Mr. Nashe, didn't hear it, but I am wondering what the non-child question was. It sounds ridiculous.
Essentially quoting another Labour MP (female) that she would be supporting Cooper because she's got children, and therefore knows what it's really like ... blah, blah, blah. I'm really in despair about the current state of the Labour party.
You are right to despair. As of now it is difficult to see where a Labour resurrection will come from. The Nats aren't going away. Nor is UKIP.
Osborne has stolen all of Labour's sexiest lingerie from the political washing line. What are Labour gonna wear in 2020, to attract Tory, Nat and UKIP voters? Really?
I can't think of a single policy they could credibly adopt in five years' time which might get them anywhere near a majority.
Their best bet is EVENTS, DEAR BOY, EVENTS, but it is thin gruel.
It's not just down to Osborne. It's becoming increasingly obvious just how badly EdM f*cked the party over.
It's that prat Chris Leslie with his interview earlier that's really depressed me. They look set to double down on the mistakes of the past 5 years.
Rather than Miliband being "too left-wing", the real problem is that Labour never properly challenged any of the Tories' arguments (that cutting the deficit is the big issue, that the poor need to be "incentivised", that it's Communist to say businesses have a responsibility to society as well as to maximise their profits). If the public are presented a right-wing worldview as indisputable fact, without any dissent from Labour (or anyone else), then of course they're going to conclude that worldview must be correct and will always trust the market leaders the Tories best on those issues.
Yes, I didn't buy this idea of EdM being 'too left wing'. The problem was his idea of winning through focus groups: i.e. Step 1) you target every conceivable demographic and find out what they're concerned about. Step 2) you formulate a range of policies that appear to address these various concerns. Step 3) You bang on about how 'out of touch' the tories are. It was the most cynical way to try and win an election and people recognised it as such - this was effectively what they were saying when they brought up the leadership issue - he couldn't be trusted to be a Prime Minister. And the longer term effect of his approach has been the hollowing out of Labour's soul.
So when David Cameron said tax credits will not fall, he was.......?
when did he say that? we knew tax credits were going to be targetted since the election pretty much
On the televised Question Time event.
He specifically said they would not fall.
A lot of people will be getting a surprise when the new financial year starts. George had better hope businesses are willing to give pay rises in the next few years
Mr. T, not a perfect parallel, as China's not a democratic country and if the Communists fail to provide growth jobs and ever-rising prosperity for a prolonged period the massive middle class might wonder if a democratic approach would be better.
That said, I don't expect serious ructions, just flagging it up as a credible possibility.
I'm beginning to wonder if I have some sort of mental block that prevents me from foreseeing future Tory success - I was among the egregious offenders of the EICIPM thinking, and even after the Tory win I find it hard to picture it happening again. I figure the 'Enough years in power for people to want a change' and 'events/tory self harming will favour Labour' is bound to be right at some point.
I do like the description of policy announcements being 'headline grabbing', but then demonstrating that the Indy was able to resist that grabbing, since they haven't mentioned any of those policies on the front page, let alone in the headline.
So when David Cameron said tax credits will not fall, he was.......?
when did he say that? we knew tax credits were going to be targetted since the election pretty much
On the televised Question Time event.
He specifically said they would not fall.
A lot of people will be getting a surprise when the new financial year starts. George had better hope businesses are willing to give pay rises in the next few years
No he didn't. He said Child Benefit would not fall. Child Tax Credits are not Child Benefit they are two completely different things.
One of the ironies of New Labour's obsession with the minimum wage is that it's actually one of the main examples of the "statism" they claimed to be against.
The real way of getting effective higher wages is surely to have much stronger trade unions like in Germany which could negotiate on a case-by-case basis by industry, rather than a one-size-fits-all minimum wage which doesn't take into account the relative strength of a particular trade or industry or any cyclical downturns. (Admittedly that would involve union leaders acting in better faith than they did in the 1960s and 1970s.) Though in that case, there would still be a need for tax credits to top-up the pay of employees of smaller businesses which couldn't compete with the wages of their mega-rivals.
Why do people continually cite Germany as an economic exemplar? Just because they don't have a deficit? Is that it?
German growth is moribund (lower than ours). German demographics make depressing reading. Their exports are good, but that's largely because they've enjoyed an artificially low currency thanks to the weakness of the peripheral euro nations they are busy pauperizing. And, lest we forget, German wages have barely grown in 20 years.
This brilliant German model is also about to blow up in Berlin's sausage-fed face, leaving it on the hook for £50bn in Greek debts as its currency zone implodes.
No one should be copying "Germany".
China not looking too rosy tonight. 3 trillion dollars wiped off the stock market in the last 3 weeks, most of whom are small investors. The Chinese roaring twenties have ended with a stockmarket crash of epic proportions*. Germany and the Eurozone are going to look pretty good fairly shortly.
* channels his inner Hunchman...
When the government called the big brokers and said "please buy shares - we will give you an interest free loan to do so" people lost their nerve...it's no longer even a pretendy-free market
Indeed, plenty to play for. The 5 year fixed cycle also helps Labour, had it been 4 years and the next election been in 2018 then Cameron would probably have stayed on and won as Blair did in 2005. However, since WW2 only one party has won an election after 10 or more years in power, the Tories in 1992 and the only reason they won that was because electing John Major seemed like a change of government from Thatcher anyway. Osborne will not seem like such a change from Cameron and the present government as he has been at the forefront of it from the start
Agreed. I see an awful lot of parallels between Osborne and Brown - two highly politically Chancellors. Like Brown, I think that Osborne's tendency to make political decisions, first and foremost will eventually come back to haunt him. There's been an awful lot of talk of the lack of talent in Labour's ranks, and the mentioning of Osborne, Javid etc by contrast for 2020. But Osborne, while a great strategist, as you say lacks the affable and personable nature of Cameron to be a leader which appeals to broad audiences. Very rarely do great strategists, turn out to be great leaders.
There's still the potential of a split caused by the EU ref, the impact of inevitable interest rises, a potential recession, and how the departure of Cameron is handled. The Tories will inevitably face a wobbly mid-term period, where things won't seem so rosy. Right now, with much of the press sympathetic to their cause, and a disorganized opposition, it is relatively easy for them to control the political narrative. But this won't always be the case - at some-point, Labour will elect a new leader, and they have the opportunity at this point to take the fight to this government. Things also get interesting, in regard to the LDs and UKIP - can the LDs make any kind of progress in the local elections? Can UKIP also build up a credible local government base - particularly in the North, when they hope to challenge Labour. How popular will, post 2017, the SNP be? They will probably still be dominating Scottish politics, but won't as infallible as they are now.
If George does manage to take over from Cameron and win 2020, I wonder if Brown will be watching and thinking 'Oh, you mean Tony and I should have worked together harmoniously, then I could have taken over successfully?'
I do think The_Apocalypse identifies some of the flaws with George's own approach - not all of which, in fairness, are within his control - so it's no sure thing, but he's a contender now, which is more than most would have considered once even as a joke (the same was true of Johnson of course), so it'll be fun to see if he has it in him.
@Reuters: BREAKING: Some large Greek banks face possible closure, merger with peers after a bailout for Greece, sources say.
Given the ongoing controversy about the original bailout, perhaps the fair thing would be to arrange shotgun weddings for the Greek banking sector with French and German banks taking them over, a la Lloyds and HBOS.
Summary: Merkel has run into serious reservations about concessions to Greece in her party, but won't be too worried about getting them through if she wants to. However, the SPD head, Gabriel, has been taking a very hard line, and in turn is facing mutiny on the left, who want a more supportive approach.
