Those yougov ratings are atrocious. At what point do the moderates scent blood (though this is Labour we're talking about...)
When there is an electoral disaster for Labour. But May's locals should be manageable to spin even if they are poor (and maybe they won't be), and London looks rock solid for Khan, so it won't be this year. No amount of poll numbers would be enough without proof, particularly right now.
Matt Wells Only on the Guardian could you read a review of tinned tomatoes where the No 1 recommendation costs £4.95 https://t.co/ICqztryucH
Cant imagine your a Morrisons value at 30p per tin person
Odd not knowing the price of a tin of tomatoes
They are 39p unless you buy the ones with added Basil.
Which I imagine is entirely possible
You are probably wrong about the triple too
In the mid 90's there was a supermarket price war over beans. As they tried to beat each other, one shop was even selling an own-brand can for a penny.
Myself and a few mates decided to do a taste test with, from memory, everything from top-of-the-range beans to the cheap stuff. In the latter case the beans were hard, the sauce like water and gritty. They were truly the sweepings off the factory floor.
You could really taste the price difference.
Sometimes you get what you pay for. At others you are ripped off.
The bread price war in late 97/early 98 (can't remember exactly when) was incredible if you were a student and didn't mind eating something that tasted of plastic. It got down to 7p a loaf in my local Safeways. I think that was less than the price of the electricity to fire the ovens.
If Labour think the media tried to "destroy" Miliband, what on earth do they think will happen with Corbyn in charge?
She also states that the media tried to destroy Blair. It's not an analysis; it's a persecution complex.
It's also a problem for Labour. In not distinguishing that there was a qualitative difference between some teasing of the early Blair as 'Bambi', what Miliband got, and what Corbyn will get, she's doing her party a disservice. She's not recognising any dynamic in the relationship, simply taking the media as one might take the weather. There's no acknowledgement that Blair (and Brown) courted the media while Miliband and Corbyn went and have gone out of their ways to antagonise them.
But unless you first understand the problem, you can't devise a solution.
More dangerously, if you believe that the media is unrelentlessly hostile then you retreat to a state of permanent war. As an aside, I remember the mid-90s through to circa 2003 and I'm fairly sure that Labour didn't have the worst of it but that's beside the point. If you believe it to be true, unfair and unfixable through normal methods then of necessity, you will conclude the solution is censorship and control.
If ever a film was designed NOT to be watched on a TV set it's Revenant. You'll miss 80% of what makes it what it is. I worried slightly that most BAFTA members watch the films on TV's so they might miss too much but it's very rare that academy members do for the Oscars.
MarqueeM
Your Missus is right. If it wasn't for Revenant my favourite film would be either Room or Carol with an honourable mention for Brooklyn. Room was brilliant and certainly an outside best for best direction. I wouldn't have gone for Brie Larson either but the boy. It was by a distance the best performance I've ever from one so young which is why Abrahamson should be an outside bet for best Director
Sunil
Possibly. He was very good-certainly better than Redmayne-but I need to think about it.
There are plenty of movies that are better than the book Indeed
I confess I haven't seen Room yet.
Martian was another disappointment (and from Ridley Scott!). Great idea, great plot, great potential, great performance from Matt Damon - but impoverished by a sluggish script and a totally lacklustre cast.
It could have been a classic. But was merely good-ish. Ridley took his eye off the ball. Or maybe he is just ageing.
Best film I've seen in years. Though admittedly that I wasn't expecting it to be good may have made me appreciate it even more than I would otherwise.
Revenant is good, but not a great. Should have been about 30 mins shorter.
If Leo Di Caprio gets an Oscar for that and not The Wolf of Wall Street, then there's no justice in the world.
All about who deserves one for career efforts, not individual performances though
It reminds me of literary fiction. Lovely sentence after lovely sentence, but no plot, no pace, so no emotional punch.
One of the most concise summaries of why I am a literary reverse snob, and have probably missed out on some good works over the years. That sort of thing drives me nuts.
@georgegalloway: Dugher told us yesterday. Corbyn will be overthrown in May whereafter there will be two Labour Parties. One in parliament with a new leader.
@georgegalloway: Dugher told us yesterday. Corbyn will be overthrown in May whereafter there will be two Labour Parties. One in parliament with a new leader.
Revenant..best Pic and Director Di Caprio best actor..Maggie Smith Best Actress..Design to Bridge of Spies..Cinematography to Revenant.. Adapted Script to Short Money..meanwhile tonight ..another ep of the stunning Fargo.
I could go and see Brooklyn (the film) this evening, or stay in the warm with Silent Witness.
Q:Is Brooklyn worth the risk of frostbite, or shall I wait for The Big Short for my weekly fix?
Yes.
SeanT. Inside Out would be my choice for best animation but never best film. It was an interesting story (and I love animation) but it was a long way from being the best animation even of the last few years.
Mostly OT, but you are discussing the Oscars: Fresh Prince fans might like this video of Aunt Viv (the original, I think) slamming Jada Pinkett and Will Smith: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9eY-kKXBnQ
Mostly OT, but you are discussing the Oscars: Fresh Prince fans might like this video of Aunt Viv (the original, I think) slamming Jada Pinkett and Will Smith: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9eY-kKXBnQ
Mr Dancer I have purchased some Morris Dancing bells.
They have only been used to pretend Santa is here.
Mr. Owls, morris dancing is a renowned method for both enhancing fitness and attracting women. They simply can't resist the wave of lace and thrust of wiffle stick.
Mr. Owls, morris dancing is a renowned method for both enhancing fitness and attracting women. They simply can't resist the wave of lace and thrust of wiffle stick.
Shh Mrs BJ is within sight.
Not be a lot of call for those uses at Armthorpe tonight I wouldnt have thought but Thanks anyway.
Where do you get wiffle sticks are they available at Morrisons?
I could go and see Brooklyn (the film) this evening, or stay in the warm with Silent Witness.
Q:Is Brooklyn worth the risk of frostbite, or shall I wait for The Big Short for my weekly fix?
Yes.
