politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » GE19’s first big TV event: A debate between 2 men whose partie

ydoethur said:

In a sane world, this story would be a disaster for both parties:

General Election 2019: Public spending 'to rocket' in next parliament
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-50283719

Alas, we no longer live in a sane world.

If the estimates of the hit to the economy of Boris’s Brexit deal are at all correct, imagine what the combination of that and this level of spending will mean for us all.

Stocky said:

OnlyLivingBoy said: "That's interesting. My model has Labour winning it with the Lib Dems 3rd, although the Tories would win if BXP were squeezed right down. Maybe my model is just wrong."

Your model doesn`t allow for the Chuka factor??

I haven't allowed for any seat/candidate specific factors yet, apart from in Brighton Pavilion and Buckingham. I am not convinced Chuka is a huge factor either way. I wonder whether the model is too favourable to Labour in heavy remain voting seats.

geoffw said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Not sure if this has been pointed out already, but the spreads on the LibDems at all the spread-bet providers have dropped quite sharply over the weekend: they were at 45-50, now 39-44.

Which party has the compensating rise?

The Conservatives, I think, although I don't have the previous figure for them. The current spreads at Sporting Index are:

Con 321-329
Lab 209-217
LD 39-44
SNP 48-51

SpreadEx have Con 2 seats lower and Lab 2 higher, with the SNP one lower.

Miss Cyclefree, quite.

Boris Johnson, from the moment he became PM, began splurging cash on this promise and that. He's headline hunting, not seeking to govern. Daft sod.

And yet, the alternative is even worse!

The ideal result is a Conservative victory and the PM to lose his seat.

Just rejoice at the news......

https://order-order.com/2019/11/04/john-bercow-no-longer-mp/

Floater said: "Just rejoice at the news......"

Yes indeed. Though it sticks in the craw that Bercow will make a fortune on the speech circuit.

Richard_Nabavi said:

geoffw said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Not sure if this has been pointed out already, but the spreads on the LibDems at all the spread-bet providers have dropped quite sharply over the weekend: they were at 45-50, now 39-44.

Which party has the compensating rise?

The Conservatives, I think, although I don't have the previous figure for them. The current spreads at Sporting Index are:

Con 321-329
Lab 209-217
LD 39-44
SNP 48-51

SpreadEx have Con 2 seats lower and Lab 2 higher, with the SNP one lower.

Labour and Con are both up on those figures.

SquareRoot said:

Stocky said:

Floater said: "Just rejoice at the news......"

Yes indeed. Though it sticks in the craw that Bercow will make a fortune on the speech circuit.

why would anyone want to listen to him..

All sorts of politicians go on the after-dinner circuit. See them advertised on and off.

The best news of the election so far:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/latestnews/2019/election

The BBC is bringing back Arthur - albeit a remix version, which won't be as good as the original.

OldKingCole said:

SquareRoot said:

Stocky said:

Floater said: "Just rejoice at the news......"

Yes indeed. Though it sticks in the craw that Bercow will make a fortune on the speech circuit.

why would anyone want to listen to him..

All sorts of politicians go on the after-dinner circuit. See them advertised on and off.

Yes I know , but why would you want to listen to him.. period. What has he got to say of interest..

Richard_Tyndall said:

Theuniondivvie said:

I approve this message.

https://twitter.com/StuartMaconie/status/1191295395844042752?s=20

The 70s was an awesome decade for music. But most of it was American.

Most decades are fine for most people, even when there is political turmoil.

Cyclefree said:

geoffw said:

Cyclefree said:

ydoethur said:

In a sane world, this story would be a disaster for both parties:

General Election 2019: Public spending 'to rocket' in next parliament
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-50283719

Alas, we no longer live in a sane world.

If the estimates of the hit to the economy of Boris’s Brexit deal are at all correct, imagine what the combination of that and this level of spending will mean for us all.

One offsets the other.

The spending has to be paid for. And it will - by us, through increased taxes, and by our children, through increased borrowing.

Assuming the spending actually occurs. It's one of Boris' promises, remember.

