Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Take Khan to the bank

SystemSystem Posts: 6,666
edited December 2 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Take Khan to the bank

The tip I’m about to give is not particularly exciting, or thrilling and it certainly won’t get you rich overnight seeing as the potential payday in question is top price 2-5 and 542 days away at the time of writing this article.

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 22,281
    edited December 2
    That sounds a good tip, and rational thinking.

    Thanks Pulpstar.

    Edit: and first.

    But as for your last line: if a Labour leadership contest comes up before 2020, is there a small but non-zero chance he'd throw his hat into the ring ala Boris and leave the mayoralty at, or before, the end of his term?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 48,635
    Listening to the boxing, not sure how a man knocked down twice can be so certain to be ahead..
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 9,754
    OT boxing -- just cashed out on Fury.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 9,754

    OT boxing -- just cashed out on Fury.

    Which turned out to be a mistake as I'd had a small bet on the draw at 40/1 as well. My bottle went at the thought of a home town decision.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 22,281
    Pulpstar said:

    Listening to the boxing, not sure how a man knocked down twice can be so certain to be ahead..

    Why watch or listen to two people fighting? It's barbaric.

    If I wanted to watch that sort of entertainment than I'd just go around Kate Osamor's house... ;)
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 10,610
    Draw
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 31,449
    Disgraceful result in the boxing. The judge having wilder winning by 4 is about a believable as jezza being a massive I’m a celeb fan.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 9,754

    Pulpstar said:

    Listening to the boxing, not sure how a man knocked down twice can be so certain to be ahead..

    Why watch or listen to two people fighting? It's barbaric.

    If I wanted to watch that sort of entertainment than I'd just go around Kate Osamor's house... ;)
    What price Kate for Mayor of London? And then Foreign Secretary?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 48,635

    Disgraceful result in the boxing. The judge having wilder winning by 4 is about a believable as jezza being a massive I’m a celeb fan.

    How long was Fury down for in the twelfth though
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 31,449
    edited December 2
    Pulpstar said:

    Disgraceful result in the boxing. The judge having wilder winning by 4 is about a believable as jezza being a massive I’m a celeb fan.

    How long was Fury down for in the twelfth though
    Them gypsy folk are as hard as nails....but my point that particular judge had wilder winning comfortably even before the 10-8 final round which is total horseshit.

    Not quite as outrageous as the first GGG vs canelo fight but not far off.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 48,635

    Pulpstar said:

    Disgraceful result in the boxing. The judge having wilder winning by 4 is about a believable as jezza being a massive I’m a celeb fan.

    How long was Fury down for in the twelfth though
    Them gypsy folk are as hard as nails....but my point that particular judge had wilder winning comfortably even before the 10-8 final round which is total horseshit.
    Sounds like a rigged draw
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 22,281

    Pulpstar said:

    Listening to the boxing, not sure how a man knocked down twice can be so certain to be ahead..

    Why watch or listen to two people fighting? It's barbaric.

    If I wanted to watch that sort of entertainment than I'd just go around Kate Osamor's house... ;)
    What price Kate for Mayor of London? And then Foreign Secretary?
    Given Labour has an anti-Semite at its head, it wouldn't surprise me if they chose a violent, selfish and nasty person for such a position ...
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 9,754

    Pulpstar said:

    Listening to the boxing, not sure how a man knocked down twice can be so certain to be ahead..

    Why watch or listen to two people fighting? It's barbaric.

    If I wanted to watch that sort of entertainment than I'd just go around Kate Osamor's house... ;)
    What price Kate for Mayor of London? And then Foreign Secretary?
    Given Labour has an anti-Semite at its head, it wouldn't surprise me if they chose a violent, selfish and nasty person for such a position ...
    And you do not condemn the Conservatives who actually did so?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 48,635
    The 114 110 scorecard is wrong. See twitter
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 22,281

    Pulpstar said:

    Listening to the boxing, not sure how a man knocked down twice can be so certain to be ahead..

    Why watch or listen to two people fighting? It's barbaric.

    If I wanted to watch that sort of entertainment than I'd just go around Kate Osamor's house... ;)
    What price Kate for Mayor of London? And then Foreign Secretary?
    Given Labour has an anti-Semite at its head, it wouldn't surprise me if they chose a violent, selfish and nasty person for such a position ...
    And you do not condemn the Conservatives who actually did so?
    Are you referring to Zac? If so, I don't think he's ever threatened a journalist. Or thrown water over one. Or behaved in quite the way Osamor has.

    Boris is a very different matter. And yes, I do condemn him over the Guppy mess. I quite like him, but he should be nowhere near the levers of power - let him keep on submitting ghostwritten columns as a journalist ...

    I know you say you're not a Labour member, but you certainly seem keen to 'look, squirrel!' whenever they're criticised ...
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 9,754

    Pulpstar said:

    Listening to the boxing, not sure how a man knocked down twice can be so certain to be ahead..

    Why watch or listen to two people fighting? It's barbaric.

    If I wanted to watch that sort of entertainment than I'd just go around Kate Osamor's house... ;)
    What price Kate for Mayor of London? And then Foreign Secretary?
    Given Labour has an anti-Semite at its head, it wouldn't surprise me if they chose a violent, selfish and nasty person for such a position ...
    And you do not condemn the Conservatives who actually did so?
    Are you referring to Zac? If so, I don't think he's ever threatened a journalist. Or thrown water over one. Or behaved in quite the way Osamor has.

    Boris is a very different matter. And yes, I do condemn him over the Guppy mess. I quite like him, but he should be nowhere near the levers of power - let him keep on submitting ghostwritten columns as a journalist ...

    I know you say you're not a Labour member, but you certainly seem keen to 'look, squirrel!' whenever they're criticised ...
    Not at all. I'm not Labour, or any party, just a punter. And as I posted earlier, the betting angle here is to lay Boris because he is vulnerable on issues the Conservatives attack Labour for. Including this one.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 9,675
    Pulpstar said:

    The 114 110 scorecard is wrong. See twitter

    What an embarrassment of a sport boxing is.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 22,281

    Pulpstar said:

    Listening to the boxing, not sure how a man knocked down twice can be so certain to be ahead..

    Why watch or listen to two people fighting? It's barbaric.

    If I wanted to watch that sort of entertainment than I'd just go around Kate Osamor's house... ;)
    What price Kate for Mayor of London? And then Foreign Secretary?
    Given Labour has an anti-Semite at its head, it wouldn't surprise me if they chose a violent, selfish and nasty person for such a position ...
    And you do not condemn the Conservatives who actually did so?
    Are you referring to Zac? If so, I don't think he's ever threatened a journalist. Or thrown water over one. Or behaved in quite the way Osamor has.