Overall, doesn't sound as though a deal will be rejected by Germany *if* Merkel wants it - not enough organised hostility on the CDU/CDU side, not enough support for a hard line on the left.
Pretty even stevens at the test I would say. Given this number of wickets on day 1 I think a draw is unlikely unless there is some serious rain.
For sure - I think England may well have a marginal advantage actually.
Anyway I'm laying the draw and backing England right now, quite content with that.
DavidL is excused cricket comment during the Ashes, at least during the hours of play.
It looks pretty even right now, but the pitch is not offering much. Given where England were aftr an hour it's a great recovery. Given where they were just after tea, it's a bit of a let down. But what is so good to see is players playing without fear. Root, Stoke, Buttler, Ali. They'll make mistakes, they'll get themselves out form time to time, but they will not give an inch. There must be room for another of similar ilk in there when Bell is dropped.
You wouldn't believe how tempted I was to praise Root today during play SO. But I have learned, even me.
Summary: Merkel has run into serious reservations about concessions to Greece in her party, but won't be too worried about getting them through if she wants to. However, the SPD head, Gabriel, has been taking a very hard line, and in turn is facing mutiny on the left, who want a more supportive approach.
Overall, doesn't sound as though a deal will be rejected by Germany *if* Merkel wants it - not enough organised hostility on the CDU/CDU side, not enough support for a hard line on the left.
Merkel faces the risk though of losing support to the anti-euro AfD if another, more generous bailout is agreed
Before the election many people, including me, were expecting the Conservatives to raise the minimum wage to shoot Labour's fox. I was surprised when they did not. Now we find out why: George Osborne was saving it up for the post-election budget to pair with the cutting of tax credits. If he had done the first before the election and the last afterwards, all the focus tonight would be on the Tories' assault on tax credits and the cuts in general. Instead, he has presented a budget which sets out his credo in full at a time when Labour is unable sensibly to respond.
Labour should be very afraid of a strategist who is that patient and wily.
If George does manage to take over from Cameron and win 2020, I wonder if Brown will be watching and thinking 'Oh, you mean Tony and I should have worked together harmoniously, then I could have taken over successfully?'
I do think The_Apocalypse identifies some of the flaws with George's own approach - not all of which, in fairness, are within his control - so it's no sure thing, but he's a contender now, which is more than most would have considered once even as a joke (the same was true of Johnson of course), so it'll be fun to see if he has it in him.
Brown also was too cautious, had he called an election in 2007 he may have had a tiny majority or Labour would have been largest party but he wanted the certainty of a more comfortable majority for 3 years
Mr. palmer, what did you make of reports earlier this week that 16/18 (excluding Greece) eurozone countries didn't want Greece in the single currency any more?
'However, since WW2 only one party has won an election after 10 or more years in power, the Tories in 1992 and the only reason they won that was because electing John Major seemed like a change of government from Thatcher anyway.'
With the difficulties in the Greek banking system, stores, businesses, filling stations etc have large wads of cash they can't deposit, credit card receipts they can't monetize etc. In addition more and more people and businesses are feeling the effect of the 60 euro withdrawal limit. Mass layoffs are on the way also.
The banks will soon run out of cash.
When this happens, how long before civil unrest breaks out? It can only be a matter of days, surely.
Pretty even stevens at the test I would say. Given this number of wickets on day 1 I think a draw is unlikely unless there is some serious rain.
For sure - I think England may well have a marginal advantage actually.
Anyway I'm laying the draw and backing England right now, quite content with that.
DavidL is excused cricket comment during the Ashes, at least during the hours of play.
It looks pretty even right now, but the pitch is not offering much. Given where England were aftr an hour it's a great recovery. Given where they were just after tea, it's a bit of a let down. But what is so good to see is players playing without fear. Root, Stoke, Buttler, Ali. They'll make mistakes, they'll get themselves out form time to time, but they will not give an inch. There must be room for another of similar ilk in there when Bell is dropped.
You wouldn't believe how tempted I was to praise Root today during play SO. But I have learned, even me.
On C4 News headlines he was described as 'Yorkshire's Joe Root'. I found that identification interesting. Had the captain struck a match-changing century, I don't think they would have referred to him as 'Essex's Alistair Cook'.
'The only politically interesting question is whether Nat MPs will vote on this most English of issues, and expose themselves as utter hypocrites ("we don't vote on English only matters!"). I bet many will, partly to make mischief.'
If that happens then they wait until EVEL is up & running and have another vote.
Indeed, plenty to play for. The 5 year fixed cycle also helps Labour, had it been 4 years and the next election been in 2018 then Cameron would probably have stayed on and won as Blair did in 2005. However, since WW2 only one party has won an election after 10 or more years in power, the Tories in 1992 and the only reason they won that was because electing John Major seemed like a change of government from Thatcher anyway. Osborne will not seem like such a change from Cameron and the present government as he has been at the forefront of it from the start
Agreed. I see an awful lot of parallels between Osborne and Brown - two highly politically Chancellors. Like Brown, I think that Osborne's tendency to make political decisions, first and foremost will eventually come back to haunt him. There's been an awful lot of talk of the lack of talent in Labour's ranks, and the mentioning of Osborne, Javid etc by contrast for 2020. But Osborne, while a great strategist, as you say lacks the affable and personable nature of Cameron to be a leader which appeals to broad audiences. Very rarely do great strategists, turn out to be great leaders.
There's still the potential of a split caused by the EU ref, the impact of inevitable interest rises, a potential recession, and how the departure of Cameron is handled. The Tories will inevitably face a wobbly mid-term period, where things won't seem so rosy. Right now, with much of the press sympathetic to their cause, and a disorganized opposition, it is relatively easy for them to control the political narrative. But this won't always be the case - at some-point, Labour will elect a new leader, and they have the opportunity at this point to take the fight to this government. Things also get interesting, in regard to the LDs and UKIP - can the LDs make any kind of progress in the local elections? Can UKIP also build up a credible local government base - particularly in the North, when they hope to challenge Labour. How popular will, post 2017, the SNP be? They will probably still be dominating Scottish politics, but won't as infallible as they are now.
Agree on Osborne, it would be a bit like making Mandelson Labour leader after Blair, another great strategist but not a frontman. Events may also have an impact as you say and we will need to see what happens to the minor parties
@screwlabour: After championing Miliband's £8 minimum wage manifesto promise, Owen the Bewildered has spent the day rubbishing the Tory £9. #budget2015
Pretty even stevens at the test I would say. Given this number of wickets on day 1 I think a draw is unlikely unless there is some serious rain.
For sure - I think England may well have a marginal advantage actually.
Anyway I'm laying the draw and backing England right now, quite content with that.
DavidL is excused cricket comment during the Ashes, at least during the hours of play.
It looks pretty even right now, but the pitch is not offering much. Given where England were aftr an hour it's a great recovery. Given where they were just after tea, it's a bit of a let down. But what is so good to see is players playing without fear. Root, Stoke, Buttler, Ali. They'll make mistakes, they'll get themselves out form time to time, but they will not give an inch. There must be room for another of similar ilk in there when Bell is dropped.
You wouldn't believe how tempted I was to praise Root today during play SO. But I have learned, even me.
On C4 News headlines he was described as 'Yorkshire's Joe Root'. I found that identification interesting. Had the captain struck a match-changing century, I don't think they would have referred to him as 'Essex's Alistair Cook'.
It's obvious.
