Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Welsh vote could give Thomas the edge for SPOTY
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Welsh vote could give Thomas the edge for SPOTY
I’ve just put a bet on Geriant Thomas for the 2018 Sporting Personality of the Year. I got 3/1 on Betfair.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
It means I can escape quicker
Regret not backing him for SPOTY, but there we are.
Still think Kane or suchlike might get it.
I don't think it's likely but it's a possibility.
Lose
Win (2.32)
Win (lay 3.75)
Lose
Lose.
Those who have niche hobby horses like Eurofederalism would do well to reflect on that.
A lot might come down to why Joshua didn't win last year. Was it complacency by the voters who voted for who they wanted to finish second?
Lewis Hamilton if he wins a 5th title?
We seem to win it every year now; doesn’t seem a big deal. Which is a bit sad for the British winner! Well done Geraint.
The Swedes and the Swiss have a list of foods that they should stockpile.
What should our list consisit of ?
Viewed in that context the over 8% of Palestine (including what is now Jordan) that was Jewish in 1890 or roughly 33% in 1948 is much more significant a percentage than Wales is.
But Wales as shown by this bet is meaningful and significant despite being a small percentage of the UK as a whole.
(Hope that link worked appropriately)
Although I'm not sure your own analogy works. The Welsh have not tried to take over large sections of England on the basis that until the 6th century they were the dominant people.
In the US it's called Primaries !
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jul/28/frank-field-criticises-local-labour-members-confidence-vote
But then, I wonder if Southgate embodies that even more?
- are full of energy
- make us feel good
- don't need cooking, so can still be enjoyed even if the gas and electricity get cut off
Crisps and chocolate are both high on my emergency preparedness list.
I suspect that in a couple of years time that Brexit will be as popular as the second Gulf War is now. Brexit will be an unwanted orphan, with hardcore Brexiteers arguing like aging Communists over it not being implemented correctly.
https://twitter.com/oliverjamesking/status/1022873025253978112?s=19
If there's no deal *and* the fallout is anything better than totally catastrophic then Europe should disappear as a major political issue surprising quickly. Otherwise the arguing could drag on indefinitely.
Your solution has the merit of being sensible, but there is a flaw. The neighbour in question for a number of reasons would have to be Jordan. The majority of Jordan's population is in fact of Palestinian origin or descent (70% according to the Jerusalem post: https://m.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/A-Palestinian-Jordanian-confederation) However, Jordan itself faces economic problems and water shortages that would make absorbing more refugees almost impossible. Money might sort the former - hard to see it resolving the latter in an all but landlocked state...
Technology might solve the latter - both Israeli agritech (which would have the added benefit of generating a degree of goodwill), and solar power, for which the ME as well situated as just about anywhere else on the planet.
The Arab states are fairly backward economically, which is why Israel has managed to retain regional dominance. Hoping that will remain the case is not a sensible long term strategy - and prosperous societies are also less likely to be implacable enemies.
Getting from where we are now to peaceable coexistence is an extremely difficult route, but I don’t see any other alternative. Repression can preserve the status quo, but not forever.
The Scottish/English border has moved a number of times whenever we were at war with each other. These border areas have been developed by their new nation when that happened.
The problem is that since the Arabs declared war on newly founded Israel there hasn't been a single day of peace since. Ceasefires but never peace.
EDIT: I'll leave crisps and chocolate on my list. In the event of panic buying my favourite varieties might be temporarily unavailable anyway.
The rapid expansion of the Welsh population afterwards doesn't magically entitle them to take English lands, no matter how meaningful and significant our Welsh population is, even if the Welsh people became the most meaningful and significant people the world had ever seen, it would still be wrong for them to take English lands for their recent arrivals from abroad.
Unless you oppose all migration or don't consider migrants people (even after nearly 60 years) I don't see why 1890 is super relevant.
Seriously though, he did play consistently well throughout the tournament. He'll probably get it because the bar is set lower for footballers.
Southgate, by contrast, is not automatically associated with any particular club. Palace, Villa and Boro are not disliked widely.
Although I'd go for Thomas personally.
But I agree on Kane struggling to win votes of supporters of big clubs other than Tottenham.
