politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » LDs now down ten seats on the Commons spread markets since the

Richard_Tyndall said:

Charles said:

alex. said:

Charles said:

Ishmael_Z said:

Baskerville said:

FPT:
For those wondering whether Ms Abbott's gaffe last week was a one off that could happen to anyone, try this from June last year.

Written PQ from Diane Abbott: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, what steps she has taken to assist people in the Indonesian province of Province of Davao del Norte affected by the drought in that province.
Answer from SoS DfiD Justine Greening: There is no province called Davao del Norte in Indonesia.
https://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-question/Commons/2016-06-24/41141/

"The earliest blacks in Britain were probably black Roman centurions that came over hundreds of years before Christ."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/modern/dabbott_01.shtml

This from a graduate of Cambridge "University", ffs.

In fairness there is evidence of extensive trade links, certainly from the mid 50s BC onwards so plausible before then. In this context it's likely that there were blacks (or at least African born) Romans in Britain in the time frame she suggests

Probably not Centurions though!

It's not my period, but I believe retired NCOs like Centurions retained their rank. But that does make it less likely, yes, although not laughably stupid.

(At least it wouldn't be laughably stupid if it had been someone other than Abbott making the comment. She's just a blithering idiot)

It is laughably stupid because she seems to believe there were Romans in Britain 'hundreds of years before Christ'. Whatever your view on there being blacks amongst the Romans who landed here - and I think it very likely to the point of certainty, she has managed to push back the arrival of the Romans by several centuries.

She is basically dumber than a bag of rocks.

Charles said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Charles said:

PaulM said:

Ishmael_Z said:

Baskerville said:

FPT:
For those wondering whether Ms Abbott's gaffe last week was a one off that could happen to anyone, try this from June last year.

Written PQ from Diane Abbott: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, what steps she has taken to assist people in the Indonesian province of Province of Davao del Norte affected by the drought in that province.
Answer from SoS DfiD Justine Greening: There is no province called Davao del Norte in Indonesia.
https://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-question/Commons/2016-06-24/41141/

"The earliest blacks in Britain were probably black Roman centurions that came over hundreds of years before Christ."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/modern/dabbott_01.shtml

This from a graduate of Cambridge "University", ffs.

Wasn't aware that Christ had ever come over to Britain..

Of course. With Joseph of Arimathea. Went to Glastonbury

Why isn't this mentioned in The Bible?

It happened during the missing 30 years....

JonnyJimmy said:

Does 'fascism' now mean 'wanting immigration controls'?

Charles said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Charles said:

alex. said:

Charles said:

Ishmael_Z said:

Baskerville said:

FPT:
For those wondering whether Ms Abbott's gaffe last week was a one off that could happen to anyone, try this from June last year.

Written PQ from Diane Abbott: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, what steps she has taken to assist people in the Indonesian province of Province of Davao del Norte affected by the drought in that province.
Answer from SoS DfiD Justine Greening: There is no province called Davao del Norte in Indonesia.
https://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-question/Commons/2016-06-24/41141/

"The earliest blacks in Britain were probably black Roman centurions that came over hundreds of years before Christ."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/modern/dabbott_01.shtml

This from a graduate of Cambridge "University", ffs.

In fairness there is evidence of extensive trade links, certainly from the mid 50s BC onwards so plausible before then. In this context it's likely that there were blacks (or at least African born) Romans in Britain in the time frame she suggests

Probably not Centurions though!

It's not my period, but I believe retired NCOs like Centurions retained their rank. But that does make it less likely, yes, although not laughably stupid.

(At least it wouldn't be laughably stupid if it had been someone other than Abbott making the comment. She's just a blithering idiot)

It is laughably stupid because she seems to believe there were Romans in Britain 'hundreds of years before Christ'. Whatever your view on there being blacks amongst the Romans who landed here - and I think it very likely to the point of certainty, she has managed to push back the arrival of the Romans by several centuries.

She is basically dumber than a bag of rocks.

I think it is very probable there were Romans in Britain hundreds of years before Christ.

Each extra criterion (centurions, black) reduces the probability somewhat.

But I agree with your conclusion! What I don't understand is how did she get into Fenland Poly?

TheScreamingEagles said:

I hate Theresa May. She's trying to topple Richard Burgon, we need him in Parliament, he should be Corbyn's replacement.

