Every month my pay cheque arrives and I decide how to invest the excess. I have some P2P loans, a stocks and shares ISA, and a portfolio of political bets.
With Trump to be renominated at 1.12 or 1.13 on Betfair and Smarkets; isn't that a clear winning strategy? The risk of losing the bet is, imho, maybe 1-2% at most. The return is in just 9 months time, making the annual % return in the mid-teens*. That's double the return I'd expect on either of the other investments, or property. Shares might do better but are volatile, and on average I'd expect 6-8% per year is pretty decent.
Am I missing something? If I 'invest' using a betting exchange I don't even have to risk complete wipeout, since I can cash out for a loss if something changes the situation.
*(Anyone know how to easily calculate the AER on a 9 month time period?)
I'll believe it when I see it. It was said the EU wanted us to provide a plan for the last extension to ensure there wasn't another one, but they let it happen despite the lack of one.
I wish they'd gone for the really short extension last time - all this one achieved was deferring the arguments for 2 months.
Rather comical that Clarke is considered a one nation Tory when he thinks a marxist government would be less damaging than leaving the EU with no deal. He's just an EU worshipping fanatic. The last time the supposed one nation Tories like Major, Clarke and Heseltine were running things their legacy was 13 years of Labour. Now Clarke is prepared for us to have a marxist at no 10. The Tories are well rid of Clarke and his cronies.
EU worshipping who voted to leave the eu multiple times. And it was not for BINO given JRM and Boris backed it too.
Which tells you it wasn't really leaving the EU..... He could live with May's Deal because it was BINO.
RPI should have been abolished for CPI some years ago
On Boris he is on course to destroy the one nation section which includes myself and requires each mp to sign a no deal pledge. Any conservative refusing will be deselected but the problem is that there is an army of TBP MEPs who could be used in an agreement between Farage and Boris. Farage has already announced he will not stand his candidates in the 28 spartan seats and is looking at an agreement that his party will be given free run in Doncaster to take on Ed Miliband
It also looks as if Boris is to seek a judicial review on the no deal act and no doubt John Bercow will be at the heart of the case on the grounds he failed to act impartially and assisted one side of the argument, rather than being even handed
When a GE comes around it raises a huge issue for me. In almost every case I would not vote conservative but if by doing so I put Corbyn in no 10 that would be a step too far. I suspect many thousands of conservatives face the same difficult decision.
I would say I could vote lib dem and quite like Jo Swinson and in any election I hope she does well but in Aberconwy it is a straight conservative-labour marginal
"One nation" and "remain" don't mean the same thing and it is cheeky of remainers to try and pretend they represent the one nation wing. It isn't one nation MPs that are leaving it is remainers.
Boris is a one nation Tory. What he's not is a remainer. One nation never meant 48% of the nation.
Or 52%. Anyone pursuing no deal cannot be described in any manner a one nation. It’s not even supported by all leavers.
And I’d remind you how many of those ejected from the party actually voted for May’s deal.
Johnson has no core political belief other than his right to be at the top.
Why do people keep bringing up May's Deal? Did May make her deal a confidence matter? If so why didn't she expel MPs? It's not comparable at all.
The valid comparison is Maastricht and not one "bastard" voted down Maastricht. The 21 are worse than the bastards.
Boris did not make the vote a matter of confidence in either the old or new sense. If it were, he would have resigned. He has not.
Hes allowed to tell mps he is treating it like one as far as consequences for the whip goes.
Yes and if Boris were treating it as a vote of confidence then, since he lost that vote, he would have resigned. He has not.
Read what I wrote. Treating it as one as far as consequences for the whip. Not in other ways.
One 'shocking' thought. With everyone running round racking their brains as to how Johnson B gets out of this, what if they really do have a plan? What if its the breathless press who are getting a surfeit of wood for the excitement each day brings and the opposition and rebels who are pleasuring themselves at their awesomeness that are missing something? Like what's happening to the country, the electorate..... Farage is moving to back the Tories in a pact, the key thing there is that regardless of what happens with the extension, that pact locks in the angry leave vote. And that vote wins. The main parties have been fracturing for a while now, labour are no longer labour, the Tories are no longer the C and U party and the LDs are morphing with this assimilation of theirs. The old guard is being swept away in front of our eyes, hence the panic in Westminster from all those stuck in the world before Corbyn and Brexit.
The one notable thing watching Sky this morning is the complete change of tone. They seem almost chastened as they realise that nothwithstanding their generally anti brexit views the polls are still showing a good lead for Boris and as they comment Corbyn is not making progress
They talk about the courts being used to challenge the no deal act with almost incredulity but of course Gina Miller used the courts and still uses the courts so who knows where this ends
We are a very divided nation and most people feel helpless and let down by the mps. They are all bankrupt and my desire is for a GE asap to rid us of so many of these incompetents and start a new
More to the point, leaders who can not accommodate the view of others would rapidly be sidelined under PR.
I'm a supporter of PR, but that's mistaken. As PR systems all over the world show, what happens under PR is you get lots of niche parties who thrive on say 10% of the vote - it's an election-losing policy to try for a big tent under such systems, what you want is a crystal-clear appeal to your niche.
Of course, if you're too divisive then you struggle to get in a coalition after the election, as e.g. the AfD and Linke have found in Germany. But if you persist then the ohers eventually say oh well, I suppose so, and let you in, as the Danish People's Party found. Sometimes you then lose a lot of your niche vote, though, as the DPP also found.
The thing about DPP is that they broadened their social policy offering to win more support, and it worked. That fits under the banner of accommodating the view of others. But more interestingly, when it came to forming a government after the 2015 election, Venstre, who finished 3rd, headed it. DPP, who finished second, couldn't. They were sidelined because of their more extreme stance, which is exactly the phenomenon we're talking about. And that is a good thing, because even though they had a higher positive share than Venstre, they were more reviled in the Danish population than Venstre. Multi-party proportional representation delivered the kind of compromise which seems to be eluding us today.
Very well-informed post, and I do agree. I think that people honestly standing for what they believe in (and it does evolve over time), getting whatever % agree with them in seat numbers, and then seeking agreements afterwards is healthier than a choice of disingenuous broad tents which may behave differently after you vote for them (as e.g. BigG has found with his 2017 Conservative vote). As you say, the parties perceived by others to be extreme then struggle to get into leadership.
Every month my pay cheque arrives and I decide how to invest the excess. I have some P2P loans, a stocks and shares ISA, and a portfolio of political bets.
With Trump to be renominated at 1.12 or 1.13 on Betfair and Smarkets; isn't that a clear winning strategy? The risk of losing the bet is, imho, maybe 1-2% at most. The return is in just 9 months time, making the annual % return in the mid-teens*. That's double the return I'd expect on either of the other investments, or property. Shares might do better but are volatile, and on average I'd expect 6-8% per year is pretty decent.
Am I missing something? If I 'invest' using a betting exchange I don't even have to risk complete wipeout, since I can cash out for a loss if something changes the situation.
*(Anyone know how to easily calculate the AER on a 9 month time period?)
Trump will get the nomination again — unless he decides himself to stand down.
Previous Tory plans to redraw constituency boundaries and reduce the number of MPs were predicated on the Tory-voting public as it was back in 2010 - principally southern, relatively affluent and suburban. If the Tories win next time it won’t be with such votes.
Far more likely that they see it as their one chance to change the system. Likewise, should they hold the balance of power, I expect it to be part of the price of their support. The promise of a referendum on the matter is unlikely to be persuasive.
I think not.
If the LibDems have a 50 seat majority, then they have 350 seats But, on 35 per cent of the vote, they should have 227 seats.
So, you are asking for about 130 LibDem MPs to immolate themselves.
The only circumstance in which PR will be introduced is, if having governed for 4 years and found themselves back on 10 per cent of the vote, the LibDems realise they are facing a wipeout and PR will save some LibDem seats.
So cynical. Not implausible though. It's easy to find an excuse not to follow through. I wonder if Trudeau in Canada will promise to change to voting system again.
If the LibDems really did win with a 50 seat majority, they will fall victim to the same kind of "We Can Not Be Killed" hubris that did for New Labour.
Changing the electoral system will not arise because there are more important things to do.
The LibDems will be on the triumphalist crest of a wave in which "they have shattered the glass paradigm of cyclical politics" (to quote the former partner of a now LibDem MP)
As I said, I seriously doubt that. A 50 seat majority on 35% of the vote , for a party which has been out of government for so long, would be unlikely to lead to quite such hubris.
And as I said below, the careerists among them would realise their best long term prospects lay under PR.
Rather comical that Clarke is considered a one nation Tory when he thinks a marxist government would be less damaging than leaving the EU with no deal. He's just an EU worshipping fanatic. The last time the supposed one nation Tories like Major, Clarke and Heseltine were running things their legacy was 13 years of Labour. Now Clarke is prepared for us to have a marxist at no 10. The Tories are well rid of Clarke and his cronies.
There is no chance the EU are going to block another delay. They will keep letting the UK extend and extend until it decides to stay in permanently.
So you're saying we can't trust anything the French say?
No, it means the circumstances will change. Boris can't stumble on like this, everybody knows this government is without a majority and without a mandate. It'll be renewed or removed.
