politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » EU Referendum punters unmoved by by drop in REMAIN phone po
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » EU Referendum punters unmoved by by drop in REMAIN phone poll position
With all eyes this week on the final stage of the EU talks there has been very little movement on the referendum outcome betting in spite of the movements away from REMAIN in the latest online and phone polls.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
https://twitter.com/jakewsimons/status/699572539547320320
I would not be surprised at all to see this market supported by agents of the powers that be (on Betfair and elsewhere). Part of the appeal of Remain is that it is favourite, and that by implication Leave is a minority position.
Unless I've gone mental, one of the biggest value bets ever
South Carolina poll :
Clinton 55%
Sanders 34%
Black vote:
Clinton 63%
Sanders 23%
PPP
Cameron will proclaim it as a huge success, and then double-down on Project Fear, call up every friend in the universe to say the UK should stay, drop a British Bill of Rights dead cat, and cross his fingers.
It will probably be enough.
This is all assuming that the polls can be trusted, which remains unclear.
As @Tissue_Price suggests it's possible that the odds aren't following the polls because someone's backing Remain hard, or someone has insider knowledge of a big rabbit that's about to come out of the PM's hat.
They might move further in Leave's favour. Alternatively, they might not and just stay stuck at a narrow Remain lead.
You are right to be wary of the polls.
youtu.be/kLBDuWvcy7U
Wonders how long it will take Paddy Power to pay out on the maximum being scored anyway, as it will cost them peanuts compared to the publicity they'll get from it.
See if you can persuade her to put Zac 2nd pref behind whoever. To vote is to choose - if she's chosen "not Sadiq" she should use her vote to its fullest extent to bring that about.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/12159556/How-chessmaster-George-Osborne-could-neutralise-his-Eurosceptic-enemies.html
He might, for instance, say to Juncker he has the charisma of a damp rag, and the appearance of a low grade bank clerk.
* some people are expecting a rabbit and they won't get one
* the Cabinet sceptics being unleashed must have some effect (wags will say yes, it will help Remain)
“I don't want to talk to you no more, you empty headed animal food trough wiper. I fart in your general direction. Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries. I wave my private parts in your face."
Although I am seriously irritated by his comments on the border moving to Dover etc, I have now calmed down a bit and have to concede that his comments may have a ring of truth. I don't believe he would have said this otherwise.
Either way, the French hate us, as do the rest of them. They are going to give us such a kicking, whether we vote in or out.
You have to admire the PM's work rate. He looks knackered and I'm sure would much prefer having a break with his family.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/c0e910c4-d005-11e5-831d-09f7778e7377.html
(Currently free, apparently).
of course
but does he have to back himself in to a corner quite so regularly ?
Might take some creative drafting, and could lead to some legal challenges down the line as to whether there has been a failure, but the amendment could be passed into law before June 23rd, with a fair wind, to show it's not all talk, regardless of whether we subsequently vote Leave or Remain.
Thoughts?
Which is exactly what they are doing.
What SeanT wrote was "Either Cameron is lying, or the EU Parliament is lying".
How about these possibilities:
1) SeanT has misunderstood one or other
2) Cameron is mistaken
3) The 'EU Parliament' (by which presumably SeanT means Martin Schulz) is mistaken
4) Martin Schulz is saying the EU parliament might not support the deal, to which Cameron would reply: So what? It's a deal amongst the nations whose treaties set up the EU.
Since the Legal Counsel of the European Council has given a formal opinion that the deal will be legally binding, options 1, 3 and 4 seem the most likely.
I admit, I expected Project Fear to have gained some traction by now, but the reverse seems to be true.
#Popcorn
http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/why-we-should-leave-the-eu-european-union-tony-parsons
Like many successful insiders, Yentob sees himself partly as an outsider.
Yentob has said that, when he arrived at the BBC, money was “a flexible concept”.
Yentob’s resignation means he is once more largely a film-maker. Critics have called his Imagine arts documentaries hagiographies, but his ambition continues. His trip to Calais with Daldry is focused on the jungle refugee camp. “There are musicians there,” he says. “What we’ve heard from the jungle are terrible stories — but what about the people and their lives and their expectations? Not just the sad stories.”
It just goes on and on and on. It makes W1A mockumentary looks like a toned down documentary.
