politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Mrs May has missed an opportunity and it could be costly

Second!

Careful - mention of Abba Eban without concomitant condemnation will bring @Roger out in a muck sweat.

Beverley_C said:

Cyclefree said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

You had me at Abba.

S.O.S? Or "Lay all your love on me"?

The 2nd one is now banned. Kindly report yourself to Purity Control

Ah.... Take a Chance on Me.

Very good article and I was really hoping that Fallon and even Green going would open a window for inspired choice of successors. TM failed the test and, as generally a sympathetic supporter in all her troubles, this has disappointed me

Is that David Lidington with the awesome nose? I'd never noticed it in profile.

Cyclefree said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Cyclefree said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

You had me at Abba.

S.O.S? Or "Lay all your love on me"?

Waterloo or Dancing Queen.

Love isn't Easy (But it Sure is Hard Enough). Coming to a Parliament near you.

I think the ones in trouble are knowing me knowing you.

Pulpstar said:

kle4 said:

Quick braintrust question - how much is a decent amount of spending money for someone of modest means about to go on holiday in China for 10 days?

Whereabouts in China are you going ?

You'll need more in a 5* hotel in Hong Kong compared to a hostel in Kunming..

It's a standard tour deal to beking, shanghai and xian, nice but not fancy hotels I imagine. I'm thinking just how much cash is generally advisable.

PeterMannion said:

brendan16 said:

Yorkcity said:

It was much easier in the last parliament , when you could sack someone for a tweet showing a picture of an England flag.

I think the point in that case was that the shadow foreign secretary was sneering and looking down her nose at people who displayed England flags on their homes.

Or was she?

I think she was, although I didn't think she deserved the sack for it.

stevef said:

I believe there is a massive reconstruction of parties that will come if Corbyn gets his hands on power. It will be the end of the Labour Party. And no, it will not be a rebirth of the Lib Dems -they toxified themselves tenfold in the coalition. But there will be a new party.

People predicting a reconstruction like that, well, it sounds a good idea but I just cannot see it.

I wonder how Abba Eban would have fared today, with his jokes, such as "There's no business like Shoah business."

Beverley_C said:

I find myself amazed at thinking that Marx may well have had a point. In its current state, I am not sure our political system is fixable. It may very well need to be destroyed and rebuilt from the ground up.

Which is what the Brexiteer Leninists are clearly about. Destroy everything in the hope that something better will arise in its place.

Can you be reported now for listening to Rock and Roll ( part 1 & 2 ) ?

Good header CycleFree:

https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/926459965358903301

Yorkcity said:

Can you be reported now for listening to Rock and Roll ( part 1 & 2 ) ?

I wonder about the literally seminal song 'I Touch Myself' by The Divinyls

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wv-34w8kGPM

I had no idea about this song until it was mentioned on Buffy: The Vampire Slayer.

rottenborough said:

Good header CycleFree:

https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/926459965358903301

Blimey: I'm being quoted by journalists now....... I need to lie down.

And yet and yet. If they can keep the show on the road somehow, play the long game, get past Brexit without imploding and then select a leader with some popular appeal, I can quite see the tories winning the next GE. They only need a dozen more seats and they will probably be facing someone who I got the strong sense was peaking when he headlined Glastonbury. On the betting, you can lay JC at 5/1 on BF for 'next PM after May' and that IMO is a great trade. You lose only if (i) May leads the tories into the next GE and (ii) she loses it to Corbyn. That double I make more like 12/1.

Beverley_C said:

Pong said:

It would be interesting to have some polling on this new sexual puritanism.

It is not really Sexual Puritanism. It is more like "Can you please stop sexually harrassing me?"

I was being provocative

The polling is the interesting thing.

kinabalu said:

And yet and yet. If they can keep the show on the road somehow, play the long game, get past Brexit without imploding and then select a leader with some popular appeal, I can quite see the tories winning the next GE. They only need a dozen more seats and they will probably be facing someone who I got the strong sense was peaking when he headlined Glastonbury. On the betting, you can lay JC at 5/1 on BF for 'next PM after May' and that IMO is a great trade. You lose only if (i) May leads the tories into the next GE and (ii) she loses it to Corbyn. That double I make more like 12/1.