Mr Burgon, who nominated Mr Corbyn in the 2015 Labour leadership election, has failed to reference Mr Corbyn once in his four page campaign leaflet.

He has instead included a photograph of himself stood alongside the shadow business secretary Rebecca Long-Bailey and adopted the slogan ‘Putting East Leeds First’.

His constituency of Leeds East, where he has a 12,533 majority, is one of Theresa May's key target seats in June's election.

philiph said:

RoyalBlue said:

Thinking back to the CPS, it will be far more damaging if the charges come out in dribs and drabs, rather than in one go.

As a non legal expert, is the CPS expected to bring charges in cases that it thinks they will win, or where they think the potential defendant is guilty?

Guilt can be exceedingly difficult to prove and the two are very different.

SandyRentool said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

progressive adjective> pro·gres·sive \prə-ˈgre-siv\

(Of a political party) : Convinced of its own moral superiority, especially over the Conservative Party; hypocritical.

Could we have a definition of 'near-perfect' please Mr N?

TheScreamingEagles said:

I hate Theresa May. She's trying to topple Richard Burgon, we need him in Parliament, he should be Corbyn's replacement.

Mr Burgon, who nominated Mr Corbyn in the 2015 Labour leadership election, has failed to reference Mr Corbyn once in his four page campaign leaflet.

He has instead included a photograph of himself stood alongside the shadow business secretary Rebecca Long-Bailey and adopted the slogan ‘Putting East Leeds First’.

His constituency of Leeds East, where he has a 12,533 majority, is one of Theresa May's key target seats in June's election.

Richard_Nabavi said:

SandyRentool said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

progressive adjective> pro·gres·sive \prə-ˈgre-siv\

(Of a political party) : Convinced of its own moral superiority, especially over the Conservative Party; hypocritical.

Could we have a definition of 'near-perfect' please Mr N?

Certainly:

tyson said:

bobajobPB said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Interesting. I did write about this a few weeks ago.

Top pollster Stephan Shakespeare will be analysing the state of the parties exclusively for the Standard during the General Election campaign. Today the CEO and founder of YouGov says the latest evidence indicates many traditional Labour voters are preparing to ‘hold their nose’ and back the party again despite doubts over Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/general-election-2017-polls-jeremy-corbyn-could-benefit-as-labour-voters-hold-noses-to-back-party-a3533271.html

A lot of my Leftie mates seem to be leaning that way, which I think unwise as a vote for Labour will be interpreted as a vote for Corbyn. What happens if I write Corbyn is a Massive Twat in the Labour box?

I have come to the conclusion that a vote for Labour is a vote for Corbyn's cronies (Milne and McDonnell), and one vote closer to them staying propping the old fool up...

TheWhiteRabbit said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I hate Theresa May. She's trying to topple Richard Burgon, we need him in Parliament, he should be Corbyn's replacement.

Mr Burgon, who nominated Mr Corbyn in the 2015 Labour leadership election, has failed to reference Mr Corbyn once in his four page campaign leaflet.

He has instead included a photograph of himself stood alongside the shadow business secretary Rebecca Long-Bailey and adopted the slogan ‘Putting East Leeds First’.

His constituency of Leeds East, where he has a 12,533 majority, is one of Theresa May's key target seats in June's election.

Can we rewind... Leeds East - key target?!

TheScreamingEagles said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I hate Theresa May. She's trying to topple Richard Burgon, we need him in Parliament, he should be Corbyn's replacement.

Mr Burgon, who nominated Mr Corbyn in the 2015 Labour leadership election, has failed to reference Mr Corbyn once in his four page campaign leaflet.

He has instead included a photograph of himself stood alongside the shadow business secretary Rebecca Long-Bailey and adopted the slogan ‘Putting East Leeds First’.

His constituency of Leeds East, where he has a 12,533 majority, is one of Theresa May's key target seats in June's election.

Can we rewind... Leeds East - key target?!

According to The Telegraph and Mrs May.

tyson said:

bobajobPB said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Interesting. I did write about this a few weeks ago.

