Rishi Sunak - Prime Minister
Discussion
shed driver said:
If he does lose his seat, possibly (but no actual proof) that this has been a factor, would the bet still be valid?
SD.
I would be amazed if the bet has not already been cancelled by the bookmaker. It’s obvious that he will not have declared his role in the outcome, so he has used deception to gain an unfair advantage. SD.
Question is if he has broken other laws. I think that must be the case.
Elysium said:
jdw100 said:
Elysium said:
Mr Penguin said:
Now this is a proper bet - £8k. At least he didn't try to deflect using the word "flutter" as though a flutter is worse than a bet. It's quickly becoming my least favourite word in politics, just as journos stopped saying "psychodrama" they spring this one on me.
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/tory-...
This has to be the winner surely. Non paywalled story here:https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/tory-...
https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/philip-davies-ac...
Police investigating as potentially other offences beyond gambling act.
If the former, how much would he have won?
https://news.bet365.com/en-gb/article/politics-odd...
If he put £8k down he would win around £1140
He would have lost money on the bet if he had won the bet?
jdw100 said:
Elysium said:
jdw100 said:
Elysium said:
Mr Penguin said:
Now this is a proper bet - £8k. At least he didn't try to deflect using the word "flutter" as though a flutter is worse than a bet. It's quickly becoming my least favourite word in politics, just as journos stopped saying "psychodrama" they spring this one on me.
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/tory-...
This has to be the winner surely. Non paywalled story here:https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/tory-...
https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/philip-davies-ac...
Police investigating as potentially other offences beyond gambling act.
If the former, how much would he have won?
https://news.bet365.com/en-gb/article/politics-odd...
If he put £8k down he would win around £1140
He would have lost money on the bet if he had won the bet?
jdw100 said:
Sorry, never put a bet on anything in my life.
He would have lost money on the bet if he had won the bet?
He’d get his stake back on a winning bet. As with Alex Craig, I suspect this is another example of a fun bet to cushion the blow, the sums involved are not exactly life changing and I’d consider those who placed bets on the election date, using inside information, to have been more at fault. Has Rishi suspended him yet? He would have lost money on the bet if he had won the bet?
Blue62 said:
jdw100 said:
Sorry, never put a bet on anything in my life.
He would have lost money on the bet if he had won the bet?
He’d get his stake back on a winning bet. As with Alex Craig, I suspect this is another example of a fun bet to cushion the blow, the sums involved are not exactly life changing and I’d consider those who placed bets on the election date, using inside information, to have been more at fault. Has Rishi suspended him yet? He would have lost money on the bet if he had won the bet?
So he would have made a grand.
Not exactly crime of the century then. Dubious behaviour certainly, but about what we might expect of a politician.
I think if i worked for him, putting in hours of my time (for free?) i’d be pissed off.
If it had been 10k+ then i’d have different view.
I guess many of his constituents would like to have a spare 8k to put on a bit of a jokey bet.
Blue62 said:
jdw100 said:
Sorry, never put a bet on anything in my life.
He would have lost money on the bet if he had won the bet?
He’d get his stake back on a winning bet. As with Alex Craig, I suspect this is another example of a fun bet to cushion the blow, the sums involved are not exactly life changing and I’d consider those who placed bets on the election date, using inside information, to have been more at fault. Has Rishi suspended him yet? He would have lost money on the bet if he had won the bet?
It might be normal for people to place a bet on their team losing so they get a bit of a commiseration prize. But it’s obviously not OK if your goalkeeper bets that he won’t save any goals.
It is blatantly obvious that the person placing the bet is in direct control of the outcome. A much more direct example of cheating than the potential use of inside information. Particularly when we don’t know if there was inside information or how useful if actually was.
But the bigger issue is that the event this Conservative MP and the Labour candidate who did the same is ‘mucking about’ with is not about them. It is about the electorate. They are making an absolute mockery of our democratic process.
It does not matter if the sums involved are small or if we think it’s unlikely that they would do anything improper. They have already done something improper.
Edited by Elysium on Thursday 27th June 08:44
blueg33 said:
£8k stake to win just over £1k doesn’t shout good judgement to me, even without the potential rule breaking.
If o told my investors they would get £1m for £8m invested with high risk they would be laughing for weeks.
It would be better business if you knew it was actually a dead cert because you had already decided to accept a loss and were not going to bother with any campaigning……..If o told my investors they would get £1m for £8m invested with high risk they would be laughing for weeks.
jdw100 said:
Thanks both.
So he would have made a grand.
Not exactly crime of the century then. Dubious behaviour certainly, but about what we might expect of a politician.
I think if i worked for him, putting in hours of my time (for free?) i’d be pissed off.
If it had been 10k+ then i’d have different view.
I guess many of his constituents would like to have a spare 8k to put on a bit of a jokey bet.
