
    Camborne and Redruth they're not ridiculously far back.

    Everywhere else the margin's well over 3,000 votes, usually nearer 20,000, and in two seats they're in third.

    Have a good morning.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 22,397

    Mr. L, no no, he's enjoying a free state-sponsored holiday in one of their luxurious and remote locations.

    A well earned break, no doubt.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 4,675
    edited October 8
    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    MY ENTRY

    48.16 for Beto.

    Close but no cigar.

    There are three candidates in the race, although yours is still more plausible than some!
    There are? https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2018/senate/tx/texas_senate_cruz_vs_orourke-6310.html

    He doesn't seem to be troubling the scorers much.
    This is the third one:

    https://www.nealdikeman.com
    Why do they bother? It must be a slightly weird hobby, like trainspotting (sorry Sunil). Probably means I am a bit high though.
    Why do the Liberal Democrats field candidates in Liverpool Wavertree? Or Labour in Cornwall? Or the Conservatives in most of Manchester?
    Because they want to be seen as representative of and interested in the whole country. Accepting no go areas would damage them overall.

    If I was American I would find the Libertarian viewpoint interesting but ultimately frivolous because it is a wasted vote.
    And a vote for the Liberal Democrats is not (with apologies to Foxy)?
    The Liberals adopted a policy of standing in all seats under Thorpe, until the late Sixties they stood in barely half. It didn't get them many extra seats but did significantly boost vote share FWIW.

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 10,857
    MY ENTRY

    51.01
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 883
    ydoethur said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    MY ENTRY

    48.16 for Beto.

    Close but no cigar.

    There are three candidates in the race, although yours is still more plausible than some!
    There are? https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2018/senate/tx/texas_senate_cruz_vs_orourke-6310.html

    He doesn't seem to be troubling the scorers much.
    This is the third one:

    https://www.nealdikeman.com
    Why do they bother? It must be a slightly weird hobby, like trainspotting (sorry Sunil). Probably means I am a bit high though.
    Why do the Liberal Democrats field candidates in Liverpool Wavertree? Or Labour in Cornwall? Or the Conservatives in most of Manchester?
    Because they want to be seen as representative of and interested in the whole country. Accepting no go areas would damage them overall.

    If I was American I would find the Libertarian viewpoint interesting but ultimately frivolous because it is a wasted vote.
    Wasted no longer. John McAfee is going to be Libertarian candidate for 2020. He is Trump Squared.
    Does he count as a natural born citizen? I mean, I was also born in the Forest of Dean and I could have sworn it was in the UK.
    On a US Air Base... I guess, if he's going for it, that must count.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 14,807
    No! My Entry!

    46.46
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 45,496
    Betting Post

    F1: backed Bottas, each way, to win in the US. He's 8.5 (9 with boost), a third the odds top 2.

    He's finished second in the last two races. He's qualified first and second in the last two races. I think Vettel's shorter odds reflect name recognition and following rather than his actual chances. The Mercedes seems faster both in qualifying and race trim, and the German has been making increasing numbers of mistakes, as has Ferrari's strategy team.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 33,654
    edited October 8
    41.87MYENTRY
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 46,102
    MY ENTRY

    O'Rourke 45%
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 46,102
    alex. said:

    O/T

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/oct/08/new-zealands-degrading-abortion-ban-breaches-human-rights-say-activists

    I had no idea New Zealand's abortion laws were so tough. What are the historic reasons for this? Religious, or something else? Seems anomalous in a country which boasts of its progressive politics as regards representation of women?

    After Northern Ireland, New Zealand has the toughest abortion laws in the Western World
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 45,496
    Mr. HYUFD, it needs to be to two decimal places.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 46,102
    DavidL said:

    This election is interesting because Cruz is so manifestly odious but it is not currently even the closest. There are several incredibly close races. The latest poll in Missouri made it a tie and the republican is an average of 0.5% ahead. Florida is very close too. If the democratic wave is losing momentum several races where they have tiny edges may start to swing against them.

    If the Democrats add Florida and Missouri to the states they lead in it will be 50 50 in the Senate.

    Tennessee is also more marginal than Texas on current polls and is the seat the Democrats really need for a majority. If 'O Rourke wins the Democrats have likely already won the Senate
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 30,975
    alex. said:

    O/T

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/oct/08/new-zealands-degrading-abortion-ban-breaches-human-rights-say-activists

    I had no idea New Zealand's abortion laws were so tough. What are the historic reasons for this? Religious, or something else? Seems anomalous in a country which boasts of its progressive politics as regards representation of women?

