politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The LAB-UKIP race is on: Which party will split first?

DaveDave said:

You may have covered this already, but surely Farage could be the next leader of UKIP. I assume there are odds somewhere?

RobD said:

Speedy said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

Speedy said:

JackW said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I need to pick your brain.

Imagine if John McCain was the GOP nominee in 2000, would he have become POTUS, defeating Al Gore?

Yes.

McCain's double misfortune was Bush winning on 2000 largely on the basis of Gore detaching himself from Bill Clinton and then in 08 coming up against the brilliant campaigner in Obama and the financial crisis.

McCain would also win now against Clinton.

McCain would have nuked the entire world on 9/11.

His only policy is:

"I'm John McCain, and I endorse WAR"

Anyway this is circulating:

https://twitter.com/LarrySabato/status/760841043499585537

He can't withdraw, his name would still go forward as the Republican candidate.

The idea is that Trump resigns the nomination and the RNC nominates someone else, there is precedent from 1912 and 1972 but for VP's.

I can't see that working politically because half of republican voters are Trump fanatics, only if they replaced Trump with another Trump would it work.

Best case right now, Trump resigns but the nomination stays in the Trump family and goes to Ivanka.

She is well liked by the media, is seen as the most political savvy of the Trump family and as a woman she would get Hillary's only card.

But the only ones who can convince Trump of doing this is probably his own family.
It's probably for the better of them since the Trump family name is going through the gutter right now, and Trump is facing a hostile and politically charged Jury on his trial.

I never though that my 10000th comment would be speculation of Trump withdrawing from the GOP nomination, but there you go.

10,001

Speedy said:

RobD said:

Speedy said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

Speedy said:

JackW said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I need to pick your brain.

Imagine if John McCain was the GOP nominee in 2000, would he have become POTUS, defeating Al Gore?

Yes.

McCain's double misfortune was Bush winning on 2000 largely on the basis of Gore detaching himself from Bill Clinton and then in 08 coming up against the brilliant campaigner in Obama and the financial crisis.

McCain would also win now against Clinton.

McCain would have nuked the entire world on 9/11.

His only policy is:

"I'm John McCain, and I endorse WAR"

Anyway this is circulating:

https://twitter.com/LarrySabato/status/760841043499585537

He can't withdraw, his name would still go forward as the Republican candidate.

The idea is that Trump resigns the nomination and the RNC nominates someone else, there is precedent from 1912 and 1972 but for VP's.

I can't see that working politically because half of republican voters are Trump fanatics, only if they replaced Trump with another Trump would it work.

Best case right now, Trump resigns but the nomination stays in the Trump family and goes to Ivanka.

She is well liked by the media, is seen as the most political savvy of the Trump family and as a woman she would get Hillary's only card.

But the only ones who can convince Trump of doing this is probably his own family.
It's probably for the better of them since the Trump family name is going through the gutter right now, and Trump is facing a hostile and politically charged Jury on his trial.

I never though that my 10000th comment would be speculation of Trump withdrawing from the GOP nomination, but there you go.

10,001

10000th

The Larry Sabato tweet post.

ThreeQuidder said:

MTimT said:

Charles said:

ThreeQuidder said:

MaxPB said:

HYUFD said:

Philip_Thompson said:

HYUFD said:

I expect Farage will start a new populist anti immigration party which Woolfe will lead and UKIP will be left with Carswell, Neil Hamilton and whichever nonentity they now elect to lead them and wither on the vine

Since the EU is no longer an issue they should just concentrate on being British ...

Sounds like you want them to be rather nationalist, they should put National in their name too ...

Obviously they are a Party ...

Now what name could they go for ...

When May agrees to continue free movement with controls to get some access to the single market that will be the time for an anti immigration party and the British Nationalists is as good a name as any

Why not just add the word Socialist on the end. British national socialist party. Has a nice ring to it, plus if they are going to try and appeal to traditional Labour voters then saying they are socialist is a must.

