Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » After a week of big national developments we’ve ten local

SystemSystem Posts: 11,705
edited July 2016 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » After a week of big national developments we’ve ten local by-elections

Exmouth, Littleham (Con defence) and Honiton, St. Michael’s (Con defence) on East Devon
Result of council at last election (2015): Conservatives 37, Independents 16, Liberal Democrats 6 (Conservative majority of 17)
Referendum Result: REMAIN 40,743 (46%) LEAVE 48,040 (54%) on a turnout of 79%

Read the full story here


«1

Comments

  • Options
    FregglesFreggles Posts: 3,486
    Furst
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,990
    Second, thanks Harry!
  • Options
    FregglesFreggles Posts: 3,486
    What is the point of these small, insignificant, fractured ultra-left parties like 'People for Profit'? Why not just join the larger insignificant fractured Labour party?
  • Options
    MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    There is an 11th by election which only came to light rather late
    South Staffs DC Great Wyrely Town ward Conservative seat Candidates Con/Lab/UKIP
    2015 result Con 1787/1602/1584 Lab 979/826/743 UKIP 825
  • Options
    MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    Freggles said:

    What is the point of these small, insignificant, fractured ultra-left parties like 'People for Profit'? Why not just join the larger insignificant fractured Labour party?

    Presumably the same as UKIP v joining the Conservatives .

  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,990

    Freggles said:

    What is the point of these small, insignificant, fractured ultra-left parties like 'People for Profit'? Why not just join the larger insignificant fractured Labour party?

    Presumably the same as UKIP v joining the Conservatives .

    Would hardly call UKIP insignificant. :p
  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,800
    Freggles said:

    What is the point of these small, insignificant, fractured ultra-left parties like 'People for Profit'? Why not just join the larger insignificant fractured Labour party?

    Ask them.

    "People for profit" doesn't sound very left.





  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,048
    edited July 2016
    Freggles said:

    What is the point of these small, insignificant, fractured ultra-left parties like 'People for Profit'?

    There's no point, they're just full of people who lack even the basic social skills to exist in a larger group. Hence the difference between the CPGB and the CPGB-ML, to pick just one example.

    My favourite is the fantastically ill named Left Unity. Which I believe itself had a split in at least one place, with a former Left Unity comrade standing as an indy against the other Left Unity candidate.
  • Options
    nunununu Posts: 6,024
    Freggles said:

    What is the point of these small, insignificant, fractured ultra-left parties like 'People for Profit'? Why not just join the larger insignificant fractured Labour party?

    They won assembly seats in Northern Ireland. Clearly disquiet out there.........
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,048
    Omnium said:

    Freggles said:

    What is the point of these small, insignificant, fractured ultra-left parties like 'People for Profit'? Why not just join the larger insignificant fractured Labour party?

    Ask them.

    "People for profit" doesn't sound very left.





    It's People Before Profit.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,990
    fitalass said:
    Isn't the problem that it's a multi party state, only that one party completely eclipses the rest?
  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,800
    "A serviceman that was threatened with a knife..." (no dead perp)

    I know there are all sorts of service-people, standing orders and the like, but we'll finish up with "A Regiment that was threatened with a gun" (no dead perps)



  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,667
    Hard not to love Ruth Davidson:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-36854959
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,990

    Hard not to love Ruth Davidson:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-36854959

    I should watch some First Minister's Questions at some point, although I fear the grown up nature of the place will put this PB Tory right off! :p
  • Options
    tpfkartpfkar Posts: 1,548
    I was leafleting in one of these yesterday in the sunshine -LDs seemed optimistic. Will post which later!
  • Options
    nunununu Posts: 6,024

    Hard not to love Ruth Davidson:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-36854959

    nunu said:

    Freggles said:

    What is the point of these small, insignificant, fractured ultra-left parties like 'People for Profit'? Why not just join the larger insignificant fractured Labour party?

    They won assembly seats in Northern Ireland. Clearly disquiet out there.........
    Edit: think the Irish party and Lewisham one are different.
  • Options
    EPGEPG Posts: 6,033

    Hard not to love Ruth Davidson:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-36854959

    Still, a promise was made which her side didn't keep. The grace of losing is that you get to hold the winners to account. So Davidson gets to hold official Holyrood to account as something of a gadfly blank-slate unionist, without saying anything specific she would do, while Sturgeon gets to needle No/Leavers who promised stuff to Scots and got caught telling lies.
  • Options
    nunu said:

    Hard not to love Ruth Davidson:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-36854959

    nunu said:

    Freggles said:

    What is the point of these small, insignificant, fractured ultra-left parties like 'People for Profit'? Why not just join the larger insignificant fractured Labour party?

