Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The chances of Mrs May getting her own way on the Article 50 r
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The chances of Mrs May getting her own way on the Article 50 revocation date are less than 78%
A massive political battle is brewing on the PM’s declaration at last week’s CON conference that she’ll invoke Article 50 to extract the UK from EU in March. As can be seen from the chart of Betfair betting above punters have moved sharply to the Jan-June 2017 option which reached an 81% chance and is now starting to slip a bit.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
We want Parliamentary sovereignty and oversight on the Brexit deal, not to frustrate Brexit, but to ensure it is a good Brexit.
REMAIN 16,141,241
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/10/10/currency-guru-says-pound-slide-liberates-uk-from-malign-grip-of/
“The UK economy is rebalancing amazingly well. It is a stunning achievement that a once-in-fifty-year event should have gone to smoothly,” he told the Telegraph.
@faisalislam: "If we were to leave single market, consequences could be disastrous" says @MayorofLondon pic.twitter.com/vJoNcneuMv
Hard Brexit is an idea that must be tested (to destruction), but remainers don't need to join in.
The huge decline in the value of pound and the threats of some US firms to leave the City of London are adding to the pressure.
I'm rather baffled by this statement, although quite a few people seem to be thinking that way. Surely the damaging uncertainty is a conclusive argument for getting on with it, rather than delaying it?
@faisalislam: Sense in City/business is Government not prioritising financial passport that underpinned their EU HQ activity- starting to act accordingly
There may be a debate on the terms of exit but that's a different process. I think the govt has made a mistake in ruling that out too but if Labour force a debate and a vote - and they can - it still won't change the fact of, or the timetable for, leaving.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebec_referendum,_1995
But he didn't.
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/f1-2014-second-and-third-tests.html
I voted remain, and have serious concerns about risks to the economy; this isn't one of them.
I may or may not have shares in Scottish brass nameplate suppliers.
No amount of REMOANING will alter the result.
LEAVE 7,410,742
REMAIN 10,141,241
Just as silly a comment :-0
That's a lot of potential Conservative rebels, never mind the Leaver MPs who are true Parliamentarians.
It's so binary. And that's both - but at least I get to be surprised by the lie detector.
The lack of a lender of last resort, and no automaticity that iScotland would be in the single market made it a no no
party unity from donald!
Scotland is leaving the EU.
The thing I'm finding interesting is some Leavers are saying there is a mandate to leave the single market, well if that's right, surely there's also a mandate to give the NHS £350m a week.
Non-Leave 29.1m
Who's to say how many would now get of their lazy arses now they see the damage wrought by the Brexiteer liars?
1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements."
I assume that the interpretation of the Treaty is a matter for the ECJ. That being so, is there any reason why the disaffected should not apply *to the ECJ* for a ruling on what the constitutional requirements of the UK are, as well as or instead of applying to the court here? That would be fun, and would take years.
Bear in mind that Giuliano Amato who drafted Article 50 has admitted that the sole purpose of the Article is to troll the UK (I paraphrase, but only slightly).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welsh_devolution_referendum,_1997
Clue to the hard of learning: Democratic identifiers are not necessarily the same as Democratic voters.
I hate to break it to you, but most remainers are now claiming this 'damage' is being delayed. It hasn't happened yet, but we're running on empty I believe, is the current stance.
You remainers really should co-ordinate your doom mongering.
Clearly Parliament ought to get a say on the eventual deal. And they will, though rejecting it would be very awkward indeed.
I continue to mock the 45%ers, for the same reason I mock the Brexiteers.
Petty Nationalism (in any guise) is a cancerous ideology that must be opposed at all times.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2016/10/11/samsung-tells-galaxy-note-7-owners-to-turn-off-devices-and-stops/
"I wrote Article 50, so I know it well," Amato told a conference in Rome, saying he had inserted it specifically to prevent the British from complaining that there was no clear cut, official way for them to bail out of the Union.
"My intention was that it should be a classic safety valve that was there, but never used. It is like having a fire extinguisher that should never have to be used. Instead, the fire happened."
I also explore why a poll of 500 likely voters isn't that difference in MOE terms from a 1,000 strong poll, or 2,000 poll.
I'm sure there'll be a link from Breitbart or 4CHan that people will use to repudiate my piece.
What do we want?
Parliamentary democracy!
When do we want it.
Not now obviously, that could be awkward, but later, for sure, OK?
It's all perilously close to trusting the Government to carry "on an undertaking of great advantage, but nobody to know what it is”.
On the night before the vote I went to the theatre in Plymouth. On the way in was a large group of people demonstrating in favour of an IN vote, and they were still at it when I came out again. If you put a similar amount of serious effort into campaigning for the result you (and I) wanted, well done and commiserations on the result. But if, as I suspect, the sum total of your contribution to the war effort was to sit at your screen retweating 140-character gobbets of secondhand vapid bilge on PB, I have nothing to offer but howls of derisive laughter, and a musical entertainment consisting of massed choirs singing "suck it up, loser" to the tune of "O come all ye faithful", followed by the world's saddest sonata played on the world's smallest violin.
And a lifetime's supply of homeopathic butthurt remedies.
*runs and hides*
I don't buy that the referendum was close.
The weight of establishment was on the side of Remain, it was the status quo, and they mustered a number of heavyweights on their side.
All Leave had was Nigel and Boris! For Leave to get to a 52:48 win was a phenomenally good result for them.
Though I'm going to love seeing John Redwood and Sir Bill Cash voting for that. My irony meter will break.
It was The Sunil wot won it!
Like Dan Hannan.
The SNP is a misnomer, they aren't nationalists, they're EU stooges and lackeys.
And Trump is the same - who will win? I've no idea now.
The parliamentary maths and internal party politics seem to dictate it.
Once she has a deal - something along the lines of an EEA deal, she can call an election, win an almighty majority over a demoralised Labour and deflated UKIP, and then ride it out - letting the headbangers froth on the backbenches.
It's a high wire act, but that's what I'd try to do.
Of course it assumes EU leaders would sign up to such a deal. Big assumption.
She has missed a trick by not guaranteeing the rights of resident EU citizens at the outset and declaring that her objective is the closest possible economic relationship with the EU compatible with national sovereignty. Also that while we cannot continue to rely on immigration for growth, we cannot and will not deliver prosperity by closing off from the world.
This would have set the right tone and settled a few nerves in addition.
May should slap the nay sayers in her own party down by threatening to withdraw the whip (or perhaps speaking to constituency chairmen) from the Tory trouble markers. Unity on this issue, as well as being the right thing, means the opposition can be painted as not accepting the result.
No offence.
Moreover, for Clinton herself, it’s a problematic line of attack: she likes to espouse the ‘believe all victims’ mantra of the new feminists, yet for decades she has smeared her husband’s accusers...
Challenged to defend her Wikileaks-revealed comments to Goldman Sachs about having a public and private persona, Clinton tried to claim she was referencing Abraham Lincoln. Trump counterpunched with his best line of the evening: ‘She lied, and now she’s blaming the lie on the late, great Abraham Lincoln.’ In another telling moment, as Clinton argued that she could bring the country together, Trump reminded us that Hillary views a huge swathe of the population as ‘deplorable’ and ‘irredeemable’. Again, a very effective use of turning Clinton’s own weakness – her elitism – against her.
http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/trump-and-clinton-how-low-can-they-go/18855#.V_zWy_sp0s6.twitter
"It has been a damned nice thing — the nearest run thing you ever saw in your life."