Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Punters make it a 65% chance that Johnson will still be PM on Jan 1 2022 – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited November 20 in General
imagePunters make it a 65% chance that Johnson will still be PM on Jan 1 2022 – politicalbetting.com

Betting chart from the Smarkets exchange

Read the full story here

«13456

Comments

  • First, subject to recount.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 4,028
    Pricing looks about right.
  • pingping Posts: 101
    edited November 20

    I think punters are overestimating the chance of Johnson going in 2021.

    He has made an awful job of just about everything in 2020, and has mounting problems. But he's only got one year on the PM clock, and won a substantial majority in December 2019, whilst purging many potentially dangerous colleagues.

    I can see him running into trouble later in the term, and I can see him losing in 2024. What I don't see is how an endgame in the next 13 months is as much as a 35% chance.

    I agree.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 2,205

    I think punters are overestimating the chance of Johnson going in 2021.

    He has made an awful job of just about everything in 2020, and has mounting problems. But he's only got one year on the PM clock, and won a substantial majority in December 2019, whilst purging many potentially dangerous colleagues.

    I can see him running into trouble later in the term, and I can see him losing in 2024. What I don't see is how an endgame in the next 13 months is as much as a 35% chance.

    Agree. Though whatever happens after a messy climbdown Brexit, now certain, is pretty unknowable. He will do whatever it takes to survive. A climbdown Brexit is more survivable than a nothing in shops/factories close because of tariffs Brexit. Part of the last minuteism is because Boris needs to say to the party 'Vote for this, right now, no second chances, no time for considered reflection' to get it through, if possible without Labour needing to help.

  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 15,134
    In defence of the people trying to prove Trump won the election somehow, 4 states beginning with "MI" is definitely too many and calling one of them "MI" is asking for trouble.

  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 15,134
    On topic, the rule is that things mostly don't happen, and when they do happen they're not the things you expect to happen. Also Boris is agile and shameless, don't underestimate his ability to reinvent himself.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 4,028

    I think punters are overestimating the chance of Johnson going in 2021.

    He has made an awful job of just about everything in 2020, and has mounting problems. But he's only got one year on the PM clock, and won a substantial majority in December 2019, whilst purging many potentially dangerous colleagues.

    I can see him running into trouble later in the term, and I can see him losing in 2024. What I don't see is how an endgame in the next 13 months is as much as a 35% chance.

    Your arguments are right but only go so far, pushing his chances of survival a bit over 50%. On the other side: his personal ratings collapse, signs of poor health, emergence of Sunak, Brexit disruption ahead, Scottish issue with elections ahead, terrible economic outlook, chaotic personal style, general incompetence, loss of Cummings. He has a better than evens chance of surviving 2021 in office, not much better than that, IMHO.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 51,201
    edited November 20

    In defence of the people trying to prove Trump won the election somehow, 4 states beginning with "MI" is definitely too many and calling one of them "MI" is asking for trouble.

    twitter.com/Ike_Saul/status/1329799212091940870?s=19

    Do they normally work for SAGE?
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 9,213

    In defence of the people trying to prove Trump won the election somehow, 4 states beginning with "MI" is definitely too many and calling one of them "MI" is asking for trouble.

    Literally a plotline from The Newsroom...
  • pingping Posts: 101
    edited November 20
    I’d guess the correct %’ages are;

    2% 2020
    10% 2021
    8% 2022
    10% 2023
    40% 2024
    30% 2025 or later

    So imo, the value is laying 2021
  • Even May lasted 2 years, should be at least >90% that Boris is still PM in 2022.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 9,213

    On topic, the rule is that things mostly don't happen, and when they do happen they're not the things you expect to happen. Also Boris is agile and shameless, don't underestimate his ability to reinvent himself.

    He can't reinvent himself as competent.

    The most likely thing to bring him down is, ironically, Brexit.

    Either he signs a deal that the headbangers revolt over, or he doesn't and the food riots do for him
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 44,308
    edited November 20

    In defence of the people trying to prove Trump won the election somehow, 4 states beginning with "MI" is definitely too many and calling one of them "MI" is asking for trouble.

    Wow.

    Though when even Tucker Carlson isn't buying what Trump is selling you know its over.
  • isamisam Posts: 34,623
    ping said:

    I’d guess the correct %’ages are;

    2% 2020
    10% 2021
    8% 2022
    10% 2023
    40% 2024
    30% 2025 or later

    So imo, the value is laying 2021

    2024 or later is 13/8 on Betfair - long time to wait, but 32% of value not to be sniffed at
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 4,641

    In defence of the people trying to prove Trump won the election somehow, 4 states beginning with "MI" is definitely too many and calling one of them "MI" is asking for trouble.

    Wow.

    Though when even Tucker Carlson isn't buying what Trump is selling you know its over.
    He told you.. MI (I presume him) is asking for trouble :)
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 51,201
    edited November 20
    So this is the new line of i like lots of tweets, but cos BBC bosses might be watching, just saying I am not passing an opinion...heres an easier option, don't like them in the first place.

  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 2,634
    Scott_xP said:
    Excellent. Tory MPs have rightly decided that if you managed to be 'bullied' by someone who's barely tall enough to ride the rollercoaster at Alton Towers, then you may well be the one with the problem...
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 86,761
    edited November 20

    In defence of the people trying to prove Trump won the election somehow, 4 states beginning with "MI" is definitely too many and calling one of them "MI" is asking for trouble.

    I saw on Twitter last week on MAGA chap convinced voter fraud had taken place in Washington DC because more people voted in DC than there are voters, which proved that Dems stole the election nationwide.

    He seemed oblivious to the fact that he was comparing the population of Washington DC with the voting figures of Washington state.
  • Even May lasted 2 years, should be at least >90% that Boris is still PM in 2022.

    I agree with this. May was in a far more critical condition and with no majority at all in mid-2017.

    Yes, things might happen over the next few months to push Johnson up to that sort of DEFCON level of the sorts Only Living Boy mentions. Although equally they may not and other things may happen (reasonably rapid vaccine rollout, better than expected economic progress, a smooth-ish Brexit deal, Labour divisions to the fore) that ease the position for Johnson.

    But, crucially, even if they do escalate, the May example shows that the "inevitable" can take a hell of a lot longer than people expect. I think this is an error punters regularly make... assuming that things will play out a lot quicker than they normally do in practice.
  • I think punters are overestimating the chance of Johnson going in 2021.

    He has made an awful job of just about everything in 2020, and has mounting problems. But he's only got one year on the PM clock, and won a substantial majority in December 2019, whilst purging many potentially dangerous colleagues.

    I can see him running into trouble later in the term, and I can see him losing in 2024. What I don't see is how an endgame in the next 13 months is as much as a 35% chance.

