politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A tweet that seems to sum up British politics today
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A tweet that seems to sum up British politics today
An analysis of @ShippersUnbound's excellent books illustrates just how British politics has changed since the #Brexit referendum. Noticeable increase in both the FPP Score (up 68%) and CPP score (up 190%). pic.twitter.com/gvsbX0jr3J
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
firstsecond.On Mark Reckless defecting: "I can't say the word c**t but he's a f**king c**t who deserves a hot poker up his arse."
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2014/09/30/memo-to-the-tories-never-hate-your-enemies-it-affects-your-judgement/
I've asked the wifey to get me Fall Out for Christmas.
I'm surprised TSE is still such a Remainer after reading All Out War, where the Remain side come out equally as badly as the Brexit side* (apart from Banks and the Leave EU lot, who seemed hell-bent in knocking 5% off the Leave vote).
*It must be noted, however, that George Osborne demonstrated remarkable loyalty to Cameron. He never wavered in his support and effectively sacrificed his career on the altar of increasingly apocalyptic claims... all done to help his friend win.
https://www.irishnews.com/magazine/entertainment/2017/10/17/news/british-politics-is-already-too-silly-for-satire-armando-iannucci-1165030/
Perhaps a good idea to move rapidly off-topic:
https://www.racingpost.com/news/news/latest-figures-show-remote-profits-are-up-as-shop-numbers-fall/310437
Some fascinating data from the gambling world and the bookmaking industry. The whole article is well worth a read but the headline is absurd.
There remain 8,500 betting shops in the UK and from these the operators made £3.19 billion. For every £ profit after paying out winnings, 43.5p came from traditional over- the counter betting and 56.5p from FOBTs so more than half the GGY (Gross Gambling Yield) from the shops comes from the machines so you can see why the ABB is so worried about any restrictions on their use.
The amount of GGY from remote and offshore firms rose 10% leading to an overall rise of 1.8% in GGY across the whole industry as shop incomes fell.
The ABB are claiming changes in FOBT regulation would cost over 20,000 jobs and lead to the closure of half the country's betting shops.
Noel Gallagher: “Fuck Jeremy Corbyn. He’s a Communist”
http://www.nme.com/news/music/noel-gallagher-fuck-jeremy-corbyn-communist-2166527#78lkWHCE0hzZXQgq.99
The ABB are claiming changes in FOBT regulation would cost over 20,000 jobs and lead to the closure of half the country's betting shops."
Is that supposed to make us feel sorry for them?
I never particularly liked Mr Osborne but I can admire him for that.
I'm sure Cameron now regrets not taking his advice!
https://www.amazon.co.uk/review/RZJMJ6ACU72BE/ref=cm_cr_rdp_perm
Sadly, I can't give it a 'helpful' vote but others can if they find it so.
*paging Sunil*
I only come here for the political analysis and not the betting, honest.
You'll never find a quote on or off the record from Osborne or his 'friends' criticising Dave.
He remembered David Maxwell Fyfe's maxim that 'Loyalty is the Tory party's secret weapon.'
She sacked him for being good at his job to try and boost her Brexit credentials. The first of her many cock-ups
Just remember she and her team decided to fight the campaign by not doing what Dave and George did.
Which saw her lose the Tory majority, if only she had listened to George.
She forgot loyalty is a two way street.
https://media1.britannica.com/eb-media/36/9336-004-A10141CD.jpg
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2154743-politics-chat-on-reddit-reads-like-it-was-written-by-6-year-olds/?utm_campaign=RSSNSNS&utm_source=NSNS&utm_medium=RSS&utm_content=news&campaign_id=RSSNSNS-news
"The team analysed 3.5 billion comments posted by 25.3 million people between 2007 and 2017. They sorted the comments into two groups: one non-political, the other comprised of things posted to politics subreddits, including mainstream groups such as SandersForPresident and The_Donald, where Trump participated in an official discussion. Noting the frequency of offensive words and phrases gave a measure of how civil the discussions were.
The non-political comments were fairly civil, but the political comments were a different story. People were 35 per cent more likely on average to use offensive language in political than nonpolitical discussions. Political discourse was more offensive between May 2016 and May 2017 than in any other 12-month period in Reddit’s history."
A career blighted, I would say, by the Derek Bentley affair!
I'm afraid the difference between the way DC and GO have responded to the May Premiership, which was always going to be a very difficult one anyway, speaks volumes.