Top pollster Stephan Shakespeare will be analysing the state of the parties exclusively for the Standard during the General Election campaign. Today the CEO and founder of YouGov says the latest evidence indicates many traditional Labour voters are preparing to ‘hold their nose’ and back the party again despite doubts over Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/general-election-2017-polls-jeremy-corbyn-could-benefit-as-labour-voters-hold-noses-to-back-party-a3533271.html

A lot of my Leftie mates seem to be leaning that way, which I think unwise as a vote for Labour will be interpreted as a vote for Corbyn. What happens if I write Corbyn is a Massive Twat in the Labour box?

I have come to the conclusion that a vote for Labour is a vote for Corbyn's cronies (Milne and McDonnell), and one vote closer to them staying propping the old fool up...

Ishmael_Z said:

Charles said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Charles said:

alex. said:

Charles said:

Ishmael_Z said:

Baskerville said:

This from a graduate of Cambridge "University", ffs.

In fairness there is evidence of extensive trade links, certainly from the mid 50s BC onwards so plausible before then. In this context it's likely that there were blacks (or at least African born) Romans in Britain in the time frame she suggests

Probably not Centurions though!

It is laughably stupid because she seems to believe there were Romans in Britain 'hundreds of years before Christ'. Whatever your view on there being blacks amongst the Romans who landed here - and I think it very likely to the point of certainty, she has managed to push back the arrival of the Romans by several centuries.

She is basically dumber than a bag of rocks.

I think it is very probable there were Romans in Britain hundreds of years before Christ.

Each extra criterion (centurions, black) reduces the probability somewhat.

But I agree with your conclusion! What I don't understand is how did she get into Fenland Poly?

"Extensive trade links from mid 50s BC onwards" doesn't justify "so probably before that as well", because of rather important events in 55 and 54 BC. And, again, trade links don't imply travels from one end of the chain to the other. She presumably simply misdates Caesar's invasion by a few centuries, since she says "centurions" rather than "traders" (and also thinks centurion just means soldier, in the absence of any argument why centurions are more likely to be black than other ranks are).

chrisb said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I hate Theresa May. She's trying to topple Richard Burgon, we need him in Parliament, he should be Corbyn's replacement.

Mr Burgon, who nominated Mr Corbyn in the 2015 Labour leadership election, has failed to reference Mr Corbyn once in his four page campaign leaflet.

He has instead included a photograph of himself stood alongside the shadow business secretary Rebecca Long-Bailey and adopted the slogan ‘Putting East Leeds First’.

His constituency of Leeds East, where he has a 12,533 majority, is one of Theresa May's key target seats in June's election.

Can we rewind... Leeds East - key target?!

According to The Telegraph and Mrs May.

She has stopped off there on her campaign tour. Of all the places she's stopped at, I think it's the one with the biggest swing required to take it.

TheScreamingEagles said:

philiph said:

RoyalBlue said:

Thinking back to the CPS, it will be far more damaging if the charges come out in dribs and drabs, rather than in one go.

As a non legal expert, is the CPS expected to bring charges in cases that it thinks they will win, or where they think the potential defendant is guilty?

Guilt can be exceedingly difficult to prove and the two are very different.

This should explain it better than I can

Here's one of the tests.

The evidential test

The prosecutor must first decide whether or not there is enough evidence against the defendant for a realistic prospect of conviction.

This means that the magistrates or jury are more likely than not to convict the defendant of the charge. If there is not a realistic prospect of conviction, the case must not go ahead, no matter how important or serious it may be.

It is the duty of every Crown Prosecutor to make sure that the right person is prosecuted for the right offence. In doing so, Crown Prosecutors must always act in the interests of justice and not only for the purpose of obtaining a conviction

https://www.cps.gov.uk/victims_witnesses/reporting_a_crime/decision_to_charge.html

chrisb said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I hate Theresa May. She's trying to topple Richard Burgon, we need him in Parliament, he should be Corbyn's replacement.

Mr Burgon, who nominated Mr Corbyn in the 2015 Labour leadership election, has failed to reference Mr Corbyn once in his four page campaign leaflet.

He has instead included a photograph of himself stood alongside the shadow business secretary Rebecca Long-Bailey and adopted the slogan ‘Putting East Leeds First’.

His constituency of Leeds East, where he has a 12,533 majority, is one of Theresa May's key target seats in June's election.

Can we rewind... Leeds East - key target?!

According to The Telegraph and Mrs May.

She has stopped off there on her campaign tour. Of all the places she's stopped at, I think it's the one with the biggest swing required to take it.

