politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » So who wants to be the British Emmanuel Macron? There’s £50 mi
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » So who wants to be the British Emmanuel Macron? There’s £50 million worth of support waiting for you
Tomorrow’s Observer…
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
https://www.freeflush.co.uk/blogs/freeflush-rainwater-harvesting-blog/revealed-the-wettest-cities-in-the-uk
In regards to the article and a new party.
If they are anti Brexit centrists I can't see why Lib Dems seats would fall to them, I think for some the idea is the Lib Dems would join or at least they wouldn't compete with each other, so why compete with the Lib Dems and if so why swap Lib Dem MP for new party MP?
It also doesn't seem likely that safe Conservative or safe Labour seats would fall to a new party. Too much ground to make up and an attachment to the party holding the seat already.
Scotland just seems too crowded for anyone else to make a break through, not that England and Wales aren't but with the SNP and the independence issue on top I struggle to see even a new party that somehow starts making strides elsewhere breaking in.
That would presumably leave the main hunting ground as marginal seats where the Lib Dems aren't holding the seat or aren't the party in second place. Which can't leave a huge amount of potential seats before we even get into how difficult taking these seats will be.
The SDP was a long time ago now but looking to the much more recent past UKIP's experiences are very telling. Despite winning millions of votes without having any kind of strong regional base they couldn't in the end win any seats and only held the 1 that defected to them.
The media wasn't necessarily crying out for a UKIP style party, not as much as they do a centrist party now but there were much more favourable conditions for a UKIP style party to flourish back then and they could not actually breakthrough.
There is something of a counter argument about them actually achieving their main aim and I would concede that a couple of decades (ish) after being formed and winning millions of votes in a couple of general elections they did bring about change. I'm just not sure that a new party will do as well as even them.
"Syria war: At least 70 reported dead in suspected gas attack"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-43686157
Half of the electorate believes that there are at least pockets of antisemitism in the Labour party, according to a poll.
A third (34%) of voters also believe that Jeremy Corbyn is among those in the party who hold antisemitic views, despite his repeated denials and pledge to be a “militant opponent” of the problem.
https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/2018/apr/08/labour-antisemitism-opinion-poll?__twitter_impression=true
https://twitter.com/MsHelicat/status/982723842786328577
I thank you.
https://twitter.com/MsHelicat/status/982720195948097537
Up here we use proper metres, and my valley sees 2 1/2 of these per year.
An interesting story, though it is in The Observer [where the fake news of Conservatives apparently not believing animals could be sentient, causing quite the Twitter storm, came from].
Distribution of resources would be critical. Not merely in the tactical "can we win seats?" sense, but, perhaps more importantly, in avoiding the appearance of being an anti-Conservative or anti-Labour party. If it looks like the Ralph Nader Party, that could be less than helpful for its prospects.
CON 27%+1
LAB 26%+3
LD 6%=
GRN 2%=
Comparisons with last September
Sunday Times Panelbase .
Looks like the Scottish Tories holding up rather well.
His analysis of Corbyn may even be fully justified, but let other people say it. The British foreign secretary should be concentrating on his job, not trying to score party political points. It is surely in the interests of the U.K. to play down internal political opposition to their Russia stance not big it up.
But where and by whom is any such thinking being done?
The Observer story is money before tactics before strategy before purpose; three carts before one horse. Insofar as it is possible to tell, the floated new outfit looks dangerously like a 'status quo party' (not Brexit, not Corbyn..), at a time when confidence in the status quo is remarkably low; even a small-c conservative like Mrs May is forced to at least speak about how things need to change.
Indeed isn't this the same hole the LibDems have already fallen into, being seen as principally defending the current settlement at the worst possible time?
Another interesting thing is that in the last four races at Bahrain, only once has the chap on pole won it. [I expect that to become two in five, but it's a bit surprising].
Deltapoll also looked at the popularity of leading politicians. Corbyn scored a net approval rating of -27, with the prime minister, Theresa May, on -6. She had better ratings than her cabinet team, with the chancellor Philip Hammond on -10, Brexit secretary David Davis on -22, and foreign secretary Boris Johnson on -26.
At the bottom of the pile came Vince Cable. With the Lib Dems still struggling to make an impact, its leader has a net approval rating of -29
Corbyn tied with Johnson.....sounds about right.....
SNP 36.9%
Con 28.6%
Lab 27.1%
On topic - any new party will need to take a position on Brexit as politics will continue to be seen through that prism for the next few years at least. That immediately limits its appeal and possible vote share by a half. It then needs to be distinctive and not-status quo. Not much chance of it pulling anything off IMHO.
The SDP was based upon talented and respected Labour MPs (Owen, Jenkins, Williams, Rodgers) who were credible with the public and their opposition to the hard left of Labour. When I look across the current landscape, I see no credible personalities in the same mould.
