politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Ladbrokes 20/1 that the Brexit Secretary, DDavis, will be

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Ladbrokes 20/1 that the Brexit Secretary, DDavis, will be next Cabinet minister out looks like a value bet

The @jameschappers claims about DD could damage. Just bet at 20/1 that he'll be next Cabinet minister out. https://t.co/vowq0lx88K pic.twitter.com/mrSd5ZqNhh

Read the full story here

Casino_Royale

It's an interesting bet. As things stand he should be there until at least Autumn 2018, when the deal is meant to be sealed and the voting starts, and it's whether or not all other cabinet ministers hold ranks for 14 months *or* a scandal or ill health forces him to leave early, rather less likely.

20/1 isn't bad.

CarlottaVance

Second! Like Remain & Corbyn!

freetochoose

This is getting ridiculous, an attention seeking ex employee puts something on twitter, which reaches The Times, which prompts a betting tip on here.

As somebody pointed out last night, this site used to be full of interesting discourse, now its an extension of facebook, very disappointing.

And a word to those who got hysterical about Trump using "us" or "em", it weakens your stance in future debates if others know you're prepared to tell lies.

CarlottaVance

Agree 20/1 is value - though as Chappers has re-tweeted OGH doubt it will last.....meanwhile:

https://twitter.com/jameschappers/status/897693458403655680

Charles

CarlottaVance said:

Agree 20/1 is value - though as Chappers has re-tweeted OGH doubt it will last.....meanwhile:

https://twitter.com/jameschappers/status/897693458403655680

On look Mummy! I was bag carrier to a mid ranking politician once.

ydoethur

Not tempted. 4-5% chance is about right. The likely next one to go is May herself, but if she is excluded the one to watch is probably Jeremy Hunt. She never wanted him in the first place and he would be a popular sacking.

Boris and Hammond are also in for a difficult quarter - Boris as America spirals out of control and Hammond because he has to square an impossible circle in the budget.

Davis will be the only Brexit Secretary unless he's caught embezzling money from old ladies or approving of Jeremy Corbyn or something equally insane.

felix

freetochoose said:

This is getting ridiculous, an attention seeking ex employee puts something on twitter, which reaches The Times, which prompts a betting tip on here.

As somebody pointed out last night, this site used to be full of interesting discourse, now its an extension of facebook, very disappointing.

And a word to those who got hysterical about Trump using "us" or "em", it weakens your stance in future debates if others know you're prepared to tell lies.

+1 - with a paper out today re the Irish border as well it is really quite risible.

ydoethur

felix said:

freetochoose said:

This is getting ridiculous, an attention seeking ex employee puts something on twitter, which reaches The Times, which prompts a betting tip on here.

As somebody pointed out last night, this site used to be full of interesting discourse, now its an extension of facebook, very disappointing.

And a word to those who got hysterical about Trump using "us" or "em", it weakens your stance in future debates if others know you're prepared to tell lies.

+1 - with a paper out today re the Irish border as well it is really quite risible.

Why are they publishing a separate paper on that? Surely most of it was covered yesterday.

CarlottaVance

I always have a rule – that I learned from my folks – which is to be nice to people.

http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/james-chapman-daily-mail

AlastairMeeks

I always start from the viewpoint that if there are 22 members of the Cabinet, the par odds are 21/1. So David Davis is almost exactly par.

James Chapman has gone rogue. Whether he actually has anything damaging remains to be seen. But the will to damage is certainly there. I'm not betting on this but I'd say there's value at 20/1. I'd price this at around 12/1.

daodao

ydoethur said:

felix said:

freetochoose said:

This is getting ridiculous, an attention seeking ex employee puts something on twitter, which reaches The Times, which prompts a betting tip on here.

As somebody pointed out last night, this site used to be full of interesting discourse, now its an extension of facebook, very disappointing.

And a word to those who got hysterical about Trump using "us" or "em", it weakens your stance in future debates if others know you're prepared to tell lies.

+1 - with a paper out today re the Irish border as well it is really quite risible.

Why are they publishing a separate paper on that? Surely most of it was covered yesterday.

The papers on customs arrangements and the Irish border continue the theme of "having your cake and eating it". The Maykip government is living in cloud cuckoo land, however plausible DD sounds in interviews. He'll be gone by 2019, but probably not before.

There has to be a hard border for a full Brexit, and the best place for it is in the Irish Sea, extending up the Solway Firth and along the Cheviots, reflecting national votes in the EURef on 23/6/16. The alternative of a soft Brexit isn't Brexit at all, merely taxation without representation.

ydoethur

Charles said:

CarlottaVance said:

Agree 20/1 is value - though as Chappers has re-tweeted OGH doubt it will last.....meanwhile:

https://twitter.com/jameschappers/status/897693458403655680

On look Mummy! I was bag carrier to a mid ranking politician once.

An interesting article. It is worth pointing out however that there has been a flourishing wine industry in Gloucestershire for the small matter of two millennia. So he is entirely wrong to suggest that this failed vineyard in Romsey marked the beginning of the English wine system.

Even if we date it from the establishment of the first large-scale modern vineyard, that takes us back to 1973 (the Three Choirs).

CarlottaVance

ydoethur said:

felix said:

freetochoose said:

This is getting ridiculous, an attention seeking ex employee puts something on twitter, which reaches The Times, which prompts a betting tip on here.

As somebody pointed out last night, this site used to be full of interesting discourse, now its an extension of facebook, very disappointing.

And a word to those who got hysterical about Trump using "us" or "em", it weakens your stance in future debates if others know you're prepared to tell lies.

+1 - with a paper out today re the Irish border as well it is really quite risible.

Why are they publishing a separate paper on that? Surely most of it was covered yesterday.

The EU insist they are separate issues? It's a fiction they are keen to preserve because otherwise they think they can't blackmail us into coughing up before we discuss trade terms...

ydoethur

daodao said:

ydoethur said:

felix said:

freetochoose said:

This is getting ridiculous, an attention seeking ex employee puts something on twitter, which reaches The Times, which prompts a betting tip on here.

As somebody pointed out last night, this site used to be full of interesting discourse, now its an extension of facebook, very disappointing.

And a word to those who got hysterical about Trump using "us" or "em", it weakens your stance in future debates if others know you're prepared to tell lies.

+1 - with a paper out today re the Irish border as well it is really quite risible.

Why are they publishing a separate paper on that? Surely most of it was covered yesterday.

The papers on customs arrangements and the Irish border continue the theme of "having your cake and eating it". The Maykip government is living in cloud cuckoo land, however plausible DD sounds in interviews. He'll be gone by 2019, but probably not before.

There has to be a hard border for a full Brexit, and the best place for it is in the Irish Sea, extending up the Solway Firth and along the Cheviots, reflecting national votes in the EURef on 23/6/16. The alternative of a soft Brexit isn't Brexit at all, merely taxation without representation.

Which had no relevance whatsoever to my question.

@CarlottaVance I suppose that's possible but it still seems rather unnecessary. The straightforward issue is whether or not we are in a customs union. If we are there is no problem. It's only if that ceases that the issue arises.

