politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Long-Bailey back as next LAB leader favourite in very edgy bet

Is there anybody there?

"Of course it is members of the party’s selectorate who will decide and my reading is that after a fourth successive defeat finding a leader with the potential to win back power might be paramount. That I use the term “might” here speaks volumes."

Still think they'll pick the most left-wing candidate available.

2nd like the BBC, as they can't be bothered showing the news as the Apprentice needs a crappy follow-up programme.

What idiot thought that was a good idea.

rottenborough said:

2nd like the BBC, as they can't be bothered showing the news as the Apprentice needs a crappy follow-up programme.

What idiot thought that was a good idea.

You’re right. The Apprentice is a completely ridiculous program.

Had £15 on McD at 1000 earlier. Another bad bet to go with the others...

https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1207424699904462848

This. One thousand times.

nunu2 said:

kle4 said:

RobD said:

Pulpstar said:

I think Labour's combined leadership and EU position has done something which has been a long running issue for the Tories.

It's (For electoral purposes) expunged the ghost of Thatcher in England's old coalfields. Seismic.

Millions of new voters now have the blue taint.

It can be overcome!

I think.

Labour will never win (as in gain a majority) ever gain. This is much worse than what the tories faced in 1997.

Hubris. Then Nemesis.

I won't believe that Labour's been staked until its very last MP gets voted out - and somehow I don't see it losing the urban cores, the university towns and the seats with very high BAME votes no matter what happens.

FWIW, I expect Labour will be back in business before too many more years have passed. People will get sick of the Tories - though hopefully not until after Labour has purged its system properly of the Corbyn-Momentum Far Left - and there needs to be an Opposition.

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1207424699904462848

This. One thousand times.

Unless what comes afterwards is something with slightly less of an image problem but the same rotten interior.

Black_Rook said:

nunu2 said:

kle4 said:

RobD said:

Pulpstar said:

I think Labour's combined leadership and EU position has done something which has been a long running issue for the Tories.

It's (For electoral purposes) expunged the ghost of Thatcher in England's old coalfields. Seismic.

Millions of new voters now have the blue taint.

It can be overcome!

I think.

Labour will never win (as in gain a majority) ever gain. This is much worse than what the tories faced in 1997.

Hubris. Then Nemesis.

I won't believe that Labour's been staked until its very last MP gets voted out - and somehow I don't see it losing the urban cores, the university towns and the seats with very high BAME votes no matter what happens.

FWIW, I expect Labour will be back in business before too many more years have passed. People will get sick of the Tories - though hopefully not until after Labour has purged its system properly of the Corbyn-Momentum Far Left - and there needs to be an Opposition.

It's fine. Farage and the Reform Party have the Opposition thing covered. Politics will be much simpler once we have an actual fake right wing party performing that role, rather than the fake fake right wing version that Blair was so enamoured with.

TheGreenMachine said:

Off-Topic



Man City are very easy to lay at that price.

Given the draw Leicester are the clear value at those prices. They should be strong odds-on to beat Villa and odds-on to beat United if United beat City, or only just the underdogs against City.

Leicester should be about 5/2 max not 7/2

https://twitter.com/IanDunt/status/1207343404625125378

https://twitter.com/FrankLuntz/status/1207428344741953536

isam said:

Had £15 on McD at 1000 earlier. Another bad bet

When you are in the hole you need to stop digging.

Thornberry on Peston. Doubt she has a chance, but she has moments when she can explain things in a clear way that other pols can't do.

Alistair said:

Endillion said:

Loving the "we" in the header, in relation to the Conservatives.

I cannot understand why the only declared candidate (Thornberry) is still only a 3% chance. Surely she's a similar enough prospect to Starmer, only more left (tick), closer to Corbyn (big tick) and more personality (tick, sort of)?

Is suing Flinty really that harmful to one's prospects? If so then Nandy looks great value as the only moderately comparable candidate.

She's not closer to Corbyn. She's seen as the great betrayer.