One 'shocking' thought. With everyone running round racking their brains as to how Johnson B gets out of this, what if they really do have a plan? What if its the breathless press who are getting a surfeit of wood for the excitement each day brings and the opposition and rebels who are pleasuring themselves at their awesomeness that are missing something? Like what's happening to the country, the electorate..... Farage is moving to back the Tories in a pact, the key thing there is that regardless of what happens with the extension, that pact locks in the angry leave vote. And that vote wins. The main parties have been fracturing for a while now, labour are no longer labour, the Tories are no longer the C and U party and the LDs are morphing with this assimilation of theirs. The old guard is being swept away in front of our eyes, hence the panic in Westminster from all those stuck in the world before Corbyn and Brexit.
The one notable thing watching Sky this morning is the complete change of tone. They seem almost chastened as they realise that nothwithstanding their generally anti brexit views the polls are still showing a good lead for Boris and as they comment Corbyn is not making progress
They talk about the courts being used to challenge the no deal act with almost incredulity but of course Gina Miller used the courts and still uses the courts so who knows where this ends
We are a very divided nation and most people feel helpless and let down by the mps. They are all bankrupt and my desire is for a GE asap to rid us of some many of these incompetents and start a new
The doorstep feedback will also be hitting the leaders over the weekend. I expect it to scare the sh*t out of Corbyn
Rather comical that Clarke is considered a one nation Tory when he thinks a marxist government would be less damaging than leaving the EU with no deal. He's just an EU worshipping fanatic. The last time the supposed one nation Tories like Major, Clarke and Heseltine were running things their legacy was 13 years of Labour. Now Clarke is prepared for us to have a marxist at no 10. The Tories are well rid of Clarke and his cronies.
Thank you Private.
It's a pleasure sir. And you'll be pleased to hear I've always been a fan of the French.
I think, on that poll. All others no change or near enough.
And a very strange and curious exception. That must at least partly refer to traffic directly from the Tories to Labour, which I don't think I've seen in any other recent polling, really.
Not really. Quite a few polls show a very small Tory lead, with Lab in the lead if Brexit delayed.
Let. Him. Stew.
But those are hypotheticals for the future, aren't they ? These seem to refer to any possible change in voters attitude to the present.
May not be significant, ofcourse. Everything is up in the air in the moment, but that also makes every potential anomaly a potentially useful guide , or helpful hint of something.
Interesting polling though
You've changed your tune on polling.
Not at all. It’s all bullshit. I’m winding up the poll wallahs on here who obsessively post polling that suits their view.
Previous Tory plans to redraw constituency boundaries and reduce the number of MPs were predicated on the Tory-voting public as it was back in 2010 - principally southern, relatively affluent and suburban. If the Tories win next time it won’t be with such votes.
RPI should have been abolished for CPI some years ago
I would say I could vote lib dem and quite like Jo Swinson and in any election I hope she does well but in Aberconwy it is a straight conservative-labour marginal
You will have to hold your nose and vote Labour.
That will not happen under Corbyn under any circumstances
So whether you do so under protest or not, you are still doing so.
It depends on the constituency. If I was in a seat that voting lib dem could beat labour I would do so. But Aberconwy is a marginal and the labour candidate is a Corbynista so I will vote conservative, but with some dismay I have to do this
You may as well be voting for Farage. If he joins will that stop you voting "Conservative", in reality already bluekip trying to implement the least conservative policy in living memory.
In Aberconwy the only vote to stop the Corbynista is conservative and I will never be a part of electing Corbyn
Of course your vote is entirely up to you, and I share your concerns about Corbyn.
The last couple of weeks have shown that the conservative part of the Conservative party is at best in hibernation if it has not already gone. The cheerleaders of the party embrace revolution, breaking the rule of law, zero sum diplomacy with our friends, whipping up nationalism, disloyalty to colleagues and intolerance of disagreement.
They are in no sense conservatives. I would ask all who believe in conservatism to understand there is no conservative element to this Conservative party. Do not vote for it to deliver conservatism. If you want revolution, nationalism, authoritarian government by all means support it.
At the moment the only side that has a realistic chance of a majority is the Conservatives. The question that should be asked by those who are politically homeless is which is more dangerous, the revolutionary party with a majority (Conservatives) or the revolutionary party constrained by sensible coalition (Labour).
The current answer to me is clear, but if Labour started to poll as a possible majority party I could change my mind. I shall vote for a hung parliament, with as few Tory/Labour leadership loyalists as possible.
There is no chance the EU are going to block another delay. They will keep letting the UK extend and extend until it decides to stay in permanently.
Yes, I see no benefit to them blocking. I know some like to revel in melancholy about how they see us as a pariah now and how frustrated they are - seriously, some are obsessed with such talk - but their actions to date dont seem like they are eager for us to be gone even though we are pissing them off with all this pissing about.
Plus if we do ask for an extension an election will be coming soon which might change things, even if that means we no deal we have made up our minds not fallen out by default.
"'The coming collapse' - How Dominic Cummings has a plan to 'rebuild' the UK's future
Dominic Cummings has revolutionary designs for the way government policies are devised, decided and delivered, where "flawed" human decision making is mended by big data modelling and machine intelligence.
The Government advisor, currently war-gaming the next move for Mr Johnson, sees gaping errors in the state of political affairs suggesting they currently rely on idealistic human narratives and personal authorities prone to “systemic dysfunction and the influence of grotesque incompetents."
This sounds like something from the early 1950s US.
It sounds to me to be like the same delusion which afflicted the finance industry in the years leading up to the crisis: the belief that through clever algos and other techie/mathematical wizardry they had could eliminate risk and keep on making money, seemingly forever. In fact, they made the system even riskier than before and when, as was bound to happen, it went wrong, it was a disaster.
Beware anyone claiming that they have some new paradigm - whether it’s for finance or politics or administration. It is fool’s gold.
The art of politics is creating the space in which people can come together. Cummings knows jack shit about that.
Every month my pay cheque arrives and I decide how to invest the excess. I have some P2P loans, a stocks and shares ISA, and a portfolio of political bets.
With Trump to be renominated at 1.12 or 1.13 on Betfair and Smarkets; isn't that a clear winning strategy? The risk of losing the bet is, imho, maybe 1-2% at most. The return is in just 9 months time, making the annual % return in the mid-teens*. That's double the return I'd expect on either of the other investments, or property. Shares might do better but are volatile, and on average I'd expect 6-8% per year is pretty decent.
Am I missing something? If I 'invest' using a betting exchange I don't even have to risk complete wipeout, since I can cash out for a loss if something changes the situation.
*(Anyone know how to easily calculate the AER on a 9 month time period?)
Trump will get the nomination again — unless he decides himself to stand down.
There are other risks involved, such as death or incapacity. They aren't nice thoughts, but they are possibilities that need to be priced in.
Every month my pay cheque arrives and I decide how to invest the excess. I have some P2P loans, a stocks and shares ISA, and a portfolio of political bets.
With Trump to be renominated at 1.12 or 1.13 on Betfair and Smarkets; isn't that a clear winning strategy? The risk of losing the bet is, imho, maybe 1-2% at most. The return is in just 9 months time, making the annual % return in the mid-teens*. That's double the return I'd expect on either of the other investments, or property. Shares might do better but are volatile, and on average I'd expect 6-8% per year is pretty decent.
Am I missing something? If I 'invest' using a betting exchange I don't even have to risk complete wipeout, since I can cash out for a loss if something changes the situation.
*(Anyone know how to easily calculate the AER on a 9 month time period?)
Trump will get the nomination again — unless he decides himself to stand down.
That's a fair point, but while I considered that plausible in 2017 it seems by now that he's extremely committed. He is unpredictable though, so it's always possible.
Every month my pay cheque arrives and I decide how to invest the excess. I have some P2P loans, a stocks and shares ISA, and a portfolio of political bets.
With Trump to be renominated at 1.12 or 1.13 on Betfair and Smarkets; isn't that a clear winning strategy? The risk of losing the bet is, imho, maybe 1-2% at most. The return is in just 9 months time, making the annual % return in the mid-teens*. That's double the return I'd expect on either of the other investments, or property. Shares might do better but are volatile, and on average I'd expect 6-8% per year is pretty decent.
Am I missing something? If I 'invest' using a betting exchange I don't even have to risk complete wipeout, since I can cash out for a loss if something changes the situation.
*(Anyone know how to easily calculate the AER on a 9 month time period?)
Trump will get the nomination again — unless he decides himself to stand down.
That's a fair point, but while I considered that plausible in 2017 it seems by now that he's extremely committed. He is unpredictable though, so it's always possible.
Or dies - which if it’s a significant amount of money should enter in to the calculation.
Every month my pay cheque arrives and I decide how to invest the excess. I have some P2P loans, a stocks and shares ISA, and a portfolio of political bets.
With Trump to be renominated at 1.12 or 1.13 on Betfair and Smarkets; isn't that a clear winning strategy? The risk of losing the bet is, imho, maybe 1-2% at most. The return is in just 9 months time, making the annual % return in the mid-teens*. That's double the return I'd expect on either of the other investments, or property. Shares might do better but are volatile, and on average I'd expect 6-8% per year is pretty decent.