They are trying to protect Cook's reputation by hiding the fact he's from Essex.
German political watchers, are there any truly significant opposition figures to Merkel on the scene or near horizon? She'll have been Chancellor for 12 years in 2017 and leader of her party for 17, and whatever the domestic situation, and the probable impossibility of resolving the contradictions of EU problems, it feels lately like she is giving off more of an impression of being unwilling to act, in foreign terms at least, than having any kind of structured approach. That might well be unfair, but for years now it feels like she's been portrayed as impregnable, unflappable, one who does not rush to judgement, and this whole Greece debacle is making it seem more like permanent indecision that strategy. Eventually her personal appeal has to fade, and I wonder what shape the German opposition is in.
Pretty even stevens at the test I would say. Given this number of wickets on day 1 I think a draw is unlikely unless there is some serious rain.
For sure - I think England may well have a marginal advantage actually.
Anyway I'm laying the draw and backing England right now, quite content with that.
DavidL is excused cricket comment during the Ashes, at least during the hours of play.
It looks pretty even right now, but the pitch is not offering much. Given where England were aftr an hour it's a great recovery. Given where they were just after tea, it's a bit of a let down. But what is so good to see is players playing without fear. Root, Stoke, Buttler, Ali. They'll make mistakes, they'll get themselves out form time to time, but they will not give an inch. There must be room for another of similar ilk in there when Bell is dropped.
You wouldn't believe how tempted I was to praise Root today during play SO. But I have learned, even me.
On C4 News headlines he was described as 'Yorkshire's Joe Root'. I found that identification interesting. Had the captain struck a match-changing century, I don't think they would have referred to him as 'Essex's Alistair Cook'.
It's obvious.
They are trying to protect Cook's reputation by hiding the fact he's from Essex.
Pretty even stevens at the test I would say. Given this number of wickets on day 1 I think a draw is unlikely unless there is some serious rain.
For sure - I think England may well have a marginal advantage actually.
Anyway I'm laying the draw and backing England right now, quite content with that.
DavidL is excused cricket comment during the Ashes, at least during the hours of play.
It looks pretty even right now, but the pitch is not offering much. Given where England were aftr an hour it's a great recovery. Given where they were just after tea, it's a bit of a let down. But what is so good to see is players playing without fear. Root, Stoke, Buttler, Ali. They'll make mistakes, they'll get themselves out form time to time, but they will not give an inch. There must be room for another of similar ilk in there when Bell is dropped.
You wouldn't believe how tempted I was to praise Root today during play SO. But I have learned, even me.
On C4 News headlines he was described as 'Yorkshire's Joe Root'. I found that identification interesting. Had the captain struck a match-changing century, I don't think they would have referred to him as 'Essex's Alistair Cook'.
It's obvious.
They are trying to protect Cook's reputation by hiding the fact he's from Essex.
Yorkshire = All things good and brilliant
Essex = Chav central, TOWIE and Essex Girls
Yorkshirites have massive chips on their shoulders and get special treatment to stop them throwing a wobbler may be an alternate explanation. Not that I share that view of course.
Incidentally, the Eurosceptic AfD looks like splitting - the party founder has been replaced by a harder right-winger and has resigned from the party, with speculation that he's gonig to start a new one.
Pretty even stevens at the test I would say. Given this number of wickets on day 1 I think a draw is unlikely unless there is some serious rain.
For sure - I think England may well have a marginal advantage actually.
Anyway I'm laying the draw and backing England right now, quite content with that.
DavidL is excused cricket comment during the Ashes, at least during the hours of play.
It looks pretty even right now, but the pitch is not offering much. Given where England were aftr an hour it's a great recovery. Given where they were just after tea, it's a bit of a let down. But what is so good to see is players playing without fear. Root, Stoke, Buttler, Ali. They'll make mistakes, they'll get themselves out form time to time, but they will not give an inch. There must be room for another of similar ilk in there when Bell is dropped.
You wouldn't believe how tempted I was to praise Root today during play SO. But I have learned, even me.
On C4 News headlines he was described as 'Yorkshire's Joe Root'. I found that identification interesting. Had the captain struck a match-changing century, I don't think they would have referred to him as 'Essex's Alistair Cook'.
It's obvious.
They are trying to protect Cook's reputation by hiding the fact he's from Essex.
Incidentally, the Eurosceptic AfD looks like splitting - the party founder has been replaced by a harder right-winger and has resigned from the party, with speculation that he's gonig to start a new one.
Maybe, but of course the UKIP founder Dr Alan Sked has left the party too and looked at founding his own. Originally founded by intellectuals UKIP has become ever more populist and its voteshare has risen at the same time
Sure, people from Yorkshire are great, but do they have a nickname which shares the name of a crappy Bond movie? Which is surely a mark of greatness for a county.
German political watchers, are there any truly significant opposition figures to Merkel on the scene or near horizon? She'll have been Chancellor for 12 years in 2017 and leader of her party for 17, and whatever the domestic situation, and the probable impossibility of resolving the contradictions of EU problems, it feels lately like she is giving off more of an impression of being unwilling to act, in foreign terms at least, than having any kind of structured approach. That might well be unfair, but for years now it feels like she's been portrayed as impregnable, unflappable, one who does not rush to judgement, and this whole Greece debacle is making it seem more like permanent indecision that strategy. Eventually her personal appeal has to fade, and I wonder what shape the German opposition is in.
Not good. The SPD (social democrats) are drifting with the customary "second party in government" malaise. The Left is marginally up but not yet seen as ready to wleocme into a coalition. The Greens are marking time. The AfD is in trouble, as noted below. Merkel isn't seen as wildly inspiring, but more prime ministerialo than anyone else in sight.
Mr. palmer, what did you make of reports earlier this week that 16/18 (excluding Greece) eurozone countries didn't want Greece in the single currency any more?
I think that the Euro countries are thoroughly fed up with having their currency messed about by Greek Trotskyists and by and large wish they'd go away. It doesn't mean that they'll necessarily reject a deal, but they are not in a mood to be wildly generous.
'However, since WW2 only one party has won an election after 10 or more years in power, the Tories in 1992 and the only reason they won that was because electing John Major seemed like a change of government from Thatcher anyway.'
The one more heave strategy.
Even Kinnock would have beaten Thatcher in 1989, it was her replacement by a completely new face in John Major which enabled the Tories to win 1 more time in 1992.
German political watchers, are there any truly significant opposition figures to Merkel on the scene or near horizon? She'll have been Chancellor for 12 years in 2017 and leader of her party for 17, and whatever the domestic situation, and the probable impossibility of resolving the contradictions of EU problems, it feels lately like she is giving off more of an impression of being unwilling to act, in foreign terms at least, than having any kind of structured approach. That might well be unfair, but for years now it feels like she's been portrayed as impregnable, unflappable, one who does not rush to judgement, and this whole Greece debacle is making it seem more like permanent indecision that strategy. Eventually her personal appeal has to fade, and I wonder what shape the German opposition is in.
As far as I was aware, Ursula Von der Leyen, the current defence minister (CDU) has been talked up as a successor to Merkel. But Europhobes would hate her, even more than they dislike Merkel: she apparently favours an 'EU army'.
'However, since WW2 only one party has won an election after 10 or more years in power, the Tories in 1992 and the only reason they won that was because electing John Major seemed like a change of government from Thatcher anyway.'
The one more heave strategy.
Even Kinnock would have beaten Thatcher in 1989, it was her replacement by a completely new face in John Major which enabled the Tories to win 1 more time in 1992.