She kept too close to him. She is odious imho. Another loser trying to hide her title and be ons of the bruvvers....

isam said:

Philip_Thompson said:

TheGreenMachine said:

Off-Topic



Man City are very easy to lay at that price.

Given the draw Leicester are the clear value at those prices. They should be strong odds-on to beat Villa and odds-on to beat United if United beat City, or only just the underdogs against City.

Leicester should be about 5/2 max not 7/2

Each way bet on Leicester is surely huuuuge value? 2.17 to beat Villa over two legs

Actually isn’t it worth backing Villa each way as well? Are they really offering 1/3 1-2?

We have a home draw in the FA Cup on Sat 4th of Jan against Wigan, and Southampton at home on the 11th, so I would expect to see the reserves in the FA cup and the first team in the Carabao that week. We should be good to beat the Villa, but we are lacking a bit of depth in the squad, particularly as Centrebacks and striker.

I wouldn't expect to see any first teamer to go in January (our owners have established that now after Mahrez and Maguire) and we may well make a couple of signings. We do have a very busy January though.

Foxy said:

isam said:

Philip_Thompson said:

TheGreenMachine said:

Off-Topic



Man City are very easy to lay at that price.

Given the draw Leicester are the clear value at those prices. They should be strong odds-on to beat Villa and odds-on to beat United if United beat City, or only just the underdogs against City.

Leicester should be about 5/2 max not 7/2

Each way bet on Leicester is surely huuuuge value? 2.17 to beat Villa over two legs

Actually isn’t it worth backing Villa each way as well? Are they really offering 1/3 1-2?

We have a home draw in the FA Cup on Sat 4th of Jan against Wigan, and Southampton at home on the 11th, so I would expect to see the reserves in the FA cup and the first team in the Carabao that week. We should be good to beat the Villa, but we are lacking a bit of depth in the squad, particularly as Centrebacks and striker.

I wouldn't expect to see any first teamer to go in January (our owners have established that now after Mahrez and Maguire) and we may well make a couple of signings. We do have a very busy January though.

My brain may be frazzled but isn’t the place part of that book wrong?

City 87% chance of making final
Utd 38%
Leicester 46%
Villa 20%

191%

Or am I going mad?

Alistair said:

Endillion said:

Loving the "we" in the header, in relation to the Conservatives.

I cannot understand why the only declared candidate (Thornberry) is still only a 3% chance. Surely she's a similar enough prospect to Starmer, only more left (tick), closer to Corbyn (big tick) and more personality (tick, sort of)?

Is suing Flinty really that harmful to one's prospects? If so then Nandy looks great value as the only moderately comparable candidate.

She's not closer to Corbyn. She's seen as the great betrayer.

Apparently; I just seem to have missed the bit where Starmer somehow got away with it, even though he was the one in charge of the policy.

Endillion said:

Alistair said:

Endillion said:

Loving the "we" in the header, in relation to the Conservatives.

I cannot understand why the only declared candidate (Thornberry) is still only a 3% chance. Surely she's a similar enough prospect to Starmer, only more left (tick), closer to Corbyn (big tick) and more personality (tick, sort of)?

Is suing Flinty really that harmful to one's prospects? If so then Nandy looks great value as the only moderately comparable candidate.

She's not closer to Corbyn. She's seen as the great betrayer.

Apparently; I just seem to have missed the bit where Starmer somehow got away with it, even though he was the one in charge of the policy.

Starmer was not in charge of policy. That’s the point.

If there’s anything anyone should learn in this political climate it’s not to say something will ‘never’ happen. I’ve certainly learned that lesson myself.

isam said:

Drutt said:

isam said:

Had £15 on McD at 1000 earlier. Another bad bet to go with the others...

isam that's savage. That's worse than the time in 2016 when I gave millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation in the expectation of some cushy contracts from Uncle Sam.

Alistair said:

isam said:

Had £15 on McD at 1000 earlier. Another bad bet

When you are in the hole you need to stop digging.

