Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » May v Corbyn: Who’ll go first?
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » May v Corbyn: Who’ll go first?
Paddy Power’s market on who will cease to be leader first, Theresa May or Jeremy Corbyn is an intriguing one.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
- something like credit card debt that is essentially unbacked. When a borrower fails to repay, you are looking at very large write downs.
- something like a mortgage, where there is no income stream associated with it, but there is an asset that can be sold. When a borrower fails to pay, there is usually pretty good recovery.
- something backed by actual dollar revenue - like an oil well. If - say - Pioneer Natural Resources fails to repay because of some combination of (a) lower than expected oil prices, and (b) lower than expected production in year two or three, then the bank will simply assume ownership of the wells. They may not be repaid 100% of their money, but as they will have haircut the expected cashflows from the well, their recovery will be pretty good. Furthermore, while oil prices correlate, different areas recovery rates do not. So, while there might be a problem with (say) Bakken wells cash flows, that is unlikely to affect Permian.
I'd also note that a most of reserves based lending is now being done by non-bank entities - i.e. funds. If there are losses, it will be embarassing for the manager of the Cayenne Energy Fund, who'll see his fund drop 10-15% in a year (and for his customers), but it wont be systematically dangerous.
Mrs May, on the other hand, has a horrible six months coming up of trying to steer a path for Brexit through the negotiating crunch. If the Tories in Parliament can unify behind another potential leader who isn’t Boris Johnson, then she could be gone very quickly.
The bet I like is Brexit to happen before May goes. Better than evens, which given the way betfair defines Brexit, seems very likely to me.
Magic Grandpa is performing his tricks with all the dexterity of Tommy Cooper, but with none of the laughs. But he needs another election defeat before the likes of BJO will crawl out of Corbyn's magic circle......
Corbyn, however has no real opportunity to redeem himself. He is what he is. His anti-Semitic and conspiracist sympathies won't disappear, nor will he recant of them. He can't do a Brexit deal because he's not in government and an awful lot of his voters would see it as a betrayal. So a split and fracturing is much more likely than the Tories - something which actually could precipitate him standing down given that it would be obvious, even to him, that it would be the only way of healing things.
Plus, I think he's more likely to 'lose' the next election (i.e. not win) and even if defaeat placed at the door of nefarious Blairites, then it might be the moment his faction is so hegemonic, he feels he can go.
He will stay as long as he likes.
You don't get to be PM without colossal amounts of self belief.....
I don’t see any evidence for it.
Viewed from 5 years back, or 5 years forward, that is quite remarkable. The Labour brand, totally Ratnered.
How do you think he’s going to go?
Dislike this market. The timing is indeterminate and could be years. Odds not long enough to warrant placing a bet, for me, anyway.
FWIW I have bet on him making an exit in 2020 and 2021, as I thought the odds were value, but that’s far from a certainty. And I certainly don’t think his departure is imminent.
I have read things on Facebook by members of the Labour Party which are truly disgusting. I then reported Aaron Bastani. I've considered reporting others. But whats the point? Christine Shawcroft was appointed chair of the disputes panel and covered up/ignored evidence against a member which forced her resignation screaming abuse about purges. Willsman on the panel apparently didn't see any anti-semitism. All things have to go through the Corbyn filter where "enemies" of Corbyn (like Jon Lansman...!) are liars who can be ignored.
Until we get another "enough is enough" scandal. Where the politicians at the top table tell Corbyn he has to do something. And then we have more "not in my name" statements but not actual action. None of this is permanent and irreversible though. They worship Him and only Him. They have no interest in policy other than what He wants. Why would they stick around after He steps down? Its not like they have any interest in being in government and all the nuances and compromises that entails.
Labour under the spell of wazzocks. Tories "led" by a zombie trading insults with a buffoon whilst the membership get infiltrated by UKIP crazies. Good times...
That is the disconnect keeping him in place for as long as he wants. You are keeping him in place, reporting the odd anti-Semite outlier notwithstanding.
May's first of many Brexit related mistakes was creating DExEU in the first place, it should have been under the FCO from the beginning, though that would have been easier if the FCO hadnt shed a lot of staff since 2010 through austerity.
Jeremy has survived a rebellion by three quarters of his own MPs and has over 600,000 (and growing) supportive members. If anyone thinks the Chief Rabbi, Simon Hattenstone Guido and the Jewish Chronicle are going to force him out they're dreaming.