SeanT. Inside Out would be my choice for best animation but never best film. It was an interesting story (and I love animation) but it was a long way from being the best animation even of the last few years.
Revenant isn't playing in the same league. Revenant is a good movie, well acted, with excellent cinematography - is all.
Sounds like Gravity in that respect - great piece of art in many ways, but taken alltogether, not a great movie.
Has anyone been brave/stupid enough to plunge balls deep into mining stocks yet ?
Nope. There will be a bounce but going in right now is for the super brave.
Commodity stocks are at the same point more or less as they were in Feb 2009. The bigger ones should be OK, as able to hold on while smaller miners go out of business. In the longer term they will bounce back.
I have a fair chunk of big miners (RIO and BLT) in my ISA, but will hold on. I may even add a bit once I have paid my taxes at the end of the month.
Cant imagine your a Morrisons value at 30p per tin person
Odd not knowing the price of a tin of tomatoes
They are 39p unless you buy the ones with added Basil.
Which I imagine is entirely possible
You are probably wrong about the triple too
Miss P, You might want to look again at Waitrose. Herself tells me that basic stuff there are not much different in price from Tescos and it has a spiffing pick your own offers scheme with 20% off an item. If I am going to Burgess Hill she is able to print me off a sheet from the Waitrose website of the things that I am to buy, each with a little picture of what it looks like, the size and the discount. It is brilliant, not only do we get stonking good deals but, as long as I buy what is in the picture, I can't get shouted at when I get home. I see quote a few men of a certain age wandering isles with similar print outs to my own.
and moved those of us waiting over whilst they cleaned up.
Was malcolmg visiting the area?
I need never stoop to looking at prices or reduced items and as a cultured gentlemen would never abuse a working person just for doing their job. You appear to be conflating things with oicks like yourself and behaviour you see at your BNP meetings.
Hush malcolm. We can all picture the image of a pasty faced, wizened figure, arguing over the price of the free coffee whilst reluctantly opening an ancient tartan purse to pay for a few heavily discounted items. Before you place them in an old string shopping bag.
I could do with a fair amount of wizening for sure.
Matt Wells Only on the Guardian could you read a review of tinned tomatoes where the No 1 recommendation costs £4.95 https://t.co/ICqztryucH
Cant imagine your a Morrisons value at 30p per tin person
Odd not knowing the price of a tin of tomatoes
They are 39p unless you buy the ones with added Basil.
Which I imagine is entirely possible
You are probably wrong about the triple too
Miss P, You might want to look again at Waitrose. Herself tells me that basic stuff there are not much different in price from Tescos and it has a spiffing pick your own offers scheme with 20% off an item. If I am going to Burgess Hill she is able to print me off a sheet from the Waitrose website of the things that I am to buy, each with a little picture of what it looks like, the size and the discount. It is brilliant, not only do we get stonking good deals but, as long as I buy what is in the picture, I can't get shouted at when I get home. I see quote a few men of a certain age wandering isles with similar print outs to my own.
I saw a very odd occurrence in the St Neots Waitrose last year. A gentleman of a certain age, complete with flat cap, had a massive and prolonged argument with the teller over a reduced item (it was not reduced, but he thought it was). He continued the argument despite the teller, and then the manager, offering him the discount anyway.
He ended up tipping his bags over the counter, smashing a jar on the bagging area, and storming out without his shopping. All over what was, from memory, only a few pence.
It was quite amazing to observe. The staff quietly and efficiently opened another till and moved those of us waiting over whilst they cleaned up.
Was malcolmg visiting the area?
I need never stoop to looking at prices or reduced items .
With all the SNP's Middle Class perks why would you need to?
Those yougov ratings are atrocious. At what point do the moderates scent blood (though this is Labour we're talking about...)
Yet again, talk of what "the moderates" (presuming you mean MPs) would do is missing the point entirely. If it was entirely in the hands of the MPs, Corbyn would've been gone by the end of September, regardless of how much "guts" the MPs had. They won't remove him because they don't possess the power to remove him - he would get automatic right to stand if they triggered another leadership election, and he would win a landslide.
Their only way out is to persuade the membership that the "moderates" offer a better course. While the membership stays staunchly in favour of Corbyn, he is safe irrespective of how "gutsy" the MPs are.
I could go and see Brooklyn (the film) this evening, or stay in the warm with Silent Witness.
Q:Is Brooklyn worth the risk of frostbite, or shall I wait for The Big Short for my weekly fix?
Yes.
SeanT. Inside Out would be my choice for best animation but never best film. It was an interesting story (and I love animation) but it was a long way from being the best animation even of the last few years.
Inside Out is quite possibly the best animated movie ever made, and is without question the best movie of the year. Revenant isn't playing in the same league. Revenant is a good movie, well acted, with excellent cinematography - is all.
Compare Revenant to a truly great neo-Western like Eastwood's Unforgiven. The latter is infinitely superior.
Better recent animations out of my head....Belleville Rendez-Vous, Ratatouille, Persepolis, Waltz with Bashir, Wall-E, Up, Fantastic Mr Fox plus any number of Japanese ones though generally not for children
I could go and see Brooklyn (the film) this evening, or stay in the warm with Silent Witness.
Q:Is Brooklyn worth the risk of frostbite, or shall I wait for The Big Short for my weekly fix?
Yes.
SeanT. Inside Out would be my choice for best animation but never best film. It was an interesting story (and I love animation) but it was a long way from being the best animation even of the last few years.
Inside Out is quite possibly the best animated movie ever made, and is without question the best movie of the year. Revenant isn't playing in the same league. Revenant is a good movie, well acted, with excellent cinematography - is all.
Compare Revenant to a truly great neo-Western like Eastwood's Unforgiven. The latter is infinitely superior.
Better recent animations out of my head....Belleville Rendez-Vous, Ratatouille, Persepolis, Waltz with Bashir, Wall-E, Up, Fantastic Mr Fox plus any number of Japanese ones though generally not for children
Inside Out was a better version of the Numskulls from the Beano. Not bad, but I cannot see that it is better than either Toy Story 1 or 2, or Shrek 1 or 2, even if only looking at modern US cartoons.
