politicalbetting
Home› General

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Sign In Register

Categories

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If the government cannot get key measures through the commo

SystemSystem Posts: 12,218
edited July 2015 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If the government cannot get key measures through the commons then it doesn’t have a working majority

Tories have now pulled votes on fox hunting, EVEL and Human Rights Act – proof that a majority of 12 is barely a majority at all.

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • MP_SEMP_SE Posts: 3,642
    First
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    It's a good job Labour aren't busy running around saying how they'll help the Tories out by voting for cuts for the poor, then.

    Sigh.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Fox hunting is a key measure ?

    Arf !
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Meanwhile the Crosby victory party is underway - barnacles scraped off and the day was won.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,871
    Or proof that Cameron never really wanted to do them. Perhaps 'pulling because we won't win' is the new Lib Dems.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    @Antifrank will surely be selling up on hearing this ghastly, illiberal news?

    https://twitter.com/MailOnline/status/621039865539506176
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    How many of these votes have the Government lost?

    Oh, wait...
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,032
    TGOHF said:

    Fox hunting is a key measure ?

    Arf !

    Quite. In true barnacle fashion the smarter move would have been to have had the vote, lost it, manfully cope with the grief and carry on though. Don't know why they didn't.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,706
    DavidL said:

    TGOHF said:

    Fox hunting is a key measure ?

    Arf !

    Quite. In true barnacle fashion the smarter move would have been to have had the vote, lost it, manfully cope with the grief and carry on though. Don't know why they didn't.
    Key enough to schedule a vote.

  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    I think SeanT is stalking me - I went on to Facebook and the first thing I saw was an ad for the Ice Twins on amazon.
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    HYUFD said:

    Dair said:

    HYUFD said:

    jayfdee said:


    Farron is an extremely good constituency MP , he is very popular locally, and he works hard at it, in an area that was Con, and is a natural con area.
    I think in this case the constituents vote for the man, not the party , or the politics.
    I do not think the local appeal will necessarily translate across to a national leader.
    Meanwhile across the border Morecambe and Lunesdale, Lennox Boyd was OK, but got swept away in the labour landslide, Geraldine Smith got swept in, did her best, and got chucked out in 2010, David Morris is a no body,got re elected, actually with an increase, but does not have anything like the local prescence of Farron.
    Farron will win, but may cost him locally.

    Indeed, but accept he will retain his seat, if he won it in 2015 he has it for life!
    He may have it for life, but it might be a very lonely life

    Tom Brake 1,068
    Alistair Carmichael 817
    Nick Clegg 2,353
    Tim Farron 8,949
    Norman Lamb 4,043
    Greg Mulholland 2,907
    John Pugh 1,322
    Mark Williams 2,088

    At least two of those are dead men walking already. I guess Lamb should cling on, maybee Mulholland. The rest could be gone.
    Farron offers a clear shift left from Clegg, indeed on some issues he is arguably left of Salmond and Sturgeon, he is unlikely to return them to government but should build up their campaigning base again
    This fabled campaign base which didn't materialise in 2015 and, judging by the loss of seats in 2010 appears to have crumbled well before the coalition misadventure.

    10 new members per constituency won't really make much difference if they're already a hollowed out shell.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,175
    The honeymoon period for a new govt never lasts long but I think the analysis in this case is mere wishful thinking. The Scotland issue is interesting - polls show the SNP growing in popularity while the Scots remain unwilling to support independence. There is a dissonance there which cannot last - maybe the Scots need to make their mind up. Of course the header is nonsense.

    At any rate the big home news is that Labour is looking sillier and sillier with Burnham leading the pack in rank stupidity. All looking good for Cooper I think. And even better for Cameron.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,032
    Jonathan said:

    DavidL said:

    TGOHF said:

    Fox hunting is a key measure ?

    Arf !

    Quite. In true barnacle fashion the smarter move would have been to have had the vote, lost it, manfully cope with the grief and carry on though. Don't know why they didn't.
    Key enough to schedule a vote.

    And now they will have to do it again when the SNP can't play. Another embarrassment they could have done without in my opinion but hey, if the unspeakable still want to pursue the uneatable in England why should I care? Just makes them look a bit sillier than they need to.
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    HYUFD said:

    Dair said:

    HYUFD said:


    Well good for her, although that ICM suggests at Westminster at least Labour doing a tad better in Scotland, but the average Scot is more rightwing on welfare than both Labour and the SNP may like to admit, even if a little left on the issue than rUK

    Your delusional straw clutching is providing great humour. Please don't stop posting.

    I'm sure you can find another subsample to cling to after the next Scottish national poll puts the SNP maintaining its 50%+ position in both Westminster and Holyrood VI.
    We shall see, does not change the position on welfare though
    I think I understand your problem.

    You don't understand how people make their voting decision.

    In general it is an AESTHETIC decision not an arithmetic one. Feelings and impressions are far more important in how people vote. Just ask Ed Miliband.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,175
    DavidL said:

    Jonathan said:

    DavidL said:

    TGOHF said:

    Fox hunting is a key measure ?

    Arf !

    Quite. In true barnacle fashion the smarter move would have been to have had the vote, lost it, manfully cope with the grief and carry on though. Don't know why they didn't.
    Key enough to schedule a vote.

    And now they will have to do it again when the SNP can't play. Another embarrassment they could have done without in my opinion but hey, if the unspeakable still want to pursue the uneatable in England why should I care? Just makes them look a bit sillier than they need to.
    You mean of course as silly as the situation which currently exists in Scotland?
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    The level of panic the SNP are currently causing amongst the Tory ranks is becoming quite apparent.

    As the obvious solution of working together is complete anathema to Tories, I don't see this problem ending any time soon. If anything it will get worse.