Cyclefree said:

geoffw said:

Cyclefree said:

ydoethur said:

In a sane world, this story would be a disaster for both parties:

General Election 2019: Public spending 'to rocket' in next parliament
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-50283719

Alas, we no longer live in a sane world.

If the estimates of the hit to the economy of Boris’s Brexit deal are at all correct, imagine what the combination of that and this level of spending will mean for us all.

One offsets the other.

The spending has to be paid for. And it will - by us, through increased taxes, and by our children, through increased borrowing.

Or through the growth increase we can get once freed from the constraints of the sclerotic and slowly growing European Union.

StuartDickson said:

Casino_Royale said:

MarqueeMark said:

Casino_Royale said:

Alistair said:

In a suprise move John Lamont commits to a 2020 Scottish Independence Referendum

https://twitter.com/John2Win/status/1190559768215203840?s=19

This is precisely the sort of thing that will lead to the Scottish Conservatives retaining almost all their seats.

Based on that photo, there's no mistaking an SNP activist and a ray of sunshine......

Indeed. Once you tune out all the sarcasm and sledging, you recognise they are getting rather nervous that the Scottish Conservatives might piss on their parade.

The best way for any Unionist to stop independence getting legs next year is to deny the SNP any of the gains they want in Scotland this year, and deny the possibility of any alternative Government led by Corbyn.

That means Labour are utterly toast in Scotland, and the Tories will retain most of their seats. On a very good night, they might only lost 2-3 but gain 5-6 others.

Which is why I've taken the 16/1 on Tories on 16+ seats with Ladbrokes.

With punters like this - betting with the heart rather than the head - Shadsy will be leading a comfortable retirement.

I am betting with my head, and I expect to do well.

This is a keeper for election night.

Alistair said:

In a suprise move John Lamont commits to a 2020 Scottish Independence Referendum

https://twitter.com/John2Win/status/1190559768215203840?s=19

The Scottish results could be very different to the rest of Britain..........as usual.

I think we will see big unionist tactical voting meaning Scott Tories keep most of their seats. And almost all of the Scott Tories will have first time incumbency support

Cyclefree said:

geoffw said:

Cyclefree said:

ydoethur said:

In a sane world, this story would be a disaster for both parties:

General Election 2019: Public spending 'to rocket' in next parliament
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-50283719

Alas, we no longer live in a sane world.

If the estimates of the hit to the economy of Boris’s Brexit deal are at all correct, imagine what the combination of that and this level of spending will mean for us all.

One offsets the other.

The spending has to be paid for. And it will - by us, through increased taxes, and by our children, through increased borrowing.

"The spending has to be paid for."
If there is the deflationary "hit to the economy" which you assert, which results in unemployment and underutilized capacity then the opportunity cost of increased spending to offset it is zero.

Pulpstar said:

Just because we've wallowed around in hung parliaments or small majorities for what seems like ages doesn't mean the next election will be the same:

ANY Majority @ 22 looks to be a buy (Worth paying 1 pt over Tory maj to get Labour Maj chucked in however unlikely that seems right now)
Con 400 Ups @ 3 is also. That probably won't win but the implied volatility of the Election is on your side here.

The advantage of Tory Maj over buying CON at 329 is you get a hard stop at CON 326 - if the Tories shit the bed you've got very limited losses.

Presumably that's any majority at 2.2? If it's 22 I'm in for sure!

Dura_Ace said: "Boris is looking quite strange today. It's like Alf fucked a Moomin."

The chicks seem to like him.

Anyone know what time the speaker vote is??

Pulpstar said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Or through the growth increase we can get once freed from the constraints of the sclerotic and slowly growing European Union.

Whilst slowly growing might be a statement of fact, "sclerotic" as if it has a negative effect on our economy is a nonsense.

Why is it a nonsense? Euroslerosis has been a known issue for decades now. Economists have discussed Eurosclerosis since the 1970s and it is still an issue today. The term sclerosis has been adopted based on the medical term to reflect Europes inflexible market conditions leading to slugglish economic performance. This was a major issue in prior decades and has shown up again in Europe in recent years.

