politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » PB 2018 betting review – Next CON leader

First!

Third! Like Boris in the MP’s ballot....

I guess the real question is “Who is the not Boris?

Sajid or Jeremy?

Having survived the 1922 committee confidence vote, any contest is almost certainly a year away, and too much can change to have me commit any more of my book to the Tory leadership market. Some political reputations will be trashed this year.

50 minutes without a comment? Is the thread broken or is everyone else still on holiday and safely tucked up in bed?

DavidL said:

50 minutes without a comment? Is the thread broken or is everyone else still on holiday and safely tucked up in bed?

They're all still watching the highlights from Melbourne and shouting, 'This is how it felt, you Aussie bastards!'

ydoethur said:

DavidL said:

50 minutes without a comment? Is the thread broken or is everyone else still on holiday and safely tucked up in bed?

They're all still watching the highlights from Melbourne and shouting, 'This is how it felt, you Aussie bastards!'

Blimey, what's happened to the pitch? Gather rain is forecast though.

OldKingCole said:

ydoethur said:

DavidL said:

50 minutes without a comment? Is the thread broken or is everyone else still on holiday and safely tucked up in bed?

They're all still watching the highlights from Melbourne and shouting, 'This is how it felt, you Aussie bastards!'

Blimey, what's happened to the pitch? Gather rain is forecast though.

The Aussies batted on it.

Then Pujara played a duff shot.

Apparently it's also bouncing a bit more, but those two things sum up the difference really.

OldKingCole said:

Match in Christchurch is turning out similar. Massive NZ score in their second innings, leaving SL to score 660 in their second. At stumps 24-2!

There are three tests going on and they all seem to be bubbling away quite nicely. Pakistan will have to bowl sensationally to win, the other two have to bat sensationally to secure draws.

ydoethur said:

This is an important story:

More than half a million potholes reported last year - RAC

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-46694506

It's not just the number of them, it's the abysmal standard of the repairs. Last week three potholes were filled outside my front door. This week, the holes have all reappeared. Although they used tarmac, not just gravel, no seal was put round it so the first rainstorm saw the whole thing disintegrate again.

There's a hole outside my house where this happens regularly. I think the pothole has been 'repaired' three times in the past four years. There's another patch further down the road where repairs break up within a very few weeks.

Edited for silly mistake!

The Nigel Evans piece of Legal Aid in the Guardian is frightening, and underlines the Nasty Party description of the Tories.
See '‘It’s completely wrong’: falsely accused Tory MP attacks legal aid cuts" on the Guardian website.

Guten Morgen, meine Freunde.

I think Raab, Gove, Rudd, and Mogg have little to no chance. Boris is overstated (as ever) and would be a woeful leader.

Javid, Hunt, or Mordaunt seem likeliest to me.

On potholes: agree entirely. The repairs tend to be sticking plasters with little adhesive.

AmpfieldAndy said:

When May loses her Brexit deal vote, she has to be replaced by a Leaver. Of those listed, only Raab or Mordaunt would do a decent job. Boris has no application or attention to detail, JRM has shown in recent weeks that he’s all mouth and no trousers, and Gove has no loyalty to anyone but Gove and simply can’t be trusted.

Javid and Hunt are both straw men who voted Leave and Rudd is a motor mouth who seldom puts her brain in action and who would betray Brexit in a heartbeat.

The only way she gets replaced is if she resigns, that doesn't seem very likely.

Mr. D, Mordaunt would make a superb PM.

AmpfieldAndy said:

When May loses her Brexit deal vote, she has to be replaced by a Leaver. Of those listed, only Raab or Mordaunt would do a decent job. Boris has no application or attention to detail, JRM has shown in recent weeks that he’s all mouth and no trousers, and Gove has no loyalty to anyone but Gove and simply can’t be trusted.

Javid and Hunt are both straw men who voted Leave and Rudd is a motor mouth who seldom puts her brain in action and who would betray Brexit in a heartbeat.

With the current Brexit process a shambles and with support for it oozing away, I would have thought that picking a remainer who respected the result was the optimum strategy from both a getting Brexit through and getting re-elected point of view. Which means Rudd or Hunt.

