politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » On the betting markets a March 29th UK Brexit down from a 71%
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » On the betting markets a March 29th UK Brexit down from a 71% chance to 16% in just five months
Betdata.io chart of movement on the Betfair exchange
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
That's not impossible and 16% looks about right for that combination to me.
I'm currently expecting the deal to go down - again - and by about 150. It doesn't look as if it will be remotely close to me.
Not building enough walls ;-)
How many MPs are actually moving? I think I've counted about 10 who've hinted at softening to the deal. Theresa May needs 116 and she seems to be antagonising the people she needs to be turning.
Deal fails.
We remain.
Far right rises.
Politicians in the centre are baffled.
Incidentally, the far right rising is highly likely to take the form of new parties rather than the parasitical infestation of the Conservatives. Nazis haven't been tolerated on the backbenches of the blues in the same way that Marxists have for the reds.
That will make rapid Parliamentary progress more difficult. But, as UKIP and now TIG teach us, even a very small party can drastically alter the course of politics.
In an age where the Newcastle rape gang got less coverage than Julia Hartley-Brewer's knee being touched a decade or two ago, and when an immigrant being pushed is top drawer news but a white man being denied a police position on the basis of his race (and gender/sexuality), there's a window of opportunity for white supremacists/the far right to capitalise on the gaping chasm between ordinary people and the political/media class.
My worry, one, anyway, is that if people conclude voting for the mainstream parties is worthless, and/or that they want something done to roll back the acceptability of anti-white rhetoric (White Saviour from Lammy, divide and rule from Abbott, male, pale, and stale from various) they may take the view I heard from a Dutch voter some time ago, on why he backed Wilders despite not agreeing with him: the voter felt the country was sick, and he preferred medicine that was too strong to none at all.
This can be headed off. Regardless of whether we remain, depart in name only, or leave properly (perhaps with no deal at all), politics is going to be very turbulent and the already poisonous atmosphere is likely to intensify. What's urgently needed is some competence, which is starkly lacking from either leadership, with many senior ministers (and shadows) similarly woeful.
Anyway, that's enough rambling from me.
It may seem unfair that it's not simply a matter of self-determination, but many countries include minorities within them, and the legal (and moral?) consensus is that current boundaries should be kept to wherever possible. The alternative is too disruptive.
Not sure about "far right" but I do think Farage's Brexit Party will do very well at future elections.
While it's not in recession territory yet, it is now at a multi year low.
DavidL said:
Indeed. Can May really survive another heavy defeat? There has to come a point when we conclude that if May is the answer we are asking the wrong question.
David Herdson said:
A change of PM will not change the parliamentary/diplomatic maths and will waste precious time.
I say:
That has been my view up to now but we have a PM who is utterly unpersuasive, could not build a consensus to save her life and just seems to have no chance of getting a perfectly respectable deal through a hostile Commons. Time for someone else to have a go.
We’re leaving with no deal in 21 days.
https://twitter.com/emptywheel/status/1103805233531109382
https://twitter.com/ScottHech/status/1103809139900407808
https://twitter.com/thelauracoates/status/1103811277942591488
Also, it seems to me, zero chance of leaving with no deal on 29th March, so the 16% is, I think mostly predicated on actually getting a deal done and the logistics sorted. But if Alistair Meeks says that's impossible then it probably is...….Which would make an 84% of not leaving on 29th March generous.
In the very likely event May's Deal doesn't go through I put the odds highly in favour of parliament asking for an extension. But I'm not sure what happens then.
Macron has made threats that there can be no extension without a purpose. I've heard less from the other 26 but I'm sure there's a lot of thinking going on behind the scenes. I wouldn't be surprised if an extension comes back with conditions attached.
What happens then? Does parliament vote on it (I'm guessing they'll accept whatever) or does May take it upon herself to reject the offer and call meaningful vote three now that the clock has been run down and there's no time for parliament to stop her?
https://twitter.com/NickyMorgan01/status/1103957587991638017
However, my guess, and I could be wrong (predicting politics now is not easy), is that some other organisation will spring up. And *that* might be the most dangerous one.
Mr. Eagles, that's what the mood music suggests, and explains why the deal passing has lengthened from 2.5 to 4.33 (Ladbrokes).
I agree with the markets, we won’t have left by March 29.
It's interesting that of UKIP, although a few others were around, only Farage could be considered a big political beast.
It's a risk that a country sometimes has to take. And if the far-right rises, given time the far-right will also sink.
It’s a troubled country with amazing culture and horrible poverty and quite nice beer.
But my, oh my, what it does have is beautiful people. The men often look like young dashing Hussars, well built and athletic, the women are even better: generally exquisite, with a mix of sultry southern brown eyes, high Aryan cheekbones, and the rosy complexion of the steppes.
Having now travelled the entire world (apart from Moldova) I can now say with authority the best looking people in the world, on average, are the Nepalese.
They are also some of the poorest. There must be a profound lesson here, but I haven’t grasped it yet.