The problem both parties have is who on earth is next? This is starting to look more of an issue for Labour even than the Tories. Such talent as they have is on the centre left and I don't see the Corbynites allowing the party to slip back into such a position. Their elected supporters in the cult, as was pointed out by a very good thread header the other day, are all of a certain age and no more vigorous than Corbyn, less in most cases. I think Corbyn will want to hold on until someone of his ilk develops from the next generation.
The Tories have Javid, Hunt and Hammond among the sane choices. None are star quality but they are all safe(ish) pairs of hands that could do a vaguely credible job and unite the party against the Boris tendency. I don't see the equivalents in Labour except possibly Emily Thornberry but I am not sure is she is sufficiently in with the cult.
My reservation is that there are signs that Corbyn is becoming increasingly petulant. He really doesn't like his hoary old verities and self delusions being challenged. There is real potential for him to genuinely lose it at some point. Hmm...
Given Corbyn's grip on the Labour membership the only way he is likely to be removed is by losing a general election. Although there is a slim chance if he blocks Labour backing a 'People's Vote' at the Labour Party conference that could annoy enough Labour members to undermine him, that likely poses a greater threat to him than anti Semitism allegations
90% of Corbyn supporters are just normal, everyday, frustrated Labour supporters who are ecstatic to finally, after decades, have a genuine choice, a real alternative to relentless privatisation of the public sphere, ever-yawning wealth inequality and endless foreign military adventurism at the side of appalling nations like Saudi Arabia.
These are all very popular positions nationally and aren't going away, whatever happens to Corbyn. People are excited about the first hope in ages of some of these things changing, not about Corbyn per se.
But the BBC certainly know how to pick 'em: 'Anyone would do as long as they had boobs'.
https://twitter.com/RobBurl/status/1036689943760961540
It might just be that somebody noticed if they wait until 2019, that will be the 500th anniversary of Leonardo da Vinci's death?
For all that was wrong with Blairism, he is your most successful ever leader.
The Labour First and Progress votes could be counted as anti Corbyn to some degree.
JC 9 pro Corbyn.
Ann Black is actually a Corbyn supporter who was previously on the left slate, she will get anti Corbyn votes but pro Corbyn votes as well. Izzard has worked hard to position himself as neutral so much the same as Ann votes from both sides.
There are pro Corbyn people who didn't want to just go for the slate.
Probably a pro Corbyn, anti Corbyn and others breakdown would be more accurate.
Also we are just talking about from those that voted, Stephen Bush reckons the membership has changed from about 6 in 10 Corbyn supporters in 2016 (leadership election) to around 8 in 10 today with the churn in between. He doesn't know for sure (though he is usually fairly good) but you would suspect there had been some churn in the membership in Corbyn's favour since 2016.
https://twitter.com/RobBurl/status/1036577237796048896
https://twitter.com/RobBurl/status/1036689943760961540
Anyone have an idea which version is the honest account?
I do not see both of these staying up for very long !
I think that he will survive though the #peoplesvote movement at conference may well be the bigger threat. It could pull some of his support base from under him.
The replacement could come from anywhere in the party, but my hunch is that it will not be soon and not from his closest supporters in the PLP. It is the nature of successions that the discredited outgoing leader does not get to choose their successor.
About as likely as Mike, myself and Mr Meeks entering a long hair competition
He critically wounded the enemy without and the enemy within, and if he does 1/10 as well at increasing the vote next time, the Tories will be out of government.
Chequers is dead.
six months to go and still the fire of the Tories is aimed at each other.
@JWisemann - I have no problem with "ordinary" Corbyn supporters enthused by our policies. I think our 2017 manifesto was our finest in years and we still aren't offering genuine solutions for the structural issues in the economy that the Tories try and pretend don't exist. I don't want a change in direction. I don't even demand a change in leader. Its the cult surrounding him thats the problem.
Ian Kershaw's Hitler Biography highlights fervent Nazis inspired by the Fuhrer creating all kinds of horrendous policies and actions not ordered by Hitler - "working towards the Fuhrer" they called it. THAT is what is happening in the Labour Party - twats like Bastani trying to replace the BBC (they have a #wearehismedia tag...) souting lies and anti-semitic abuse. Corbyn hasn't asked him to. Corbyn has said people like him don't speak in his name. Yet they still do.