    Boris is a very different matter. And yes, I do condemn him over the Guppy mess. I quite like him, but he should be nowhere near the levers of power - let him keep on submitting ghostwritten columns as a journalist ...

    I know you say you're not a Labour member, but you certainly seem keen to 'look, squirrel!' whenever they're criticised ...
    Not at all. I'm not Labour, or any party, just a punter. And as I posted earlier, the betting angle here is to lay Boris because he is vulnerable on issues the Conservatives attack Labour for. Including this one.
    Thanks for the kind offer, but I won't 'lay' Boris. He's just not my type. ;)

    But look at your reaction to my post: it's typical 'look, squirrel!'. Someone criticises Labour, and you go on about how evil the Conservatives are. Every time ...
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 22,281
    tlg86 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    The 114 110 scorecard is wrong. See twitter

    What an embarrassment of a sport boxing is.
    it's a sport? I thought it was an utterly rigged, corrupt business ?

    (And no, I don't like seeing people hitting each other, or think it's a sport.)
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 9,754
    edited December 2

    Pulpstar said:

    Listening to the boxing, not sure how a man knocked down twice can be so certain to be ahead..

    Why watch or listen to two people fighting? It's barbaric.

    If I wanted to watch that sort of entertainment than I'd just go around Kate Osamor's house... ;)
    What price Kate for Mayor of London? And then Foreign Secretary?
    Given Labour has an anti-Semite at its head, it wouldn't surprise me if they chose a violent, selfish and nasty person for such a position ...
    And you do not condemn the Conservatives who actually did so?
    Are you referring to Zac? If so, I don't think he's ever threatened a journalist. Or thrown water over one. Or behaved in quite the way Osamor has.

    Boris is a very different matter. And yes, I do condemn him over the Guppy mess. I quite like him, but he should be nowhere near the levers of power - let him keep on submitting ghostwritten columns as a journalist ...

    I know you say you're not a Labour member, but you certainly seem keen to 'look, squirrel!' whenever they're criticised ...
    Not at all. I'm not Labour, or any party, just a punter. And as I posted earlier, the betting angle here is to lay Boris because he is vulnerable on issues the Conservatives attack Labour for. Including this one.
    Thanks for the kind offer, but I won't 'lay' Boris. He's just not my type. ;)

    But look at your reaction to my post: it's typical 'look, squirrel!'. Someone criticises Labour, and you go on about how evil the Conservatives are. Every time ...
    Reminding people the Conservatives have form on this exact point, and pointing out a betting angle, is not "look squirrel".

    ETA I think we should let this rest. We have both made our points and this sort of tit-for-tat can spoil the site if extended.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 22,281

    Pulpstar said:

    Listening to the boxing, not sure how a man knocked down twice can be so certain to be ahead..

    Why watch or listen to two people fighting? It's barbaric.

    If I wanted to watch that sort of entertainment than I'd just go around Kate Osamor's house... ;)
    What price Kate for Mayor of London? And then Foreign Secretary?
    Given Labour has an anti-Semite at its head, it wouldn't surprise me if they chose a violent, selfish and nasty person for such a position ...
    And you do not condemn the Conservatives who actually did so?
    Are you referring to Zac? If so, I don't think he's ever threatened a journalist. Or thrown water over one. Or behaved in quite the way Osamor has.

    Boris is a very different matter. And yes, I do condemn him over the Guppy mess. I quite like him, but he should be nowhere near the levers of power - let him keep on submitting ghostwritten columns as a journalist ...

    I know you say you're not a Labour member, but you certainly seem keen to 'look, squirrel!' whenever they're criticised ...
    Not at all. I'm not Labour, or any party, just a punter. And as I posted earlier, the betting angle here is to lay Boris because he is vulnerable on issues the Conservatives attack Labour for. Including this one.
    Thanks for the kind offer, but I won't 'lay' Boris. He's just not my type. ;)

    But look at your reaction to my post: it's typical 'look, squirrel!'. Someone criticises Labour, and you go on about how evil the Conservatives are. Every time ...
    Reminding people the Conservatives have form on this exact point, and pointing out a betting angle, is not "look squirrel".
    You response was not a betting post, as it did not refer to anyone likely to be candidate for the Conservatives.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 9,754

    Pulpstar said:

    Listening to the boxing, not sure how a man knocked down twice can be so certain to be ahead..

    Why watch or listen to two people fighting? It's barbaric.

    If I wanted to watch that sort of entertainment than I'd just go around Kate Osamor's house... ;)
    What price Kate for Mayor of London? And then Foreign Secretary?
    Given Labour has an anti-Semite at its head, it wouldn't surprise me if they chose a violent, selfish and nasty person for such a position ...
    And you do not condemn the Conservatives who actually did so?
    Are you referring to Zac? If so, I don't think he's ever threatened a journalist. Or thrown water over one. Or behaved in quite the way Osamor has.

    Boris is a very different matter. And yes, I do condemn him over the Guppy mess. I quite like him, but he should be nowhere near the levers of power - let him keep on submitting ghostwritten columns as a journalist ...

    I know you say you're not a Labour member, but you certainly seem keen to 'look, squirrel!' whenever they're criticised ...
    Not at all. I'm not Labour, or any party, just a punter. And as I posted earlier, the betting angle here is to lay Boris because he is vulnerable on issues the Conservatives attack Labour for. Including this one.
    Thanks for the kind offer, but I won't 'lay' Boris. He's just not my type. ;)

    But look at your reaction to my post: it's typical 'look, squirrel!'. Someone criticises Labour, and you go on about how evil the Conservatives are. Every time ...
    Reminding people the Conservatives have form on this exact point, and pointing out a betting angle, is not "look squirrel".
    You response was not a betting post, as it did not refer to anyone likely to be candidate for the Conservatives.
    Lay Boris to succeed Theresa May as next party leader and prime minister. I'd hardly recommend laying Boris in a market that did not involve him.
  • It's not often you find value in an odds on shot but it is possible and at 2/5 I should say this is an exception. I agree with Pulpstar - 1/10 would be more like it.

    Thanks P, I'm on.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 12,951

    tlg86 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    The 114 110 scorecard is wrong. See twitter

    What an embarrassment of a sport boxing is.
    it's a sport? I thought it was an utterly rigged, corrupt business ?