Completely OT. just when you think it's a really competitive year for the Oscars along comes Inarratu with 'Revenant' to blow the rest out of the water. Almost certainly 'best film' 'best director' and 'best cinematography' and very possibly 'best actor' too. Such a conventional story but so well done....
...sorry back to your tinned tomatoes
I'm watching it now. It's rather beautiful, and rather dull. Classic middlebrow cinema, that would appeal to middlebrow cinema-goers aspiring to appear arty.
It reminds me of literary fiction. Lovely sentence after lovely sentence, but no plot, no pace, so no emotional punch.
The best film of the year, by a distance, was Inside Out: hugely clever, funny, moving, strange, unexpected, inspiring, ambitious, all at once, and ravishingly pretty AS WELL. But it didn't even get nominated, because middlebrow old farts don't see cartoons as "art".
Inside Out is the only movie I've been to where the entire audience was crying at the end. Literally everyone (apart from my flinty 9 year old daughter). Pure genius.
Revenant is good, but not a great. Should have been about 30 mins shorter.
If Leo Di Caprio gets an Oscar for that and not The Wolf of Wall Street, then there's no justice in the world.
I could go and see Brooklyn (the film) this evening, or stay in the warm with Silent Witness.
Q:Is Brooklyn worth the risk of frostbite, or shall I wait for The Big Short for my weekly fix?
Yes.
SeanT. Inside Out would be my choice for best animation but never best film. It was an interesting story (and I love animation) but it was a long way from being the best animation even of the last few years.
Inside Out is quite possibly the best animated movie ever made, and is without question the best movie of the year. Revenant isn't playing in the same league. Revenant is a good movie, well acted, with excellent cinematography - is all.
Compare Revenant to a truly great neo-Western like Eastwood's Unforgiven. The latter is infinitely superior.
Better recent animations out of my head....Belleville Rendez-Vous, Ratatouille, Persepolis, Waltz with Bashir, Wall-E, Up, Fantastic Mr Fox plus any number of Japanese ones though generally not for children
Inside Out was a better version of the Numskulls from the Beano. Not bad, but I cannot see that it is better than either Toy Story 1 or 2, or Shrek 1 or 2, even if only looking at modern US cartoons.
Judging purely on how well it tugged my emotions, Inside Out was better than any of those. As a child and adult Toy Story never threatened to make me cry (and Shrek, enjoyable as it was, certainly didn't). In terms of the animation itself...I can't say I'd notice.
As a reminder there is great speculation of the upcoming major announcement that Trump will make later today in Iowa, many say it's either a Branstad, a Palin or a Falwell endorsement:
Alex Burns @alexburnsNYT 48m48 minutes ago Alex Burns Retweeted MJ Lee
Whoa – Iowa governor calls for Cruz's defeat >
Alex Burns added, MJ Lee @mj_lee Asked by a reporter "so you want to see him defeated?" Branstad answers: "yes."
Those yougov ratings are atrocious. At what point do the moderates scent blood (though this is Labour we're talking about...)
Yet again, talk of what "the moderates" (presuming you mean MPs) would do is missing the point entirely. If it was entirely in the hands of the MPs, Corbyn would've been gone by the end of September, regardless of how much "guts" the MPs had. They won't remove him because they don't possess the power to remove him - he would get automatic right to stand if they triggered another leadership election, and he would win a landslide.
Their only way out is to persuade the membership that the "moderates" offer a better course. While the membership stays staunchly in favour of Corbyn, he is safe irrespective of how "gutsy" the MPs are.
The laughable thing is that it was in the hands of the MPs. No-one made those who weren't going to vote for him their nominations.
As you rightly say though, it isn't now.
As long as Khan wins London, he'll be ok next year too no matter how bad the results are elsewhere.
Completely OT. just when you think it's a really competitive year for the Oscars along comes Inarratu with 'Revenant' to blow the rest out of the water. Almost certainly 'best film' 'best director' and 'best cinematography' and very possibly 'best actor' too. Such a conventional story but so well done....
...sorry back to your tinned tomatoes
I'm watching it now. It's rather beautiful, and rather dull. Classic middlebrow cinema, that would appeal to middlebrow cinema-goers aspiring to appear arty.
It reminds me of literary fiction. Lovely sentence after lovely sentence, but no plot, no pace, so no emotional punch.
The best film of the year, by a distance, was Inside Out: hugely clever, funny, moving, strange, unexpected, inspiring, ambitious, all at once, and ravishingly pretty AS WELL. But it didn't even get nominated, because middlebrow old farts don't see cartoons as "art".
Inside Out is the only movie I've been to where the entire audience was crying at the end. Literally everyone (apart from my flinty 9 year old daughter). Pure genius.
Revenant is good, but not a great. Should have been about 30 mins shorter.
If Leo Di Caprio gets an Oscar for that and not The Wolf of Wall Street, then there's no justice in the world.
Wolf of Wall Street was also 30 minutes too long.
That seems to be a criterion for nomination these days.
As a reminder there is great speculation of the upcoming major announcement that Trump will make later today in Iowa, many say it's either a Branstad, a Palin or a Falwell endorsement:
Alex Burns @alexburnsNYT 48m48 minutes ago Alex Burns Retweeted MJ Lee
Whoa – Iowa governor calls for Cruz's defeat >
Alex Burns added, MJ Lee @mj_lee Asked by a reporter "so you want to see him defeated?" Branstad answers: "yes."
As a reminder there is great speculation of the upcoming major announcement that Trump will make later today in Iowa, many say it's either a Branstad, a Palin or a Falwell endorsement:
Alex Burns @alexburnsNYT 48m48 minutes ago Alex Burns Retweeted MJ Lee
Whoa – Iowa governor calls for Cruz's defeat >
Alex Burns added, MJ Lee @mj_lee Asked by a reporter "so you want to see him defeated?" Branstad answers: "yes."