    Your arguments are right but only go so far, pushing his chances of survival a bit over 50%. On the other side: his personal ratings collapse, signs of poor health, emergence of Sunak, Brexit disruption ahead, Scottish issue with elections ahead, terrible economic outlook, chaotic personal style, general incompetence, loss of Cummings. He has a better than evens chance of surviving 2021 in office, not much better than that, IMHO.
    The one to watch is Sunak. And whilst he is clearly burnishing is public image in a quite bonkers way, he's not actually striking to bring the PM down. Just making sure that everyone knows that he's there, arguing for the sort of stuff Conservative MPs like. But of course he is fully supportive of the PM.

    My theory? He's concluded that 2024 is a writeoff, whatever happens next. (The simple fact of Getting Brexit Done will mean the team drift their separate ways, even if it goes well. Which it may well not.) So Shagger can take the hit for that, and Rishi can rebuild in his own time and in his own image. He's young enough.

    And if Sunak is holding fire, who else is there to push Bozza out?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 51,201
    edited November 20
    Another day, another soft soap article on Lewis Hamilton on the BBC website....Whoever is doing his PR, certainly earning their money.
  • In defence of the people trying to prove Trump won the election somehow, 4 states beginning with "MI" is definitely too many and calling one of them "MI" is asking for trouble.

    I saw on Twitter last week on MAGA chap convinced voter fraud had taken place in Washington DC because more people voted in DC than there are voters, which proved that Dems stole the election nationwide.

    He seemed oblivious to the fact that he was comparing the population of Washington DC with the voting figures of Washington state.
    I think that might be some kind of parody/trolling. I've seen the same with Georgia a few times, where someone posts a link showing the population of Georgia (country) is 3.7m but 5m voted in Georgia (US state)! Not totally sure, but I think it's being done for a laugh and to rile people.
  • In defence of the people trying to prove Trump won the election somehow, 4 states beginning with "MI" is definitely too many and calling one of them "MI" is asking for trouble.

    I saw on Twitter last week on MAGA chap convinced voter fraud had taken place in Washington DC because more people voted in DC than there are voters, which proved that Dems stole the election nationwide.

    He seemed oblivious to the fact that he was comparing the population of Washington DC with the voting figures of Washington state.
    I think that might be some kind of parody/trolling. I've seen the same with Georgia a few times, where someone posts a link showing the population of Georgia (country) is 3.7m but 5m voted in Georgia (US state)! Not totally sure, but I think it's being done for a laugh and to rile people.
    No this was a proper MAGA account going back a decade, years worth of pro Trump stuff.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 4,190

    Scott_xP said:
    Excellent. Tory MPs have rightly decided that if you managed to be 'bullied' by someone who's barely tall enough to ride the rollercoaster at Alton Towers, then you may well be the one with the problem...
    She is scary though to be honest. Not Widdecombe levels of terror, but still.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 20,341
    Deleted
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 7,735

    I think punters are overestimating the chance of Johnson going in 2021.

    He has made an awful job of just about everything in 2020, and has mounting problems. But he's only got one year on the PM clock, and won a substantial majority in December 2019, whilst purging many potentially dangerous colleagues.

    I can see him running into trouble later in the term, and I can see him losing in 2024. What I don't see is how an endgame in the next 13 months is as much as a 35% chance.

    Your arguments are right but only go so far, pushing his chances of survival a bit over 50%. On the other side: his personal ratings collapse, signs of poor health, emergence of Sunak, Brexit disruption ahead, Scottish issue with elections ahead, terrible economic outlook, chaotic personal style, general incompetence, loss of Cummings. He has a better than evens chance of surviving 2021 in office, not much better than that, IMHO.
    The one to watch is Sunak. And whilst he is clearly burnishing is public image in a quite bonkers way, he's not actually striking to bring the PM down. Just making sure that everyone knows that he's there, arguing for the sort of stuff Conservative MPs like. But of course he is fully supportive of the PM.

    My theory? He's concluded that 2024 is a writeoff, whatever happens next. (The simple fact of Getting Brexit Done will mean the team drift their separate ways, even if it goes well. Which it may well not.) So Shagger can take the hit for that, and Rishi can rebuild in his own time and in his own image. He's young enough.

    And if Sunak is holding fire, who else is there to push Bozza out?
    Gove looks like he might have a weapon of assassination carefully concealed on each ankle.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 26,860
    edited November 20
    Scott_xP said:
    This before or after they were asked/instructed to 'form a square' ?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 49,740

    So this is the new line of i like lots of tweets, but cos BBC bosses might be watching, just saying I am not passing an opinion...heres an easier option, don't like them in the first place.

    Why does he think people care whether or not he's read their tweet or not.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 49,740

    In defence of the people trying to prove Trump won the election somehow, 4 states beginning with "MI" is definitely too many and calling one of them "MI" is asking for trouble.

    I saw on Twitter last week on MAGA chap convinced voter fraud had taken place in Washington DC because more people voted in DC than there are voters, which proved that Dems stole the election nationwide.

    He seemed oblivious to the fact that he was comparing the population of Washington DC with the voting figures of Washington state.
    I think that might be some kind of parody/trolling. I've seen the same with Georgia a few times, where someone posts a link showing the population of Georgia (country) is 3.7m but 5m voted in Georgia (US state)! Not totally sure, but I think it's being done for a laugh and to rile people.
    No this was a proper MAGA account going back a decade, years worth of pro Trump stuff.
    Deep cover.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 29,905

    On topic, the rule is that things mostly don't happen, and when they do happen they're not the things you expect to happen. Also Boris is agile and shameless, don't underestimate his ability to reinvent himself.

    I am betting he is not going to be able to reinvent himself as a conscientious, hard working PM determined to deliver the best for the whole of the country.
  • Do we really think someone is qualified to be Home Secretary (or even a manager at McDonald's) if they repeatedly don't know they are bullying people.

    Then just imagine you've also been sacked before for being a risk to national security and now you find yourself in charge of MI5.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 51,201
    edited November 20
    RobD said:

    So this is the new line of i like lots of tweets, but cos BBC bosses might be watching, just saying I am not passing an opinion...heres an easier option, don't like them in the first place.

    Why does he think people care whether or not he's read their tweet or not.
    It is why it is a horseshit excuse. Some people care about the number of likes / retwatters, but who is going through, especially those who don't agree with Vine, going well better check if Jezza has read it.

    Its up there with my twitter was hacked when someone famous is caught having liked a tweet from a nuddie twitter account.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 20,341
    Nigelb said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Excellent. Tory MPs have rightly decided that if you managed to be 'bullied' by someone who's barely tall enough to ride the rollercoaster at Alton Towers, then you may well be the one with the problem...
    Congratulations on the most foolish comment of the day.
    Indeed; suggest you talk to a vet who has tried to treat a Jack Russell.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 4,028

    I think punters are overestimating the chance of Johnson going in 2021.

    He has made an awful job of just about everything in 2020, and has mounting problems. But he's only got one year on the PM clock, and won a substantial majority in December 2019, whilst purging many potentially dangerous colleagues.