You can't just turn up in a country and become part of the claim on it. That is the whole point of the discussion, turning up the day before partition happens and thus insisting your are just as deserving of the land as people who had been living there for many generations is kind of the whole point.... that is basically what the war is about.
Much like if a massive wave of Muslim immigration came into Britain (and was enforced on us) this largely foreign people then take a large swathe of the country based largely on the recent wave of immigration and kick people like you and your family out their homes to make way for the people living in the Muslim country.
That is pretty much war. You cannot take land from other people for your own people and then claim defence, and then continue to take land and continue to claim defence. There is no nation on Earth that wouldn't have taken the Israeli actions as war.
Do you consider the Windrush generation and their descendents not to be legitimate or have a claim to be here?
Similarly there has been Muslim migration to this country which was lawful. Are the Muslim descendants and migrants here not legitimate? Do you oppose it as an act or war?
You are using the language and attitudes of the EDL.
The Tories asked the voters: do you want to Brexit? They said yes. The Tories are only in the LibDems place if they don't deliver Brexit. And if they don't, they are in a worse place than the Canadian Conservatives.....
(I think your screen name might give away your team
Or maybe Freddie Mercury will come riding in on his unicorn, leading the invasion of France, and we'll conquer the EU in a single day.
BBC wibbling about the rise of fake news was mildly amusing, given I wanted to watch the Sunday Politics, but it wasn't on today... Homes Under the Hammer was instead.
Anyone started stock piling baked beans and soup yet?
So it would be an ironic twist if decades later lifelong Eurosceptic and Blair opponent Corbyn benefited from Brexit.
Whatever the historical rights and wrongs (and there are plenty to spread around), the fact remains that there is an established, nuclear armed Jewish state which is not going away, just as there is a dispossessed Palestinian people who are not going away.
Trying to ascribe blame, rather than look for a solution which accommodates both sides, is a futile exercise, IMO.
(Which is not to argue against valid criticism of the actions of the Israeli government.)
I really don't think the political class knows what it's doing when it comes to trying to stop fake news. A lot of it is simply generated by ordinary people in a 'chatting down the pub' sort of way. You can't stop people just chatting.
On a lighter note, I was moderately pleased with my summary of the Die Hard plot:
https://twitter.com/MorrisF1/status/1023503651095146497
https://tinyurl.com/ycvyrqwz
Personally I'd have axed Andrew Marr.
second point - we make A LOT of insulin in Denmark - under no circumstances would Denmark refuse to export insulin to the uk - UNDER.NO.CIRCUMSTANCES - same goes for colostomy bags and all those other boring medical essentials manufactured here.
Brexit is a political curse - it destroys everything it touches. Major and Cameron have fallen victim, and May will certainly follow them in the near future. It now threatens the political system and is putting the union under severe strain.
Where Brexiteers (I'm using this as shorthand for the mad Twitter variety) go wrong is likening the scare stories to the Millenium bug. I'm one of the many people who worked hard to port software, remove logic bombs and so on to ensure that there were no problems.
However, the Y2K issue was tangible; we could actually bid on remedying problems in 'N' lines of code, where N was a large number. We couldn't ignore it or leave those remedies to the last minute.
The EU and UK can agree a deal at the stroke of a pen, at the 11th hour (pick your cliche of choice), so it's probably not yet time for us to quake in our boots.
A true 'no deal' Brexit, in the sense of no interim or even emergency measures would be calamitous for all parties; it would certainly poison relations for a long time (of course Remain will blame the Brexiteers, Brexiteers will blame the EU, rinse and repeat ad nauseam).
If we run out of everything after we Leave would you still share your last Rollo with me?
And it is the Conservatives who will have to pay the price for that.
If they were a pragmatic party, as they were once upon a time, they would put their hands up, plead guilty and work to remain in the EU.
There's a particular problem, from the EU enthusiasts' point of view, with the fact that getting out of the thing has been a drag, a bore and altogether rather a large pain in the arse (and one that's been preceded by literally decades of long, tedious arguments over whether to stay or go to begin with.) Given what's already happened then, if the Government does finally succeed in getting us out completely, what percentage of the general population is going to want to go through the entire rigmarole - of arguing about the subject for X number of years, and then negotiating accession for Y number of years after that, and with the unappetising prospect of having to swallow the Euro thrown in for good measure at the end of it - for a second time?