As a reminder there is great speculation of the upcoming major announcement that Trump will make later today in Iowa, many say it's either a Branstad, a Palin or a Falwell endorsement:
Alex Burns @alexburnsNYT 48m48 minutes ago Alex Burns Retweeted MJ Lee
Whoa – Iowa governor calls for Cruz's defeat >
Alex Burns added, MJ Lee @mj_lee Asked by a reporter "so you want to see him defeated?" Branstad answers: "yes."
As a reminder there is great speculation of the upcoming major announcement that Trump will make later today in Iowa, many say it's either a Branstad, a Palin or a Falwell endorsement:
Alex Burns @alexburnsNYT 48m48 minutes ago Alex Burns Retweeted MJ Lee
Whoa – Iowa governor calls for Cruz's defeat >
Alex Burns added, MJ Lee @mj_lee Asked by a reporter "so you want to see him defeated?" Branstad answers: "yes."
Which is dumb as he is clearly eligible, so that's a moot point. Arguing over whether he is eligible is idotic and pointless, how about arguing whether he should be voted for as that will determine whether he gets the job or not.
I'll keep the nice green 4 figure number next to Kasich's name on Betfair. Just one poll, but he looks better value than Mark Rubio for sure !
The guy who is running in the wrong party could beat Rubio for second in N.H. That will be pretty much the end for Rubio if he's beaten by someone like Kasich.
On the plus side for those who lost money on Rubio, they can make some of it back by selling Rubio and buying Kasich temporarily as a trade bet.
I'll keep the nice green 4 figure number next to Kasich's name on Betfair. Just one poll, but he looks better value than Mark Rubio for sure !
The guy who is running in the wrong party could beat Rubio for second in N.H. That will be pretty much the end for Rubio if he's beaten by someone like Kasich.
On the plus side for those who lost money on Rubio, they can make some of it back by selling Rubio and buying Kasich temporarily as a trade bet.
Rubio's been behind Jeb! in some national polls. The establishment favourites could both end up doing worse than Liz Kendall.
As a reminder there is great speculation of the upcoming major announcement that Trump will make later today in Iowa, many say it's either a Branstad, a Palin or a Falwell endorsement:
Alex Burns @alexburnsNYT 48m48 minutes ago Alex Burns Retweeted MJ Lee
Whoa – Iowa governor calls for Cruz's defeat >
Alex Burns added, MJ Lee @mj_lee Asked by a reporter "so you want to see him defeated?" Branstad answers: "yes."
Which is dumb as he is clearly eligible, so that's a moot point. Arguing over whether he is eligible is idotic and pointless, how about arguing whether he should be voted for as that will determine whether he gets the job or not.
If Cruz is eligible, so is Winston Churchill (born abroad of an American mother).
Except he wasn't, no-one ever thought he was, being an alien who was ultimately honoured with "honorary citizenship" by Congress in 1963.
NBCs don't need honorary citizenship, or any other congressional indulgence to make them citizens...
Therefore Cruz, a person who is a citizen and isn't a naturalized citizen, is a natural-born citizen for the purposes of eligibility to the Presidency.
Has anyone been brave/stupid enough to plunge balls deep into mining stocks yet ?
Nope. There will be a bounce but going in right now is for the super brave.
Commodity stocks are at the same point more or less as they were in Feb 2009. The bigger ones should be OK, as able to hold on while smaller miners go out of business. In the longer term they will bounce back.
I have a fair chunk of big miners (RIO and BLT) in my ISA, but will hold on. I may even add a bit once I have paid my taxes at the end of the month.
The price of commodities is only about 3% higher than they were in 1900....
"Kasich" or Casey as it is apparently pronounced has also received multiple endorsements in NH and zero attacks from any other candidate against him so far. He should not be fifth to win the state by odds.
Therefore Cruz, a person who is a citizen and isn't a naturalized citizen, is a natural-born citizen for the purposes of eligibility to the Presidency.
Trump was talking about a supreme court decision (which would trump a technical interpretation) claiming it wasnt that simple..
I really like Kasich (moderate, courageous, open-minded), but I'm not sure my political profile is, um, exactly that of a mainstream Republican voter . If he wins NH, it's hard to it helping the GOP establishment stop Trump or Cruz, since it will postpone the time that they find an establishment figure who most GOP voters like.
Leadership ratings were a much better guide to both 2010 and 2015. I guess as we move to a more presidential style of government where the PM plays a much more prominent role than ordinary Ministers it is inevitable that the leader ratings have become more important than the headline share.
Clegg's ratings were very good in 2010, weren't they? But the LDs lost seats (even though they gained votes). EdM's ratings were dire, but Labour gained votes even though it lost seats.
There's a danger of fighting the last war.
I'm quite confident that the next Tory leader will not have the appeal of David Cameron, so perhaps VI might be the best indicator in 2020.
This has been my thinking too.
At any rate favourability ratings for party leaders are of limited use now, when we don't know who the next Con leader is and can't be confident that Corbyn will lead Labour to the next GE.
I'm touching on that this weekend.
Also includes the worst Latin pun in history, which will have you reaching for the mind bleach too.
Further to that point, one good reason to look at the VI polls is that ultimately it's more likely to be a collapse in VI, more than low personal approval ratings, that trigger anti-Corbyn MPs to attempt defenestration.
Obviously there are other potential triggers - a gaffe or scandal, or an electoral drubbing, a policy crisis (particularly one where Corbyn finds himself opposed to the unions, who may have more "legitimacy" in the Labour movement than their MPs do right now). But a really shocking VI - say, Labour dropping to third in the polls - could be quite a dramatic push in its own right. Corbyn being ranked fourth or fifth among party leaders on favourability would be nowhere near so significant.
Therefore Cruz, a person who is a citizen and isn't a naturalized citizen, is a natural-born citizen for the purposes of eligibility to the Presidency.
Cobblers, he IS a naturalized citizen.
We know the 14th amendment does not define an NBC. See Minor v Happersett, US v Wong Kim Ark. "The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that."
We know the 14th amendment does not cover persons born abroad (it says so), and if they are to be citizens at all, instead of aliens, they need a statute which naturalizes them at birth. See US v Wong Kim Ark (1898), Rogers v Bellei (1971), Miller v Albright (1998)
I've posted the unanimous opinion in Rogers enough times already. How about Miller, only seventeen years ago.?