A more logical reason might be to reassure the Irish, and there could be worse reasons than that.

freetochoose

Charles said:

CarlottaVance said:

Agree 20/1 is value - though as Chappers has re-tweeted OGH doubt it will last.....meanwhile:

https://twitter.com/jameschappers/status/897693458403655680

On look Mummy! I was bag carrier to a mid ranking politician once.

Those of us who have flirted with politics (in person as opposed to online) will have encountered sycophantic lickspittles such as Chapman. If they are so smart and influential why not stand and get elected?

rkrkrk

Casino_Royale said:

It's an interesting bet. As things stand he should be there until at least Autumn 2018, when the deal is meant to be sealed and the voting starts, and it's whether or not all other cabinet ministers hold ranks for 14 months *or* a scandal or ill health forces him to leave early, rather less likely.

20/1 isn't bad.

It's not bad odds (better than many others previously touted in this market) - but I'm not that tempted.

According to wiki there are 23 people in the current Cabinet. So 20/1 still means more likely than average.

I think it would be much easier for TM to move someone in a junior position.
I also think this is DD dream job in many ways, he is unlikely to want to go?
I don't know - but he doesn't seem to be the worst performer in this Cabinet

Then there are a few mavericks in Cabinet who might do something weird/scandalous/illegal... Boris, Gove, Fox...

Also if there's a reshuffle where lots of people move, it will hard to know or work out who went first?

ydoethur

AlastairMeeks said:

I always start from the viewpoint that if there are 22 members of the Cabinet, the par odds are 21/1. So David Davis is almost exactly par.

James Chapman has gone rogue. Whether he actually has anything damaging remains to be seen. But the will to damage is certainly there. I'm not betting on this but I'd say there's value at 20/1. I'd price this at around 12/1.

He's certainly damaging himself.

I will be very surprised if he is still working at Bell Pottinger on October 1st. Bringing the company into disrepute in this way is normally a sacking offence.

ydoethur

rkrkrk said:

I don't know - but he doesn't seem to be the worst performer in this Cabinet

Although considering the um, really quite remarkable uselessness of some of the others - Liam Fox springs to mind - that's not saying much.

freetochoose

AlastairMeeks said:

I always start from the viewpoint that if there are 22 members of the Cabinet, the par odds are 21/1. So David Davis is almost exactly par.

James Chapman has gone rogue. Whether he actually has anything damaging remains to be seen. But the will to damage is certainly there. I'm not betting on this but I'd say there's value at 20/1. I'd price this at around 12/1.

Sorry I disagree, in a test match with 22 players Jimmy Anderson is 21/1 to be top scorer according to your "par", in reality he's nearer 2000/1.

Which actually isn't my point, if we've got to the stage where an ex employee on twitter is influencing government we are royally fucked.

Casino_Royale

rkrkrk said:

Casino_Royale said:

It's an interesting bet. As things stand he should be there until at least Autumn 2018, when the deal is meant to be sealed and the voting starts, and it's whether or not all other cabinet ministers hold ranks for 14 months *or* a scandal or ill health forces him to leave early, rather less likely.

20/1 isn't bad.

It's not bad odds (better than many others previously touted in this market) - but I'm not that tempted.

According to wiki there are 23 people in the current Cabinet. So 20/1 still means more likely than average.

I think it would be much easier for TM to move someone in a junior position.
I also think this is DD dream job in many ways, he is unlikely to want to go?
I don't know - but he doesn't seem to be the worst performer in this Cabinet

Then there are a few mavericks in Cabinet who might do something weird/scandalous/illegal... Boris, Gove, Fox...

Also if there's a reshuffle where lots of people move, it will hard to know or work out who went first?

OGH wants to believe Chapman because he doesn't like Brexit; ergo it's a bet to take. It's heart over head and you have to be very careful on that as a gambler.

Nevertheless I think there is some value in 20/1, but I wouldn't expect it to come in.

CarlottaVance

ydoethur said:

AlastairMeeks said:

I always start from the viewpoint that if there are 22 members of the Cabinet, the par odds are 21/1. So David Davis is almost exactly par.

James Chapman has gone rogue. Whether he actually has anything damaging remains to be seen. But the will to damage is certainly there. I'm not betting on this but I'd say there's value at 20/1. I'd price this at around 12/1.

He's certainly damaging himself.

I will be very surprised if he is still working at Bell Pottinger on October 1st. Bringing the company into disrepute in this way is normally a sacking offence.

Bell Pottinger haven't been having the best of times:

Why is British public relations firm Bell Pottinger, according to Bloomberg, whitewashing the reputation of Venezuelan state oil company PDVSA?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/venezuela-nicolas-maduro-dictatorship-elections-jeremy-corbyn

SouthamObserver

Davis's propensity to wing it due to an aversion to detail is what could do for him, not any Tweets from Mr Chapman. Remember, it was only a year or so ago that he was telling us we'd have trade deals done and dusted with everyone within in two years. A few months later, when in the cabinet, he was saying the Brexit deal would deliver all the benefits the UK and its citizens currently get from EU membership. Only someone with a very lazy mind could have thought these things.

Bottom line, though, is that May is too weak to sack anyone. Throw in her decision to embrace the Brexit right's extremism and the idea of her firing Davis is a non-starter. He'd have to resign. Can't see him doing that.

AlastairMeeks

freetochoose said:

AlastairMeeks said:

I always start from the viewpoint that if there are 22 members of the Cabinet, the par odds are 21/1. So David Davis is almost exactly par.

James Chapman has gone rogue. Whether he actually has anything damaging remains to be seen. But the will to damage is certainly there. I'm not betting on this but I'd say there's value at 20/1. I'd price this at around 12/1.

Sorry I disagree, in a test match with 22 players Jimmy Anderson is 21/1 to be top scorer according to your "par", in reality he's nearer 2000/1.

Which actually isn't my point, if we've got to the stage where an ex employee on twitter is influencing government we are royally fucked.

My method worked well for me when I have played this market. Your cricket analogy doesn't work, first because you're looking for the lowest scorer not the highest scorer and secondly because there are far more ways of getting out in this game.

If ex-employees have relevant information, they should be listened to. Whistleblowers have their place.

CarlottaVance

https://twitter.com/jameschappers/status/897701919816372230

https://twitter.com/gavinaldrich/status/897701603129647105

freetochoose

@southam

I'd like to press you on this:

Throw in her decision to embrace the Brexit right's extremism

I'd be grateful if you could give an example of this. Please bear in mind last night's conversation centred around the KKK.

Alanbrooke

Mrs Merkel back to rigging markets

this time airlines accoring to Ryanair

http://www.faz.net/aktuell/wirtschaft/unternehmen/offensichtlicher-komplott-eu-kommission-prueft-staatshilfen-fuer-air-berlin-15153420.html

freetochoose

AlastairMeeks said:

freetochoose said:

AlastairMeeks said:

I always start from the viewpoint that if there are 22 members of the Cabinet, the par odds are 21/1. So David Davis is almost exactly par.

James Chapman has gone rogue. Whether he actually has anything damaging remains to be seen. But the will to damage is certainly there. I'm not betting on this but I'd say there's value at 20/1. I'd price this at around 12/1.