Since no such election took place that is pure speculation. Two months ago many predicted that Miliband would oust Cameron from Downing Street.
German political watchers, are there any truly significant opposition figures to Merkel on the scene or near horizon? She'll have been Chancellor for 12 years in 2017 and leader of her party for 17, and whatever the domestic situation, and the probable impossibility of resolving the contradictions of EU problems, it feels lately like she is giving off more of an impression of being unwilling to act, in foreign terms at least, than having any kind of structured approach. That might well be unfair, but for years now it feels like she's been portrayed as impregnable, unflappable, one who does not rush to judgement, and this whole Greece debacle is making it seem more like permanent indecision that strategy. Eventually her personal appeal has to fade, and I wonder what shape the German opposition is in.
As far as I was aware, Ursula Von der Leyen, the current defence minister (CDU) has been talked up as a successor to Merkel. But Europhobes would hate her, even more than they dislike Merkel: she apparently favours an 'EU army'.
Well, I've transitioned into being an Out voter recently, but I'm in favour of her as that's a great name, which is really what I look for in my political leaders.
German political watchers, are there any truly significant opposition figures to Merkel on the scene or near horizon? She'll have been Chancellor for 12 years in 2017 and leader of her party for 17, and whatever the domestic situation, and the probable impossibility of resolving the contradictions of EU problems, it feels lately like she is giving off more of an impression of being unwilling to act, in foreign terms at least, than having any kind of structured approach. That might well be unfair, but for years now it feels like she's been portrayed as impregnable, unflappable, one who does not rush to judgement, and this whole Greece debacle is making it seem more like permanent indecision that strategy. Eventually her personal appeal has to fade, and I wonder what shape the German opposition is in.
Not good. The SPD (social democrats) are drifting with the customary "second party in government" malaise. The Left is marginally up but not yet seen as ready to wleocme into a coalition. The Greens are marking time. The AfD is in trouble, as noted below. Merkel isn't seen as wildly inspiring, but more prime ministerialo than anyone else in sight.
Has Merkel ever been seen as 'wildly inspiring', though? She did tell Tony Blair, and Johnathan Powell, that she had 'no charisma'. Merkel's appeal, as far as I can see is almost being like a 'mother' figure in German politics - thus, the name 'mutti' in the German press. She has never been a charming, suave and slick politician. I think the real worry for Germany, is when Merkel goes, do they really have anyone who can slip into her shoes? They don't appear to have any strong leaders on the rise.
Incidentally, the Eurosceptic AfD looks like splitting - the party founder has been replaced by a harder right-winger and has resigned from the party, with speculation that he's gonig to start a new one.
Maybe, but of course the UKIP founder Dr Alan Sked has left the party too and looked at founding his own. Originally founded by intellectuals UKIP has become ever more populist and its voteshare has risen at the same time
Yes, it's always hard to predict what voters on the left and right will want - quite often it's fatal to become too moderate, since that removes their USP. The AfD voting share in polls has remained in the 4.5-5.0 range pretty consistently up to now, but it does have some serious internal divisions (not just the founder): Eurosceptics close to business vs hard-line anti-immigrant types. Cicero (independent centrist magazine) calls the current leadership "the NPD with university degrees" (the NPD was the fringe neo-Nazi party, now more or less defunct) - probably an exaggeration, but...
German political watchers, are there any truly significant opposition figures to Merkel on the scene or near horizon? She'll have been Chancellor for 12 years in 2017 and leader of her party for 17, and whatever the domestic situation, and the probable impossibility of resolving the contradictions of EU problems, it feels lately like she is giving off more of an impression of being unwilling to act, in foreign terms at least, than having any kind of structured approach. That might well be unfair, but for years now it feels like she's been portrayed as impregnable, unflappable, one who does not rush to judgement, and this whole Greece debacle is making it seem more like permanent indecision that strategy. Eventually her personal appeal has to fade, and I wonder what shape the German opposition is in.
As far as I was aware, Ursula Von der Leyen, the current defence minister (CDU) has been talked up as a successor to Merkel. But Europhobes would hate her, even more than they dislike Merkel: she apparently favours an 'EU army'.
Well, I've transitioned into being an Out voter recently, but I'm in favour of her as that's a great name, which is really what I look for in my political leaders.
You won't want the Education Minister, Johanna Wanka, to take over then.
I have a sneaking suspicion that France is going to be the one to broker the deal with Greece and kick the proverbial can down the road.
Hey Tim, did you see Spurs signed a 10 year NFL deal for 2 games a year?
Yes, I did. It's no secret that the NFL was not thrilled with Wembley, both for scheduling reasons, access, and because the field at Wembley is just terrible.
Good old BBC, saying that at least 2 NFL 'matches' a year will be played there.
The NFL is serious about growing the game in the UK.
400 million pounds seems a ludicrously small amount for a decent stadium, particularly in a high cost place like the UK.
Has Merkel ever been seen as 'wildly inspiring', though? She did tell Tony Blair, and Johnathan Powell, that she had 'no charisma'. Merkel's appeal, as far as I can see is almost being like a 'mother' figure in German politics - thus, the name 'mutti' in the German press. She has never been a charming, suave and slick politician. I think the real worry for Germany, is when Merkel goes, do they really have anyone who can slip into her shoes? They don't appear to have any strong leaders on the rise.
She's a hard act to follow. There's almost no political antecedent for her anywhere. She combines the 'mother' figure image as you say, with being hard as nails in power battles and a pragmatic and consensual approach to policy.
While we're on the subject of Germany, the SPD there are a good counter-example to this "Labour must move closer to the Tories on policy": the SPD have long been about as centrist as possible, yet their result in 2013 makes Labour's this year look like a landslide win.
Pretty even stevens at the test I would say. Given this number of wickets on day 1 I think a draw is unlikely unless there is some serious rain.
For sure - I think England may well have a marginal advantage actually.
Anyway I'm laying the draw and backing England right now, quite content with that.
DavidL is excused cricket comment during the Ashes, at least during the hours of play.
It looks pretty even right now, but the pitch is not offering much. Given where England were aftr an hour it's a great recovery. Given where they were just after tea, it's a bit of a let down. But what is so good to see is players playing without fear. Root, Stoke, Buttler, Ali. They'll make mistakes, they'll get themselves out form time to time, but they will not give an inch. There must be room for another of similar ilk in there when Bell is dropped.
You wouldn't believe how tempted I was to praise Root today during play SO. But I have learned, even me.
On C4 News headlines he was described as 'Yorkshire's Joe Root'. I found that identification interesting. Had the captain struck a match-changing century, I don't think they would have referred to him as 'Essex's Alistair Cook'.
It's obvious.
They are trying to protect Cook's reputation by hiding the fact he's from Essex.
Yorkshire = All things good and brilliant
Essex = Chav central, TOWIE and Essex Girls
Yorkshirites have massive chips on their shoulders and get special treatment to stop them throwing a wobbler may be an alternate explanation. Not that I share that view of course.
I am sure someone who studies Roman history with be coming up with an analogy, but tim is sooooo last year and is fighting battles that cannot be won. The sort of crap he was doing yrs ago about Dave and George benefitting from IHT changes... I think tim is stuck in a time ward where the Rubik's cube is still in vogue hE has not even noticed that EICWNBPM has been and gone.
'However, since WW2 only one party has won an election after 10 or more years in power, the Tories in 1992 and the only reason they won that was because electing John Major seemed like a change of government from Thatcher anyway.'
The one more heave strategy.
Even Kinnock would have beaten Thatcher in 1989, it was her replacement by a completely new face in John Major which enabled the Tories to win 1 more time in 1992.
Since no such election took place that is pure speculation. Two months ago many predicted that Miliband would oust Cameron from Downing Street.
While the polls in May 1989 were reasonably close, both parties were over 40% and there was less of an issue with minor parties like the SNP as there was in 2015. By November 1989 Mori had Labour with a 14 point lead, NOP a 12 point lead, ICM a 10 point lead, Gallup a 9 point lead http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/historical-polls/voting-intention-1987-1992
I have a sneaking suspicion that France is going to be the one to broker the deal with Greece and kick the proverbial can down the road.
Hey Tim, did you see Spurs signed a 10 year NFL deal for 2 games a year?
Yes, I did. It's no secret that the NFL was not thrilled with Wembley, both for scheduling reasons, access, and because the field at Wembley is just terrible.
Good old BBC, saying that at least 2 NFL 'matches' a year will be played there.
The NFL is serious about growing the game in the UK.
400 million pounds seems a ludicrously small amount for a decent stadium, particularly in a high cost place like the UK.
Maybe they have a Greek accountant
If Spurs have signed this 2 game deal (down from the 3 game deal Wembley now has), does this mean that the talk of a London franchise is dead in the water?
'However, since WW2 only one party has won an election after 10 or more years in power, the Tories in 1992 and the only reason they won that was because electing John Major seemed like a change of government from Thatcher anyway.'
The one more heave strategy.
Even Kinnock would have beaten Thatcher in 1989, it was her replacement by a completely new face in John Major which enabled the Tories to win 1 more time in 1992.
Since no such election took place that is pure speculation. Two months ago many predicted that Miliband would oust Cameron from Downing Street.
While the polls in May 1989 were reasonably close, both parties were over 40% and there was less of an issue with minor parties like the SNP as there was in 2015. By November 1989 Mori had Labour with a 14 point lead, NOP a 12 point lead, ICM a 10 point lead, Gallup a 9 point lead http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/historical-polls/voting-intention-1987-1992
It's fair to say that if Thatcher were thinking of going to the country in 1989 she wouldn't have made the same choices about the poll tax, etc. Speculation based on mid-term polls is futile.
@WikiGuido: BBC News refers to "what he called" the National Living Wage, extending their ISIS policy to George Osborne.
BBC also seem to think GO has implemented EIC best ideas with respect to wages non doms etc
That must leave a residual impression in people's minds when it comes to the next election. Soft Labour voters will think it's safe to vote for Osborne as he'll implement anything worthwhile that the other side have been saying.
'However, since WW2 only one party has won an election after 10 or more years in power, the Tories in 1992 and the only reason they won that was because electing John Major seemed like a change of government from Thatcher anyway.'
The one more heave strategy.
Even Kinnock would have beaten Thatcher in 1989, it was her replacement by a completely new face in John Major which enabled the Tories to win 1 more time in 1992.
Since no such election took place that is pure speculation. Two months ago many predicted that Miliband would oust Cameron from Downing Street.
While the polls in May 1989 were reasonably close, both parties were over 40% and there was less of an issue with minor parties like the SNP as there was in 2015. By November 1989 Mori had Labour with a 14 point lead, NOP a 12 point lead, ICM a 10 point lead, Gallup a 9 point lead http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/historical-polls/voting-intention-1987-1992
It's fair to say that if Thatcher were thinking of going to the country in 1989 she wouldn't have made the same choices about the poll tax, etc. Speculation based on mid-term polls is futile.
True, but the poll tax was not actually introduced in England and Wales until 1990 although it was trialled in Scotland in 1989
While we're on the subject of Germany, the SPD there are a good counter-example to this "Labour must move closer to the Tories on policy": the SPD have long been about as centrist as possible, yet their result in 2013 makes Labour's this year look like a landslide win.
Although the fact Germany has PR means the leftwing Die Linke and the Greens win more seats
Has Merkel ever been seen as 'wildly inspiring', though? She did tell Tony Blair, and Johnathan Powell, that she had 'no charisma'. Merkel's appeal, as far as I can see is almost being like a 'mother' figure in German politics - thus, the name 'mutti' in the German press. She has never been a charming, suave and slick politician. I think the real worry for Germany, is when Merkel goes, do they really have anyone who can slip into her shoes? They don't appear to have any strong leaders on the rise.
She's a hard act to follow. There's almost no political antecedent for her anywhere. She combines the 'mother' figure image as you say, with being hard as nails in power battles and a pragmatic and consensual approach to policy.
Isn't "hard as nails in power battles and a pragmatic and consensual approach to policy" tautologous with "mother"?
Has Merkel ever been seen as 'wildly inspiring', though? She did tell Tony Blair, and Johnathan Powell, that she had 'no charisma'. Merkel's appeal, as far as I can see is almost being like a 'mother' figure in German politics - thus, the name 'mutti' in the German press. She has never been a charming, suave and slick politician. I think the real worry for Germany, is when Merkel goes, do they really have anyone who can slip into her shoes? They don't appear to have any strong leaders on the rise.
She's a hard act to follow. There's almost no political antecedent for her anywhere. She combines the 'mother' figure image as you say, with being hard as nails in power battles and a pragmatic and consensual approach to policy.
Isn't "hard as nails in power battles and a pragmatic and consensual approach to policy" tautologous with "mother"?
That's why she's a hard act to follow. It's almost impossible to combine all her qualities into a single person.
Has Merkel ever been seen as 'wildly inspiring', though? She did tell Tony Blair, and Johnathan Powell, that she had 'no charisma'. Merkel's appeal, as far as I can see is almost being like a 'mother' figure in German politics - thus, the name 'mutti' in the German press. She has never been a charming, suave and slick politician. I think the real worry for Germany, is when Merkel goes, do they really have anyone who can slip into her shoes? They don't appear to have any strong leaders on the rise.
She's a hard act to follow. There's almost no political antecedent for her anywhere. She combines the 'mother' figure image as you say, with being hard as nails in power battles and a pragmatic and consensual approach to policy.
Isn't "hard as nails in power battles and a pragmatic and consensual approach to policy" tautologous with "mother"?
While we're on the subject of Germany, the SPD there are a good counter-example to this "Labour must move closer to the Tories on policy": the SPD have long been about as centrist as possible, yet their result in 2013 makes Labour's this year look like a landslide win.
Dont tell Toby Perkins he will call you intellectually bankrupt unless you agree Kendall is the only way forward.
Has Merkel ever been seen as 'wildly inspiring', though? She did tell Tony Blair, and Johnathan Powell, that she had 'no charisma'. Merkel's appeal, as far as I can see is almost being like a 'mother' figure in German politics - thus, the name 'mutti' in the German press. She has never been a charming, suave and slick politician. I think the real worry for Germany, is when Merkel goes, do they really have anyone who can slip into her shoes? They don't appear to have any strong leaders on the rise.
She's a hard act to follow. There's almost no political antecedent for her anywhere. She combines the 'mother' figure image as you say, with being hard as nails in power battles and a pragmatic and consensual approach to policy.
Isn't "hard as nails in power battles and a pragmatic and consensual approach to policy" tautologous with "mother"?
Not my mother!
No comment....! (I'll only get myself into trouble!)
Has Merkel ever been seen as 'wildly inspiring', though? She did tell Tony Blair, and Johnathan Powell, that she had 'no charisma'. Merkel's appeal, as far as I can see is almost being like a 'mother' figure in German politics - thus, the name 'mutti' in the German press. She has never been a charming, suave and slick politician. I think the real worry for Germany, is when Merkel goes, do they really have anyone who can slip into her shoes? They don't appear to have any strong leaders on the rise.