I think we should bear in mind that it’s only an accusation at this stage. All things are relative and I would imagine that £8k is not a big sum of money to him, but I have a feeling MP’s may have been betting against themselves for years. I’m speculating of course, but maybe since the election date scandal story broke it’s all now under greater scrutiny. So he would have made a grand.
Not exactly crime of the century then. Dubious behaviour certainly, but about what we might expect of a politician.
I think if i worked for him, putting in hours of my time (for free?) i’d be pissed off.
If it had been 10k+ then i’d have different view.
I guess many of his constituents would like to have a spare 8k to put on a bit of a jokey bet.
Personally I’m far less concerned about this practice than the election date scandal, but I’m sure there’ll be a gambling expert along in a minute to put us all right.
Blue62 said:
Personally I’m far less concerned about this practice than the election date scandal
Why?The sums involved in the election date betting were equally modest.
They might have picked up whispers of Rishi’s plans or they might just have guessed based on rumour.
Why on earth would you see that as more concerning than someone betting that they personally will not do something?
The FA ban both:
https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/po...
Elysium said:
Why?
The sums involved in the election date betting were equally modest.
They might have picked up whispers of Rishi’s plans or they might just have guessed based on rumour.
Why on earth would you see that as more concerning than someone betting that they personally will not do something?
The FA ban both:
https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/po...
Because the date scandal comes with a credible suggestion those placing bets knew the outcome. This isn't difficult to grasp if you could just put down your political bias for five minutes. The sums involved are irrelevant, as is your unfounded speculation on the motivations.The sums involved in the election date betting were equally modest.
They might have picked up whispers of Rishi’s plans or they might just have guessed based on rumour.
Why on earth would you see that as more concerning than someone betting that they personally will not do something?
The FA ban both:
https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/po...
jdw100 said:
Blue62 said:
jdw100 said:
Sorry, never put a bet on anything in my life.
He would have lost money on the bet if he had won the bet?
He’d get his stake back on a winning bet. As with Alex Craig, I suspect this is another example of a fun bet to cushion the blow, the sums involved are not exactly life changing and I’d consider those who placed bets on the election date, using inside information, to have been more at fault. Has Rishi suspended him yet? He would have lost money on the bet if he had won the bet?
So he would have made a grand.
Not exactly crime of the century then. Dubious behaviour certainly, but about what we might expect of a politician.
I think if i worked for him, putting in hours of my time (for free?) i’d be pissed off.
If it had been 10k+ then i’d have different view.
I guess many of his constituents would like to have a spare 8k to put on a bit of a jokey bet.
Betting that you'll lose when everyone else seems to think you will looks like cushioning the blow, but it does lead one to question if you have a vested interest against putting in your best performance- doubly so if you're expected to win. This is why there are rules about what footballers can & can't bet on.
Well it's another day. A day of opportunities for Rishi ,Sir Keir.and of course Ed Davey
In Rishi's case I feel the worst is now behind him. There is unlikely to be any more scandals or wrong behaviour by his MP's.
He can now take the fight to Labour and explain to people why a Labour Government will lead to worse and longer strikes by the Junior doctors.
In Keirs case he can emphasize the broad appeal of his top table. I think it's time for Sir Keir to put some of his shadow cabinet people to the front of the campaign. I am also thinking another chap should be utilkised due to his easy going nature and ability to get on with all types of people. It's time for Richard Burgon to be utilised
In Sir Ed Daveys case he can just go camping for the day and perform some hilarious rib tickling deliberate mistakes when erecting the tent.
In Rishi's case I feel the worst is now behind him. There is unlikely to be any more scandals or wrong behaviour by his MP's.
He can now take the fight to Labour and explain to people why a Labour Government will lead to worse and longer strikes by the Junior doctors.
In Keirs case he can emphasize the broad appeal of his top table. I think it's time for Sir Keir to put some of his shadow cabinet people to the front of the campaign. I am also thinking another chap should be utilkised due to his easy going nature and ability to get on with all types of people. It's time for Richard Burgon to be utilised
In Sir Ed Daveys case he can just go camping for the day and perform some hilarious rib tickling deliberate mistakes when erecting the tent.
President Merkin said:
Elysium said:
Why?
The sums involved in the election date betting were equally modest.
They might have picked up whispers of Rishi’s plans or they might just have guessed based on rumour.
Why on earth would you see that as more concerning than someone betting that they personally will not do something?
The FA ban both:
https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/po...
Because the date scandal comes with a credible suggestion those placing bets knew the outcome. This isn't difficult to grasp if you could just put down your political bias for five minutes. The sums involved are irrelevant, as is your unfounded speculation on the motivations.The sums involved in the election date betting were equally modest.
They might have picked up whispers of Rishi’s plans or they might just have guessed based on rumour.