"You keep posting on sentience as if it is a minor thing. It really isn't - it was hugely controversial on introduction and has massive philosophical implications in terms of future regulation.
For example: is it right to test lifesaving drugs on a sentient being without their consent? Is it right to eat them?
Fundamentally humans are different to other animals and have different rights. The advocates of animal sentience are seeking moral equivalence because of their political end game."
This is an odd comment for three reasons:
1. Very few people now adopt Descartes' view that animals are NOT sentient. How much they feel, how similar it is to our feelings, how much we should empathise are all separate questions. But no Ministers or MPs to my knowledge deny animal sentience altogether. Do you?
2. The issue has come up because of Article 13 of the TFEU (Lisbon Treaty), which acknowledges animal sentience and imposes a requirement that animal welfare be given full regard when new policy is developed. This doesn't apply to existing policy (eating meat or developing drugs, to give your examples), nor does it require that welfare always take priority. It merely requires that full consideration is given. For instance, it would make it harder to sign a trade deal with a country with standard of welfare that we felt were lower, without considering this and putting the case why we should sign anyway.
3. Specifically, the issue has come up for the Withdrawal Bill, because Michael Gove toldParliament that Article 13 would "absolutely" be included in this Bill, and the Bill's explanatory notes indicate that it is not intended to change the legal position, merely to transfer it to UK sovereignty. If sentience is deliberately omitted, that breaks both commitments.
And why should the Government omit it anyway, when it doesn't think that animals aren't sentient, and says it doesn't plan to ignore welfare in the future?
To save you all the bother, it's a link to a Russia Today article.
https://twitter.com/JohnnyMercerUK/status/936248303062278144
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/936250549707640832
*sighs*
But just heard.
The independent inquiry into child abuse call for witnesses and statements being hampered by local indepedent radio stations refusing to play adverts asking people to come forward and tell their stories.
"In case children hear and ask uncomfortable questions."
Won't someone think of the children?
When it happened again this week, the security guard let him in through a side door but politely (yet firmly) asked him to please make the effort to remember his pass.
Could another Plebgate incident be brewing? Let's hope not, as other journalists going in through the correct door have remarked that George has been "looking a little tired" of recent.
From another PB.
Lab 41.4%
Con 40.4%
LD 7.2%
UKIP 4.0%
Greens 2.4%
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#Poll_results
Perhaps it’s time to equalise succession laws for peerages? Couldn’t hurt to have a few more jure uxoris Earls and Dukes.
Like Thatcher Mrs May is going to sell out Northern Ireland to Dublin so enraging the Unionists they'll resign as MPs and trigger a wave of by elections.
But is Leo Varadkar the Garret FitzGerald de nos jours?
Using European roulette as an example, there’s a 1 in 784 chance that the colour you’re betting on is not going to hit for 10 spins in a row. But this number applies to the start of the event, not during. In other words, when you first spin the wheel there’s a 1 in 784 that you will go on a run of your colour not hitting for 10 spins, but after 5 spins of your colour not hitting, the odds of that increasing to 10 are no longer 1 in 784 because you’ve already had 5 of them, so the odds reduce dramatically.
Not right, shirley?!
Lab +0.4%
Con -3.1%
LD -0.4%
UKIP +2.1%
Greens +0.7%
If you're doing a different calculation of what are the odds of 5 winners in a row, then of course the odds reduce.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/12701362.UDA__apos_has_drawn_up_Doomsday_plan_apos_/
The ''Doomsday'' scenario recognises there would be large numbers of Catholics left within the Protestant homeland and offers three chilling options on dealing with them -- expulsion, internment, or nullification.
A prominent member of the Rev. Ian Paisley's Democratic Unionist Party, Mr Sammy Wilson, last night described the alleged Doomsday plan as ''a very valuable return to reality''.
However if you have already had five in a row, the odds of you now getting to the end of the sequence will be the odds of five in a row. Only useful or relevant if you can change your strategy part way though. If you think about it, you intuitively know this is right, since on the last roll your odds are obviously the odds for that roll alone.
Makes more sense now although v badly worded.
https://www.popsci.com/descended-from-royalty?dom=rss-default&src=syn
"White House 'has plan to replace Tillerson'"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-42187070
Seems a very iffy site to me. Best ignored.
I think it's also the case that there's a much wider gulf between DUP and UUP than in the 1980s (not least that I think UUP supported Remain). UUP seem less tolerant of the Paisleyite belligerence than 30 years ago. It isn't a given that they'd stand aside for DUP in by-elections.