What about those candidates who readily refute the last election result to garner Trumps endorsement. The we have characters like Marjory Taylor Green. Maybe our news over here is badly weighted and I'm poorly informed, but baffled I certainly am.
Some candidates cling to Trump others don't want him close. In the end they will win or lose, depending on what the voters say.

The Republicans have Marjory and Lauren (who lives right down the county road from me) and the Democrats have AOC and the Squad. Meh.
 
Never had any premium bonds.
I remember my ma once complaining to them after having had a few and never winning anything at all over years. She thought there was supposed to be some sort of guarantee that all bonds would win at least something at least once. I.e. that the random number thing, ERNIE, was true. She got no change out of them.
When doing my Dad's probate I found he had a few bonds too and had had them for about 50 years. I rang them up and sho nuff, he'd never won feck all neither.
So don't think I'll be getting any soon!!:mad::mad:
 
Never had any premium bonds.
I remember my ma once complaining to them after having had a few and never winning anything at all over years. She thought there was supposed to be some sort of guarantee that all bonds would win at least something at least once. I.e. that the random number thing, ERNIE, was true. She got no change out of them.
When doing my Dad's probate I found he had a few bonds too and had had them for about 50 years. I rang them up and sho nuff, he'd never won feck all neither.
So don't think I'll be getting any soon!!:mad::mad:

Ma T got me some when I was an ickle Turk an I've never won on them in fifty years - or at least she didn't mention it. :)
My recent win was from a modest batch I got a year or so ago..
 
@Stanleysteamer
Ere Stan, how is a random number generator going to guarantee that any given ticket wins at least once?
Cos if it is truely random it should eventually generate all the numbers it possibly can.
"Random numbers explained
For a number in a sequence or distribution to be truly random, it must be independent. The independence of numbers means there is no correlation between successive numbers. In addition, these numbers should occur in the distribution with approximately the same frequency."
From https://www.techtarget.com/whatis/d...ndom number occurs in,on past or present ones.
So, given time, all the numbers in the distribution should get at least one hit.
The limitation is the number of times the wheel is spun as it were and the number of numbers in the distribution, which is kinda the same thing said in a different way.
Ernie could be bust or not being switched on often enough!!!
Think of monkeys, typewriters and Shakespeare. ;)
 
So the tenners worth of bonds I bought in 1981 might cough up just after the end of the universe and time:(
According to the website, the odds of winning are 24,000 to one for £1 bonds so 2,400 to one for you winning anything with your stake. Divide 2400 by 12 = 200 so that's the chances for you in a year, So to be sure(?!) of a win you need to have held onto them for 200 years. 1/169 at the mo!
If my maths is up the spout then I apologise in advance!!!
But it just shows you need to own a shedload to be sure of a win!
Still better odds than the Euromillions.

Still plucking up the courage to click on "post reply" on this cos maths is not my strongpoint despite once getting an A level in it!
 

Similar threads