Am I missing something? If I 'invest' using a betting exchange I don't even have to risk complete wipeout, since I can cash out for a loss if something changes the situation.
*(Anyone know how to easily calculate the AER on a 9 month time period?)
Trump will get the nomination again — unless he decides himself to stand down.
There are other risks involved, such as death or incapacity. They aren't nice thoughts, but they are possibilities that need to be priced in.
Every month my pay cheque arrives and I decide how to invest the excess. I have some P2P loans, a stocks and shares ISA, and a portfolio of political bets.
With Trump to be renominated at 1.12 or 1.13 on Betfair and Smarkets; isn't that a clear winning strategy? The risk of losing the bet is, imho, maybe 1-2% at most. The return is in just 9 months time, making the annual % return in the mid-teens*. That's double the return I'd expect on either of the other investments, or property. Shares might do better but are volatile, and on average I'd expect 6-8% per year is pretty decent.
Am I missing something? If I 'invest' using a betting exchange I don't even have to risk complete wipeout, since I can cash out for a loss if something changes the situation.
*(Anyone know how to easily calculate the AER on a 9 month time period?)
Trump will get the nomination again — unless he decides himself to stand down.
There are other risks involved, such as death or incapacity. They aren't nice thoughts, but they are possibilities that need to be priced in.
True, but 9 months isn't very long and he has access to very good doctors.
This isn't very significant. Of COURSE the French would ask for a change in the "present circumstances";if they just hand out a delay without conditions, after all their flouncing last time, it would be humiliating for Macron, and he's not a man who likes being humiliated.
Also it would set a very bad precedent: the UK could expect endless delays for no reason. The EU cannot tolerate this.
As it happens there will very likely be the perfect reason to extend: a new UK general election. This, along with a 2nd referendum, was one of the specific cases cited by the EU previously, where they expressly said they would happily extend to help the UK make a final decision.
I guess my point isn't that I think it is a sure thing, it's that I think it's as sure a thing as stocks not collapsing over the same period. There are tail risks in everything, are they any worse on Trump's renomination failing?
"'The coming collapse' - How Dominic Cummings has a plan to 'rebuild' the UK's future
Dominic Cummings has revolutionary designs for the way government policies are devised, decided and delivered, where "flawed" human decision making is mended by big data modelling and machine intelligence.
The Government advisor, currently war-gaming the next move for Mr Johnson, sees gaping errors in the state of political affairs suggesting they currently rely on idealistic human narratives and personal authorities prone to “systemic dysfunction and the influence of grotesque incompetents."
This sounds like something from the early 1950s US.
It sounds to me to be like the same delusion which afflicted the finance industry in the years leading up to the crisis: the belief that through clever algos and other techie/mathematical wizardry they had could eliminate risk and keep on making money, seemingly forever. In fact, they made the system even riskier than before and when, as was bound to happen, it went wrong, it was a disaster.
Beware anyone claiming that they have some new paradigm - whether it’s for finance or politics or administration. It is fool’s gold.
The art of politics is creating the space in which people can come together. Cummings knows jack shit about that.
And has no interest in. He appears to want to remake public administration in his image, bypassing politics entirely.
Rather comical that Clarke is considered a one nation Tory when he thinks a marxist government would be less damaging than leaving the EU with no deal. He's just an EU worshipping fanatic. The last time the supposed one nation Tories like Major, Clarke and Heseltine were running things their legacy was 13 years of Labour. Now Clarke is prepared for us to have a marxist at no 10. The Tories are well rid of Clarke and his cronies.
EU worshipping who voted to leave the eu multiple times. And it was not for BINO given JRM and Boris backed it too.
Which tells you it wasn't really leaving the EU..... He could live with May's Deal because it was BINO.
Rather comical that Clarke is considered a one nation Tory when he thinks a marxist government would be less damaging than leaving the EU with no deal. He's just an EU worshipping fanatic. The last time the supposed one nation Tories like Major, Clarke and Heseltine were running things their legacy was 13 years of Labour. Now Clarke is prepared for us to have a marxist at no 10. The Tories are well rid of Clarke and his cronies.
EU worshipping who voted to leave the eu multiple times. And it was not for BINO given JRM and Boris backed it too.
Which tells you it wasn't really leaving the EU..... He could live with May's Deal because it was BINO.
1) so BoJo was content with BINO?
2) if it were BINO diehard remainers would not have fought this hard to avoid it. They know once out that might be it, and even BINO might get more B over time.
If you want to claim that an eu fan backing it makes it BINO well a lot lot more EU fans opposed it so by your logic that makes it not BINO.
This isn't very significant. Of COURSE the French would ask for a change in the "present circumstances";if they just hand out a delay without conditions, after all their flouncing last time, it would be humiliating for Macron, and he's not a man who likes being humiliated.
Also it would set a very bad precedent: the UK could expect endless delays for no reason. The EU cannot tolerate this.
As it happens there will very likely be the perfect reason to extend: a new UK general election. This, along with a 2nd referendum, was one of the specific cases cited by the EU previously, where they expressly said they would happily extend to help the UK make a final decision.
A general election will be just fine then.
And Boris can say that the Benn "Surrender" Act is dead because of all things, the French won't let us surrender.
Just when you thought Brexit couldn't get more surreal....
However these models ignore tactical voting which will be significant (and Baxter uses UNS which is questionable on large swings in share).
My own constituency model uses a mixture of 75% additive (UNS) and 25% multiplicative swings.
For tactical voting it assumes a switch of 2.5% from Green to Labour and 1.0% from Green to LD.
It assumes that if the LD vote in a constituency was less than 50% of the Labour vote in 2017, then 30% of the LD vote will transfer to Labour.
It also assumes that if the Labour vote in a constituency was less than the LD vote in 2017, then 50% of the Labour vote will transfer to Labour.
I've done sensitivity runs on all these assumptions and, for instance, if 70% of Labour voters switch to LD (instead of 50%) where Labour is behind LD, it gives the LDs 3 more seats and the Tories 3 less than the 50% assumptions.
The central case result, with tactical voting, is:
Con 298 Lab 234 LD 48 SNP 51 i.e. a minority Labour government.
The doorstep feedback will also be hitting the leaders over the weekend. I expect it to scare the sh*t out of Corbyn
I rather doubt it will have that effect. Mr Corbyn seems to believe that he will win any election offered, thus his keenness to give Boris his election. It seems to be that the only reason he held off was that the party's strategists said "No".
Perhaps he is aware he cannot win? Perhaps he just enjoys going on the stump and doing rallies and raising the hopes of millions? Perhaps he views it as a recruitment method for The Cult?
I do not think he will be bothered by any doorstep feedback because he is not really a politician.
There is no chance the EU are going to block another delay. They will keep letting the UK extend and extend until it decides to stay in permanently.
Yes, I see no benefit to them blocking. I know some like to revel in melancholy about how they see us as a pariah now and how frustrated they are - seriously, some are obsessed with such talk - but their actions to date dont seem like they are eager for us to be gone even though we are pissing them off with all this pissing about.
Plus if we do ask for an extension an election will be coming soon which might change things, even if that means we no deal we have made up our minds not fallen out by default.
I think the mistake is to regard them in this instance as an individual entity. How dure are you that each of the 27 countries is committed to extending? I think it is probable but far from certain.
This isn't very significant. Of COURSE the French would ask for a change in the "present circumstances";if they just hand out a delay without conditions, after all their flouncing last time, it would be humiliating for Macron, and he's not a man who likes being humiliated.
Also it would set a very bad precedent: the UK could expect endless delays for no reason. The EU cannot tolerate this.
As it happens there will very likely be the perfect reason to extend: a new UK general election. This, along with a 2nd referendum, was one of the specific cases cited by the EU previously, where they expressly said they would happily extend to help the UK make a final decision.
And they gave us time to have one last time but we cocked about. This time they just want to emphasise they want us to do something, and as you note be more confident we wont waste the time.
OT but related to comments on the last thread. This book:
The Revolution That Wasn’t: How Digital Activism Favors Conservatives, by Jen Schradie
The internet has been hailed as a leveling force that is reshaping activism. From the Arab Spring and Occupy Wall Street to Black Lives Matter and #MeToo, digital activism seemed cheap, fast, and open to all. Now this celebratory narrative finds itself competing with an increasingly sinister story as platforms like Facebook and Twitter—once the darlings of digital democracy—are on the defensive for their role in promoting fake news. While hashtag activism captures headlines, conservative digital activism is proving more effective on the ground. https://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674972339
We are told that everyone who voted Leave knew No Deal was a realistic prospect because the Remain campaign said it was. At the next election, the Tories will warn incessantly that Labour, the LDs, the SNP want to keep the UK in the EU. Clearly, then, if the Tories do not get a majority there will be a mandate for Revoke.
Every month my pay cheque arrives and I decide how to invest the excess. I have some P2P loans, a stocks and shares ISA, and a portfolio of political bets.
With Trump to be renominated at 1.12 or 1.13 on Betfair and Smarkets; isn't that a clear winning strategy? The risk of losing the bet is, imho, maybe 1-2% at most. The return is in just 9 months time, making the annual % return in the mid-teens*. That's double the return I'd expect on either of the other investments, or property. Shares might do better but are volatile, and on average I'd expect 6-8% per year is pretty decent.