    I can see him running into trouble later in the term, and I can see him losing in 2024. What I don't see is how an endgame in the next 13 months is as much as a 35% chance.

    Your arguments are right but only go so far, pushing his chances of survival a bit over 50%. On the other side: his personal ratings collapse, signs of poor health, emergence of Sunak, Brexit disruption ahead, Scottish issue with elections ahead, terrible economic outlook, chaotic personal style, general incompetence, loss of Cummings. He has a better than evens chance of surviving 2021 in office, not much better than that, IMHO.
    The one to watch is Sunak. And whilst he is clearly burnishing is public image in a quite bonkers way, he's not actually striking to bring the PM down. Just making sure that everyone knows that he's there, arguing for the sort of stuff Conservative MPs like. But of course he is fully supportive of the PM.

    My theory? He's concluded that 2024 is a writeoff, whatever happens next. (The simple fact of Getting Brexit Done will mean the team drift their separate ways, even if it goes well. Which it may well not.) So Shagger can take the hit for that, and Rishi can rebuild in his own time and in his own image. He's young enough.

    And if Sunak is holding fire, who else is there to push Bozza out?
    Maybe. I am not sure 2024 is such an obvious write off. You could see the Tories changing horses mid stream and pulling off a surprising narrow win like in 1992.
    Sunak, Patel and Gove are the main dangers to Johnson I reckon. Sunak probably gets the prize, in 2022.
  • I think punters are overestimating the chance of Johnson going in 2021.

    He has made an awful job of just about everything in 2020, and has mounting problems. But he's only got one year on the PM clock, and won a substantial majority in December 2019, whilst purging many potentially dangerous colleagues.

    I can see him running into trouble later in the term, and I can see him losing in 2024. What I don't see is how an endgame in the next 13 months is as much as a 35% chance.

    Your arguments are right but only go so far, pushing his chances of survival a bit over 50%. On the other side: his personal ratings collapse, signs of poor health, emergence of Sunak, Brexit disruption ahead, Scottish issue with elections ahead, terrible economic outlook, chaotic personal style, general incompetence, loss of Cummings. He has a better than evens chance of surviving 2021 in office, not much better than that, IMHO.
    The one to watch is Sunak. And whilst he is clearly burnishing is public image in a quite bonkers way, he's not actually striking to bring the PM down. Just making sure that everyone knows that he's there, arguing for the sort of stuff Conservative MPs like. But of course he is fully supportive of the PM.

    My theory? He's concluded that 2024 is a writeoff, whatever happens next. (The simple fact of Getting Brexit Done will mean the team drift their separate ways, even if it goes well. Which it may well not.) So Shagger can take the hit for that, and Rishi can rebuild in his own time and in his own image. He's young enough.

    And if Sunak is holding fire, who else is there to push Bozza out?
    Gove looks like he might have a weapon of assassination carefully concealed on each ankle.
    I'm sure Gove wants the job (and might well have the tools to get the job), and knows that it's soon or never.

    But does anybody want Gove? Shades of Nixon-Agnew...
  • I think punters are overestimating the chance of Johnson going in 2021.

    He has made an awful job of just about everything in 2020, and has mounting problems. But he's only got one year on the PM clock, and won a substantial majority in December 2019, whilst purging many potentially dangerous colleagues.

    I can see him running into trouble later in the term, and I can see him losing in 2024. What I don't see is how an endgame in the next 13 months is as much as a 35% chance.

    Your arguments are right but only go so far, pushing his chances of survival a bit over 50%. On the other side: his personal ratings collapse, signs of poor health, emergence of Sunak, Brexit disruption ahead, Scottish issue with elections ahead, terrible economic outlook, chaotic personal style, general incompetence, loss of Cummings. He has a better than evens chance of surviving 2021 in office, not much better than that, IMHO.
    The one to watch is Sunak. And whilst he is clearly burnishing is public image in a quite bonkers way, he's not actually striking to bring the PM down. Just making sure that everyone knows that he's there, arguing for the sort of stuff Conservative MPs like. But of course he is fully supportive of the PM.

    My theory? He's concluded that 2024 is a writeoff, whatever happens next. (The simple fact of Getting Brexit Done will mean the team drift their separate ways, even if it goes well. Which it may well not.) So Shagger can take the hit for that, and Rishi can rebuild in his own time and in his own image. He's young enough.

    And if Sunak is holding fire, who else is there to push Bozza out?
    Gove looks like he might have a weapon of assassination carefully concealed on each ankle.
    I'm sure Gove wants the job (and might well have the tools to get the job), and knows that it's soon or never.

    But does anybody want Gove? Shades of Nixon-Agnew...
    The Scot Nats want Gove as PM.

    Not sure if that counts.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 51,201
    edited November 20

    In defence of the people trying to prove Trump won the election somehow, 4 states beginning with "MI" is definitely too many and calling one of them "MI" is asking for trouble.

    I saw on Twitter last week on MAGA chap convinced voter fraud had taken place in Washington DC because more people voted in DC than there are voters, which proved that Dems stole the election nationwide.

    He seemed oblivious to the fact that he was comparing the population of Washington DC with the voting figures of Washington state.
    I think that might be some kind of parody/trolling. I've seen the same with Georgia a few times, where someone posts a link showing the population of Georgia (country) is 3.7m but 5m voted in Georgia (US state)! Not totally sure, but I think it's being done for a laugh and to rile people.
    No this was a proper MAGA account going back a decade, years worth of pro Trump stuff.
    Not saying is true in this case, but this is the MO.of the Russian interference. Setting up social media for the long haul. They have been found running stuff like Black Christian groups for years on end.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 7,735
    edited November 20

    Scott_xP said:
    Excellent. Tory MPs have rightly decided that if you managed to be 'bullied' by someone who's barely tall enough to ride the rollercoaster at Alton Towers, then you may well be the one with the problem...
    What a quaint view of the world you have.

    You have clearly never worked with anyone with that outdated social stereotype, "Napoleon complex".
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 22,820

    MaxPB said:

    Roy_G_Biv said:

    MaxPB said:

    Roy_G_Biv said:

    MaxPB said:

    I think I'd look at it from the opposite direction.

    A young Asian, immigrant class, female minister takes over a department full of Oxbridge educated old white middle to upper class men. They see her as an affront to them, a threat to their domination of the establishment. They refuse to work with her and refuse to take directions from her and she, increasingly frustrated, has had enough of these old white elitists telling her how things are done and she fucks them off.

    I have much more sympathy to her because I've lived this career for the last 5 years, taking over teams dominated by older white Oxbridge educated elitists who look down their noses at a working class Asian man who went to Cardiff university and state school, at least I have ways to move these people on and get a team in that doesn't rely on their societal status to get their way.