Matt Singh posted some interesting graphs of approval this morning.

https://twitter.com/MattSingh_/status/926423815478968322

https://twitter.com/MattSingh_/status/926428161482592258

oxfordsimon said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/TheGreenParty/status/926391000393703424

That is slightly over-stating things by the Greens (quelle surprise)

At 16 you can't get married in England without parental consent. The same applies to joining the Army.

So the top two things on their list, you can't do without your parents agreeing.

So perhaps they should get the vote, but only if their parents agree?

tlg86 said:

oxfordsimon said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/TheGreenParty/status/926391000393703424

That is slightly over-stating things by the Greens (quelle surprise)

At 16 you can't get married in England without parental consent. The same applies to joining the Army.

So the top two things on their list, you can't do without your parents agreeing.

So perhaps they should get the vote, but only if their parents agree?

Let's just move everything up to 18 - much easier then.

TheScreamingEagles said:

I had no idea about this song until it was mentioned on Buffy: The Vampire Slayer.

"It was terrible. I moped over you for months. Sitting in my room listening to that Divinyls song "I Touch Myself". Of course, I had no idea what it was about"

kyf_100 said:

What's to stop Labour imploding over the same issue? Fact is, a heck of a lot of Labour voters voted to Leave. Corbyn knows he has to keep them on side to win the next election, even if it means going against the wishes of most of his core of supporters and wider party membership.

That's a reasonable question, except Labour should have imploded multiple times since Corbyn took over and hasn't.

Members will keep voting for the myth they have invested in the man, and voters will keep voting for the brand.

Neither of them need to measure up to reality, apparently.

Sean_F said:

Pong said:

It would be interesting to have some polling on this new sexual puritanism.

There's a poll up on the Yougov website, which shows very big differences in peoples' views over what constitutes some forms of sexual harassment.

Thanks. Really interesting.

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/6use40wjdi/SexualHarassment_Oct17.pdf

It's frustratingly heterosexual. Female on male harassment questions are absent, too.

Pong wantz proppa data.

A full UK sexual attitudes survey would be awesome.

kyf_100 said:

Scott_P said:

kinabalu said:

And yet and yet. If they can keep the show on the road somehow, play the long game, get past Brexit without imploding

Hold on, I think I see a problem. Yes, right there...

What's to stop Labour imploding over the same issue? Fact is, a heck of a lot of Labour voters voted to Leave. Corbyn knows he has to keep them on side to win the next election, even if it means going against the wishes of most of his core of supporters and wider party membership.

Labour voters are not generally as obsessive about the EU as many Tories. To many Labour leavers their loyalty to Labour trumps their support for leave. It's hardly the world's most closely guarded secret that :Labour favours a much softer approach to Brexit than the Tories.

Scott_P said:

kyf_100 said:

What's to stop Labour imploding over the same issue? Fact is, a heck of a lot of Labour voters voted to Leave. Corbyn knows he has to keep them on side to win the next election, even if it means going against the wishes of most of his core of supporters and wider party membership.

That's a reasonable question, except Labour should have imploded multiple times since Corbyn took over and hasn't.

Members will keep voting for the myth they have invested in the man, and voters will keep voting for the brand.

Neither of them need to measure up to reality, apparently.

Fair point.

Tissue_Price said:

tlg86 said:

oxfordsimon said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/TheGreenParty/status/926391000393703424

That is slightly over-stating things by the Greens (quelle surprise)

At 16 you can't get married in England without parental consent. The same applies to joining the Army.

So the top two things on their list, you can't do without your parents agreeing.

So perhaps they should get the vote, but only if their parents agree?

This is part of my proposal (or at least option for discussion). Give everyone a vote, but have parents exercise it on their behalf until 18/16 (a half-vote each guardian - a full vote if sole custody).

Wait, that gives parents too many votes

Betting Post

F1: for what it's worth, I've made some early bets with small stakes.

My view is that the Renault engine is critical. If it's on song next year then Alonso at 12 each way (Ladbrokes, odds boosted [weirdly, this is also working for each way bets]) is the best value by a mile. Also backed Vandoorne at 81 each way on the basis that Australia tends to be good for McLaren and whilst he's unlikely to be on terms with Alonso, that equates to 17 to be top 3, which is possible.