    (And no, I don't like seeing people hitting each other, or think it's a sport.)
    Seconded
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 48,635
    tlg86 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    The 114 110 scorecard is wrong. See twitter

    What an embarrassment of a sport boxing is.
    I know everyone is on about the 111 115 card, but the 114 110 guy literally can't copy the number 112.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 14,352

    tlg86 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    The 114 110 scorecard is wrong. See twitter

    What an embarrassment of a sport boxing is.
    it's a sport? I thought it was an utterly rigged, corrupt business ?

    (And no, I don't like seeing people hitting each other, or think it's a sport.)
    Seconded
    *puts on best Mr Yeatman voice*

    And I third it.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 6,012
    any polls out last night?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 22,281

    Pulpstar said:

    Listening to the boxing, not sure how a man knocked down twice can be so certain to be ahead..

    Why watch or listen to two people fighting? It's barbaric.

    If I wanted to watch that sort of entertainment than I'd just go around Kate Osamor's house... ;)
    What price Kate for Mayor of London? And then Foreign Secretary?
    Given Labour has an anti-Semite at its head, it wouldn't surprise me if they chose a violent, selfish and nasty person for such a position ...
    And you do not condemn the Conservatives who actually did so?
    Are you referring to Zac? If so, I don't think he's ever threatened a journalist. Or thrown water over one. Or behaved in quite the way Osamor has.

    Boris is a very different matter. And yes, I do condemn him over the Guppy mess. I quite like him, but he should be nowhere near the levers of power - let him keep on submitting ghostwritten columns as a journalist ...

    I know you say you're not a Labour member, but you certainly seem keen to 'look, squirrel!' whenever they're criticised ...
    Not at all. I'm not Labour, or any party, just a punter. And as I posted earlier, the betting angle here is to lay Boris because he is vulnerable on issues the Conservatives attack Labour for. Including this one.
    Thanks for the kind offer, but I won't 'lay' Boris. He's just not my type. ;)

    But look at your reaction to my post: it's typical 'look, squirrel!'. Someone criticises Labour, and you go on about how evil the Conservatives are. Every time ...
    Reminding people the Conservatives have form on this exact point, and pointing out a betting angle, is not "look squirrel".
    You response was not a betting post, as it did not refer to anyone likely to be candidate for the Conservatives.
    Lay Boris to succeed Theresa May as next party leader and prime minister. I'd hardly recommend laying Boris in a market that did not involve him.
    (fx: sighs theatrically). Which is nothing to do with the posts in question. Mayor of London is not party leader/PM ...
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 22,281
    ydoethur said:

    tlg86 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    The 114 110 scorecard is wrong. See twitter

    What an embarrassment of a sport boxing is.
    it's a sport? I thought it was an utterly rigged, corrupt business ?

    (And no, I don't like seeing people hitting each other, or think it's a sport.)
    Seconded
    *puts on best Mr Yeatman voice*

    And I third it.
    The thing is, I just don't see the appeal of it as a physical activity, yet alone as a competitive sport. firstly there's little glory in two people knocking two shades of sh*t out of each other, and secondly the capacity and opportunities for corruption are legendary and obvious. It doesn't classify as a 'sport' in either way.

    I don't mind wrestling anywhere near as much, although I never really saw the Saturday afternoon wrestling on TV as a sport, either. Entertainment, yes. Sport, no.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 21,256
    So Theresa, Pop Quiz: what do you do? Publish the full legal advice that admits the EU has an effective veto on our actually leaving the EU - or face contempt of Parliament by not publishing it?

    Top BBC story - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46416591
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 12,321
    Not very edifying on here this morning.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 5,750
    IanB2 said:

    Not very edifying on here this morning.

    Don't panic. Brexit groundhog day will be along shortly.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 9,754

    It's not often you find value in an odds on shot but it is possible and at 2/5 I should say this is an exception. I agree with Pulpstar - 1/10 would be more like it.

    Thanks P, I'm on.

    2/5 might be value but March 2020 is literally quite some time in the future, so I shan't be investing. If the vote were tomorrow, the price would be bet-compelling, but it is not even next year.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 48,635

    It's not often you find value in an odds on shot but it is possible and at 2/5 I should say this is an exception. I agree with Pulpstar - 1/10 would be more like it.

    Thanks P, I'm on.

    2/5 might be value but March 2020 is literally quite some time in the future, so I shan't be investing. If the vote were tomorrow, the price would be bet-compelling, but it is not even next year.
    I think it'll be more like 1-7 the day before the election
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 46,598
    Good morning, everyone.

    Given the result, quite glad I didn't bother dipping my toe into the boxing betting.

    Hmm. I might back Khan. I've got a little on Bailey at 61.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 48,635

    Good morning, everyone.

    Given the result, quite glad I didn't bother dipping my toe into the boxing betting.

    Hmm. I might back Khan. I've got a little on Bailey at 61.

    Bailey at 61 is amazing. Well done
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 6,985

    So Theresa, Pop Quiz: what do you do? Publish the full legal advice that admits the EU has an effective veto on our actually leaving the EU - or face contempt of Parliament by not publishing it?

    Top BBC story - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46416591

    Publish, say 'woops - I didn't notice that bit' then scrap the deal.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 46,598
    Mr. Pulpstar, thanks. I think I backed him the previous time. Unfortunately I only have £2 on (can't remember if I tipped it, but suspect not).

    To be fair, I did also back two other Conservative candidates for the same hefty sum.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 2,520
    IanB2 said:

    Not very edifying on here this morning.

    It will be once Milliband Minor is back in the Shad Cab.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 9,982
    Why isn’t May publishing the advice?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 14,352
    Jonathan said:

    Why isn’t May publishing the advice?

    Why didn't Blair publish the advice on the Iraq War?

    I think it would be the same reason.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 21,256
    edited December 2

    So Theresa, Pop Quiz: what do you do? Publish the full legal advice that admits the EU has an effective veto on our actually leaving the EU - or face contempt of Parliament by not publishing it?

    Top BBC story - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46416591

    Publish, say 'woops - I didn't notice that bit' then scrap the deal.
    The bit that was specifically drawn to your attention by the Attorney General? The bit that was so sensitive, there were numbered copies of the advice given out and collected back because they were so explosive? Whoops indeed.....