They also need to mention Workers. British Workers National Socialist Party.

Workers & National Kipper, English Regions & Socialist party?

I wonder what acronym we could use for that?

How about the Local Occasionally Socialist English Regions Syndicate?

oxfordsimon said:

SimonStClare said:

DaveDave said:

You may have covered this already, but surely Farage could be the next leader of UKIP. I assume there are odds somewhere?

His name is not on the ballot – barring a civil war, surely a named person will be next leader?

I thought Named Persons was now illegal....

houndtang said:

Is Wolfe worth a punt at 6-1 on the basis this could be reversed?

SimonStClare said:

oxfordsimon said:

SimonStClare said:

DaveDave said:

You may have covered this already, but surely Farage could be the next leader of UKIP. I assume there are odds somewhere?

His name is not on the ballot – barring a civil war, surely a named person will be next leader?

I thought Named Persons was now illegal....

any more lip from you sir, and I’ll report you to your head teacher for corrective training

Speedy said:

The Trump resignation rumour is picking up steam:

https://twitter.com/GioBenitez/status/760838639161081856

https://twitter.com/BraddJaffy/status/760854625847083012

As I mentioned, this trick could work only if then nomination stays in the Trump family (they can keep all the logos, the policies, Trump voters, but getting rid of Trump's manners), my recommendation would be to give it to Ivanka Trump.

MTimT said:

Sandpit said:

MTimT said:

Sandpit said:

Afternoon all. Catching up after a busy day and lots of being stuck in traffic.

For fans of plane crash photos: (nobody seriously injured BTW)
http://www.thenational.ae/uae/transport/emirates-flight-catches-fire-on-landing-at-dubai-airport---in-pictures
Looking like bad weather at the moment, was 49 degrees, very low pressure and strong but variable winds today - a pilot's nightmare.

What time of day. I know that in that part of the world the biggies tend to take off in the wee hours of the morning for the heavier air.

12:45 local, 08:45GMT. Horrible weather today, seriously hot and humid. Pressure was 988mb and temp 49C. Rumour is that there was a wind shear and he tried to go around but fell into the hole in the air. Very unfortunate, and reminiscent of the BA crash in a similar 777 at LHR a few years back, although it for different reasons. Those Boeings are very well built indeed.

I think there was a domestic US crash in the mid 80s which led to the discovery of microbursts.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delta_Air_Lines_Flight_191

Scott_P said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Lots of empty seats at the cricket today.

@hendopolis: Guys on @bbctms wondering why game not sold out. It is £90 and you can't take your own booze.

@hendopolis: Also stunned the @bbctms guys cheerfully admit they don't know how much tickets cost. Hopelessly privileged?

FrancisUrquhart said:

Not sure where he got the £90 figure from. A quick look & You can get good seats tomorrow for £40.

Scott_P said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Not sure where he got the £90 figure from. A quick look & You can get good seats tomorrow for £40.

I assume the £90s are sold out...

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Simon, quite.

As I said, bad news shouldn't be ignored, but nor should it be exaggerated or manufactured.

FrancisUrquhart said:

I have no idea where he got that figure. The official website is showing loads of tickets everyday at £40-60 behind the bowlers arm. Might go myself.

RobD said:

nunu said:

Massive double standards, apparently he was a "volunteer" not brown enough to be a terrorist?

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/36959218?client=ms-android-oneplus

He was fighting with the good guys, surely?

Ishmael_X said:

HurstLlama said:

@valleyboy

"You should have come over to Pembrokeshire. Better beaches but less crowded. Mind you, the mobile signal is shit."

We had a holiday in North Devon a few years ago and I thought then why isn't there a ferry across to Wales? If done in the holiday season I would have thought it could be done at a profit and benefit both sides.

That said I spent most of the crossing to and from Lundy Island trying not to spew my ring and that on a lovely, if somewhat blowy, day in August.