Recidivist said:

AmpfieldAndy said:

When May loses her Brexit deal vote, she has to be replaced by a Leaver. Of those listed, only Raab or Mordaunt would do a decent job. Boris has no application or attention to detail, JRM has shown in recent weeks that he’s all mouth and no trousers, and Gove has no loyalty to anyone but Gove and simply can’t be trusted.

Javid and Hunt are both straw men who voted Leave and Rudd is a motor mouth who seldom puts her brain in action and who would betray Brexit in a heartbeat.

With the current Brexit process a shambles and with support for it oozing away, I would have thought that picking a remainer who respected the result was the optimum strategy from both a getting Brexit through and getting re-elected point of view. Which means Rudd or Hunt.

I soo like Rudd, but maybe her seat is too marginal.

h

ydoethur said:

OldKingCole said:

ydoethur said:

DavidL said:

50 minutes without a comment? Is the thread broken or is everyone else still on holiday and safely tucked up in bed?

They're all still watching the highlights from Melbourne and shouting, 'This is how it felt, you Aussie bastards!'

Blimey, what's happened to the pitch? Gather rain is forecast though.

The Aussies batted on it.

Then Pujara played a duff shot.

Apparently it's also bouncing a bit more, but those two things sum up the difference really.

Bumrah bowled brilliantly, by all accounts. I like the Aussie pitch description - 22 yards of cat vomit (and that was before their abject batting display).

Toxic cat vomit now, I suspect.

Mr. B, recent evidence (even were we to assume you were correct on Mordaunt) would not suggest the possession of talent is indicative of prospects in a leadership contest.

OldKingCole said:

The Nigel Evans piece of Legal Aid in the Guardian is frightening, and underlines the Nasty Party description of the Tories.
See '‘It’s completely wrong’: falsely accused Tory MP attacks legal aid cuts" on the Guardian website.

We are approaching the US situation, where justice is only available to the rich.

Though of course the rich are sometimes above the law to an unconscionable extent:
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/article220097825.html

Nigelb said:

h

ydoethur said:

OldKingCole said:

ydoethur said:

DavidL said:

50 minutes without a comment? Is the thread broken or is everyone else still on holiday and safely tucked up in bed?

They're all still watching the highlights from Melbourne and shouting, 'This is how it felt, you Aussie bastards!'

Blimey, what's happened to the pitch? Gather rain is forecast though.

The Aussies batted on it.

Then Pujara played a duff shot.

Apparently it's also bouncing a bit more, but those two things sum up the difference really.

Bumrah bowled brilliantly, by all accounts. I like the Aussie pitch description - 22 yards of cat vomit (and that was before their abject batting display).

Toxic cat vomit now, I suspect.

It certainly threw up a surprise.

Yes, the commentary on Bumrah does suggest he bowled exceptionally well (an Indian quick bowling well? Are we facing the end times)? But let's face it, without Steve Smith this Aussie batting lineup wouldn't frighten Yorkshire 2nd XI.

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. B, recent evidence (even were we to assume you were correct on Mordaunt) would not suggest the possession of talent is indicative of prospects in a leadership contest.

Indeed not but there still needs to be a reason for them to win over fellow Mps. Is she a stop Boris candidate, an anti remain candidate, is she super competent or able to be publicly popular? What is her pitch to Mps and does she live up to that pitch?

I confess other than her being attractive I don't recall much of her.

AmpfieldAndy said:

When May loses her Brexit deal vote, she has to be replaced by a Leaver. Of those listed, only Raab or Mordaunt would do a decent job. Boris has no application or attention to detail, JRM has shown in recent weeks that he’s all mouth and no trousers, and Gove has no loyalty to anyone but Gove and simply can’t be trusted.

Javid and Hunt are both straw men who voted Leave and Rudd is a motor mouth who seldom puts her brain in action and who would betray Brexit in a heartbeat.

What could possibly lead you to believe Raab or Mordaunt could run a bath never mind a country.

Mr. kle4, reaching the top two requires not being something, rather than being something.