She's a hard act to follow. There's almost no political antecedent for her anywhere. She combines the 'mother' figure image as you say, with being hard as nails in power battles and a pragmatic and consensual approach to policy.
Isn't "hard as nails in power battles and a pragmatic and consensual approach to policy" tautologous with "mother"?
Not my mother!
No comment....! (I'll only get myself into trouble!)
Incidentally, the Eurosceptic AfD looks like splitting - the party founder has been replaced by a harder right-winger and has resigned from the party, with speculation that he's gonig to start a new one.
Maybe, but of course the UKIP founder Dr Alan Sked has left the party too and looked at founding his own. Originally founded by intellectuals UKIP has become ever more populist and its voteshare has risen at the same time
Yes, it's always hard to predict what voters on the left and right will want - quite often it's fatal to become too moderate, since that removes their USP. The AfD voting share in polls has remained in the 4.5-5.0 range pretty consistently up to now, but it does have some serious internal divisions (not just the founder): Eurosceptics close to business vs hard-line anti-immigrant types. Cicero (independent centrist magazine) calls the current leadership "the NPD with university degrees" (the NPD was the fringe neo-Nazi party, now more or less defunct) - probably an exaggeration, but...
As the AfD is more libertarian it is not really like the NPD. However libertarianism only really has a market amongst about 5% of the population, hence their present score. If they become more populist and anti Euro, anti bailout and anti immigration then they may become less savoury but their voteshare is likely to rise to the 10-20% marketshare their is for a party of the populist right, as UKIP's voteshare began to use this year
I have a sneaking suspicion that France is going to be the one to broker the deal with Greece and kick the proverbial can down the road.
Hey Tim, did you see Spurs signed a 10 year NFL deal for 2 games a year?
Yes, I did. It's no secret that the NFL was not thrilled with Wembley, both for scheduling reasons, access, and because the field at Wembley is just terrible.
Good old BBC, saying that at least 2 NFL 'matches' a year will be played there.
The NFL is serious about growing the game in the UK.
Good luck. They'd have better luck growing lacrosse?
I note that the Women's World Cup Final attracted more viewers in the USA than almost any basketball match this season
Not only is American sports exceptionalism being roundly demolished by football, American sports are being beaten by WOMEN'S football.
Chortle.
Yes, the WWCF had the highest audience of any soccer game ever on US TV, beating both the baseball (no big deal) and NBA (slightly bigger deal) playoffs, the former last year.
It is very good news for women's soccer. WOMEN'S soccer.
ESPN had an 'Outside the Lines' special, featuring the business aspects of this - will it help soccer grow in the US?
The conclusions: soccer in the US is primarily a women's game - far more girls than boys play it at school - surveys say most people watched to see the US win and be patriotic than the fact they are soccer fans. Also the novelty factor: like the Olympics it is only every 4 years.
BUT - this is very good for women's soccer in the US and will help it grow.
Maybe it will one day become as popular as women's soccer in the UK.
The US men's soccer league is an atrocious product and shows no signs of improving. There is little money and little interest. The Premier League is shown here, although they got the rights for several years (about 5 I think) for less than the cost of a single NFL Monday Night Football game. There are many sports networks and they need content.
Regarding growing lacrosse, lacrosse is Canada's national sport, although de facto it's hockey.
NFL fan support in the UK is growing at a healthy rate.
Nobody in their wildest dreams imagines it will ever match soccer. But so long as the NFL can make money they will continue growing it in the UK.
Soccer is as far as ever from taking the US by storm.
'However, since WW2 only one party has won an election after 10 or more years in power, the Tories in 1992 and the only reason they won that was because electing John Major seemed like a change of government from Thatcher anyway.'
The one more heave strategy.
Even Kinnock would have beaten Thatcher in 1989, it was her replacement by a completely new face in John Major which enabled the Tories to win 1 more time in 1992.
Since no such election took place that is pure speculation. Two months ago many predicted that Miliband would oust Cameron from Downing Street.
While the polls in May 1989 were reasonably close, both parties were over 40% and there was less of an issue with minor parties like the SNP as there was in 2015. By November 1989 Mori had Labour with a 14 point lead, NOP a 12 point lead, ICM a 10 point lead, Gallup a 9 point lead http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/historical-polls/voting-intention-1987-1992
It's fair to say that if Thatcher were thinking of going to the country in 1989 she wouldn't have made the same choices about the poll tax, etc. Speculation based on mid-term polls is futile.
By 1989 Maggie was well past her best and beginning to go bonkers. The reason the party dumped her is the simple and ruthless reason that Tories have for dumping a leader. She was going to lose the next election.
Has Merkel ever been seen as 'wildly inspiring', though? She did tell Tony Blair, and Johnathan Powell, that she had 'no charisma'. Merkel's appeal, as far as I can see is almost being like a 'mother' figure in German politics - thus, the name 'mutti' in the German press. She has never been a charming, suave and slick politician. I think the real worry for Germany, is when Merkel goes, do they really have anyone who can slip into her shoes? They don't appear to have any strong leaders on the rise.
She's a hard act to follow. There's almost no political antecedent for her anywhere. She combines the 'mother' figure image as you say, with being hard as nails in power battles and a pragmatic and consensual approach to policy.
Isn't "hard as nails in power battles and a pragmatic and consensual approach to policy" tautologous with "mother"?
@suttonnick: Thursday's Daily Mail front page: Fearless George Slays the Dragons #tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers #budget2015 http://t.co/wdlcHXkkqV
Shocker and the Mirror doesnt shock
I find that level of partisanship amusing on headlines (and I like the imagery such a headline evokes even without seeing it, a bit more colourful than just 'Con man'), but I don't know how people manage it day in day out. Even on things I support if a story is too effusive, too unsubtle in its praise, it grates after a short while. Each to their own I guess.
I have a sneaking suspicion that France is going to be the one to broker the deal with Greece and kick the proverbial can down the road.
Hey Tim, did you see Spurs signed a 10 year NFL deal for 2 games a year?
Yes, I did. It's no secret that the NFL was not thrilled with Wembley, both for scheduling reasons, access, and because the field at Wembley is just terrible.
Good old BBC, saying that at least 2 NFL 'matches' a year will be played there.
The NFL is serious about growing the game in the UK.
Good luck. They'd have better luck growing lacrosse?
I note that the Women's World Cup Final attracted more viewers in the USA than almost any basketball match this season
Not only is American sports exceptionalism being roundly demolished by football, American sports are being beaten by WOMEN'S football.
Chortle.
Yes, the WWCF had the highest audience of any soccer game ever on US TV, beating both the baseball (no big deal) and NBA (slightly bigger deal) playoffs, the former last year.
It is very good news for women's soccer. WOMEN'S soccer.
ESPN had an 'Outside the Lines' special, featuring the business aspects of this - will it help soccer grow in the US?
The conclusions: soccer in the US is primarily a women's game - far more girls than boys play it at school - surveys say most people watched to see the US win and be patriotic than the fact they are soccer fans. Also the novelty factor: like the Olympics it is only every 4 years.
BUT - this is very good for women's soccer in the US and will help it grow.
Maybe it will one day become as popular as women's soccer in the UK.
The US men's soccer league is an atrocious product and shows no signs of improving. There is little money and little interest. The Premier League is shown here, although they got the rights for several years (about 5 I think) for less than the cost of a single NFL Monday Night Football game. There are many sports networks and they need content.
