politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » David Cameron’s popularity – the reason why we are having a

Loyalty is the Tory party's secret weapon

TheScreamingEagles said:

Loyalty is the Tory party's secret weapon

When it comes to Europe, loyalty goes out of the window.

FPT:

tlg86 said:

TudorRose said:

RobD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

antifrank said:

I suspect in six months' time we'll all be looking back fondly to the constructive threads we used to have during the AV referendum about what constitutes a majority.

Do you want me to do regular threads on AV/electoral reform ?

Is that what you're saying ?

Edit: Also remember the Scottish independence angle to this referendum

The Scottish Indy ref angle being that the next one will be held under AV, with everyone having two votes?

I always thought the Indy referendum should have had two electoral colleges, one representing Scotland and the other representing rUK. Independence would be granted if 'Yes' won both colleges.

On a similar theme I have a German colleague who is genuinely confused why we will have a FPTP system in the EU referendum. He believes that a 70% mandate should be required for such an 'important' decision.

On the first paragraph the reason that wasn't done is the potential embarrassment of Scotland voting to stay and everyone else voting for them to leave.

On the second - do you mean if Remain was not get 70% of the vote we'd be out? I'd be happy with that...

FWIW BBC news EU comments are heavily in favour of "out".

Stuart Rose's arguments for staying in are pretty lame. The key determining factor is surely going to be whether enough people who are inclined against the EU project decide that it is nevertheless too risky to leave and the status quo prevails.

If however the "out" side can persuade people that leaving is not a scary option, out could still win.

FWIW (again) I am one of those...and currently leaning to "out".

JonCisBack said:

FWIW BBC news EU comments are heavily in favour of "out".

Comments on the internet are about as representative as Twitter.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Dave's a winner too, he's never lost a general election or referendum.

He's very good at politics isn't he?

Didn't he lose all of the referendums to have elected mayors, apart from Bristol?

This could be weakened if the referendum isn't held til 2017, though, when mid-term blues will have inevitably set in (just like in the last parliament).

SandyRentool said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Dave's a winner too, he's never lost a general election or referendum.

He's very good at politics isn't he?

Didn't he lose all of the referendums to have elected mayors, apart from Bristol?

I meant proper referendums like AV and Scottish independence.

Casino_Royale said:

I will be voting Leave and strongly believe it is in our best interests to do so.

However, from a betting perspective, I agree with this: Cameron will almost certainly recommend Remain and, unless there's a huge event that gets in the way, Remain will therefore win.

And I think that will be a disaster for the UK.

You're being far too pessimistic.

Well this is why I didn't want cameron to get a majority... I agree that he will have a massive influence on the result and that there is virtually no chance of him campaigning to leave. The gravitas that comes with being PM w a majority will allow all manner of half truths and weasel words to be presented as fact and his loyalists will gobble it up ( £1.7bn Bill payment for instance)

TheScreamingEagles said:

Far too pessimistic on Leave winning that is

Thanks TSE. Sadly, it's what I think. It's a good job I'm not leading Leave for that reason!

My mood swings would be colossal.

Richard_Nabavi said:

If Mike is right, then the Leave campaign need to be very careful how they handle the renegotiation question. If they go with a 'Cameron is a lying toad and the renegotiation was a sham' message, they'll just put floaters off. They would be much better advised to say 'The PM has done as good a job as anyone could to get reforms, but the EU is set on its course to ever-closer union and we'd still be better off out'.

I expect that they'll go for the former approach.

They might do both - Cameron has achieved piddlesticks but although we think his renegotiation strategy was flawed, the EU clearly never wanted to play ball and put him in a difficult position. They knew he favoured the EU anyway and called his bluff as he clearly always believed it's in our best interests to stay. Better off out.

I'm not one to bleat about females in any job - this was rather startling however *What it looks like when men are photoshopped out of politics*

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-politics/11926344/more-women-elle-feminism-politics.html

An addendum to add: going for EFTA/EEA also allows us to create a genuine core of non-Eurozone countries that want to be helpful to Europe and the Eurozone without being bound by it.

I think we could blaze a path that could be followed by Sweden, and by various Eastern European countries who want to be part of Europe, but not a part of a European Superstate.