    Not sure I see any acceptable way out on this. The DUP won't back down, because they are the DUP. Labour won't back down because it's blood sport. The other parties want their "me too" moment. Tories who hate her deal arent going to help out if it says "May's Brexit don't mean Brexit". So you have to think that by some point this coming week, the PM has a toxic piece of advice published. Whilst she is out and about flogging her horse that isn't just dead, it's at the knackers yard being melted down for glue. Result? her "deal" dies by a majority of over two hundred....

    Whoops.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 9,754
    edited December 2
    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    Why isn’t May publishing the advice?

    Why didn't Blair publish the advice on the Iraq War?

    I think it would be the same reason.
    I'm not sure. Theresa May's decision seems quite arbitrary, and to serve no great purpose one way or the other. Whose mind would be changed? Whose vote? No-one's.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 9,982
    edited December 2
    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    Why isn’t May publishing the advice?

    Why didn't Blair publish the advice on the Iraq War?

    I think it would be the same reason.
    Curious that you immediately equate Brexit to Iraq.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 46,598
    Hmm. Does Ladbrokes have a London mayoral market up? Can't seem to find it.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 9,754
    OT Bet365 seems to have stopped reverting on Pricewise. They have a £220 million salary to pay.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 21,256

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    Why isn’t May publishing the advice?

    Why didn't Blair publish the advice on the Iraq War?

    I think it would be the same reason.
    I'm not sure. Theresa May's decision seems quite arbitrary, and to serve no great purpose one way or the other. Whose mind would be changed? Whose vote? No-one's.
    The people whose mind would be changed are those who currently think it it is the best Brexit on offer - if the Attorney General's advice says it is no Brexit because the EU can just avoid getting round to a deal. At best, it utterly compromises our negotiating ability for the (arguably much more important) full trading arrangment for decades to come.

    When faced with such a terribly compromised future position, some might revisit whether the short-term pain of No Deal under WTO terms - and a clean slate for the trade talks - might not be a better option after all. Those offered her choice of "Shit sandwich? Or starve?" might just discover they have lost their appetite.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 9,754

    Hmm. Does Ladbrokes have a London mayoral market up? Can't seem to find it.

    Not that I can see on their site, and Oddschecker does not list one but others are available.
    https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/london-mayoral-election-2020/london-mayoral-election-winner-2020
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 2,890
    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    Why isn’t May publishing the advice?

    Why didn't Blair publish the advice on the Iraq War?

    I think it would be the same reason.
    Curious that you immediately equate Brexit to Iraq.
    The comparison is apt.
    Both are national disasters, built on lies, and while initially supported by the public, increasingly understood as a mistake.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 14,352
    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    Why isn’t May publishing the advice?

    Why didn't Blair publish the advice on the Iraq War?

    I think it would be the same reason.
    Curious that you immediately equate Brexit to Iraq.
    No, I'm equating the non-publication of legal advice to the government to a recent precedent.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 14,352

    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    Why isn’t May publishing the advice?

    Why didn't Blair publish the advice on the Iraq War?

    I think it would be the same reason.
    Curious that you immediately equate Brexit to Iraq.
    The comparison is apt.
    Both are national disasters, built on lies, and while initially supported by the public, increasingly understood as a mistake.
    I suppose you could add that it was narrow support (around 56-44 on Iraq IIRC) but that the London commentariat was overwhelmingly negative.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 9,982

    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    Why isn’t May publishing the advice?

    Why didn't Blair publish the advice on the Iraq War?

    I think it would be the same reason.
    Curious that you immediately equate Brexit to Iraq.
    The comparison is apt.
    Both are national disasters, built on lies, and while initially supported by the public, increasingly understood as a mistake.
    Both triggered by a Foreign power, in Iraq’s case GW Bush. In Brexit, Putin?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 46,598
    Mr. JohnL, cheers.

    I'll probably just leave it then, for now at least.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 14,352
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    Why isn’t May publishing the advice?

    Why didn't Blair publish the advice on the Iraq War?

    I think it would be the same reason.
    Curious that you immediately equate Brexit to Iraq.
    The comparison is apt.
    Both are national disasters, built on lies, and while initially supported by the public, increasingly understood as a mistake.
    Both triggered by a Foreign power, in Iraq’s case GW Bush. In Brexit, Putin?
    Via his former employee Jeremy Corbyn?

    (That's a reference to his appearances on Russia Today, btw, not to any conspiracy theories about Corbyn being a Soviet mole.)
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 14,352
    It has to be said, the more I think about it, the more my accidental comparison seems to be apt.

    On the other hand, we have a way out here. We just need our MPs to grow up and take it...
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 48,635

    Hmm. Does Ladbrokes have a London mayoral market up? Can't seem to find it.

    My bet was with Skybet. They limited me to win £50.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 20,060

    Pulpstar said:

    Listening to the boxing, not sure how a man knocked down twice can be so certain to be ahead..

    Why watch or listen to two people fighting? It's barbaric.

    If I wanted to watch that sort of entertainment than I'd just go around Kate Osamor's house... ;)
    What price Kate for Mayor of London? And then Foreign Secretary?
    Given Labour has an anti-Semite at its head, it wouldn't surprise me if they chose a violent, selfish and nasty person for such a position ...
    And you do not condemn the Conservatives who actually did so?
    Are you referring to Zac? If so, I don't think he's ever threatened a journalist. Or thrown water over one. Or behaved in quite the way Osamor has.

    Boris is a very different matter. And yes, I do condemn him over the Guppy mess. I quite like him, but he should be nowhere near the levers of power - let him keep on submitting ghostwritten columns as a journalist ...

    I know you say you're not a Labour member, but you certainly seem keen to 'look, squirrel!' whenever they're criticised ...
    Not at all. I'm not Labour, or any party, just a punter. And as I posted earlier, the betting angle here is to lay Boris because he is vulnerable on issues the Conservatives attack Labour for. Including this one.
    Thanks for the kind offer, but I won't 'lay' Boris. He's just not my type. ;)

    But look at your reaction to my post: it's typical 'look, squirrel!'. Someone criticises Labour, and you go on about how evil the Conservatives are. Every time ...
    They are extremely evil though, so even if avoidance tactics it is truthful
  • So Theresa, Pop Quiz: what do you do? Publish the full legal advice that admits the EU has an effective veto on our actually leaving the EU - or face contempt of Parliament by not publishing it?

    Top BBC story - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46416591

    Publish, say 'woops - I didn't notice that bit' then scrap the deal.
    The bit that was specifically drawn to your attention by the Attorney General? The bit that was so sensitive, there were numbered copies of the advice given out and collected back because they were so explosive? Whoops indeed.....