JUSTICE SCALIA, concurring. 'The Constitution "contemplates two sources of citizenship, and two only: birth and naturalization." United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U. S. 649, 702 (1898). Under the Fourteenth Amendment, "[e]very person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, becomes at once a citizen of the United States, and needs no naturalization." Ibid. Petitioner, having been born outside the territory of the United States, is an alien as far as the Constitution is concerned, and "can only become a citizen by being naturalized, either by treaty, as in the case of the annexation of foreign territory; or by authority of Congress." Id., at 702-703; see also Rogers v. Bellei, 401 U. S. 815, 827 (1971). Here it is the "authority of Congress" that is appealed to its power under Art. I, § 8, cl. 4, to "establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization." If there is no congressional enactment granting petitioner citizenship, she remains an alien.'
Leadership ratings were a much better guide to both 2010 and 2015. I guess as we move to a more presidential style of government where the PM plays a much more prominent role than ordinary Ministers it is inevitable that the leader ratings have become more important than the headline share.
Clegg's ratings were very good in 2010, weren't they? But the LDs lost seats (even though they gained votes). EdM's ratings were dire, but Labour gained votes even though it lost seats.
There's a danger of fighting the last war.
I'm quite confident that the next Tory leader will not have the appeal of David Cameron, so perhaps VI might be the best indicator in 2020.
This has been my thinking too.
At any rate favourability ratings for party leaders are of limited use now, when we don't know who the next Con leader is and can't be confident that Corbyn will lead Labour to the next GE.
I'm touching on that this weekend.
Also includes the worst Latin pun in history, which will have you reaching for the mind bleach too.
Leadership ratings were a much better guide to both 2010 and 2015. I guess as we move to a more presidential style of government where the PM plays a much more prominent role than ordinary Ministers it is inevitable that the leader ratings have become more important than the headline share.
Clegg's ratings were very good in 2010, weren't they? But the LDs lost seats (even though they gained votes). EdM's ratings were dire, but Labour gained votes even though it lost seats.
There's a danger of fighting the last war.
I'm quite confident that the next Tory leader will not have the appeal of David Cameron, so perhaps VI might be the best indicator in 2020.
This has been my thinking too.
At any rate favourability ratings for party leaders are of limited use now, when we don't know who the next Con leader is and can't be confident that Corbyn will lead Labour to the next GE.
I'm touching on that this weekend.
Also includes the worst Latin pun in history, which will have you reaching for the mind bleach too.
This is the Cyclefree Guide to the Nine Stages of a Crisis - which could, with some small adjustments, be applied to Labour and its attempt at an analysis of why it is in a mess.
1. people turn a blind eye 2. people can't believe it 3. people refuse to believe it 4. people accept that something has gone wrong but insist that it is limited to one or two "bad apples". (In Labour's case, this is replaced by "we did not have an over-arching narrative but everyone really loved our policies.") 5. when it becomes clear that not "one or two" (or that the "narrative" excuse does not work) stages 1, 2 and 3 are repeated 6. people become more concerned with the reputation of / protecting the institution than dealing with what is wrong 7. a limited inquiry is instituted in the hope that this will sort matters out. It won't. 8. when it becomes public people become defensive and concentrate on the PR aspects. (A particular favourite of Labour this one: it's all the media's fault.) 9. eventually ….. eventually when the stench and/or the outside pressure become too much to bear a much more extensive investigation is instituted and remedial measures are put in place. Almost inevitably this is done far too late. And the institution will have to deal with the continuing fall-out from the previous failures for some time long after it has put its house in order. (Several defeats are usually necessary for political parties to get the voters' message.)
The lesson to be learned (and there are many, of course) is that trust takes a very long time to build in the first place, can be lost in an instant and once lost or damaged will take a very long time indeed to rebuild.
Therefore Cruz, a person who is a citizen and isn't a naturalized citizen, is a natural-born citizen for the purposes of eligibility to the Presidency.
Cobblers, he IS a naturalized citizen.
We know the 14th amendment does not define an NBC. See Minor v Happersett, US v Wong Kim Ark. "The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that."
We know the 14th amendment does not cover persons born abroad (it says so), and if they are to be citizens at all, instead of aliens, they need a statute which naturalizes them at birth. See US v Wong Kim Ark (1898), Rogers v Bellei (1971), Miller v Albright (1998)
I've posted the unanimous opinion in Rogers enough times already. How about Miller, only seventeen years ago.?
JUSTICE SCALIA, concurring. 'The Constitution "contemplates two sources of citizenship, and two only: birth and naturalization." United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U. S. 649, 702 (1898). Under the Fourteenth Amendment, "[e]very person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, becomes at once a citizen of the United States, and needs no naturalization." Ibid. Petitioner, having been born outside the territory of the United States, is an alien as far as the Constitution is concerned, and "can only become a citizen by being naturalized, either by treaty, as in the case of the annexation of foreign territory; or by authority of Congress." Id., at 702-703; see also Rogers v. Bellei, 401 U. S. 815, 827 (1971). Here it is the "authority of Congress" that is appealed to its power under Art. I, § 8, cl. 4, to "establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization." If there is no congressional enactment granting petitioner citizenship, she remains an alien.'
[my emphasis]
Is it possible that the restrictions on who can serve as president are unconstitutional?
I purchased iPhones for the family in October from a well know phone store and reputable. We watched all of them being opened , set up and scanned before leaving. One of them developed a charging fault recently so we took it into an apple shop for checking today. They took it out around the back and returned around 15 mins later asking if the phone had been opened previously. We said no and it most certainly had not been at any time. Apple stated the screen section was not Apple and on the inside it should have a logo and this one did not. Apple have therefore refused to touch it which is normal in such circumstances. The original phone shop would repair it but they would not replace it given this information and effectively infer as it's been opened it's not anything to do with them. Again probably quite rightly.
So I essentially have bought and I am paying for an IPhone that isn't and there appears nothing I can do about this. I know we have neverr opened the phone so the screen part must have been there as we opened the sealed Apple package in the store when we bought the phone how else would it get there? We saw the packages opened and seals broken the only other time it's been away from us was today for inspection n an official Apple Store.
We are now effectively now caught in the middle and paying a lot for something we haven't got that still has a fault while two companies now effectively play us off against them.
I am sure somewhere we have been scammed but once an I phone is opened is impossible to prove. To prove you have been scammed you have to open the I phone though.
The others phones appear to be ok according to Apple. I reiterate the duff phone has never been opened since purchase and is all the original item
Is it true that Jeremy Corbyn was born in New York City and is therefore eligible to be POTUS, but regrettably cannot be PM?
Wasn't that Boris born in the USA?
Might keep Rod happy that he is a candidate for POTUS!
Indeed, it raises an interesting twist. As Boris is a "Natural Born Citizen" who has not maintained his US citizenship (I think) could he be POTUS if he regained citizenship?
Is it true that Jeremy Corbyn was born in New York City and is therefore eligible to be POTUS, but regrettably cannot be PM?
Wasn't that Boris born in the USA?
Might keep Rod happy that he is a candidate for POTUS!
Indeed, it raises an interesting twist. As Boris is a "Natural Born Citizen" who has not maintained his US citizenship (I think) could he be POTUS if he regained citizenship?
I purchased iPhones for the family in October from a well know phone store and reputable. We watched all of them being opened , set up and scanned before leaving. One of them developed a charging fault recently so we took it into an apple shop for checking today. They took it out around the back and returned around 15 mins later asking if the phone had been opened previously. We said no and it most certainly had not been at any time. Apple stated the screen section was not Apple and on the inside it should have a logo and this one did not. Apple have therefore refused to touch it which is normal in such circumstances. The original phone shop would repair it but they would not replace it given this information and effectively infer as it's been opened it's not anything to do with them. Again probably quite rightly.
So I essentially have bought and I am paying for an IPhone that isn't and there appears nothing I can do about this. I know we have neverr opened the phone so the screen part must have been there as we opened the sealed Apple package in the store when we bought the phone how else would it get there? We saw the packages opened and seals broken the only other time it's been away from us was today for inspection n an official Apple Store.
We are now effectively now caught in the middle and paying a lot for something we haven't got that still has a fault while two companies now effectively play us off against them.
I am sure somewhere we have been scammed but once an I phone is opened is impossible to prove. To prove you have been scammed you have to open the I phone though.
The others phones appear to be ok according to Apple. I reiterate the duff phone has never been opened since purchase and is all the original item
What can I do?
Contact trading standards. Oh and tell the shop you are doing so and will be complaining they sold you an item that was not what they claimed.
Is it true that Jeremy Corbyn was born in New York City and is therefore eligible to be POTUS, but regrettably cannot be PM?
Wasn't that Boris born in the USA?
Might keep Rod happy that he is a candidate for POTUS!
Indeed, it raises an interesting twist. As Boris is a "Natural Born Citizen" who has not maintained his US citizenship (I think) could he be POTUS if he regained citizenship?
BoJo vs Trump - that would be something to see. Battle of the blondes.
Is it true that Jeremy Corbyn was born in New York City and is therefore eligible to be POTUS, but regrettably cannot be PM?
Wasn't that Boris born in the USA?
Might keep Rod happy that he is a candidate for POTUS!
Indeed, it raises an interesting twist. As Boris is a "Natural Born Citizen" who has not maintained his US citizenship (I think) could he be POTUS if he regained citizenship?
Boris is NOT an NBC.
He was born in New York and had dual nationality from birth apparently.
If Rubio is third in Iowa and NH his campaign is over, Trump-Kasich outside bet for the ticket? Palin said to endorse Trump in Iowa at 6pm their time tonight
I purchased iPhones for the family in October from a well know phone store and reputable. We watched all of them being opened , set up and scanned before leaving. One of them developed a charging fault recently so we took it into an apple shop for checking today. They took it out around the back and returned around 15 mins later asking if the phone had been opened previously. We said no and it most certainly had not been at any time. Apple stated the screen section was not Apple and on the inside it should have a logo and this one did not. Apple have therefore refused to touch it which is normal in such circumstances. The original phone shop would repair it but they would not replace it given this information and effectively infer as it's been opened it's not anything to do with them. Again probably quite rightly.
So I essentially have bought and I am paying for an IPhone that isn't and there appears nothing I can do about this. I know we have neverr opened the phone so the screen part must have been there as we opened the sealed Apple package in the store when we bought the phone how else would it get there? We saw the packages opened and seals broken the only other time it's been away from us was today for inspection n an official Apple Store.
We are now effectively now caught in the middle and paying a lot for something we haven't got that still has a fault while two companies now effectively play us off against them.
I am sure somewhere we have been scammed but once an I phone is opened is impossible to prove. To prove you have been scammed you have to open the I phone though.
The others phones appear to be ok according to Apple. I reiterate the duff phone has never been opened since purchase and is all the original item
What can I do?
Contact trading standards. Oh and tell the shop you are doing so and will be complaining they sold you an item that was not what they claimed.
Thanks but effectively they can simply say it has been opened at some point (as it now has of course) I cannot prove it left their shop like that. It must have done but proof is required. As soon as I open a phone for such proof they can walk away saying it was previously opened just like Apple have. I suspect trading standards may feel the same. Like I said caught in the middle and still paying.
If Rubio is third in Iowa and NH his campaign is over, Trump-Kasich outside bet for the ticket? Palin said to endorse Trump in Iowa at 6pm their time tonight
Looks that way - there was a charter from Alaska into Des Moines last night.
I purchased iPhones for the family in October from a well know phone store and reputable. We watched all of them being opened , set up and scanned before leaving. One of them developed a charging fault recently so we took it into an apple shop for checking today. They took it out around the back and returned around 15 mins later asking if the phone had been opened previously. We said no and it most certainly had not been at any time. Apple stated the screen section was not Apple and on the inside it should have a logo and this one did not. Apple have therefore refused to touch it which is normal in such circumstances. The original phone shop would repair it but they would not replace it given this information and effectively infer as it's been opened it's not anything to do with them. Again probably quite rightly.