Tides are a problem - that's why there are no marinas along that coast.

TheScreamingEagles said:

For those who cannot speak German, 69% of Germans say Merkel's policy on refugees did not contribute to the recent terrorist attacks in Germany, which makes sense.

https://twitter.com/andreaspetzold/status/760706316415406080

Philip_Thompson said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Scott_P said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

I have no idea where he got that figure. The official website is showing loads of tickets everyday at £40-60 behind the bowlers arm. Might go myself.

@hendopolis: .@DJ_CUPPA @bbctms my Lords ticket cost £90 and so did my Oval ticket.

Apparently it's cheaper "up north"...

So the journo got his facts wrong then...lords is always stupid money but people seem to be willing to pay it in London.

£40 for a days cricket doesn't seem bad to me. Unfortunately i have meetings tomorrow & Friday, so my concern would be will we get a full day 4.

I always recall Tests starting on a Thursday (or the rare Friday). Since when was a Wednesday start so common?

john_zims said:

@Speedy

'She only allowed the terrorists in for free.'

What else can they say,they know their stuffed ?

MarkHopkins said:

HurstLlama said:

I agree Mr, Mede but can you imagine the screaming? All those landlords who would suddenly be underwater on their BTL loans. Doesn't bear thinking about. However, I suspect until such distorting payments are abolished then we will never get of the structural deficit and the SE will continue to attract more people than it can properly cope with.

That said what I would rather like to see in the next couple of years is a government scheme to encourage elderly people to move out of large family houses in the SE into smaller, but not small, houses in the North, places like Hexham. Need not be too expensive, zero stamp duty, a government grant towards moving costs, that sort of thing. Trivial amounts of money in the great scheme of things but perhaps of useful benefit for North, South and me.

Move elderly people away from their families and the area they've known all their life?

Can't see a great number taking that up.

HurstLlama said:

MarkHopkins said:

HurstLlama said:

I agree Mr, Mede but can you imagine the screaming? All those landlords who would suddenly be underwater on their BTL loans. Doesn't bear thinking about. However, I suspect until such distorting payments are abolished then we will never get of the structural deficit and the SE will continue to attract more people than it can properly cope with.

That said what I would rather like to see in the next couple of years is a government scheme to encourage elderly people to move out of large family houses in the SE into smaller, but not small, houses in the North, places like Hexham. Need not be too expensive, zero stamp duty, a government grant towards moving costs, that sort of thing. Trivial amounts of money in the great scheme of things but perhaps of useful benefit for North, South and me.

Move elderly people away from their families and the area they've known all their life?

Can't see a great number taking that up.

You might be surprised., Mr. Hopkins.

At present in the SE the figures for downsizing just don't work and actually there are a lot of people who would very much like to downsize and whose children and families are spread all over the globe let alone the UK. So I think you might be surprised about how little attachment to place there is amongst the elderly in the SE.

Add into that the massive housebuilding that is going on in the SE without the concomitant investment in infrastructure (transport and health particularly) and it is not difficult to see how for the investment of, in relative terms, a few quid shifting the oldies up North, whilst leaving them with a wodge to pay for health/social care, might e a very attractive option.

HurstLlama said:

Philip_Thompson said:

HurstLlama said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

"he committed the party to pushing the minimum wage up to £8.25 and forcing employers to give it to all adults on the payroll, not just those over 25 - to be funded by tax increases for the highest-earners in society and businesses."

Huh...so tax businesses more to pay for businesses to pay their employees more. How does that one work then?

Well if business will not pay their people enough even for a very minimal standard of living and expect the taxpayers to pick up the difference, what can you expect? Some businesses might have a leg to stand on if they were not paying their senior executives very large sums indeed whilst the junior staff cannot afford to keep a roof over their heads on the wages that they are paid.