RobD said:

isam said:

Well this is why I didn't want cameron to get a majority... I agree that he will have a massive influence on the result and that there is virtually no chance of him campaigning to leave. The gravitas that comes with being PM w a majority will allow all manner of half truths and weasel words to be presented as fact and his loyalists will gobble it up ( £1.7bn Bill payment for instance)

If Cam didn't have a majority there would be no referendum. Bit of a double edged sword.

Yes it is, although he said he would have a referendum as long as he was PM... Which didn't mean a majority.

rcs1000 said:

Casino_Royale said:

I will be voting Leave and strongly believe it is in our best interests to do so.

However, from a betting perspective, I agree with this: Cameron will almost certainly recommend Remain and, unless there's a huge event that gets in the way, Remain will therefore win.

And I think that will be a disaster for the UK.

Actually, a small "In" vote will not be a disaster for the UK. Because in every negotiation between now and Armageddon, the British government (assuming it is looking after the interests of the British people), will be able to say "hmmmm... tricky... we only just won the referendum last time... and there's no way we can back this and hope to remain in power, or win the shall we stay in the EU referendum again..."

A big "In" vote, on the other hand, would be a disaster.

I firmly believe that the bulk of people in the UK would be happy with a Swiss or Norwegian deal. British interests would be served, immigration would be dramatically reduced, while retaining much freedom of movement. We would actually have more say over EU legislation. And we'd be able to sign a meaningless "Free Trade" agreement with the Chinese.

However, I don't believe the referendum will be about EFTA/EEA. Instead Farage will promise no diminution of sovereignty (without realising that all trade deals involve at least some diminution), and he'll fight with other people about what "Out" means. Some will talk of closing the borders. And a lot of businesses who would prefer EFTA/EEA will come down on the side of "In", because it is less risky than "Out", if "Out" means genuinely out in the cold.

He was on the Sunday politics yesterday talking about what out would mean and was nothing like the caricature people on here are desperate for him to be

RobD said:

isam said:

RobD said:

isam said:

Well this is why I didn't want cameron to get a majority... I agree that he will have a massive influence on the result and that there is virtually no chance of him campaigning to leave. The gravitas that comes with being PM w a majority will allow all manner of half truths and weasel words to be presented as fact and his loyalists will gobble it up ( £1.7bn Bill payment for instance)

If Cam didn't have a majority there would be no referendum. Bit of a double edged sword.

Yes it is, although he said he would have a referendum as long as he was PM... Which didn't mean a majority.

Yeah, but can you imagine a vote getting throug Parliament without a Tory majority?

I was hoping for half a dozen kippers to be there holding them to ransom!

I think the ideal result for ukip was a weak miliband led coalition that fell early, replaced by a Eurosceptic tory... Oh well, it is what it is ( or S.O.C.K.S as the Spanish say)

isam said:

Well this is why I didn't want cameron to get a majority... I agree that he will have a massive influence on the result and that there is virtually no chance of him campaigning to leave. The gravitas that comes with being PM w a majority will allow all manner of half truths and weasel words to be presented as fact and his loyalists will gobble it up ( £1.7bn Bill payment for instance)

You keep finding new ways to spout rubbish.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Jonathan said:

Technical point.

Just because someone is preferred to Ed Miliband or the Tory party is not quite enough to say that they are popular or liked.

Tories like him. That might be enough.

Lib Dems like him too. The Scots love him too. That's why they voted last year to be ruled by Dave

That was the way they voted this year as well.

isam said:

Well this is why I didn't want cameron to get a majority... I agree that he will have a massive influence on the result and that there is virtually no chance of him campaigning to leave. The gravitas that comes with being PM w a majority will allow all manner of half truths and weasel words to be presented as fact and his loyalists will gobble it up ( £1.7bn Bill payment for instance)

Mr. Sam, I have long thought that Cameron would try and replicate the Wilson strategy for he 1975 referendum, which is what you seem to be suggesting. However, I am not so sure that it will work as well in the modern age. People are less respectful of authority now and far less trusting of politicians in general. Whilst some Conservative Party loyalists will believe any old crap that Cameron comes out with they will be a small minority of the electorate as a whole.