Why on earth would you see that as more concerning than someone betting that they personally will not do something?
The FA ban both:
https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/po...
I just don’t understand your thinking. Don’t you see that it is absolutely obvious that someone standing for election can ensure that they lose? They don’t just have inside information on the issue, they can directly control it.
You seem to have decided that this doesn’t matter because it’s unlikely that they would do that. But surely that isn’t the point. We don’t know what they might do.
That’s why this activity is banned by the FA.
Elysium said:
I just don’t understand your thinking. Don’t you see that it is absolutely obvious that someone standing for election can ensure that they lose? They don’t just have inside information on the issue, they can directly control it.
They definitely do not; they can influence for sure(get arrested for something horrible, make a racist/sexist/etc statement on social media, etc), but they have no control over the actions of the electorate.Elysium said:
I have zero political bias on this matter.
yeah that really comes across.Elysium said:
I just don’t understand your thinking. Don’t you see that it is absolutely obvious that someone standing for election can ensure that they lose? They don’t just have inside information on the issue, they can directly control it.
You seem to have decided that this doesn’t matter because it’s unlikely that they would do that. But surely that isn’t the point. We don’t know what they might do.
That’s why this activity is banned by the FA.
This isn't football, so your FA analogy is irrelevant. Your argument Craig would run a lousy campaign in order to lose & cash in falls down on two counts. The guy is a millionaire & doesn't need the cash & there is no evidence he didn't try. And he does not have control, the electorate do.You seem to have decided that this doesn’t matter because it’s unlikely that they would do that. But surely that isn’t the point. We don’t know what they might do.
That’s why this activity is banned by the FA.
You are long on excusing the date guys, oh they might have got a whiff, they might have guessed but you're all over Kevin Craig like a cheap coat. Your predispoisition is visible from space.
Elysium said:
Blue62 said:
jdw100 said:
Sorry, never put a bet on anything in my life.
He would have lost money on the bet if he had won the bet?
He’d get his stake back on a winning bet. As with Alex Craig, I suspect this is another example of a fun bet to cushion the blow, the sums involved are not exactly life changing and I’d consider those who placed bets on the election date, using inside information, to have been more at fault. Has Rishi suspended him yet? He would have lost money on the bet if he had won the bet?
It might be normal for people to place a bet on their team losing so they get a bit of a commiseration prize. But it’s obviously not OK if your goalkeeper bets that he won’t save any goals.
It is blatantly obvious that the person placing the bet is in direct control of the outcome . A much more direct example of cheating than the potential use of inside information. Particularly when we don’t know if there was inside information or how useful if actually was.
But the bigger issue is that the event this Conservative MP and the Labour candidate who did the same is ‘mucking about’ with is not about them. It is about the electorate. They are making an absolute mockery of our democratic process.
It does not matter if the sums involved are small or if we think it’s unlikely that they would do anything improper. They have already done something improper.
Edited by Elysium on Thursday 27th June 08:44
markh1973 said:
Elysium said:
Blue62 said:
jdw100 said:
Sorry, never put a bet on anything in my life.
He would have lost money on the bet if he had won the bet?
He’d get his stake back on a winning bet. As with Alex Craig, I suspect this is another example of a fun bet to cushion the blow, the sums involved are not exactly life changing and I’d consider those who placed bets on the election date, using inside information, to have been more at fault. Has Rishi suspended him yet? He would have lost money on the bet if he had won the bet?
It might be normal for people to place a bet on their team losing so they get a bit of a commiseration prize. But it’s obviously not OK if your goalkeeper bets that he won’t save any goals.
It is blatantly obvious that the person placing the bet is in direct control of the outcome . A much more direct example of cheating than the potential use of inside information. Particularly when we don’t know if there was inside information or how useful if actually was.
But the bigger issue is that the event this Conservative MP and the Labour candidate who did the same is ‘mucking about’ with is not about them. It is about the electorate. They are making an absolute mockery of our democratic process.
It does not matter if the sums involved are small or if we think it’s unlikely that they would do anything improper. They have already done something improper.
Edited by Elysium on Thursday 27th June 08:44
It feels like PH could really use a consolidated thread of Tory scandals.
While some folks busy themselves creating nothingburger Labour Party threads over things that HMRC and the Police couldn't care less about, I find myself struggling to keep up with the high crimes, misdemeanours, and general skullduggery of the Tories. With Sunak likely to be out the door in a few weeks, I'm sure it won't be long before the floodgates open on a fresh wave of Tory shenanigans.
While some folks busy themselves creating nothingburger Labour Party threads over things that HMRC and the Police couldn't care less about, I find myself struggling to keep up with the high crimes, misdemeanours, and general skullduggery of the Tories. With Sunak likely to be out the door in a few weeks, I'm sure it won't be long before the floodgates open on a fresh wave of Tory shenanigans.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff