Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The party leaders most opposed to BREXIT appear to be the most
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The party leaders most opposed to BREXIT appear to be the most secure in their positions
Interesting market recently gone up at William Hill – which of the main party leaders as listed will be first to leave? Going through it:
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Given UKIP's recent history, the odds have to be on Nuttall being the first to go. Has anyone checked to see how he signed his form yet?
(I've just had my first glass of wine in months, which might explain some of my (hick) posts.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43F7qJTmRFs
I see Lord Prior has also passed away too
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38292549
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/12/12/exclusive-european-citizens-living-uk-should-remain-jurisdiction/
Corbyn is where he is because he's a bit crap.
Nuttal because UKIP are like rats in a sack
Farron because no one cares. Sturgeon because she's doing fine for the Nats.
May because she'd none of the above.
I rather feel like that about Mrs May. Perhaps she will surprise us all. Perhaps.
So the moment Labour ditch Corbyn that's when Mrs May might be vaguely electable, someone like Dan Jarvis, Clive Lewis, or Richard Burgon, so cannot see May going before Jez.
I think Farron and Sturgeon are secure no matter what, so by the process of elimination it has to be Nuttal, but not at those odds.
for a 7-day payout I've been looking at the Strictly betting and not sure why Danny Mac is the best-priced 10/11 fav. he scored higher with the judges than louise in the semi but ended up in the dance off which means louise must have pulled in more public votes. and the final is all about the public vote with judges scores counting for nothing.
Ironically, it will probably help her politically if there's a few more spurious legal challenges and judicial reviews, as they'll buy her some more time before the government are seen as holding up Brexit in the eyes of those who voted for it.
http://www.pathetic.org.uk/unbuilt/m64/
Cameron was up against Corbyn too, and he didn't perform as strongly. May inspires confidence in an awful lot of voters - especially the old, who grant her enormous leads - which must be counted as an achievement in itself. Would George Osborne have performed as well, for example? Discuss.
Corbyn will just stay where he is , it's useless/hopeless.
She's never been in the bottom two, unlike the other two, and the final is down purely to the public vote.
One of them will be eliminated in the first half of the final, then it'll be down to the final two.
I think laying Ore is the best option, who has regularly been in the dance off.
In addition, Cameron had been party leader for ten years, and had suffered continual attacks from a competent Labour spin machine for all those years. May's new to the job and has got no competent opposition.
Osborne would also have been subject to the same problem as Cameron: he's been the focus of many attacks that May has more or less (her infamous speech aside) been free from.
To my mind her best moment was how she approached the campaign to be leader. But since then, it's all felt a bit "meh" and some worrying signs have emerged.
Having got into power by making it clear that she got the country's message, she needed to be open and generous and reassuring - to us, all of us - and to the EU and other countries. And to start sketching out a view of what Britain's role in Europe and the world can be. Something beyond soundbites and banalities.
Instead of which she's slapped down anyone who's dared say anything, has refused to say anything very much at all, giving the impression that she has nothing to say, has tried to cut out Parliament rather than involve it, and has got herself tangled in a legal case.
Brexit will - at best - be difficult and messy. To get through it, we need leadership. That involves telling people some hard truths. And it involves being the sort of person that people will trust even when she is saying something they don't want to hear.
Leadership is not about working very hard at her desk until all hours. Nor is it about micro-managing or trying to do everything herself. For the moment, I don't see her as a leader. And the delay and the emptiness where the debate about how Brexit can work practically is leading to a vacuum.
Keeping your negotiating cards to your chest is one thing. But just as the failure to have a proper debate about what the EU was really about poisoned Britain's relationship with the EU from the start so its failure to have a proper debate now about what is realistic and practical, about the costs and benefits, risks poisoning the post-Brexit future.
May could have spent her time while avoiding committing during the referendum to come up with the outline of one I suppose. That she appears to be a reed in the wind is not something that you seem keen to dwell on.
And the public are in no doubt where the LDs stand - so campaigning will continue even if the 2nd referendum has to fall.
It's infinitely better than those awful 100-yard sections of dual carriageway that used to exist near Sudbury, which were the cause of no end of accidents.
http://news.sky.com/story/forest-hill-station-stabbing-knifeman-shouted-i-want-to-kill-a-muslim-10693616
They must all be asleep.
Yesterday I tipped Labour to poll under 20% at the next GE at 10/1, now down to 6/1
In the land of the blind etc.......
But her personnel choices have not been great and there is a sense of drift.
And for someone who wants to keep her negotiating cards close to her chest she's given away the one card the UK had i.e. the timing of the Article 50 notification. Far better, IMO, to have done the hard work thinking and talking to stakeholders about the various options: EFTA, Single Market, Customs Union, whatever and only when we were really ready give the notification, even if that meant waiting longer. Getting this right matters rather more than getting it done quickly, especially for those whom May professes to care about.
As it is in little over 3 months time the notification will be given, we haven't a clue what our position is, we don't even know whether legally we can do it, we have titans like Bojo and David Davis making arses of themselves around Europe and our own May and Rudd adopting a tone which will make fruitful negotiations harder.
