Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A proxy bet for a Leave victory
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A proxy bet for a Leave victory
Sometimes when you think the value on a particular bet has gone, and you have to look for a proxy bet elsewhere, with with the best price on Leave winning at 13/5 perhaps the backing the 5/1 on the next Scottish independence referendum happening before 2020 could be a good proxy bet.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Especially if Nigel Farage in a feathery cap replaces Hollande as new Viceroy of France.
Little England is the Chilterns, Wensleydale, the Forest of Dean, Constable Country, rural Devon. Little England is Leighton Buzzard, Tunbridge Wells, Wetherby, Harrogate, Lyme Regis. Little England is actually the heartland of the Conservative Party.
And Cameron has accepted that he cannot win over that heartland.
A EU member on England's northern border would be a bit of an "screw you" gesture to a departing England.
It's going to be:
Leave
The audience on the ITV debate
Remain
Voodoo poll said so, innit.
I think the proportion will be worse this time as an urban myth went around that you had register specially for the referendum.
Furthermore, the arguments about whether Scotland would retain grandfather rights to the UK's treaty advantages would be over: there would be no grandfathered rights and Scotland would be joining as a new country and signed up to the Euro and everything else.
With oil - the driving force behind independence - no longer the cash cow it was once perceived to be, a precipitate second referendum on the European question (when a substantial minority within Scotland favour Leave anyway), could kill the question for twenty years.
Sanders says he'll continue the fight next Tuesday in the DC primary, then take the fight to the convention. Obama called him today, as did Hillary Clinton.
He has a meeting with Obama at the White House on Thursday.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/06/rattled-cameron-holds-press-conference-to-try-to-change-eu-referendum-debate/
"If the Crisis is a little more serious than all the issues that have summoned COBRA, such as Ash Dieback and horsemeat, then the most important thing that Number 10 can do is call a press conference with the Prime Minister.
David Cameron doesn’t do that many press conferences at all, despite promising in Opposition that he would hold a monthly one, and so when he summons hacks to the roof of a hotel at short notice, you know that there is a Crisis that the Prime Minister is taking Very Seriously indeed..."
The similarities with the EU are there for all to see, most politicians are control freaks, I want them out of the way, most are useless, counter productive.
Why would a non-EU to EU border be more problematic Scotland/England than Ireland/NI?
The SNP Government is not planning a second referendum on Scottish independence in the event of Brexit because “they don’t think they can win”, one of the country’s leading business figures claimed yesterday.
David Watt, head of the Institute of Directors in Scotland, told industry leaders yesterday that a number of “senior” figures have indicated that a quickfire second referendum is not on the cards at the moment.
It came as a second leading SNP politician inside a week played down the prospect of another vote on the constitution because the Yes camp may lose.
http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/snp-not-planning-2nd-indyref-after-brexit-1-4147484#ixzz4AxvtEU5R
But, I am yet to be convinced he has.
https://twitter.com/MSNBC/status/740265852012920833
@ben4ipswich: The choice is between @nigel_farage’s little England or a Great Britain with a strong future #StrongerIn #ITVEURef https://t.co/9KKfPNL36C
That'd also probably require separate Scottish EU accession talks as well, and negotiating EMU/Schengen opt-outs all over again.
If the EU goes south in the meantime, in particular, I wouldn't see it as a big factor.
It has a specific meaning, analogous to the definition of too rich always referring to someone with that little bit more money than you, but never you.
I know HRC had already won, but that is very poor for Bernie.
It sounds a bit core votey to me.
Still find the odds barmy given the state of the polls...
I don't see any reasons why the EU would offer Scotland the UK's current opt-outs. Pressure from members with their own seccessionist regions will ensure that Scotland would get no special favours.
The sleeper has just been revamped hasn't it? Only ever gone as far as Waverley. Fancy doing it to the highlands one day!
That will be a big blow.
Interestingly, the architects are almost always less confident/more realistic.
Cute.
http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2016/06/cameron-slumps-boris-slides-and-davidson-soars-in-our-cabinet-league-table.html
#EUref #itveuref
@PolhomeEditor: "If you're going to talk about immigration, you need to get the right tone," says UKIP MP Douglas Carswell. He's talking about you, Nigel.
Plus, going North, the taking the train sometimes allows you to 'get off at Haymarket'.
Looking at the audience it was typical of London but by no means representative of the UK. Were there any polls conducted afterwards?
Looking forward to Dominic Cummings calm, balanced, nuanced reation.....
'Two whores brawling in public will do none of us any good'.....
The last time around we had a white paper from the government of Scotland promising an extra £1000 a head in public spending and a Leave type list of all the things that we could spend it on. Pre-school education was the favourite and a vote for Independence was supposed to be a vote for their future.
This was of course a dishonest fantasy but many people believed it and voted for it. That simply would not happen again. The vast majority appreciate that if Scotland was independent now we would be facing austerity on a scale that would make Osborne shiver.