It is an article of faith among many that the UK faces a downside and no upside from leaving the sclerotic European Union but if an independent United Kingdom can be more flexible and more agile at adapting to the modern market then we could benefit and grow more.

Philip_Thompson said:

Pulpstar said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Or through the growth increase we can get once freed from the constraints of the sclerotic and slowly growing European Union.

Whilst slowly growing might be a statement of fact, "sclerotic" as if it has a negative effect on our economy is a nonsense.

Why is it a nonsense? Euroslerosis has been a known issue for decades now. Economists have discussed Eurosclerosis since the 1970s and it is still an issue today. The term sclerosis has been adopted based on the medical term to reflect Europes inflexible market conditions leading to slugglish economic performance. This was a major issue in prior decades and has shown up again in Europe in recent years.

It is an article of faith among many that the UK faces a downside and no upside from leaving the sclerotic European Union but if an independent United Kingdom can be more flexible and more agile at adapting to the modern market then we could benefit and grow more.

Anglosclerosis next, then.

Stocky said:

Anyone know what time the speaker vote is??

Someone said 8.00pm but I haven't heard it myself yet

Nigelb said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pulpstar said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Or through the growth increase we can get once freed from the constraints of the sclerotic and slowly growing European Union.

Whilst slowly growing might be a statement of fact, "sclerotic" as if it has a negative effect on our economy is a nonsense.

Why is it a nonsense? Euroslerosis has been a known issue for decades now. Economists have discussed Eurosclerosis since the 1970s and it is still an issue today. The term sclerosis has been adopted based on the medical term to reflect Europes inflexible market conditions leading to slugglish economic performance. This was a major issue in prior decades and has shown up again in Europe in recent years.

It is an article of faith among many that the UK faces a downside and no upside from leaving the sclerotic European Union but if an independent United Kingdom can be more flexible and more agile at adapting to the modern market then we could benefit and grow more.

Anglosclerosis next, then.

You think we'll be inflexible once we're out? Its possible and if the Corbynites win quite probable but that doesn't seem likely to me at the moment.

Pulpstar said:

Just because we've wallowed around in hung parliaments or small majorities for what seems like ages doesn't mean the next election will be the same:

ANY Majority @ 22 looks to be a buy (Worth paying 1 pt over Tory maj to get Labour Maj chucked in however unlikely that seems right now)
Con 400 Ups @ 3 is also. That probably won't win but the implied volatility of the Election is on your side here.

The advantage of Maj over buying CON at 329 is you get a hard stop at CON 326 - if the Tories shit the bed you've got very limited losses.

Hmm, I don't think I'd go for the Any Majority bet. That's effectively a 324-up market (assuming they interpret a majority in that way, which isn't clear in the rules). So you need the Tories (or Labour, ha ha) to get 346 seats before you even start to make a profit, but you make a loss everywhere else. Yes, you've limited your downside, but you've also reduced your upside and much increased the risk of a loss.

Casino_Royale said:

I see UK turnout at under 60% is now 7/1 at Ladbrokes.

Those who followed my tip at the weekend could have got it at 12/1.

Interesting why do you think it'd be low?

I think turnout will be up and possibly over 70%

Stocky said:

One of you says 2:30, the other 8pm for the speaker vote.

I`ll google it.

It starts at 2:30 but it will be a multi-round process that will go on all day.

Stocky said:

camel said: "45-50 looked utterly impossible to me."

You can sell Sporting Index`s Lib Dem 50-up market at 3.5. Looks a banker to me.

I don`t spread bet myself - it scares me. I had IG Index and SP Index accounts years ago. One year I did so badly that IG sent me a massive side of smoked salmon for Xmas as thanks for being a "valued client".

I'm very much an amateur. I don't have enough grip on my two-toed feet to negotiate slippery slopes.