Sorry I disagree, in a test match with 22 players Jimmy Anderson is 21/1 to be top scorer according to your "par", in reality he's nearer 2000/1.

Which actually isn't my point, if we've got to the stage where an ex employee on twitter is influencing government we are royally fucked.

My method worked well for me when I have played this market. Your cricket analogy doesn't work, first because you're looking for the lowest scorer not the highest scorer and secondly because there are far more ways of getting out in this game.

If ex-employees have relevant information, they should be listened to. Whistleblowers have their place.

Placing a bet is about judgement, we all use different criteria. In selecting mine I'm usually wary of those who may have an axe to grind. If you collect good for you, I suspect this is one of those scenarios that you want to happen as opposed to having strong convictions about.

Stable lads work with racehorses all day every day, 99% of them are skint.

AlastairMeeks

freetochoose said:

AlastairMeeks said:

freetochoose said:

AlastairMeeks said:

I always start from the viewpoint that if there are 22 members of the Cabinet, the par odds are 21/1. So David Davis is almost exactly par.

James Chapman has gone rogue. Whether he actually has anything damaging remains to be seen. But the will to damage is certainly there. I'm not betting on this but I'd say there's value at 20/1. I'd price this at around 12/1.

Sorry I disagree, in a test match with 22 players Jimmy Anderson is 21/1 to be top scorer according to your "par", in reality he's nearer 2000/1.

Which actually isn't my point, if we've got to the stage where an ex employee on twitter is influencing government we are royally fucked.

My method worked well for me when I have played this market. Your cricket analogy doesn't work, first because you're looking for the lowest scorer not the highest scorer and secondly because there are far more ways of getting out in this game.

If ex-employees have relevant information, they should be listened to. Whistleblowers have their place.

Placing a bet is about judgement, we all use different criteria. In selecting mine I'm usually wary of those who may have an axe to grind. If you collect good for you, I suspect this is one of those scenarios that you want to happen as opposed to having strong convictions about.

Stable lads work with racehorses all day every day, 99% of them are skint.

I've not placed this bet. Nor am I particularly impressed with James Chapman. As he commits Twitter suicide, however, he may bring down a whole host of others, which makes this bet value because he's most likely to have dirt on David Davis and is clearly willing to use it if he does. When thieves fall out...

rkrkrk

AlastairMeeks said:

I always start from the viewpoint that if there are 22 members of the Cabinet, the par odds are 21/1. So David Davis is almost exactly par.

James Chapman has gone rogue. Whether he actually has anything damaging remains to be seen. But the will to damage is certainly there. I'm not betting on this but I'd say there's value at 20/1. I'd price this at around 12/1.

I started from the same place and ended up with the opposite conclusion!

Charles

ydoethur said:

felix said:

freetochoose said:

This is getting ridiculous, an attention seeking ex employee puts something on twitter, which reaches The Times, which prompts a betting tip on here.

As somebody pointed out last night, this site used to be full of interesting discourse, now its an extension of facebook, very disappointing.

And a word to those who got hysterical about Trump using "us" or "em", it weakens your stance in future debates if others know you're prepared to tell lies.

+1 - with a paper out today re the Irish border as well it is really quite risible.

Why are they publishing a separate paper on that? Surely most of it was covered yesterday.

Probably because Eire is a potential ally in discussions and it's much more important to get right than the precise details of the Danegeld

foxinsoxuk

ydoethur said:

rkrkrk said:

I don't know - but he doesn't seem to be the worst performer in this Cabinet

Although considering the um, really quite remarkable uselessness of some of the others - Liam Fox springs to mind - that's not saying much.

That is the problem with this bet. There are plenty of other incompetents in cabinet who can flounce or be sacked, including the PM herself.

I would price it up as follows:

DD to go first due to genuine health reasons: perhaps 1%

DD to go due to some sort of personal scandal: seems slim, and the nation is less puritanical about sex, though money could provide one. 1% again.

DD resigns: It is his dream job, but on the other hand he has a history of Quixiotic flouncing. 5% perhaps.

DD is sacked: I don't think TM is "Strong and Stable" enough to depose him; but the risk of Brexit negotiations being blatantly mishandled is there. On the otherhand , lack of ability has never been a bar to holding high public office! 5% again.

I reckon perhaps a 12% chance of going in the next year. When you run the same sieve over Boris or my near namesake, or Spreadsheet Phil (who TM had in her sights and has a problematic punishment budget on the way), there are far more likely candidates for the exit, and the PM herself of course. No bet from me.

ydoethur

AlastairMeeks said:

freetochoose said:

AlastairMeeks said:

freetochoose said:

AlastairMeeks said:

I always start from the viewpoint that if there are 22 members of the Cabinet, the par odds are 21/1. So David Davis is almost exactly par.

James Chapman has gone rogue. Whether he actually has anything damaging remains to be seen. But the will to damage is certainly there. I'm not betting on this but I'd say there's value at 20/1. I'd price this at around 12/1.

Sorry I disagree, in a test match with 22 players Jimmy Anderson is 21/1 to be top scorer according to your "par", in reality he's nearer 2000/1.

Which actually isn't my point, if we've got to the stage where an ex employee on twitter is influencing government we are royally fucked.

My method worked well for me when I have played this market. Your cricket analogy doesn't work, first because you're looking for the lowest scorer not the highest scorer and secondly because there are far more ways of getting out in this game.

If ex-employees have relevant information, they should be listened to. Whistleblowers have their place.

Placing a bet is about judgement, we all use different criteria. In selecting mine I'm usually wary of those who may have an axe to grind. If you collect good for you, I suspect this is one of those scenarios that you want to happen as opposed to having strong convictions about.

Stable lads work with racehorses all day every day, 99% of them are skint.

I've not placed this bet. Nor am I particularly impressed with James Chapman. As he commits Twitter suicide, however, he may bring down a whole host of others, which makes this bet value because he's most likely to have dirt on David Davis and is clearly willing to use it if he does. When thieves fall out...

So far he's been big on making allegations. However, I would suggest that before he becomes a threat to Davis he's going to need proof of them. I don't think anyone is going to fall on his unsupported word unless they bring a libel action and lose (which as you noted last night is possible).

FF43

I think Davis is difficult to sack because he's the only one in government taking Brexit seriously. The others either wish it would go away (Hammond etc) or are using it to score ideological points (Johnson, Fox)

rkrkrk

CarlottaVance said:

I always have a rule – that I learned from my folks – which is to be nice to people.

http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/james-chapman-daily-mail

It's an interesting interview. Being in government has certainly changed his mind on a lot of issues:

I mean:
"we should be falling over ourselves in gratitude that there are people like that [top civil servants] who are prepared to work in public service.... the people I encountered.... any of these people could be running any multinational company they wanted. And people would snap them up if they put themselves on LinkedIn. This country should be really thankful."

Isn't exactly the standard Daily Mail line on civil servants...