In work benefits always strike me as pernicious as they are, in effect a subsidy, from the marginal net taxpayer the larger companies and the very well off. If a company's business model relies on employing people on the minimum legal wage knowing that those wages will be topped up from taxpayers then that company does not deserve to survive.

Wages are not topped up for employees on the minimum legal wage. If somebody is working 40 hours a week on 7.20 an hour then that is an income of just over £15000 per year. If a couple are doing that then they are on a minimum wage of over £30,000 per year.

Please show me an automatic subsidy given to all families on more than £30,000 per year.

Those on benefits are typically getting benefits for children and/or are part timers. If the government wants to pay more for children or people working part time hours then that is not the employers fault. Quite the opposite in fact as an employer it can be a real challenge to get people to agree to work more than 16 hours per week sometimes.

Housingg benefit, tax credits

TheScreamingEagles said:

HurstLlama said:

MarkHopkins said:

HurstLlama said:

I agree Mr, Mede but can you imagine the screaming? All those landlords who would suddenly be underwater on their BTL loans. Doesn't bear thinking about. However, I suspect until such distorting payments are abolished then we will never get of the structural deficit and the SE will continue to attract more people than it can properly cope with.

That said what I would rather like to see in the next couple of years is a government scheme to encourage elderly people to move out of large family houses in the SE into smaller, but not small, houses in the North, places like Hexham. Need not be too expensive, zero stamp duty, a government grant towards moving costs, that sort of thing. Trivial amounts of money in the great scheme of things but perhaps of useful benefit for North, South and me.

Move elderly people away from their families and the area they've known all their life?

Can't see a great number taking that up.

You might be surprised., Mr. Hopkins.

At present in the SE the figures for downsizing just don't work and actually there are a lot of people who would very much like to downsize and whose children and families are spread all over the globe let alone the UK. So I think you might be surprised about how little attachment to place there is amongst the elderly in the SE.

Add into that the massive housebuilding that is going on in the SE without the concomitant investment in infrastructure (transport and health particularly) and it is not difficult to see how for the investment of, in relative terms, a few quid shifting the oldies up North, whilst leaving them with a wodge to pay for health/social care, might e a very attractive option.

Why should the North have to deal with the South's problems?

It's not like there's a problem with house prices oop North.

Civil Wars have started over less.

Scott_P said:

malcolmg said:

No still in trials and will be with you in a month or two, once they get round the right wing Junta kangaroo court ruling

Parents in the current trials are now considering court action, since the trials are probably illegal too

Speedy said:

She is qualified by the constitution, she would be 35 years old by election day.
She would probably beat Hillary by a landslide in that she is:

A. Trump
B. Not Donald
C. A woman
D. Is a young mother
E. Liked by media

Donald Trump would probably gain a pardon from his daughter in case of conviction on his Trump University trial and of course access to the White House.

HurstLlama said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

HurstLlama said:

MarkHopkins said:

HurstLlama said:

I agree Mr, Mede but can you imagine the screaming? All those landlords who would suddenly be underwater on their BTL loans. Doesn't bear thinking about. However, I suspect until such distorting payments are abolished then we will never get of the structural deficit and the SE will continue to attract more people than it can properly cope with.

That said what I would rather like to see in the next couple of years is a government scheme to encourage elderly people to move out of large family houses in the SE into smaller, but not small, houses in the North, places like Hexham. Need not be too expensive, zero stamp duty, a government grant towards moving costs, that sort of thing. Trivial amounts of money in the great scheme of things but perhaps of useful benefit for North, South and me.

Move elderly people away from their families and the area they've known all their life?

Can't see a great number taking that up.

You might be surprised., Mr. Hopkins.

At present in the SE the figures for downsizing just don't work and actually there are a lot of people who would very much like to downsize and whose children and families are spread all over the globe let alone the UK. So I think you might be surprised about how little attachment to place there is amongst the elderly in the SE.