Mordaunt's neither a Grievance Remainer nor a Borisian Leaver. She isn't too old. She isn't inexperienced in ministerial terms (handy, when the leader becomes PM right away). She doesn't have baggage of a personal or political nature (the longer Javid's at Home, the longer the odds of something just going wrong, whether his doing or not).

kle4 said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. B, recent evidence (even were we to assume you were correct on Mordaunt) would not suggest the possession of talent is indicative of prospects in a leadership contest.

Indeed not but there still needs to be a reason for them to win over fellow Mps. Is she a stop Boris candidate, an anti remain candidate, is she super competent or able to be publicly popular? What is her pitch to Mps and does she live up to that pitch?

I confess other than her being attractive I don't recall much of her.

Specsavers for you Kle4

kle4 said:

malcolmg said:

CarlottaVance said:

I guess the real question is “Who is the not Boris?

Sajid or Jeremy?

God help us if that is the best they can muster, pick a donkey , any donkey.

I think that's how they ended up with those two in the first place.

I've quite turned against both. Even during the most critical period of brexit all they seem to care about is careful positioning for a leadership contest. They could pretend a bit more at least.

That would involve having some intelligence and principles.

malcolmg said:

kle4 said:

malcolmg said:

CarlottaVance said:

I guess the real question is “Who is the not Boris?

Sajid or Jeremy?

God help us if that is the best they can muster, pick a donkey , any donkey.

I think that's how they ended up with those two in the first place.

I've quite turned against both. Even during the most critical period of brexit all they seem to care about is careful positioning for a leadership contest. They could pretend a bit more at least.

That would involve having some intelligence and principles.

One of the two would be sufficient right now!

TheScreamingEagles said:

On topic, laying Boris was profitable last time

Please excuse me while I throw up.

Jonathan said:

kle4 said:

malcolmg said:

CarlottaVance said:

I guess the real question is “Who is the not Boris?

Sajid or Jeremy?

God help us if that is the best they can muster, pick a donkey , any donkey.

I think that's how they ended up with those two in the first place.

I've quite turned against both. Even during the most critical period of brexit all they seem to care about is careful positioning for a leadership contest. They could pretend a bit more at least.

That’s a bit harsh, they did not make Mays leadership an issue and any politician worth their salt would have to respond to the situation.

They have attimes leaked that they have concerns about the deal while not being brave enough to just quit, and are openly on manuevers, putting in little effort on selling that which they purportedly support, transparently because they will pretend later they had no choice but to back it.

No I don't expect politicians to ignore leadership wrangling. But they could put more effort in to looking like they care about what us before us right now beyond their chance to be PM, and they could show some leadership and spine if they are not satisfied. Silly as it was those cabinet members not quitting while publicly trying to change the deal showed more spine.

CD13 said:

Priti Patel was attractive, but she's put on a bit of timber lately.

Really? I judge people by ability, so I woodn't know.

I think Mordaunt ticks a lot of boxes, a leaver who can offer generational change.

She's stayed in office whilst others have quit, non toxic background in international development. Seems relatable with a working class background. If I was a Tory MP my only criteria is, can this person win an election against Corbyn?

I think Penny is value at current price

kle4 said:

ydoethur said:

CD13 said:

Priti Patel was attractive, but she's put on a bit of timber lately.

Really? I judge people by ability, so I woodn't know.

Oof. You're barking up the wrong tree with that comment.

I wondered who wood twig first...

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. kle4, just leaf it.

Bud it's funny, Mr Dancer!

When Cameron was PM there were three clear and papabile candidates to succeed him: Osborne, May, and Johnson.

It’s really not clear if there are any decent successors to May.

So we are left with Hunt and Javid, and whichever it is will lose in 2022 to whoever it is that succeeds Corbyn.

Nigelb said:

OldKingCole said:

The Nigel Evans piece of Legal Aid in the Guardian is frightening, and underlines the Nasty Party description of the Tories.
See '‘It’s completely wrong’: falsely accused Tory MP attacks legal aid cuts" on the Guardian website.

We are approaching the US situation, where justice is only available to the rich.

Though of course the rich are sometimes above the law to an unconscionable extent:
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/article220097825.html

Even if one is rich, the US justice system can be terrifying.

Skip over this if you are having breakfast, but JRM did really offer the prolonged lay of the year.