Am I missing something? If I 'invest' using a betting exchange I don't even have to risk complete wipeout, since I can cash out for a loss if something changes the situation.
*(Anyone know how to easily calculate the AER on a 9 month time period?)
Trump will get the nomination again — unless he decides himself to stand down.
There are other risks involved, such as death or incapacity. They aren't nice thoughts, but they are possibilities that need to be priced in.
Hey, you mentioned the D and I words without a trigger warning, and I thought this site was a Safe Space.
Can I protest against the mid Victorian mimsiness which is stealthily overtaking this place? Anyone who cannot handle statements like "a lot of Leavers have d**d since 2016" is possibly better off elsewhere.
"'The coming collapse' - How Dominic Cummings has a plan to 'rebuild' the UK's future
Dominic Cummings has revolutionary designs for the way government policies are devised, decided and delivered, where "flawed" human decision making is mended by big data modelling and machine intelligence.
The Government advisor, currently war-gaming the next move for Mr Johnson, sees gaping errors in the state of political affairs suggesting they currently rely on idealistic human narratives and personal authorities prone to “systemic dysfunction and the influence of grotesque incompetents."
This sounds like something from the early 1950s US.
It sounds to me to be like the same delusion which afflicted the finance industry in the years leading up to the crisis: the belief that through clever algos and other techie/mathematical wizardry they had could eliminate risk and keep on making money, seemingly forever. In fact, they made the system even riskier than before and when, as was bound to happen, it went wrong, it was a disaster.
Beware anyone claiming that they have some new paradigm - whether it’s for finance or politics or administration. It is fool’s gold.
The art of politics is creating the space in which people can come together. Cummings knows jack shit about that.
Indeed. The concept of a sort of libertarian-rationalist technocracy pre-2008 prefigures what Cummings hopes for, which, with considerably irony for some of the more emotional leavers, is another form of scientific-rationalist technocracy, but maybe without the free-market worship this time. These were the kind of ideas floating around from the Rand corporation in 1950s america, and the 1960s were, partly , a response to them.
More to the point, leaders who can not accommodate the view of others would rapidly be sidelined under PR.
I'm a supporter of PR, but that's mistaken. As PR systems all over the world show, what happens under PR is you get lots of niche parties who thrive on say 10% of the vote - it's an election-losing policy to try for a big tent under such systems, what you want is a crystal-clear appeal to your niche.
Of course, if you're too divisive then you struggle to get in a coalition after the election, as e.g. the AfD and Linke have found in Germany. But if you persist then the ohers eventually say oh well, I suppose so, and let you in, as the Danish People's Party found. Sometimes you then lose a lot of your niche vote, though, as the DPP also found.
Finland has 25 parties in parliament and 5 in government. It seems to be, um, strong and stable.
I think in countries with PR people expect a coalition to take up to a few months to form. So no-one panics after a result such as 2010 (or the equiv. result with PR) and keeps ranting at politicians 'get a move on'.
Maybe NP knows, I don't know if C&S arrangements happen in countries with PR. I do know that the 1976-79 Lib-Lab one gave us pretty good government (except that Callaghan replacing Castle and Wilson as PM wasn't good for the country; he was too union-friendly).
Sorry to PB users aged under 55-60 who can't remember the Lib-Lab pact.
One 'shocking' thought. With everyone running round racking their brains as to how Johnson B gets out of this, what if they really do have a plan? What if its the breathless press who are getting a surfeit of wood for the excitement each day brings and the opposition and rebels who are pleasuring themselves at their awesomeness that are missing something? Like what's happening to the country, the electorate..... Farage is moving to back the Tories in a pact, the key thing there is that regardless of what happens with the extension, that pact locks in the angry leave vote. And that vote wins. The main parties have been fracturing for a while now, labour are no longer labour, the Tories are no longer the C and U party and the LDs are morphing with this assimilation of theirs. The old guard is being swept away in front of our eyes, hence the panic in Westminster from all those stuck in the world before Corbyn and Brexit.
The one notable thing watching Sky this morning is the complete change of tone. They seem almost chastened as they realise that nothwithstanding their generally anti brexit views the polls are still showing a good lead for Boris and as they comment Corbyn is not making progress
They talk about the courts being used to challenge the no deal act with almost incredulity but of course Gina Miller used the courts and still uses the courts so who knows where this ends
We are a very divided nation and most people feel helpless and let down by the mps. They are all bankrupt and my desire is for a GE asap to rid us of some many of these incompetents and start a new
The doorstep feedback will also be hitting the leaders over the weekend. I expect it to scare the sh*t out of Corbyn
I think they were expecting to be polling in the low 40s this week end with their Churchill like leader Johnson reaping the benefits in his personal ratings. It hasn’t happened and they know what can happen to a poll lead once the real election comes. They will have wound down the language whilst they rethink next steps. As to what the current cunning plan is to avoid signing the letter I suggest you look to what he has already ruled out as a good place to start. No prorogation, no election ....
There is no chance the EU are going to block another delay. They will keep letting the UK extend and extend until it decides to stay in permanently.
Yes, I see no benefit to them blocking. I know some like to revel in melancholy about how they see us as a pariah now and how frustrated they are - seriously, some are obsessed with such talk - but their actions to date dont seem like they are eager for us to be gone even though we are pissing them off with all this pissing about.
Plus if we do ask for an extension an election will be coming soon which might change things, even if that means we no deal we have made up our minds not fallen out by default.
I think the mistake is to regard them in this instance as an individual entity. How dure are you that each of the 27 countries is committed to extending? I think it is probable but far from certain.
I am not regarding them as a single entity. Like you I'm thinking about the probabilities and my conclusion is that overwhelmingly they would rather extend and the reluctant would be persuaded to come on board, perhaps with a shorter timescale as happened last time.
"'The coming collapse' - How Dominic Cummings has a plan to 'rebuild' the UK's future
Dominic Cummings has revolutionary designs for the way government policies are devised, decided and delivered, where "flawed" human decision making is mended by big data modelling and machine intelligence.
The Government advisor, currently war-gaming the next move for Mr Johnson, sees gaping errors in the state of political affairs suggesting they currently rely on idealistic human narratives and personal authorities prone to “systemic dysfunction and the influence of grotesque incompetents."
This sounds like something from the early 1950s US.
It sounds to me to be like the same delusion which afflicted the finance industry in the years leading up to the crisis: the belief that through clever algos and other techie/mathematical wizardry they had could eliminate risk and keep on making money, seemingly forever. In fact, they made the system even riskier than before and when, as was bound to happen, it went wrong, it was a disaster.
Beware anyone claiming that they have some new paradigm - whether it’s for finance or politics or administration. It is fool’s gold.
The art of politics is creating the space in which people can come together. Cummings knows jack shit about that.
I am beginning to wonder exactly what Mr Cummings does know anything about. I am, so far, distinctly underwhelmed by his cunning plans.
However these models ignore tactical voting which will be significant (and Baxter uses UNS which is questionable on large swings in share).
My own constituency model uses a mixture of 75% additive (UNS) and 25% multiplicative swings.
For tactical voting it assumes a switch of 2.5% from Green to Labour and 1.0% from Green to LD.
It assumes that if the LD vote in a constituency was less than 50% of the Labour vote in 2017, then 30% of the LD vote will transfer to Labour.
It also assumes that if the Labour vote in a constituency was less than the LD vote in 2017, then 50% of the Labour vote will transfer to Labour.
I've done sensitivity runs on all these assumptions and, for instance, if 70% of Labour voters switch to LD (instead of 50%) where Labour is behind LD, it gives the LDs 3 more seats and the Tories 3 less than the 50% assumptions.
The central case result, with tactical voting, is:
Con 298 Lab 234 LD 48 SNP 51 i.e. a minority Labour government.
Interesting, and thankyou, but it looks more like wishcasting than forecasting, to me.
For example: I wonder how much tactical voting we will see. There may be LESS in this election than usual. Why? Because Brexit is so visceral and because Corbyn is SUCH a c*nt.
How many Remainers will hover over the ballot paper, and think quietly, "I know I should vote tactically for Corbyn in my constituency, but I just can't - he's a not-so-secret Leaver, and an anti-Semitic c*nt, and besides a vote for the Lib Dems is not wasted, I can express my feelings and they are high in the polls..."
There will be lots like that. Corbyn no longer attracts strays and floaters, he repels them. And the LDs are resurgent.
This isn't very significant. Of COURSE the French would ask for a change in the "present circumstances";if they just hand out a delay without conditions, after all their flouncing last time, it would be humiliating for Macron, and he's not a man who likes being humiliated.
Also it would set a very bad precedent: the UK could expect endless delays for no reason. The EU cannot tolerate this.
As it happens there will very likely be the perfect reason to extend: a new UK general election. This, along with a 2nd referendum, was one of the specific cases cited by the EU previously, where they expressly said they would happily extend to help the UK make a final decision.
A reminder that this website is free, which is amazing given the richly comic content served up daily. Here, we have Traitorfinder General, who advocates daily for the flounciest of exits from the EU, accusing someone else of sashaying dramatically. There is a swish and verve to this kind of comedy that you really can't get elsewhere. I salute you, Byronic.
