Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » TMay’s great current strength is that there’s little convictio
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » TMay’s great current strength is that there’s little conviction that anyone else could do better
So another day of Theresa May’s leadership begins and no doubt she will be under pressure yet again by her party and maybe even the official opposition about her stance and approach to Brexit. Later she’s facing the Conservative backbench 1922 committee of which there was some overblown talk over the weekend off this being a “show trial.” That of itself illustrated the schism within the party.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
"The OBR thinks the cash size of economy is bigger than official figures currently show and therefore tax revenues are stronger. So far this year, official records indicate the total receipts flowing into the Treasury are 4.4 per cent stronger than last year. The OBR predicted in March they would be up by only 3 per cent."
We called it guys
I'll start the ball rolling. Republicans to hold the House at 7/4 on Ladbrokes.
RCP showing the Dems with only a 5 seat lead (205-200) in the House and polling of the swing seats looking more favourable to the Republicans in recent days. Plus should be some positive economic data just before the election.
The answer is Vulcan. Vulcanisation was (maybe still is) used on natural rubber to make car tyres.
Who, in Greek terms, was Saturn named after?
And - I've gone big on Julian Castro for next President. He's definitely running, and I got on at between 150 and 200/1.
It's a strange day indeed when I think I'm the sanest person in the room.
Decision Desk gives 6.8% probability !
The Cook political report is more favourable, but the Dems only need 9/30 'toss up' seats.
I think 7-4 is too skinny a price in all honesty, would consider perhaps at 5-1 or so.
Understandably most of the commentary surrounding the question of the timing of Theresa May's exit from Number Ten has focused on the Brexit negotiations and the perception that her leadership is a drag on Conservative electoral prospects. The imminent budget may also become a factor.
The expectation is that Hammond will explain where he is finding £20bn for the NHS and that this would include tax increases. Tax increases that are not popular on the backbenches.
The better than expected public borrowing figures reduce the necessity for tax rises only enough to make them more of a problem to reconcile with ideological opponents. However, quite apart from the continuing deficit there is a political imperative to increase taxes to fund increased NHS spending which will put May and Hammond on a collision course with their own MPs.
There is no easily definable upper limit to NHS spending. This does not mean one should never increase NHS spending, but it does mean there is always a case for increasing it further so the political challenge for the Tories is to win the argument that they are spending as much as is reasonably possible on the NHS.
A tax increase that people will notice is the best way to make that argument. It says, "We have increased taxes to fund the NHS as much as possible, but there's not even a moderately difficult source of money to fund further increases, even though we wish it were otherwise."
Without a noticeable tax increase a more persuasive argument could be, "Even the Tories have admitted the NHS needs more money, but they won't give it the money it deserves because they don't really want to, even though it wouldn't be difficult."
This is the political case for an increase in employee National Insurance contributions in the coming budget. Might it be the final straw for some of May's critics?
when Fritgern crossed the Danube in 376 did he bring more or less Gothic warriors with him than there protestors in London last weekend ?
This looks like a non sequitur at first glance.
You know you want to .....
I think the possibility of a financial crisis occurring is probably a greater threat than a blockade of Calais. I hope I am wrong though!
I've just read the NAO summary of their report on border preparedness.
It's laughable.
*weeps*
The ONS collects tax data as received. The OBR, by contrast, uses growth estimates to model what tax receipts should be. In principle, this means it is less affected by variations in the data (be they seasonal, one-off, etc.) but in practice what it seems to suggest is that issues recording growth are throwing out the OBR's forecast of tax receipts.
Which I find quite evocative.
Thanks for all the tips, will take a look at the May and Castro ones, although I think Trump will win in 2020...
“Cant get medicines” is project fear redux
There are complexities and disadvantages (to both the EU and the U.K.) of us not being in the EMA so it’s a shame that silly wankers have stopped a pragmatic solution
Key ones:
1. we need to built up MHRA competencies - we’ve got a very good starting position already
2. EMA approved drugs are not approved in the U.K. - just grandfather them FFS
3. Need for an EU located QC/QA function - yes, needs to be put in place but not that expensive. Unnecessary duplication.