    I'm surprised they haven't offered the whip to the UUP already, even that extra 4 of a majority would be very helpful in this position.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,175
    Dair said:

    The level of panic the SNP are currently causing amongst the Tory ranks is becoming quite apparent.

    As the obvious solution of working together is complete anathema to Tories, I don't see this problem ending any time soon. If anything it will get worse.

    I'm surprised they haven't offered the whip to the UUP already, even that extra 4 of a majority would be very helpful in this position.

    The SNP are making noise due to the absence of any other real opposition - come back and crow about it when they vote down the budget.
  • DisraeliDisraeli Posts: 1,106
    Dair said:

    The level of panic the SNP are currently causing amongst the Tory ranks is becoming quite apparent.
    .

    So "apparent" that the only person who can see this imagined phenomenon is yourself.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,168
    Dair said:


    You don't understand how people make their voting decision.

    In general it is an AESTHETIC decision not an arithmetic one.

    That is indeed the absolute nub of it.

  • watford30watford30 Posts: 3,474
    Dair said:

    The level of panic the SNP are currently causing amongst the Tory ranks is becoming quite apparent.

    'Level of panic'?

    That's clearly the voices in your head.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Dair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Dair said:

    HYUFD said:


    Well good for her, although that ICM suggests at Westminster at least Labour doing a tad better in Scotland, but the average Scot is more rightwing on welfare than both Labour and the SNP may like to admit, even if a little left on the issue than rUK

    Your delusional straw clutching is providing great humour. Please don't stop posting.

    I'm sure you can find another subsample to cling to after the next Scottish national poll puts the SNP maintaining its 50%+ position in both Westminster and Holyrood VI.
    We shall see, does not change the position on welfare though
    I think I understand your problem.

    You don't understand how people make their voting decision.

    In general it is an AESTHETIC decision not an arithmetic one. Feelings and impressions are far more important in how people vote. Just ask Ed Miliband.
    As I recall May 8th Miliband was wrong.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Dair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Dair said:

    HYUFD said:

    jayfdee said:


    Farron is an extremely good constituency MP , he is very popular locally, and he works hard at it, in an area that was Con, and is a natural con area.
    I think in this case the constituents vote for the man, not the party , or the politics.
    I do not think the local appeal will necessarily translate across to a national leader.
    Meanwhile across the border Morecambe and Lunesdale, Lennox Boyd was OK, but got swept away in the labour landslide, Geraldine Smith got swept in, did her best, and got chucked out in 2010, David Morris is a no body,got re elected, actually with an increase, but does not have anything like the local prescence of Farron.
    Farron will win, but may cost him locally.

    Indeed, but accept he will retain his seat, if he won it in 2015 he has it for life!
    He may have it for life, but it might be a very lonely life

    Tom Brake 1,068
    Alistair Carmichael 817
    Nick Clegg 2,353
    Tim Farron 8,949
    Norman Lamb 4,043
    Greg Mulholland 2,907
    John Pugh 1,322
    Mark Williams 2,088

    At least two of those are dead men walking already. I guess Lamb should cling on, maybee Mulholland. The rest could be gone.
    Farron offers a clear shift left from Clegg, indeed on some issues he is arguably left of Salmond and Sturgeon, he is unlikely to return them to government but should build up their campaigning base again
    This fabled campaign base which didn't materialise in 2015 and, judging by the loss of seats in 2010 appears to have crumbled well before the coalition misadventure.

    10 new members per constituency won't really make much difference if they're already a hollowed out shell.
    The membership numbers have gone up by more than 20 per constituency, and Farron made the reasonable target of 20+ seats in 2020 at the hustings last week, starting from a ground up pavement politics route. Lamb planned much the same.

    A poor or ineffective Labour leader would help a bit.
  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    Dair said:

    The level of panic the SNP are currently causing amongst the Tory ranks is becoming quite apparent.

    Where?
    There is only puzzlement as the SNP portrayed themselves as people of principle and now break their first UK HoC rule. So, hey what the heck, the SNP cannot be trusted on fundamental promises such as not voting on purely English matters. We all move on.
  • MonksfieldMonksfield Posts: 2,809
    A majority of 12 is fine when you have your party behind you. The fact is these bills weren't universally popular among his own MPs - they were just red meat being waved to the loony right - and probably shouldn't have been proposed in the manifesto. Glad to see all three crash and burn.
  • MP_SEMP_SE Posts: 3,642
    isam said:

    @Antifrank will surely be selling up on hearing this ghastly, illiberal news?

    https://twitter.com/MailOnline/status/621039865539506176

    Wouldn't gangs just tunnel under it or people climb over it?

    They will need motion sensors and police officers to monitor the fence.
  • Y0kelY0kel Posts: 2,307
    edited July 2015
    On topic, maybe Cameron might get the point. Use parliamentary time for proper big stuff you arse. I'm against hunting with hounds myself but why the heck this was considered so pertinent for the good of the nation to be scheduled in so early beats me.

    Off topic, nice to see Donald Trump reportedly using images of guys dressed up as WW2 German infantry in one of his election images...and not deliberately.....
  • JEOJEO Posts: 3,656
    Dair said:

    The level of panic the SNP are currently causing amongst the Tory ranks is becoming quite apparent.

    As the obvious solution of working together is complete anathema to Tories, I don't see this problem ending any time soon. If anything it will get worse.

    I'm surprised they haven't offered the whip to the UUP already, even that extra 4 of a majority would be very helpful in this position.

    Working together to decide English-only policy, you mean?
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @dhothersall: Apparently one isn't allowed to criticise @MhairiBlack, even when she picks the day the SNP did a U-turn to cite Tony Benn on weathervanes.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Monksfield said:

    Glad to see all three crash and burn.

    I can't believe they lost all 3 votes.

    Oh, wait...
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,952
    edited July 2015
    Dair said:

    The level of panic the SNP are currently causing amongst the Tory ranks is becoming quite apparent.