Ishmael_Z said:

Charles said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Charles said:

alex. said:

Charles said:

In fairness there is evidence of extensive trade links, certainly from the mid 50s BC onwards so plausible before then. In this context it's likely that there were blacks (or at least African born) Romans in Britain in the time frame she suggests

Probably not Centurions though!

It's not my period, but I believe retired NCOs like Centurions retained their rank. But that does make it less likely, yes, although not laughably stupid.

(At least it wouldn't be laughably stupid if it had been someone other than Abbott making the comment. She's just a blithering idiot)

It is laughably stupid because she seems to believe there were Romans in Britain 'hundreds of years before Christ'. Whatever your view on there being blacks amongst the Romans who landed here - and I think it very likely to the point of certainty, she has managed to push back the arrival of the Romans by several centuries.

She is basically dumber than a bag of rocks.

I think it is very probable there were Romans in Britain hundreds of years before Christ.

Each extra criterion (centurions, black) reduces the probability somewhat.

But I agree with your conclusion! What I don't understand is how did she get into Fenland Poly?

"Extensive trade links from mid 50s BC onwards" doesn't justify "so probably before that as well", because of rather important events in 55 and 54 BC. And, again, trade links don't imply travels from one end of the chain to the other. She presumably simply misdates Caesar's invasion by a few centuries, since she says "centurions" rather than "traders" (and also thinks centurion just means soldier, in the absence of any argument why centurions are more likely to be black than other ranks are).

RobinWiggs said:

bobajobPB said:

What happens if I write Corbyn is a Massive Twat in the Labour box?

If it is entirely within the box, a good agent will argue that it is expression of a clear preference and that the vote should stand.

I've argued that a quickly drawn phallus is a valid vote...

RepublicanTory said:

bobajobPB said:

If I credited Corbyn with any guile I would say that his ludicrous statement that he will go on and on was designed to spark a mid campaign rebellion from the PLP so the absurd Milne can then blame the inevitable election smashing on them. But that would be too clever by half. As it is, Corbyn will be challenged and if he wins the challenge the party will split. So be it. Five years is long enough to build a party. Just look at Macron!

That is a very fair point-if you were a Labour MP who was not a Corbynista, Macron's victory would be very encouraging.

I know the electoral system is different but it is still encouraging.

Philip_Thompson said:

RepublicanTory said:

bobajobPB said:

If I credited Corbyn with any guile I would say that his ludicrous statement that he will go on and on was designed to spark a mid campaign rebellion from the PLP so the absurd Milne can then blame the inevitable election smashing on them. But that would be too clever by half. As it is, Corbyn will be challenged and if he wins the challenge the party will split. So be it. Five years is long enough to build a party. Just look at Macron!

That is a very fair point-if you were a Labour MP who was not a Corbynista, Macron's victory would be very encouraging.

I know the electoral system is different but it is still encouraging.

The electoral system is not that different. It is closer to our system than it is to PR. Of all the forms of alternative electoral systems, the French is the model after FPTP I'd accept the most.

JonnyJimmy said:

bobajobPB said:

ThreeQuidder said:

bobajobPB said:

Three Quidder

Indeed.

But as your definition of bullying means asking people to make election predictions rather than trolling; and smearing, quoting polls; you might have a problem with crying wolf.

Repeatedly demanding a particular person appears so you can have a go at them is bullying.

Misleadingly partially quoting polls to make a group you disagree with look bad is smearing.

Hope this helps.

I asked Moniker several times to predict the French election result after he - several times - ramped and dog whistled a Le Pen victory. That is a perfectly reasonable response. It is not bullying.

Will you define fascist for us? I think you've been throwing it around a bit lately, and accusing fellow PBers of being fascist supporters, if memory serves (apols if I'm wrong). Surely you can quite easily tell us precisely what you mean by it?

philiph said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

philiph said:

RoyalBlue said:

Thinking back to the CPS, it will be far more damaging if the charges come out in dribs and drabs, rather than in one go.

As a non legal expert, is the CPS expected to bring charges in cases that it thinks they will win, or where they think the potential defendant is guilty?

Guilt can be exceedingly difficult to prove and the two are very different.

This should explain it better than I can

Here's one of the tests.

The evidential test

The prosecutor must first decide whether or not there is enough evidence against the defendant for a realistic prospect of conviction.