Pulpstar said:

Casino_Royale said:

Pulpstar said:

Just because we've wallowed around in hung parliaments or small majorities for what seems like ages doesn't mean the next election will be the same:

ANY Majority @ 22 looks to be a buy (Worth paying 1 pt over Tory maj to get Labour Maj chucked in however unlikely that seems right now)
Con 400 Ups @ 3 is also. That probably won't win but the implied volatility of the Election is on your side here.

The advantage of Maj over buying CON at 329 is you get a hard stop at CON 326 - if the Tories shit the bed you've got very limited losses.

Can’t you get Con 400+ at Ladbrokes for 5/1?

Buying ANY majority is clearly better than Tory seats 400+ at 5-1.

400 Tory seats would mean a majority of 150. That means at a buy of 22 seats you're getting 5.8 - 1.

In addition you're getting some stake back if Labour win a majority.

& You also win if the Tories get less than 400 seats.

400 Tory seats would be an 'elective dictatorship' and no mistake.

Richard_Nabavi said:

Pulpstar said:

Just because we've wallowed around in hung parliaments or small majorities for what seems like ages doesn't mean the next election will be the same:

ANY Majority @ 22 looks to be a buy (Worth paying 1 pt over Tory maj to get Labour Maj chucked in however unlikely that seems right now)
Con 400 Ups @ 3 is also. That probably won't win but the implied volatility of the Election is on your side here.

The advantage of Maj over buying CON at 329 is you get a hard stop at CON 326 - if the Tories shit the bed you've got very limited losses.

Hmm, I don't think I'd go for the Any Majority bet. That's effectively a 324-up market (assuming they interpret a majority in that way, which isn't clear in the rules). So you need the Tories (or Labour, ha ha) to get 346 seats before you even start to make a profit, but you make a loss everywhere else. Yes, you've limited your downside, but you've also reduced your upside and much increased the risk of a loss.

No, it's total majority in seats over the opposition parties.

Con 346 = 304 Oppo = Con Majority 42.

Stocky said:

camel said: "45-50 looked utterly impossible to me."

You can sell Sporting Index`s Lib Dem 50-up market at 3.5. Looks a banker to me.

I don`t spread bet myself - it scares me. I had IG Index and SP Index accounts years ago. One year I did so badly that IG sent me a massive side of smoked salmon for Xmas as thanks for being a "valued client".

If you think that sell of the 50-up market is 'a banker', then you're wise not to dabble on the spreads! Yes, it would probably make you a profit of 3.5 x your per-seat stake, but if there's a LibDem resurgence, it might potentially lead to another side-of-smoked-salmon-sized loss.

Gather there's some tactical candidature arrangements being made in N Ireland, according the BBC.

Pulpstar said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Pulpstar said:

Just because we've wallowed around in hung parliaments or small majorities for what seems like ages doesn't mean the next election will be the same:

ANY Majority @ 22 looks to be a buy (Worth paying 1 pt over Tory maj to get Labour Maj chucked in however unlikely that seems right now)
Con 400 Ups @ 3 is also. That probably won't win but the implied volatility of the Election is on your side here.

The advantage of Maj over buying CON at 329 is you get a hard stop at CON 326 - if the Tories shit the bed you've got very limited losses.

Hmm, I don't think I'd go for the Any Majority bet. That's effectively a 324-up market (assuming they interpret a majority in that way, which isn't clear in the rules). So you need the Tories (or Labour, ha ha) to get 346 seats before you even start to make a profit, but you make a loss everywhere else. Yes, you've limited your downside, but you've also reduced your upside and much increased the risk of a loss.

No, it's total majority in seats over the opposition parties.

Con 346 = 304 Oppo = Con Majority 42.

Ah yes, sorry my mistake.

Do they include Sinn Fein as an opposition party? It's not completely clear from their rules.

@Richard_Nabavi

Surely SF is included in "The field" from the top spiel ?

Markets refer to the UK General Election.
For information purposes the total number of seats available = 650, although no Northern Ireland seats count towards any of these markets, except as part of 'The Field', referring to the remainder of the total 650 seats not won by The Conservatives.
Note: Nominated Speaker of the House will NOT count as per the Party they stand for at the Election.