4. EMA approved manufacturing - we are already moving to mutual recognition of FDA and EMA inspections so it should be fine
5. Borders - yes in theory. But these are lightweight goods so can be flown in and fast tracked if really necessary
https://twitter.com/tamcohen/status/1055024795685998593
Did you mean below rather than lower?
Everyone should have a voice. It can be ignored, of course, or ridiculed, but it should not be denied.
[awaits accusations of virtue signalling]
- The GFA has reasonably successfully managed to straddle the fact that a significant proportion of people in NI consider themselves Irish and and another equally significant proportion consider themselves British.
- No-one sane wants to upset that and return to violence.
- NI voted to Remain in the EU.
- NI is currently heavily subsidised by the UK and were it to reunite with Ireland this would impose a significant cost on the latter.
- No-one wants a hard border.
- The majority in NI do not want to lose their links to Britain.
- The EU wants a backstop.
- Britain wants an orderly exit from the EU.
Why then isn’t some form of shared sovereignty over NI a possible way forward? NI has never been a part of Britain in the same way that Dorset has been. Britain could continue to help subsidise NI - maybe a part of the the £39 billion could be used. The multiple identities of the different communities would be preserved. The hard border issue would be solved. NI would still vote for MPs to represent their interests in the Commons and some other forum could be used (the Council of Ireland?) to ensure that NI’s interests in relation to the CU/SM could be represented. Britain would get its withdrawal treaty.
Maybe over time there would be change eg reunification. Or a different relationship between Britain and the EU, possibly rejoining or associate membership, who knows? Maybe NI’s membership of the SM might form a backdoor way for Britain to contribute usefully - but on the quiet - to EU legislation. But one possible source of toxic flare up would be avoided
I am probably missing something obvious. But why shouldn’t the special status of NI be used as a stepping stone to a solution rather than as a boulder standing in the way of success?
Damn, that felt good.
Tax increases need to be targeted at wealth not income.
"There is no easily definable upper limit to NHS spending." That's true but a commitment to spend as a proportion of GDP based on, say a G8 average might make sense and (slightly) de-politicise it.
The DUP.
Unfortunately SF and the DUP arent in the business of making their electors better off, and the moderate centre cant get its act together.
You probably are missing something but it does sound like a good idea to me (then again I live in Dorset!)
Vigorous debate is an essential ingredient of this forum but the use of intemperate, almost bullying language, often defeats the essence of the user's actual arguments that at times are very well made
Mrs C, correct, but still need the name.
Mr. Brooke, Fritigern's the name of one of the protagonists in my excellent book Journey to Altmortis, which you should definitely buy.fr
Mr. Cooke, Cronos is correct
and on that note I shall go and do some other stuff for a while
These are crazy times!
Till later.
This is like being on QI except we aren't all massive c---s.
Edit: found it (https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/). It was 71.4/28.6, with an estimated lead for Clinton of 3.6%. The result was what, 2.2% lead?
If TM is replaced how does anyone else do any better.
Same issues, same contraditions, same parliamentary arithmetic, same factions, same logjams
i) Despite the "Disaster at Salzburg" there has been little shift in perception over whether anyone else could do better - if anything a slight drift away from the notion - (diff vs early Sept)
May getting good deal: 3 (-)
May bad deal, other leader better: 25 (-2)
May bad deal other leader no different: 45 (+3)
ii) Somewhat surprisingly, there is not the level of party political polarisation you might expect to see:
May good/May bad, other leader better/May bad, other leader no different:
OA: 3 / 25 / 45
Con: 5 / 23 / 50
Lab: 1 / 30 / 46
iii) Similarly, while more Leave voters than Remain voters think someone else could do better a plurality still think no one else could:
May good/May bad, other leader better/May bad, other leader no different:
OA: 3 / 25 / 45
Remain: 2 / 19 / 56
Leave: 4 / 32 / 41
The country is united! Mrs May is getting a bad deal, and no one could do better.
Which suggests the country may not see Mrs May as the single variable in all this....
http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/f7un4iy29l/Times_181019_Trackers.pdf
I'm not apportioning blame (if anything, it's May's fault for holding her snap election), but the parliamentary arithmetic undoubtedly means that MPs who might otherwise have been brushed aside have more than a little influence.