"'The coming collapse' - How Dominic Cummings has a plan to 'rebuild' the UK's future
Dominic Cummings has revolutionary designs for the way government policies are devised, decided and delivered, where "flawed" human decision making is mended by big data modelling and machine intelligence.
The Government advisor, currently war-gaming the next move for Mr Johnson, sees gaping errors in the state of political affairs suggesting they currently rely on idealistic human narratives and personal authorities prone to “systemic dysfunction and the influence of grotesque incompetents."
This sounds like something from the early 1950s US.
It sounds to me to be like the same delusion which afflicted the finance industry in the years leading up to the crisis: the belief that through clever algos and other techie/mathematical wizardry they had could eliminate risk and keep on making money, seemingly forever. In fact, they made the system even riskier than before and when, as was bound to happen, it went wrong, it was a disaster.
Beware anyone claiming that they have some new paradigm - whether it’s for finance or politics or administration. It is fool’s gold.
The art of politics is creating the space in which people can come together. Cummings knows jack shit about that.
I am beginning to wonder exactly what Mr Cummings does know anything about. I am, so far, distinctly underwhelmed by his cunning plans.
Do tell us the circumstances in which you would had said "I am overwhelmed with the brilliance of this plan by Mr Cummings", otherwise the uncharitable might suggest your comment has the rhetorical value of a vinegary burp.
This isn't very significant. Of COURSE the French would ask for a change in the "present circumstances";if they just hand out a delay without conditions, after all their flouncing last time, it would be humiliating for Macron, and he's not a man who likes being humiliated.
Also it would set a very bad precedent: the UK could expect endless delays for no reason. The EU cannot tolerate this.
As it happens there will very likely be the perfect reason to extend: a new UK general election. This, along with a 2nd referendum, was one of the specific cases cited by the EU previously, where they expressly said they would happily extend to help the UK make a final decision.
And they gave us time to have one last time but we cocked about. This time they just want to emphasise they want us to do something, and as you note be more confident we wont waste the time.
TBF, the options are narrowing each time. Eventually a resolution will occur and, if they keep passing out extensions, they keep their hands clean.
"'The coming collapse' - How Dominic Cummings has a plan to 'rebuild' the UK's future
Dominic Cummings has revolutionary designs for the way government policies are devised, decided and delivered, where "flawed" human decision making is mended by big data modelling and machine intelligence.
The Government advisor, currently war-gaming the next move for Mr Johnson, sees gaping errors in the state of political affairs suggesting they currently rely on idealistic human narratives and personal authorities prone to “systemic dysfunction and the influence of grotesque incompetents."
This sounds like something from the early 1950s US.
It sounds to me to be like the same delusion which afflicted the finance industry in the years leading up to the crisis: the belief that through clever algos and other techie/mathematical wizardry they had could eliminate risk and keep on making money, seemingly forever. In fact, they made the system even riskier than before and when, as was bound to happen, it went wrong, it was a disaster.
Beware anyone claiming that they have some new paradigm - whether it’s for finance or politics or administration. It is fool’s gold.
The art of politics is creating the space in which people can come together. Cummings knows jack shit about that.
I am beginning to wonder exactly what Mr Cummings does know anything about. I am, so far, distinctly underwhelmed by his cunning plans.
Do tell us the circumstances in which you would had said "I am overwhelmed with the brilliance of this plan by Mr Cummings", otherwise the uncharitable might suggest your comment has the rhetorical value of a vinegary burp.
Ask me that again in November. Perhaps by then the Cumming's Plan will be revealed in all its glory.
"'The coming collapse' - How Dominic Cummings has a plan to 'rebuild' the UK's future
Dominic Cummings has revolutionary designs for the way government policies are devised, decided and delivered, where "flawed" human decision making is mended by big data modelling and machine intelligence.
The Government advisor, currently war-gaming the next move for Mr Johnson, sees gaping errors in the state of political affairs suggesting they currently rely on idealistic human narratives and personal authorities prone to “systemic dysfunction and the influence of grotesque incompetents."
This sounds like something from the early 1950s US.
It sounds to me to be like the same delusion which afflicted the finance industry in the years leading up to the crisis: the belief that through clever algos and other techie/mathematical wizardry they had could eliminate risk and keep on making money, seemingly forever. In fact, they made the system even riskier than before and when, as was bound to happen, it went wrong, it was a disaster.
Beware anyone claiming that they have some new paradigm - whether it’s for finance or politics or administration. It is fool’s gold.
The art of politics is creating the space in which people can come together. Cummings knows jack shit about that.
I am beginning to wonder exactly what Mr Cummings does know anything about. I am, so far, distinctly underwhelmed by his cunning plans.
And no doubt many would have said that before the Referendum result was in too....
To change the present electoral system, you have to win under FPTP.
All parties that win under FPTP become enamoured of its great merits.
For example, suppose the meltdown continues and the LibDems end up with 35 per cent of the vote and a 50 seat majority against Corby and Boris on 25 per cent each at the next election
My bet is that the LibDems will suddenly see the great advantages of FPTP.
Yup, this is why FPTP is really hard to change. But hypothetically, what if you had a bunch of parties that were in opposition having a hard time with FPTP, but the government first ran amok with the prerogative powers in a way that brought these disparate parties together, and then conducted a purge which handed a large chunk of his MPs over to the opposition side, resulting in the said opposition unexpectedly getting a temporary parliamentary majority?
Why do people keep bringing up May's Deal? Did May make her deal a confidence matter? If so why didn't she expel MPs? It's not comparable at all.
The valid comparison is Maastricht and not one "bastard" voted down Maastricht. The 21 are worse than the bastards.
Boris did not make the vote a matter of confidence in either the old or new sense. If it were, he would have resigned. He has not.
Hes allowed to tell mps he is treating it like one as far as consequences for the whip goes.
Yes and if Boris were treating it as a vote of confidence then, since he lost that vote, he would have resigned. He has not.
Read what I wrote. Treating it as one as far as consequences for the whip. Not in other ways.
Yes that's one sided. He can do it if he wants.
Yes but commentators on venerable political betting sites should not be taken in, and should not call it a matter of confidence. Attempted extortion if you must, but not confidence.
Note "current circumstances". My reading is we will get an extension with a proviso from the EU that unless there is a GE or a People's Vote, that will be it. I think it will suit everyone.
We are told that everyone who voted Leave knew No Deal was a realistic prospect because the Remain campaign said it was. At the next election, the Tories will warn incessantly that Labour, the LDs, the SNP want to keep the UK in the EU. Clearly, then, if the Tories do not get a majority there will be a mandate for Revoke.
Unless they can get a majority with DUP and Brexit Party MPs.
Revoke, deal, no deal all have chunks of support. Delay is a wildly unpopular choice. That needs factoring in to any betting thoughts on any election. MPs are forcing a delay, that is not a popular choice ergo...... I think the rebel alliance are mistaking the vocal and commendably dedicated activism of say 20% committed to revoke as more beneficial to them than the quiet anger, frustration and keenness to move on to other concerns of a larger number
Why do people keep bringing up May's Deal? Did May make her deal a confidence matter? If so why didn't she expel MPs? It's not comparable at all.
Because it is the ONLY deal we are going to get.
No Deal is dead thanks to Parliament so the only options left are the Deal or Revoke.
That is it.
Not quite accurate. Britain could change or bin its current red lines and negotiate a different deal, one which kept us within the Single Market, for instance.
"'The coming collapse' - How Dominic Cummings has a plan to 'rebuild' the UK's future
Dominic Cummings has revolutionary designs for the way government policies are devised, decided and delivered, where "flawed" human decision making is mended by big data modelling and machine intelligence.
The Government advisor, currently war-gaming the next move for Mr Johnson, sees gaping errors in the state of political affairs suggesting they currently rely on idealistic human narratives and personal authorities prone to “systemic dysfunction and the influence of grotesque incompetents."
This sounds like something from the early 1950s US.
It sounds to me to be like the same delusion which afflicted the finance industry in the years leading up to the crisis: the belief that through clever algos and other techie/mathematical wizardry they had could eliminate risk and keep on making money, seemingly forever. In fact, they made the system even riskier than before and when, as was bound to happen, it went wrong, it was a disaster.
Beware anyone claiming that they have some new paradigm - whether it’s for finance or politics or administration. It is fool’s gold.
The art of politics is creating the space in which people can come together. Cummings knows jack shit about that.
I am beginning to wonder exactly what Mr Cummings does know anything about. I am, so far, distinctly underwhelmed by his cunning plans.
Do tell us the circumstances in which you would had said "I am overwhelmed with the brilliance of this plan by Mr Cummings", otherwise the uncharitable might suggest your comment has the rhetorical value of a vinegary burp.
Ask me that again in November. Perhaps by then the Cumming's Plan will be revealed in all its glory.
I am not holding my breath....
It's as well not to hold in those vinegary burps....
However these models ignore tactical voting which will be significant (and Baxter uses UNS which is questionable on large swings in share).
My own constituency model uses a mixture of 75% additive (UNS) and 25% multiplicative swings.