Furthermore, whilst Cameron has been careful not to tell anyone the detail of what he wants from these negotiations (including, if the press can be believed, the people he is negotiating with) I seem to recall he has made some public statements about the aim. Something about a fundamental change in our relationship was it not? Again, if the press can be believed, the ragbag of non-legally binding measures reported in the Telegraph barely amount to a minor change. Could Cameron sell that as good enough? I am not so sure that even the most accomplished snake-oil salesman could.

HurstLlama said:

isam said:

Well this is why I didn't want cameron to get a majority... I agree that he will have a massive influence on the result and that there is virtually no chance of him campaigning to leave. The gravitas that comes with being PM w a majority will allow all manner of half truths and weasel words to be presented as fact and his loyalists will gobble it up ( £1.7bn Bill payment for instance)

Mr. Sam, I have long thought that Cameron would try and replicate the Wilson strategy for he 1975 referendum, which is what you seem to be suggesting. However, I am not so sure that it will work as well in the modern age. People are less respectful of authority now and far less trusting of politicians in general. Whilst some Conservative Party loyalists will believe any old crap that Cameron comes out with they will be a small minority of the electorate as a whole.

Furthermore, whilst Cameron has been careful not to tell anyone the detail of what he wants from these negotiations (including, if the press can be believed, the people he is negotiating with) I seem to recall he has made some public statements about the aim. Something about a fundamental change in our relationship was it not? Again, if the press can be believed, the ragbag of non-legally binding measures reported in the Telegraph barely amount to a minor change. Could Cameron sell that as good enough? I am not so sure that even the most accomplished snake-oil salesman could.

It's certainly true that many Cameroon's mistake fear of miliband and the SNP as love for Dave... Here's to their complacency!

Philip_Thompson said:

isam said:

RobD said:

isam said:

Well this is why I didn't want cameron to get a majority... I agree that he will have a massive influence on the result and that there is virtually no chance of him campaigning to leave. The gravitas that comes with being PM w a majority will allow all manner of half truths and weasel words to be presented as fact and his loyalists will gobble it up ( £1.7bn Bill payment for instance)

If Cam didn't have a majority there would be no referendum. Bit of a double edged sword.

Yes it is, although he said he would have a referendum as long as he was PM... Which didn't mean a majority.

Though what alternative would be realistic? The only realistic alternative to a Tory Majority was a Coalition 2.0 - with the expect 30 LDs propping up say 300 Tories, in which case do you think the government would have been any better for your cause?

EDIT: At least with a Tory Majority it requires keeping the whole Tory Party on board (which meant retreating on purdah) for it to work. Had Cameron been propped up by the Lib Dems it would have gone in the other direction.

That's true, this con maj is probably better than the con LD coalition for us

isam said:

flightpath01 said:

isam said:

Well this is why I didn't want cameron to get a majority... I agree that he will have a massive influence on the result and that there is virtually no chance of him campaigning to leave. The gravitas that comes with being PM w a majority will allow all manner of half truths and weasel words to be presented as fact and his loyalists will gobble it up ( £1.7bn Bill payment for instance)

You keep finding new ways to spout rubbish.

I had breakfast at 930... Am I posh or lower middle class... Or neither??! Prey tell cc

Were you wearing a dressing gown, and was a Butler present?

If it was a kimono and somebody else's wife, then you are most definitely posh. or related to the Speaker.

if you received the consideration then you are aristocracy.

MattW said:

isam said:

flightpath01 said:

isam said:

Well this is why I didn't want cameron to get a majority... I agree that he will have a massive influence on the result and that there is virtually no chance of him campaigning to leave. The gravitas that comes with being PM w a majority will allow all manner of half truths and weasel words to be presented as fact and his loyalists will gobble it up ( £1.7bn Bill payment for instance)

You keep finding new ways to spout rubbish.

I had breakfast at 930... Am I posh or lower middle class... Or neither??! Prey tell cc

Were you wearing a dressing gown, and was a Butler present?

No to both, although as it was Waitrose muesli it probably makes me a LibDem

HurstLlama said:

flightpath01 said:

rcs1000 said:

An addendum to add: going for EFTA/EEA also allows us to create a genuine core of non-Eurozone countries that want to be helpful to Europe and the Eurozone without being bound by it.

I think we could blaze a path that could be followed by Sweden, and by various Eastern European countries who want to be part of Europe, but not a part of a European Superstate.

