Options
A 50% return in fewer than three months? – politicalbetting.com
A 50% return in fewer than three months? – politicalbetting.com
We'd offer 1/2 on this being the widest margin of victory in London Mayoral election history (since 2000)https://t.co/XSJYmpEmoD https://t.co/1Maa9vjSgm
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
The Tucker Putin interview has had 187 MILLION impressions on Twitter, just on Carlson's channel
https://x.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1755734526678925682?s=20
And another 12m on Carlson's YoutTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOCWBhuDdDo
Another 10m on Russian YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIbL_MXK8Tg
And elswhere, endlessly - 3m on Telegraph YouTube, on and on
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rKigbrcGNg
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
And that’s not the main platform. X is
Vladimir Putin claims he was ready to end war 18 months ago but Boris Johnson scuppered deal by telling Ukraine leaders it was 'better to fight Russia'
https://twitter.com/i/status/1756508944728826361
Carlson’s Youtube
https://youtu.be/fOCWBhuDdDo?si=CLqzV057bBTF1Hi0
12m
Russian YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIbL_MXK8Tg
10m
Russel brand’s take
https://youtu.be/TpeSVOwys6M?si=GsBl1aP5xUiRmj-s
2m
Telegraph
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rKigbrcGNg
3m
Arabic
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBh0KycV92Y&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==
1m
Live reaction
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJr7sxEWpbc&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==
2.9m
Fox now
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4boi-mCDUCQ&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==
1m
Times radio
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gd9qktZnVJQ&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==
1.2m
Some weird Russian thing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0vQ5wZfQQw&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==
Nearly 1m
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
It's a bit of a litmus test, really: the people who believe this are the people who are so down the BDS hole that they believe Putin over Boris.
A somewhat different view:
https://www.thebureau.news/p/no-the-west-did-not-sabotage-an-early
https://twitter.com/CourierBoyUK/status/1756339975820374181
Well I thought it was funny.
I read an interesting take the other day. The pro-Putin western hard right are weirdly like the pro-hamas far left - ‘queers for Palestine’ makes as much sense as American nationalists for Putin. Putin clearly detests and fears America, he wouldn’t make exceptions for American nutters in bullhorn helmets
What else might be interesting is who is spreading the clips. As I said yesterday, there are a lot of blue ticks for a Russian bot farm. But I do not have the tools to follow this up.
This is my point. The interview has the classic ingredients of virality. It will greatly please some, greatly intrigue others, and greatly annoy many more, so everyone talks about it or shares it, so it is ubiquitous
This is what I predicted would happen. I never made any comment on the morality of it or the veracity of the dyad involved. Indeed I can see an argument, morally, why you shouldn’t interview Putin - tho on the whole I do not agree, it is better to see our enemy and understand how he thinks, even if it risks him smuggling his ideas into our discourse
Another interesting point about this stupid interview is that, allegedly, the Russian-language version for domestic audiences is (ahem) somewhat cut. Another example of Russia saying different things to different audiences.
As to who's spreading it: apparently, people like you...
As for 'deranged': no. It's too early on a Sunday morning for that.
ETA it could be a prediction that Paddy Power will pay out early, in exactly one or two months
Yes I know its Skwawkbox but can't see how SKS can do anything else as the BOD demand his head on a plate.
I placed a bet on GG at 4/1 as the news broke yesterday
(A more pertinent question would be, why did they pick the silly sod in the first place?)
We done Luke.
Who do you want to win in Rochdale??
Because there would be a certain irony if in response to a post about antisemitic* conspiracy theorists you put forward an antisemitic conspiracy theory...
*Autocorrect tried to make that 'antiepstic' for some reason...
https://www.sealionpress.co.uk/post/other-ideologies-ii-georgism
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68266447
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish?
Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
He also led the shortlisting panel via his NEC role.
Which Antisemitic conspiracy theory have I put forward?
And btw I note you are unable to answer who you want to win in Rochdale
Which seems, to put it mildly, slightly unlikely. And would count as an antisemitic conspiracy theory.
(Do you also mean 'We Believe in Israel' rather than 'Israel first'? He's secretary of Labour First which is different.)