Charles

freetochoose said:

Charles said:

CarlottaVance said:

Agree 20/1 is value - though as Chappers has re-tweeted OGH doubt it will last.....meanwhile:

https://twitter.com/jameschappers/status/897693458403655680

On look Mummy! I was bag carrier to a mid ranking politician once.

Those of us who have flirted with politics (in person as opposed to online) will have encountered sycophantic lickspittles such as Chapman. If they are so smart and influential why not stand and get elected?

Agreed. Although it can also be fun to stay in the background...

The lickspittle route is a cul de sac unless you can use it as a springboard (and even then it leaves you a stunted politician)

Sandpit

Any tips on this market also assume it won't be settled by dead heat rules with a general reshuffle in the autumn. As others have said 20/1 is a par score for any individual cabinet member, and I'm not sure someone is going to be sacked or forced out by the insane Twitter ramblings of a former staffer. Especially not from such a sensitive cabinet role.

ydoethur

foxinsoxuk said:

DD to go due to some sort of personal scandal: seems slim, and the nation is less puritanical about sex, though money could provide one. 1% again.

When I first read that, still being half asleep, I thought it was a reference to prostitution and I thought, 'surely he's never been accused of frequenting such places?'

Agree with most of the rest. Johnson is surely the likeliest to go, followed by Hammond. I just worry Gove might replace them.

foxinsoxuk

CarlottaVance said:

ydoethur said:

AlastairMeeks said:

I always start from the viewpoint that if there are 22 members of the Cabinet, the par odds are 21/1. So David Davis is almost exactly par.

James Chapman has gone rogue. Whether he actually has anything damaging remains to be seen. But the will to damage is certainly there. I'm not betting on this but I'd say there's value at 20/1. I'd price this at around 12/1.

He's certainly damaging himself.

I will be very surprised if he is still working at Bell Pottinger on October 1st. Bringing the company into disrepute in this way is normally a sacking offence.

Bell Pottinger haven't been having the best of times:

Why is British public relations firm Bell Pottinger, according to Bloomberg, whitewashing the reputation of Venezuelan state oil company PDVSA?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/venezuela-nicolas-maduro-dictatorship-elections-jeremy-corbyn

Yes but if a PR company can put up a plausible defence of the indefensible, then it is surely a feather in their cap?

If we were only allowed the morally pure as clients then all the PB lawyers, accountants and my own dear profession would be very short of clients...

Morris_Dancer

Good morning, everyone.

I'm not inclined to bet based on something Chapman said, to be honest.

Charles

AlastairMeeks said:

freetochoose said:

AlastairMeeks said:

freetochoose said:

AlastairMeeks said:

I always start from the viewpoint that if there are 22 members of the Cabinet, the par odds are 21/1. So David Davis is almost exactly par.

James Chapman has gone rogue. Whether he actually has anything damaging remains to be seen. But the will to damage is certainly there. I'm not betting on this but I'd say there's value at 20/1. I'd price this at around 12/1.

Sorry I disagree, in a test match with 22 players Jimmy Anderson is 21/1 to be top scorer according to your "par", in reality he's nearer 2000/1.

Which actually isn't my point, if we've got to the stage where an ex employee on twitter is influencing government we are royally fucked.

My method worked well for me when I have played this market. Your cricket analogy doesn't work, first because you're looking for the lowest scorer not the highest scorer and secondly because there are far more ways of getting out in this game.

If ex-employees have relevant information, they should be listened to. Whistleblowers have their place.

Placing a bet is about judgement, we all use different criteria. In selecting mine I'm usually wary of those who may have an axe to grind. If you collect good for you, I suspect this is one of those scenarios that you want to happen as opposed to having strong convictions about.

Stable lads work with racehorses all day every day, 99% of them are skint.

I've not placed this bet. Nor am I particularly impressed with James Chapman. As he commits Twitter suicide, however, he may bring down a whole host of others, which makes this bet value because he's most likely to have dirt on David Davis and is clearly willing to use it if he does. When thieves fall out...

I think the problem is that he's just throwing shit at the wall and seeing if any of it sticks.

Conceptual he might have. 1-2 really damaging items and 20 pieces of fluff. He would have been more effective to run with those 1-2 to allow them to gather momentum.

I think he's just sharing third hand village gossip with no real insight

foxinsoxuk

Sandpit said:

Any tips on this market also assume it won't be settled by dead heat rules with a general reshuffle in the autumn. As others have said 20/1 is a par score for any individual cabinet member, and I'm not sure someone is going to be sacked or forced out by the insane Twitter ramblings of a former staffer. Especially not from such a sensitive cabinet role.

How do dead heat rules operate in these markets?

CarlottaVance

foxinsoxuk said:

CarlottaVance said:

ydoethur said:

AlastairMeeks said:

I always start from the viewpoint that if there are 22 members of the Cabinet, the par odds are 21/1. So David Davis is almost exactly par.

James Chapman has gone rogue. Whether he actually has anything damaging remains to be seen. But the will to damage is certainly there. I'm not betting on this but I'd say there's value at 20/1. I'd price this at around 12/1.

He's certainly damaging himself.

I will be very surprised if he is still working at Bell Pottinger on October 1st. Bringing the company into disrepute in this way is normally a sacking offence.

Bell Pottinger haven't been having the best of times:

Why is British public relations firm Bell Pottinger, according to Bloomberg, whitewashing the reputation of Venezuelan state oil company PDVSA?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/venezuela-nicolas-maduro-dictatorship-elections-jeremy-corbyn

Yes but if a PR company can put up a plausible defence of the indefensible, then it is surely a feather in their cap?
.

You think Venezuela has had a good press recently?

CarlottaVance

Charles said:

AlastairMeeks said:

freetochoose said:

AlastairMeeks said:

freetochoose said:

AlastairMeeks said:

I always start from the viewpoint that if there are 22 members of the Cabinet, the par odds are 21/1. So David Davis is almost exactly par.

James Chapman has gone rogue. Whether he actually has anything damaging remains to be seen. But the will to damage is certainly there. I'm not betting on this but I'd say there's value at 20/1. I'd price this at around 12/1.

Sorry I disagree, in a test match with 22 players Jimmy Anderson is 21/1 to be top scorer according to your "par", in reality he's nearer 2000/1.

Which actually isn't my point, if we've got to the stage where an ex employee on twitter is influencing government we are royally fucked.

My method worked well for me when I have played this market. Your cricket analogy doesn't work, first because you're looking for the lowest scorer not the highest scorer and secondly because there are far more ways of getting out in this game.

If ex-employees have relevant information, they should be listened to. Whistleblowers have their place.

Placing a bet is about judgement, we all use different criteria. In selecting mine I'm usually wary of those who may have an axe to grind. If you collect good for you, I suspect this is one of those scenarios that you want to happen as opposed to having strong convictions about.

Stable lads work with racehorses all day every day, 99% of them are skint.

I've not placed this bet. Nor am I particularly impressed with James Chapman. As he commits Twitter suicide, however, he may bring down a whole host of others, which makes this bet value because he's most likely to have dirt on David Davis and is clearly willing to use it if he does. When thieves fall out...

