Categories
Meet the parents – politicalbetting.com
Meet the parents – politicalbetting.com
Two groups of Con 2019 voters who put chance of voting Con now < 5/10, in E Thanet & Portsmouth N (Penny Mordaunt’s seat)
2
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Will the Penny drop?
But what do I know? I thought the picture quiz was Fred Harris from Play School and The Burkiss Way.
"This is my friend, and as long as I have any money with your house, let him have it to any amount he thinks proper to draw for"
From his wiki bio:
"In the [1922] general election, Churchill lost his Dundee seat [won in 1918 as a Coalition Liberal], to Edwin Scrymgeour, a prohibitionist candidate. Later, he wrote that he was "without an office, without a seat, without a party, and without an appendix".
After the 1923 general election was called, seven Liberal associations asked Churchill to stand as their candidate, and he selected Leicester West, but he did not win the seat. . . .
On 19 March 1924, alienated by Liberal support for Labour, Churchill stood as an independent anti-socialist candidate in the Westminster Abbey by-election but was defeated. In May, he addressed a Conservative meeting in Liverpool and declared that there was no longer a place for the Liberal Party in British politics. . . .
In July, he agreed with Conservative leader Stanley Baldwin that he would be selected as a Conservative candidate in the next general election, which was held on 29 October. Churchill stood at Epping, but he described himself as a "Constitutionalist".
The Conservatives [including "Constitutionalist" Churchill] were victorious, and Baldwin formed the new government. Although Churchill had no background in finance or economics, Baldwin appointed him as Chancellor of the Exchequer.
That is indeed a lovely hummingbird photo. 9/10
I would maybe add cranes to our list of entrancing creatures. Not quite up there with hummingbirds and dolphins - but they have something about them. You can see why the Chinese are always writing poetry about them
Also sea horses, agreed
I would likewise add the nudibranchs for their outrageous colours. I remember seeing my first - I thought it was a multicoloured rubber toy
From your ID of Miguel Ricardo de Alava I foillowed a link to Cape Finisterre where I found this little gem:
"Additionally, laws governing the colonies of the British Empire (including the 1766 amendment to the Sugar Act of 1764) used the latitude of Cape Finisterre as the latitude past which certain goods could not be shipped north directly between British colonies. For instance, it was forbidden to ship sugar cane directly from Jamaica to Nova Scotia, as such a transaction crossed through this latitude. Instead, the laws required that the sugar cane be shipped first from Jamaica to Britain, where it would be re-exported to Nova Scotia."
Not exactly what we would call 'free trade'.
He was almost certainly right
We really are THE GREATEST COUNTRY EVER DESPITE THE WEATHER
I have now had three strong coffees
The idea that you could sell goods to anyone, anywhere at a price you chose was considered anarchy. Yes, bits worked like that, but on the whole, trying (and failing) to control trade was how it was.
Same with the Gang of Four- only Rogers was in the Shadow Cabinet at the time.
Mordaunt is a long standing Cabinet minister.
Are you sure your coffee is not… reinforced?
The two great simple ideas: there isn't a fixed size cake, and prosperous nations make good customers are mind blowing in their importance - along with the law of comparative advantage.
This all developed in a world less complex. While the principle remains, it isn't possible to apply it strictly(ask Rachel Reeves) to issues touching national security, and many other things too. And you reach a point where the globalisation is so great that countries (UK a good example) start feeling they have been bought up by others. This was not the same issue in the 18th century.
The consequence would be a fall in the Labour in constituencies like Canterbury.
https://archive.is/yEuA7
Indeed FDR and WSC were quite big on internationalism even during the war.
It's not just students at risk though - local authorities conduct their annual canvass to update the register updating exercise each Autumn and only issue a comprehensive new register based on the results after the turn of the year.
So an October or even November register will be based on records of who was living at a property at least 1 year earlier at the time of the annual canvass (or even earlier if the canvass form wasn't returned which is very common), unless the person bothered to register online themselves on moving (i.e. without being prompted by the local authority.) Some universities try to get around that by using their enrolment process as a prompt to immediate electoral registration, what the Guardian article is pointing out that a September or October election won't allow time for that.
Owner occupiers who move very rarely won't be much affected, especially pensioners who don't need to move for work reasons. The more transient younger population of renters will though be hugely affected.