For tactical voting it assumes a switch of 2.5% from Green to Labour and 1.0% from Green to LD.
It assumes that if the LD vote in a constituency was less than 50% of the Labour vote in 2017, then 30% of the LD vote will transfer to Labour.
It also assumes that if the Labour vote in a constituency was less than the LD vote in 2017, then 50% of the Labour vote will transfer to Labour.
I've done sensitivity runs on all these assumptions and, for instance, if 70% of Labour voters switch to LD (instead of 50%) where Labour is behind LD, it gives the LDs 3 more seats and the Tories 3 less than the 50% assumptions.
The central case result, with tactical voting, is:
Con 298 Lab 234 LD 48 SNP 51 i.e. a minority Labour government.
Interesting, and thankyou, but it looks more like wishcasting than forecasting, to me.
For example: I wonder how much tactical voting we will see. There may be LESS in this election than usual. Why? Because Brexit is so visceral and because Corbyn is SUCH a c*nt.
How many Remainers will hover over the ballot paper, and think quietly, "I know I should vote tactically for Corbyn in my constituency, but I just can't - he's a not-so-secret Leaver, and an anti-Semitic c*nt, and besides a vote for the Lib Dems is not wasted, I can express my feelings and they are high in the polls..."
There will be lots like that. Corbyn no longer attracts strays and floaters, he repels them. And the LDs are resurgent.
Also doesn't account for Brexit Party voters voting tactically for the tories.
Revoke, deal, no deal all have chunks of support. Delay is a wildly unpopular choice. That needs factoring in to any betting thoughts on any election. MPs are forcing a delay, that is not a popular choice ergo...... I think the rebel alliance are mistaking the vocal and commendably dedicated activism of say 20% committed to revoke as more beneficial to them than the quiet anger, frustration and keenness to move on to other concerns of a larger number
No one’s policy will be delay at the next election. The number of people who think the decision to Leave was the wrong one continues to increase incrementally over time.
"'The coming collapse' - How Dominic Cummings has a plan to 'rebuild' the UK's future
Dominic Cummings has revolutionary designs for the way government policies are devised, decided and delivered, where "flawed" human decision making is mended by big data modelling and machine intelligence.
The Government advisor, currently war-gaming the next move for Mr Johnson, sees gaping errors in the state of political affairs suggesting they currently rely on idealistic human narratives and personal authorities prone to “systemic dysfunction and the influence of grotesque incompetents."
This sounds like something from the early 1950s US.
It sounds to me to be like the same delusion which afflicted the finance industry in the years leading up to the crisis: the belief that through clever algos and other techie/mathematical wizardry they had could eliminate risk and keep on making money, seemingly forever. In fact, they made the system even riskier than before and when, as was bound to happen, it went wrong, it was a disaster.
Beware anyone claiming that they have some new paradigm - whether it’s for finance or politics or administration. It is fool’s gold.
The art of politics is creating the space in which people can come together. Cummings knows jack shit about that.
I am beginning to wonder exactly what Mr Cummings does know anything about. I am, so far, distinctly underwhelmed by his cunning plans.
He has had difficulty getting in touch with his mate, Baldrick !
To change the present electoral system, you have to win under FPTP.
All parties that win under FPTP become enamoured of its great merits.
For example, suppose the meltdown continues and the LibDems end up with 35 per cent of the vote and a 50 seat majority against Corby and Boris on 25 per cent each at the next election
My bet is that the LibDems will suddenly see the great advantages of FPTP.
Yup, this is why FPTP is really hard to change. But hypothetically, what if you had a bunch of parties that were in opposition having a hard time with FPTP, but the government first ran amok with the prerogative powers in a way that brought these disparate parties together, and then conducted a purge which handed a large chunk of his MPs over to the opposition side, resulting in the said opposition unexpectedly getting a temporary parliamentary majority?
Terrible confession. A little bit of me wants the Lib Dems to cut through and win an amazing surprise victory. Why?
1. just the bantz. What an incredible denouement that would be. All the writers of Britain, 2014-2019, a Docudrama would get Emmys
2. the Lib Dems would simply revoke. Yes this would come at a terrible cost, and it would roil the country in horrible ways, but.... then at least the paralysing political nightmare would be over. Done. Finished (yes yes I know this is glib - but I am talking about private fantasies).
Told you so. Nobody has said they will break the law.
Will you break the news to HYUFD who was positively salivating at the prospect of Alexander de Pfeffel Boris Mandela Ghandi Johnson being thrown behind bars?
HYUFD has been amazing recently. He has morphed from a sensible conservative with an ecentric view of the power of opinion polls to a Boris 'Chemical Ali' type figure and his latest of comparison of Boris to Nelson Mandela is consistent with his cult like views
However, I defend his right to post and he provides a lot of discussion and to be fair is generally polite if obsessed
I just go past his posts nowadays as they are just fantasy
Note "current circumstances". My reading is we will get an extension with a proviso from the EU that unless there is a GE or a People's Vote, that will be it. I think it will suit everyone.
Note "current circumstances". My reading is we will get an extension with a proviso from the EU that unless there is a GE or a People's Vote, that will be it. I think it will suit everyone.
Rudd is saying we’ve been had, you can’t trust the guy. I don’t understand how Boris has any backers at all. If you think he represents the Tory party or brexit more fool you. He represents Boris Johnson.
Far more likely that they see it as their one chance to change the system. Likewise, should they hold the balance of power, I expect it to be part of the price of their support. The promise of a referendum on the matter is unlikely to be persuasive.
I think not.
If the LibDems have a 50 seat majority, then they have 350 seats But, on 35 per cent of the vote, they should have 227 seats.
So, you are asking for about 130 LibDem MPs to immolate themselves.
The only circumstance in which PR will be introduced is, if having governed for 4 years and found themselves back on 10 per cent of the vote, the LibDems realise they are facing a wipeout and PR will save some LibDem seats.
Get again provided these useless twunts are only there for self interest, stuff the public just make sure they make money for themselves
Malcolm, if they were there for their own self interest they wouldn't be LDs would they?
Still you expect them to have a few principles and some semblance of care for constituents and country.
Revoke, deal, no deal all have chunks of support. Delay is a wildly unpopular choice. That needs factoring in to any betting thoughts on any election. MPs are forcing a delay, that is not a popular choice ergo...... I think the rebel alliance are mistaking the vocal and commendably dedicated activism of say 20% committed to revoke as more beneficial to them than the quiet anger, frustration and keenness to move on to other concerns of a larger number
No one’s policy will be delay at the next election. The number of people who think the decision to Leave was the wrong one continues to increase incrementally over time.
But a delay will have just been imposed and there will be the promise of further delay to get a referendum over the next 18 months as a further kick in the nuts for those wanting it sorted out. Vote for me and with negotiation and referendum you can have another 18 months of Brexit!
Note "current circumstances". My reading is we will get an extension with a proviso from the EU that unless there is a GE or a People's Vote, that will be it. I think it will suit everyone.
Boris will NOT ask for an extension.
He doesn't need to. The legal status of the UK is one of extension. The EU just have to say so. Much like March 2019. May was not even in the room when it was extended to October 2019.
We are told that everyone who voted Leave knew No Deal was a realistic prospect because the Remain campaign said it was. At the next election, the Tories will warn incessantly that Labour, the LDs, the SNP want to keep the UK in the EU. Clearly, then, if the Tories do not get a majority there will be a mandate for Revoke.
Unless they can get a majority with DUP and Brexit Party MPs.
Yep. The next election will basically be No Deal or Revoke.
"'The coming collapse' - How Dominic Cummings has a plan to 'rebuild' the UK's future
Dominic Cummings has revolutionary designs for the way government policies are devised, decided and delivered, where "flawed" human decision making is mended by big data modelling and machine intelligence.
The Government advisor, currently war-gaming the next move for Mr Johnson, sees gaping errors in the state of political affairs suggesting they currently rely on idealistic human narratives and personal authorities prone to “systemic dysfunction and the influence of grotesque incompetents."
This sounds like something from the early 1950s US.
It sounds to me to be like the same delusion which afflicted the finance industry in the years leading up to the crisis: the belief that through clever algos and other techie/mathematical wizardry they had could eliminate risk and keep on making money, seemingly forever. In fact, they made the system even riskier than before and when, as was bound to happen, it went wrong, it was a disaster.
Beware anyone claiming that they have some new paradigm - whether it’s for finance or politics or administration. It is fool’s gold.
The art of politics is creating the space in which people can come together. Cummings knows jack shit about that.
And has no interest in. He appears to want to remake public administration in his image, bypassing politics entirely.
He can stand for election then. Or push off to China where they don’t believe in democracy and love the idea of using AI to control what people say and do.
To change the present electoral system, you have to win under FPTP.
All parties that win under FPTP become enamoured of its great merits.
For example, suppose the meltdown continues and the LibDems end up with 35 per cent of the vote and a 50 seat majority against Corby and Boris on 25 per cent each at the next election
My bet is that the LibDems will suddenly see the great advantages of FPTP.
