politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » “TMay exit” level-pegging with “UK leaving the EU” on the whic

ydoethur said:

Never heard 'brown envelope' jobs called 'wages' before.

You never got a paypacket?

Those of you looking for a non-partisan but delightedly parliamentary way of passing the next 30 seconds should click here:

https://twitter.com/Darren_Dutton/status/1089298638373879808

No autotune, apparently. Just Bercow.

Drutt said:

Those of you looking for a non-partisan but delightedly parliamentary way of passing the next 30 seconds should click here:

twitter.com/Darren_Dutton/status/1089298638373879808

No autotune, apparently. Just Bercow.

Will they all be singing that at Glasto this year?

https://twitter.com/BBCVickiYoung/status/1089976318089981952

TheScreamingEagles said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Well yes...her response to that law suit was about as well thought out of a certain Labour MP made up Russian joyrider.

I think someone worked out the Mail paid a seven figure total in damages and legal fees following all the problems from her columns.

Here's some examples.

Mail pays out £150,000 to Muslim family over Katie Hopkins column

Hopkins had falsely accused Mahmood family, who were stopped from visiting Disneyland by US authorities, of extremist links

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/dec/19/mail-pays-out-150k-to-muslim-family-over-katie-hopkins-column

Mail Online to pay damages to teacher over Katie Hopkins column

Columnist falsely accused Jackie Teale of taking schoolchildren to demonstration against Donald Trump in Westminster

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/nov/28/mail-online-damages-teacher-katie-hopkins-column

Cannot understand why the Mail let her go.

I reckon she is definitely a milk in firster....

Kudos to Corbyn.

On a day when the government look even more chaotic than yesterday, he manages to out-omnishambles them.

Again.

https://twitter.com/siennamarla/status/1089974029698650112

Drutt said:

Those of you looking for a non-partisan but delightedly parliamentary way of passing the next 30 seconds should click here:

https://twitter.com/Darren_Dutton/status/1089298638373879808

No autotune, apparently. Just Bercow.

I don't quite know what I'm looking at.

Drutt said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Drutt said:

Those of you looking for a non-partisan but delightedly parliamentary way of passing the next 30 seconds should click here:

twitter.com/Darren_Dutton/status/1089298638373879808

No autotune, apparently. Just Bercow.

Will they all be singing that at Glasto this year?

In 2020 youtube videos of that Glasto chant will be as cringey as 2015 youtube videos about putting loombands on fidget spinners.

If only pissing Fortnite would go the way of loombands and fidget spinners...

dixiedean said:

So May is now whipping an amendment forcing her to go back to re-negotiate her own Deal? To replace the backstop with...er...something else?
Which will probably be defeated.
So. She is likely to lose her Deal. And lose on forcing herself to the re-negotiating table.
If she wins, then in the face of such a powerful mandate, the EU is bound to cave?
Have I got that right?

Perhaps she wants to be seen to be 'forced' by the house to do something that will fail so she can say they share in her defeat this time (previously the EU agreed her deal and it was parliament who said no to it after all), thus opening the door to them all deciding to just cave?

kle4 said:

Drutt said:

Those of you looking for a non-partisan but delightedly parliamentary way of passing the next 30 seconds should click here:

https://twitter.com/Darren_Dutton/status/1089298638373879808

No autotune, apparently. Just Bercow.

I don't quite know what I'm looking at.

THE LYRICS ARE RIGHT THERE KLE4.

https://twitter.com/CatMcKinnell/status/1089979217704611840

kle4 said:

dixiedean said:

So May is now whipping an amendment forcing her to go back to re-negotiate her own Deal? To replace the backstop with...er...something else?
Which will probably be defeated.
So. She is likely to lose her Deal. And lose on forcing herself to the re-negotiating table.
If she wins, then in the face of such a powerful mandate, the EU is bound to cave?
Have I got that right?

Perhaps she wants to be seen to be 'forced' by the house to do something that will fail so she can say they share in her defeat this time (previously the EU agreed her deal and it was parliament who said no to it after all), thus opening the door to them all deciding to just cave?

In which case I suspect she may be overthinking.

kle4 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Drutt said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Drutt said:

Those of you looking for a non-partisan but delightedly parliamentary way of passing the next 30 seconds should click here:

twitter.com/Darren_Dutton/status/1089298638373879808

No autotune, apparently. Just Bercow.

Will they all be singing that at Glasto this year?

In 2020 youtube videos of that Glasto chant will be as cringey as 2015 youtube videos about putting loombands on fidget spinners.

If only pissing Fortnite would go the way of loombands and fidget spinners...

More of a PUBG man?

PUBG has turned into a shit show....Fortnite though, try talking to any child and all you will get is babble about Fortnite and they will start Jones-ing like some addict if they don't get to play it (or very least watch it on YouTube / Twitch).

All the parents I know, all they talk about is how trying to get their kids away from Fortnite is a daily battle.

Beverley_C said:

Charles said:

ydoethur said:

HYUFD said:

Former Cabinet Secretary Ben Gummer 'Threat to leave the EU with No Deal is pie in the sky, so extend Article 50'

https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/threat-to-leave-eu-with-no-deal-is-pie-in-the-sky-so-extend-article-50-a4050536.html

Ben Gummer was never the Cabinet Secretary.

I think he was Cabinet Office Minister though, which is significant less important

Minister for Burger Consumption perhaps?

His Dad(?) I think - John Selwyn Gummer

dixiedean said:

kle4 said:

dixiedean said:

So May is now whipping an amendment forcing her to go back to re-negotiate her own Deal? To replace the backstop with...er...something else?
Which will probably be defeated.
So. She is likely to lose her Deal. And lose on forcing herself to the re-negotiating table.
If she wins, then in the face of such a powerful mandate, the EU is bound to cave?
Have I got that right?

Perhaps she wants to be seen to be 'forced' by the house to do something that will fail so she can say they share in her defeat this time (previously the EU agreed her deal and it was parliament who said no to it after all), thus opening the door to them all deciding to just cave?

In which case I suspect she may be overthinking.

Her actions to date indicate she has either done far too little thinking, or far too much thinking, with the same result - inability to move forward.

gypsumfantastic said:

kle4 said:

Drutt said:

Those of you looking for a non-partisan but delightedly parliamentary way of passing the next 30 seconds should click here:

https://twitter.com/Darren_Dutton/status/1089298638373879808

No autotune, apparently. Just Bercow.

I don't quite know what I'm looking at.

Jeremy Corbyn?

Ah, I can see where I was going wrong.

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/channel4news/status/1089967123848417281?s=21

Interesting how much the EU are clear you cannot go back on a decision, when they are seemingly willing for us to go back on the Brexit decision.

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/channel4news/status/1089967123848417281?s=21

Stubbornness leading to no deal?

Weyand will get overruled.

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/channel4news/status/1089967123848417281?s=21

So if she's correct we've dug our own elephant trap.

Ingenious...

williamglenn said:

Mortimer said:

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/channel4news/status/1089967123848417281?s=21

Stubbornness leading to no deal?

Weyand will get overruled.

By whom?

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1089533497558122496?s=21

They know what concessions we want, what are they talking about? That we negotiated the backstop is not of huge concern, it is now the thing which is the biggest stumbling block whoever came up with it.

I really find the smug preening of the EU on this point rather baffling - is it making them feel better to know it will be our fault if we no deal? Perhaps they will get lucky and we will indeed cave one last time, but this self satisfaction that we're responsible for our own mess is odd when they will at the least catch some of the mess when we land in it, and they could so easily avoid it (or at least make it a lot closer to being avoided).

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/channel4news/status/1089967123848417281?s=21

If they really mean that, then we just have a choice between the Deal as it is now, No Deal and Revocation.

Obviously that implies an extension is pointless, unless it's for (1) passing necessary legislation after the choice has been made, (2) a referendum or (3) a general election. And there would be no guarantee that a general election would resolve the problem.

kle4 said:

williamglenn said:

Mortimer said:

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/channel4news/status/1089967123848417281?s=21

Stubbornness leading to no deal?

Weyand will get overruled.

By whom?

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1089533497558122496?s=21

They know what concessions we want, what are they talking about? That we negotiated the backstop is not of huge concern, it is now the thing which is the biggest stumbling block whoever came up with it.

I really find the smug preening of the EU on this point rather baffling - is it making them feel better to know it will be our fault if we no deal? Perhaps they will get lucky and we will indeed cave one last time, but this self satisfaction that we're responsible for our own mess is odd when they will at the least catch some of the mess when we land in it, and they could so easily avoid it (or at least make it a lot closer to being avoided).

We agreed the backstop, now we don’t want it. What is the serious, viable alternative?

https://twitter.com/GuardianAnushka/status/1089986151086280704

So all in all another successful day in Brexit-land so far then?

Drutt said:

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/channel4news/status/1089967123848417281?s=21

How do you prepare the ground for ditching your backstop without looking like you're ditching your backstop? Say it's not your backstop.

She's right, though, isn't she? The entire backstop is the result of Britain's red lines.

https://twitter.com/jeffmason1/status/1089987511101857792

Drutt said:

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/channel4news/status/1089967123848417281?s=21

How do you prepare the ground for ditching your backstop without looking like you're ditching your backstop? Say it's not your backstop.

That's a... creative reading of her message

Stereotomy said:

Drutt said:

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/channel4news/status/1089967123848417281?s=21

How do you prepare the ground for ditching your backstop without looking like you're ditching your backstop? Say it's not your backstop.

That's a... creative reading of her message

Another Brexiter flailing around trying to grasp a piece of driftwood from a wreckage of their own making.

kle4 said:

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/channel4news/status/1089967123848417281?s=21

Interesting how much the EU are clear you cannot go back on a decision, when they are seemingly willing for us to go back on the Brexit decision.

I don't think they're trying to sell not going back on decisions as a general concept, so much as refusing to go back on this particular one

IanB2 said:

kle4 said:

dixiedean said:

So May is now whipping an amendment forcing her to go back to re-negotiate her own Deal? To replace the backstop with...er...something else?
Which will probably be defeated.
So. She is likely to lose her Deal. And lose on forcing herself to the re-negotiating table.
If she wins, then in the face of such a powerful mandate, the EU is bound to cave?
Have I got that right?

Perhaps she wants to be seen to be 'forced' by the house to do something that will fail so she can say they share in her defeat this time (previously the EU agreed her deal and it was parliament who said no to it after all), thus opening the door to them all deciding to just cave?

One thing that is obvious is we don't have enough time left to prepare for any sort of Leave by end March. Hence we absolutely need to delay.

Another thing that is obvious is that the government party cannot survive being seen to promote such an extension itself.

Hence the only solution is an extension forced upon them by the opposition and some rebels.

The EU may say we can have an 8-week extension, but only on condition we make a definite decision first.

Chris said:

kle4 said:

williamglenn said:

Mortimer said:

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/channel4news/status/1089967123848417281?s=21

Stubbornness leading to no deal?

Weyand will get overruled.

By whom?

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1089533497558122496?s=21

They know what concessions we want, what are they talking about? That we negotiated the backstop is not of huge concern, it is now the thing which is the biggest stumbling block whoever came up with it.

I really find the smug preening of the EU on this point rather baffling - is it making them feel better to know it will be our fault if we no deal? Perhaps they will get lucky and we will indeed cave one last time, but this self satisfaction that we're responsible for our own mess is odd when they will at the least catch some of the mess when we land in it, and they could so easily avoid it (or at least make it a lot closer to being avoided).

But their frustration is understandable if May has insisted on including something that a large chunk of her own MPs won't accept.

You could offer a number of those MPs the moon on a stick and they would complain about the type of wood.

Jonathan said:

It’s all about winning the blame game now.

And then what?

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/GuardianAnushka/status/1089986151086280704

Well, no, obviously. Which does make EU's reticence more reasonable, since there's no guarantee that the deal gets through even if they concede on the backstop.

Stereotomy said:

kle4 said:

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/channel4news/status/1089967123848417281?s=21

Interesting how much the EU are clear you cannot go back on a decision, when they are seemingly willing for us to go back on the Brexit decision.

I don't think they're trying to sell not going back on decisions as a general concept, so much as refusing to go back on this particular one

Which would carry more weight if the whole thing might not collapse by refusing to do so. Cutting of the nose and so on (yes, we're doing it too)

TheScreamingEagles said:

Jonathan said:

It’s all about winning the blame game now.

Don't worry German car manufacturers will come to the rescue.

Phew! Boy, they like to leave it late, those wacky pranksters.

SouthamObserver said:

kle4 said:

williamglenn said:

Mortimer said:

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/channel4news/status/1089967123848417281?s=21

Stubbornness leading to no deal?

Weyand will get overruled.

By whom?

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1089533497558122496?s=21

They

We agreed the backstop, now we don’t want it. What is the serious, viable alternative?

I wasn't saying them refusing was unreasonable, I'm saying this smug attitude and continuing insistence they don't know what we want on this point is entirely phoney. We did not agree the backstop, the government did, and it is not getting through. I accepted it on the basis I think it's one of the prices of a deal, but parliament disagrees. The EU is not obliged to change their mind on what they consider a fair deal, but this game they play, and the EU have always done this, in pretending not to understand us (while also simultaneously speaking as if totally understanding us better than we do) is just needless gameplaying.

Oh FFS! Just revoke Article 50 and get on with it. Explain that there is no agreement in any party or Parliament on how to leave, that a No Deal exit is too uncertain and harmful to the country and that no responsible politician would inflict that on the country, even if the price is the loss of their job. Explain that there is no shame in changing one's mind when the facts change, referendum vote notwithstanding and that if the voters don't like it they can make their views known at the next election.