I don't really care who wins in Rochdale, frankly. I don't think it's a significant by-election, unlike Wellingborough.
I would prefer it not to be Galloway who makes Mosley look like a moderate these days, but I'd be surprised if it was. The real irony and what I presume Ali is nervous about when he made these stupid remarks is if he takes enough of the vote off Labour to let the Tories or (less probably) the Liberal Democrats through the middle.
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.224220834
https://www.thejc.com/lets-talk/why-has-labours-rochdale-candidate-fundraised-for-a-mosque-that-hosted-extremists-ln6owl6f
Since then, the Mail reports a recording of Ali, well:-
Outrage after Labour candidate claims Israel deliberately allowed 1,400 of its citizens to be massacred on October 7 in order to give it the 'green light' to invade Gaza
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13069671/Outrage-Labour-candidate-claims-Israel-deliberately-allowed-1-400-citizens-massacred-October-7-order-green-light-invade-Gaza.html
I said he chaired the shortlisting panel which he did.
I did not say "he was paid by Israel to manage the selection panel."
My first post said "paid Israeli lobbyist led the shortlisting panel"
That is 100% correct no matter how much you try to claim otherwise nor is it antisemitic
Stop making stuff up and claiming stuff is anti-semitic when it isn't.
It is funny though to see you squirm over the SKS Candidate for Rochdale and not have a horse in the race.
Just to confirm - you accept you were wrong about which organisations he leads, in order to promote a false picture of his views?
In which case, fair enough to Labour. They were unlucky.
But I can't see how he survives saying it. Even our own resident antisemites don't suggest Israel deliberately allowed 7th October, although the more we know the more spectacular the failure of the Israeli government under Netanyahu looks.
That is 100% correct no matter how much you try to claim otherwise nor is it antisemitic
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/25858745/river-thames-abdul-ezedi-clapham-attack/
Makes you wonder how many deaths go unremarked each year, if a search for one body has found two others in the same narrow stretch of water. Perhaps someone should develop an AI underwater drone to search for corpses year-round.
That said, the 2024 election is perfectly timed to create the maximum margin of victory. If Khan had only stood aside after two terms to allow for a fresh candidate and we might then expect a real blowout.
I am also pretty sure these words were from November ie before the selection in which case bad due diligence rather than unlucky.
Bad due diligence not unlucky
0/10 try harder
Galloway is seeking the votes of the different British Asian communities (and there are many) - which will drive more aggro. I’ve had a scan through his TwiX feed and he is literally just going for their votes on this one issue.
Will be interesting to see what percentage of the electorate vote for him rather than Labour
Free focus group stuff for SKS in that type of ward with that type of demographics.
On the front page of the website there are four or five articles saying Fuckyeah this is bad, get rid of the old duffer, and just one short terse column trying to defend him (not very well)
Perhaps betting positions must be adjusted accordingly. The NYT is powerfully influential for Democrats
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/feb/10/labour-mps-facing-wave-of-independent-challengers-over-stance-on-gaza
Ali made his remarks in October or November.
The world doesn't work like that. All Carlson needs - to claim media victory - is a few seconds of eyeballs on his interview, and a massive media frenzy. He has achieved both and then some. He'sgot tens, possibly hundreds of milliions of people catching a glimpse, and he has absolutely caused a shitstorm of global publicity, with him at the centre
Job done. Extremely well. From his perspective
Tony Lloyd wasn’t even dead when he made these statements.
Labour have screwed up with the selection.
BJO’s statement on Luke Akehurst is a fact, it is hardly anti semitic.
But this is the NYT turning on Biden. That's like the Telegraph, Times, Sun and Spectator turning on Rishi Sunak, all at once
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/feb/10/labour-mps-facing-wave-of-independent-challengers-over-stance-on-gaza
It will change the world.
This could easily have an effect on 15-20 seats.
If Streeting was under pressure I’d expect labour to flood the seat with resources.
The govt have already expressed their concerns. Labour will probably sit on their hands given current form.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-68266335
https://x.com/The_Real_Feisty/status/1756311591459365353?s=20
Problem is that all the Free Palestine shit is pro Hamas pro antisemitism pro River to the Sea. Hamas need to free the hostages and stop firing Iranian weapons into Israel as well as the IDF stopping its now futile military operation.