    They won assembly seats in Northern Ireland. Clearly disquiet out there.........
    Edit: think the Irish party and Lewisham one are different.
    You never know.

    It wasnt that long ago that Basingstoke had a Democratic Unionist MP.....
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,990
    EPG said:

    Hard not to love Ruth Davidson:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-36854959

    Still, a promise was made which her side didn't keep. The grace of losing is that you get to hold the winners to account. So Davidson gets to hold official Holyrood to account as something of a gadfly blank-slate unionist, without saying anything specific she would do, while Sturgeon gets to needle No/Leavers who promised stuff to Scots and got caught telling lies.
    isn't it more likely the money will be found as the deficit target has been abandoned?
  • Options
    GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    kle4 said:

    Omnium said:

    Freggles said:

    What is the point of these small, insignificant, fractured ultra-left parties like 'People for Profit'? Why not just join the larger insignificant fractured Labour party?

    Ask them.

    "People for profit" doesn't sound very left.





    It's People Before Profit.
    That's a great shame.
    I'd have voted for "People for Profit"
    They sounded very sensible.
  • Options
    saddenedsaddened Posts: 2,245
    Omnium said:

    "A serviceman that was threatened with a knife..." (no dead perp)

    I know there are all sorts of service-people, standing orders and the like, but we'll finish up with "A Regiment that was threatened with a gun" (no dead perps)



    What is this supposed to mean?
  • Options
    MonikerDiCanioMonikerDiCanio Posts: 5,792

    Hard not to love Ruth Davidson:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-36854959

    Davidson is markedly Sturgeon's intellectual and political superior. Good news for Scotland.
  • Options
    SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
  • Options
    John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503
    GeoffM said:

    kle4 said:

    Omnium said:

    Freggles said:

    What is the point of these small, insignificant, fractured ultra-left parties like 'People for Profit'? Why not just join the larger insignificant fractured Labour party?

    Ask them.

    "People for profit" doesn't sound very left.





    It's People Before Profit.
    That's a great shame.
    I'd have voted for "People for Profit"
    They sounded very sensible.
    I think People for Profit would probably have been targeted under the Modern Slavery Act.
  • Options
    nunununu Posts: 6,024
    tpfkar said:

    I was leafleting in one of these yesterday in the sunshine -LDs seemed optimistic. Will post which later!

    Lib dems have been doing excellent in by elections recently. Should continue to gain seats off the Tories.
    Labour should easily hold in momentum heartlands of Hackney and Islington.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,667
    EPG said:

    Hard not to love Ruth Davidson:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-36854959

    Still, a promise was made which her side didn't keep. The grace of losing is that you get to hold the winners to account. So Davidson gets to hold official Holyrood to account as something of a gadfly blank-slate unionist, without saying anything specific she would do, while Sturgeon gets to needle No/Leavers who promised stuff to Scots and got caught telling lies.
    Nicola Sturgeon has promised Scots plenty she hasn't delivered.

    And the Type 26s will be coming.
  • Options
    ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,018
    Speedy said:
    There's a difference of timescale: Cruz's ambitions are four years away, while Gove's were simply a week away. Nevertheless, I think you're probably right.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,146
    Speedy said:

    Seems Ted Cruz doing a Gove will land him exactly where Gove is

    Louise Mensch has been tweeting her approval all day, calling him Lion Ted. :)
  • Options
    ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,018
    nunu said:

    tpfkar said:

    I was leafleting in one of these yesterday in the sunshine -LDs seemed optimistic. Will post which later!

    Lib dems have been doing excellent in by elections recently. Should continue to gain seats off the Tories.
    Labour should easily hold in momentum heartlands of Hackney and Islington.
    Momentum has member heartlands, rather than voter heartlands. Last week's results were dreadful for Labour, so it'll be interesting to see what happens there.
  • Options
    MonikerDiCanioMonikerDiCanio Posts: 5,792
    Speedy said:
    It's hard to imagine two more odious hate figures than Lyin' Ted and Crooked Hilary. Trump is fortunate in his enemies.
  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,800
    saddened said:

    Omnium said:

    "A serviceman that was threatened with a knife..." (no dead perp)

    I know there are all sorts of service-people, standing orders and the like, but we'll finish up with "A Regiment that was threatened with a gun" (no dead perps)



    What is this supposed to mean?
    What it means is that I think we'd like our armed services personnel to be able to deal with knife threats. We actually employ them to deal with threats that are much more extreme.