    In practice:

    New Zealand's abortion rate (number of abortions per 1000 women aged 15–44 years) is slightly below Australia's (22.2), and the United States (21.3), but above Japan's (13.8), Finland and Scotland's (both 10.9) and many European countries.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_New_Zealand
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 46,102
    Japan says the UK would be welcomed 'with open arms' to the Trans Pacific Partnership even as the USA withdraws from it

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45780889
  • 148grss148grss Posts: 43
    MY ENTRY

    47.35

    I think Beto is showing Dems how they need to approach the South; don't apologise for believing in what you believe in, and don't try and be mushy mouthed about it, but also be really grateful that your opponent is crap.

    Texas is weird enough (for instance you cannot register people to vote statewide in Texas, every county needs a different permit to allow you to register people) that turnout differential and Cruz's general unlikeability could mean Beto wins. Indeed, I'm surprised the Libertarian isn't polling higher, as I would imagine a few anti-Trump / anti-Cruz GOP types opting for him instead.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 12,382
    Dura_Ace said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    MY ENTRY

    48.16 for Beto.

    Close but no cigar.

    There are three candidates in the race, although yours is still more plausible than some!
    There are? https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2018/senate/tx/texas_senate_cruz_vs_orourke-6310.html

    He doesn't seem to be troubling the scorers much.
    This is the third one:

    https://www.nealdikeman.com
    Why do they bother? It must be a slightly weird hobby, like trainspotting (sorry Sunil). Probably means I am a bit high though.
    Why do the Liberal Democrats field candidates in Liverpool Wavertree? Or Labour in Cornwall? Or the Conservatives in most of Manchester?
    Because they want to be seen as representative of and interested in the whole country. Accepting no go areas would damage them overall.

    If I was American I would find the Libertarian viewpoint interesting but ultimately frivolous because it is a wasted vote.
    Wasted no longer. John McAfee is going to be Libertarian candidate for 2020. He is Trump Squared.
    If there was a candidate who had buried himself in sand with a cardboard box over his head to hide from police, I think I would feel obliged to vote for them.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 11,013
    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    This election is interesting because Cruz is so manifestly odious but it is not currently even the closest. There are several incredibly close races. The latest poll in Missouri made it a tie and the republican is an average of 0.5% ahead. Florida is very close too. If the democratic wave is losing momentum several races where they have tiny edges may start to swing against them.

    If the Democrats add Florida and Missouri to the states they lead in it will be 50 50 in the Senate.

    Tennessee is also more marginal than Texas on current polls and is the seat the Democrats really need for a majority. If 'O Rourke wins the Democrats have likely already won the Senate
    I looked closely at the Betfair Exchange market on the Senate, but the odds look reasonable - 1.44 for the GOP, 4 for hung, 10 for Dems. For the Dems to win, every single close race has to go their way, plus Texas or Tennessee. Given the strength of local/personal factors in US politics, it's hard to believe in a uniform swing like that. But GOP 51 looks non-trivial too - my guess is they'll end up with either 51 or 50, plus 47-48 Dems and 2 Independent pro-Dem.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 46,102

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    This election is interesting because Cruz is so manifestly odious but it is not currently even the closest. There are several incredibly close races. The latest poll in Missouri made it a tie and the republican is an average of 0.5% ahead. Florida is very close too. If the democratic wave is losing momentum several races where they have tiny edges may start to swing against them.

    If the Democrats add Florida and Missouri to the states they lead in it will be 50 50 in the Senate.

    Tennessee is also more marginal than Texas on current polls and is the seat the Democrats really need for a majority. If 'O Rourke wins the Democrats have likely already won the Senate
    I looked closely at the Betfair Exchange market on the Senate, but the odds look reasonable - 1.44 for the GOP, 4 for hung, 10 for Dems. For the Dems to win, every single close race has to go their way, plus Texas or Tennessee. Given the strength of local/personal factors in US politics, it's hard to believe in a uniform swing like that. But GOP 51 looks non-trivial too - my guess is they'll end up with either 51 or 50, plus 47-48 Dems and 2 Independent pro-Dem.
    Tennessee is the key Senate swing state and last night Taylor Swift who moved to the state aged 14 said she would be voting for the Democratic candidate there and urged her young fans to do the same

    https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/newsbeat-45781929
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 23,214
    MY ENTRY

    45.83
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 46,102
    HYUFD said:

    MY ENTRY

    O'Rourke 45.55%

    Updated to two decimal places
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 46,102

    Mr. HYUFD, it needs to be to two decimal places.