I think he's just sharing third hand village gossip with no real insight

While he's enlivened a dull August there don't seem to be many revelations among the "fluff" - the latest a recycling of an old story about the authenticity of a Minister's marriage....

foxinsoxuk

CarlottaVance said:

foxinsoxuk said:

CarlottaVance said:

ydoethur said:

AlastairMeeks said:

I always start from the viewpoint that if there are 22 members of the Cabinet, the par odds are 21/1. So David Davis is almost exactly par.

James Chapman has gone rogue. Whether he actually has anything damaging remains to be seen. But the will to damage is certainly there. I'm not betting on this but I'd say there's value at 20/1. I'd price this at around 12/1.

He's certainly damaging himself.

I will be very surprised if he is still working at Bell Pottinger on October 1st. Bringing the company into disrepute in this way is normally a sacking offence.

Bell Pottinger haven't been having the best of times:

Why is British public relations firm Bell Pottinger, according to Bloomberg, whitewashing the reputation of Venezuelan state oil company PDVSA?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/venezuela-nicolas-maduro-dictatorship-elections-jeremy-corbyn

Yes but if a PR company can put up a plausible defence of the indefensible, then it is surely a feather in their cap?
.

You think Venezuela has had a good press recently?

No, but like being the advocate for the Charlottesville driver, there is a challenge to be had.

To be fair on Bell Pottinger, spinning Venezuela is not an easy job. You cannot polish a turd, though sprinkling it with glitter is fairly easy.

If there is one thing that Chappers is demonstrating is that he knows how to get publicity!

ydoethur

foxinsoxuk said:

Yes but if a PR company can put up a plausible defence of the indefensible, then it is surely a feather in their cap?

Totally off topic, but to lighten the mood:

I came across a poem by Burns I'd never heard of yesterday. It was about a young soldier who duebto his prowess was allowed to put a feather in his hat.

Unfortunately the feather came from a male chicken, and the hat in question was a beaver hat...

...so there really is a Burns poem called Cock Up Your Beaver.

How language changes, eh?

CarlottaVance

ydoethur said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Yes but if a PR company can put up a plausible defence of the indefensible, then it is surely a feather in their cap?

...so there really is a Burns poem called Cock Up Your Beaver.

How language changes, eh?

With a Johnie no less:

When first my brave Johnie lad came to this town,
He had a blue bonnet that wanted the crown;
But now he has gotten a hat and a feather,
Hey, brave Johnie lad, cock up your beaver!

Cock up your beaver, and cock it fu' sprush,
We'll over the border, and gie them a brush;
There's somebody there we'll teach better behaviour,
Hey, brave Johnie lad, cock up your beaver!

http://www.robertburns.org/works/333.shtml

chrisoxon

Charles said:

I think the problem is that he's just throwing shit at the wall and seeing if any of it sticks.

Conceptual he might have. 1-2 really damaging items and 20 pieces of fluff. He would have been more effective to run with those 1-2 to allow them to gather momentum.

I think he's just sharing third hand village gossip with no real insight

Quite. At one point yesterday he started lashing out at Andrew Neil, who immediately hit back. By mixing venomous bile with "whistleblowing" he's damaging his prospects of success.

Furthermore, why use Twitter? If he really is privy to explosive and damaging allegations about Brexit and Davis I'm sure Newsnight would have had him on. Maybe that would have had a bit more credibility?

There are also the health comments made by some journalists and politicians yesterday. Could be a smear, but would you really risk your own reputation trying to smear a former SPAD? What's the reward?

Pulpstar

Hmm If I was May, there is no way on God's green earth I'd like to be seen to have been influenced by an ex employee holding a grudge.
So I think DD is probably safer than average actually.
I was on Justine Greening and Fox although as I placed those bets a while back I have no idea if they are still live post GE. Probably not

SouthamObserver

freetochoose said:

@southam

I'd like to press you on this:

Throw in her decision to embrace the Brexit right's extremism

I'd be grateful if you could give an example of this. Please bear in mind last night's conversation centred around the KKK.

I would not compare the Brexit right to the KKK. They are deluded imperialists yearning for a trade-based Empire 2.0, not white supremacists. We are nowhere near having the same breakdown the US is in the process of having.

But May embraced the No Surrender, White Cliffs of Dover, cliff-edge Brexiteers after the referendum. She's been hobbled because voters did not give her the mandate to pursue that. But her bed has been made.

Morris_Dancer

Meanwhile, the land border dispute got a tiny bit hot the other day. No, not us and Ireland. China and India:
https://twitter.com/michaelbd/status/897575483772108800

ydoethur

Pulpstar said:

Hmm If I was May, there is no way on God's green earth I'd like to be seen to have been influenced by an ex employee holding a grudge.
So I think DD is probably safer than average actually.
I was on Justine Greening and Fox although as I placed those bets a while back I have no idea if they are still live post GE. Probably not

If it was before the General Election, would Gunmer count (I know he wasn't technically a member of the full cabinet).

Sandpit

foxinsoxuk said:

Sandpit said:

Any tips on this market also assume it won't be settled by dead heat rules with a general reshuffle in the autumn. As others have said 20/1 is a par score for any individual cabinet member, and I'm not sure someone is going to be sacked or forced out by the insane Twitter ramblings of a former staffer. Especially not from such a sensitive cabinet role.

How do dead heat rules operate in these markets?

If for example three people leave the cabinet on the same day, then each individual bet pays out at 1/3 of the odds, etc.

So your 20/1 bet would become 20/3 if three people left, and 20/5 if 5 people left on the same day.

The bookie may also hold for two days if the evening finishes with half a reshuffle completed, it's definitely one to carefully check the Ts and Cs.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Observer, the only people who keep banging on about the empire are those attacking our departure from the EU.

It must be the first time in history a country has left a supra-national body by its own volition, only for those unhappy with the decision to cite imperialism as the cause.

Scott_P

SouthamObserver said:

But May embraced the No Surrender, White Cliffs of Dover, cliff-edge Brexiteers after the referendum. She's been hobbled because voters did not give her the mandate to pursue that. But her bed has been made.

@jameschappers: A cynical bid for job she is totally unsuited to run by Nick Timothy https://twitter.com/realpaolathomas/status/897712092878438402

freetochoose

SouthamObserver said:

freetochoose said:

@southam

I'd like to press you on this:

Throw in her decision to embrace the Brexit right's extremism

I'd be grateful if you could give an example of this. Please bear in mind last night's conversation centred around the KKK.

I would not compare the Brexit right to the KKK. They are deluded imperialists yearning for a trade-based Empire 2.0, not white supremacists. We are nowhere near having the same breakdown the US is in the process of having.

But May embraced the No Surrender, White Cliffs of Dover, cliff-edge Brexiteers after the referendum. She's been hobbled because voters did not give her the mandate to pursue that. But her bed has been made.

Time and again you resort to massively exaggerated hyperbole, it really does your cause no good at all.

As I continually point out, free trade Brexiteers want to trade with and embrace the world, its you little EUers that are frit.

