Categories
Options
Defection watch – politicalbetting.com
Defection watch – politicalbetting.com
This betting opportunity from Smarkets is worth looking at, the market is about a Tory MP defecting to Labour by the end of the year, my hunch is plenty of you will fancy a seven per cent return in just over two months.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Regulate that shit.
F1: Bottas at 3.5 to be winner without the big 6 looks good. Ladbrokes.
Has QAnon become the modern day equivalent of 30s Nazi theology? There are a lot of overlaps - the OG Nazis were very into the occult IIRC.
https://twitter.com/sundaytimessco/status/1586662647956705282?s=46&t=cRTge5ZqVPsxaWgzKvYw2w
He and his wife (lib dem cllr) stood in East Dunbartonshire but don't live in the council area, used false addresses on their papers, and both have been arrested
This is where it’s different to changing PMs, although many would claim they are voting for a PM.
We should be encouraging more individuality in parliament, not less.
The Opinium pollster has been allowing for 'swingback' since changing its methodology last February. Had it not done so , the Labour lead of 16% would be likely to be above 20%.
That’s a grave place to be
Texas party switcher Phil Gramm would agree with you: "Gramm's voting record was very conservative, even by Texas Democratic standards of the time. During his first four terms, he tallied an average rating of 89 from the American Conservative Union, and from 1980 to 1982 he garnered the highest rating from that body of any Democrat in the Texas delegation.[5][6][7][8] In 1981, he co-sponsored the Gramm-Latta Budget which implemented President Ronald Reagan's economic program, increased military spending, cut other spending, and mandated the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 (the Kemp-Roth Tax Cut).[citation needed]
Just days after being reelected in 1982, Gramm was thrown off the House Budget Committee. In response, Gramm resigned his House seat on January 5, 1983. He then ran as a Republican for his own vacancy in a February 12, 1983 special election, and won easily. "
source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Gramm
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jussie_Smollett_hate_crime_hoax
So while my initial assumption is that what appears to be the case is indeed the case, the rumours that this is staged are not beyond the bounds of credibility.
But I’d also note that Musk is re-tweeting stories from a conspiracy publication (who previously, for example, reported that Clinton had died in 2016 and was replaced by a stand-in for the debates with Trump).
Given that Musk is now CEO and owner (along with the Saudis) of Twitter, that has global import.
- it was a passenger plane shot down by Ukrainians
- it was a NATO plane full of already dead bodies shot down by a fighter plane
- it was the Ukraine airforce trying to assassinate Putin
and so on.
(SPOILER: it was shot down by Russia)
The aim is not to come up with credible alternatives to hide the truth, but to make any reportage on the event confusing to the public and damage trust in parties and institutions.
What doesn't help is credulous people wanting juicy stories straight away. They're the useful idiots here. Fast is more important than true for those people, because they are only looking to be entertained.
Certainly by the end of November a lot more candidates will have been decided.
Same would apply to a Labour candidate defecting to the Conservatives
Are you going to answer my question asked on the previous couple of threads re the economics of travel journalism? Would be grateful for the feedback. I used the @Leon reference so you should find it easily.
And to anyone else can you give advice please: I have some medlars which have bletted and I have removed the flesh. I don't want to make jam. Any suggestions as to what to do with it?
The scope for spoonerisms is huge here.
It is often the case though yes that those who do go all the way feel they need to show true conversion to the cause, not least to ensure they preserve their career having made the switch
This despite now-accepted stories like this:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-62688532
The more sophisticated analysis is that truth in American politics is increasingly hard to secure on all sides. And you can accept this even as you acknowledge that Trump really is a madman, january 6 really was an attempted coup, etc
Let's talk about Lee Anderson. A lifelong Labour activist supporting Gloria Del Piero until his defection to the Tories in 2018 and victory in 2019, and now one of Boris Johnson's most loyal lapdogs (yourself not withstanding).
Lula and the Workers' Party's number is 13, Bolsonaro and the Liberal Party's is 22. Numbers are big in Brazilian politics.
Bolsonaro is telling evangelical Christians that Lula plans to close churches because he's on the side of evil. Evangelical Christians are ~30% of the population and span many classes. Even some gang organisations are evangelical. (But I doubt they try to talk to you about Jesus after they rob you.) I'm told the Bolsonaro campaign has been using the "Vote for me against the Satanic church-closer" line a lot on "social" media in the past week, pitched mostly at the less well educated and poorer among the ECs, possibly mainly those in the favelas. The favelas are mostly pro-Lula for obvious reasons, but they aren't wholly so, and this is a direct election so every vote counts equally. Lula would have been better off with number 12 or 14. He will take by far the largest portion of the voteshare from the candidates who finished 3rd and 4th in the first round. If that's correct then Bolsonaro needs to win votes among those who voted Lula earlier this month, which is a tall order, but if he has kept banging away with a Satan-hates-churches-13-13-13-evil message then he may have bagged a few. If all that happens is the 3rd and 4th shares go to Lula then Lula will score 55.6%, which is higher than he's been polling. My analysis says the result will be a Lula win at around 53-47 and I've increased my stake on Lula.