What the SNP need to do is get on with actually governing, help the Scottish economy to grow in viable ways (less green nonsense that only makes economic sense if it is subsidised by the public purse) and close that gap. If they do then the discussion can no doubt take place again but that is not a 2 year project.
Sturgeon is far from stupid and is acutely aware of this. She will do her best to avoid a referendum that she knows she would lose and which would set independence back for a generation. There is a chance that, Cameron like, she might find herself blocked in and with no choice but to offer a referendum but the odds against that are way more than 5/1. Not a good bet.
The difficulty with EURef (and by no means am I conflating an iScotland which, as you say, would have been in real difficulty, with an ex-EU UK, which would be fine, albeit inhibited), is that no one knows how sensible or not the rEU would or will be.
Plenty of "they will make life difficult, pour encourager les autres.." but in actual fact we have no idea whether they will fold instantly, their bluff having been called in negotiations if we do leave, or whether they will take the hard line some expect.
And we know where he stands.
Snap verdict Cameron vs Farage
A better night for the Prime Minister. Mr Farage tetchy under questioning while Mr Cameron managed to shift the tone of the debate beyond dry and dusty economics, as he implored voters not to embrace the "little England of Nigel Farage", appealing the voters' patriotism as talked of a "bigger, greater Britain". "We're an amazing country. If you love your country, don't damage your economy." But with the polls deadlocked it was no game changer.
http://news.sky.com/story/1708581/how-did-cameron-and-farage-score-in-eu-debate
An example ... Cammo's no ifs and no buts immigration. You can reduce immigration but you need the ability to do so and the will to do so. Or a massive recession. Cameron knew he was lying, but he did it anyway. I'm not upset by politicians lying, but his lie wasn't even clever. He clearly thinks enough of the voters are stupid.
If you ask him why he lied, he will talk about what he's currently doing and how effective it will be. That is not the question. You can argue about the benefits of immigration, you can argue about racism, but that is evading the question.
He lied, and much worse, he expects to get away with it. That is the real problem (not the lie), and perhaps that isn't the fault of the politicians.
We are now at the stage where we just have to hope that the Leave side is right about the economic consequences of Brexit. The parallels with the Scottish independence referendum are really uncanny in so many ways.
Throughout that campaign the Yes side rubbished every No warning and talked about Project Fear. Independence, they said, would set Scotland free to plot a path to prosperity that Westminster - which took far more from Scotland than it gave back - would never deliver. When No said that the Scottish economy was too reliant on oil revenues this was dismissed. Oil is just a bonus, the Yes side said; and, in any case, we are heading towards a new boom. The experts are talking Scotland down, they are never right, this is just the establishment seeking to protect itself and its vested interests.
Turns out, though, that the establishment was right. That the experts did know what they were talking about. That the data and the stats the Yes side produced were completely wrong. That all the assurances they gave and the claims they made were false. It turns out that if Scotland had voted for independence it would now be embroiled in financial and economic catastrophe. It turns out that Yes was completely and utterly wrong.
Let us hope that Leave aren't wrong. Because if they are, it is going to get very, very unpleasant for a great many of this country's people very quickly.
On the one hand, Scottish voters would presumably have been excluded from the vote (I think Scotland was supposed to be independent by now) which would help Leave given Scotland is overwhelmingly pro-Remain. On the other, the oil price crash would probably have caused a catastrophic start to an independent Scotland which may have pushed voters to Remain.
First thing I hear on the BBC this morning, is how the government is contorting itself in an effort to extend the registration period for voting; with the L/Dems and Greens urging this illegality on, in the hope it would benefit the REMAIN side.
Set against that the reduction in that trade would reduce our overall trade deficit somewhat so the effect would probably be even less. There is a reason that the Treasury forecasts are 4 or 5 years ahead. It is only by multiplying those figures on an annual basis can you get anything reasonable (and even then by assuming ceteris paribus and that no significant counteraction such as a depreciation in the £ would not be taken by the government to offset the effect).
There is a perfectly legitimate argument about why we would want to take that risk and have the possibility of such self-inflicted harm, no matter how small. There is a counter-argument that taking control of our own affairs gives us at least the opportunity to make good that damage and then some. This is the judgement we are being asked to me and it is far from straightforward. For me, the decisive factor is not what the EU is like now but what it is likely to be like in 10-20 years time. I see that as less attractive to us than the alternative but that is, I fully accept, another judgement call.
Just catching up on the debate with Cameron and Farage. Two good positive performances.
Farage was on the receiving end of a lot of the Remain soundbites and argumentative questioners, whereas the questioners of the PM were a little more deferential. DC was very good though, he toned down the rhetoric of war and famine, showed why he won the election last year.
NF 7/10, DC 8/10
Still not changed my mind though, postal vote arrived today and is being sent back with a cross in the Leave box.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7oB0SHTh08E
I'm not so sure.
A referendum would surely require a fresh Holyrood mandate, and isn't the next Scottish election in 2021?