This means that the magistrates or jury are more likely than not to convict the defendant of the charge. If there is not a realistic prospect of conviction, the case must not go ahead, no matter how important or serious it may be.

It is the duty of every Crown Prosecutor to make sure that the right person is prosecuted for the right offence. In doing so, Crown Prosecutors must always act in the interests of justice and not only for the purpose of obtaining a conviction

https://www.cps.gov.uk/victims_witnesses/reporting_a_crime/decision_to_charge.html

Thanks

That is clear and understandable, could be because there are no puns or 80s pop music references.

I wonder if those criteria are more helpful to the accused than to CPS or other parties?

It has always looked to me that the real guilt lies at Central Office, not local level. I could see a case built around the advice from central office that the EC had always accepted the battle bus costs as National expenditure in the past, so it was not to be included in local costs as overwhelmingly persuasive. I suspect the EC is guilty of allowing unacceptable practice to grow over time, and for that to become the moving line with each election to which the parties could acceptably bend the rules.

Whilst guilt of someone(or more than one) in the Tory ranks is undeniable, I could see agents and MPs building a good defense.

That, of course, is academic in terms of the bad press from charges, accusations and a hostile and aggressive press.

IanB2 said:

RobinWiggs said:

bobajobPB said:

What happens if I write Corbyn is a Massive Twat in the Labour box?

If it is entirely within the box, a good agent will argue that it is expression of a clear preference and that the vote should stand.

I've argued that a quickly drawn phallus is a valid vote...

I doubt a written comment obviously negative about a candidate would qualify as a valid vote (leaving aside any considerations about identifying the voter). I believe there is case precedent about "not him" written in the box not counting.

At least with a drawing there is a degree of ambiguity.

Scrapheap_as_was said:

RobD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

*Surge KLAXON*

twitter.com/MsHelicat/status/861698888532668417

Hm, what's louder and more dramatic than a KLAXON?

10 or more will do fine.......

Richard_Nabavi said:

Leeds East? Really?

chrisb said:

"The findings are based on an analysis by the Scottish Conservatives of first preference votes from last week's council elections"Hmm...

Charles said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Mortimer said:

Charles said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Charles said:

alex. said:

Charles said:

Ishmael_Z said:

Baskerville said:

FPT:
For those wondering whether Ms Abbott's gaffe last week was a one off that could happen to anyone, try this from June last year.

Written PQ from Diane Abbott: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, what steps she has taken to assist people in the Indonesian province of Province of Davao del Norte affected by the drought in that province.
Answer from SoS DfiD Justine Greening: There is no province called Davao del Norte in Indonesia.
https://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-question/Commons/2016-06-24/41141/

"The earliest blacks in Britain were probably black Roman centurions that came over hundreds of years before Christ."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/modern/dabbott_01.shtml

This from a graduate of Cambridge "University", ffs.

In fairness there is evidence of extensive trade links, certainly from the mid 50s BC onwards so plausible before then. In this context it's likely that there were blacks (or at least African born) Romans in Britain in the time frame she suggests

Probably not Centurions though!

It's not my period, but I believe retired NCOs like Centurions retained their rank. But that does make it less likely, yes, although not laughably stupid.
.
(At least it wouldn't be laughably stupid if it had been someone other than Abbott making the comment. She's just a blithering idiot)

She is basically dumber than a bag of rocks.

I think it is very probable there were Romans in Britain hundreds of years before Christ.

Each extra criterion (centurions, black) reduces the probability somewhat.

But I agree with your conclusion! What I don't understand is how did she get into Fenland Poly?

I've heard they even let people with red shoes into Fen Poly.

Wouldn't happen at good old Cowley Tech.

Cowley Tech let in David Miliband with 3 Bs and a D, and also Jeffrey Archer.

Just saying.

Now CEO of International Rescue (Archer never went to Oxford). So if he was as dense as Abbott going in, we must have added more value while he was there...

MarqueeMark said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Leeds East? Really?

Hmmmm....target? Filed under "They're avin' a larf....."

bobajobPB said:

Jonny

I said Le Pen was a fascist.

Arthur_Penny said:

JonnyJimmy said:

Does 'fascism' now mean 'wanting immigration controls'?

It means anything that the 'liberal elite' don't like - and as such has no meaning at all and so can be safely ignored along with racist, xenophobe, islamophobe, corbynophobe, little-englander, neocon, lepenophile etc.