Regarding growing lacrosse, lacrosse is Canada's national sport, although de facto it's hockey.
NFL fan support in the UK is growing at a healthy rate.
Nobody in their wildest dreams imagines it will ever match soccer. But so long as the NFL can make money they will continue growing it in the UK.
Soccer is as far as ever from taking the US by storm.
Gridiron football has quite a following in some parts of Britain. I have a nephew that plays for his University team.
It isn't a game that people play for fun though, unlike cricket, footy or rugby. Apart from College and Pro leagues hardly anyone plays after high school. It is essentially a spectator sport.
By 1989 Maggie was well past her best and beginning to go bonkers. The reason the party dumped her is the simple and ruthless reason that Tories have for dumping a leader. She was going to lose the next election.
I agree with that, but nevertheless there was a good chance that Kinnock would have found a way to lose it first.
I have a sneaking suspicion that France is going to be the one to broker the deal with Greece and kick the proverbial can down the road.
Hey Tim, did you see Spurs signed a 10 year NFL deal for 2 games a year?
Yes, I did. It's no secret that the NFL was not thrilled with Wembley, both for scheduling reasons, access, and because the field at Wembley is just terrible.
Good old BBC, saying that at least 2 NFL 'matches' a year will be played there.
The NFL is serious about growing the game in the UK.
400 million pounds seems a ludicrously small amount for a decent stadium, particularly in a high cost place like the UK.
Maybe they have a Greek accountant
If Spurs have signed this 2 game deal (down from the 3 game deal Wembley now has), does this mean that the talk of a London franchise is dead in the water?
The NFL applied to be the anchor tenant at the London Olympic stadium, but was turned down.
Also, I'm not aware that they have abandoned Wembley. They are contracted there for several more seasons.
The objective, so far as I know, is to have more games in London, at some point a London franchise and eventually a Super Bowl.
Has Merkel ever been seen as 'wildly inspiring', though? She did tell Tony Blair, and Johnathan Powell, that she had 'no charisma'. Merkel's appeal, as far as I can see is almost being like a 'mother' figure in German politics - thus, the name 'mutti' in the German press. She has never been a charming, suave and slick politician. I think the real worry for Germany, is when Merkel goes, do they really have anyone who can slip into her shoes? They don't appear to have any strong leaders on the rise.
She's a hard act to follow. There's almost no political antecedent for her anywhere. She combines the 'mother' figure image as you say, with being hard as nails in power battles and a pragmatic and consensual approach to policy.
Isn't "hard as nails in power battles and a pragmatic and consensual approach to policy" tautologous with "mother"?
Has Merkel ever been seen as 'wildly inspiring', though? She did tell Tony Blair, and Johnathan Powell, that she had 'no charisma'. Merkel's appeal, as far as I can see is almost being like a 'mother' figure in German politics - thus, the name 'mutti' in the German press. She has never been a charming, suave and slick politician. I think the real worry for Germany, is when Merkel goes, do they really have anyone who can slip into her shoes? They don't appear to have any strong leaders on the rise.
She's a hard act to follow. There's almost no political antecedent for her anywhere. She combines the 'mother' figure image as you say, with being hard as nails in power battles and a pragmatic and consensual approach to policy.
Isn't "hard as nails in power battles and a pragmatic and consensual approach to policy" tautologous with "mother"?
Not my mother!
No comment....! (I'll only get myself into trouble!)
I have a sneaking suspicion that France is going to be the one to broker the deal with Greece and kick the proverbial can down the road.
Hey Tim, did you see Spurs signed a 10 year NFL deal for 2 games a year?
The US men's soccer league is an atrocious product and shows no signs of improving. There is little money and little interest. The Premier League is shown here, although they got the rights for several years (about 5 I think) for less than the cost of a single NFL Monday Night Football game. There are many sports networks and they need content.
Regarding growing lacrosse, lacrosse is Canada's national sport, although de facto it's hockey.
NFL fan support in the UK is growing at a healthy rate.
Nobody in their wildest dreams imagines it will ever match soccer. But so long as the NFL can make money they will continue growing it in the UK.
Soccer is as far as ever from taking the US by storm.
Gridiron football has quite a following in some parts of Britain. I have a nephew that plays for his University team.
It isn't a game that people play for fun though, unlike cricket, footy or rugby. Apart from College and Pro leagues hardly anyone plays after high school. It is essentially a spectator sport.
In general consensus here, soccer is a contact sport, football is a collision sport. It requires expensive equipment to play, and your chance of being injured is pretty much 100%, unlike soccer - even with Rory.
Most schools here have football teams, there are local leagues for all ages from 6 up.
Soccer, rugby and cricket are pretty much 'pick up' sports - a couple of jackets on the ground for goal posts, a ball and you're done. Other than flag football, 'gridiron' is not like that. It also requires substantial time in the gym, practicing due to its complexity, and so on.
I imagine that in the UK, it is, as you say, primarily a spectator sport. Another sport taking off here is Aussie Rules football. There are several leagues here and it's growing. It's another game that doesn't require expensive equipment to play.
I think those involved in the US mens game (football) aren't relying on MLS (which is shite) to help it gain popularity in the US. They are relying on the USMNT having some kind of success, to do that.
Has Merkel ever been seen as 'wildly inspiring', though? She did tell Tony Blair, and Johnathan Powell, that she had 'no charisma'. Merkel's appeal, as far as I can see is almost being like a 'mother' figure in German politics - thus, the name 'mutti' in the German press. She has never been a charming, suave and slick politician. I think the real worry for Germany, is when Merkel goes, do they really have anyone who can slip into her shoes? They don't appear to have any strong leaders on the rise.
She's a hard act to follow. There's almost no political antecedent for her anywhere. She combines the 'mother' figure image as you say, with being hard as nails in power battles and a pragmatic and consensual approach to policy.
Isn't "hard as nails in power battles and a pragmatic and consensual approach to policy" tautologous with "mother"?
Not my mother!
No comment....! (I'll only get myself into trouble!)
It was your mother that punched Harriet Harman?
Knocked her flat on her bottom as well
I now have a mental picture of your mum like the mum in this ad!:
Trump takes the lead by 4 points for the first time in a poll. His war against Mexico is very popular with republican voters, and the debates (which he will probably dominate) are only a month away.
Faisal Islam @faisalislam 5h5 hours ago So @resfoundation "A low earning single parent with one child, working 20 hours a week at £9.35 an hour, will be £1,000 a year worse off."
I think those involved in the US mens game (football) aren't relying on MLS (which is shite) to help it gain popularity in the US. They are relying on the USMNT having some kind of success, to do that.
It's the same problem - it's only once every four years. Novelty value plus patriotism.
You need some kind of farm system to develop future talent. Players at the high school level can get college scholarships for soccer, but there is no money in it professionally.
Also Americans like scoring - a 1-0 game is not going to cut it.
Most Americans know two things about soccer -
1) That guy who bit the other guy's ear off at the World Cup
2) the outrageous dives that soccer players take to fake injury, the most egregious of which regularly make the 'not top ten' lists on SportsCenter.
Faisal Islam @faisalislam 5h5 hours ago So @resfoundation "A low earning single parent with one child, working 20 hours a week at £9.35 an hour, will be £1,000 a year worse off."
The whole point is that work is incentivized, and people are rewarded for working full time rather than part time.
Faisal Islam @faisalislam 5h5 hours ago So @resfoundation "A low earning single parent with one child, working 20 hours a week at £9.35 an hour, will be £1,000 a year worse off."