Yup, this is why FPTP is really hard to change. But hypothetically, what if you had a bunch of parties that were in opposition having a hard time with FPTP, but the government first ran amok with the prerogative powers in a way that brought these disparate parties together, and then conducted a purge which handed a large chunk of his MPs over to the opposition side, resulting in the said opposition unexpectedly getting a temporary parliamentary majority?
Terrible confession. A little bit of me wants the Lib Dems to cut through and win an amazing surprise victory. Why?
1. just the bantz. What an incredible denouement that would be. All the writers of Britain, 2014-2019, a Docudrama would get Emmys
2. the Lib Dems would simply revoke. Yes this would come at a terrible cost, and it would roil the country in horrible ways, but.... then at least the paralysing political nightmare would be over. Done. Finished (yes yes I know this is glib - but I am talking about private fantasies).
3. It would be good for London property prices
Once Brexit is sorted one way or the other I'll give them a look, they are turning into something new. Get rid of the sandalistas and let's see what they have to offer! Once idiots like Cable and co are out of the way and probably after Swinson they might just be the future
Note "current circumstances". My reading is we will get an extension with a proviso from the EU that unless there is a GE or a People's Vote, that will be it. I think it will suit everyone.
Boris will NOT ask for an extension.
He doesn't need to. The legal status of the UK is one of extension. The EU just have to say so. Much like March 2019. May was not even in the room when it was extended to October 2019.
May had requested am extension on behalf of the executive/HMQ. The EU will not offer without a request from the executive.
Now that it's clear the EDL and other neo Nazi groups are coalescing around the Johnson/Cummings proto fascist government and mobbing in Parliament Square harassing journalists and other opposition it's got to be time for action.
To clear the U-bend Corbyn and Johnson have to be removed and an election has to be called. Now that these thiugs have become involved things have become unpredictable and dangerous. If both put personal ambition behind them and fuck off to St Helena we can maybe reach consensus.
Revoke, deal, no deal all have chunks of support. Delay is a wildly unpopular choice. That needs factoring in to any betting thoughts on any election. MPs are forcing a delay, that is not a popular choice ergo...... I think the rebel alliance are mistaking the vocal and commendably dedicated activism of say 20% committed to revoke as more beneficial to them than the quiet anger, frustration and keenness to move on to other concerns of a larger number
No one’s policy will be delay at the next election. The number of people who think the decision to Leave was the wrong one continues to increase incrementally over time.
But a delay will have just been imposed and there will be the promise of further delay to get a referendum over the next 18 months as a further kick in the nuts for those wanting it sorted out. Vote for me and with negotiation and referendum you can have another 18 months of Brexit!
1) don’t be too sure about an election coming pronto.
2) it’s generally good politics to appeal to a majority rather than a minority.
We are told that everyone who voted Leave knew No Deal was a realistic prospect because the Remain campaign said it was. At the next election, the Tories will warn incessantly that Labour, the LDs, the SNP want to keep the UK in the EU. Clearly, then, if the Tories do not get a majority there will be a mandate for Revoke.
Unless they can get a majority with DUP and Brexit Party MPs.
Yep. The next election will basically be No Deal or Revoke.
To change the present electoral system, you have to win under FPTP.
All parties that win under FPTP become enamoured of its great merits.
For example, suppose the meltdown continues and the LibDems end up with 35 per cent of the vote and a 50 seat majority against Corby and Boris on 25 per cent each at the next election
My bet is that the LibDems will suddenly see the great advantages of FPTP.
Yup, this is why FPTP is really hard to change. But hypothetically, what if you had a bunch of parties that were in opposition having a hard time with FPTP, but the government first ran amok with the prerogative powers in a way that brought these disparate parties together, and then conducted a purge which handed a large chunk of his MPs over to the opposition side, resulting in the said opposition unexpectedly getting a temporary parliamentary majority?
Terrible confession. A little bit of me wants the Lib Dems to cut through and win an amazing surprise victory. Why?
1. just the bantz. What an incredible denouement that would be. All the writers of Britain, 2014-2019, a Docudrama would get Emmys
2. the Lib Dems would simply revoke. Yes this would come at a terrible cost, and it would roil the country in horrible ways, but.... then at least the paralysing political nightmare would be over. Done. Finished (yes yes I know this is glib - but I am talking about private fantasies).
3. It would be good for London property prices
Once Brexit is sorted one way or the other I'll give them a look, they are turning into something new. Get rid of the sandalistas and let's see what they have to offer! Once idiots like Cable and co are out of the way and probably after Swinson they might just be the future
After Brexit is done, however it is done, I wonder if we might see a vicious pendulum swingback - to the centre.
Britain is still a pragmatic, small c conservative country. We're having a civil war kinda moment, but this won't last for ever. History teaches us that a healing Charles II figure comes after a divisive Oliver Cromwell. After the Revolution, Restoration.
The Lib Dems could benefit greatly if we all decide to be sensible and centrist after our dalliance with radicalism.
Note "current circumstances". My reading is we will get an extension with a proviso from the EU that unless there is a GE or a People's Vote, that will be it. I think it will suit everyone.
Boris will NOT ask for an extension.
He doesn't need to. The legal status of the UK is one of extension. The EU just have to say so. Much like March 2019. May was not even in the room when it was extended to October 2019.
To change the present electoral system, you have to win under FPTP.
All parties that win under FPTP become enamoured of its great merits.
For example, suppose the meltdown continues and the LibDems end up with 35 per cent of the vote and a 50 seat majority against Corby and Boris on 25 per cent each at the next election
My bet is that the LibDems will suddenly see the great advantages of FPTP.
Yup, this is why FPTP is really hard to change. But hypothetically, what if you had a bunch of parties that were in opposition having a hard time with FPTP, but the government first ran amok with the prerogative powers in a way that brought these disparate parties together, and then conducted a purge which handed a large chunk of his MPs over to the opposition side, resulting in the said opposition unexpectedly getting a temporary parliamentary majority?
Terrible confession. A little bit of me wants the Lib Dems to cut through and win an amazing surprise victory. Why?
1. just the bantz. What an incredible denouement that would be. All the writers of Britain, 2014-2019, a Docudrama would get Emmys
2. the Lib Dems would simply revoke. Yes this would come at a terrible cost, and it would roil the country in horrible ways, but.... then at least the paralysing political nightmare would be over. Done. Finished (yes yes I know this is glib - but I am talking about private fantasies).
3. It would be good for London property prices
Once Brexit is sorted one way or the other I'll give them a look, they are turning into something new. Get rid of the sandalistas and let's see what they have to offer! Once idiots like Cable and co are out of the way and probably after Swinson they might just be the future
After Brexit is done, however it is done, I wonder if we might see a vicious pendulum swingback - to the centre.
Britain is still a pragmatic, small c conservative country. We're having a civil war kinda moment, but this won't last for ever. History teaches us that a healing Charles II figure comes after a divisive Oliver Cromwell. After the Revolution, Restoration.
The Lib Dems could benefit greatly if we all decide to be sensible and centrist after our dalliance with radicalism.
If they rebrand I think theyll probably surge like crazy
To change the present electoral system, you have to win under FPTP.
All parties that win under FPTP become enamoured of its great merits.
For example, suppose the meltdown continues and the LibDems end up with 35 per cent of the vote and a 50 seat majority against Corby and Boris on 25 per cent each at the next election
My bet is that the LibDems will suddenly see the great advantages of FPTP.
Yup, this is why FPTP is really hard to change. But hypothetically, what if you had a bunch of parties that were in opposition having a hard time with FPTP, but the government first ran amok with the prerogative powers in a way that brought these disparate parties together, and then conducted a purge which handed a large chunk of his MPs over to the opposition side, resulting in the said opposition unexpectedly getting a temporary parliamentary majority?
Terrible confession. A little bit of me wants the Lib Dems to cut through and win an amazing surprise victory. Why?
1. just the bantz. What an incredible denouement that would be. All the writers of Britain, 2014-2019, a Docudrama would get Emmys
2. the Lib Dems would simply revoke. Yes this would come at a terrible cost, and it would roil the country in horrible ways, but.... then at least the paralysing political nightmare would be over. Done. Finished (yes yes I know this is glib - but I am talking about private fantasies).
3. It would be good for London property prices
Once Brexit is sorted one way or the other I'll give them a look, they are turning into something new. Get rid of the sandalistas and let's see what they have to offer! Once idiots like Cable and co are out of the way and probably after Swinson they might just be the future
After Brexit is done, however it is done, I wonder if we might see a vicious pendulum swingback - to the centre.
Britain is still a pragmatic, small c conservative country. We're having a civil war kinda moment, but this won't last for ever. History teaches us that a healing Charles II figure comes after a divisive Oliver Cromwell. After the Revolution, Restoration.
The Lib Dems could benefit greatly if we all decide to be sensible and centrist after our dalliance with radicalism.
For the Lib Dems to break out, they need to come across as more than a 12-step programme for triggered centrists.
I say this as a “hardcore” Remainer and a Lib Dem voter.
To change the present electoral system, you have to win under FPTP.
All parties that win under FPTP become enamoured of its great merits.
For example, suppose the meltdown continues and the LibDems end up with 35 per cent of the vote and a 50 seat majority against Corby and Boris on 25 per cent each at the next election
My bet is that the LibDems will suddenly see the great advantages of FPTP.