It should not be taken as read (even though I want Labour to win) that students have a constitutional right to vote as a bloc at uni (Labour of course), to Labour's advantage when they can vote at home - where I should think a plurality come from Tory seats. (In this election this is where their Labour votes in Tory seats are most needed!).
This is classic Guardian. There is a moan to be had, but it's massively exaggerated, isn't really true, and they should mostly vote at home anyway.
While doing completely the opposite to make it easy for their activisits to fill in the forms so they can do the voting for foreign immigrants? Nothing dodgy there, oh no bless my heart.
(What's that you say? Yes, I dam' well mean "immigrants" - the ones who ahave immigrated into *other* countries.)
Trump should be proof of that.
Would you want Europe led by a European Trump? Better only one nation is, than a whole continent is.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjONM1919rQ&t=1s
Didn't Han say it in A New Hope from memory? Along with "I've got a bad feeling about this", wasn't it an oft-used phrase?
...as the bus turned in the wrong direction. Wrong bus.
In a kerfuffle I dinged the bell, got off, ran back but could not get back in time for the right bus. And then realised I had left half the shopping on the bus.
True story.
👿
So you bussed wide open?
(Sorry, couldn't resist...)
Also, there can't be a September election unless it's called in August, which is unlikely given the recess dates.
With their ridiculous voter ID rules and attempts to stop students from voting I wonder what will be next .
Damn
I'll phone the company.
On topic: One advantage Sherrod Brown has in Ohio is that he is anti-free trade.
"Brown has criticized free trade with China and other countries. In a 2006 Washington Post article, Brown argued against free trade on the grounds that labor activism was responsible for the growth of the U.S. middle class, and that the U.S. economy is harmed by trade relations with countries that lack the kind of labor regulations that have resulted from that activism.[131]
In 2011, the Columbus Dispatch noted that Brown "loves to rail against international trade agreements."[132] Brown's book Myths of Free Trade argues that "an unregulated global economy is a threat to all of us."[133] In the book he recommends measures that would allow for emergency tariffs, protect Buy America laws, including those that give preference to minority and women-owned businesses, and hold foreign producers to American labor and environmental standards.[134] Brown was the co-author and sponsor of a bill that would officially declare China a currency manipulator and require the Department of Commerce to impose countervailing duties on Chinese imports."
source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherrod_Brown#Political_positions
Most economists may love free trade -- but many voters in the US don't.
(My own view: I think NAFTA has been a solid success, good for all three nations -- but I recognize that it is not especially popular in any of the three. Incidentally, it is a bipartisan success: RR proposed it, GHWB negotiated it, and BC got it ratified.
Trade with China, on the other hand, has been a mixed bag. For example, I think we here in the US are going to have to think very hard about their technology thefts. I have seen estimates of a trillion dollars stolen.)
As long as the Israeli government backs the settlers, no-one can credibly claim Israel wants peace. They are a purely imperialist power.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/03/22/israel-largest-west-bank-settlement-blinken-visit/
Indeed having more nationalist leaders may lead to a more variable federation, with quite different local rules, but free trade and movement.
It might well be more to our taste when we Rejoin.
If it wasn't for US sanctions on Japan they wouldn't have attacked Pearl Harbour, and if it weren't for the internationalism of FDR no Lend Lease before 1942.
Your shopping needed to be picked up by a mysterious loner, who soon after calls the police from a public phone box saying he has knowledge of a planned assassination attempt on a leading public figure... The police quickly track the stranger down but he flees leaving the shopping bag with a receipt for your shopping in it, which the police trace back to you. Since you bear a passing resemblance to the stranger, and have no alibi for the time of the call or the near capture of the stranger, it takes you 24 hours in police custody to convince them they're mistaken.
Meanwhile, a leading public figure (not the one the stranger identified, but similar) is assassinated...
..and so on.
The whole point of Federalism is local variations in law, or "states rights". So yes I do support States Rights as long as they do not impinge on the powers reserved to the central government.
WOW. Worst favourability ratings for the Conservatives since the 2019 election.
58% unfavourable towards Conservatives. 19% favourable. Net -39.
