Starmer out by June 30, 2026? ↗

Price rose 4.0pp from 42.5% to 46.5% over 1h (front_loaded). Now at 46.5%. [Prior context: 24h ago: 36.0%, 72h range: 35.0%-46.5%]

Days to resolution: 69 days. Theta-bleed is not a major factor yet (deadline >90 days), so absence of news is not inherently bearish for YES. Step 1a: The trend is UP (YES more likely), but there are zero ★DIRECT events—no resignations, no formal no-confidence vote, no official process steps toward Starmer's ouster. All news is CONTEXT: the Mandelson/Robbins scandal is intensifying, with new testimony, calls for a no-confidence vote from SNP and Tories, and visible cabinet unease. However, these are political pressure and commentary, not formal ouster mechanisms. The story is INTENSIFYING in terms of media and political pressure, but not in terms of concrete process toward removal. Signal count: Momentum signals: trend=0, counter=0 (no ★DIRECT process steps either way). Remaining space: 53.5pp. Step 3 hard rule check: With zero ★DIRECT signals and all news being context or rhetoric, Principle 1 and the Personnel Ouster module require that we treat this as NOISE for resolution. The move is a front-loaded spike on intensifying scandal coverage, but without process news, this is not actionable momentum. Rule 4 ("plateauing," "not intensifying" in process terms) and Rule 2 (BALANCED MIXED, as all sides are rhetoric) bind: Action MUST be STALL.

the deterministic planner rejected this trade. typical causes: poor R:R, spread exceeds gap, settlement danger zone, market too close to resolution. LLM assessment is above (Stage 6); planner is a pure-math gate layered on top.