So I essentially have bought and I am paying for an IPhone that isn't and there appears nothing I can do about this. I know we have neverr opened the phone so the screen part must have been there as we opened the sealed Apple package in the store when we bought the phone how else would it get there? We saw the packages opened and seals broken the only other time it's been away from us was today for inspection n an official Apple Store.
We are now effectively now caught in the middle and paying a lot for something we haven't got that still has a fault while two companies now effectively play us off against them.
I am sure somewhere we have been scammed but once an I phone is opened is impossible to prove. To prove you have been scammed you have to open the I phone though.
The others phones appear to be ok according to Apple. I reiterate the duff phone has never been opened since purchase and is all the original item
What can I do?
You should have a statutory rights claim under the "as described" clause. Essentially, though, it will come down to you claiming that the shop sold you something that was fake and they claiming that you must have broken it open and replaced the screen with a fake (although I'm not sure why you would do that!)
If Rubio is third in Iowa and NH his campaign is over, Trump-Kasich outside bet for the ticket? Palin said to endorse Trump in Iowa at 6pm their time tonight
Looks that way - there was a charter from Alaska into Des Moines last night.
Comments
It's also a problem for Labour. In not distinguishing that there was a qualitative difference between some teasing of the early Blair as 'Bambi', what Miliband got, and what Corbyn will get, she's doing her party a disservice. She's not recognising any dynamic in the relationship, simply taking the media as one might take the weather. There's no acknowledgement that Blair (and Brown) courted the media while Miliband and Corbyn went and have gone out of their ways to antagonise them.
But unless you first understand the problem, you can't devise a solution.
More dangerously, if you believe that the media is unrelentlessly hostile then you retreat to a state of permanent war. As an aside, I remember the mid-90s through to circa 2003 and I'm fairly sure that Labour didn't have the worst of it but that's beside the point. If you believe it to be true, unfair and unfixable through normal methods then of necessity, you will conclude the solution is censorship and control.
If ever a film was designed NOT to be watched on a TV set it's Revenant. You'll miss 80% of what makes it what it is. I worried slightly that most BAFTA members watch the films on TV's so they might miss too much but it's very rare that academy members do for the Oscars.
MarqueeM
Your Missus is right. If it wasn't for Revenant my favourite film would be either Room or Carol with an honourable mention for Brooklyn. Room was brilliant and certainly an outside best for best direction. I wouldn't have gone for Brie Larson either but the boy. It was by a distance the best performance I've ever from one so young which is why Abrahamson should be an outside bet for best Director
Sunil
Possibly. He was very good-certainly better than Redmayne-but I need to think about it.
Has anyone been brave/stupid enough to plunge balls deep into mining stocks yet ?
There are plenty of movies that are better than the book
Indeed
I confess I haven't seen Room yet.
Martian was another disappointment (and from Ridley Scott!). Great idea, great plot, great potential, great performance from Matt Damon - but impoverished by a sluggish script and a totally lacklustre cast.
It could have been a classic. But was merely good-ish. Ridley took his eye off the ball. Or maybe he is just ageing.
Best film I've seen in years. Though admittedly that I wasn't expecting it to be good may have made me appreciate it even more than I would otherwise.
Revenant is good, but not a great. Should have been about 30 mins shorter.
If Leo Di Caprio gets an Oscar for that and not The Wolf of Wall Street, then there's no justice in the world.
All about who deserves one for career efforts, not individual performances though
It reminds me of literary fiction. Lovely sentence after lovely sentence, but no plot, no pace, so no emotional punch.
One of the most concise summaries of why I am a literary reverse snob, and have probably missed out on some good works over the years. That sort of thing drives me nuts.
Dr. Prasannan, no. That also applies to me (prior film I saw at the cinema was either Return of the King, or Kill Bill Volume II).
Q:Is Brooklyn worth the risk of frostbite, or shall I wait for The Big Short for my weekly fix?
@georgegalloway: Dugher told us yesterday. Corbyn will be overthrown in May whereafter there will be two Labour Parties. One in parliament with a new leader.
@alexcarre567: If you're a #Labour voter that supports #Corbyn @SadiqKhan is not your man @georgegalloway is Vote GG #alondonforall https://t.co/Ujbjgmn29W
@theobertram: Less and less the Labour Party, more and more the Stop the War Party.
SeanT. Inside Out would be my choice for best animation but never best film. It was an interesting story (and I love animation) but it was a long way from being the best animation even of the last few years.
Only Room is with frostbite of the current batch.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9eY-kKXBnQ
I understand in the past some terrible tackles flew in at this one.
First away game of the year for SMWFC frostbite for me as I am tweeting tonight.
They have only been used to pretend Santa is here.
Is there any other use?
Not be a lot of call for those uses at Armthorpe tonight I wouldnt have thought but Thanks anyway.
Where do you get wiffle sticks are they available at Morrisons?
I have a fair chunk of big miners (RIO and BLT) in my ISA, but will hold on. I may even add a bit once I have paid my taxes at the end of the month.
Their only way out is to persuade the membership that the "moderates" offer a better course. While the membership stays staunchly in favour of Corbyn, he is safe irrespective of how "gutsy" the MPs are.
New N.H. poll by ARG:
Trump 27 +2
Kasich 20 +6
Rubio 10 -4
Cruz 9 0
Christie 9 -1
Bush 8 0
Paul 5 +1
Fiorina 2 -1
Carson 2 0
Alex Burns @alexburnsNYT 48m48 minutes ago
Alex Burns Retweeted MJ Lee
Whoa – Iowa governor calls for Cruz's defeat >
Alex Burns added,
MJ Lee @mj_lee
Asked by a reporter "so you want to see him defeated?" Branstad answers: "yes."