It’s getting better! Earlier it was -£303

I am only green on Rayner, Phillips, Benn, Lammy and Ashworth. Rayner may be a good bet if RLB drops out, and both Phillips and Lammy have the egos to run as reformist candidates. I wonder about Lucy Powell as a long shot candidate.

I cannot see value in the prices on RLB, Starmer and Nandy. They are too short and all are charisma vacuums.

NorthernPowerhouse said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/Rachael_Swindon/status/1207402621188935682

Yeh, these people need better, so learn why you lost. The victims of Jezza's vanity and left wing fantasy are the poorest and the most deserving.

WCAs were literally brought in by the last labour government !

Yes, but the last Labour government was actually a Tory government.

NorthernPowerhouse said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/Rachael_Swindon/status/1207402621188935682

Yeh, these people need better, so learn why you lost. The victims of Jezza's vanity and left wing fantasy are the poorest and the most deserving.

WCAs were literally brought in by the last labour government !

They are pretty callous. I am always getting involved with patients appeals. There are some stories that make you want to cry.

rcs1000 said:

NorthernPowerhouse said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/Rachael_Swindon/status/1207402621188935682

Yeh, these people need better, so learn why you lost. The victims of Jezza's vanity and left wing fantasy are the poorest and the most deserving.

WCAs were literally brought in by the last labour government !

Yes, but the last Labour government was actually a Tory government.

It's posts like this that give me hope that the Tories might just remain in power for 100 years!

rottenborough said:

Thornberry on Peston. Doubt she has a chance, but she has moments when she can explain things in a clear way that other pols can't do.

Her odds at 34 look value to me - I've had a £2 nibble on Betfair. Less unlikely than Yvette Cooper at 21 or Jess Phillips at 16. The profile of the winner is going to be someone who rejects a radical shift back to Blairism, avoids a lot of Corbyn-bashing but looks more reasonable and competent and preferably energetic too (which is where I think Nandy and Starmer need to up their game).

@isam Have gone 35 each way on Leicester and 12.50 we on Villa. Think that's +EV ?

NickPalmer said:

rottenborough said:

Thornberry on Peston. Doubt she has a chance, but she has moments when she can explain things in a clear way that other pols can't do.

Her odds at 34 look value to me - I've had a £2 nibble on Betfair. Less unlikely than Yvette Cooper at 21 or Jess Phillips at 16. The profile of the winner is going to be someone who rejects a radical shift back to Blairism, avoids a lot of Corbyn-bashing but looks more reasonable and competent and preferably energetic too (which is where I think Nandy and Starmer need to up their game).

I agree her odds look value. Just taken a nibble.

NorthernPowerhouse said:

Foxy said:

NorthernPowerhouse said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/Rachael_Swindon/status/1207402621188935682

Yeh, these people need better, so learn why you lost. The victims of Jezza's vanity and left wing fantasy are the poorest and the most deserving.

WCAs were literally brought in by the last labour government !

They are pretty callous. I am always getting involved with patients appeals. There are some stories that make you want to cry.

I can imagine. You need some kind of assessment system though, and there’s always going to be terrible cases. I wonder what drives some of the more unjust decisions.

So far as I can make out, the private companies doing the assessments use non-medical assessors incentivised to deny people benefits.

Like much of the welfare state, the vulnerable get screwed and the chancers get away with it. Basically because the vulnerable chronic sick are not very good at working the system.

JBriskinindyref2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

JBriskinindyref2 said:

Is it still the case that the members count as one third of the “selectorate’.
??

No.

Okay is it 50pc or 100pc ??

100%

Foxy said:

isam said:

Drutt said:

isam said:

Had £15 on McD at 1000 earlier. Another bad bet to go with the others...

isam that's savage. That's worse than the time in 2016 when I gave millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation in the expectation of some cushy contracts from Uncle Sam.

Alistair said:

isam said:

Had £15 on McD at 1000 earlier. Another bad bet

When you are in the hole you need to stop digging.

It’s getting better! Earlier it was -£303

I am only green on Rayner, Phillips, Benn, Lammy and Ashworth. Rayner may be a good bet if RLB drops out, and both Phillips and Lammy have the egos to run as reformist candidates. I wonder about Lucy Powell as a long shot candidate.

