Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Johnson appears to be doing what Gordon Brown did in the summe
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Johnson appears to be doing what Gordon Brown did in the summer of 2017 giving you all the signs of going for an early election
On Betfair it’s now a 72% chance that there will be a general election this year. pic.twitter.com/kJPhshLAzu
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
"This period reminds me very much of summer 2017 when Gordon Brown took over from Tony Blair in the June of that year"
I consider it very possible, but not heavily odds on.
In other news, it appears the Russians have admitted that their recent not-a-nuclear-missile-honest-guv explosion was, in fact, an explosion involving a nuclear rector. Which just so happened to be on a missile range.
Obviously, the perfect place to have a nuclear reactor is on a missile range - if you're not building a nuclear-powered missile, that is.
(There are massive concerns to be had over such missiles from an ecological and environmental point of view, yet alone militarily.)
And of course there is the not inconsiderable chance that matters might be taken out of Boris' hands.
The current odds look about right to me.
My instinct is that the Conservatives would lose further seats in London to Labour, and some surprising big swings in the Home Counties would lead it losing a number of safe seats to the LDs.
Meanwhile, only a handful of gains in the Midlands and the North would materialise.
So, i could see Boris on 250-260 seats and LoTO in rather short order.
He needs to go for it whilst Corbyn is still in place.
2020 OTOH ... oh my word.
If he seriously contemplates winning an election, he has to fight it this year.
My reading of Bozo - having seen how cowardly he was during the leadership contest - is that he won’t risk throwing away the job unless he absolutely has to. The betting issue is that he may absolutely have to.
Indeed, they are only getting worse by indulging their worst aspects.
This isn’t 1983. Voting habits are far looser now, much more aligned to social identity and UNS is breaking at the seams.
I expect the reverse: for them to be regionally and demographically concentrated in a way that disfavours the Conservatives.
No, I think Johnson merely needs to ensure that he does not lose too badly & no-one else wins. Suppose Boris suffers a net loss of 20 seats. That is not good, but it is eminently recoverable.
It would see a Lab + Lib + SNP government (presumably) trying to deal with the complexities of Brexit.
There is no majority for any (positive) Brexit decision. There is only bitching about what people don't want.
So a Lab + Lib + SNP Government (assuming it could even be got off the ground and set flying) would not last long. Boris could come straight back in another election.
It goes back to David Herdon's astute observation after the 2017 election -- let Corbyn try.
It is no disaster for Johnson to lose modestly, and let Corbyn or Swinson try and let them suffer the unpopularity that will come with any active decision.
This is especially the case if Boris is forced into an election, rather than actively choses one.
Which is why I hate Brexit - it has no redeeming factors at all.
Maybe we can line them up against the wall when the revolution comes
Make clear if the Bill isn’t dropped a few deals and trading arrangements will be dropped, and a few other Chinese visas and investments dropped.
So you dont like their optimism. Which I would agree with you on, and you may say fundamentally Brexit is more negatively focused, but I think framing it in moral terms as optimists back x is an open goal for no dealers .
‘Shortly there will be an election, in which the Conservatives will increase its majority’
https://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/conference/2007/09/labour-majority-increase
If you decide to revoke, it will lose you votes.
That is why the LibDem candidate in Brecon & Radnorshire did not campaign for anything (like for revoking).
She campaigned against something (a Hard Brexit).
I pity the poor people of Hong Kong for being on their own with all this
Principles aren’t principles if they don’t cost you anything. China depend on us buying their tat; they’re not omnipotent.
Why? When he was a child he just wanted to be world king; I don’t remember any ambition to make the world a better place. In his first job as a journalist he confessed to having no political principles or ideals whatsoever. He is likely the same as Gordon Brown, just wanting the job and its trappings, but not wanting the work (which even Gordon was up for), accountability or ability to improve things.
So it all feels a bit like Hungary 1956.
(For the hard of comprehension, this does not mean that I think Brexit is like the invasion of Hungary by the Warsaw Pact. One has to be so careful these days......