The whole point is that work is incentivized, and people are rewarded for working full time rather than part time.
Yes, that's it. The only reason poor people are poor is because they can't be bothered or don't have enough incentives to work more.
Comments
He specifically said they would not fall.
A lot of people will be getting a surprise when the new financial year starts. George had better hope businesses are willing to give pay rises in the next few years
That said, I don't expect serious ructions, just flagging it up as a credible possibility.
https://twitter.com/amolrajan/status/618880730375000064
There's still the potential of a split caused by the EU ref, the impact of inevitable interest rises, a potential recession, and how the departure of Cameron is handled. The Tories will inevitably face a wobbly mid-term period, where things won't seem so rosy. Right now, with much of the press sympathetic to their cause, and a disorganized opposition, it is relatively easy for them to control the political narrative. But this won't always be the case - at some-point, Labour will elect a new leader, and they have the opportunity at this point to take the fight to this government. Things also get interesting, in regard to the LDs and UKIP - can the LDs make any kind of progress in the local elections? Can UKIP also build up a credible local government base - particularly in the North, when they hope to challenge Labour. How popular will, post 2017, the SNP be? They will probably still be dominating Scottish politics, but won't as infallible as they are now.
I do think The_Apocalypse identifies some of the flaws with George's own approach - not all of which, in fairness, are within his control - so it's no sure thing, but he's a contender now, which is more than most would have considered once even as a joke (the same was true of Johnson of course), so it'll be fun to see if he has it in him.
Edited extra bit: Mr. kle4, I would guess Brown lacks that degree of self-awareness.
http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/inland/sigmar-gabriels-grexit-konfrontation-von
-spd-abgelehnt-13692051.html
Summary: Merkel has run into serious reservations about concessions to Greece in her party, but won't be too worried about getting them through if she wants to. However, the SPD head, Gabriel, has been taking a very hard line, and in turn is facing mutiny on the left, who want a more supportive approach.
Overall, doesn't sound as though a deal will be rejected by Germany *if* Merkel wants it - not enough organised hostility on the CDU/CDU side, not enough support for a hard line on the left.
Before the election many people, including me, were expecting the Conservatives to raise the minimum wage to shoot Labour's fox. I was surprised when they did not. Now we find out why: George Osborne was saving it up for the post-election budget to pair with the cutting of tax credits. If he had done the first before the election and the last afterwards, all the focus tonight would be on the Tories' assault on tax credits and the cuts in general. Instead, he has presented a budget which sets out his credo in full at a time when Labour is unable sensibly to respond.
Labour should be very afraid of a strategist who is that patient and wily.
Right after I have published the Sunday Afternoon thread at 3pm
'However, since WW2 only one party has won an election after 10 or more years in power, the Tories in 1992 and the only reason they won that was because electing John Major seemed like a change of government from Thatcher anyway.'
The one more heave strategy.
The banks will soon run out of cash.
When this happens, how long before civil unrest breaks out? It can only be a matter of days, surely.
Anyway, I'm off for the night.
'The only politically interesting question is whether Nat MPs will vote on this most English of issues, and expose themselves as utter hypocrites ("we don't vote on English only matters!"). I bet many will, partly to make mischief.'
If that happens then they wait until EVEL is up & running and have another vote.
@screwlabour: After championing Miliband's £8 minimum wage manifesto promise, Owen the Bewildered has spent the day rubbishing the Tory £9. #budget2015
They are trying to protect Cook's reputation by hiding the fact he's from Essex.
Yorkshire = All things good and brilliant
Essex = Chav central, TOWIE and Essex Girls
http://entertainment.guardianoffers.co.uk/i-dd-rm001557-xaa/yorkshire-right;-everywhere-else-wrong/
http://imfromyorkshire.com/yorkshire-t-shirts/mr-ahh-much-yorkshire-t-shirt/
Good old BBC, saying that at least 2 NFL 'matches' a year will be played there.
The NFL is serious about growing the game in the UK.
400 million pounds seems a ludicrously small amount for a decent stadium, particularly in a high cost place like the UK.
Maybe they have a Greek accountant
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/historical-polls/voting-intention-1987-1992
@suttonnick: Thursday's Daily Mail front page:
Fearless George Slays the Dragons
#tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers #budget2015 http://t.co/wdlcHXkkqV
It is very good news for women's soccer. WOMEN'S soccer.
ESPN had an 'Outside the Lines' special, featuring the business aspects of this - will it help soccer grow in the US?
The conclusions: soccer in the US is primarily a women's game - far more girls than boys play it at school - surveys say most people watched to see the US win and be patriotic than the fact they are soccer fans. Also the novelty factor: like the Olympics it is only every 4 years.
BUT - this is very good for women's soccer in the US and will help it grow.
Maybe it will one day become as popular as women's soccer in the UK.
The US men's soccer league is an atrocious product and shows no signs of improving. There is little money and little interest. The Premier League is shown here, although they got the rights for several years (about 5 I think) for less than the cost of a single NFL Monday Night Football game. There are many sports networks and they need content.
Regarding growing lacrosse, lacrosse is Canada's national sport, although de facto it's hockey.
NFL fan support in the UK is growing at a healthy rate.
Nobody in their wildest dreams imagines it will ever match soccer. But so long as the NFL can make money they will continue growing it in the UK.
Soccer is as far as ever from taking the US by storm.
Subway has suspended its relationship with its spokesman Jared Fogle after authorities searched his home as part of a child pornography case.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-33446693
It isn't a game that people play for fun though, unlike cricket, footy or rugby. Apart from College and Pro leagues hardly anyone plays after high school. It is essentially a spectator sport.
Also, I'm not aware that they have abandoned Wembley. They are contracted there for several more seasons.
The objective, so far as I know, is to have more games in London, at some point a London franchise and eventually a Super Bowl.
As to the timing, I have no idea.
The Office for Budget Responsibility said it expects Britain’s contributions to Brussels to jump by £1.3 billion next year alone.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/11727741/Budget-2015-Cost-of-EU-member-to-be-3-billion-higher-than-expected.html
I didn't hear Osborne tell us about this in the budget speech....
Labour will vote against it...
Most schools here have football teams, there are local leagues for all ages from 6 up.
Soccer, rugby and cricket are pretty much 'pick up' sports - a couple of jackets on the ground for goal posts, a ball and you're done. Other than flag football, 'gridiron' is not like that. It also requires substantial time in the gym, practicing due to its complexity, and so on.
I imagine that in the UK, it is, as you say, primarily a spectator sport. Another sport taking off here is Aussie Rules football. There are several leagues here and it's growing. It's another game that doesn't require expensive equipment to play.
The SNP is impotent.
https://youtu.be/pEvDYIdoz9U
Only a wee bit posher!
Trump takes the lead by 4 points for the first time in a poll.
His war against Mexico is very popular with republican voters, and the debates (which he will probably dominate) are only a month away.
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2015/PPP_Release_NC_70815.pdf
So @resfoundation "A low earning single parent with one child, working 20 hours a week at £9.35 an hour, will be £1,000 a year worse off."
You need some kind of farm system to develop future talent. Players at the high school level can get college scholarships for soccer, but there is no money in it professionally.
Also Americans like scoring - a 1-0 game is not going to cut it.
Most Americans know two things about soccer -
1) That guy who bit the other guy's ear off at the World Cup
2) the outrageous dives that soccer players take to fake injury, the most egregious of which regularly make the 'not top ten' lists on SportsCenter.
It's a big hole to dig out of.