For good measure, say that referenda for such questions are bloody silly ideas in a Parliamentary democracy. If we want to have referenda like the Swiss do, they we need to do a whole load of other things the Swiss do as well to make them work. We don't and haven't here. And it's clear that trying to force through a country-changing decision through bullying, Parliamentary chicanery, in a panic, at the last-minute, when we haven't prepared - and are not in a position to prepare - for one of the alternatives is the stupidest way possible to make a decision.

So the Tory party gets destroyed. So bloody what? It is busy destroying itself at the moment. At least this way it doesn't take the country with it.

If people want to leave the EU in the future, fine. At least they can learn some lessons from the shambles of the last 3 years about what they need to think about before doing so.

Chris said:

kle4 said:

williamglenn said:

Mortimer said:

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/channel4news/status/1089967123848417281?s=21

Stubbornness leading to no deal?

Weyand will get overruled.

By whom?

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1089533497558122496?s=21

They know what concessions we want, what are they talking about? That we negotiated the backstop is not of huge concern, it is now the thing which is the biggest stumbling block whoever came up with it.

I really find the smug preening of the EU on this point rather baffling - is it making them feel better to know it will be our fault if we no deal? Perhaps they will get lucky and we will indeed cave one last time, but this self satisfaction that we're responsible for our own mess is odd when they will at the least catch some of the mess when we land in it, and they could so easily avoid it (or at least make it a lot closer to being avoided).

But their frustration is understandable if May has insisted on including something that a large chunk of her own MPs won't accept.

Frustration, yes, but the smug pretence they don't know what the problem is (and notably this is one thing it is not May's fault) is false, and just a chance for them to be sarcastic, which is pretty silly considering they are caught in the shit splash zone.

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/jeffmason1/status/1089987511101857792

I hope he has evidence for that accusation they are in breach of the Sherman Act

True Detective series 3 episode 4. Do. Not. Disturb......

If Mrs May does manage to engineer a final at -the-death binary choice for parliament of her deal or no deal I wonder which way that would go?

Can you imagine the suspense of that division if it comes to pass. Whole country watching, giant communal screens, the lot. Wow.

IanB2 said:

Cyclefree said:

Oh FFS! Just revoke Article 50 and get on with it. Explain that there is no agreement in any party or Parliament on how to leave, that a No Deal exit is too uncertain and harmful to the country and that no responsible politician would inflict that on the country, even if the price is the loss of their job. Explain that there is no shame in changing one's mind when the facts change, referendum vote notwithstanding and that if the voters don't like it they can make their views known at the next election.

For good measure, say that referenda for such questions are bloody silly ideas in a Parliamentary democracy. If we want to have referenda like the Swiss do, they we need to do a whole load of other things the Swiss do as well to make them work. We don't and haven't here. And it's clear that trying to force through a country-changing decision through bullying, Parliamentary chicanery, in a panic, at the last-minute, when we haven't prepared - and are not in a position to prepare - for one of the alternatives is the stupidest way possible to make a decision.

So the Tory party gets destroyed. So bloody what? It is busy destroying itself at the moment. At least this way it doesn't take the country with it.

If people want to leave the EU in the future, fine. At least they can learn some lessons from the shambles of the last 3 years about what they need to think about before doing so.

Way too sensible. And for our politicians, the third para simply won't compute.

Absolutely right, and absolutely not going to happen.

Seems like that guardian letter from the usual suspects backing up Venezuela was a clusterf##k. They included a peer as a supposed signature, but says she knew nothing about it and doesn’t agree. Then they claimed it was actually they meant another lady...who is dead.

Beverley_C said:

Mortimer said:

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/channel4news/status/1089967123848417281?s=21

Stubbornness leading to no deal?

Weyand will get overruled.

Velma from Scooby Do is the EU deputy negotiator? Did we get Shaggy?

Unfortunately, the Conservative Party decided to split up and look for clues. They still don't have one.
But they are sure there is a scary old allotment owner around frightening people away.

kle4 said:

kinabalu said:

If Mrs May does manage to engineer a final at -the-death binary choice for parliament of her deal or no deal I wonder which way that would go?

Can you imagine the suspense of that division if it comes to pass. Whole country watching, giant communal screens, the lot. Wow.

Drama indeed. If we take people at their word, deal should win easily in such a scenario simply because far more claim to be determined to prevent no deal than deal which, despite its humongous defeat and the vast array of complaints, justified and otherwise, that people have with it, is at least palatable in parts to more of them, they are hardly going to be against the totality of it when, after all, the EU itself says it is a reasonable deal (notwithstanding that is evidence of its terribleness for some).