But the leavers are split. They will not run with the EFTA/EEA route. Too many outers are in it for the ego trip and to massage their bigotry

And you have the cheek to accuse others of spouting rubbish!

Come off it.
Why won't outers come out with an opinion on the EEA? Just where is there a single serious figure willing to say ' leave the EU and join the EEA'?
Just where is there anyone willing to say we can leave the EU, join the EEA but still be risk free from joining Schengen?
Outers do not live in the real world. The dynamic to leaving the EU is be able to transfer to the EEA and still stay out of Schengen.
No Outers are willing to even broach the subject.

isam said:

MattW said:

isam said:

flightpath01 said:

isam said:

Well this is why I didn't want cameron to get a majority... I agree that he will have a massive influence on the result and that there is virtually no chance of him campaigning to leave. The gravitas that comes with being PM w a majority will allow all manner of half truths and weasel words to be presented as fact and his loyalists will gobble it up ( £1.7bn Bill payment for instance)

You keep finding new ways to spout rubbish.

I had breakfast at 930... Am I posh or lower middle class... Or neither??! Prey tell cc

Were you wearing a dressing gown, and was a Butler present?

No to both, although as it was Waitrose muesli it probably makes me a LibDem

Was it accompanied by a Fairtrade skinny latte?

"Mr. kle4, aye, you wouldn't want to be the chap that cocked up and accidentally blinded everyone. One would guess the military discipline of Basil II's army was pretty strict."

chuckle.

No, you would not.

flightpath01 said:

HurstLlama said:

flightpath01 said:

rcs1000 said:

An addendum to add: going for EFTA/EEA also allows us to create a genuine core of non-Eurozone countries that want to be helpful to Europe and the Eurozone without being bound by it.

I think we could blaze a path that could be followed by Sweden, and by various Eastern European countries who want to be part of Europe, but not a part of a European Superstate.

But the leavers are split. They will not run with the EFTA/EEA route. Too many outers are in it for the ego trip and to massage their bigotry

And you have the cheek to accuse others of spouting rubbish!

Come off it.
Why won't outers come out with an opinion on the EEA? Just where is there a single serious figure willing to say ' leave the EU and join the EEA'?
Just where is there anyone willing to say we can leave the EU, join the EEA but still be risk free from joining Schengen?
Outers do not live in the real world. The dynamic to leaving the EU is be able to transfer to the EEA and still stay out of Schengen.
No Outers are willing to even broach the subject.

Farage said on Sunday politics if we leave we will still be in the EEA

stodge said:

Sean_F said:

It's not David Cameron's popularity now that matters. It's his popularity at the time of the Referendum.

At the moment, I would make Remain slight favourites (say 3/2) but no more than that.

Sean, you are an intelligent and deeply thoughtful fellow but you'll never make a bookie !! Making the favourite in a two-horse race 6/4 is a one way ticket to the poorhouse.

If I were pricing this now, I'd be 4/9 REMAIN and 5/4 LEAVE.

He's saying 60/40 REMAIN/LEAVE in terms of votes isn't he?

IN TWO PARTS (because of size constraints):-

PART ONE

The difficulty I have with this issue is that the status quo is not an option. I could live with the EU as is. There are plenty of things that it can do and co-operation across boundaries can be a worthwhile exercise.

But what worries me most about the EU are three things:-

1. The direction of travel - to an effective political union - a single state in all but name. I don't want that and think it untenable in an area the size of the EU with such varied legal, historical and political cultures. A vote for Remain will be taken as a vote for ever closer union with all that that implies.

For instance, what would a single criminal justice system be like? Would we lose the right to trial by jury or, even, the presumption of innocence or the burden of proof? These are English concepts, rooted in our history and culture and not shared to anything like the same extent - if at all - by the majority of our European neighbours. I pick this as one example. There are others.

2. The UK being harmed by the decisions of the eurozone with no effective say in them or to prevent them harming our interests. If that happens we may as well be Out and get such benefits from that as well as the undoubted downsides.