Greta Van Susteren @greta 22s22 seconds ago
safe to say that @tedcruz will be mad as a wet hen if rumors are true @SarahPalinUSA endorses @realDonaldTrump
Greta Van Susteren @greta 23m23 minutes ago
Bristol #Palin slaps Sen Ted @tedcruz around http://www.patheos.com/blogs/bristolpalin/2016/01/is-this-why-people-dont-like-cruz/ …
As things are going, it could be all of them at the same moment.
As you rightly say though, it isn't now.
As long as Khan wins London, he'll be ok next year too no matter how bad the results are elsewhere.
http://www.breitbart.com/video/2016/01/15/tribe-cruz-a-constitutional-opportunist-hypocrite/
That will be pretty much the end for Rubio if he's beaten by someone like Kasich.
On the plus side for those who lost money on Rubio, they can make some of it back by selling Rubio and buying Kasich temporarily as a trade bet.
Lab voters think Corbyn has changed Lab party for the better (37-27)
But:
All voters think Corbyn has changed Lab party for the worse (45-21)
(Ignoring No change).
That's a huge negative move amongst all voters.
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/mm8d71xdb9/InternalResults_160115_Corbyn_W.pdf
http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/public-accounts-committee/sustainability-and-financial-performance-of-acute-hospital-trusts/oral/27053.html
Except he wasn't, no-one ever thought he was, being an alien who was ultimately honoured with "honorary citizenship" by Congress in 1963.
NBCs don't need honorary citizenship, or any other congressional indulgence to make them citizens...
Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides for only two classes of citizen, one of which is naturalized.
The naturalization process is well defined: https://www.uscis.gov/us-citizenship/citizenship-through-naturalization
Therefore Cruz, a person who is a citizen and isn't a naturalized citizen, is a natural-born citizen for the purposes of eligibility to the Presidency.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/01/19/inspector-general-clinton-emails-had-intel-from-most-secretive-classified-programs.html
On R5 - is John Hartson the Abbott/Ken version of their footie punditry? Always on, always saying the same thing in a mildly annoying way.
Obviously there are other potential triggers - a gaffe or scandal, or an electoral drubbing, a policy crisis (particularly one where Corbyn finds himself opposed to the unions, who may have more "legitimacy" in the Labour movement than their MPs do right now). But a really shocking VI - say, Labour dropping to third in the polls - could be quite a dramatic push in its own right. Corbyn being ranked fourth or fifth among party leaders on favourability would be nowhere near so significant.
We know the 14th amendment does not define an NBC. See Minor v Happersett, US v Wong Kim Ark. "The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that."
We know the 14th amendment does not cover persons born abroad (it says so), and if they are to be citizens at all, instead of aliens, they need a statute which naturalizes them at birth. See US v Wong Kim Ark (1898), Rogers v Bellei (1971), Miller v Albright (1998)
I've posted the unanimous opinion in Rogers enough times already. How about Miller, only seventeen years ago.?
JUSTICE SCALIA, concurring.
'The Constitution "contemplates two sources of citizenship, and two only: birth and naturalization." United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U. S. 649, 702 (1898). Under the Fourteenth Amendment, "[e]very person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, becomes at once a citizen of the United States, and needs no naturalization." Ibid. Petitioner, having been born outside the territory of the United States, is an alien as far as the Constitution is concerned, and "can only become a citizen by being naturalized, either by treaty, as in the case of the annexation of foreign territory; or by authority of Congress." Id., at 702-703; see also Rogers v. Bellei, 401 U. S. 815, 827 (1971). Here it is the "authority of Congress" that is appealed to its power under Art. I, § 8, cl. 4, to "establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization." If there is no congressional enactment granting petitioner citizenship, she remains an alien.'
[my emphasis]
Frustratingly, I mostly passed on the 20/1 available on BF for the NH primary.
I'm only on for a tenner. IIRC, there was >£50 available yesterday(?)
16/1 available to those with a boylesports account.
I purchased iPhones for the family in October from a well know phone store and reputable. We watched all of them being opened , set up and scanned before leaving. One of them developed a charging fault recently so we took it into an apple shop for checking today. They took it out around the back and returned around 15 mins later asking if the phone had been opened previously. We said no and it most certainly had not been at any time. Apple stated the screen section was not Apple and on the inside it should have a logo and this one did not. Apple have therefore refused to touch it which is normal in such circumstances. The original phone shop would repair it but they would not replace it given this information and effectively infer as it's been opened it's not anything to do with them. Again probably quite rightly.
So I essentially have bought and I am paying for an IPhone that isn't and there appears nothing I can do about this. I know we have neverr opened the phone so the screen part must have been there as we opened the sealed Apple package in the store when we bought the phone how else would it get there? We saw the packages opened and seals broken the only other time it's been away from us was today for inspection n an official Apple Store.
We are now effectively now caught in the middle and paying a lot for something we haven't got that still has a fault while two companies now effectively play us off against them.
I am sure somewhere we have been scammed but once an I phone is opened is impossible to prove. To prove you have been scammed you have to open the I phone though.
The others phones appear to be ok according to Apple. I reiterate the duff phone has never been opened since purchase and is all the original item
What can I do?
Better at footie than he was at pool, but that didn't stop all the girls hanging around him.
Might keep Rod happy that he is a candidate for POTUS!
Indeed, it raises an interesting twist. As Boris is a "Natural Born Citizen" who has not maintained his US citizenship (I think) could he be POTUS if he regained citizenship?
Do follow the link and read it. You might learn something.
Donald Trump: 27% (21%)
John Kasich: 20% (13%)
Marco Rubio: 10% (15%)
Ted Cruz: 9% (10%)
Chris Christie: 9% (12%)
Jeb Bush: 8% (7%)
Rand Paul: 5% (4%)
Ben Carson: 2% (6%)
Carly Fiorina: 2% (5%)
Mike Huckabee: 1% (*)
Rick Santorum: 1% (*)
Jim Gilmore: – (-)
Other: 1% (*)
Undecided: 7% (5%)
http://americanresearchgroup.com/pres2016/primary/rep/nhrep.html
http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/regulation/consumer-rights-act
You can also make a Section 75 claim against your credit card company.
If this fails, I'd suggest joining Twitter and/or writing to one of the consumer champions in the press!