I'm backing Harris and Warren for POTUS (long at weighted average about 4) and Biden for the nom as hedge to win an amount to cover my exposure on POTUS.
So, best outcome for me is Harris or Warren get the nom and go on to beat Trump. Worst outcome is one of the women get the nom and lose to Trump. I lose lose if that happens. So does the world.
If Biden gets the nom I will be net flat and will then (probably) back him to beat Trump.
That's my MO on this one. You didn't ask, but I'm telling you anyway.
Or do they just do it at a price we like?
“Mr. Zephyr, how do you think we will end up remaining? What political steps do you think will be, or could be, taken?”
Experiments were carried out on monkeys, placing mother and baby in a cage on a hot plate and heating the plate. Ultimately the mum monkey stood on the baby to survive.
What I am about to describe is not this government blinking or getting cold feet. It’s a logical and reasoned political argument, about doing what you need to obtain political power and keep it. Like standing naked in front the mirror and asking: is it better to be feared or loved?
Imagine this government negotiating our brexit departure, As a team Cummings and all, as a cabinet, (and unlike how May tried to secretly fiddle and bounce it) to get what they really want, what they know is not just the best exit for Britain but for their own politics in medium and long term. It’s presented as being Mays deal dead, full steam ahead, but is this really this governments best option for their medium term survival? They could hit a pause button to negotiate it their way, their deal better than a no deal, particularly to their electoral prospects (what happens to inflation once we no deal out). And once we delay again, winds of political change, second ref, brexit death.
if they cared about brexit, delay is a risk to it. But The people in the top jobs in government today, controlling the country’s policy agenda, do they care more about being in those jobs than brexit, out of those two options which one will they throw the dice on and risk?
Politics ultimately doesn’t work to a master plan, it’s just a series of best managing the situations and crisis thrown at you.
Betting on no brexit is a value bet.
Especially if there is a VONC in Sept and a GE before 311019.
Corbyn's only chance is if no deal is a disaster.
This is no different.
Fair enough. I’m backing my judgement with money and laying a Tory majority.
And China are one of the largest holders of the patents for 5G technologies.
As for their dependence on our buying their tat, many Chinese suppliers are growing considerably more interested in their domestic market.
And their biggest customer is already engaging in a trade war with them, so our leverage is limited.
We have a few universities which would probably go bust without their students, too.
Oh, and our European allies....
It’s probably more accurate to say the West has become more insular with regard to security and economic self-interests and is far less bothered about asserting its values worldwide.
I think that’s a serious mistake. It might be an easier path in the short term. It certainly isn’t in the longer term.
It will have set their intelligence efforts back several years.
I’m bored shitless by it and can’t be arsed.
Thanks.
Europe stood by while Putin helped the Syrian mass murderer kill tens of thousands if civilians and make refugees of millions, more or less on its doorstep.
Do you think a city attached to the Chinese mainland will get any consideration ?
And the world’s onetime policeman is now interested only in US interests.
We could indeed do f*** all about it. The Chinese pledged that HK would stay "wu shi nian bu bian" (fifty years without change) but not only are we well into that period (and here's us saying things have changed constitutionally since June 2016) but for China, HK is an inviolable part of China, and whether legitimate or not, they evidently see a threat to their political system there and there is not much that we can do about it.
The time for action was in 1972 not now.
Got to say, I disagree. I'm neither persuaded that just because something should happen it will, nor that the PM has the reasoning power of a monkey.
Like i said, it’s about leadership.
I think Adam Smith would be proud. There's evidently masses of specialisation and mutually beneficial trade. I have no idea how hard it would be to excise one of the largest nodes from that.
Interestingly Hong Kong itself features prominently.
If we are to work towards that we would need to build stronger solidarity between Western countries. At that moment if we were to turn away Chinese students from our universities there would be many other universities in other countries delighted to take them.
I agree that to do this requires leadership,as well as consistency that we could show on Saudi Arabia, for example, but if anything we are going backwards on this in recent years. Brexit is an obvious example.