Remainers will be put up in 5 star hotels.
But yes, the only way the UK leaves on 29/3 now is with No Deal.
Not all Muslims believe in Fundamentalist Islam, any more than not all Nationalists are Fascists.
I would equate any organised religion with nationalism, but fundamentalist religion with fundamentalist nationalism [ie fascism].
I suspect that, regardless of what happens in terms of remaining/leaving, things are going to be very fraught and bitter for quite some time.
The tantrum-throwing Remainery Ian McEwans of this world get all the attention, as tantrum throwers do, but the idea that all artists/writers etc are Remain is as clumsy and foolish as the idea “all old people are Brexiteers”
I don't disagree about May's deficiency in leadership skills but even if there were someone who demonstrably had those skills and could sell a better outcome (who?), and they could take over tomorrow (could they?), there still remains the hostile Commons and intransigent EU.
Either way, I don't think you're right.
The answer to how this campaign starts again is firstly to remove as many as possible of our current MPs.
Don't have my school books to hand, as you might expect. Checking Wikipedia, this is under the Revelations section:
"The Quran (literally, "Recitation") is viewed by Muslims as the final revelation and literal word of God..."
That's a literalist/fundamentalist perspective of the Quran and, I believe, the position held by the vast majority of Muslims.
Later, in the Sunni section:
"Traditionalist theology is characterized by its adherence to a literal understanding of the Quran and the Sunnah, the belief in the Quran to be uncreated and eternal, and opposes reason (kalam) in religious matters"
Both those excerpts do have source numbers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-47502089
Good.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-47501763
No, you are spot on.
fundamentalist has a specific meaning in religion, namely the view that a text (the Quran, in this case) is literally the Word of God. That the events within literally happened. (The difference between a literalist and fundamentalist is that the former believes every single thing is 100% right, and a fundamentalist will accept that there might be the odd errant comma and apostrophe due to human failing in copying the document).
Bit annoyed that I tracked down the polling from Trevor Phillips' programme a few years ago and it doesn't actually seem to ask about views on the Quran. Shame.
(It's at https://www.icmunlimited.com/polls/ and search for Muslims Survey to find it).
I don't think so somehow...
I'm just very unconvinced as to the extent to which ordinary people (even deeply committed religious people) actually spend enough time thinking and caring about religious dogma that they could be considered "fundamentalists."
Again, appreciate that this was not the point being made.
Trying to opine about religions based upon GCE RS and Wikipedia is somewhat unwise.
https://twitter.com/MehreenKhn/status/1104046036463599617
Also, 14% tended to disagree and 38% strongly disagreed that homosexuality should be legal.
I never said *all* Muslims believe anything. I said a clear majority had a fundamentalist view of the Quran. I'd welcome any polling links that confirm or deny that.
I used the terms literalist/fundamentalist (correctly, as it happens) to refer to the majority Muslim view of the Quran. That's one of the key ways it's different to Christianity which has a conservative*/liberal majority.
*Journalist misuse the term 'conservative' in a religious sense all the time, speaking of things like "Conservative clerics from Iran". Conservative, religiously, just means that someone holds much, but not all, of the contents of a religious text to be literally true and believes that the whole text has at least implicit value (ie parables teaching important lessons).
It's fascinating, if tiring to repeat myself with what I thought was a straightforward statement, that so many here have apparently never heard that (correct) definition of 'fundamentalist' before. The term itself is not pejorative, it just refers to a literal or near literal view of a religious text.
I don't know enough about Islam to make specific judgements, but in general it's clear that they aren't as far down that road as Christianity is and, compared to when Turkey was established as an avowedly secular state, it seems as though Islam has become more fundamentalist rather than less.
That said, I worry about the future fire Christian minorities in Muslim countries when I hear people stating that there's no room for Muslims in Christian countries.
Anyway, if you have any polling that shows a majority of Muslims don't believe the Quran to be literally/fundamentally true, I'd be glad to see it.
Having said that, it is actually one of the more sensible Brexit outcomes. Given there has to be checks somewhere in Ireland if the UK diverges from the EU, the Stranraer to Larne ferry is the obvious place to have them. It is localised to a couple of ferry ports, they have the time to do them, lorries are going through other checks anyway, it keeps the land border with 300 crossing points clean. Nortthen Ireland, which doesn't have much going for it economically, gets a free trade zone.
However an emotional upset is small beer compared to the damage to incomes, livelihoods and real lives that most of the Brexits on offer will deliver; certainly the harder and more precipitous ones. Weighing up some people's livelihoods against other people's emotions isn't really a hard call, especially as many of the latter appear to be hard wired to be upset even if we manage to leave with a deal.
I also never mentioned 'fear'. Here's the original post I wrote:
"Mr. Thompson, the clear majority of Muslims are fundamentalists. I don't say that in a pejorative way, only in reference to their approach to religious books. Biblical fundamentalists (and literalists, who are almost identical) are in a minority compared to conservatives (a term which journalists abuse and misuse all the time...) and liberals. That is not true of Islam."