Add into that the massive housebuilding that is going on in the SE without the concomitant investment in infrastructure (transport and health particularly) and it is not difficult to see how for the investment of, in relative terms, a few quid shifting the oldies up North, whilst leaving them with a wodge to pay for health/social care, might e a very attractive option.

Why should the North have to deal with the South's problems?

It's not like there's a problem with house prices oop North.

Civil Wars have started over less.

An influx of people who are cash and time rich, in need of services but able to pay for them you think that is a bad idea. Weird folk in Sheffield. I suppose that is why it has been for many years been referred to as the People's Republic of South Yorkshire and has been a shit place and had shit services to match.

Philip_Thompson said:

HurstLlama I've just entered into the government's tax credit calculator 15000 each for two people with no kids and funnily enough Tax Credits available was £0. So couples working full time in minimum wage are not entitled to Tax Credits.

Again if the government wants to give benefits to part timers or parents that's not a businesses responsibility. Unless you think perhaps we should have one minimum wage for childless people and a higher minimum wage if you employ a parent.

malcolmg said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

For people with more money than sense

https://twitter.com/RuthDavidsonMSP/status/760869715946442752

Ruth underemployed, fit her better to try and come up with a policy or two and try to make the Tories anything other than a joke.

williamglenn said:

Speedy said:

JackW said:

Speedy said:

As I mentioned, this trick could work only if then nomination stays in the Trump family (they can keep all the logos, the policies, Trump voters, but getting rid of Trump's manners), my recommendation would be to give it to Ivanka Trump.

Wasn't Ivanka Trump born in Kenya? ....

She is qualified by the constitution, she would be 35 years old by election day.
She would probably beat Hillary by a landslide in that she is:

A. Trump
B. Not Donald
C. A woman
D. Is a young mother
E. Liked by media

Donald Trump would probably gain a pardon from his daughter in case of conviction on his Trump University trial and of course access to the White House.

Here Ivanka is asked if she would ever run for public office.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/08/02/ivanka-trump-says-clearly-disagrees-with-obama-calling-her-father-unfit-to-be-president.html

Speedy said:

williamglenn said:

Speedy said:

JackW said:

Speedy said:

As I mentioned, this trick could work only if then nomination stays in the Trump family (they can keep all the logos, the policies, Trump voters, but getting rid of Trump's manners), my recommendation would be to give it to Ivanka Trump.

Wasn't Ivanka Trump born in Kenya? ....

She is qualified by the constitution, she would be 35 years old by election day.
She would probably beat Hillary by a landslide in that she is:

A. Trump
B. Not Donald
C. A woman
D. Is a young mother
E. Liked by media

Donald Trump would probably gain a pardon from his daughter in case of conviction on his Trump University trial and of course access to the White House.

Here Ivanka is asked if she would ever run for public office.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/08/02/ivanka-trump-says-clearly-disagrees-with-obama-calling-her-father-unfit-to-be-president.html

" The businesswoman said while her father always told her "never to say never" on the possibility of running for elected office one day, she told Van Susteren the possibility of running is "not something I want to be doing." "

Open doors and windows.

TheScreamingEagles said:

MarqueeMark said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

A colleague suggested it, I do enjoy my visits to the South West of England.

Not sure how long you are down for, but if you are still around, the British Fireworks Championships in Plymouth on 16th-17th Aug are worth catching....

Arriving this Friday and leaving the following Friday, sadly, I likes fireworks.

I'd like to make it Lewes for bonfire night one year

not_on_fire said:

Speedy said:

JackW said:

Speedy said:

As I mentioned, this trick could work only if then nomination stays in the Trump family (they can keep all the logos, the policies, Trump voters, but getting rid of Trump's manners), my recommendation would be to give it to Ivanka Trump.

Wasn't Ivanka Trump born in Kenya? ....