Not quite sure how May would engineer it to be literally one of those two choices though.

No. Very hard tô see how May could engineer this - MPs will suggest Remain or delay as amendments and Bercow will allow them to be put. And delay would probably win.

dixiedean said:

Beverley_C said:

Mortimer said:

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/channel4news/status/1089967123848417281?s=21

Stubbornness leading to no deal?

Weyand will get overruled.

Velma from Scooby Do is the EU deputy negotiator? Did we get Shaggy?

Unfortunately, the Conservative Party decided to split up and look for clues. They still don't have one.
But they are sure there is a scary old allotment owner around frightening people away.

Yesterday when I mentioned to my son that the Sunday papers were referring to the possibility of martial law being used in the event of riots etc, he responded by saying "And these people think we'll be scared when they say that Corbyn will turn us into Venezuela."

He has a point. The Tories are not just making it more likely that Corbyn will be PM but they are undermining any argument they might want to make that his brand of left-wing politics will be no good for Britain.

(For the record, my son has turned away from Corbyn precisely because he is doing nothing to stop Brexit.)

anothernick said:

kle4 said:

kinabalu said:

If Mrs May does manage to engineer a final at -the-death binary choice for parliament of her deal or no deal I wonder which way that would go?

Can you imagine the suspense of that division if it comes to pass. Whole country watching, giant communal screens, the lot. Wow.

Drama indeed. If we take people at their word, deal should win easily in such a scenario simply because far more claim to be determined to prevent no deal than deal which, despite its humongous defeat and the vast array of complaints, justified and otherwise, that people have with it, is at least palatable in parts to more of them, they are hardly going to be against the totality of it when, after all, the EU itself says it is a reasonable deal (notwithstanding that is evidence of its terribleness for some).

Not quite sure how May would engineer it to be literally one of those two choices though.

No. Very hard tô see how May could engineer this - MPs will suggest Remain or delay as amendments and Bercow will allow them to be put. And delay would probably win.

I'm half convinced that really was May's only plan, that she was blindsided by the A50 case decision making revocation so much easier a prospect (previously it could not be certain to work even if we wanted to go down that route), and has simply never come up with another stratagem.

Cyclefree said:

dixiedean said:

Beverley_C said:

Mortimer said:

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/channel4news/status/1089967123848417281?s=21

Stubbornness leading to no deal?

Weyand will get overruled.

Velma from Scooby Do is the EU deputy negotiator? Did we get Shaggy?

Unfortunately, the Conservative Party decided to split up and look for clues. They still don't have one.
But they are sure there is a scary old allotment owner around frightening people away.

Yesterday when I mentioned to my son that the Sunday papers were referring to the possibility of martial law being used in the event of riots etc, he responded by saying "And these people think we'll be scared when they say that Corbyn will turn us into Venezuela."

He has a point. The Tories are not just making it more likely that Corbyn will be PM but they are undermining any argument they might want to make that his brand of left-wing politics will be no good for Britain.

(For the record, my son has turned away from Corbyn precisely because he is doing nothing to stop Brexit.)

Mmmm. Certainly the "coalition of chaos" line won't play well next time

FrancisUrquhart said:

The former CEO of coffee chain Starbucks has said he is "seriously considering" running for president. Howard Schultz, who stepped down as the firm's boss last year, says he is considering running as a centrist independent candidate in 2020.

I am sure his companies record of aggressive tax efficiency won’t come up as an issue.

Not has he got any chance of winning the rustbelt, at most he might pick up a few libertarian Republicans and centrist Democrats on the coasts

Cyclefree said:

dixiedean said:

Beverley_C said:

Mortimer said:

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/channel4news/status/1089967123848417281?s=21

Stubbornness leading to no deal?

Weyand will get overruled.

Velma from Scooby Do is the EU deputy negotiator? Did we get Shaggy?

Unfortunately, the Conservative Party decided to split up and look for clues. They still don't have one.
But they are sure there is a scary old allotment owner around frightening people away.

Yesterday when I mentioned to my son that the Sunday papers were referring to the possibility of martial law being used in the event of riots etc, he responded by saying "And these people think we'll be scared when they say that Corbyn will turn us into Venezuela."

He has a point. The Tories are not just making it more likely that Corbyn will be PM but they are undermining any argument they might want to make that his brand of left-wing politics will be no good for Britain.

(For the record, my son has turned away from Corbyn precisely because he is doing nothing to stop Brexit.)

No Deal Brexit and Corbyn are both two sides of the same coin, protest votes against globalisation, corporate capitalism and uncontrolled immigration