Hope the suspicious package isn't anything serious.

nunu2 said:

Alistair said:

In a suprise move John Lamont commits to a 2020 Scottish Independence Referendum

https://twitter.com/John2Win/status/1190559768215203840?s=19

The Scottish results could be very different to the rest of Britain..........as usual.

I think we will see big unionist tactical voting meaning Scott Tories keep most of their seats. And almost all of the Scott Tories will have first time incumbency support

First time incumbency support like the SNP figures they defeated had?

Morris_Dancer said:

Hope the suspicious package isn't anything serious.

It really is sad and worrying how far we have descended recently in standards of behaviour and attitudes to each other

Philip_Thompson said:

Nigelb said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pulpstar said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Or through the growth increase we can get once freed from the constraints of the sclerotic and slowly growing European Union.

Whilst slowly growing might be a statement of fact, "sclerotic" as if it has a negative effect on our economy is a nonsense.

Why is it a nonsense? Euroslerosis has been a known issue for decades now. Economists have discussed Eurosclerosis since the 1970s and it is still an issue today. The term sclerosis has been adopted based on the medical term to reflect Europes inflexible market conditions leading to slugglish economic performance. This was a major issue in prior decades and has shown up again in Europe in recent years.

It is an article of faith among many that the UK faces a downside and no upside from leaving the sclerotic European Union but if an independent United Kingdom can be more flexible and more agile at adapting to the modern market then we could benefit and grow more.

Anglosclerosis next, then.

You think we'll be inflexible once we're out? Its possible and if the Corbynites win quite probable but that doesn't seem likely to me at the moment.

The UK is already one of the most flexible and business friendly economies in the world. The World Bank's Doing Business survey puts us at #9 globally, one of 7 EU economies in the top 20 (so much for the EU being a sclerotic inflexible backwater). Leaving the EU's single market will create significant additional barriers for business, and it scares me to think what environmental protections or rights at work we will be jettisoning to compensate.

Richard_Nabavi said:

Pulpstar said:

@Richard_Nabavi

Surely SF is included in "The field" from the top spiel ?

Markets refer to the UK General Election.
For information purposes the total number of seats available = 650, although no Northern Ireland seats count towards any of these markets, except as part of 'The Field', referring to the remainder of the total 650 seats not won by The Conservatives.
Note: Nominated Speaker of the House will NOT count as per the Party they stand for at the Election.

That's probably right but it seems a bit odd to count them for the purposes of a majority, since they don't provide any opposition MPs.

Still, if you do your assessment on the basis that they do count, as a buyer it works in your favour if SPIN settle on the basis that they don't.

Well that would be a nice bonus but I'm expecting this result to be settled "in line" with whatever 'Majority' is reported on the day.

It's a contract one enters into also so it can't be "palped". Personally I think a fair price for ANY Maj is 35-37 or thereabouts.

kinabalu said:

Pulpstar said:

Just because we've wallowed around in hung parliaments or small majorities for what seems like ages doesn't mean the next election will be the same:

ANY Majority @ 22 looks to be a buy (Worth paying 1 pt over Tory maj to get Labour Maj chucked in however unlikely that seems right now)
Con 400 Ups @ 3 is also. That probably won't win but the implied volatility of the Election is on your side here.

The advantage of Maj over buying CON at 329 is you get a hard stop at CON 326 - if the Tories shit the bed you've got very limited losses.

On those as part of my opening salvo. Any maj @ 15 and 400 up @ 1.

Agree that both still good now.

My sense is country ready to go with Boris and his Brexit and his general Bullshit.

400 Ups at 1 is astonishingly good.

kyf_100 said:

alednam said:

We need to get out of the habit of using 'Leavers' to describe both Johnson and Corbyn. It's as if we'd all bought into 'Leave means Leave', brainwashed into thinking that really only ERG types know what Brexit is.
Corbyn's desired Brexit a) won't ever be available, and b) would be put to a public vote in the extraordinarily unlikely event that it came to be available.To portray Corbyn as one "Leaver" up against another is, to put to mildly, misleading.

If Corbyn isn't a leaver, then what is he? You'd be hard pressed to describe him as a remainer.