Yup, this is why FPTP is really hard to change. But hypothetically, what if you had a bunch of parties that were in opposition having a hard time with FPTP, but the government first ran amok with the prerogative powers in a way that brought these disparate parties together, and then conducted a purge which handed a large chunk of his MPs over to the opposition side, resulting in the said opposition unexpectedly getting a temporary parliamentary majority?
Terrible confession. A little bit of me wants the Lib Dems to cut through and win an amazing surprise victory. Why?
1. just the bantz. What an incredible denouement that would be. All the writers of Britain, 2014-2019, a Docudrama would get Emmys
2. the Lib Dems would simply revoke. Yes this would come at a terrible cost, and it would roil the country in horrible ways, but.... then at least the paralysing political nightmare would be over. Done. Finished (yes yes I know this is glib - but I am talking about private fantasies).
3. It would be good for London property prices
Once Brexit is sorted one way or the other I'll give them a look, they are turning into something new. Get rid of the sandalistas and let's see what they have to offer! Once idiots like Cable and co are out of the way and probably after Swinson they might just be the future
After Brexit is done, however it is done, I wonder if we might see a vicious pendulum swingback - to the centre.
Britain is still a pragmatic, small c conservative country. We're having a civil war kinda moment, but this won't last for ever. History teaches us that a healing Charles II figure comes after a divisive Oliver Cromwell. After the Revolution, Restoration.
The Lib Dems could benefit greatly if we all decide to be sensible and centrist after our dalliance with radicalism.
Charles II had everyone still surviving who signed his father's death warrant tracked down, imprisoned, and hung, drawn and quartered.
Comments
Every month my pay cheque arrives and I decide how to invest the excess. I have some P2P loans, a stocks and shares ISA, and a portfolio of political bets.
With Trump to be renominated at 1.12 or 1.13 on Betfair and Smarkets; isn't that a clear winning strategy? The risk of losing the bet is, imho, maybe 1-2% at most. The return is in just 9 months time, making the annual % return in the mid-teens*. That's double the return I'd expect on either of the other investments, or property. Shares might do better but are volatile, and on average I'd expect 6-8% per year is pretty decent.
Am I missing something? If I 'invest' using a betting exchange I don't even have to risk complete wipeout, since I can cash out for a loss if something changes the situation.
*(Anyone know how to easily calculate the AER on a 9 month time period?)
Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
I wish they'd gone for the really short extension last time - all this one achieved was deferring the arguments for 2 months.
And watch Farage get a majority at the next election on his pledge to just tell the EU to go spin.
Yes that's one sided. He can do it if he wants.
They talk about the courts being used to challenge the no deal act with almost incredulity but of course Gina Miller used the courts and still uses the courts so who knows where this ends
We are a very divided nation and most people feel helpless and let down by the mps. They are all bankrupt and my desire is for a GE asap to rid us of so many of these incompetents and start a new
A 50 seat majority on 35% of the vote , for a party which has been out of government for so long, would be unlikely to lead to quite such hubris.
And as I said below, the careerists among them would realise their best long term prospects lay under PR.
I did say in various posts that a 'functioning government' is the sine qua non - formed either after an election or by some other mechanism.
I can be gotcha'd - does happen - but not in this case.
Plus if we do ask for an extension an election will be coming soon which might change things, even if that means we no deal we have made up our minds not fallen out by default.
Beware anyone claiming that they have some new paradigm - whether it’s for finance or politics or administration. It is fool’s gold.
The art of politics is creating the space in which people can come together. Cummings knows jack shit about that.
Also it would set a very bad precedent: the UK could expect endless delays for no reason. The EU cannot tolerate this.
As it happens there will very likely be the perfect reason to extend: a new UK general election. This, along with a 2nd referendum, was one of the specific cases cited by the EU previously, where they expressly said they would happily extend to help the UK make a final decision.
He appears to want to remake public administration in his image, bypassing politics entirely.
2) if it were BINO diehard remainers would not have fought this hard to avoid it. They know once out that might be it, and even BINO might get more B over time.
If you want to claim that an eu fan backing it makes it BINO well a lot lot more EU fans opposed it so by your logic that makes it not BINO.
And Boris can say that the Benn "Surrender" Act is dead because of all things, the French won't let us surrender.
Just when you thought Brexit couldn't get more surreal....
Con 32.2% Lab 24.7% LD 18.0% BXP 13.7% Grn 4.6%
Taking the average of Baxter and Flavible gives:
Con 335
Lab 201
LD 42
SNP 51
i.e. Tory majority
However these models ignore tactical voting which will be significant (and Baxter uses UNS which is questionable on large swings in share).
My own constituency model uses a mixture of 75% additive (UNS) and 25% multiplicative swings.
For tactical voting it assumes a switch of 2.5% from Green to Labour and 1.0% from Green to LD.
It assumes that if the LD vote in a constituency was less than 50% of the Labour vote in 2017, then 30% of the LD vote will transfer to Labour.
It also assumes that if the Labour vote in a constituency was less than the LD vote in 2017, then 50% of the Labour vote will transfer to Labour.
I've done sensitivity runs on all these assumptions and, for instance, if 70% of Labour voters switch to LD (instead of 50%) where Labour is behind LD, it gives the LDs 3 more seats and the Tories 3 less than the 50% assumptions.
The central case result, with tactical voting, is:
Con 298
Lab 234
LD 48
SNP 51
i.e. a minority Labour government.
Perhaps he is aware he cannot win? Perhaps he just enjoys going on the stump and doing rallies and raising the hopes of millions? Perhaps he views it as a recruitment method for The Cult?
I do not think he will be bothered by any doorstep feedback because he is not really a politician.
The Revolution That Wasn’t: How Digital Activism Favors Conservatives, by Jen Schradie
The internet has been hailed as a leveling force that is reshaping activism. From the Arab Spring and Occupy Wall Street to Black Lives Matter and #MeToo, digital activism seemed cheap, fast, and open to all. Now this celebratory narrative finds itself competing with an increasingly sinister story as platforms like Facebook and Twitter—once the darlings of digital democracy—are on the defensive for their role in promoting fake news. While hashtag activism captures headlines, conservative digital activism is proving more effective on the ground.
https://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674972339
Can I protest against the mid Victorian mimsiness which is stealthily overtaking this place? Anyone who cannot handle statements like "a lot of Leavers have d**d since 2016" is possibly better off elsewhere.
I think in countries with PR people expect a coalition to take up to a few months to form. So no-one panics after a result such as 2010 (or the equiv. result with PR) and keeps ranting at politicians 'get a move on'.
Maybe NP knows, I don't know if C&S arrangements happen in countries with PR. I do know that the 1976-79 Lib-Lab one gave us pretty good government (except that Callaghan replacing Castle and Wilson as PM wasn't good for the country; he was too union-friendly).
Sorry to PB users aged under 55-60 who can't remember the Lib-Lab pact.
For example: I wonder how much tactical voting we will see. There may be LESS in this election than usual. Why? Because Brexit is so visceral and because Corbyn is SUCH a c*nt.
How many Remainers will hover over the ballot paper, and think quietly, "I know I should vote tactically for Corbyn in my constituency, but I just can't - he's a not-so-secret Leaver, and an anti-Semitic c*nt, and besides a vote for the Lib Dems is not wasted, I can express my feelings and they are high in the polls..."
There will be lots like that. Corbyn no longer attracts strays and floaters, he repels them. And the LDs are resurgent.
There is a swish and verve to this kind of comedy that you really can't get elsewhere. I salute you, Byronic.
I am not holding my breath....
Later....
I think the rebel alliance are mistaking the vocal and commendably dedicated activism of say 20% committed to revoke as more beneficial to them than the quiet anger, frustration and keenness to move on to other concerns of a larger number
However, the blocs don’t seem to be shifting either.
A Tory/Brexit pact looks inevitable from this juncture. Why not, indeed, appoint Farage to that now-vacant ambassadorship?
1. just the bantz. What an incredible denouement that would be. All the writers of Britain, 2014-2019, a Docudrama would get Emmys
2. the Lib Dems would simply revoke. Yes this would come at a terrible cost, and it would roil the country in horrible ways, but.... then at least the paralysing political nightmare would be over. Done. Finished (yes yes I know this is glib - but I am talking about private fantasies).
3. It would be good for London property prices
If I have time later I will have a look at it and may do a thread header on the topic.
https://mobile.twitter.com/martinboon/status/1170581689996926976
To clear the U-bend Corbyn and Johnson have to be removed and an election has to be called. Now that these thiugs have become involved things have become unpredictable and dangerous. If both put personal ambition behind them and fuck off to St Helena we can maybe reach consensus.
2) it’s generally good politics to appeal to a majority rather than a minority.
Oh ! I hope the lawyers are ready. Maybe not.
Britain is still a pragmatic, small c conservative country. We're having a civil war kinda moment, but this won't last for ever. History teaches us that a healing Charles II figure comes after a divisive Oliver Cromwell. After the Revolution, Restoration.
The Lib Dems could benefit greatly if we all decide to be sensible and centrist after our dalliance with radicalism.
If they did this, the response from opponents would be...unpredictable.
I say this as a “hardcore” Remainer and a Lib Dem voter.