She is qualified by the constitution, she would be 35 years old by election day.
She would probably beat Hillary by a landslide in that she is:

A. Trump
B. Not Donald
C. A woman
D. Is a young mother
E. Liked by media

Donald Trump would probably gain a pardon from his daughter in case of conviction on his Trump University trial and of course access to the White House.

Ivanka cannot be president. She is only 34 and the consitution requires that the President is aged at least 45

not_on_fire said:

Speedy said:

JackW said:

Speedy said:

As I mentioned, this trick could work only if then nomination stays in the Trump family (they can keep all the logos, the policies, Trump voters, but getting rid of Trump's manners), my recommendation would be to give it to Ivanka Trump.

Wasn't Ivanka Trump born in Kenya? ....

She is qualified by the constitution, she would be 35 years old by election day.
She would probably beat Hillary by a landslide in that she is:

A. Trump
B. Not Donald
C. A woman
D. Is a young mother
E. Liked by media

Donald Trump would probably gain a pardon from his daughter in case of conviction on his Trump University trial and of course access to the White House.

Ivanka cannot be president. She is only 34 and the consitution requires that the President is aged at least 45

williamglenn said:

not_on_fire said:

Speedy said:

JackW said:

Speedy said:

As I mentioned, this trick could work only if then nomination stays in the Trump family (they can keep all the logos, the policies, Trump voters, but getting rid of Trump's manners), my recommendation would be to give it to Ivanka Trump.

Wasn't Ivanka Trump born in Kenya? ....

She is qualified by the constitution, she would be 35 years old by election day.
She would probably beat Hillary by a landslide in that she is:

A. Trump
B. Not Donald
C. A woman
D. Is a young mother
E. Liked by media

Donald Trump would probably gain a pardon from his daughter in case of conviction on his Trump University trial and of course access to the White House.

Ivanka cannot be president. She is only 34 and the consitution requires that the President is aged at least 45

"No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of 35 Years, and been 14 Years a Resident within the United States."

not_on_fire said:

williamglenn said:

not_on_fire said:

Speedy said:

JackW said:

Speedy said:

As I mentioned, this trick could work only if then nomination stays in the Trump family (they can keep all the logos, the policies, Trump voters, but getting rid of Trump's manners), my recommendation would be to give it to Ivanka Trump.

Wasn't Ivanka Trump born in Kenya? ....

She is qualified by the constitution, she would be 35 years old by election day.
She would probably beat Hillary by a landslide in that she is:

A. Trump
B. Not Donald
C. A woman
D. Is a young mother
E. Liked by media

Donald Trump would probably gain a pardon from his daughter in case of conviction on his Trump University trial and of course access to the White House.

Ivanka cannot be president. She is only 34 and the consitution requires that the President is aged at least 45

"No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of 35 Years, and been 14 Years a Resident within the United States."

Ah, I stand corrected. Her 35th birthday is on 30 October so she just makes it!

A min age of 35 must still have been a relatively high barrier in 1776 given lower life expectancy. Probably equivalent to about 50 today.

williamglenn said:

Speedy said:

not_on_fire said:

Speedy said:

JackW said:

Speedy said:

As I mentioned, this trick could work only if then nomination stays in the Trump family (they can keep all the logos, the policies, Trump voters, but getting rid of Trump's manners), my recommendation would be to give it to Ivanka Trump.

Wasn't Ivanka Trump born in Kenya? ....

She is qualified by the constitution, she would be 35 years old by election day.
She would probably beat Hillary by a landslide in that she is:

A. Trump
B. Not Donald
C. A woman
D. Is a young mother
E. Liked by media

Donald Trump would probably gain a pardon from his daughter in case of conviction on his Trump University trial and of course access to the White House.

Ivanka cannot be president. She is only 34 and the consitution requires that the President is aged at least 45

35, not 45.

She will be 35 on October 30th, the election is on November 8th.

It's very historically convenient if she becomes the GOP nominee in the place of her father, just in the nick of time.

Someone registered draftivanka.com last October. That's forward planning!