    Not sure I see any acceptable way out on this. The DUP won't back down, because they are the DUP. Labour won't back down because it's blood sport. The other parties want their "me too" moment. Tories who hate her deal arent going to help out if it says "May's Brexit don't mean Brexit". So you have to think that by some point this coming week, the PM has a toxic piece of advice published. Whilst she is out and about flogging her horse that isn't just dead, it's at the knackers yard being melted down for glue. Result? her "deal" dies by a majority of over two hundred....

    Whoops.
    And then brexit dies as we rejoin
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 6,560

    So Theresa, Pop Quiz: what do you do? Publish the full legal advice that admits the EU has an effective veto on our actually leaving the EU - or face contempt of Parliament by not publishing it?

    Top BBC story - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46416591

    Publish, say 'woops - I didn't notice that bit' then scrap the deal.
    The bit that was specifically drawn to your attention by the Attorney General? The bit that was so sensitive, there were numbered copies of the advice given out and collected back because they were so explosive? Whoops indeed.....

    Not sure I see any acceptable way out on this. The DUP won't back down, because they are the DUP. Labour won't back down because it's blood sport. The other parties want their "me too" moment. Tories who hate her deal arent going to help out if it says "May's Brexit don't mean Brexit". So you have to think that by some point this coming week, the PM has a toxic piece of advice published. Whilst she is out and about flogging her horse that isn't just dead, it's at the knackers yard being melted down for glue. Result? her "deal" dies by a majority of over two hundred....

    Whoops.
    And then brexit dies as we rejoin
    ... or never actually leave.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 46,598
    Mr. Pulpstar, sounds fair. I mean, they determine the markets, the odds, the options. Can't have anyone winning too much, can we? :p
  • So Theresa, Pop Quiz: what do you do? Publish the full legal advice that admits the EU has an effective veto on our actually leaving the EU - or face contempt of Parliament by not publishing it?

    Top BBC story - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46416591

    Publish, say 'woops - I didn't notice that bit' then scrap the deal.
    The bit that was specifically drawn to your attention by the Attorney General? The bit that was so sensitive, there were numbered copies of the advice given out and collected back because they were so explosive? Whoops indeed.....

    Not sure I see any acceptable way out on this. The DUP won't back down, because they are the DUP. Labour won't back down because it's blood sport. The other parties want their "me too" moment. Tories who hate her deal arent going to help out if it says "May's Brexit don't mean Brexit". So you have to think that by some point this coming week, the PM has a toxic piece of advice published. Whilst she is out and about flogging her horse that isn't just dead, it's at the knackers yard being melted down for glue. Result? her "deal" dies by a majority of over two hundred....

    Whoops.
    And then brexit dies as we rejoin
    ... or never actually leave.
    Indeed
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 14,352

    So Theresa, Pop Quiz: what do you do? Publish the full legal advice that admits the EU has an effective veto on our actually leaving the EU - or face contempt of Parliament by not publishing it?

    Top BBC story - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46416591

    Publish, say 'woops - I didn't notice that bit' then scrap the deal.
    The bit that was specifically drawn to your attention by the Attorney General? The bit that was so sensitive, there were numbered copies of the advice given out and collected back because they were so explosive? Whoops indeed.....

    Not sure I see any acceptable way out on this. The DUP won't back down, because they are the DUP. Labour won't back down because it's blood sport. The other parties want their "me too" moment. Tories who hate her deal arent going to help out if it says "May's Brexit don't mean Brexit". So you have to think that by some point this coming week, the PM has a toxic piece of advice published. Whilst she is out and about flogging her horse that isn't just dead, it's at the knackers yard being melted down for glue. Result? her "deal" dies by a majority of over two hundred....

    Whoops.
    And then brexit dies as we rejoin
    ... or never actually leave.
    If the EU will let us. An important caveat too many people are forgetting and what the headbangers of the ERG and DUP seem to be gambling on.

    I would expect the EU to be very anxious to have us abort Brexit, but it will only take one naysayer - say, a deeply unpopular Spanish PM looking for some cheap domestic points, or an Irish PM who doesn't understand the issues, or an ill-judged phrase from a very arrogant but not very bright German in charge of the secretariat - to wreck it and leave us with no deal at all and every flight on the planet grounded.

    With that bombshell, I am needed elsewhere. Have a good morning.
  • ydoethur said:

    So Theresa, Pop Quiz: what do you do? Publish the full legal advice that admits the EU has an effective veto on our actually leaving the EU - or face contempt of Parliament by not publishing it?

    Top BBC story - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46416591

    Publish, say 'woops - I didn't notice that bit' then scrap the deal.
    The bit that was specifically drawn to your attention by the Attorney General? The bit that was so sensitive, there were numbered copies of the advice given out and collected back because they were so explosive? Whoops indeed.....

    Not sure I see any acceptable way out on this. The DUP won't back down, because they are the DUP. Labour won't back down because it's blood sport. The other parties want their "me too" moment. Tories who hate her deal arent going to help out if it says "May's Brexit don't mean Brexit". So you have to think that by some point this coming week, the PM has a toxic piece of advice published. Whilst she is out and about flogging her horse that isn't just dead, it's at the knackers yard being melted down for glue. Result? her "deal" dies by a majority of over two hundred....

    Whoops.
    And then brexit dies as we rejoin
    ... or never actually leave.
    If the EU will let us. An important caveat too many people are forgetting and what the headbangers of the ERG and DUP seem to be gambling on.

    I would expect the EU to be very anxious to have us abort Brexit, but it will only take one naysayer - say, a deeply unpopular Spanish PM looking for some cheap domestic points, or an Irish PM who doesn't understand the issues, or an ill-judged phrase from a very arrogant but not very bright German in charge of the secretariat - to wreck it and leave us with no deal at all and every flight on the planet grounded.

    With that bombshell, I am needed elsewhere. Have a good morning.
    Most seem to forget we are on course to leave with no deal.

    That is default and without legislation it clicks in in March 19
  • Theresa Villiers on Sky to be kind to her is naive beyond belief.

    Her argument seems to accept there will be disruption if the EU want to behave in an unreasonable way

    But we will be fine on WTO
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 31,846

    ydoethur said:

    So Theresa, Pop Quiz: what do you do? Publish the full legal advice that admits the EU has an effective veto on our actually leaving the EU - or face contempt of Parliament by not publishing it?