He's a leaver that has clearly been bullied by McDonnell, Momentum and about 180 of his backbenchers into adopting a net remain position he's clearly uncomfortable with.

kyf_100 said:

alednam said:

We need to get out of the habit of using 'Leavers' to describe both Johnson and Corbyn. It's as if we'd all bought into 'Leave means Leave', brainwashed into thinking that really only ERG types know what Brexit is.
Corbyn's desired Brexit a) won't ever be available, and b) would be put to a public vote in the extraordinarily unlikely event that it came to be available.To portray Corbyn as one "Leaver" up against another is, to put to mildly, misleading.

If Corbyn isn't a leaver, then what is he? You'd be hard pressed to describe him as a remainer.

One would assume that during 1973-5 Corbyn, like his sectional leader, Tony Benn, campaigned against continued membership of the EU as a result of deeply held principles.
Jeremy Corbyn is not a man known for changing his mind of matters of principle.

viewcode said:

tlg86 said:

The best news of the election so far:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/latestnews/2019/election

The BBC is bringing back Arthur - albeit a remix version, which won't be as good as the original.

I will miss Dimbleby. Mind you tho, I still miss Peter Snow. I know soliciting acts of violence is a bad thing, but can somebody arrange to drop a large safe on Jeremy Vine so he doesn't arse around with wildly inappropriate animations and 3d graphics please?

Although, it is worth having him on the show. If Boris gets a majority and can implement Brexit within days/weeks, then Jeremy is going to give the first indication of the great Remainer meltdown, live on air.

Nigelb said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Nigelb said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pulpstar said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Or through the growth increase we can get once freed from the constraints of the sclerotic and slowly growing European Union.

Whilst slowly growing might be a statement of fact, "sclerotic" as if it has a negative effect on our economy is a nonsense.

Why is it a nonsense? Euroslerosis has been a known issue for decades now. Economists have discussed Eurosclerosis since the 1970s and it is still an issue today. The term sclerosis has been adopted based on the medical term to reflect Europes inflexible market conditions leading to slugglish economic performance. This was a major issue in prior decades and has shown up again in Europe in recent years.

It is an article of faith among many that the UK faces a downside and no upside from leaving the sclerotic European Union but if an independent United Kingdom can be more flexible and more agile at adapting to the modern market then we could benefit and grow more.

Anglosclerosis next, then.

You think we'll be inflexible once we're out? Its possible and if the Corbynites win quite probable but that doesn't seem likely to me at the moment.

I think your Eurosclerosis is largely a myth, that Brexit is an enormous and expensive distraction from any constructive policy formation, and that we’ll very likely be less competitive at the margin.

Brexit is the new opiate of the people. A distraction from things that are far more important, and undemocratic anomalies are studiously ignored by those who bleat about the importance of "respecting" a highly vague and possibly dubious referendum held in 2016.

Er, could the Tories maybe think about perhaps, er, starting to campaign? Not that the other parties have made much of an impact, but if it were me, I'd want to at least have one big event setting out the major themes of the campaign so as to try to frame the next 6 weeks from my perspective as much as possible...

Nigel_Foremain said:

Nigelb said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Nigelb said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pulpstar said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Or through the growth increase we can get once freed from the constraints of the sclerotic and slowly growing European Union.

Whilst slowly growing might be a statement of fact, "sclerotic" as if it has a negative effect on our economy is a nonsense.

Why is it a nonsense? Euroslerosis has been a known issue for decades now. Economists have discussed Eurosclerosis since the 1970s and it is still an issue today. The term sclerosis has been adopted based on the medical term to reflect Europes inflexible market conditions leading to slugglish economic performance. This was a major issue in prior decades and has shown up again in Europe in recent years.

It is an article of faith among many that the UK faces a downside and no upside from leaving the sclerotic European Union but if an independent United Kingdom can be more flexible and more agile at adapting to the modern market then we could benefit and grow more.

Anglosclerosis next, then.

You think we'll be inflexible once we're out? Its possible and if the Corbynites win quite probable but that doesn't seem likely to me at the moment.