The Germans make a mistake when they think the Outers are harking back to the Empire. Some may. But many feel that the EU itself is far too inward looking and far too cumbersome and far too prone to think that a 1950's model is the way to approach the world in 2020 and beyond. A big bloated quasi-state/federation may not have the nimbleness and agility needed to survive in the world to come. What can seem like a source of strength ("We're big. We can negotiate with China.") can also feel like a straightjacket.

flightpath01 said:

HurstLlama said:

flightpath01 said:

rcs1000 said:

An addendum to add: going for EFTA/EEA also allows us to create a genuine core of non-Eurozone countries that want to be helpful to Europe and the Eurozone without being bound by it.

I think we could blaze a path that could be followed by Sweden, and by various Eastern European countries who want to be part of Europe, but not a part of a European Superstate.

But the leavers are split. They will not run with the EFTA/EEA route. Too many outers are in it for the ego trip and to massage their bigotry

And you have the cheek to accuse others of spouting rubbish!

Come off it.
Why won't outers come out with an opinion on the EEA? Just where is there a single serious figure willing to say ' leave the EU and join the EEA'?
Just where is there anyone willing to say we can leave the EU, join the EEA but still be risk free from joining Schengen?
Outers do not live in the real world. The dynamic to leaving the EU is be able to transfer to the EEA and still stay out of Schengen.
No Outers are willing to even broach the subject.

Sorry, I am an outer, in that I strongly believe that the UK would be better off outside the EU. I am not on an ego trip or looking to massage my own bigotry. Oh, yes, I do live in the real world.

If you want to debate ideas lay off the insults.

rcs1000 said:

The ultimate argument for EFTA/EEA to me is that in Norway, there are majorities (60%+) against joining the EU, and 85+% for remaining a part of EFTA/EEA. In other words, they seem pretty f*cking happy with their arrangement.

@isam: Nigel Farage has come out saying that while he would prefer EFTA/EEA, his preferred option would be neither EU or EFTA/EEA. So long as the major voice in favour of Brexit does not have EFTA/EEA as his main objective, he is likely to "scare the horses". My view is that there is a good 20% of the population (including most businesses) who have their preferences in the order of (1) EFTA/EEA, (2) EU, and (3) total "independence". This group of people will vote "In" if they think the real choice is between (2) and (3).

Farage discusses this w Andrew Neil on yesterday's show

isam said:

rcs1000 said:

The ultimate argument for EFTA/EEA to me is that in Norway, there are majorities (60%+) against joining the EU, and 85+% for remaining a part of EFTA/EEA. In other words, they seem pretty f*cking happy with their arrangement.

@isam: Nigel Farage has come out saying that while he would prefer EFTA/EEA, his preferred option would be neither EU or EFTA/EEA. So long as the major voice in favour of Brexit does not have EFTA/EEA as his main objective, he is likely to "scare the horses". My view is that there is a good 20% of the population (including most businesses) who have their preferences in the order of (1) EFTA/EEA, (2) EU, and (3) total "independence". This group of people will vote "In" if they think the real choice is between (2) and (3).

Farage discusses this w Andrew Neil on yesterday's show

Yes: but he has also said on numerous occasions that EFTA/EEA is just a path to complete independence.

stodge said:

Sean_F said:

It's not David Cameron's popularity now that matters. It's his popularity at the time of the Referendum.

At the moment, I would make Remain slight favourites (say 3/2) but no more than that.

Sean, you are an intelligent and deeply thoughtful fellow but you'll never make a bookie !! Making the favourite in a two-horse race 6/4 is a one way ticket to the poorhouse.

If I were pricing this now, I'd be 4/9 REMAIN and 5/4 LEAVE.

I'm well aware I'd never make a bookmaker.

Put another way, I'd put the likelihood of remain at 60%.

stodge said:

isam said:

He's saying 60/40 REMAIN/LEAVE in terms of votes isn't he?

Probably but that's not how I read it. If, as a UKIP supporter, he thinks REMAIN is 20% ahead at this stage, that should be a concern for LEAVE.

The more interesting part of the poll is the high proportion of Conservative voters who want Cameron to adopt a position of Wilsonian neutrality. In other words, having got the re-negotiation package, he shouldn't then try to sell it.

Curious.

Oh it seems he was saying 60/40 in chance of winning terms... I'm not sure how that translates to votes, prob 53/47 ish?