I cannot see value in the prices on RLB, Starmer and Nandy. They are too short and all are charisma vacuums.

I thought keeping Thornberry and Rayner onside was good as they are Keir and RLB replacements. I wouldn’t vote for her, but Phillips would be best I think. Lefties would lap up her ‘gritty take it to the man’ approach I reckon, contrived as I think it is

Philip_Thompson said:

Endillion said:

JBriskinindyref2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

JBriskinindyref2 said:

Is it still the case that the members count as one third of the “selectorate’.
??

No.

Okay is it 50pc or 100pc ??

100%

Not really. Members used to be a third so a members vote measured more than an affiliated supporters vote.

Now its one-supporter-one-vote and it doesn't matter if that supporter is a member or not. The supporters make up 100% through all sorts of means . . . members don't.

Oh alright then. They no.longer have the three thirds system of members/MPs/trade unionists. Everyone's vote counts equally. Of the options he gave, it's 100% rather than 50%.

I'm still a little unclear how the registered supporter system works - AIUI, last time they changed the rules mid-contest to make them pay more than just the initial £3 to get voting rights. I believe the final rules for this contest are still TBD.

isam said:

Foxy said:

isam said:

Drutt said:

isam said:

Had £15 on McD at 1000 earlier. Another bad bet to go with the others...

isam that's savage. That's worse than the time in 2016 when I gave millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation in the expectation of some cushy contracts from Uncle Sam.

Alistair said:

isam said:

Had £15 on McD at 1000 earlier. Another bad bet

When you are in the hole you need to stop digging.

It’s getting better! Earlier it was -£303

I am only green on Rayner, Phillips, Benn, Lammy and Ashworth. Rayner may be a good bet if RLB drops out, and both Phillips and Lammy have the egos to run as reformist candidates. I wonder about Lucy Powell as a long shot candidate.

I cannot see value in the prices on RLB, Starmer and Nandy. They are too short and all are charisma vacuums.

I thought keeping Thornberry and Rayner onside was good as they are Keir and RLB replacements. I wouldn’t vote for her, but Phillips would be best I think. Lefties would lap up her ‘gritty take it to the man’ approach I reckon, contrived as I think it is

What is lacking from any of the candidates is a clear direction on the issues of the day, rather than appealing as a Woman/Northerner/Corbynite loyalist/Corbynite opponent. The candidates need to come forth with a coherent idea of what the party is for, not just what it is against. Until that process starts there is no prospect of winning.

https://twitter.com/johnmcdonnellMP/status/1207374790425817088?s=20

https://twitter.com/IainDale/status/1207303448607236096?s=20

https://twitter.com/KTHopkins/status/1207428571947503616?s=20

Marcus01 said:

rcs1000 said:

NorthernPowerhouse said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/Rachael_Swindon/status/1207402621188935682

Yeh, these people need better, so learn why you lost. The victims of Jezza's vanity and left wing fantasy are the poorest and the most deserving.

WCAs were literally brought in by the last labour government !

Yes, but the last Labour government was actually a Tory government.

It's posts like this that give me hope that the Tories might just remain in power for 100 years!

I was joking...

Pulpstar said:

Having done the maths, both Leicester and Villa good value lol.

Better value than SF taking their Westminster seats, lol.

The_Apocalypse said:

@HYUFD you a fan of Katie Hopkins now?

She is punchy whether you like her or not, I know President Trump is a fan of hers

Lol..

https://twitter.com/GarethDennis/status/1207367037590364160?s=20
https://twitter.com/GarethDennis/status/1207381347741904896?s=20

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/KTHopkins/status/1207428571947503616?s=20

The question I have is, is there anything Trump could do that is impeachable? Or is the concept of impeachment simply outmoded, and the President of the day should have unfettered power.

The defence I see as plausible is that impeachment is supposed to be for Treason and for High Crimes and Misdemeanours. And whatever you might think of the Ukraine call, it does not reach that bar.