    The only thing becoming apparent is that the SNP think winning seats means they can "do politics".

    They are showing themselves to be really rather poor at it.

  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    edited July 2015
    Scott_P said:

    @dhothersall: Apparently one isn't allowed to criticise @MhairiBlack, even when she picks the day the SNP did a U-turn to cite Tony Benn on weathervanes.

    Black calls the pot a kettle?
    (one for the Sun sub-editor)
  • john_zimsjohn_zims Posts: 3,399
    edited July 2015
    'Tories have now pulled votes on fox hunting, EVEL and Human Rights Act - proof that a majority of 12 is barely a majority at all.'

    Complete rubbish.

    Human Rights act is scheduled for next year,government made the mistake in believing Sturgeon,won't happen again and we now have clear proof that a heavy duty version of EVEL is required.

    I guess payback will be to stuff the SNP with FFA and then they will have something to genuinely whine about
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    MP_SE said:

    isam said:

    @Antifrank will surely be selling up on hearing this ghastly, illiberal news?

    https://twitter.com/MailOnline/status/621039865539506176

    Wouldn't gangs just tunnel under it or people climb over it?

    They will need motion sensors and police officers to monitor the fence.
    70% of the migrants to Hungary are from Kosovo, because recently Serbia opened the border making it much easy to travel.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,569
    Scott_P said:

    How many of these votes have the Government lost?

    Oh, wait...

    If we have a Tory Government that doesn't actually do the stuff that they said they wanted to, perhaps it won't be too bad. As Shakespeare might have quoted...

    "I will do such things,--
    What they are, yet I know not: but they shall be
    The terrors of the earth.
    Then again
    Mayhap
    I will not bother."

    I think both Tories are overestimating the significance of the SNP voting in English matters. Of course they will if they care enough, or enough voters demand it. Will it lose them votes? Nah. Will it strengthen support for EVEL? Not if the case study on offer is a tweak on hunting, yawn.

    The Tories need to find (a) a terrifically popular policy that (b) the SNP helps to defeat with (c) the help of Labour and Tory rebels.

    Tricky.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @lindayueh: “@AFP: #BREAKING Greek PM says banks could stay shut for a month” Earlier another minister said it could be 2 months #Greece
  • JEOJEO Posts: 3,656
    On topic, I think this is a reminder that the election win was a thrill more due to it being unexpected than it being a strong result. We really need to be aiming for 40% and the four million UKIP votes should be the opportunity if we reach out to those voters.
  • frpenkridgefrpenkridge Posts: 670
    "What did you do in the War for Scottish independence, Daddy?"
    "I stopped English toffs killing foxes in Dorset, darling."
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    NickPalmer said:

    Scott_P said:

    How many of these votes have the Government lost?

    Oh, wait...

    If we have a Tory Government that doesn't actually do the stuff that they said they wanted to, perhaps it won't be too bad. As Shakespeare might have quoted...

    "I will do such things,--
    What they are, yet I know not: but they shall be
    The terrors of the earth.
    Then again
    Mayhap
    I will not bother."

    I think both Tories are overestimating the significance of the SNP voting in English matters. Of course they will if they care enough, or enough voters demand it. Will it lose them votes? Nah. Will it strengthen support for EVEL? Not if the case study on offer is a tweak on hunting, yawn.

    The Tories need to find (a) a terrifically popular policy that (b) the SNP helps to defeat with (c) the help of Labour and Tory rebels.

    Tricky.
    The budget will be the real test. I think Osbornes plan is to push it through before the Tory majority gets eroded by events.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    frpenkridge said:

    "What did you do in the War for Scottish independence, Daddy?"
    "I stopped English toffs killing foxes in Dorset, darling."

    I stopped them from having a vote. For a bit...
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,045
    edited July 2015
    Jonathan said:

    DavidL said:

    TGOHF said:

    Fox hunting is a key measure ?

    Arf !

    Quite. In true barnacle fashion the smarter move would have been to have had the vote, lost it, manfully cope with the grief and carry on though. Don't know why they didn't.
    Key enough to schedule a vote.

    So all measures are key measure? Okay then. Somewhat devalues the word 'key'.
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    NickPalmer said:

    I think both Tories are overestimating the significance of the SNP voting in English matters. Of course they will if they care enough, or enough voters demand it. Will it lose them votes? Nah. Will it strengthen support for EVEL? Not if the case study on offer is a tweak on hunting, yawn.

    The Tories need to find (a) a terrifically popular policy that (b) the SNP helps to defeat with (c) the help of Labour and Tory rebels.

    Tricky.

    The SNP helped the Tories to a majority, and now they are helping them to EV4EL.

    Lucky Dave has had Miliband, Hollande, Syriza and the SNP.

  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    I don't pretend to follow Scottish politics, but what is the rationale behind the SNP's increase in support, yet the lack of Scots support for independence? On the face of it it seems illogical.

    Is it an anti-Labour sentiment?
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    chestnut said:

    The SNP helped the Tories to a majority, and now they are helping them to EV4EL.

    Lucky Dave has had Miliband, Hollande, Syriza and the SNP.

    The whole election campaign was "the SNP will screw around with English only matters"

    And their Monty Pythonesque response has been...

    No, no, no, no ,no , er, yes. Well, a bit...

    All the stuff that Nicola said before the election, blown away without a vote.

    Awesome.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,952
    SeanT said:

    I just used Apple Pay. To get on and off the Tube. Camden to Warren St for a drink.

    It actually took slightly LONGER than using a contactless card, but hey.

    What struck me was the revolutionary potential of modern ID tech (retina and fingerprint sensitive smartphones) allied with instant payment.

    You can go online with your smartphone and pay for ANYTHING with one tap of your fingerprint. 0.5 seconds. Increasingly you'll be able to do the same in shops.