I think this looks like rare poor judgement from OGH. 39% saying they like Cameron is not remarkable. It's meaningless with a percentage dislike figure too. I'm not surprised the result was different when the renegotiation question was asked. About the best example of push polling there can be. You also have to factor in potential political changes between now and the referendum. Tax credits cuts won't help him and an economic downturn could be even more damaging to his own reputation.

The real point is that out doesn't have someone of similar calibre at this stage. Boris or someone like him could shift that.

rcs1000 said:

isam said:

rcs1000 said:

The ultimate argument for EFTA/EEA to me is that in Norway, there are majorities (60%+) against joining the EU, and 85+% for remaining a part of EFTA/EEA. In other words, they seem pretty f*cking happy with their arrangement.

@isam: Nigel Farage has come out saying that while he would prefer EFTA/EEA, his preferred option would be neither EU or EFTA/EEA. So long as the major voice in favour of Brexit does not have EFTA/EEA as his main objective, he is likely to "scare the horses". My view is that there is a good 20% of the population (including most businesses) who have their preferences in the order of (1) EFTA/EEA, (2) EU, and (3) total "independence". This group of people will vote "In" if they think the real choice is between (2) and (3).

Farage discusses this w Andrew Neil on yesterday's show

Yes: but he has also said on numerous occasions that EFTA/EEA is just a path to complete independence.

I shouldn't think Farage will either be the head of the leave campaign or have any involvement with a post Brexit deal... It doesn't really have anything to do with him

Why would David Cameron's view be so persuasive. He is PM of the country not an expert on the costs/benefits of the EU to my mind. I'll listen to his analysis, consider it - then make my own mind up.

isam said:

flightpath01 said:

isam said:

Well this is why I didn't want cameron to get a majority... I agree that he will have a massive influence on the result and that there is virtually no chance of him campaigning to leave. The gravitas that comes with being PM w a majority will allow all manner of half truths and weasel words to be presented as fact and his loyalists will gobble it up ( £1.7bn Bill payment for instance)

You keep finding new ways to spout rubbish.

I had breakfast at 930... Am I posh or lower middle class... Or neither??! Prey tell cc

Retired?

DavidL said:

What the conversation (to use a polite term) shows so far is that this is still very much a debate on the right in which much of the left are fairly uninterested observers. So we have slightly obsessive comments about sovereignty against business and big business in particular.

None of this on either side is going to get those millions who voted Labour before they got a scum bag as leader to jump in or out. In the past Delors persuaded Labour that the EU was good for the left because it applied minimum standards to working time, maternity, sickness, holiday entitlement and other work related benefits that were better than the UK had or were frankly likely to have. Does that Faustian pact still hold or does the prevalence of centre right governments in the EU make a further tranche of rights unlikely?

For me, this is the key question as to how the vote is likely to go, much more important than the issues that obsess and divide the right which sail over the heads of most voters. And none of those who are currently active in this debate give a damn about these issues or even want to talk about them.

My Corbyn supporting mate is probably an outter at the moment. He thinks the EU is a machine for enforcing capitalism.

Pulpstar said:

Why would David Cameron's view be so persuasive. He is PM of the country not an expert on the costs/benefits of the EU to my mind. I'll listen to his analysis, consider it - then make my own mind up.

The one thing the likes of Farage and Hannan have going for them is they seem to know their stuff. Okay, so they are probably selective in what they talk about, but I don't suppose Cameron knows the workings of the EU nearly as well some of the outers. If there is some kind of debate, whoever does it for the In side needs to know their stuff.

Morris_Dancer said:

Miss Cyclefree, I largely agree except I think the strategic direction is irreversible. The true believers will keep the EU going towards integration until it goes off a cliff.

Mr. Llama, not sure if you saw it on the previous thread but you may be interested in my ramble about the Battle of Kleidion, which was more notable for what happened after, rather than during, the battle:
http://thaddeusthesixth.blogspot.co.uk/2015/10/the-battle-of-kleidion.html

Mr. D., thanks for pointing me at your piece on the battle of Kleidon. I don't pay as much attention to your excellent blog as I once did and I really should. Anyway, on topic the Byzantines really were a bunch of bastards, weren't they? Sometimes ruthlessly and cruelly efficient and sometimes just ruthless and cruel.

Isn't this poll basically saying "We want to leave. If we get what we want then we'll stay."?