Scott_P

@RupertMyers: "Hope is not a policy" - the UK's policy is a "smugglers charter" says @SenatorMarkDaly of @fiannafailparty to #BBCR4today #Brexit

Slackbladder

Scott_P said:

@RupertMyers: "Hope is not a policy" - the UK's policy is a "smugglers charter" says @SenatorMarkDaly of @fiannafailparty to #BBCR4today #Brexit

Was self-assessment a 'tax evaders' charter? Thats only been around for 20odd years after all.

Sean_F

ydoethur said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Yes but if a PR company can put up a plausible defence of the indefensible, then it is surely a feather in their cap?

Totally off topic, but to lighten the mood:

I came across a poem by Burns I'd never heard of yesterday. It was about a young soldier who duebto his prowess was allowed to put a feather in his hat.

Unfortunately the feather came from a male chicken, and the hat in question was a beaver hat...

...so there really is a Burns poem called Cock Up Your Beaver.

How language changes, eh?

Arthur Ransome included three characters called Able Seaman Titty, Salty Seaman, and Roger the Ship's Boy, in Swallows and Amazons.

Scott_P

freetochoose said:

free trade Brexiteers want to trade with and embrace the world

By pulling out of the largest free trade agreement in the World

Delusional

foxinsoxuk

Chappers is having fun!

https://twitter.com/jameschappers/status/897698001724076032

DecrepitJohnL

Sandpit said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Sandpit said:

Any tips on this market also assume it won't be settled by dead heat rules with a general reshuffle in the autumn. As others have said 20/1 is a par score for any individual cabinet member, and I'm not sure someone is going to be sacked or forced out by the insane Twitter ramblings of a former staffer. Especially not from such a sensitive cabinet role.

How do dead heat rules operate in these markets?

If for example three people leave the cabinet on the same day, then each individual bet pays out at 1/3 of the odds, etc.

So your 20/1 bet would become 20/3 if three people left, and 20/5 if 5 people left on the same day.

The bookie may also hold for two days if the evening finishes with half a reshuffle completed, it's definitely one to carefully check the Ts and Cs.

No. That is not how dead heats are settled. In your example of three ministers leaving the cabinet, each would be settled at the full odds to a third of the stake, and not a third of the odds to the full stake.

chrisoxon

CarlottaVance said:

I always have a rule – that I learned from my folks – which is to be nice to people.

http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/james-chapman-daily-mail

"How does one get to be as successful in politics as you? What’s the secret?

"The honest truth, and this is the secret to anything you do – always be nice to people."

Well, that went out the window pretty swiftly eh?

The whole article could be fisked following his antics on Twitter - which is the real James Chapman? The one who calls for freedom of speech for the Daily Mail or the one who says leveson will be implemented in full so they can be closed down and that UKIP will be listed as a proscribed organisation?

Sean_F

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Observer, the only people who keep banging on about the empire are those attacking our departure from the EU.

It must be the first time in history a country has left a supra-national body by its own volition, only for those unhappy with the decision to cite imperialism as the cause.

The Empire is history. No one thinks it's coming back.

SouthamObserver

freetochoose said:

SouthamObserver said:

freetochoose said:

@southam

I'd like to press you on this:

Throw in her decision to embrace the Brexit right's extremism

I'd be grateful if you could give an example of this. Please bear in mind last night's conversation centred around the KKK.

I would not compare the Brexit right to the KKK. They are deluded imperialists yearning for a trade-based Empire 2.0, not white supremacists. We are nowhere near having the same breakdown the US is in the process of having.

But May embraced the No Surrender, White Cliffs of Dover, cliff-edge Brexiteers after the referendum. She's been hobbled because voters did not give her the mandate to pursue that. But her bed has been made.

Time and again you resort to massively exaggerated hyperbole, it really does your cause no good at all.

As I continually point out, free trade Brexiteers want to trade with and embrace the world, its you little EUers that are frit.

We can trade with the rest of the world now. Most of the trade we do as a company is outside the EU. That's why we have offices in Washington DC and Hong King. We'll be investing a lot more in those over the coming years and less in London. In fact, we've just moved to a bigger office in Hong King. That's good news for shareholders like me; less good for the UK economy as it means we'll be creating fewer well-paid jobs and generating less UK tax as a result.

Scott_P

https://twitter.com/polhomeeditor/status/897715134906462210

Casino_Royale

Charles said:

AlastairMeeks said:

freetochoose said:

AlastairMeeks said:

freetochoose said:

AlastairMeeks said:

I always start from the viewpoint that if there are 22 members of the Cabinet, the par odds are 21/1. So David Davis is almost exactly par.

James Chapman has gone rogue. Whether he actually has anything damaging remains to be seen. But the will to damage is certainly there. I'm not betting on this but I'd say there's value at 20/1. I'd price this at around 12/1.

Sorry I disagree, in a test match with 22 players Jimmy Anderson is 21/1 to be top scorer according to your "par", in reality he's nearer 2000/1.

Which actually isn't my point, if we've got to the stage where an ex employee on twitter is influencing government we are royally fucked.

My method worked well for me when I have played this market. Your cricket analogy doesn't work, first because you're looking for the lowest scorer not the highest scorer and secondly because there are far more ways of getting out in this game.

If ex-employees have relevant information, they should be listened to. Whistleblowers have their place.

Placing a bet is about judgement, we all use different criteria. In selecting mine I'm usually wary of those who may have an axe to grind. If you collect good for you, I suspect this is one of those scenarios that you want to happen as opposed to having strong convictions about.

Stable lads work with racehorses all day every day, 99% of them are skint.

I've not placed this bet. Nor am I particularly impressed with James Chapman. As he commits Twitter suicide, however, he may bring down a whole host of others, which makes this bet value because he's most likely to have dirt on David Davis and is clearly willing to use it if he does. When thieves fall out...

I think the problem is that he's just throwing shit at the wall and seeing if any of it sticks.

Conceptual he might have. 1-2 really damaging items and 20 pieces of fluff. He would have been more effective to run with those 1-2 to allow them to gather momentum.

I think he's just sharing third hand village gossip with no real insight

There's overplaying a weak hand, and there's James Chapman.

He's gone to the games cupboard to dig out every single deck of cards he can find inside, and slapped the lot down on the table in the hope it works and he gets away with it.

TheScreamingEagles

Excellent tip Mike, glad I took the 20/1 too, especially as the price is currently suspended.

I note with interest that James has retweeted Mike's tweet about the bet.

Mortimer

SouthamObserver said:

freetochoose said:

@southam

I'd like to press you on this:

Throw in her decision to embrace the Brexit right's extremism

I'd be grateful if you could give an example of this. Please bear in mind last night's conversation centred around the KKK.

I would not compare the Brexit right to the KKK. They are deluded imperialists yearning for a trade-based Empire 2.0, not white supremacists. We are nowhere near having the same breakdown the US is in the process of having.

But May embraced the No Surrender, White Cliffs of Dover, cliff-edge Brexiteers after the referendum. She's been hobbled because voters did not give her the mandate to pursue that. But her bed has been made.

Brexit bot malfunction this morning - neither swivel eyed nor willy waving mentioned.

Mrs May embraced the only form of Brexit which is actually worthwhile or achivable - so called soft Brexit would be worse than we have now (from a sovereignty POV).