    The inquiry didn't find that Patel was the victim, though. It found that she was the bully.
    That's a small difference compared to gender and ethnicity, but some would dare to suggest it's an important one.
    The inquiry wasn't tasked with looking at elitist culture at the Home Office and wider civil service. I know these types of people, they hate people like me with all their being. They see people like me as upstarts and a threat to their cosy chumocracy at the top of big business and government departments. You clearly don't understand what that feels like in the workplace but it is why I have got more sympathy for Patel than most.
    You've had a certain negative experience
    You see someone as being in the same "group" as you in some way
    Therefore they've had the same negative experience
    That negative experience is also the reason for them being wrongly accused of wrongdoing

    versus

    They did something wrong and got caught
    It's not just me though, go out and speak to any Asian or Black person in a position of seniority in big business or government who has had the displeasure of dealing with these elitists and a similar story will emerge. It's something you will probably never experience so I can understand if you just don't get it, but I have and have heard countless stories of similar issues. There is still a glass ceiling in this country and those few who manage to break through it are subjected to the worst kind of belittling and exclusion by the Oxbridge chums. Thankfully it's a problem that will soon be part of history as that generation finally fucks off and dies and their racist ways die with them.

    Anyway, I've said my piece. You're free to continue your ignorance of what people actually experience if you want.
    I have seen this second hand and I believe you. To be honest I have mixed feelings about the case against Patel. I suspect that she is a wrong un but I wonder why she has been singled out, I doubt she is the worst offender.
    Which is sort of my point, I'm not going to accept the judgement because to me it's the chums protecting other chums. I've been highly critical of the chumocracy that Boris is so fond of and it's deleterious effects on the nation, to me Patel is a victim of a different kind of chumocracy that exists at the top of big business and the civil service. They all look out for each other and don't believe that one of their ranks could ever have done anything wrong. They see Patel as an awful upstart woman who absolutely must be in the wrong regardless of the situation.

    I've said it already, I actually think Patel probably did bully this civil servant out of the job. I also think she's up against the worst kind of people on the other side and I think part of the reason she did it is because she had no other recourse to be rid of this chum who had all of the institutional protections given to someone of his status.

    Again, I say this as I've been there and had this very issue, only I was able to get the company to put together a severance package, even then there were accusations flying around and I was accused of "acting above my station" whatever that means.

    I'm actually torn because I don't think she's a very good minister, but I also don't think she's been left with very much choice in this matter. Ultimately she's the decision maker and if there is someone who is unwilling to get on board and is happy to sabotage the rest of the team they have to go by any means necessary.
  • isamisam Posts: 34,623
    edited November 20

    I think punters are overestimating the chance of Johnson going in 2021.

    He has made an awful job of just about everything in 2020, and has mounting problems. But he's only got one year on the PM clock, and won a substantial majority in December 2019, whilst purging many potentially dangerous colleagues.

    I can see him running into trouble later in the term, and I can see him losing in 2024. What I don't see is how an endgame in the next 13 months is as much as a 35% chance.

    Your arguments are right but only go so far, pushing his chances of survival a bit over 50%. On the other side: his personal ratings collapse, signs of poor health, emergence of Sunak, Brexit disruption ahead, Scottish issue with elections ahead, terrible economic outlook, chaotic personal style, general incompetence, loss of Cummings. He has a better than evens chance of surviving 2021 in office, not much better than that, IMHO.
    The one to watch is Sunak. And whilst he is clearly burnishing is public image in a quite bonkers way, he's not actually striking to bring the PM down. Just making sure that everyone knows that he's there, arguing for the sort of stuff Conservative MPs like. But of course he is fully supportive of the PM.

    My theory? He's concluded that 2024 is a writeoff, whatever happens next. (The simple fact of Getting Brexit Done will mean the team drift their separate ways, even if it goes well. Which it may well not.) So Shagger can take the hit for that, and Rishi can rebuild in his own time and in his own image. He's young enough.

    And if Sunak is holding fire, who else is there to push Bozza out?
    Lockdown doubter/Brexiteer Steve Baker is my tip. If the public turn against the restrictions he is in place to challenge. He seems to want the job, isn't part of the chumocracy, not privately educated, decent CV - small neg that he is a born again Christian I guess

    50/1 is a nice price I think... can anyone put a bet on for me?!
  • pingping Posts: 101
    edited November 20
    Ooh betting anecdote time!

    Back in October 2016 sunbets allowed me £10 at 1846/1 on trump winning the election and - at some point during his presidency - declaring war on Mexico.

    Murdoch pulled the plug on sunbets a couple of years later and partially settled my bet for £100.

    Cheers, Rupe!
  • RobDRobD Posts: 49,740

    RobD said:

    So this is the new line of i like lots of tweets, but cos BBC bosses might be watching, just saying I am not passing an opinion...heres an easier option, don't like them in the first place.

    Why does he think people care whether or not he's read their tweet or not.
    It is why it is a horseshit excuse. Some people care about the number of likes / retwatters, but who is going through, especially those who don't agree with Vine, going well better check if Jezza has read it.

    Its up there with my twitter was hacked when someone famous is caught having liked a tweet from a nuddie twitter account.
    All those likes on porn tweets were real though.
  • GaussianGaussian Posts: 166
    Can't be long 'til Wales does the same.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 33,988
    Scott_xP said:

    In defence of the people trying to prove Trump won the election somehow, 4 states beginning with "MI" is definitely too many and calling one of them "MI" is asking for trouble.

    Literally a plotline from The Newsroom...
    "M" is dramatically overrepresented, because there are another four M's even after the Mi's.
  • isamisam Posts: 34,623

    RobD said:

    So this is the new line of i like lots of tweets, but cos BBC bosses might be watching, just saying I am not passing an opinion...heres an easier option, don't like them in the first place.

    Why does he think people care whether or not he's read their tweet or not.
    It is why it is a horseshit excuse. Some people care about the number of likes / retwatters, but who is going through, especially those who don't agree with Vine, going well better check if Jezza has read it.

    Its up there with my twitter was hacked when someone famous is caught having liked a tweet from a nuddie twitter account.
    To be fair to him, people do like tweets as a kind of bookmark to read later, although I guess that generally means they probably do like the anticipated content. And I think some people do appreciate knowing that their tweet has been read, if it is addressed to the person liking it
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 7,735
    edited November 20

    Steve Baker at 50/1 ?


    A good value bet, but are the Conservatives daft enough to install their very own Jeremy Corbyn into No 10?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 33,988

    Scott_xP said:
    Excellent. Tory MPs have rightly decided that if you managed to be 'bullied' by someone who's barely tall enough to ride the rollercoaster at Alton Towers, then you may well be the one with the problem...
    Short people can behave badly too.

    A couple of them tried invading Russia, and that didn't turn out too well for them.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 7,780
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Roy_G_Biv said:

    MaxPB said:

    Roy_G_Biv said:

    MaxPB said:

    I think I'd look at it from the opposite direction.

    A young Asian, immigrant class, female minister takes over a department full of Oxbridge educated old white middle to upper class men. They see her as an affront to them, a threat to their domination of the establishment. They refuse to work with her and refuse to take directions from her and she, increasingly frustrated, has had enough of these old white elitists telling her how things are done and she fucks them off.