Not sure how Mr Cameron's popularity came into it. After all Winston Churchill was VERY popular after the 2nd world war.

Casino_Royale said:

stodge said:

Sean_F said:

It's not David Cameron's popularity now that matters. It's his popularity at the time of the Referendum.

At the moment, I would make Remain slight favourites (say 3/2) but no more than that.

Sean, you are an intelligent and deeply thoughtful fellow but you'll never make a bookie !! Making the favourite in a two-horse race 6/4 is a one way ticket to the poorhouse.

If I were pricing this now, I'd be 4/9 REMAIN and 5/4 LEAVE.

Betfair price is 1.45-1.46. Value for Leave if you believe that.

He is betting a two horse race to 114%!!! Almost everything should be value

OldKingCole said:

isam said:

flightpath01 said:

isam said:

Well this is why I didn't want cameron to get a majority... I agree that he will have a massive influence on the result and that there is virtually no chance of him campaigning to leave. The gravitas that comes with being PM w a majority will allow all manner of half truths and weasel words to be presented as fact and his loyalists will gobble it up ( £1.7bn Bill payment for instance)

You keep finding new ways to spout rubbish.

I had breakfast at 930... Am I posh or lower middle class... Or neither??! Prey tell cc

Retired?

Lazy!

richardDodd said:

Voting to stay in the EU is basically voting to be ruled by Germany and France..just like all the other member states..

Copyright JE Powell 1975

DavidL makes the key point which is that so far the discussion is only taking place among the obsessives (who almost to a man - gender reference intentional - are Leavers). The referendum will be won and lost among the profoundly unenthused.

Many of the arguments about the pros and cons of the EU are technical and Remain has a huge advantage in having most of the sensible people on its side. The establishment aren't liked but their judgement is going to be trusted more than that of the flakier ends of the political spectrum. So David Cameron will indeed be a large asset for Remain, assuming that's the way he jumps

DavidL said:

FrankBooth said:

DavidL said:

What the conversation (to use a polite term) shows so far is that this is still very much a debate on the right in which much of the left are fairly uninterested observers. So we have slightly obsessive comments about sovereignty against business and big business in particular.

None of this on either side is going to get those millions who voted Labour before they got a scum bag as leader to jump in or out. In the past Delors persuaded Labour that the EU was good for the left because it applied minimum standards to working time, maternity, sickness, holiday entitlement and other work related benefits that were better than the UK had or were frankly likely to have. Does that Faustian pact still hold or does the prevalence of centre right governments in the EU make a further tranche of rights unlikely?

For me, this is the key question as to how the vote is likely to go, much more important than the issues that obsess and divide the right which sail over the heads of most voters. And none of those who are currently active in this debate give a damn about these issues or even want to talk about them.

My Corbyn supporting mate is probably an outter at the moment. He thinks the EU is a machine for enforcing capitalism.

I think Corbyn thinks the same. He may even be right (stopped clocks etc). The focus on what the Tories think about this is wrong. Watch how Labour and Labour supporters respond.

This is where the whole renegotiation is fraught with difficulty. Cameron needs something big to keep his part onside but the sort of thing that will please his party are not going to please those on the left he needs to placate as well. The rumour not long ago was of a potential referendum in the spring. Now it increasingly looks like it could be 2017. Can't help but think that Dave knows he's in trouble and is delaying for as long as possible.

Incidentally what are the rules for all this? How much prior warning does Cameron need to give on the date and what's to stop him going for a snap referendum to confuse the outters?

tlg86 said:

RobD said:

isam said:

Well this is why I didn't want cameron to get a majority... I agree that he will have a massive influence on the result and that there is virtually no chance of him campaigning to leave. The gravitas that comes with being PM w a majority will allow all manner of half truths and weasel words to be presented as fact and his loyalists will gobble it up ( £1.7bn Bill payment for instance)

If Cam didn't have a majority there would be no referendum. Bit of a double edged sword.

You reckon? How strongly would he have thought in coalition negotiations with the Lib Dems (assuming they'd kept 25 seats instead of 8) to have the referendum? If the answer was, not at all, then the Tories would have been exposed to Ukip. And how strongly would the Lib Dems have fought against it?

It was in the Tory manifesto to have a referendum. Didn't Clegg say that he would accept that in the event of a renewed coalition?