    So why bother with debit or credit cards at all? Indeed why bother with cash? We all have a phone on us, all the time. Why bother with accounts? Let Apple look after everything, and just automatically deduct money from your iTunes account. Let Apple be your banker

    This is the end of cash, of money, of banks.

    One company to rule us all.

    One Company to find them,
    One Company to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
    In the Land of Apple, where the Shadows lie.
  • DisraeliDisraeli Posts: 1,106
    NickPalmer said:

    ...Tories are overestimating the significance of the SNP voting in English matters.

    Understandable. Fear of the SNP in England only won them the General Election, after all.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Tim_B said:

    I don't pretend to follow Scottish politics, but what is the rationale behind the SNP's increase in support, yet the lack of Scots support for independence? On the face of it it seems illogical.

    Is it an anti-Labour sentiment?

    With the current settlement, the SNP get to spray around goodies from Edinburgh paid for in London.

    Why vote to change that?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,417
    NickPalmer said:

    Scott_P said:

    How many of these votes have the Government lost?

    Oh, wait...

    If we have a Tory Government that doesn't actually do the stuff that they said they wanted to, perhaps it won't be too bad.
    The Tories are getting through the important stuff like scrapping Labour's death duties and upping the minimum wage to £9/hr (Something that will benefit quite alot of people I know personally).

    The SNP are handily preventing them retoxing themselves over fox hunting too.Where do Labour stand on the important questions, have a position on tax credits yet ?
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,168
    Tim_B said:

    I don't pretend to follow Scottish politics, but what is the rationale behind the SNP's increase in support, yet the lack of Scots support for independence? On the face of it it seems illogical.

    Is it an anti-Labour sentiment?

    No, it's an anti-Con/LD/Labour sentiment.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,504
    SeanT said:

    I just used Apple Pay. To get on and off the Tube. Camden to Warren St for a drink.

    It actually took slightly LONGER than using a contactless card, but hey.

    What struck me was the revolutionary potential of modern ID tech (retina and fingerprint sensitive smartphones) allied with instant payment.

    You can go online with your smartphone and pay for ANYTHING with one tap of your fingerprint. 0.5 seconds. Increasingly you'll be able to do the same in shops.

    So why bother with debit or credit cards at all? Indeed why bother with cash? We all have a phone on us, all the time. Why bother with accounts? Let Apple look after everything, and just automatically deduct money from your iTunes account. Let Apple be your banker

    This is the end of cash, of money, of banks.

    One company to rule us all.

    I think you've hit the nail on the head when it comes to the problem. ;)

    Leaving aside the Apple-is-evil meme, security is an issue in a myriad of ways. We refuse to use contactless banking tech because of the vulnerabilities, and we are hardly tinfoil-hat specialists.

    A hint for others: whenever a bank issues a change: whether it is from cheques to cashcards, cashcards to contactless, they try to push as much of the transaction risk as possible onto the consumers.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Disraeli said:

    Understandable. Fear of the SNP in England only won them the General Election, after all.

    Shhh. They still haven't figured that out yet...
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    SeanT said:

    I just used Apple Pay. To get on and off the Tube. Camden to Warren St for a drink.

    It actually took slightly LONGER than using a contactless card, but hey.

    What struck me was the revolutionary potential of modern ID tech (retina and fingerprint sensitive smartphones) allied with instant payment.

    You can go online with your smartphone and pay for ANYTHING with one tap of your fingerprint. 0.5 seconds. Increasingly you'll be able to do the same in shops.

    So why bother with debit or credit cards at all? Indeed why bother with cash? We all have a phone on us, all the time. Why bother with accounts? Let Apple look after everything, and just automatically deduct money from your iTunes account. Let Apple be your banker

    This is the end of cash, of money, of banks.

    One company to rule us all.

    You have been able to pay with your phone for several years, certainly in the US. McDonalds has let folks pay with android phones for quite some time using NFC.

    Yet again, Apple is not an innovator but a follower.
  • DisraeliDisraeli Posts: 1,106
    frpenkridge said:

    "What did you do in the War for Scottish independence, Daddy?"
    "I stopped English toffs killing foxes in Dorset, darling."

    LOL! :-)
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,417
    SeanT said:


    So why bother with debit or credit cards at all? Indeed why bother with cash?

    Once phones start running without charge as long as those old Nokias it could really take off, but Sky Go drains em too fast to rely on them for payment.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,504
    Pulpstar said:

    SeanT said:


    So why bother with debit or credit cards at all? Indeed why bother with cash?

    Once phones start running without charge as long as those old Nokias it could really take off, but Sky Go drains em too fast to rely on them for payment.
    Just pay Mrs J a little more and she may come up with something. ;)
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    Theuniondivvie said:

    Tim_B said:

    I don't pretend to follow Scottish politics, but what is the rationale behind the SNP's increase in support, yet the lack of Scots support for independence? On the face of it it seems illogical.

    Is it an anti-Labour sentiment?

    No, it's an anti-Con/LD/Labour sentiment.
    If you are correct, being merely a protest vote doesn't bode well for the SNP long term.
  • DisraeliDisraeli Posts: 1,106
    Owen Jones has a "Damascus" moment
    "The left must now campaign to leave the EU – the case is undeniable"
    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jul/14/left-reject-eu-greece-eurosceptic

    “Everything good about the EU is in retreat; everything bad is on the rampage,” writes George Monbiot, explaining his about-turn. “All my life I’ve been pro-Europe,” says Caitlin Moran, “but seeing how Germany is treating Greece, I am finding it increasingly distasteful.” Nick Cohen believes the EU is being portrayed “with some truth, as a cruel, fanatical and stupid institution”. “How can the left support what is being done?” asks Suzanne Moore. “The European ‘Union’. Not in my name.” There are senior Labour figures in Westminster and Holyrood privately moving to an “out” position too.
  • john_zimsjohn_zims Posts: 3,399
    edited July 2015
    @Scott_P

    'Shhh. They still haven't figured that out yet...'