    Thanks and amended
  • kjhkjh Posts: 281

    49.02
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 23,214
    edited October 8
    Almost nothing on the Today programme about the Brazilian election. I think it's one of the biggest stories around at the moment. 46% voting for a far-right demagogue in a country where white men are only about 20% of the population. (White men supposedly being the type of person who vote for this sort of candidate).
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 11,796
    My entry 45.45

    Looking at the Brazil election results it looks like Bolsanaro won every district in Rio de Janeiro state:

    https://politica.estadao.com.br/eleicoes/2018/cobertura-votacao-apuracao/primeiro-turno/presidente
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 33,654
    edited October 8
    AndyJS said:

    Almost nothing on the Today programme about the Brazilian election. I think it's one of the biggest stories around at the moment. 46% voting for a far-right demagogue in a country where white men are only about 20% of the population.

    his previously small party doing well too I understand.

  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 9,033
    Dura_Ace said:

    DavidL said:


    Because they want to be seen as representative of and interested in the whole country. Accepting no go areas would damage them overall.

    If I was American I would find the Libertarian viewpoint interesting but ultimately frivolous because it is a wasted vote.

    Wasted no longer. John McAfee is going to be Libertarian candidate for 2020. He is Trump Squared.
    McAfee is nothing like Trump, except to the extent that they're both rich and scammy.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 2,186

    Dura_Ace said:

    DavidL said:


    Because they want to be seen as representative of and interested in the whole country. Accepting no go areas would damage them overall.

    If I was American I would find the Libertarian viewpoint interesting but ultimately frivolous because it is a wasted vote.

    Wasted no longer. John McAfee is going to be Libertarian candidate for 2020. He is Trump Squared.
    McAfee is nothing like Trump, except to the extent that they're both rich and scammy.
    They are both fanny rats of the highest order.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 45,496
    Mr. JS, trust in mainstream news would be better if they made wiser decisions about what to cover. It'll always be subjective to an extent, but some decisions are quite odd.
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 883
    The Times had an interesting pair of Russia themed headlines over the weekend, particularly the targeting of teens by bot accounts. It led to another discussion with my 14 year old about the general political leanings of his peers, gamer boys from the top sets of both a white/black quite impoverished urban school and middle class and agricultural sector kids from a predominantly white semi-rural school.

    In both cases the anecdotage is that kids don't really identify with UK political parties in a way that I had started to do at his age. There is a very strong divide along the lines of embracing or rejecting self-identity politics (someone referenced a Liddle article over the weekend): the gamer boys reject, and the gender divide seems pretty strong as pretty much everyone is a gamer boy post Overwatch, but it is played out through the reference points of Trump-Clinton. I don't remember a time when Americanisation was not an issue for the olds, but YouTube is my bug bear. My son is anti-identitarian and we've certainly has lots of discussions to try and nuance some of the borderline alt right and vehemently anti feminist stuff he brings up.

    As to the Russian bots - he has a username which hints to dogs, and has seen a lot of attempts to befriend him with puppy images (I know, I know!), but really their US centred propoganda has thoroughly salted any more UK targeted pro Corbyn messages they might try with UK kids. My son is quite familiar with aspects of Russian culture, be it angry Gopniks (Russian chavs) on his game servers and memes, and numerous Eastern European friends with, ahem, varied views on Russia.

    I'll not post much more than this today, but as a final comment, the 18-24s at the next election don't seem on course to behave in the way that you might think. Is there a good polling series on the political attitudes of those coming into the voter base that might be picking up any of this on an objective basis, with enough history to correlate with what those generations then do post 18? There's a thread header in this for someone.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 11,796
    AndyJS said:

    Almost nothing on the Today programme about the Brazilian election. I think it's one of the biggest stories around at the moment. 46% voting for a far-right demagogue in a country where white men are only about 20% of the population. (White men supposedly being the type of person who vote for this sort of candidate).

    Brazil also has a younger population spread than First World countries.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 9,033
    Dura_Ace said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    DavidL said:


    Because they want to be seen as representative of and interested in the whole country. Accepting no go areas would damage them overall.

    If I was American I would find the Libertarian viewpoint interesting but ultimately frivolous because it is a wasted vote.

    Wasted no longer. John McAfee is going to be Libertarian candidate for 2020. He is Trump Squared.
    McAfee is nothing like Trump, except to the extent that they're both rich and scammy.
    They are both fanny rats of the highest order.
    I take your point, this is also true.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 9,260
    I don't know much about Brazil, but I heard the South American football expert Tim Vickery say that anyone with the means to get out of the country was doing just that.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 45,496
    Ha, I was wondering whether to mention the BBC's recent good news segment on parents being denied access to their children because of spurious claims made by their former spouse/partner (they decided to highlight a mother's case despite the vast majority of such instances happening to fathers).

    Now a spot of reinforcing negative stereotypes: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-45751016

    "Panorama: Can violent men ever change?

    Every year more than a million people are victims of domestic abuse in the UK. Often the focus is on helping the victim find safety - but what of the abusers? Should they be given help? And can they change?"