I've also backed Bottas at 16 each way. If it's Mercedes versus Ferrari, or if reliability of the Renault is as poor as this year, he's almost nailed on to be top 3 at 4 (as with Vandoorne, that's fifth the odds for top 3).

The short odds on Hamilton, Vettel, Verstappen and Ricciardo do not appeal. If Hamilton wins, the Bottas bet is likely to come off at better odds. If Renault step up their game, McLaren are far better value than Red Bull.

If/when the Constructors' comes up I'll look at Red Bull, as their driver pairing is the most balanced. It'll be them or Mercedes, in my view.

Mr. City, there's a need for fresh blood.

Yorkcity said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Indeed, Miss Cyclefree. May, yet again, had an opportunity and screwed it up.

How so Morris ? I think upto now May has done very well over all the current allegations.It must be difficult to ascertain the veracity of all the allegations.

That misses the point. She had a Minister to appoint and chose the wrong one.

tlg86 said:

oxfordsimon said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/TheGreenParty/status/926391000393703424

That is slightly over-stating things by the Greens (quelle surprise)

At 16 you can't get married in England without parental consent. The same applies to joining the Army.

So the top two things on their list, you can't do without your parents agreeing.

So perhaps they should get the vote, but only if their parents agree?

Or only if they're married soldiers.

In fairness this article may prove to be a little premature. We need to wait to see what the Sunday papers have to say before we conclude that the cabinet is going to be largely unchanged. If May gets past that with no more collateral damage then she can probably struggle on a bit longer.

It's an interesting header by Cyclefree but Gavin Williamson ticks nearly all of the suggested boxes. He's 41, only entered parliament 7 years ago, sits for a Staffordshire seat, went to a comprehensive school then a northern redbrick University and study Social Science. Superficially he is exactly the sort of demographic and fresh face Ms Cyclefree thinks should be promoted. He has been and has gone down like the Hindenberg is some quarters. So clearly demographic change alone isn't enough.

logical_song said:

https://twitter.com/garystreeterSWD/status/925751265027600384?t=1+1509722243204&cn=ZmxleGlibGVfcmVjcw==&refsrc=email&iid=6649c6ba78f84ab1934436708af01f9b&uid=257829483&nid=244+272699400

The Tories have been split over Europe for decades. They could have resolved it by fighting it out amonsgt themselves but no leader had the courage to lead the charge so they decided to split the country instead.

oxfordsimon said:

Tissue_Price said:

tlg86 said:

oxfordsimon said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/TheGreenParty/status/926391000393703424

That is slightly over-stating things by the Greens (quelle surprise)

At 16 you can't get married in England without parental consent. The same applies to joining the Army.

So the top two things on their list, you can't do without your parents agreeing.

So perhaps they should get the vote, but only if their parents agree?

This is part of my proposal (or at least option for discussion). Give everyone a vote, but have parents exercise it on their behalf until 18/16 (a half-vote each guardian - a full vote if sole custody).

Are you serious? I do not believe giving parents/guardians an extra vote is the way to improve democracy.

18 is a perfectly acceptable age to take on adult responsibilities. I would be quite content to see that extend to most if not all of the things in the Green list.

Well, serious about discussing it. The point of politics is to take decisions now for both the present and the future, informed by the past. The future seems to be underweighted in our present setup.

Independent_Colin said:

If I may point out to the Green Party that 5 year olds spending their pocket money on chocolate or ice cream or crisps pay tax.

Ice cream isn't exempt?!

More seriously the arguments are superficially very convincing.

Labour activist 'felt isolated' over complaint made against MP

Good job corbyn dealt with this swiftly and didn't promote the guy and cover up the complaint....

YellowSubmarine said:

It's an interesting header by Cyclefree but Gavin Williamson ticks nearly all of the suggested boxes. He's 41, only entered parliament 7 years ago, sits for a Staffordshire seat, went to a comprehensive school then a northern redbrick University and study Social Science. Superficially he is exactly the sort of demographic and fresh face Ms Cyclefree thinks should be promoted. He has been and has gone down like the Hindenberg is some quarters. So clearly demographic change alone isn't enough.