They’ve probably made a calculation that she is going to blow up and that’s fine by them because she’s no fan of them and they’re no fan of hers’
@George_Osborne gives his verdict on the controversial reappointment of Suella Braverman
#AndrewNeilShow 6.15pm
@AFNeil
https://twitter.com/Channel4/status/1586706762182561792
I suspect she’s got “security breach on a hair trigger” warning and the first slip and she’s sacked before she can resign.
Have PM’d you
Lee Anderson was always ideologically a Conservative, he joined Labour because it was the best way to get ahead in Ashfield. Once the Tories looked like they could win it under Boris he swiftly defected
https://cruxnow.com/church-in-the-americas/2022/10/religion-plays-central-role-in-brazilian-presidential-runoff
https://twitter.com/Falcon_Malteser/status/1586455828898500613
If the Conservatives have given up on that, there's only one place for the rejected to go, and it isn't the Lib Dems.
Fantastic piece. You don’t know what people think, and you shouldn’t say what they ought to think, based on their ancestry. (Or sexuality, I might add - the narrative of treachery directed at gay/lesbian people with non-approved opinions is much the same.)
https://twitter.com/PhilipHensher/status/1586660122000072706
https://www.buildthebottle.com/2019/08/23/medlar-gin-liqueur-recipe/
As a floating voter, I vote for whoever seems best (at a tactical voting level). Quite obviously that's not the Tories now. It's a government, not a football team.
Don't really know what I'm doing - so i'm also prepared to lose it - but it adds a bit of spice to the weekend.
It only goes to show - no matter how bad you think things are, they could always be worse.
A man who tried to row back from being caught with Nazi memorabilia on his laptop by alleging it was a "wind up" (sure, we believe you, thousands wouldn't) are somehow the sensible middle ground arbiter in all of this?
@tom_watson, having abused Parliamentary privilege to smear many innocent public servants as paedophiles, should be made a Lord of the Realm.
https://twitter.com/JamesHeartfield/status/1586620938367471618
This set-custard medlar tart looks good. https://www.dovesfarm.co.uk/recipes/medlar-tart
Will he repel more users than he attracts? We shall see
Just read his wiki.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-63446683
Although you personally have a definition of "Conservative values" (and I respect that that deeply underpins and informs your views), I think that a range of other views have been supported "inside the Tory tent" at different times in the past.
It is quite possible to have a personally consistent world view and for that to pass into the orbit of multiple parties over time, without being a careerist.
By the way he was a thoroughly decent man in every way. My late father knew him quite well.
It's funnier at local level, as a few people switch about a lot, far more dramatically than with MPs, and go back and forth.
One is the Hunter Biden story.
Two is (to a lesser extent) the lab leak theory.
But I'm struggling with any others.
And in the former case, it was a case of junkie doing stupid thing. In the latter case, the 'conspiracy' consisted of people being sceptical of something.
It's rather a leap from that to the Pelosis hiring an actor to pretend for months to be MAGA supporting, QAnon believer, and then for him to break into the Pelosi household and attack Mr Pelosi with a hammer.
Said actor then being willing to go to jail for a couple of years is also pretty impressive.
“I also think that your travel photos are taken of other people's IG accounts”.
Let us say had Corbyn been leader 20 years earlier not Blair he would almost certainly not have defected
Oh the humanity.
For one, even if she is going to blow up sooner or later she might do much damage to the public and the government whilst she is in post. There's also a chance, low though it might seem, that she doesn't blow up, and then they are stuck with her.
For two, there was a very quick fix which would have avoided the current mess to some degree, in that she could have been given another ministry, but not the Home Office, thus rewarding her political support but maintaining at least some line that you simply cannot be reappointed to the same position you literally just resigned from.
For three, giving her a 'second chance' when she's not even had time to enter the political doghouse means if she does blow up again the government would share in the criticism even more than usual, since they declared by their actions that she need not show any responsibility or contrition for her actions. At least if there was a delay to reappointing her they could potentially credibly argue that she had learned a lesson, and thus if she caused an issue again it would be more understandable that they thought she was deserving.
No, the simplest explanation to me would be that they agree with her positions and want her to succeed, and genuinely believed, for some reason, they could not advance those policies as well without her.
The issue is the sides do not appear anywhere equal in the loathsome stakes, as it applies to fundamental issues of adherence to democratic norms for example.
I suspect you are right about Corbyn as leader, although he had a stronger constitution than me and stayed whereas I left on the advent of Magic Grandpa.
Temple-Morris also sounded superb. Like Patrick McNee (John Steed of the Avengers).
Medlars are fantastic ornamentals for blossom fruit and autumn colour, as a food: if you play your cards *exactly* right you end up with something like a rotten pear, but not so nice. Discard.
Much too much sugar in that recipe by the look of it, this is how people spoil sloe gin. And sloes are tart.
https://twitter.com/thomasknox