    "Rachel is now an advocate for survivors and hears from lots of women seeking support."

    Male victims of domestic violence are often estimated at around 30-40%. One Canadian study (an outlier, to be fair) had them in the majority. The idea that perpetrators of domestic violence = men is one of those little sexist tropes deemed acceptable because it's misandry, which has brilliantly led to male refuges being horrendously underfunded.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 21,371
    44.44
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 6,299
    DavidL said:

    MY ENTRY

    48.16 for Beto.

    Close but no cigar.

    If he gets close but doesn't win in Texas, he may got for POTUS 2020.
  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 1,038
    MY ENTRY:
    43.39
  • notmenotme Posts: 2,850
    Pro_Rata said:

    The Times had an interesting pair of Russia themed headlines over the weekend, particularly the targeting of teens by bot accounts. It led to another discussion with my 14 year old about the general political leanings of his peers, gamer boys from the top sets of both a white/black quite impoverished urban school and middle class and agricultural sector kids from a predominantly white semi-rural school.

    In both cases the anecdotage is that kids don't really identify with UK political parties in a way that I had started to do at his age. There is a very strong divide along the lines of embracing or rejecting self-identity politics (someone referenced a Liddle article over the weekend): the gamer boys reject, and the gender divide seems pretty strong as pretty much everyone is a gamer boy post Overwatch, but it is played out through the reference points of Trump-Clinton. I don't remember a time when Americanisation was not an issue for the olds, but YouTube is my bug bear. My son is anti-identitarian and we've certainly has lots of discussions to try and nuance some of the borderline alt right and vehemently anti feminist stuff he brings up.

    As to the Russian bots - he has a username which hints to dogs, and has seen a lot of attempts to befriend him with puppy images (I know, I know!), but really their US centred propoganda has thoroughly salted any more UK targeted pro Corbyn messages they might try with UK kids. My son is quite familiar with aspects of Russian culture, be it angry Gopniks (Russian chavs) on his game servers and memes, and numerous Eastern European friends with, ahem, varied views on Russia.

    I'll not post much more than this today, but as a final comment, the 18-24s at the next election don't seem on course to behave in the way that you might think. Is there a good polling series on the political attitudes of those coming into the voter base that might be picking up any of this on an objective basis, with enough history to correlate with what those generations then do post 18? There's a thread header in this for someone.

    Another anecdote alert. My wife who’s a teacher did a Brexit discussion the other day with her class of fifteen year olds. More about what’s next. The choices on offer. They had a vote at the end whether to still go ahead with Brexit. 21 students, 15 go ahead, 5 remain and 1 abstain. The leavers were utterly vehement that immigration must stop, whatever the consequences.
    (I had given a bit of help to her in terms of what Chequers meant, what Canada style agreement meant and what Norway style EFTA meant).
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 1,552
    edited October 8
    AndyJS said:

    Almost nothing on the Today programme about the Brazilian election. I think it's one of the biggest stories around at the moment. 46% voting for a far-right demagogue in a country where white men are only about 20% of the population. (White men supposedly being the type of person who vote for this sort of candidate).

    Supposedly?

    If we take say Trump and Nutall to take maybe the closest examples (although they are not actual far right demagogues) white men were (or are) some of their strongest supporters.

    Although there is a rather obvious reason that would be in regards to the UK or the US or some other Western countries with White majorities rather than a blanket approach to the entire world. A leader building his popularity on attacking minorities (assuming one of those minorities is White) in a country mostly populated by Black people is obviously not going to be backed by White people, much the opposite.
  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 1,038
    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    MY ENTRY

    48.16 for Beto.

    Close but no cigar.

    There are three candidates in the race, although yours is still more plausible than some!
    There are? https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2018/senate/tx/texas_senate_cruz_vs_orourke-6310.html

    He doesn't seem to be troubling the scorers much.
    This is the third one:

    https://www.nealdikeman.com
    Why do they bother? It must be a slightly weird hobby, like trainspotting (sorry Sunil). Probably means I am a bit high though.
    Why do the Liberal Democrats field candidates in Liverpool Wavertree? Or Labour in Cornwall? Or the Conservatives in most of Manchester?
    Because they want to be seen as representative of and interested in the whole country. Accepting no go areas would damage them overall.

    If I was American I would find the Libertarian viewpoint interesting but ultimately frivolous because it is a wasted vote.
    And a vote for the Liberal Democrats is not (with apologies to Foxy)?
    To be fair, almost all votes are wasted in Single-Member Plurality.

    If your candidate was third, or second by a long way, or even won by more than a few votes, you may as well have drawn a willy on your ballot paper.
    You either voted for someone with no chance, or someone with no chance, or just piled up another vote where your candidate won anyway.
This discussion has been closed.