I think your Eurosclerosis is largely a myth, that Brexit is an enormous and expensive distraction from any constructive policy formation, and that we’ll very likely be less competitive at the margin.

Brexit is the new opiate of the people. A distraction from things that are far more important, and undemocratic anomalies are studiously ignored by those who bleat about the importance of "respecting" a highly vague and possibly dubious referendum held in 2016.

The European Union has been that opiate. Within the EU everything blameworthy gets passed - oh the EU made us do that, oh the EU won't let us do that.

Out of the EU the politicians answer to us the voters. Either they do what we want them to or we kick them out and they have nowhere to hide.

blueblue said:

Er, could the Tories maybe think about perhaps, er, starting to campaign? Not that the other parties have made much of an impact, but if it were me, I'd want to at least have one big event setting out the major themes of the campaign so as to try to frame the next 6 weeks from my perspective as much as possible...

They've (I was out) "tried" to canvas me in Bassetlaw. I live in precisely the sort of ward they'll need to win to do well in.

kyf_100 said:

alednam said:

We need to get out of the habit of using 'Leavers' to describe both Johnson and Corbyn. It's as if we'd all bought into 'Leave means Leave', brainwashed into thinking that really only ERG types know what Brexit is.
Corbyn's desired Brexit a) won't ever be available, and b) would be put to a public vote in the extraordinarily unlikely event that it came to be available.To portray Corbyn as one "Leaver" up against another is, to put to mildly, misleading.

If Corbyn isn't a leaver, then what is he? You'd be hard pressed to describe him as a remainer.

He is just a contrarian. Brexit is a challenge for him, because he can't quite decide which position makes him look more "cool" to oppose in the sixth form common room that his limited intellect permanently anchors him in.

Pulpstar said:

400 Ups at 1 is astonishingly good.

Yes, I thought so. You can put a big unit on and not lose sleep. And if it pays I'll be in the sort of emotionally fragile state which only a gigantic spread betting profit can possibly mitigate.

Philip_Thompson said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Nigelb said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Nigelb said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pulpstar said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Or through the growth increase we can get once freed from the constraints of the sclerotic and slowly growing European Union.

Whilst slowly growing might be a statement of fact, "sclerotic" as if it has a negative effect on our economy is a nonsense.

Why is it a nonsense? Euroslerosis has been a known issue for decades now. Economists have discussed Eurosclerosis since the 1970s and it is still an issue today. The term sclerosis has been adopted based on the medical term to reflect Europes inflexible market conditions leading to slugglish economic performance. This was a major issue in prior decades and has shown up again in Europe in recent years.

It is an article of faith among many that the UK faces a downside and no upside from leaving the sclerotic European Union but if an independent United Kingdom can be more flexible and more agile at adapting to the modern market then we could benefit and grow more.

Anglosclerosis next, then.

You think we'll be inflexible once we're out? Its possible and if the Corbynites win quite probable but that doesn't seem likely to me at the moment.

I think your Eurosclerosis is largely a myth, that Brexit is an enormous and expensive distraction from any constructive policy formation, and that we’ll very likely be less competitive at the margin.

Brexit is the new opiate of the people. A distraction from things that are far more important, and undemocratic anomalies are studiously ignored by those who bleat about the importance of "respecting" a highly vague and possibly dubious referendum held in 2016.

The European Union has been that opiate. Within the EU everything blameworthy gets passed - oh the EU made us do that, oh the EU won't let us do that.

Out of the EU the politicians answer to us the voters. Either they do what we want them to or we kick them out and they have nowhere to hide.

Keep taking that opium. I think you may be taking some other mind bending drugs also if you think there is anything that is positive that will come out of Brexit. I think most sensible people now think it is about damage limitation. I am sure even Boris thinks that, though with him it will be more about damage limitation to Boris Johnson.

Stereotomy said:

https://twitter.com/MattChorley/status/1191272831314735105

Both Labour and the Tories are below 2017 levels on that polling with the LDs well up and the Brexit Party around UKIP levels