    They are still focused on the Red Liberals and their fantasy canvassing returns...bless.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,987
    SeanT said:

    I just used Apple Pay. To get on and off the Tube. Camden to Warren St for a drink.

    It actually took slightly LONGER than using a contactless card, but hey.

    What struck me was the revolutionary potential of modern ID tech (retina and fingerprint sensitive smartphones) allied with instant payment.

    You can go online with your smartphone and pay for ANYTHING with one tap of your fingerprint. 0.5 seconds. Increasingly you'll be able to do the same in shops.

    So why bother with debit or credit cards at all? Indeed why bother with cash? We all have a phone on us, all the time. Why bother with accounts? Let Apple look after everything, and just automatically deduct money from your iTunes account. Let Apple be your banker

    This is the end of cash, of money, of banks.

    One company to rule us all.

    Confirms that Apple and Google, not Goldman Sachs and HSBC, are now the true 'Masters of the Universe!'
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    SeanT said:

    Tim_B said:

    SeanT said:

    I just used Apple Pay. To get on and off the Tube. Camden to Warren St for a drink.

    It actually took slightly LONGER than using a contactless card, but hey.

    What struck me was the revolutionary potential of modern ID tech (retina and fingerprint sensitive smartphones) allied with instant payment.

    You can go online with your smartphone and pay for ANYTHING with one tap of your fingerprint. 0.5 seconds. Increasingly you'll be able to do the same in shops.

    So why bother with debit or credit cards at all? Indeed why bother with cash? We all have a phone on us, all the time. Why bother with accounts? Let Apple look after everything, and just automatically deduct money from your iTunes account. Let Apple be your banker

    This is the end of cash, of money, of banks.

    One company to rule us all.

    You have been able to pay with your phone for several years, certainly in the US. McDonalds has let folks pay with android phones for quite some time using NFC.

    Yet again, Apple is not an innovator but a follower.
    You've been able to pay with your phone in the UK for years as well. (Barclays have a thingy)

    Yet again it is the size and slickness of Apple that changes the game.

    (also the involvement of Transport for London, that feels qualitatively different)
    If only Apple ran Major League Soccer ;)
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,168
    Tim_B said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Tim_B said:

    I don't pretend to follow Scottish politics, but what is the rationale behind the SNP's increase in support, yet the lack of Scots support for independence? On the face of it it seems illogical.

    Is it an anti-Labour sentiment?

    No, it's an anti-Con/LD/Labour sentiment.
    If you are correct, being merely a protest vote doesn't bode well for the SNP long term.
    Tim_B said:

    I don't pretend to follow Scottish politics

    QED.

  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    Disraeli said:

    Owen Jones has a "Damascus" moment
    "The left must now campaign to leave the EU – the case is undeniable"
    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jul/14/left-reject-eu-greece-eurosceptic

    “Everything good about the EU is in retreat; everything bad is on the rampage,” writes George Monbiot, explaining his about-turn. “All my life I’ve been pro-Europe,” says Caitlin Moran, “but seeing how Germany is treating Greece, I am finding it increasingly distasteful.” Nick Cohen believes the EU is being portrayed “with some truth, as a cruel, fanatical and stupid institution”. “How can the left support what is being done?” asks Suzanne Moore. “The European ‘Union’. Not in my name.” There are senior Labour figures in Westminster and Holyrood privately moving to an “out” position too.

    Much of the Left were only really pro-EU because the Tories were against it, rather than principle.
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    Disraeli said:


    NickPalmer said:

    ...Tories are overestimating the significance of the SNP voting in English matters.

    Understandable. Fear of the SNP in England only won them the General Election, after all.
    Except it didn't, it didn't even come close to making a difference.

  • Life_ina_market_townLife_ina_market_town Posts: 2,319
    edited July 2015
    Disraeli said:

    Owen Jones has a "Damascus" moment

    The old "the EU is a capitalist conspiracy" line. Untrue, of course, but it is excellent news that it is gaining ground on the left again.
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    Tim_B said:

    SeanT said:

    I just used Apple Pay. To get on and off the Tube. Camden to Warren St for a drink.

    It actually took slightly LONGER than using a contactless card, but hey.

    What struck me was the revolutionary potential of modern ID tech (retina and fingerprint sensitive smartphones) allied with instant payment.

    You can go online with your smartphone and pay for ANYTHING with one tap of your fingerprint. 0.5 seconds. Increasingly you'll be able to do the same in shops.

    So why bother with debit or credit cards at all? Indeed why bother with cash? We all have a phone on us, all the time. Why bother with accounts? Let Apple look after everything, and just automatically deduct money from your iTunes account. Let Apple be your banker

    This is the end of cash, of money, of banks.

    One company to rule us all.

    You have been able to pay with your phone for several years, certainly in the US. McDonalds has let folks pay with android phones for quite some time using NFC.

    Yet again, Apple is not an innovator but a follower.
    The big question is why the BBC is bigging up an Apple story when it is neither innovative or novel.

    The BBC has form on Apple promotion.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Dair said:

    Disraeli said:


    NickPalmer said:

    ...Tories are overestimating the significance of the SNP voting in English matters.

    Understandable. Fear of the SNP in England only won them the General Election, after all.
    Except it didn't, it didn't even come close to making a difference.

    Oh yes it did!
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,081
    Tim_B said:

    I don't pretend to follow Scottish politics, but what is the rationale behind the SNP's increase in support, yet the lack of Scots support for independence? On the face of it it seems illogical.

    Is it an anti-Labour sentiment?

    Tim: No great mystery: support for independence (45% or thereabouts, may be a bit more now) isn't too far from levels of support for the SNP (49% or thereabouts) But 45-49% loses a two horse race - so no independence; but it wins in a four-or-more-horse race - so SNP win almost every constituency.

    Don't fall into the easy trap of assuming that because all Scots seats voted SNP, all Scots voted SNP!
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Dair said:

    Except it didn't, it didn't even come close to making a difference.

    Where is the ROFLcopter when you need it?
  • EPGEPG Posts: 6,653
    They don't deserve a working majority on 36 point something per cent of the vote anyway.

    All the complaints that "The SNP have votes, it's not fair!" Try saying that about seat outcomes under FPTP and see how much sympathy you get from Tories here!
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,591
    edited July 2015
    Apologies if this has been brought up previously, but I was just struck by probably the purest example of damning with faint praise I've ever seen, re the Greek PM.

    In a makeshift alliance of charlatans and lunatics, Tsipras deserves only limited credit for deciding at the last minute that he was just a charlatan after all.

    Ouch.

    http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2015/07/14/look-at-syriza-look-at-greece-thats-what-jeremy-corbyn-would-do-for-labour-and-britain/
    Tim_B said:

    SeanT said:

    I just used Apple Pay. To get on and off the Tube. Camden to Warren St for a drink.

    It actually took slightly LONGER than using a contactless card, but hey.

    What struck me was the revolutionary potential of modern ID tech (retina and fingerprint sensitive smartphones) allied with instant payment.

    You can go online with your smartphone and pay for ANYTHING with one tap of your fingerprint. 0.5 seconds. Increasingly you'll be able to do the same in shops.

    So why bother with debit or credit cards at all? Indeed why bother with cash? We all have a phone on us, all the time. Why bother with accounts? Let Apple look after everything, and just automatically deduct money from your iTunes account. Let Apple be your banker

    This is the end of cash, of money, of banks.

    One company to rule us all.

    Yet again, Apple is not an innovator but a follower.
    Well, it's not who gets there first, but who stakes out the best claim once they get there after all.
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    Missed the new thread. FPT

    Looks like the Greeks are already backsliding on the deal. They've added in funeral homes and home medical services into the lower VAT rate, and now are saying that Greece will not reverse the measures taken earlier in the year (cleaning lady re-employment, reopening of state TV etc...). I had thought reversing the latter was part of the conditions of the deal. The former seems to be designed to test what they can get away with on implementation
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,081
    This thought is two days out of date: but was anyone else as nonplussed as I was by the rabid reaction in the Labour Party to Liz Kendall suggesting that you should only have the children you can afford? Surely this is how the real world operates? Every single parent I know has restricted themselves to the number of children they can afford. Suggesting, as many in the Labour Party appear to have done, that this is tantamount to eugenics is utterly bonkers - completely detached from reality.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    kle4 said:

    Well, it's not who gets there first, but who stakes out the best claim once they get there after all.

    Well quite.

    There is a strong argument that the "Mac" experience was invented by Xerox, but it is indisputable that it was successfully developed and marketed by Apple
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    foxinsoxuk said:

    Dair said:

    Disraeli said:


    NickPalmer said:

    ...Tories are overestimating the significance of the SNP voting in English matters.

    Understandable. Fear of the SNP in England only won them the General Election, after all.
    Except it didn't, it didn't even come close to making a difference.

    Oh yes it did!
    We have one piece of hard evidence on how the "SNP fear" effected the election a poll for WoS/Sunday Times which clearly showed that there gains and losses were evened out and failed to provide the necessary movement to give the Tories largest party let alone a majority.

    The failure was Labour refusing to confirm a post election deal with the SNP which could have provided enough swing to them to allow an SNP/Labour coalition. The only failure was Labour's cowardice.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,591
    MTimT said:

    Missed the new thread. FPT

    Looks like the Greeks are already backsliding on the deal. They've added in funeral homes and home medical services into the lower VAT rate, and now are saying that Greece will not reverse the measures taken earlier in the year (cleaning lady re-employment, reopening of state TV etc...). I had thought reversing the latter was part of the conditions of the deal. The former seems to be designed to test what they can get away with on implementation

    If they were sensible, the other Eurozone leaders should have agreed some limited areas Greece could publicly backtrack slightly on after the deal announcement, not so big as to anger the German public and others by revealing that, of course, this was just another can kicking exercise, but a sop for the Greek leaders to present to their people as some kind of minor victory even in the face of capitulation.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,987
    felix said:

    The honeymoon period for a new govt never lasts long but I think the analysis in this case is mere wishful thinking. The Scotland issue is interesting - polls show the SNP growing in popularity while the Scots remain unwilling to support independence. There is a dissonance there which cannot last - maybe the Scots need to make their mind up. Of course the header is nonsense.

    At any rate the big home news is that Labour is looking sillier and sillier with Burnham leading the pack in rank stupidity. All looking good for Cooper I think. And even better for Cameron.

    Kendall made a big own goal today coming out against the Inheritance Tax Cut, something which will not go down well with the middle class. As for Cooper, she has said nothing different to what Burnham has said and still has lower favourables than him
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,045
    Dair said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    Dair said:

    Disraeli said:


    NickPalmer said:

    ...Tories are overestimating the significance of the SNP voting in English matters.

    Understandable. Fear of the SNP in England only won them the General Election, after all.
    Except it didn't, it didn't even come close to making a difference.

    Oh yes it did!
    We have one piece of hard evidence on how the "SNP fear" effected the election a poll for WoS/Sunday Times which clearly showed that there gains and losses were evened out and failed to provide the necessary movement to give the Tories largest party let alone a majority.

    The failure was Labour refusing to confirm a post election deal with the SNP which could have provided enough swing to them to allow an SNP/Labour coalition. The only failure was Labour's cowardice.
    Those would be the same polls which failed to notice it in the first place? ;)
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    Latest CLP nominations:

    Burnham - 48
    Corbyn - 39
    Cooper - 29
    Kendall - 5

    Hat-tip Stephen Bush
  • EPGEPG Posts: 6,653
    Tim_B said:

    I don't pretend to follow Scottish politics, but what is the rationale behind the SNP's increase in support, yet the lack of Scots support for independence? On the face of it it seems illogical.