Continuity Remainers need one of three things to happen: for the Brexit process to somehow be halted; for the end point to be Norway + CU, in which case they could say "we're effectively in anyway, except we don't have a seat at the conference table anymore - we might as well rejoin"; or for the implementation of a hard Brexit to go so very, very badly that they can persuade a decent chunk of the Leave voters of their error, and build momentum to go back in, from there (assuming said angry voters don't pin the blame on the EU rather than the UK, of course.)
If the Brexit apocalypse turns into empty supermarket shelves for months and thousands of people dying through lack of essential medicines, then that might well be sufficient. If it transpires to consist of a brief shortage of salad vegetables then that won't be enough to change anyone's mind.
If we leave the EU without maintaining a close association to it, and the whole thing doesn't go immediately and horribly wrong, then Rejoining will assume a similar place in the national discourse to Republicanism. Somewhere between a fifth and a third of people might think it a good idea in theory, if asked about the subject by a pollster, but the numbers who actually care about it enough to try to make it happen would be minuscule.
It's then a matter of what's more likely to come first: a UK application to go back into the EU, or the collapse of the EU itself under the weight of its own problems.
Their Sunday afternoon CSPAN coverage of US politics will be a loss when it goes.
Still they do have to find savings so they can afford to pay Gary Lineker's salary.
Yes a true no deal Brexit would be calamitous for all parties. Thus a true no deal Brexit won't happen.
Nobody not even JRM wants a true no deal Brexit. People who back a no deal Brexit expect a minimal deal to deal with very basic issues and that would surely happen. Even if someone says right now it won't.
http://insider.foxnews.com/2018/07/29/us-therapists-see-increase-patients-trump-anxiety-disorder
Here’s my top 10 post-WW1 UK crises list, in order of severity based on a purely personal subjective assessment of the impact of each on the well-being, economy, reputation, and political life of the country:
Year* Crisis
1940 Norway, Fall of France, Dunkirk, Battle of Britain, the Blitz
1929 Great Depression
1956 Suez Crisis
1974 Three-day week
1938 Munich
1942 Fall of Singapore
1926 General Strike
2007 Global Financial Crisis
1976 IMF loan
1992 Black Wednesday
(* Start year for those which lasted more than a year)
Others which didn’t quite make my top 10 include: Black Monday, the Iraq War, the Cuban Missile Crisis, Ulster Troubles, the Falklands, the Abdication crisis. What have I missed? Or misplaced?
Anyhow, I could see No Deal Brexit hitting 3rd or 4th on this list, maybe even 2nd.
Devout Leavers will no doubt not expect it to make the list at all - dream on suckers!
Alternatively replace Marr with someone who does their research before asking questions and follows up the answers with further probing questions.
Firstly the windrush generation are British, so it is like a person from Wales moving to England. British people moved to a part of Britain.
Secondly the local population were not in control of their immigration policies, the immigration was forced on them, they did not get a say in it.
Thirdly they were from all different dates they did not all suddenly move in in 1891, so the vast majority of them had not been there the length of time the Windrush generation had been here. Using your model the thousands of recent foreign that turned up just before partition somehow deserved the land from those that have lived there for many generations.
TBH I think the EDL would more likely make the slip up about thinking the windrush generation were not British to begin with and I think you will find it would be more than just the EDL that would have a problem if tens of millions (to match equivalent immigration to existing population in Palestine) of Muslim immigrants were coming to Britain to set up a country here. Don't worry though a very small percentage of the eventual Muslim population will have been here as long as Windrush so there is no reason to fight back because that would make us the aggressors and at fault.
I don't know where to place it exactly, but the recognition that the sun had set on the British Empire had a profound effect on my parent's generation.
Taking your list for granted (others will doubtless pick the order apart a bit) I'd put it somewhere below the General Strike. What finally transpires might be significantly disruptive or it might all be a bit of a damp squib, but all the panic about mass hospital deaths and civil unrest that's been circulating recently is nonsense.
On SPOTY - Clearly Kane has no chance - won nothing and vast swathes of the Jezzbollah will vote against a Spurs player who is the hero to a Jewish associated club.
Hamilton is handicapped by his tax exile status. Might be a very open SPOTY contest this year.