SouthamObserver

Sean_F said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Observer, the only people who keep banging on about the empire are those attacking our departure from the EU.

It must be the first time in history a country has left a supra-national body by its own volition, only for those unhappy with the decision to cite imperialism as the cause.

The Empire is history. No one thinks it's coming back.

It's not. But the imperial Brexiteers yearn for Empire 2.0 in which the Anglosphere moves ever-closer together to lead the world. The UK's "freedom" from the "tyranny" of Brussels is a vital part of that process.

Sandpit

DecrepitJohnL said:

Sandpit said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Sandpit said:

Any tips on this market also assume it won't be settled by dead heat rules with a general reshuffle in the autumn. As others have said 20/1 is a par score for any individual cabinet member, and I'm not sure someone is going to be sacked or forced out by the insane Twitter ramblings of a former staffer. Especially not from such a sensitive cabinet role.

How do dead heat rules operate in these markets?

If for example three people leave the cabinet on the same day, then each individual bet pays out at 1/3 of the odds, etc.

So your 20/1 bet would become 20/3 if three people left, and 20/5 if 5 people left on the same day.

The bookie may also hold for two days if the evening finishes with half a reshuffle completed, it's definitely one to carefully check the Ts and Cs.

No. That is not how dead heats are settled. In your example of three ministers leaving the cabinet, each would be settled at the full odds to a third of the stake, and not a third of the odds to the full stake.

Ah yes, I just double checked that and you're right, it's a fraction of the stake rather than a fraction of the odds.

It's a pretty subtle difference in a simple market like this though.

http://www.bettingsites.co/articles/dead-heat-rules-what-happens-in-the-event-of-a-tie.html

619

https://twitter.com/LeaveEUOfficial/status/897711789940633600

foxinsoxuk

Scott_P said:

freetochoose said:

free trade Brexiteers want to trade with and embrace the world

By pulling out of the largest free trade agreement in the World

Delusional

While there is a substantial body of Free Traders amongst intellectual Brexiteers, I suspect that the anti-immigration protectionists have the majority of the votes. Indeed, I think that protectionist and interventionalism that will win Labour a majority, either before or after Brexit.

TheScreamingEagles

Interesting, I heard this rumour too yesterday.

https://twitter.com/jameschappers/status/897711077739438080

Pulpstar

Chapman is organising some sort of protest in parliament square on the 9th of September if anyone is really bored

TheScreamingEagles

Pulpstar said:

Chapman is organising some sort of protest in parliament square on the 9th of September if anyone is really bored

Alas I'm editing PB that weekend.

CornishJohn

TheScreamingEagles said:

Interesting, I heard this rumour too yesterday.

https://twitter.com/jameschappers/status/897711077739438080

I joke about this sort of thing all the time about my work, despite the fact I love it really. It's called having jovial conversation. If this is really "where the bodies are buried" it's pretty thin gruel.

Mortimer

TheScreamingEagles said:

Pulpstar said:

Chapman is organising some sort of protest in parliament square on the 9th of September if anyone is really bored

Alas I'm editing PB that weekend.

Hmm, AV or the whingeing 'Democrats' - frying pan or fire...

Sean_F

Pulpstar said:

Chapman is organising some sort of protest in parliament square on the 9th of September if anyone is really bored

Will it be better attended than the Day of Rage?

Mortimer

CornishJohn said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Interesting, I heard this rumour too yesterday.

https://twitter.com/jameschappers/status/897711077739438080

I joke about this sort of thing all the time about my work, despite the fact I love it really. It's called having jovial conversation. If this is really "where the bodies are buried" it's pretty thin gruel.

Chapman needs close friend to take him aside and explain how politics works...

CornishJohn

foxinsoxuk said:

Scott_P said:

freetochoose said:

free trade Brexiteers want to trade with and embrace the world

By pulling out of the largest free trade agreement in the World

Delusional

While there is a substantial body of Free Traders amongst intellectual Brexiteers, I suspect that the anti-immigration protectionists have the majority of the votes. Indeed, I think that protectionist and interventionalism that will win Labour a majority, either before or after Brexit.

There is nothing contradictory about supporting more free trade and more controlled immigration. This is like claiming Labour are split between the anti-banker interventionists and the pro-gay liberals.

foxinsoxuk

TheScreamingEagles said:

Pulpstar said:

Chapman is organising some sort of protest in parliament square on the 9th of September if anyone is really bored

Alas I'm editing PB that weekend.

Dare I suggest "Could the Democrats win a majority if we had AV?"

CornishJohn

Scott_P said:

freetochoose said:

free trade Brexiteers want to trade with and embrace the world

By pulling out of the largest free trade agreement in the World

Delusional

The EU is not the largest free trade agreement in the world. NAFTA is. NAFTA also does not restrict you from joining other free trade agreements as the EU does.

tlg86

CornishJohn said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Interesting, I heard this rumour too yesterday.

https://twitter.com/jameschappers/status/897711077739438080

I joke about this sort of thing all the time about my work, despite the fact I love it really. It's called having jovial conversation. If this is really "where the bodies are buried" it's pretty thin gruel.

It's what Ken Friar says about moving Arsenal to the Emirates. But I'm bloody glad him and the late Danny Fiszman saw it through.

ydoethur

Sean_F said:

ydoethur said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Yes but if a PR company can put up a plausible defence of the indefensible, then it is surely a feather in their cap?

Totally off topic, but to lighten the mood:

I came across a poem by Burns I'd never heard of yesterday. It was about a young soldier who duebto his prowess was allowed to put a feather in his hat.

Unfortunately the feather came from a male chicken, and the hat in question was a beaver hat...

...so there really is a Burns poem called Cock Up Your Beaver.

How language changes, eh?

Arthur Ransome included three characters called Able Seaman Titty, Salty Seaman, and Roger the Ship's Boy, in Swallows and Amazons.

My goodness.

Mortimer

Sean_F said:

Pulpstar said:

Chapman is organising some sort of protest in parliament square on the 9th of September if anyone is really bored

Will it be better attended than the Day of Rage?

Or the stop Brexit march!

williamglenn

SouthamObserver said:

It's not. But the imperial Brexiteers yearn for Empire 2.0 in which the Anglosphere moves ever-closer together to lead the world. The UK's "freedom" from the "tyranny" of Brussels is a vital part of that process.

https://twitter.com/DanielJHannan/status/533324157510254592

Scott_P

Mortimer said:

Mrs May embraced the only form of Brexit which is actually worthwhile or achivable

There is no form of Brexit that is worthwhile, or achievable

The end result of the process will be impoverishment, and diminished Global standing

3 cheers...

TheScreamingEagles

foxinsoxuk said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Pulpstar said:

Chapman is organising some sort of protest in parliament square on the 9th of September if anyone is really bored

Alas I'm editing PB that weekend.

Dare I suggest "Could the Democrats win a majority if we had AV?"

I like your thinking.

ydoethur

foxinsoxuk said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Pulpstar said:

Chapman is organising some sort of protest in parliament square on the 9th of September if anyone is really bored

Alas I'm editing PB that weekend.

Dare I suggest "Could the Democrats win a majority if we had AV?"

Could you not, please?

Edit:

TheScreamingEagles said:

foxinsoxuk said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Pulpstar said:

Chapman is organising some sort of protest in parliament square on the 9th of September if anyone is really bored

Alas I'm editing PB that weekend.

Dare I suggest "Could the Democrats win a majority if we had AV?"

I like your thinking.

That's why I asked you not to...

foxinsoxuk

CornishJohn said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Scott_P said:

freetochoose said:

free trade Brexiteers want to trade with and embrace the world

By pulling out of the largest free trade agreement in the World

Delusional

While there is a substantial body of Free Traders amongst intellectual Brexiteers, I suspect that the anti-immigration protectionists have the majority of the votes. Indeed, I think that protectionist and interventionalism that will win Labour a majority, either before or after Brexit.

There is nothing contradictory about supporting more free trade and more controlled immigration. This is like claiming Labour are split between the anti-banker interventionists and the pro-gay liberals.

Sure, it is possible, but not likely.

Countries with a Free Trade policy (such as UK in 19th Century) tend to be very open to immigration too.People who want to protect their communities from incomers* also want to protect their jobs and industries.

*though actually many Leave voting areas have the problem of depopulation rather than overpopulation.

SouthamObserver

Mortimer said:

SouthamObserver said:

freetochoose said:

@southam

I'd like to press you on this:

Throw in her decision to embrace the Brexit right's extremism

I'd be grateful if you could give an example of this. Please bear in mind last night's conversation centred around the KKK.

I would not compare the Brexit right to the KKK. They are deluded imperialists yearning for a trade-based Empire 2.0, not white supremacists. We are nowhere near having the same breakdown the US is in the process of having.

But May embraced the No Surrender, White Cliffs of Dover, cliff-edge Brexiteers after the referendum. She's been hobbled because voters did not give her the mandate to pursue that. But her bed has been made.

Brexit bot malfunction this morning - neither swivel eyed nor willy waving mentioned.

Mrs May embraced the only form of Brexit which is actually worthwhile or achivable - so called soft Brexit would be worse than we have now (from a sovereignty POV).

Mrs May put her Brexit vision in front of the ectorate and voters said No Thank-you.

TheScreamingEagles

To be brutally frank, David Davis deserves to be sacked for

1) He and his team spreading rumours about Mrs May and other leadership contenders

2) Appointing Stewart Jackson as Chief of Staff. We know that's going to end in tears.

MikeSmithson

SouthamObserver said:

Mortimer said:

SouthamObserver said:

freetochoose said:

@southam

I'd like to press you on this:

Throw in her decision to embrace the Brexit right's extremism

I'd be grateful if you could give an example of this. Please bear in mind last night's conversation centred around the KKK.

I would not compare the Brexit right to the KKK. They are deluded imperialists yearning for a trade-based Empire 2.0, not white supremacists. We are nowhere near having the same breakdown the US is in the process of having.

But May embraced the No Surrender, White Cliffs of Dover, cliff-edge Brexiteers after the referendum. She's been hobbled because voters did not give her the mandate to pursue that. But her bed has been made.

Brexit bot malfunction this morning - neither swivel eyed nor willy waving mentioned.

Mrs May embraced the only form of Brexit which is actually worthwhile or achivable - so called soft Brexit would be worse than we have now (from a sovereignty POV).

Mrs May put her Brexit vision in front of the ectorate and voters said No Thank-you.

Exactly. There is NO mandate for TMay's Brexit

CornishJohn

SouthamObserver said:

Sean_F said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Observer, the only people who keep banging on about the empire are those attacking our departure from the EU.

It must be the first time in history a country has left a supra-national body by its own volition, only for those unhappy with the decision to cite imperialism as the cause.

The Empire is history. No one thinks it's coming back.

It's not. But the imperial Brexiteers yearn for Empire 2.0 in which the Anglosphere moves ever-closer together to lead the world. The UK's "freedom" from the "tyranny" of Brussels is a vital part of that process.

Closer co-operation between English-speaking countries based on respect and equality is very different from a colonial Empire. Pro-Europeans should understand this, as they get very upset when the more extreme eurosceptics call the EU the fourth Reich.

Philip_Thompson

williamglenn said:

SouthamObserver said:

It's not. But the imperial Brexiteers yearn for Empire 2.0 in which the Anglosphere moves ever-closer together to lead the world. The UK's "freedom" from the "tyranny" of Brussels is a vital part of that process.

https://twitter.com/DanielJHannan/status/533324157510254592

Sounds good to me. What problem do you have with that?

MikeSmithson

Another one from Mr. Chapman

https://twitter.com/jameschappers/status/897711077739438080

ydoethur

TheScreamingEagles said:

To be brutally frank, David Davis deserves to be sacked for

1) For he and his team spreading rumours about Mrs May and other leadership contenders

2) Appointing Stewart Jackson as Chief of Staff. We know that's going to end in tears.

To be brutally frank, he would probably have been sacked already after getting up May's nostrils over ID cards in front of Juncker - if there were anyone who could do a better job.

old_labour

Guardian
Trump's bid for Sydney casino 30 years ago rejected due to 'mafia connections’

Cabinet documents reveal police warned NSW government about approving a 1986-87 plan to build city’s first casino in Darling Harbour

CornishJohn

MikeSmithson said:

SouthamObserver said:

Mortimer said:

SouthamObserver said:

freetochoose said:

@southam

I'd like to press you on this:

Throw in her decision to embrace the Brexit right's extremism

I'd be grateful if you could give an example of this. Please bear in mind last night's conversation centred around the KKK.

I would not compare the Brexit right to the KKK. They are deluded imperialists yearning for a trade-based Empire 2.0, not white supremacists. We are nowhere near having the same breakdown the US is in the process of having.

But May embraced the No Surrender, White Cliffs of Dover, cliff-edge Brexiteers after the referendum. She's been hobbled because voters did not give her the mandate to pursue that. But her bed has been made.

Brexit bot malfunction this morning - neither swivel eyed nor willy waving mentioned.

Mrs May embraced the only form of Brexit which is actually worthwhile or achivable - so called soft Brexit would be worse than we have now (from a sovereignty POV).

Mrs May put her Brexit vision in front of the ectorate and voters said No Thank-you.

Exactly. There is NO mandate for TMay's Brexit

The critical two items that matter is whether we leave the customs union and the single market. 85% of the electorate voted for parties supporting doing this.

SouthamObserver

foxinsoxuk said:

Scott_P said:

freetochoose said:

free trade Brexiteers want to trade with and embrace the world

By pulling out of the largest free trade agreement in the World

Delusional

While there is a substantial body of Free Traders amongst intellectual Brexiteers, I suspect that the anti-immigration protectionists have the majority of the votes. Indeed, I think that protectionist and interventionalism that will win Labour a majority, either before or after Brexit.

Up to now, the free-trade imperialist Brexiteers have always deferred to the protectionist, anti-immigration Brexiteers. But that is not sustainable when we get to FTAs which will essentially be dictated from the other side of the table. That's when the Brexit coalition will irrevocably split.