In any conflict both sides think they are the victims and the enemy the bad people. In Gaza both sides are wrong. We cannot go back to Status Quo Ante.
What does Gaza have to do with Wardleworth or Kirkholt?
I would not even deign to look at a headline about it, by morons for morons.
I do hope Biden can be persuaded to stand aside but somehow I doubt it.
(Although, I did forecast way back that if Biden was going to pull out he wouldn't do so until February 24; still two and a half weeks to go.)
Plus I simply don't see the point of the protest - it's not like we can nuke Israel to stop them executing their plan - which is about the only thing that would stop the current Israeli government from continuing it's current plan.
It sounds painfully believable
Distinct echoes of the London mayoral race here. Biden-Harris, like Khan, are more than distinctly flawed. But when the alternative is as bad as it is, that's less important.
But has the interview persuaded anyone that Putin is the good guy here? I doubt it. In that sense it fell flat.
And in real life I haven't seen any interest whatsoever, have you?
Even on here there is only a meta-argument about how big a deal the interview was, rather than any discussion of the interview itself.
There is just one terse column from Paul Krugman trying to defend him, but it is feeble and doesn't persuade, and has been hidden away
It's entirely consistent with their longstanding editorial stance.
The idea that the NYT is the Democrats house publication like the Telegraph is for the Tories is deluded.
If they were engaging in journalism, rather than opinion, they would have reported this, too.
https://www.justsecurity.org/92090/the-real-robert-hur-report-versus-what-you-read-in-the-news/
To be fair it’s becoming rapidly more difficult to be sympathetic with Israel. They seem to have done, or at least achieved, nothing whatsoever towards their stated aim of ‘getting the hostages back’ while at the same time slaughtering Palestinians.
I have no problem whatsoever with the idea of a safe home for the Jewish people, and can well understand why they want it in Palestine. However the Palestinians were there legally and historically and indeed I suspect that many of them have at least as good a ‘historical’ and ‘genetic’ right to be there as many of the more recent ‘Jewish’ immigrants.
Tho it is perhaps more like the Guardian vis a vis Labour (only more powerful), than the Telegraph vis a vis Tories
He wins, you have to lose. If you lose, he's won. The idea of 'win-win' doesn't enter his head.
If you have a 'contract' then you need to do what you say immediately, or else he won't keep up his end of the deal (and indeed, often won't keep up his end of the deal anyway because he should be allowed to shout 'bankrupt' and get away with everything scott-free).
All that matters is that I was righr
Fuck what Putin said. Who cares. Let him invade Mongolia and nuke the Bahamians. It's just ME BEING RIGHT. ME ME ME ME ME MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
Of course the NYT care if Trump gets elected. They really really really don't want him elected. I get that they are running a business and Trump is good box office, but they are also sincere about their Democrat, left of centre beliefs, and they are probably in actual fear of what Trump might do to them, if elected
You are the delusional one here, sorry. The NYT loathes and fears Donald Trump
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/feb/09/atlantic-ocean-circulation-nearing-devastating-tipping-point-study-finds
..Until now there has been no consensus about how severe this will be. One study last year, based on changes in sea surface temperatures, suggested the tipping point could happen between 2025 and 2095. However, the UK Met Office said large, rapid changes in Amoc were “very unlikely” in the 21st century.
The new paper, published in Science Advances, has broken new ground by looking for warning signs in the salinity levels at the southern extent of the Atlantic Ocean between Cape Town and Buenos Aires. Simulating changes over a period of 2,000 years on computer models of the global climate, it found a slow decline can lead to a sudden collapse over less than 100 years, with calamitous consequences.
The paper said the results provided a “clear answer” about whether such an abrupt shift was possible: “This is bad news for the climate system and humanity as up till now one could think that Amoc tipping was only a theoretical concept and tipping would disappear as soon as the full climate system, with all its additional feedbacks, was considered.”..
Whether we'll live to see this is a matter if doubt; it's not unlikely our children or grandchildren will.