    I have much more sympathy to her because I've lived this career for the last 5 years, taking over teams dominated by older white Oxbridge educated elitists who look down their noses at a working class Asian man who went to Cardiff university and state school, at least I have ways to move these people on and get a team in that doesn't rely on their societal status to get their way.

    The inquiry didn't find that Patel was the victim, though. It found that she was the bully.
    That's a small difference compared to gender and ethnicity, but some would dare to suggest it's an important one.
    The inquiry wasn't tasked with looking at elitist culture at the Home Office and wider civil service. I know these types of people, they hate people like me with all their being. They see people like me as upstarts and a threat to their cosy chumocracy at the top of big business and government departments. You clearly don't understand what that feels like in the workplace but it is why I have got more sympathy for Patel than most.
    You've had a certain negative experience
    You see someone as being in the same "group" as you in some way
    Therefore they've had the same negative experience
    That negative experience is also the reason for them being wrongly accused of wrongdoing

    versus

    They did something wrong and got caught
    It's not just me though, go out and speak to any Asian or Black person in a position of seniority in big business or government who has had the displeasure of dealing with these elitists and a similar story will emerge. It's something you will probably never experience so I can understand if you just don't get it, but I have and have heard countless stories of similar issues. There is still a glass ceiling in this country and those few who manage to break through it are subjected to the worst kind of belittling and exclusion by the Oxbridge chums. Thankfully it's a problem that will soon be part of history as that generation finally fucks off and dies and their racist ways die with them.

    Anyway, I've said my piece. You're free to continue your ignorance of what people actually experience if you want.
    I have seen this second hand and I believe you. To be honest I have mixed feelings about the case against Patel. I suspect that she is a wrong un but I wonder why she has been singled out, I doubt she is the worst offender.
    Which is sort of my point, I'm not going to accept the judgement because to me it's the chums protecting other chums. I've been highly critical of the chumocracy that Boris is so fond of and it's deleterious effects on the nation, to me Patel is a victim of a different kind of chumocracy that exists at the top of big business and the civil service. They all look out for each other and don't believe that one of their ranks could ever have done anything wrong. They see Patel as an awful upstart woman who absolutely must be in the wrong regardless of the situation.

    I've said it already, I actually think Patel probably did bully this civil servant out of the job. I also think she's up against the worst kind of people on the other side and I think part of the reason she did it is because she had no other recourse to be rid of this chum who had all of the institutional protections given to someone of his status.

    Again, I say this as I've been there and had this very issue, only I was able to get the company to put together a severance package, even then there were accusations flying around and I was accused of "acting above my station" whatever that means.

    I'm actually torn because I don't think she's a very good minister, but I also don't think she's been left with very much choice in this matter. Ultimately she's the decision maker and if there is someone who is unwilling to get on board and is happy to sabotage the rest of the team they have to go by any means necessary.
    You might want to reread what you wrote - last sentence. 'any means necessary' - but leaving open the question of its legality.

  • pingping Posts: 101


    Steve Baker at 50/1 ?


    A good value bet, but are the Conservatives daft enough to install their very own Jeremy Corbyn into No 10?

    Yes.
  • MaxPB said:
    Indeed, I'm still amused by Toby Young and his stunning demonstration of acalculia.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 7,735
    Scott_xP said:
    The Cummings effect, or the Corbyn effect, or MoE?
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 6,520
    MaxPB said:



    Which is sort of my point, I'm not going to accept the judgement because to me it's the chums protecting other chums. I've been highly critical of the chumocracy that Boris is so fond of and it's deleterious effects on the nation, to me Patel is a victim of a different kind of chumocracy that exists at the top of big business and the civil service. They all look out for each other and don't believe that one of their ranks could ever have done anything wrong. They see Patel as an awful upstart woman who absolutely must be in the wrong regardless of the situation.

    I've said it already, I actually think Patel probably did bully this civil servant out of the job. I also think she's up against the worst kind of people on the other side and I think part of the reason she did it is because she had no other recourse to be rid of this chum who had all of the institutional protections given to someone of his status.

    Again, I say this as I've been there and had this very issue, only I was able to get the company to put together a severance package, even then there were accusations flying around and I was accused of "acting above my station" whatever that means.

    I'm actually torn because I don't think she's a very good minister, but I also don't think she's been left with very much choice in this matter. Ultimately she's the decision maker and if there is someone who is unwilling to get on board and is happy to sabotage the rest of the team they have to go by any means necessary.

    This is quite the story you've developed.

    It is a bit simpler to believe that the 3 departments that complained about her, the numerous civil servants who didn't have a problem working for Mordaunt, Greening, Sharma, Stewart, Rudd et al, but did with her, the independent investigation.... they might be right?
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 4,396

    Scott_xP said:
    Excellent. Tory MPs have rightly decided that if you managed to be 'bullied' by someone who's barely tall enough to ride the rollercoaster at Alton Towers, then you may well be the one with the problem...
    Cripes. You genuinely feel you haven't embarrassed yourself enough yet this year? I salute your indefatigability.

    I am sure Priti is going nowhere. Like Dom.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 86,761
    edited November 20
    So we'll have to stop singing 'Your wife's a grass' at Jamie Vardy soon?

  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 4,028
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Roy_G_Biv said:

    MaxPB said:

    Roy_G_Biv said:

    MaxPB said:

    I think I'd look at it from the opposite direction.

    A young Asian, immigrant class, female minister takes over a department full of Oxbridge educated old white middle to upper class men. They see her as an affront to them, a threat to their domination of the establishment. They refuse to work with her and refuse to take directions from her and she, increasingly frustrated, has had enough of these old white elitists telling her how things are done and she fucks them off.

    I have much more sympathy to her because I've lived this career for the last 5 years, taking over teams dominated by older white Oxbridge educated elitists who look down their noses at a working class Asian man who went to Cardiff university and state school, at least I have ways to move these people on and get a team in that doesn't rely on their societal status to get their way.

    The inquiry didn't find that Patel was the victim, though. It found that she was the bully.
    That's a small difference compared to gender and ethnicity, but some would dare to suggest it's an important one.
    The inquiry wasn't tasked with looking at elitist culture at the Home Office and wider civil service. I know these types of people, they hate people like me with all their being. They see people like me as upstarts and a threat to their cosy chumocracy at the top of big business and government departments. You clearly don't understand what that feels like in the workplace but it is why I have got more sympathy for Patel than most.
    You've had a certain negative experience
    You see someone as being in the same "group" as you in some way
    Therefore they've had the same negative experience
    That negative experience is also the reason for them being wrongly accused of wrongdoing

    versus

    They did something wrong and got caught
    It's not just me though, go out and speak to any Asian or Black person in a position of seniority in big business or government who has had the displeasure of dealing with these elitists and a similar story will emerge. It's something you will probably never experience so I can understand if you just don't get it, but I have and have heard countless stories of similar issues. There is still a glass ceiling in this country and those few who manage to break through it are subjected to the worst kind of belittling and exclusion by the Oxbridge chums. Thankfully it's a problem that will soon be part of history as that generation finally fucks off and dies and their racist ways die with them.