Gardenwalker said:

When Cameron was PM there were three clear and papabile candidates to succeed him: Osborne, May, and Johnson.

It’s really not clear if there are any decent successors to May.

So we are left with Hunt and Javid, and whichever it is will lose in 2022 to whoever it is that succeeds Corbyn.

I wouldn't have said either May or Johnson were seen as especially likely successors to Cameron. It was Osborne, first and last and all the time, who was the anointed one, with Crabb seen as an outside bet on the left and Gove on the right.

Osborne trashing himself along with Cameron left the way clear for either Hammond or May, and Hammond's decision not to run, Gove's decision to destroy himself (much feasting on schadenfreude among teachers) Boris being Boris and Crabb and Leadsom being seen as too inexperienced left May as the last one standing.

That was however doubtless profitable for those who took the oft-repeated tip by me and David Herdson among many others to lay the favourite. And May was, I suppose, one name mentioned as a possible under unusual circumstances. But to call her 'clear and palpable' is an overstatement.

IanB2 said:

Skip over this if you are having breakfast, but JRM did really offer the prolonged lay of the year.

My only regret is that I eventually closed out that lay on this market, albeit very profitably. I should have left it open, as I have done on the next Prime Minister market.

matt said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. kle4, reaching the top two requires not being something, rather than being something.

Mordaunt's neither a Grievance Remainer nor a Borisian Leaver. She isn't too old. She isn't inexperienced in ministerial terms (handy, when the leader becomes PM right away). She doesn't have baggage of a personal or political nature (the longer Javid's at Home, the longer the odds of something just going wrong, whether his doing or not).

She is, however, a shameless and proven liar.

Not a hindrance any longer, as politicians from every party repeatedly prove.

Probably an advantage.

Strikingly, there appears to be no original policy thinking in the broader swathes of the Tory party: not on the backbenches, not in the thinktanks.

All is consumed by the “creation science” of Brexitism, trying to prove the the co-existence of Adam and Dinosaurs etc. None of this is going to make the country fit for the 2020s, let alone the Tory party.

Gardenwalker said:

Strikingly, there appears to be no original policy thinking in the broader swathes of the Tory party: not on the backbenches, not in the thinktanks.

All is consumed by the “creation science” of Brexitism, trying to prove the the co-existence of Adam and Dinosaurs etc. None of this is going to make the country fit for the 2020s, let alone the Tory party.

All is consumed by the desire to take out enemies and pursue grudges.

Gardenwalker said:

Strikingly, there appears to be no original policy thinking in the broader swathes of the Tory party: not on the backbenches, not in the thinktanks.

All is consumed by the “creation science” of Brexitism, trying to prove the the co-existence of Adam and Dinosaurs etc. None of this is going to make the country fit for the 2020s, let alone the Tory party.

Which makes it all the more depressing that insofar as Labour have any policy other than 'the Tories are evil, vote for us because as supporters of mass murderers we're much nicer,' they veer from the unworkable to the unoriginal to the actively dishonest.

To be honest, I have thought for a long time and I still think the biggest challenge facing us is power generation. All of the options we currently have are either poor, or unsustainable. Wind, for example, can produce 30% of our power but last night produced just 2%.

Yet the government is industriously screwing up this aspect of our infrastructure. Given a choice between building a tidal lagoon - which after construction would grant low-cost electricity more or less indefinitely with minimal environmental impact - or building a nuclear plant which will cost a fortune to build and maintain and irradiate an area for thousands of years afterwards - they went for the latter.

As a nation, we need our heads examining.

Corbyn had better be careful, some people think it is immoral to deny ancillary staff their holiday by recalling parliament.

ydoethur said:

Gardenwalker said:

Strikingly, there appears to be no original policy thinking in the broader swathes of the Tory party: not on the backbenches, not in the thinktanks.

All is consumed by the “creation science” of Brexitism, trying to prove the the co-existence of Adam and Dinosaurs etc. None of this is going to make the country fit for the 2020s, let alone the Tory party.

Which makes it all the more depressing that insofar as Labour have any policy other than 'the Tories are evil, vote for us because as supporters of mass murderers we're much nicer,' they veer from the unworkable to the unoriginal to the actively dishonest.