    I'm old and slow and not very tough. If someone threatens me with a knife though I'll make sure they work out where to stick it.
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,956
    Thanks as ever, Harry!

    Just catching up on today's threads. Really pleased to hear from Alastair Meeks - stay strong.
  • Options
    SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    nunu said:

    tpfkar said:

    I was leafleting in one of these yesterday in the sunshine -LDs seemed optimistic. Will post which later!

    Lib dems have been doing excellent in by elections recently. Should continue to gain seats off the Tories.
    Labour should easily hold in momentum heartlands of Hackney and Islington.
    LD will gain Exmouth tonight, logically.

    Everything looks predictable except Southcore.
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,956
    Speedy said:

    nunu said:

    tpfkar said:

    I was leafleting in one of these yesterday in the sunshine -LDs seemed optimistic. Will post which later!

    Lib dems have been doing excellent in by elections recently. Should continue to gain seats off the Tories.
    Labour should easily hold in momentum heartlands of Hackney and Islington.
    LD will gain Exmouth tonight, logically.

    Everything looks predictable except Southcore.
    I know you're fond of your early calls Mr Speedy, but the polls haven't even closed yet! :)
  • Options
    SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    It seems my view that Cruz doing a Gove on Trump only helps Trump, is starting be to shared by others in the media:

    https://twitter.com/matthewjdowd/status/756106221367726080

    As I said, people may like or may not like Caesar, but they definitely don't like Brutus.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,471

    nunu said:

    tpfkar said:

    I was leafleting in one of these yesterday in the sunshine -LDs seemed optimistic. Will post which later!

    Lib dems have been doing excellent in by elections recently. Should continue to gain seats off the Tories.
    Labour should easily hold in momentum heartlands of Hackney and Islington.
    Momentum has member heartlands, rather than voter heartlands. Last week's results were dreadful for Labour, so it'll be interesting to see what happens there.
    Not in London, which remains different as in so many things with strong performances from Labour.
  • Options
    alex.alex. Posts: 4,658
    IanB2 said:

    nunu said:

    tpfkar said:

    I was leafleting in one of these yesterday in the sunshine -LDs seemed optimistic. Will post which later!

    Lib dems have been doing excellent in by elections recently. Should continue to gain seats off the Tories.
    Labour should easily hold in momentum heartlands of Hackney and Islington.
    Momentum has member heartlands, rather than voter heartlands. Last week's results were dreadful for Labour, so it'll be interesting to see what happens there.
    Not in London, which remains different as in so many things with strong performances from Labour.
    http://www.wandsworthguardian.co.uk/news/14630693.Corbyn_out__Labour_groups_in_Battersea__Putney_and_Tooting_vote_no_confidence_in_party_leader/
  • Options
    MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    Speedy said:

    nunu said:

    tpfkar said:

    I was leafleting in one of these yesterday in the sunshine -LDs seemed optimistic. Will post which later!

    Lib dems have been doing excellent in by elections recently. Should continue to gain seats off the Tories.
    Labour should easily hold in momentum heartlands of Hackney and Islington.
    LD will gain Exmouth tonight, logically.

    Everything looks predictable except Southcore.
    It's Exmouth Littleham. Went to school in Littleham briefly twice, Dad taught at the Junior School. That was in the 1960s. Definitely wrong side of the track council housing, along with lovely leafy village in those days.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,167
    edited July 2016
    Speedy said:

    It seems my view that Cruz doing a Gove on Trump only helps Trump, is starting be to shared by others in the media:

    https://twitter.com/matthewjdowd/status/756106221367726080

    As I said, people may like or may not like Caesar, but they definitely don't like Brutus.

    To be fair to Cruz though he never pretended to support Trump unlike Gove with Boris. Cruz gave Trump his congratulations but just refused to endorse him. Of the convention so far I think Scott Walker gave the best speech and if Trump-Pence loses I could see a Cruz v Walker battle in 2020 for the GOP nomination
  • Options
    SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100

    Speedy said:
    It's hard to imagine two more odious hate figures than Lyin' Ted and Crooked Hilary. Trump is fortunate in his enemies.
    There is something Corbyn about Trump, their enemies make them both look good by comparison.