If Brexit causes major economic problems, Corbyn is seen as likely and the Tory leadership is unavailable (perhaps a leadership election has just been won by a right winger) it is possible that something might happen. Unlikely, but possible.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/07/opportunity-knocks-for-new-party-will-anybody-dare-open-door?CMP=share_btn_tw
Also trying to work out something involving a combination of a safety car and a good result for Hamilton, given he’ll be stopping 15 laps after everyone else, and possibly one-stopping when the field stops twice.
Syria is very strategic for Russia, it’s in their interest to keep the war going there as it blocks the possibility of a rival gas pipeline from the Arabian Gulf to Europe. O&G exports are just about Putin’s only source of hard currency, and also act to keep a lot of Eastern Europe from wanting to impose more sanctions. If that pipeline guts built Russia and Putin are screwed.
Betting PostF1: backed Ricciardo at 3.75/3.9 [with boost] to be winner without Ferrari:
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2018/04/bahrain-pre-race-2018.html
A VSC/Safety Car could cut both ways for Hamilton depending on the timing. If it comes after his stop it could set him back.
All this talk of her staying to fight the next election - bring it on!
As things stand, a British Macron will not be coming from Labour.
One presumes it will have to take a markedly pro-EU stance. So another bald man enters the fray for the comb....yawn.
Having to be a Remain party with vaguely Liberal aims would beg the question ... Isn't there already such a party called the Liberal Democrats? And that's going well, isn't it?
There was lots of overtaking in the F2 race yesterday, including Antem Markalov being pushed from the grid and starting from the pit lane, then coming through the field for a podium which was mighty impressive - nearly as impressive as the young Lando Norris, who won by a mile from pole in only his third F2 race. Two names to watch for F1 in the coming years.
Indeed. It's the faltering despair of the thwarted middle-class who see their European dreams fading. Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
They will need to accept the status quo of Brexit but be internationally minded, outward rather than inward looking.
https://twitter.com/nick_clegg/status/982876660440752128
I try not to talk from a partisan perspective especially when discussing the possibility of something but there just feel like there are too many obstacles for this to go anywhere.
I agree with Jonathan that a Macron would make more sense from the Conservative party but who even is this Macron figure?
Nobody say Ruth Davidson.
Brexit as someone else mentioned just cuts through too many things, I don't see the room for a pro Brexit centrist party, I can't imagine these millions are being thrown at the idea of a pro Brexit party anyway.
The idea I assume is anti Brexit and anti Corbyn otherwise why bother.
Then it just basically ends up as the Lib Dems as Wisemann basically pointed out.
BTW, thanks for your threader yesterday. Very interesting, and a dilemma for you.
My flabber is well and truly ghasted. The UK is attacked, and they focus the blame on ... us.
*You might think things from he lied, he exaggerated the truth for effect, he's a bumbling idiot who just says things.
Of course then there is plenty of room outside of those reasons for crazy people who think all kinds of crazy things.
I think I've said it elsewhere, my view is Russia probably did it.
I haven't signed it personally (not that I wouldn't necessarily) I think I retweeted something about him lying. You could argue we shouldn't be divided at this point but considering the evidence hasn't been shared with the opposition leader and right wingers have used this whole thing for partisan advantage you can't really blame the other side for doing the same can you?
If the Tories can't trust Corbyn I don't really see why I should trust the Tories.
I like the partisan fightback side personally but if I was going to be annoyed at Boris for anything it would be for getting caught out on something. At best it was stupid to get caught out on quite an important subject at this moment, it wasn't forgetting information, for whatever reason he actually said something that wasn't true regarding it.
Edit: To clarify regarding that last line I don't think the reason is conspiracy.
https://www.ft.com/content/12cd8338-db45-11e7-a039-c64b1c09b482
7 Dec 2017
Google a selection of the text to get past the firewall. Being turned down by Vince cable is not a good look (and parenthetically lol at his reason for spurning them *not* being on the lines of ”i already have a credible party to run”).
https://twitter.com/spreadsheetben/status/982561532461699072?s=21
Russia has slammed the Queen for downing gin, wine and champagne every day in a 'fake news' propaganda blast against the UK.Senator Aleksey Pushkov, an ally of President Vladimir Putin , said the monarch treats drinking like a "ceremony" while Prime Minster Theresa May has a brandy habit.
The politician claimed tell-tale mannerisms reveal the pair as 'unpleasant' heavy drinkers.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/russia-claims-queen-downs-cocktails-12324595
I'm bemused you see Boris as a 'bumbling idiot', yet seem to like your dear leader. Corbyn just bumbles from one thing to another, yet the devout don't treat his utterances to the same degree of scrutiny?
"We have all been wrong about Corbynism. It is not a political movement. Nor – despite the cultish devotion of his followers – is it a pseudo-religious one. It is actually a form of mass psychosis."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-5590269/DAN-HODGES-low-Corbyn-cult-Ask-Putins-poisoners.html#ixzz5C4B4PB4L