    Top BBC story - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46416591

    Publish, say 'woops - I didn't notice that bit' then scrap the deal.
    The bit that was specifically drawn to your attention by the Attorney General? The bit that was so sensitive, there were numbered copies of the advice given out and collected back because they were so explosive? Whoops indeed.....

    Not sure I see any acceptable way out on this. The DUP won't back down, because they are the DUP. Labour won't back down because it's blood sport. The other parties want their "me too" moment. Tories who hate her deal arent going to help out if it says "May's Brexit don't mean Brexit". So you have to think that by some point this coming week, the PM has a toxic piece of advice published. Whilst she is out and about flogging her horse that isn't just dead, it's at the knackers yard being melted down for glue. Result? her "deal" dies by a majority of over two hundred....

    Whoops.
    And then brexit dies as we rejoin
    ... or never actually leave.
    If the EU will let us. An important caveat too many people are forgetting and what the headbangers of the ERG and DUP seem to be gambling on.

    I would expect the EU to be very anxious to have us abort Brexit, but it will only take one naysayer - say, a deeply unpopular Spanish PM looking for some cheap domestic points, or an Irish PM who doesn't understand the issues, or an ill-judged phrase from a very arrogant but not very bright German in charge of the secretariat - to wreck it and leave us with no deal at all and every flight on the planet grounded.

    With that bombshell, I am needed elsewhere. Have a good morning.
    Most seem to forget we are on course to leave with no deal.

    That is default and without legislation it clicks in in March 19
    Yes - surprisingly poor reporting from Keunsberg saying Benn’s amendment “would stop us leaving with no deal”. No it wouldn’t. For that to happen a whole raft of other things have to happen too.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 12,951
    edited December 2

    Theresa Villiers on Sky to be kind to her is naive beyond belief.

    Her argument seems to accept there will be disruption if the EU want to behave in an unreasonable way

    But we will be fine on WTO

    As a Remainer....... Rejoiner........ I see May's deal as the best on offer, and one which enable Rejoining in due course. Probably after the next GE.

    I completely fail to understand those who say that the disruption probable after March 29th if we have No Deal is in any way acceptable.

    Edited for silly spelling.
  • ydoethur said:

    So Theresa, Pop Quiz: what do you do? Publish the full legal advice that admits the EU has an effective veto on our actually leaving the EU - or face contempt of Parliament by not publishing it?

    Top BBC story - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46416591

    Publish, say 'woops - I didn't notice that bit' then scrap the deal.
    The bit that was specifically drawn to your attention by the Attorney General? The bit that was so sensitive, there were numbered copies of the advice given out and collected back because they were so explosive? Whoops indeed.....

    Not sure I see any acceptable way out on this. The DUP won't back down, because they are the DUP. Labour won't back down because it's blood sport. The other parties want their "me too" moment. Tories who hate her deal arent going to help out if it says "May's Brexit don't mean Brexit". So you have to think that by some point this coming week, the PM has a toxic piece of advice published. Whilst she is out and about flogging her horse that isn't just dead, it's at the knackers yard being melted down for glue. Result? her "deal" dies by a majority of over two hundred....

    Whoops.
    And then brexit dies as we rejoin
    ... or never actually leave.
    If the EU will let us. An important caveat too many people are forgetting and what the headbangers of the ERG and DUP seem to be gambling on.

    I would expect the EU to be very anxious to have us abort Brexit, but it will only take one naysayer - say, a deeply unpopular Spanish PM looking for some cheap domestic points, or an Irish PM who doesn't understand the issues, or an ill-judged phrase from a very arrogant but not very bright German in charge of the secretariat - to wreck it and leave us with no deal at all and every flight on the planet grounded.

    With that bombshell, I am needed elsewhere. Have a good morning.
    Most seem to forget we are on course to leave with no deal.

    That is default and without legislation it clicks in in March 19
    Yes - surprisingly poor reporting from Keunsberg saying Benn’s amendment “would stop us leaving with no deal”. No it wouldn’t. For that to happen a whole raft of other things have to happen too.
    It was the BBC who stated that everyone is forgetting that this vote does not change anything. Parliament has to legislate to stop no deal

    It has to be said that the media generally are all over the place
  • Theresa Villiers on Sky to be kind to her is naive beyond belief.

    Her argument seems to accept there will be disruption if the EU want to behave in an unreasonable way

    But we will be fine on WTO

    As a Remainer....... Rejoiner........ I see May's deal as the best on offer, and one which enable Rejoining in due course. Probably after the next GE.

    I completely fail to understand those who say that the disruption probable after March 29th if we have No Deal is in any way acceptable.

    Edited for silly spelling.
    It is extreme brexiteer land but fortunately they are massively outvoted in the HOC
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 6,012
    edited December 2

    It was the BBC who stated that everyone is forgetting that this vote does not change anything. Parliament has to legislate to stop no deal

    It has to be said that the media generally are all over the place



    The Media are no different to the politicians and no different to the views expressed on here.. All over the place
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 46,598
    Mr. NorthWales, political journalism is generally pretty rubbish.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 21,256

    Theresa Villiers on Sky to be kind to her is naive beyond belief.

    Her argument seems to accept there will be disruption if the EU want to behave in an unreasonable way

    But we will be fine on WTO

    As a Remainer....... Rejoiner........ I see May's deal as the best on offer, and one which enable Rejoining in due course. Probably after the next GE.

    I completely fail to understand those who say that the disruption probable after March 29th if we have No Deal is in any way acceptable.

    Edited for silly spelling.
    It is extreme brexiteer land but fortunately they are massively outvoted in the HOC
    Outvoted by what? How?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 48,635

    Theresa Villiers on Sky to be kind to her is naive beyond belief.

    Her argument seems to accept there will be disruption if the EU want to behave in an unreasonable way

    But we will be fine on WTO

    ydoethur said:

    So Theresa, Pop Quiz: what do you do? Publish the full legal advice that admits the EU has an effective veto on our actually leaving the EU - or face contempt of Parliament by not publishing it?

    Top BBC story - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46416591

    Publish, say 'woops - I didn't notice that bit' then scrap the deal.
    The bit that was specifically drawn to your attention by the Attorney General? The bit that was so sensitive, there were numbered copies of the advice given out and collected back because they were so explosive? Whoops indeed.....

    Not sure I see any acceptable way out on this. The DUP won't back down, because they are the DUP. Labour won't back down because it's blood sport. The other parties want their "me too" moment. Tories who hate her deal arent going to help out if it says "May's Brexit don't mean Brexit". So you have to think that by some point this coming week, the PM has a toxic piece of advice published. Whilst she is out and about flogging her horse that isn't just dead, it's at the knackers yard being melted down for glue. Result? her "deal" dies by a majority of over two hundred....