    I think Trump is also due to have his speech tonight here is a preview:

    https://twitter.com/DouthatNYT/status/756217127456083968

    For those that do not remember go search Pat Buchanan 1992 RNC speech, his speech was nicknamed the "Culture War" and defined american politics for a generation.
    It was very strong stuff, not entirely in my liking though.
  • Options
    fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,279
    RobD said:

    fitalass said:
    Isn't the problem that it's a multi party state, only that one party completely eclipses the rest?
    As the article points out. "So in Holyrood, legislative proposals brought forward by the SNP government are neither challenged nor given proper scrutiny by SNP MSPs. Their correct function here is to bring independent critical thinking to the government’s policy. But instead, government bills are afforded obedient adulation, no matter how flawed. This results in Scotland producing the lowest quality legislation in Europe."

    The latest example of this is the Named Person Law, as Jim Sillars pointed out, it would never have got through Westminster in its current form. That such an intrusive law could be passed with so little proper scrutiny should worry us all in Scotland.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    HYUFD said:

    Speedy said:

    It seems my view that Cruz doing a Gove on Trump only helps Trump, is starting be to shared by others in the media:

    https://twitter.com/matthewjdowd/status/756106221367726080

    As I said, people may like or may not like Caesar, but they definitely don't like Brutus.

    To be fair to Cruz though he never pretended to support Trump unlike Gove with Boris. Cruz gave Trump his congratulations but just refused to endorse him. Of the convention so far I think Scott Walker gave the best speech and if Trump-Pence loses I could see a Cruz v Walker battle in 2020 for the GOP nomination
    Walker was an excellent Reagan/Thatcherite governor taking on vested interests and would make a great President IMO.
  • Options
    DaemonBarberDaemonBarber Posts: 1,626
    RobD said:

    Hard not to love Ruth Davidson:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-36854959

    I should watch some First Minister's Questions at some point, although I fear the grown up nature of the place will put this PB Tory right off! :p
    It's all the applause I find off putting.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,990

    RobD said:

    Hard not to love Ruth Davidson:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-36854959

    I should watch some First Minister's Questions at some point, although I fear the grown up nature of the place will put this PB Tory right off! :p
    It's all the applause I find off putting.
    Ugh. And it's a hemicycle. Double ugh :p:D
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,990
    fitalass said:

    RobD said:

    fitalass said:
    Isn't the problem that it's a multi party state, only that one party completely eclipses the rest?
    As the article points out. "So in Holyrood, legislative proposals brought forward by the SNP government are neither challenged nor given proper scrutiny by SNP MSPs. Their correct function here is to bring independent critical thinking to the government’s policy. But instead, government bills are afforded obedient adulation, no matter how flawed. This results in Scotland producing the lowest quality legislation in Europe."

    The latest example of this is the Named Person Law, as Jim Sillars pointed out, it would never have got through Westminster in its current form. That such an intrusive law could be passed with so little proper scrutiny should worry us all in Scotland.
    "Lowest quality in Europe"? Is that a stat, or just an opinion?
  • Options
    DaemonBarberDaemonBarber Posts: 1,626
    fitalass said:

    RobD said:

    fitalass said:
    Isn't the problem that it's a multi party state, only that one party completely eclipses the rest?
    As the article points out. "So in Holyrood, legislative proposals brought forward by the SNP government are neither challenged nor given proper scrutiny by SNP MSPs. Their correct function here is to bring independent critical thinking to the government’s policy. But instead, government bills are afforded obedient adulation, no matter how flawed. This results in Scotland producing the lowest quality legislation in Europe."

    The latest example of this is the Named Person Law, as Jim Sillars pointed out, it would never have got through Westminster in its current form. That such an intrusive law could be passed with so little proper scrutiny should worry us all in Scotland.
    The SNP act like a cult.
  • Options
    alex.alex. Posts: 4,658
    Is it possible that the dominance of SNP could actually drive additional support for Independence from those who, whilst otherwise not supportive, may see it as the only way to see them properly challenged?
  • Options
    William_HWilliam_H Posts: 346
    It seems rather ridiculous to talk about a one party state when they don't even have a majority in the Scottish parliament
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,048
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Hard not to love Ruth Davidson:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-36854959

    I should watch some First Minister's Questions at some point, although I fear the grown up nature of the place will put this PB Tory right off! :p
    It's all the applause I find off putting.
    Ugh. And it's a hemicycle. Double ugh :p:D
    I'm with you on that one - applause may one day need to be accepted (outside of the rare occasions it is now) but hemicycles? Never.