    Is it an anti-Labour sentiment?

    It might, maybe, be something to do with a Conservative government.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,987
    Dair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Dair said:

    HYUFD said:


    Well good for her, although that ICM suggests at Westminster at least Labour doing a tad better in Scotland, but the average Scot is more rightwing on welfare than both Labour and the SNP may like to admit, even if a little left on the issue than rUK

    Your delusional straw clutching is providing great humour. Please don't stop posting.

    I'm sure you can find another subsample to cling to after the next Scottish national poll puts the SNP maintaining its 50%+ position in both Westminster and Holyrood VI.
    We shall see, does not change the position on welfare though
    I think I understand your problem.

    You don't understand how people make their voting decision.

    In general it is an AESTHETIC decision not an arithmetic one. Feelings and impressions are far more important in how people vote. Just ask Ed Miliband.
    I think Ed not being seen to get his sums right may also have had something to do with it
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,987
    Dair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Dair said:

    HYUFD said:

    jayfdee said:


    Farron is an extremely good constituency MP , he is very popular locally, and he works hard at it, in an area that was Con, and is a natural con area.
    I think in this case the constituents vote for the man, not the party , or the politics.
    I do not think the local appeal will necessarily translate across to a national leader.
    Meanwhile across the border Morecambe and Lunesdale, Lennox Boyd was OK, but got swept away in the labour landslide, Geraldine Smith got swept in, did her best, and got chucked out in 2010, David Morris is a no body,got re elected, actually with an increase, but does not have anything like the local prescence of Farron.
    Farron will win, but may cost him locally.

    Indeed, but accept he will retain his seat, if he won it in 2015 he has it for life!
    He may have it for life, but it might be a very lonely life

    Tom Brake 1,068
    Alistair Carmichael 817
    Nick Clegg 2,353
    Tim Farron 8,949
    Norman Lamb 4,043
    Greg Mulholland 2,907
    John Pugh 1,322
    Mark Williams 2,088

    At least two of those are dead men walking already. I guess Lamb should cling on, maybee Mulholland. The rest could be gone.
    Farron offers a clear shift left from Clegg, indeed on some issues he is arguably left of Salmond and Sturgeon, he is unlikely to return them to government but should build up their campaigning base again
    This fabled campaign base which didn't materialise in 2015 and, judging by the loss of seats in 2010 appears to have crumbled well before the coalition misadventure.

    10 new members per constituency won't really make much difference if they're already a hollowed out shell.
    Tactical voting alone would win them back a few seats
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Dair said:

    We have one piece of hard evidence ... a poll for WoS/Sunday Times

    Even a zoomer should be able to spot the logical fallacy there
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    SeanT said:


    You constantly claim the English no longer understand Scottish politics - and you do so quite convincingly. By the same token, Nats must accept they no longer understand English politics.

    The resonance of the Vote Miliband Get Salmond attack was physically palpable, down here, and countless anecdotes back it up (talk to Labour canvassers). It registered with English voters like, probably, nothing else in the election. This might explain why Cybernats are now recycling the Miliband-in-chest-pocket Tory poster meme, to their own ends (and it also proves that might have been the best election poster since Labour's Double Whammy).

    This should please you. Scots and English politics are no longer easily interchangeable. It's what you want.

    It was physically palpable because it was real (about 17% of people "less likely to vote Labour") so it is not surprising that people heard it on the doorstep.

    But it was also NOT the reason because 14% of people were "more likely to vote Labour" even with Labour refusing to countenance a deal with the SNP.

    This is the only polling evidence and it supports BOTH your claim about a real "feeling on the ground" and the reality that it did not influence the election result.
  • DisraeliDisraeli Posts: 1,106
    Dair said:

    Disraeli said:


    NickPalmer said:

    ...Tories are overestimating the significance of the SNP voting in English matters.

    Understandable. Fear of the SNP in England only won them the General Election, after all.
    Except it didn't, it didn't even come close to making a difference.

    You really DO NOT understand the many strands of English opinion at all. Here's a few examples of what I'm talking about.

    Fear of Labour’s policies and SNP trump hope in UK election
    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/32d4c934-f713-11e4-a9c0-00144feab7de.html#axzz3fu0IK6rM

    ‘Fear of SNP’ won election for David Cameron
    http://www.thecourier.co.uk/news/politics/fear-of-snp-won-election-for-david-cameron-1.888596

    Clegg: Country had 'profound fear' of Lab/ SNP pact
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33498036

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,987
    Danny565 said:

    Latest CLP nominations:

    Burnham - 48
    Corbyn - 39
    Cooper - 29
    Kendall - 5

    Hat-tip Stephen Bush

    Clearly looks to be Burnham followed by Corbyn on first preferences. Then perhaps Cooper can scrape into the run-off with Burnham by getting more of Kendall's preferences than Corbyn. Burnham then likely to win once Corbyn's preferences are allocated as Cooper is unlikely to get enough of a lead amongst Corbyn voters to overtake him
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    On topic, the budget was a key measure. Fox Hunting, EVEL and whatever they're trying to do to Human Rights Act (changing the name to the bill of rights, probably) aren't key measures, they're shiny things to dangle in front of activists.
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    RobD said:

    Dair said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    Dair said:

    Disraeli said:


    NickPalmer said:

    ...Tories are overestimating the significance of the SNP voting in English matters.

    Understandable. Fear of the SNP in England only won them the General Election, after all.
    Except it didn't, it didn't even come close to making a difference.

