• Hossenfeffer
    link
    fedilink
    English
    425 months ago

    It seems to me a given that you shouldn’t be able to place bets on outcomes you can directly influence. This is not so different from e.g. a boxer betting on himself to lose.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          75 months ago

          Think of it as a safety net, if you lose the election you lose your job… But the winnings of that bet would then help you out.

          If you win, you keep your reasonable lucrative job, no problem.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            45 months ago

            I think to most people if you can afford a “flutter” of eight grand you can afford not to be an MP.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              -15 months ago

              If you were single and earning an MPs salary it could be a bit of a no brainer - could you get a other equally or better paying job within a few months? Considering you have been a politician for the last 5 years not an SME in whatever field?

              If you had a family on that salary, unsure. If you agreed it with your other half as a planned move, maybe?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -135 months ago

      There is no indication that any of the politicians who bet against themselves intended to throw the election. Politics is not sport.

      • @HowManyNimons
        link
        75 months ago

        The possibility of throwing is what makes it a bad look.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -45 months ago

          Right, but they weren’t doing that. There’s no evidence they were and no motive for them to do so. The comparison with athletes is not apt. A pro footballer who bets on himself and manipulates the outcome is still a pro-footballer afterwards. A politician who bets on themselves and deliberately loses is not a politician afterwards. It does not make sense to do it.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              -15 months ago

              That’s about one tenth of the annual MP’s salary. So, he has a far greater financial motive to remain an MP than he does to lose and collect the bet.

              • xor
                link
                fedilink
                English
                3
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                Well except for the fact that the salary option is:

                • granted gradually over a year period
                • requires you to do a full-time job

                If they would be able to get even a slightly worse salaried job instead of being an MP, then the financial motive is - in contrast to your claim - actually in favour of him losing

              • polonius-rex
                link
                fedilink
                1
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                yes because “remaining an elected mp for the tories” and “not doing that” represent equal propositions in terms of effort, time and resources

          • @HowManyNimons
            link
            35 months ago

            The motive is money, especially if you’re pretty sure you’re going to lose.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              25 months ago

              “In the 2005 election, I busted a gut to win. I expected to lose. I had a bet on myself to lose in the 2005 election, and my bet went down the pan.”

              He didn’t throw the '05 election, even when he bet against himself.

              • polonius-rex
                link
                fedilink
                35 months ago

                so to check, you’re fine with a football player betting against themselves, so long as they then happen to win?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -2
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          The idea that anyone would put in all the work to get selected as a candidate, then decide it was a smart move to place a bet against themselves and throw the election to make a quick buck is ridiculous. There’s no way you could make enough money from the bet to make it worthwhile.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              0
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              It requires huge amounts of work to be a candidate. I know people who’ve run for parliament. One of them had previously run as a total no-hoper on multiple occasions, in order to prove he knew how to campaign well enough to get selected for a seat where he had a chance. He was so burned out by the selection process that having won the selection, he actually turned down the nomination, then quit politics altogether. The idea that he’d have deliberatey thrown any of those elections is ridiculous.

              • @woop_woop
                link
                45 months ago

                So we’re just ignoring this part then?

                In Britain, being nominated as a local election candidate simply involves signing some forms, with no deposit required. A paper candidate will often do no campaigning at all and so be able to submit a zero return of election expenses, simplifying the paperwork for the election agent. Paper candidates are commonly fielded in different locations by all the major parties in both local and national elections.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  15 months ago

                  In Britain, being nominated as a local election candidate simply involves signing some forms

                  They’re not local election candidates.

                  • polonius-rex
                    link
                    fedilink
                    35 months ago

                    This isn’t some no-name who’s scraped their way in after years of effort; he’s been the candidate since 2005.

                    Placing a bet against himself is absolutely the kind of thing that could jeopardize both his candidacy going forward, and his election chances. So “he wouldn’t do all that just to throw it away” is nonsense.

                    The man has literally given himself financial incentive not to win and you don’t see how that kind of conflict of interests is an issue? Are you real?