To be honest, I have thought for a long time and I still think the biggest challenge facing us is power generation. All of the options we currently have are either poor, or unsustainable. Wind, for example, can produce 30% of our power but last night produced just 2%.

Yet the government is industriously screwing up this aspect of our infrastructure. Given a choice between building a tidal lagoon - which after construction would grant low-cost electricity more or less indefinitely with minimal environmental impact - or building a nuclear plant which will cost a fortune to build and maintain and irradiate an area for thousands of years afterwards - they went for the latter.

As a nation, we need our heads examining.

Nothing wrong with the head of state - it's the chief executive whose decisions are wanting.

But you are entirely right.
To have dismissed tidal power on grounds of cost, while proceeding with the absurd and absurdly expensive nuclear project is unfathomable.

(I am not anti-nuclear, and think some of the new technologies - small scale molten salt plants, for example - are worth pursuing.)

ydoethur said:

Gardenwalker said:

Strikingly, there appears to be no original policy thinking in the broader swathes of the Tory party: not on the backbenches, not in the thinktanks.

All is consumed by the “creation science” of Brexitism, trying to prove the the co-existence of Adam and Dinosaurs etc. None of this is going to make the country fit for the 2020s, let alone the Tory party.

Which makes it all the more depressing that insofar as Labour have any policy other than 'the Tories are evil, vote for us because as supporters of mass murderers we're much nicer,' they veer from the unworkable to the unoriginal to the actively dishonest.

To be honest, I have thought for a long time and I still think the biggest challenge facing us is power generation. All of the options we currently have are either poor, or unsustainable. Wind, for example, can produce 30% of our power but last night produced just 2%.

Yet the government is industriously screwing up this aspect of our infrastructure. Given a choice between building a tidal lagoon - which after construction would grant low-cost electricity more or less indefinitely with minimal environmental impact - or building a nuclear plant which will cost a fortune to build and maintain and irradiate an area for thousands of years afterwards - they went for the latter.

As a nation, we need our heads examining.

Exactly. We should be talking about things like power generation, and all the other details that summed together make the country what it is. Us anoraks on here at least get to enjoy the self indulgent fun and games in Westminster, but it leaves most people cold.

Angina Jolie suggests she wants to enter politics

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46699457

AlastairMeeks said:

CarlottaVance said:

She’s attempting to pursue a policy on Brexit that appears to satisfy few within her party

And yet, Mrs May is routinely denounced for “putting Party before Country”.....

She offers nothing for everyone.

Disagree

I think she offers everything to no one

Gardenwalker said:

Strikingly, there appears to be no original policy thinking in the broader swathes of the Tory party: not on the backbenches, not in the thinktanks.

All is consumed by the “creation science” of Brexitism, trying to prove the the co-existence of Adam and Dinosaurs etc. None of this is going to make the country fit for the 2020s, let alone the Tory party.

Not entirely true. This paper, admittedly by a Tory MP not many have heard of, is quite thoughtful - http://johnpenrose.org/wp/2018/10/01/a-shining-city/.

Charles said:

AlastairMeeks said:

CarlottaVance said:

She’s attempting to pursue a policy on Brexit that appears to satisfy few within her party

And yet, Mrs May is routinely denounced for “putting Party before Country”.....

She offers nothing for everyone.

Disagree

I think she offers everything to no one

0 x 1 =1 x 0 = 0

notme2 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Nigelb said:

OldKingCole said:

The Nigel Evans piece of Legal Aid in the Guardian is frightening, and underlines the Nasty Party description of the Tories.
See '‘It’s completely wrong’: falsely accused Tory MP attacks legal aid cuts" on the Guardian website.

We are approaching the US situation, where justice is only available to the rich.

Though of course the rich are sometimes above the law to an unconscionable extent:
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/article220097825.html

Plebs don’t deserve justice following their shameful decision to back Brexit.

We spend x million on Legal Aid, we should spend that on the NHS.

Without legal aid we might find out the real market rate for some legal services. It might be lower than you think.

The Golden Era of legal aid (from a lawyer's point of view) when it really was a licence to print money, came to an end in about 2000.