Richard_Nabavi said:

IanB2 said:

Doesn't it mostly educate people to write, speak, broadcast and make political decisions about all the inventions and discoveries made by people from Cambridge?

Yes, it educates us to employ Cambridge graduates in technical support roles.

RepublicanTory said:

IanB2 said:

RepublicanTory said:

RoyalBlue said:

Thinking back to the CPS, it will be far more damaging if the charges come out in dribs and drabs, rather than in one go.

The CPS know that the Tories will win the election -are they really going to make a decision before June the 8th ?

Legally they have no choice; they have already been granted one extension and the deadlines are days away. I have no idea whether a minister could grant a further extension or not, but the political costs of doing so probably rule this out even if it could be done.

People keep talking about deadlines but -where have these dates come from?

But I wont put any money down on this election until i know what the DPS timescale is.

bobajobPB said:

RepublicanTory said:

bobajobPB said:

If I credited Corbyn with any guile I would say that his ludicrous statement that he will go on and on was designed to spark a mid campaign rebellion from the PLP so the absurd Milne can then blame the inevitable election smashing on them. But that would be too clever by half. As it is, Corbyn will be challenged and if he wins the challenge the party will split. So be it. Five years is long enough to build a party. Just look at Macron!

That is a very fair point-if you were a Labour MP who was not a Corbynista, Macron's victory would be very encouraging.

I know the electoral system is different but it is still encouraging.

Thanks. I now think that a split may not be that bad an outcome. Given that the splitting party will (I assume) have 100+ MPs and five years, that's not too bad a starting point.

IanB2 said:

RepublicanTory said:

IanB2 said:

RepublicanTory said:

RoyalBlue said:

Thinking back to the CPS, it will be far more damaging if the charges come out in dribs and drabs, rather than in one go.

The CPS know that the Tories will win the election -are they really going to make a decision before June the 8th ?

Legally they have no choice; they have already been granted one extension and the deadlines are days away. I have no idea whether a minister could grant a further extension or not, but the political costs of doing so probably rule this out even if it could be done.

People keep talking about deadlines but -where have these dates come from?

But I wont put any money down on this election until i know what the DPS timescale is.

The normal one year period to charge someone, which applied to all crimes AIUI, has been extended to two years. The date of the offence is the date the expenses returns were submitted for each constituency, and the time is almost up.

Charles said:

Ishmael_Z said:

Charles said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Charles said:

alex. said:

Charles said:

Ishmael_Z said:

"The earliest blacks in Britain were probably black Roman centurions that came over hundreds of years before Christ."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/modern/dabbott_01.shtml

This from a graduate of Cambridge "University", ffs.

In fairness there is evidence of extensive trade links, certainly from the mid 50s BC onwards so plausible before then. In this context it's likely that there were blacks (or at least African born) Romans in Britain in the time frame she suggests

Probably not Centurions though!

It's not my period, but I believe retired NCOs like Centurions retained their rank. But that does make it less likely, yes, although not laughably stupid.

(At least it wouldn't be laughably stupid if it had been someone other than Abbott making the comment. She's just a blithering idiot)

It is laughably stupid because she seems to believe there were Romans in Britain 'hundreds of years before Christ'. Whatever your view on there being blacks amongst the Romans who landed here - and I think it very likely to the point of certainty, she has managed to push back the arrival of the Romans by several centuries.

She is basically dumber than a bag of rocks.

I think it is very probable there were Romans in Britain hundreds of years before Christ.

Each extra criterion (centurions, black) reduces the probability somewhat.

But I agree with your conclusion! What I don't understand is how did she get into Fenland Poly?

"Extensive trade links from mid 50s BC onwards" doesn't justify "so probably before that as well", because of rather important events in 55 and 54 BC. And, again, trade links don't imply travels from one end of the chain to the other. She presumably simply misdates Caesar's invasion by a few centuries, since she says "centurions" rather than "traders" (and also thinks centurion just means soldier, in the absence of any argument why centurions are more likely to be black than other ranks are).

It's not my period but I tend to take the view that trade links were more extensive than previously known. There have been interesting artefacts uncovered in Cornwall that came from Phoenica, for example. It's not proof of movement, but with ships it's possible.

I suspect that Abbott was simply wrong - as you say. But she could have been right by luck..,