How is that plausible? A "misdemeanor" doesn't seem like a very high bar at all. It is literally a minor wrongdoing. And blackmailing an American ally with blocking critical military aid, in order for them to manufacture dirt on your campaign opponent, seems to qualify for minor wrongdoing.

CarlottaVance said:

Lol..

https://twitter.com/GarethDennis/status/1207367037590364160?s=20
https://twitter.com/GarethDennis/status/1207381347741904896?s=20

This is what Northern Ireland needs desperately.

A very young Keir Starmer;

https://twitter.com/JRogan3000/status/1207396361827733506?s=20

Of course he's done a lot of other stuff since, some of it at the DPP not quite so glorious...

JBriskinindyref2 said:

Gabs3 said:

Jonathan said:

Endillion said:

Alistair said:

Endillion said:

Loving the "we" in the header, in relation to the Conservatives.

I cannot understand why the only declared candidate (Thornberry) is still only a 3% chance. Surely she's a similar enough prospect to Starmer, only more left (tick), closer to Corbyn (big tick) and more personality (tick, sort of)?

Is suing Flinty really that harmful to one's prospects? If so then Nandy looks great value as the only moderately comparable candidate.

She's not closer to Corbyn. She's seen as the great betrayer.

Apparently; I just seem to have missed the bit where Starmer somehow got away with it, even though he was the one in charge of the policy.

Starmer was not in charge of policy. That’s the point.

Starmer just did this:

But Starmer, who led Labour’s side of those talks, was determined to get a commitment to a second referendum into the final package. And his lack of good faith in negotiating any sort of “compromise” Brexit deal was revealed by May’s former press chief Robbie Gibb, who wrote after May’s fall how Labour’s desire to “thwart attempts to reach common ground . . . reached an almost farcical level one April afternoon when Starmer opened his remarks by dismissing proposals, outlined in a discussion document, as ‘totally inadequate’. Gavin Barwell, then the PM’s chief of staff, sighed. ‘These are Labour’s own proposals,’ he said. ‘They have been literally cut and pasted from a document you submitted to us.’ There was a knowing and embarrassed laugh from the Labour side.”

That s ace goss - what was the source?

It was in the Times.

JBriskinindyref2 said:

Gabs3 said:

Jonathan said:

Endillion said:

Alistair said:

Endillion said:

Loving the "we" in the header, in relation to the Conservatives.

I cannot understand why the only declared candidate (Thornberry) is still only a 3% chance. Surely she's a similar enough prospect to Starmer, only more left (tick), closer to Corbyn (big tick) and more personality (tick, sort of)?

Is suing Flinty really that harmful to one's prospects? If so then Nandy looks great value as the only moderately comparable candidate.

She's not closer to Corbyn. She's seen as the great betrayer.

Apparently; I just seem to have missed the bit where Starmer somehow got away with it, even though he was the one in charge of the policy.

Starmer was not in charge of policy. That’s the point.

Starmer just did this:

But Starmer, who led Labour’s side of those talks, was determined to get a commitment to a second referendum into the final package. And his lack of good faith in negotiating any sort of “compromise” Brexit deal was revealed by May’s former press chief Robbie Gibb, who wrote after May’s fall how Labour’s desire to “thwart attempts to reach common ground . . . reached an almost farcical level one April afternoon when Starmer opened his remarks by dismissing proposals, outlined in a discussion document, as ‘totally inadequate’. Gavin Barwell, then the PM’s chief of staff, sighed. ‘These are Labour’s own proposals,’ he said. ‘They have been literally cut and pasted from a document you submitted to us.’ There was a knowing and embarrassed laugh from the Labour side.”

That s ace goss - what was the source?

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/dominic-lawson-labour-centrists-blew-this-not-corbyn-lrg82npgk

https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1207443147908890625?s=20

Interesting comparisons, maybe a little far out but it tickled the current parallels between the Johnson campaign and previous populist wins in Europe.

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2019/12/central-europe-s-authoritarians-show-where-unleashed-boris-johnson-could-lead