    Anyway, I've said my piece. You're free to continue your ignorance of what people actually experience if you want.
    I have seen this second hand and I believe you. To be honest I have mixed feelings about the case against Patel. I suspect that she is a wrong un but I wonder why she has been singled out, I doubt she is the worst offender.
    Which is sort of my point, I'm not going to accept the judgement because to me it's the chums protecting other chums. I've been highly critical of the chumocracy that Boris is so fond of and it's deleterious effects on the nation, to me Patel is a victim of a different kind of chumocracy that exists at the top of big business and the civil service. They all look out for each other and don't believe that one of their ranks could ever have done anything wrong. They see Patel as an awful upstart woman who absolutely must be in the wrong regardless of the situation.

    I've said it already, I actually think Patel probably did bully this civil servant out of the job. I also think she's up against the worst kind of people on the other side and I think part of the reason she did it is because she had no other recourse to be rid of this chum who had all of the institutional protections given to someone of his status.

    Again, I say this as I've been there and had this very issue, only I was able to get the company to put together a severance package, even then there were accusations flying around and I was accused of "acting above my station" whatever that means.

    I'm actually torn because I don't think she's a very good minister, but I also don't think she's been left with very much choice in this matter. Ultimately she's the decision maker and if there is someone who is unwilling to get on board and is happy to sabotage the rest of the team they have to go by any means necessary.
    Like I say, I have seen this kind of shit second hand and so I have a lot of sympathy with you. I have less sympathy with Patel, who seems to be, as my wife calls her, a "piece of work". As a Labour supporter I am more than happy for her to stay in post anyway.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 4,641
    @MikeSmithson

    Is Smarkets a firm we can trust in your view? My last interaction with them was them saying they'd charge me for having an inactive account, and clearly it was only inactive because they were so poor.

    Do you (or others) know who their current backers are now?

    You seem reasonably positive about them in that you're posting their prices, but I presume you'll have pondered their profile a little beforehand.


  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 51,201
    edited November 20
    Gaussian said:

    Can't be long 'til Wales does the same.
    Well despite Drakeford attempts at spin...

    Coronavirus infection rates, cases, and deaths for all parts of Wales on Friday, November 20

    Wales' infection rate has seen a slight increase with 166.5 positive cases per 100,000 people for the last seven days (November 11-17) compared with 164.5 per 100,000 on Thursday.

    https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/coronavirus-cases-deaths-wales-rates-19316791

    Now to be fair there is some piss poor reporting in there, but the trend certainly looking like it could be that cases are heading back up.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 22,820
    rkrkrk said:

    MaxPB said:



    Which is sort of my point, I'm not going to accept the judgement because to me it's the chums protecting other chums. I've been highly critical of the chumocracy that Boris is so fond of and it's deleterious effects on the nation, to me Patel is a victim of a different kind of chumocracy that exists at the top of big business and the civil service. They all look out for each other and don't believe that one of their ranks could ever have done anything wrong. They see Patel as an awful upstart woman who absolutely must be in the wrong regardless of the situation.

    I've said it already, I actually think Patel probably did bully this civil servant out of the job. I also think she's up against the worst kind of people on the other side and I think part of the reason she did it is because she had no other recourse to be rid of this chum who had all of the institutional protections given to someone of his status.

    Again, I say this as I've been there and had this very issue, only I was able to get the company to put together a severance package, even then there were accusations flying around and I was accused of "acting above my station" whatever that means.

    I'm actually torn because I don't think she's a very good minister, but I also don't think she's been left with very much choice in this matter. Ultimately she's the decision maker and if there is someone who is unwilling to get on board and is happy to sabotage the rest of the team they have to go by any means necessary.

    This is quite the story you've developed.

    It is a bit simpler to believe that the 3 departments that complained about her, the numerous civil servants who didn't have a problem working for Mordaunt, Greening, Sharma, Stewart, Rudd et al, but did with her, the independent investigation.... they might be right?
    The civil servant in question had already been shuffled across a bunch of different departments and Patel had previously shopped him around Whitehall but no one wanted him.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 7,735
    edited November 20
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Roy_G_Biv said:

    MaxPB said:

    Roy_G_Biv said:

    MaxPB said:

    I think I'd look at it from the opposite direction.

    A young Asian, immigrant class, female minister takes over a department full of Oxbridge educated old white middle to upper class men. They see her as an affront to them, a threat to their domination of the establishment. They refuse to work with her and refuse to take directions from her and she, increasingly frustrated, has had enough of these old white elitists telling her how things are done and she fucks them off.

    I have much more sympathy to her because I've lived this career for the last 5 years, taking over teams dominated by older white Oxbridge educated elitists who look down their noses at a working class Asian man who went to Cardiff university and state school, at least I have ways to move these people on and get a team in that doesn't rely on their societal status to get their way.

    The inquiry didn't find that Patel was the victim, though. It found that she was the bully.
    That's a small difference compared to gender and ethnicity, but some would dare to suggest it's an important one.
    The inquiry wasn't tasked with looking at elitist culture at the Home Office and wider civil service. I know these types of people, they hate people like me with all their being. They see people like me as upstarts and a threat to their cosy chumocracy at the top of big business and government departments. You clearly don't understand what that feels like in the workplace but it is why I have got more sympathy for Patel than most.
    You've had a certain negative experience
    You see someone as being in the same "group" as you in some way
    Therefore they've had the same negative experience
    That negative experience is also the reason for them being wrongly accused of wrongdoing

    versus

    They did something wrong and got caught
    It's not just me though, go out and speak to any Asian or Black person in a position of seniority in big business or government who has had the displeasure of dealing with these elitists and a similar story will emerge. It's something you will probably never experience so I can understand if you just don't get it, but I have and have heard countless stories of similar issues. There is still a glass ceiling in this country and those few who manage to break through it are subjected to the worst kind of belittling and exclusion by the Oxbridge chums. Thankfully it's a problem that will soon be part of history as that generation finally fucks off and dies and their racist ways die with them.

    Anyway, I've said my piece. You're free to continue your ignorance of what people actually experience if you want.
    I have seen this second hand and I believe you. To be honest I have mixed feelings about the case against Patel. I suspect that she is a wrong un but I wonder why she has been singled out, I doubt she is the worst offender.
    Which is sort of my point, I'm not going to accept the judgement because to me it's the chums protecting other chums. I've been highly critical of the chumocracy that Boris is so fond of and it's deleterious effects on the nation, to me Patel is a victim of a different kind of chumocracy that exists at the top of big business and the civil service. They all look out for each other and don't believe that one of their ranks could ever have done anything wrong. They see Patel as an awful upstart woman who absolutely must be in the wrong regardless of the situation.