Previous worst was -36 in Oct 2022. @IpsosUK @Keiranpedley
https://twitter.com/BestForBritain/status/1771592769082970253?t=QNMD5OQUvYuN1V3rWZvcQw&s=19
The election is announced in good time before the 23rd July (summer recess), time for washing up etc, with a dissolution during recess on 21st August, election on 26th September. Campaign starts in full 1st September.
Takes everyone by surprise and avoids the party conference - which would be greatly desired by the Tories.
https://youtu.be/KUeOKo85K8k?feature=shared&t=427
I can understand why, in our world of aliases, suspicions arise. So here’s the truth (promise!). I am a long-time reader of PB (a lurker, perhaps, though that sounds a bit seedy) and a true fan of the well-informed political debate that takes place here. I pay tribute to Mike Smithson for having created this site and am sorry that he is stepping back.
I do not live in Moscow or on a never-ending tour of the world’s most glamorous hotels and restaurants, but in a pleasant house deep in the West Country, with a partner (female), three dogs, a garden and a Manchester United supporters badge (sorry, TSE and others, about last Sunday). I am an ex-Fleet St journalist (physically as well as metaphorically, if that gives you a clue), past retirement age, who still dabbles in publishing/editing etc with a few other harmless pastimes. I am a political centrist, a former Tory who left the party when Boris became leader, a monarchist, pro-Europe, pro-Ukraine, anti-Trump who believes that it will probably be good for democracy to put Labour in charge for a bit.
So that’s my story (well-crafted by my handler comrades, I am sure you will agree). If anyone doubts it, let me offer a phone or zoom call to the doubter whenever convenient - I can indeed be verified (it's programmed into my algorithm). I am unlikely to be a frequent poster, but now that the ice has been broken, who knows? So, thank you @Benpointer for seeking to give me a chance.
Sorry for the lengthy post - next one will be much shorter and pithier.
In the case of the UK, it is clear to most people that there are 4 distinct units, 3 of which have the right to choose self determination while the largest in practice does not. As long as the UK and NI is held together by a desire to be a UK and NI, then given our history most people accept that there should be one supreme body, the House of Commons, elected by all, in whom ultimate legislative power rests including the power to delegate but not irrevocably transfer power and authority downwards.
(More seriously, welcome to the bear pit.)
https://x.com/marchforrejoin/status/1771528014200787322?s=61
An acquaintance left his favourite toy on a bus during the war. It was a simple toy (as most were back then...), but its loss still resonates with him to this day. I'm guessing it was because it was given to him by his father, who was away serving the country. A loss on top of a loss. The loss still gets mentioned occasionally eighty years later as a sad regret.
I find it quite poignant.
Welcome.
'Aware that Israel’s supporters and its critics have been talking past each other, I decided to write an article for The Times in which I set out some of the things critics had been saying that I had heard, understood and might be willing to accept.
I restated my belief in the need for Israel to exist and be secure, I repeated that it was unthinkable that Hamas be allowed to continue governing territory adjacent to Israel, I admitted that my view wasn’t the same as that of every Jew. And then I made my list of concessions.
I won’t repeat everything I wrote, but the thrust was that I accepted that there had been an emerging Palestinian nationalism at the same time as Zionist migration. I understood why Palestinian Arabs hadn’t wanted to share the land, even though I regretted it. I acknowledged that in the war they then launched, some Palestinians had been driven from their homes and still felt a sense of injustice.
And I agreed they needed still to have their own state, an outcome which settlements and the attitude of the Israeli government impedes. And here is what happened when I wrote this.
Nothing. Nothing happened. I had written that I was trying to establish a dialogue in which all of us showed we were listening to each other, that while some issues were ones that were about right and wrong (the horrific Hamas attack, the need for half the world’s Jews to feel secure), others were about competing rights.
But I didn’t get the dialogue I had been asking for. Not from one person. Not in a single email. Not in a single letter. Not in a single tweet. Not one person matched my concessions with concessions of their own. The only replies I got were to tell me I was right to concede and demand more.
I tried again. I wrote another column and repeated the arguments I had heard the critics make. I was even more explicit this time about seeking a response. But still, I got nothing.'
https://www.thejc.com/lets-talk/so-how-did-a-hamas-apologist-get-an-invitation-to-parliament-jbkk0e9c