I would like to think that there is some hard thinking and hard work going on somewhere in Whitehall. Who knows? When the PM's advisors are more worried about trousers, for God's sake, there's not much ground for optimism.
https://www.amazon.com/Jumbo-Quiz-Book-Value-Publishing/dp/0517205025
I bet it doesn't.
The recent win in Richmond Park was not an accident.
He said that after an hour and a half's interview, he walked out knowing nothing more about her, or her policies, or her intent than he did when he walked in.
There is no one else near her at present and as I want our Country to succeed through Brexit she is our best hope and it will define her in years to come. It is far too soon to make a judgement
Many years ago I worked for a tech company that had three transsexuals in it, one of whom became a good friend of ours. Two were male to female, one female to male.
An engineer told an American client about this. The client went up to another engineer who had long, black hair (a bit Gothish) and asked him loudly: "Are you the female to male?"
He wasn't.
There was a certain amount of trouble over the incident.
Richmond is Farron's target audience, but the UK is not Richmond.
Other than B***** means B*****?
QED
From happy clappy, bible thumping Farron, with his weird face and odd voice; to Dr Bullshitter Nuttall and his shiny bald head, to beardy, vain old twat and principled bellend Corbyn to May who can get her bloomers in a twist over a pair of trousers. May deserves special mention because she is just strange in a strange way.
Leaders go two ways, either they resign due to political failure or they are defenestrated in anticipation of further failure.
Farron is safe as he is largely in tune with his MPs and seen by members and activists as one of them. The fact that he is disliked by kippers or ignored by the wider public is irrelevant as far as this bet goes.
There is the third exit, by ill health, and that may well be telling on the one with the most gruelling job, and with significant chronic disease.
Not 100% sure that is Tezza. We shall see.
I can't think of any reason why she would want to be PM...
On the health front too...look at Trump. I wonder what kind of pharmaceutical regime keeps that obese, seemingly unhealthy old twat going. It must be a shed load of drugs mind...
She is, apparently, very well respected at Sandhurst.
If she doesn't want a referendum about every clause and article, she had better start leading.
He had the trust of a lot of the country. He should have set in motion genuine Leave contingency planning. Had that genuine contingency planning revealed stark downsides to Leaving, at that stage he still had the credibility to have explained them to the country.
But to swing from being so positive in his speeches that the UK could be successful outside the EU, to being so full of doom during the campaign, with nothing in between except a highly suspect 'good deal' that was likely to fall apart at the first challenge in the ECJ, he forfeited both the trust and the credibility of a genuine Leave contingency plan that might have looked less than optimal.
She couldn't even confidently communicate her grammar schools policy to Parliament, for heaven's sake.
I think she is scared - of the voters, of UKIP, of her MPs. Hiding in the Home Office is one thing. But a PM can't hide.
Of course there are no easy options: but even if she'd said : "Look we've voted to leave the EU and we will. But to disengage from the EU after 43 years is going to take time and is best done in stages so as to protect, as far as possible, you - the ones who are just managing - and so we are going to do this patiently, soberly, in stages and in co-operation with our allies so that we achieve what the country has voted for and we do so in a way which provides the best opportunity for us all to maintain a stable and growing economy and to develop the best relationship we can with the EU once we leave because we are and will remain a part of Europe, even if we will not be a part of the EU. And this means that we are not going to get all that we want on Day 1. But we will make a start And that will likely mean some transitional arrangement. And this is why this matters to you and is a more sensible route than that advocated by those saying that it can all be done in an instant."
Well that would have been better than what we've got now, no?
And it might also have the advantage of giving the EU time to adapt and allow passions to cool and perhaps shown the rest of the EU that, whatever they might think about the decision itself, we are at least approaching its implementation in a thoughtful manner.
Is May that person?
http://www.conservativehome.com/parliament/2016/04/theresa-mays-speech-on-brexit-full-text.html
"If the people of Scotland are forced to choose between the United Kingdom and the European Union we do not know what the result would be. But only a little more than eighteen months after the referendum that kept the United Kingdom together, I do not want to see the country I love at risk of dismemberment once more."
Do we now know the answer to this question?
The whole speech merits close analysis given that it's the best thing we have to go on regarding May's real views on some of the key issues.
The question is, is the failing hers, or is it the structure she finds herself within?
My take: Theresa May essentially has an impossible job, all she is doing is keeping her head above water, and she is doing admirably well at that. The snipers are lurking in every concievable direction and behind every corner. As soon as she sets out a position of any substance, it will be torn to shreds. So she says very little, talks in generalities, affirms certain positions, lets others do the talking, keeps control of the ship while buying time to do the spadework necessary behind the scenes to enable the country to enter in to this enormous renegotiation - the work that her predecessors notably neglected to even contemplate, such was their arrogance and willingness to screw the whole country if they couldn't get their way.
As someone who has never voted conservative on principle I have to say that at the moment she is the only person capable of holding the country together and taking Brexit to a sensible conclusion.
The idea that Jeremy Corbyn would do a better job is so laughable it is almost insane. He would be an absolute catastrophe. The people who I know in the labour party, the sensible people, agree privately.
And the idea that Andrea Leadsom, with her 'get on with article 50 with no preperation' stance could do any better is equally ridiculous.
My increasing feeling is that Theresa May needs our support because she is the last and only sensible option