    I've said it already, I actually think Patel probably did bully this civil servant out of the job. I also think she's up against the worst kind of people on the other side and I think part of the reason she did it is because she had no other recourse to be rid of this chum who had all of the institutional protections given to someone of his status.

    Again, I say this as I've been there and had this very issue, only I was able to get the company to put together a severance package, even then there were accusations flying around and I was accused of "acting above my station" whatever that means.

    I'm actually torn because I don't think she's a very good minister, but I also don't think she's been left with very much choice in this matter. Ultimately she's the decision maker and if there is someone who is unwilling to get on board and is happy to sabotage the rest of the team they have to go by any means necessary.
    You seem to have made a number of sweeping assumptions here that Priti was undermined by a minion and she is the ultimate victim.

    On the other hand, it might just be that she would be ambitious enough to think that subordinates don't matter when it comes to her race to the top. It is the sort of superior attitude that might lead a Minister of the Crown to operate their own parallel foreign policy.
  • Scott_xP said:
    The Cummings effect, or the Corbyn effect, or MoE?
    No reason not to think it's MoE. The interesting thing is the smoothed lines. Since late August (exam cockups, I guess), the blue line has trended down pretty steadily and remorselessly.
  • IshmaelZ said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Excellent. Tory MPs have rightly decided that if you managed to be 'bullied' by someone who's barely tall enough to ride the rollercoaster at Alton Towers, then you may well be the one with the problem...
    Cripes. You genuinely feel you haven't embarrassed yourself enough yet this year? I salute your indefatigability.

    I am sure Priti is going nowhere. Like Dom.
    There was a story about Dom? Gosh, I must have forgotten that, can't have been anything important.

    (And to be fair to @BluestBlue, he was right. Boris did stick by his man over the Durham thing. Right up to the moment that he had to choose between Dom and Carrie.)
  • ChrisChris Posts: 6,920
    In a pandemic, our lives are (even more than usually) in the hands of very stupid people.
  • OllyTOllyT Posts: 4,075

    Scott_xP said:
    Excellent. Tory MPs have rightly decided that if you managed to be 'bullied' by someone who's barely tall enough to ride the rollercoaster at Alton Towers, then you may well be the one with the problem...
    A truly ignorant comment from someone who hasn't a clue about bullying.

    I doubt anyone is surprised she gets away with breaking the ministerial code. She's in Boris's gang so the rules don't apply to them.
  • Scott_xP said:
    Surely "double jeopardy" protections don't apply to parties like Labour?
  • pingping Posts: 101
    edited November 20
    Omnium said:

    @MikeSmithson

    Is Smarkets a firm we can trust in your view? My last interaction with them was them saying they'd charge me for having an inactive account, and clearly it was only inactive because they were so poor.

    Do you (or others) know who their current backers are now?

    You seem reasonably positive about them in that you're posting their prices, but I presume you'll have pondered their profile a little beforehand.


    Smarkets sbk app has good odds on premier league football, often beating betfair - and all without commission.

    I can recommend.

    Be aware though, their multiple odds are a bit scammy - they multiply the odds then cut them a bit. Also their limits are a bit crap.

    But for single bets on major sports, sbk is a decent enough bookie, imo
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 7,735

    Scott_xP said:
    Surely "double jeopardy" protections don't apply to parties like Labour?
    But, but, Jeremy's special...
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 2,634
    edited November 20
    IshmaelZ said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Excellent. Tory MPs have rightly decided that if you managed to be 'bullied' by someone who's barely tall enough to ride the rollercoaster at Alton Towers, then you may well be the one with the problem...
    Cripes. You genuinely feel you haven't embarrassed yourself enough yet this year? I salute your indefatigability.

    I am sure Priti is going nowhere. Like Dom.
    What was I meant to be embarrassed about again? The media witch-hunt over Cummings was duly told to fuck off, as has been the Civil Service stitch-up of Priti, both of which were exactly what I predicted and desired.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 22,995
    I gather from certain posts on the last thread that today is all about John Bercow and Diane Abbott. I hadn't heard much about either of them recently, any clues on why everyone's talking about them?
  • IshmaelZ said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Excellent. Tory MPs have rightly decided that if you managed to be 'bullied' by someone who's barely tall enough to ride the rollercoaster at Alton Towers, then you may well be the one with the problem...
    Cripes. You genuinely feel you haven't embarrassed yourself enough yet this year? I salute your indefatigability.

    I am sure Priti is going nowhere. Like Dom.
    What was I meant to be embarrassed about again? The media witch-hunt over Cummings was duly told to fuck off, as has been the Civil Service stitch-up of Priti, both of which were exactly what I desired.
    Dom left when he outlived his usefulness.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 15,691

    Even May lasted 2 years, should be at least >90% that Boris is still PM in 2022.

    Rather depressing to agree - because of the assertion, I mean, not because it's you - but I do. Considerably higher than 65% anyway.

    My biggest open politics bet (apart from residuals on POTUS) is Johnson to still be PM on 1st July 2022 at 1.9.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 22,995
    OllyT said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Excellent. Tory MPs have rightly decided that if you managed to be 'bullied' by someone who's barely tall enough to ride the rollercoaster at Alton Towers, then you may well be the one with the problem...
    A truly ignorant comment from someone who hasn't a clue about bullying.

    I doubt anyone is surprised she gets away with breaking the ministerial code. She's in Boris's gang so the rules don't apply to them.
    Yep, seems to be suggesting that one should use physical size against forceful women...
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 7,735

    IshmaelZ said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Excellent. Tory MPs have rightly decided that if you managed to be 'bullied' by someone who's barely tall enough to ride the rollercoaster at Alton Towers, then you may well be the one with the problem...
    Cripes. You genuinely feel you haven't embarrassed yourself enough yet this year? I salute your indefatigability.

    I am sure Priti is going nowhere. Like Dom.
    What was I meant to be embarrassed about again? The media witch-hunt over Cummings was duly told to fuck off, as has been the Civil Service stitch-up of Priti, both of which were exactly what I desired.
    Dom left when he outlived his usefulness.
    No, Dom left after he called Carrie, "Princess Nut Nuts"!
  • paulyork64paulyork64 Posts: 1,294
    isam said:

    ping said:

    I’d guess the correct %’ages are;

    2% 2020
    10% 2021
    8% 2022
    10% 2023
    40% 2024
    30% 2025 or later

    So imo, the value is laying 2021

    2024 or later is 13/8 on Betfair - long time to wait, but 32% of value not to be sniffed at
    Paddys have boris exit date 2022 or later at 4/6. Meaner price but not such a wait.

    Hills have a market on whether boris will lead tories into next election. Yes 5/4. No 4/7.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 4,641

    I gather from certain posts on the last thread that today is all about John Bercow and Diane Abbott. I hadn't heard much about either of them recently, any clues on why everyone's talking about them?