Yes, but being virtually unknown, and introduced to the public as a calculating backstabber (possibly one of the more polite things that's been said about him), isn't exactly the best of starts - and political reputations get set in stone quite rapidly.

YellowSubmarine said:

It's an interesting header by Cyclefree but Gavin Williamson ticks nearly all of the suggested boxes. He's 41, only entered parliament 7 years ago, sits for a Staffordshire seat, went to a comprehensive school then a northern redbrick University and study Social Science. Superficially he is exactly the sort of demographic and fresh face Ms Cyclefree thinks should be promoted. He has been and has gone down like the Hindenberg is some quarters. So clearly demographic change alone isn't enough.

Ah, but this was not the promotion many were looking for. (Happy to reserve judgment myself!)

A very good header, @Cyclefree. We ought to be able to appeal to the younger generation who have grown up in a world full of technological innovation, new marketplaces and multiple careers. They're not hungering for 1970s style unionised jobs-for-life. True, Brexit is a cultural complication: we need to reassure people that we aren't seeking to re-enact the 1950s either.

But we have to communicate properly using the right people. The working assumption was that there would have been a relatively substantial reshuffle, post-May winning a 50+ majority. It can't be postponed much longer, but the present unedifying spectacle may need to be played out first.

kle4 said:

Independent_Colin said:

If I may point out to the Green Party that 5 year olds spending their pocket money on chocolate or ice cream or crisps pay tax.

Ice cream isn't exempt?!

More seriously the arguments are superficially very convincing.

How about 16 to vote in Local & Devolved - then 18 for GE

YellowSubmarine said:

@Tissue_Price Some demographics have vastly more children that others. Some people can't have children or have lost their children. Your suggestion means some folk will have 10 votes and others 1. You might as well advocate bring back the Property and University franchises. Or weighting voting power by Gross tax contribution. Or age.

I don't think your comparisons are like-for-like at all (age comes closest). I am simply advocating one person = one vote.

Richard_Nabavi said:

YellowSubmarine said:

@Tissue_Price Some demographics have vastly more children that others. Some people can't have children or have lost their children. Your suggestion means some folk will have 10 votes and others 1. You might as well advocate bring back the Property and University franchises. Or weighting voting power by Gross tax contribution. Or age.

Four excellent suggestions!

Missing gender, but you can’t win them all I suppose...

FF43 said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/TheGreenParty/status/926391000393703424

I flew the votes at 16 idea past PB some some months ago and was astonished by the general hostility to the idea. It's in situ and completely uncontroversial in Scotland with even the Conservatives on board.

Cocky of Cameron not to use it in the EU referendum. Obviously thought he would win anyway.

FF43 said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/TheGreenParty/status/926391000393703424

I flew the votes at 16 idea past PB some some months ago and was astonished by the general hostility to the idea. It's in situ and completely uncontroversial in Scotland with even the Conservatives on board.

But Scotland - almost alone in the world - has always recognised 16 as the age of majority. Almost all other countries have it at 18 (or occasionally more). If they are too young to execute legally-binding contracts, they are too young to vote, it seems to me.

GIN1138 said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/TheGreenParty/status/926391000393703424

They can't drink and smoke?

Can’t watch the other kind of AV...

RobD said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

YellowSubmarine said:

@Tissue_Price Some demographics have vastly more children that others. Some people can't have children or have lost their children. Your suggestion means some folk will have 10 votes and others 1. You might as well advocate bring back the Property and University franchises. Or weighting voting power by Gross tax contribution. Or age.

Four excellent suggestions!

Missing gender, but you can’t win them all I suppose...

It is true that Britain's decline in the world dates from the enfranchisement of women.

[...ducks for cover...]

rkrkrk said:

Cocky of Cameron not to use it in the EU referendum. Obviously thought he would win anyway.

Tactically, a big row about the franchise (particularly relating to EU citizens) would have brought to the fore some important issues much earlier and given the campaigns a different complexion, even if ultimately they'd stuck to the current GE format.