    Whoops.
    And then brexit dies as we rejoin
    ... or never actually leave.
    If the EU will let us. An important caveat too many people are forgetting and what the headbangers of the ERG and DUP seem to be gambling on.

    I would expect the EU to be very anxious to have us abort Brexit, but it will only take one naysayer - say, a deeply unpopular Spanish PM looking for some cheap domestic points, or an Irish PM who doesn't understand the issues, or an ill-judged phrase from a very arrogant but not very bright German in charge of the secretariat - to wreck it and leave us with no deal at all and every flight on the planet grounded.

    With that bombshell, I am needed elsewhere. Have a good morning.
    Most seem to forget we are on course to leave with no deal.

    That is default and without legislation it clicks in in March 19
    Yes - surprisingly poor reporting from Keunsberg saying Benn’s amendment “would stop us leaving with no deal”. No it wouldn’t. For that to happen a whole raft of other things have to happen too.
    Both Benn and Villiers clueless.
  • Mr. NorthWales, political journalism is generally pretty rubbish.

    Indeed
  • Nick Boles 'sound of reason' on Sophy Ridge.

    Pleasing to see a common sense approach if the deal falls
  • Theresa Villiers on Sky to be kind to her is naive beyond belief.

    Her argument seems to accept there will be disruption if the EU want to behave in an unreasonable way

    But we will be fine on WTO

    As a Remainer....... Rejoiner........ I see May's deal as the best on offer, and one which enable Rejoining in due course. Probably after the next GE.

    I completely fail to understand those who say that the disruption probable after March 29th if we have No Deal is in any way acceptable.

    Edited for silly spelling.
    It is extreme brexiteer land but fortunately they are massively outvoted in the HOC
    Outvoted by what? How?
    100 ERG - 550 against
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 12,951

    Theresa Villiers on Sky to be kind to her is naive beyond belief.

    Her argument seems to accept there will be disruption if the EU want to behave in an unreasonable way

    But we will be fine on WTO

    As a Remainer....... Rejoiner........ I see May's deal as the best on offer, and one which enable Rejoining in due course. Probably after the next GE.

    I completely fail to understand those who say that the disruption probable after March 29th if we have No Deal is in any way acceptable.

    Edited for silly spelling.
    It is extreme brexiteer land but fortunately they are massively outvoted in the HOC
    Outvoted by what? How?
    Are you suggesting that you'd be content with the (it is the be hoped) short term disruption which wil inevitably follow No Deal?
  • Gina Miller again saying no deal is default
  • Gina Miller has said a second referendum would have to ask

    Deal

    No deal

    Remain

    Adding it has to be fair to everyone
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 11,364
    edited December 2

    So Theresa, Pop Quiz: what do you do? Publish the full legal advice that admits the EU has an effective veto on our actually leaving the EU - or face contempt of Parliament by not publishing it?

    Top BBC story - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46416591

    Publish, say 'woops - I didn't notice that bit' then scrap the deal.
    Embarassing admission: I actually have no idea what "Contempt of Parliament proceedings" are. Just a resolution? Or is there some sort of trial? That would add to the dream-like quality that much of politics currently has.

    Clearly as PM you don't want it, but what exactly is the procedure if a majority said "Publish" (and the Government abstained on the vote) and the PM says "Shan't"?
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 11,364
    Ah, found it in the Guardian:

    Labour sources said that Starmer was ready to sign a joint letter with the DUP’s Westminster leader, Nigel Dodds, the Liberal Democrat Brexit spokesman Tom Brake, and the SNP Europe spokesman Stephen Gethins, asking Bercow to allow a motion “that the government has held parliament in contempt”.

    Under Commons rules, if the speaker allows the motion to go before the House and the vote is carried it would then be referred to the committee of privileges which would rule on whether a contempt of parliament had taken place.

    If it were decided that a contempt had occurred, the committee could recommend a suitable punishment which would be put back to MPs to agree.

    In theory the most severe penalty is expulsion from the House, although the prospects of that happening would appear remote.
    --------
    I do like the very British journalism of that last line - yes, probably the committee won't recommend that the entire government should be expelled.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 46,598
    edited December 2
    A second referendum (with Remain rather than Rejoin) only matters/would be valid, should that option be chosen, if it's credible.

    Edited extra bit: namely, the option to Remain has to be able to occur. Which is not certain.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 21,256
    edited December 2

    Ah, found it in the Guardian:

    Labour sources said that Starmer was ready to sign a joint letter with the DUP’s Westminster leader, Nigel Dodds, the Liberal Democrat Brexit spokesman Tom Brake, and the SNP Europe spokesman Stephen Gethins, asking Bercow to allow a motion “that the government has held parliament in contempt”.

    Under Commons rules, if the speaker allows the motion to go before the House and the vote is carried it would then be referred to the committee of privileges which would rule on whether a contempt of parliament had taken place.

    If it were decided that a contempt had occurred, the committee could recommend a suitable punishment which would be put back to MPs to agree.

    In theory the most severe penalty is expulsion from the House, although the prospects of that happening would appear remote.
    --------
    I do like the very British journalism of that last line - yes, probably the committee won't recommend that the entire government should be expelled.

    Just the Prime Minister.

    Resigning matter, surely?
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 2,254
    edited December 2

    Theresa Villiers on Sky to be kind to her is naive beyond belief.

    Her argument seems to accept there will be disruption if the EU want to behave in an unreasonable way

    But we will be fine on WTO

    As a Remainer....... Rejoiner........ I see May's deal as the best on offer, and one which enable Rejoining in due course. Probably after the next GE.

    I completely fail to understand those who say that the disruption probable after March 29th if we have No Deal is in any way acceptable.

    Edited for silly spelling.
    It will be smart politics as well putting the national interest first for Labour to support the deal. It is BINO and as you said we can review re-joining at any suitable juncture.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 21,256

    So Theresa, Pop Quiz: what do you do? Publish the full legal advice that admits the EU has an effective veto on our actually leaving the EU - or face contempt of Parliament by not publishing it?

    Top BBC story - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46416591

    Publish, say 'woops - I didn't notice that bit' then scrap the deal.
    Embarassing admission: I actually have no idea what "Contempt of Parliament proceedings" are. Just a resolution? Or is there some sort of trial? That would add to the dream-like quality that much of politics currently has.