    Every day is Bercow day - you can fit so many of them in.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 4,190
    Omnium said:

    @MikeSmithson

    Is Smarkets a firm we can trust in your view? My last interaction with them was them saying they'd charge me for having an inactive account, and clearly it was only inactive because they were so poor.

    Do you (or others) know who their current backers are now?

    You seem reasonably positive about them in that you're posting their prices, but I presume you'll have pondered their profile a little beforehand.


    I`ve used them a bit over the last year. Placed maybe 20 bets I guess over that time. They have been fine.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 7,735

    I gather from certain posts on the last thread that today is all about John Bercow and Diane Abbott. I hadn't heard much about either of them recently, any clues on why everyone's talking about them?

    Bercow being refused his Peerage by Boris as a result of allegations of bullying and Priti, er, not being a bully.

    Diane Abbot? Who cares?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 33,988
    MaxPB said:

    rkrkrk said:

    MaxPB said:



    Which is sort of my point, I'm not going to accept the judgement because to me it's the chums protecting other chums. I've been highly critical of the chumocracy that Boris is so fond of and it's deleterious effects on the nation, to me Patel is a victim of a different kind of chumocracy that exists at the top of big business and the civil service. They all look out for each other and don't believe that one of their ranks could ever have done anything wrong. They see Patel as an awful upstart woman who absolutely must be in the wrong regardless of the situation.

    I've said it already, I actually think Patel probably did bully this civil servant out of the job. I also think she's up against the worst kind of people on the other side and I think part of the reason she did it is because she had no other recourse to be rid of this chum who had all of the institutional protections given to someone of his status.

    Again, I say this as I've been there and had this very issue, only I was able to get the company to put together a severance package, even then there were accusations flying around and I was accused of "acting above my station" whatever that means.

    I'm actually torn because I don't think she's a very good minister, but I also don't think she's been left with very much choice in this matter. Ultimately she's the decision maker and if there is someone who is unwilling to get on board and is happy to sabotage the rest of the team they have to go by any means necessary.

    This is quite the story you've developed.

    It is a bit simpler to believe that the 3 departments that complained about her, the numerous civil servants who didn't have a problem working for Mordaunt, Greening, Sharma, Stewart, Rudd et al, but did with her, the independent investigation.... they might be right?
    The civil servant in question had already been shuffled across a bunch of different departments and Patel had previously shopped him around Whitehall but no one wanted him.
    I take much more issue with the reason she was originally fired: she went on a work trip to Israel, lied about it, got caught out, and then lied about it again, and was only then fired.

    I thought she behaved very poorly, and the repeated lying casts a great deal of doubt on her judgement.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 15,691

    Another day, another soft soap article on Lewis Hamilton on the BBC website....Whoever is doing his PR, certainly earning their money.

    You have posted before about this. Do you suspect a ramp for Spoty?
  • IshmaelZ said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Excellent. Tory MPs have rightly decided that if you managed to be 'bullied' by someone who's barely tall enough to ride the rollercoaster at Alton Towers, then you may well be the one with the problem...
    Cripes. You genuinely feel you haven't embarrassed yourself enough yet this year? I salute your indefatigability.

    I am sure Priti is going nowhere. Like Dom.
    What was I meant to be embarrassed about again? The media witch-hunt over Cummings was duly told to fuck off, as has been the Civil Service stitch-up of Priti, both of which were exactly what I desired.
    Dom left when he outlived his usefulness.
    No, Dom left after he called Carrie, "Princess Nut Nuts"!
    Which was outliving his usefulness.

    If you're going to insult your boss or his fiancée then don't do it in writing is in general a good idea.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 4,641
    ping said:

    Omnium said:

    @MikeSmithson

    Is Smarkets a firm we can trust in your view? My last interaction with them was them saying they'd charge me for having an inactive account, and clearly it was only inactive because they were so poor.

    Do you (or others) know who their current backers are now?

    You seem reasonably positive about them in that you're posting their prices, but I presume you'll have pondered their profile a little beforehand.


    Smarkets sbk app has good odds on premier league football, often beating betfair - and all without commission.

    I can recommend.

    Be aware though, their multiple odds are a bit scammy - they multiply the odds then cut them a bit. Also their limits are a bit crap.

    But for single bets on major sports, sbk is a decent enough bookie, imo
    Sure, but betting on politics may mean funds tied up for years. 'Next Labour Leader' - it could be settled in 50 years. I have a degree of trust in BF, in part because their exchange model ties their hands a little more tightly.

    So what I'm asking is the degree to which they are both credit-worthy and honour-worthy.
  • paulyork64paulyork64 Posts: 1,294
    rcs1000 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    In defence of the people trying to prove Trump won the election somehow, 4 states beginning with "MI" is definitely too many and calling one of them "MI" is asking for trouble.

    Literally a plotline from The Newsroom...
    "M" is dramatically overrepresented, because there are another four M's even after the Mi's.
    There are 8 'N's too.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 4,190

    rcs1000 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    In defence of the people trying to prove Trump won the election somehow, 4 states beginning with "MI" is definitely too many and calling one of them "MI" is asking for trouble.

    Literally a plotline from The Newsroom...
    "M" is dramatically overrepresented, because there are another four M's even after the Mi's.
    There are 8 'N's too.
    Slow day?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 51,201
    edited November 20
    kinabalu said:

    Another day, another soft soap article on Lewis Hamilton on the BBC website....Whoever is doing his PR, certainly earning their money.

    You have posted before about this. Do you suspect a ramp for Spoty?
    Well....I know he just won the F1 championship again and equalled Schumacher, but there really seems to be OTT coverage. It has been literally every single day a new article for the past couple of weeks. BBC News, BBC Sport, and big focus on much wider aspects of his life.

    Now is there anything coming up in the near future, where a raised positive media presence would help....
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 4,396

    Scott_xP said:
    Surely "double jeopardy" protections don't apply to parties like Labour?
    "Double jeopardy" is Americanese for a rule in criminal law which no longer applies in E & W and was called autrefois acquit when it did, and has no conceivable relevance to Corbyn's case.

    Pardon, literally, my French. They must have named it before we got our sovereignty back.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 62,626
    ping said:

    Omnium said:

    @MikeSmithson

    Is Smarkets a firm we can trust in your view? My last interaction with them was them saying they'd charge me for having an inactive account, and clearly it was only inactive because they were so poor.

    Do you (or others) know who their current backers are now?

    You seem reasonably positive about them in that you're posting their prices, but I presume you'll have pondered their profile a little beforehand.


    Smarkets sbk app has good odds on premier league football, often beating betfair - and all without commission.

    I can recommend.

    Be aware though, their multiple odds are a bit scammy - they multiply the odds then cut them a bit. Also their limits are a bit crap.

    But for single bets on major sports, sbk is a decent enough bookie, imo
    Everyone needs to move to Betdaq. Faultless this POTUS cycle
Sign In or Register to comment.