What's he's saying, quite rightly, is that a democratic institution cannot promise to vote one way or another until they've seen the deal as agreed, debated it and voted on it. Which is fair enough. The only issue is it makes Cameron and Hammond look like complete twats with their legally binding bollocks.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-35581013
Public services safe in Labour's hands...
I am not a Muslim but were I I would be deeply insulted by the assumption the Labour party seems to make that its Muslim representatives need to cosy up to the extremists and terrorist sympathisers and woman beaters and gay haters and anti-Semites in order to get my vote.
Still, if it's good enough for the Labour leader and the last Labour Mayor of London, why shouldn't it be good enough for this Labour candidate, eh?
If it comes after the referendum and is rejected I don't see any way to avoid a second referendum being justified.
If Cameron tried this there would be a leadership challenge. There are enough BOO'ers for it.
Plenty of drug taking the Beeb...allegedly...not sure how performance enhancing it is though.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/6712935/Strictly-voice-claims-drugs-are-on-sale-at-BBC.html
https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/699594955623366656
No surprise that the europhiles are already talking about defying the wishes of the voters, which is what they have been doing for the last 40-odd years.
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/euro-area/gdp-growth (select 'MAX' on the graph).
Since its inception the EZ has been a lacklustre performer. It's had twenty years to deliver, and thus far has failed to do so, while simultaneously blighting many of its members with high unemployment. I see nothing on the table that's likely to change the EZ into some high performance economic superstar. It's flattered by virtue of Germany's membership.
http://order-order.com/2016/02/16/momentum-fixer-praises-oxford-labour-anti-semitism-row/
The date of this referendum, which we are all arguing about, which we are wondering whether it will be June, July, sometime after...ain't gonna happen. According to some on here. Which makes me wonder why they are debating the merits of Leave or Remain so vigorously.
If you want a sane dissection of the legal status of the agreement - which is certainly not simple - look here:
https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2016/02/13/pavlos-eleftheriadis-the-proposed-new-legal-settlement-of-the-uk-with-the-eu/
And I think he thought or perhaps still thinks he can have a referendum and people will follow his direction...just because.
Both truly misguided and hubristic.
Mensch tweeted that under her leadership the libertarian website, Heat Street, will be a place where “disagreement will be encouraged”.
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/feb/16/louise-mensch-rupert-murdoch-news-corp-heat-street
I bet Tim has just exploded...
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/699601066262925313/photo/1
Unless there's a big rabbit coming it's clear that the EU has no interest in doing anything to help the PM and the UK, he should walk away and declare he's backing Leave. It might be the only thing that will get the EU leaders back around the table.
You don't sign a contract while the contract is still being drafted, after all. Or rather, only a fool would do so.
All this rush to get our vote smacks to me of a party which appears to want to evade full transparency and rush something past, in the hope that we might not notice that perhaps what we are being sold is not as good as it's made out to be or that there are some serious flaws.
And there is no need to rush, is there? He has until the end of 2017 after all. So why give the impression that there is something to hide?
Better get this right rather than do a poor rushed job. That is not an unreasonable request.
If Cameron really feels that he has got a wonderful deal for Britain he would be willing to have it properly and fully scrutinised and tested and kicked and looked at from all angles precisely so that he can say - when/if there is a vote the Remain - the question of Britain's membership has been settled for a generation.
The way he is going about it (at least on current evidence) will not achieve that.
A section of the population feel that politicians in the past have not been honest with them. That has been compounded by Blair's perceived dishonesty over Iraq. Cameron saw how the expenses fiasco damaged the credibility of Parliamentarians. We're being told that he's not a fool, a clever politician, a brilliant student at Oxford etc etc. So why does he not see that this decision, an important one, which ever way it goes, needs to be arrived at properly? That the process by which it is arrived at is equally as important as the substance.
Either he's not as clever as he thinks, or he just wants it to go away and can't be bothered or he's worried that the substance is no good and is not prepared to face up to what that means for what he needs to do next.
Stupidity. Complacency. Or Cowardice.
I'll leave it to others to decide which. Or come up with their own explanation.
Unfortunately it's not possible to have even the faintest idea, let alone know exactly, what we would be voting for if we vote Leave.
That's life. Voters will just have to live with the uncertainty, which of course is hugely, hugely greater on the Leave side.
In any case, it's a very odd argument to say (as you do) that (a) the renegotiation is nothing, and (b) that it's vital to know exactly what its status is. Why do you care what its status is if it's trivial?