    Clearly as PM you don't want it, but what exactly is the procedure if a majority said "Publish" (and the Government abstained on the vote) and the PM says "Shan't"?
    You'd have to think the sanction should be worse than Paisly Jnr. suffered though.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 21,256

    Theresa Villiers on Sky to be kind to her is naive beyond belief.

    Her argument seems to accept there will be disruption if the EU want to behave in an unreasonable way

    But we will be fine on WTO

    As a Remainer....... Rejoiner........ I see May's deal as the best on offer, and one which enable Rejoining in due course. Probably after the next GE.

    I completely fail to understand those who say that the disruption probable after March 29th if we have No Deal is in any way acceptable.

    Edited for silly spelling.
    It is extreme brexiteer land but fortunately they are massively outvoted in the HOC
    Outvoted by what? How?
    100 ERG - 550 against
    Again - on what motion with a mechanism that stops No Deal?
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 2,254

    Gina Miller has said a second referendum would have to ask

    Deal

    No deal

    Remain

    Adding it has to be fair to everyone

    As someone who thinks Brexit is a calamity, this is the easiest way for Remain to win, splitting the Leave vote. It is rather unfair though...
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 9,982
    murali_s said:

    Gina Miller has said a second referendum would have to ask

    Deal

    No deal

    Remain

    Adding it has to be fair to everyone

    As someone who thinks Brexit is a calamity, this is the easiest way for Remain to win, splitting the Leave vote. It is rather unfair though...
    It has to be a ranked vote.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 46,598
    Mr. S, depends. One question, three answers, and you're right.

    But if it's a two-phase referendum it'd be perhaps fairer, although that might introduce a bias to the middle.

    Q1 Should the UK Remain or Leave?

    Q2 If Leave wins, should the UK leave with May's deal, or with no deal?
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 9,982
    edited December 2

    Mr. S, depends. One question, three answers, and you're right.

    But if it's a two-phase referendum it'd be perhaps fairer, although that might introduce a bias to the middle.

    Q1 Should the UK Remain or Leave?

    Q2 If Leave wins, should the UK leave with May's deal, or with no deal?

    Phase referendum is not fairer. It is fairer to word it according to the possible outcomes. There are three. We need to pick one.

    On April we will

    Remain
    Leave with Mays deal
    Leave without Mays deal.

    That’s it. Pick one. Or rank them
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 12,951
    murali_s said:

    Gina Miller has said a second referendum would have to ask

    Deal

    No deal

    Remain

    Adding it has to be fair to everyone

    As someone who thinks Brexit is a calamity, this is the easiest way for Remain to win, splitting the Leave vote. It is rather unfair though...
    And if the result was Deal 35% No Deal 20% Remain 45% what conclusions could or should be drawn? FPTP gives Remain, of course, but there's 55% for Leaving 'somehow'!
    Or is it going to be an AV election, in which case presumably Leavers would rather vote Deal (and Leave) than Remain, which gets the Deal ahead.

    It's the old legal maxim, isn't it; never ask a question (in court) to which you do not know the answer.
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 3,147

    Mr. S, depends. One question, three answers, and you're right.

    But if it's a two-phase referendum it'd be perhaps fairer, although that might introduce a bias to the middle.

    Q1 Should the UK Remain or Leave?

    Q2 If Leave wins, should the UK leave with May's deal, or with no deal?

    I would have suggested there are two options. They both revolve around the deal.

    Option 1
    If our elected representatives have rejected the deal by a substantial margin then I see no morally logical case for them to offer us something they consider completely unacceptable, so the choice is leave / remain

    Option 2

    1st referendum is deal, yes or no.

    If no 2nd referendum is remain / no deal
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 46,598
    Mr. Jonathan, then the winning option could have under 50% (or 52%...) of the vote, undermining legitimacy. Not to mention, as Mr. S did, that having three options, two for Leave and just one for Remain, could well be seen as gerrymandering to split the Leave vote.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 5,973

    Ah, found it in the Guardian:

    Labour sources said that Starmer was ready to sign a joint letter with the DUP’s Westminster leader, Nigel Dodds, the Liberal Democrat Brexit spokesman Tom Brake, and the SNP Europe spokesman Stephen Gethins, asking Bercow to allow a motion “that the government has held parliament in contempt”.

    Under Commons rules, if the speaker allows the motion to go before the House and the vote is carried it would then be referred to the committee of privileges which would rule on whether a contempt of parliament had taken place.

    If it were decided that a contempt had occurred, the committee could recommend a suitable punishment which would be put back to MPs to agree.

    In theory the most severe penalty is expulsion from the House, although the prospects of that happening would appear remote.
    --------
    I do like the very British journalism of that last line - yes, probably the committee won't recommend that the entire government should be expelled.

    Just the Prime Minister.

    Resigning matter, surely?
    Interesting. The ERG do not have the numbers to get TMay to resign... But ERG +Labour, SNP & LDs do.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 5,973

    Nick Boles 'sound of reason' on Sophy Ridge.

    Pleasing to see a common sense approach if the deal falls


    What does he suggest?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 5,973
    Pulpstar said:

    Hmm. Does Ladbrokes have a London mayoral market up? Can't seem to find it.

    My bet was with Skybet. They limited me to win £50.
    Not going to be a life-changing win then is it? :wink:
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 9,982
    edited December 2
    Remainers will mostly rank (remain, deal, no deal)
    Conservative loyalists will split on 2nd prefs, but just about rank (deal, remain, no deal)
    Erg will tend to rank (no deal, remain, deal), but there are less than 48 of them so who cares.
    Other leavers will rank (no deal, deal, remain)

    Deal likely to be eliminated in round one, with conservative loyalists just winning it for remain, but it will be close.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 21,256
    Jonathan said:

    Mr. S, depends. One question, three answers, and you're right.

    But if it's a two-phase referendum it'd be perhaps fairer, although that might introduce a bias to the middle.

    Q1 Should the UK Remain or Leave?

    Q2 If Leave wins, should the UK leave with May's deal, or with no deal?

    Phase referendum is not fairer. It is fairer to word it according to the possible outcomes. There are three. We need to pick one.

    On April we will

    Remain
    Leave with Mays deal
    Leave without Mays deal.

    That’s it. Pick one. Or rank them
    How is that honouring a vote where 52% have already said "Leave"? Or the 2017 General Election manifestos where 86% of the votes were cast for parties pledging to implement Brexit? Go ahead - if you really want to try to break democracy in this country...
This discussion has been closed.