    Oh yes it did!
    We have one piece of hard evidence on how the "SNP fear" effected the election a poll for WoS/Sunday Times which clearly showed that there gains and losses were evened out and failed to provide the necessary movement to give the Tories largest party let alone a majority.

    The failure was Labour refusing to confirm a post election deal with the SNP which could have provided enough swing to them to allow an SNP/Labour coalition. The only failure was Labour's cowardice.
    Those would be the same polls which failed to notice it in the first place? ;)
    It's still the only piece of evidence you have and is far more compelling than speculative nonsense with not a single shred of support.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited July 2015
    Value? ...

    Betfair — Grexit 2015:

    Yes 7.4 / 7.8
    No 1.15 / 1.16

    https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/#/politics/market/1.117087478
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Dair said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    Dair said:

    Disraeli said:


    NickPalmer said:

    ...Tories are overestimating the significance of the SNP voting in English matters.

    Understandable. Fear of the SNP in England only won them the General Election, after all.
    Except it didn't, it didn't even come close to making a difference.

    Oh yes it did!
    We have one piece of hard evidence on how the "SNP fear" effected the election a poll for WoS/Sunday Times which clearly showed that there gains and losses were evened out and failed to provide the necessary movement to give the Tories largest party let alone a majority.

    The failure was Labour refusing to confirm a post election deal with the SNP which could have provided enough swing to them to allow an SNP/Labour coalition. The only failure was Labour's cowardice.
    It was important in the marginals. A strong factor in how my dad voted for example. In Labour safe seats the effect may have been neutral or even positive, but so what?

    @Cookie

    The best concise summary of Scottish politics yet!

  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Scott_P said:

    How many of these votes have the Government lost?

    Oh, wait...

    How many times has the SNP voted on English only matters

    Oh, wait.
  • EPGEPG Posts: 6,653
    Cookie said:

    This thought is two days out of date: but was anyone else as nonplussed as I was by the rabid reaction in the Labour Party to Liz Kendall suggesting that you should only have the children you can afford? Surely this is how the real world operates? Every single parent I know has restricted themselves to the number of children they can afford. Suggesting, as many in the Labour Party appear to have done, that this is tantamount to eugenics is utterly bonkers - completely detached from reality.

    People can almost always afford more children.

    Maybe not at the standard of material living they want to reach, but their ancestors were almost certainly poorer while being from more numerous families.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    Deputy CLP nominations:

    Watson - 40
    Creasy - 19
    Flint - 9
    Eagle - 6
    Bradshaw - 4
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,045
    Alistair said:

    Scott_P said:

    How many of these votes have the Government lost?

    Oh, wait...

    How many times has the SNP voted on English only matters

    Oh, wait.
    Do they need to? The government can easily schedule the votes again, but the SNP have demonstrated they will vote on English-only matters.
  • DisraeliDisraeli Posts: 1,106
    Scott_P said:

    Dair said:

    Except it didn't, it didn't even come close to making a difference.

    Where is the ROFLcopter when you need it?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=boh92DrYEWs
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,045
    Dair said:

    RobD said:

    Dair said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    Dair said:

    Disraeli said:


    NickPalmer said:

    ...Tories are overestimating the significance of the SNP voting in English matters.

    Understandable. Fear of the SNP in England only won them the General Election, after all.
    Except it didn't, it didn't even come close to making a difference.

    Oh yes it did!
    We have one piece of hard evidence on how the "SNP fear" effected the election a poll for WoS/Sunday Times which clearly showed that there gains and losses were evened out and failed to provide the necessary movement to give the Tories largest party let alone a majority.

    The failure was Labour refusing to confirm a post election deal with the SNP which could have provided enough swing to them to allow an SNP/Labour coalition. The only failure was Labour's cowardice.
    Those would be the same polls which failed to notice it in the first place? ;)
    It's still the only piece of evidence you have and is far more compelling than speculative nonsense with not a single shred of support.
    I think I'd believe that over polls any day... :D
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    Scott_P said:

    Dair said:

    We have one piece of hard evidence ... a poll for WoS/Sunday Times

    Even a zoomer should be able to spot the logical fallacy there
    So you are making a libellous statement hat Panelbase will manipulate the results of a poll specifically for the benefit/bias a commissioner of that poll?

    Even when the other commissioner would editorially want the opposite result.

    Logic really isn't even a passing acquaintence to you.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Ten years ago Tory MP Alan Duncan said there were only 5 or 6 Tories against fox hunting (including of course Ann Widdecombe). Is it really "dozens" now?
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Alistair said:

    How many times has the SNP voted on English only matters

    They said they wouldn't, will, might, haven't decided

    A party of principles. Pick one you fancy, or another one at random...
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    Disraeli said:

    Dair said:

    Disraeli said:


    NickPalmer said:

    ...Tories are overestimating the significance of the SNP voting in English matters.

    Understandable. Fear of the SNP in England only won them the General Election, after all.
    Except it didn't, it didn't even come close to making a difference.

    You really DO NOT understand the many strands of English opinion at all. Here's a few examples of what I'm talking about.

    Fear of Labour’s policies and SNP trump hope in UK election
    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/32d4c934-f713-11e4-a9c0-00144feab7de.html#axzz3fu0IK6rM

    ‘Fear of SNP’ won election for David Cameron
    http://www.thecourier.co.uk/news/politics/fear-of-snp-won-election-for-david-cameron-1.888596

    Clegg: Country had 'profound fear' of Lab/ SNP pact
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33498036

    Opinion and speculation is not evidence.

    There IS evidence. It says it did not make a meaningful difference to the election outcome.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited July 2015
    The real scandal is the amount of time taken up by the fox hunting debate over the last 10-15 years when the likes of Rotherham were going on at the same time.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Dair said:

    Opinion and speculation is not evidence..

    "there is hard evidence" "an opinion poll"

    Have you worked out the logical fallacy in your earlier statement yet?
Sign In or Register to comment.