Even HY can probably work that one out.
It is depressing that there is still no coherent position about what we actually want out of this. It just might have been a plan to work that out before serving the Article 50 notice. But hey, hindsight huh?
https://money.cnn.com/2018/09/03/news/companies/colin-kaepernick-nike-just-do-it/index.html
That’s why.
And, for the record, I don’t think either of these is likely though the former would be what would worry me as a Labour strategist. But the past stuff, while appalling (IMO) will only reinforce what people already believe about him, whether for good or ill, and will be unlikely to trigger any action. The law of diminishing returns has set in. Non-Corbynite MPs have had plenty of opportunity to act but have not done so because they do not know what they are for and lack courage.
Labout has turned into a mixture of Respect and the SWP. That will attract some and repel others but may nonetheless be more electorally popular than we might have imagined a few years ago.
Why are the hard left always talking about the enemy within?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2018/09/03/recession-risk-pushes-italy-closer-financial-political-earthquake/
It remains shocking just how poor the campaigns were.
Mr. Mortimer, religious types often hate heretics more than heathens. As the Eastern Romans once said: better the Sultan's turban than the cardinal's hat.
If Corbyn really wanted to stop what is being done in his name, he could.
This idea that he is revered and adored and brings people into the party because of him and yet is so feeble that they ignore him when he asks them to stop doing awful things is disingenuous bollocks on stilts, really.
Working forwards the fuhrer was a direct and deliberate consequence of Hitler’s anarchic leadership style.
A 1/10 increase in seats would give Labour 3 more.....
If you want a definition of self-indulgence....
Corbyn haters is a better phrase though since enemies within was taken by that German AntiSemite
Carry on spinning. A Government is supposed to Govern.
The genius of this particular play is that Nike are the clothing sponsor for the NFL. Every player and coach, whether they take a knee or not, is advertising Nike.
Or does he roll his eyes? Corbyn isn't doing these things - his supporters are. But he isn't stopping them either, its tacit approval at least
They [Trump supporters] are primarily white, older men with low levels of education and income.
https://www.thoughtco.com/meet-the-people-behind-donald-trumps-popularity-4068073
Hence Hilary Clinton's crass condescension. When it comes to voting, they matter. Buying expensive trainers, probably not so much.
Apparently this is normal.
Truly we have jumped the shark and smashed through the Overton window.
1. Corbyn sacked Hilary Benn which was the catalyst for what followed
2. A lot of shadow ministers at all level were deeply pissed off with being treated like shit by the Leader of the Opposition's Office (LOTO) and had been moaning about it for months
3. Collective "oh well we have to muddle through" thinking was smashed with the sacking of Benn and the first couple of resignations. Others looked at their own separate issues thought "fuck this" and also went
4. Various detailed different evidence was given by shadow ministers about how LOTO had fucked them, their brief, their staff. All different. All detailed. Can't just be dismissed as fiction as I was hearing this before they quit
5. So what then happened? We had a challenge to the leader within rules. We had a leadership contest within rules. The leader was re-elected within rules. The leader personally advocated such a contest within rules before he became leader. How is a process run within rules a "coup"?
Its paranoid bullshit. "infamy, infamy, they've all got it in for me!"
Secondly, we inevitably ended up with a multiplicity of campaigns saying different things and emphasising contradictory points. The result is that both sides held contradictory positions within their ranks. The inconsistencies of leave voters are only more apparent because they won.
Thirdly, we inevitably have great frustration on both sides with the result. Leavers think that they won but May is bargaining everything they wanted in a BINO. Remainers think that their views are not being listened to. May is in the middle trying to find a path acceptable to both sides.
Something similar in Scotland happened with Better Together, another cross party grouping with no agreed position on what the role of Scotland was to be in the UK going forward. Their victory inevitably led to Indy supporters claiming that that victory had been won on false promises not delivered (eg "the vow"). But Better Together was not the government and had no power to promise anything.
The only rational conclusion is that this is a damn silly way to do things. I hope we don't see any more referenda for quite a while.
However, I do think certain fundamental changes require a clear democratic mandate (changing the voting system would be another).
Does make one wonder how a theoretical second referendum would end up going.
Referendums can be a good idea if
1. The Government of the day has a concrete plan for something they want to change
2. They require public consent
In those circumstances it can work well
You can't make an omelette, etc.