    In all seriousness, I know the lack of applause generally is only a convention, it's not a big deal, but it always sounds so pathetic when people try to justify being permitted to applause all the time if they go too big with the justification, and try to make it seem like a harmless convention is some grand barrier on our political culture. It actually makes more sense to just ask what does it matter than to make it seem like a grand reform, which some make the mistake of doing - I believe Carswell complained about being told not to Periscope in such terms, and looked an idiot for doing so.
  • Options
    DaemonBarberDaemonBarber Posts: 1,626
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Hard not to love Ruth Davidson:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-36854959

    I should watch some First Minister's Questions at some point, although I fear the grown up nature of the place will put this PB Tory right off! :p
    It's all the applause I find off putting.
    Ugh. And it's a hemicycle. Double ugh :p:D
    I sat in Ruth's seat in the debating chamber at the last open day. What struck me (besides the ridiculous desks) was that the LOTO sits way off to one side with everyone facing the speaker's dias. I gather the idea is for a more collegiate format, but this is just rubbish really. The public gallery for watching debates is much bigger and closer too.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,167

    HYUFD said:

    Speedy said:

    It seems my view that Cruz doing a Gove on Trump only helps Trump, is starting be to shared by others in the media:

    https://twitter.com/matthewjdowd/status/756106221367726080

    As I said, people may like or may not like Caesar, but they definitely don't like Brutus.

    To be fair to Cruz though he never pretended to support Trump unlike Gove with Boris. Cruz gave Trump his congratulations but just refused to endorse him. Of the convention so far I think Scott Walker gave the best speech and if Trump-Pence loses I could see a Cruz v Walker battle in 2020 for the GOP nomination
    Walker was an excellent Reagan/Thatcherite governor taking on vested interests and would make a great President IMO.
    He will certainly now be a contender
  • Options
    nunununu Posts: 6,024
    alex. said:

    IanB2 said:

    nunu said:

    tpfkar said:

    I was leafleting in one of these yesterday in the sunshine -LDs seemed optimistic. Will post which later!

    Lib dems have been doing excellent in by elections recently. Should continue to gain seats off the Tories.
    Labour should easily hold in momentum heartlands of Hackney and Islington.
    Momentum has member heartlands, rather than voter heartlands. Last week's results were dreadful for Labour, so it'll be interesting to see what happens there.
    Not in London, which remains different as in so many things with strong performances from Labour.
    http://www.wandsworthguardian.co.uk/news/14630693.Corbyn_out__Labour_groups_in_Battersea__Putney_and_Tooting_vote_no_confidence_in_party_leader/
    A split between those in the marginals and those in safe Labour seats?
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,048
    William_H said:

    It seems rather ridiculous to talk about a one party state when they don't even have a majority in the Scottish parliament

    People use the term one party state pretty liberally these days, it sort of loses its meaning. It's used as with the SNP to criticise the dominant party for being too disciplined (to an unrealistic degree) to the detriment of good politics, or even the Tories after 2015, to imply that despite razor thin majority the state of opposition is such they are in effect like a one party state.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,048
    alex. said:

    Is it possible that the dominance of SNP could actually drive additional support for Independence

    Jokingly, to hear the SNP tell it, particularly during the IndyRef period, absolutely everything anyone said or did drove additional support for independence.

    More seriously, it's possible I suppose - the differences between Scotland and rUK are being emphasised out of all proportion, but there are some bigger ones and distract from other matters, and some may think that while in rUK the SNP will always manage to dominate, but if out then the tentpole issues will fall away.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Speedy said:

    It seems my view that Cruz doing a Gove on Trump only helps Trump, is starting be to shared by others in the media:

    https://twitter.com/matthewjdowd/status/756106221367726080

    As I said, people may like or may not like Caesar, but they definitely don't like Brutus.

    To be fair to Cruz though he never pretended to support Trump unlike Gove with Boris. Cruz gave Trump his congratulations but just refused to endorse him. Of the convention so far I think Scott Walker gave the best speech and if Trump-Pence loses I could see a Cruz v Walker battle in 2020 for the GOP nomination
    Walker was an excellent Reagan/Thatcherite governor taking on vested interests and would make a great President IMO.
    He will certainly now be a contender
    I hope so but four years is a very long time ... there is no certainty for 2020.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    kle4 said:

    Freggles said:

    What is the point of these small, insignificant, fractured ultra-left parties like 'People for Profit'?

    There's no point, they're just full of people who lack even the basic social skills to exist in a larger group. Hence the difference between the CPGB and the CPGB-ML, to pick just one example.

    My favourite is the fantastically ill named Left Unity. Which I believe itself had a split in at least one place, with a former Left Unity comrade standing as an indy against the other Left Unity candidate.
    I have a friend who is in Left Unity. It is real Life of Brian splitters stuff, constant infighting. Lovely detailed policy making though. Castles in the air!
  • Options
    SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100

    HYUFD said:

    Speedy said:

    It seems my view that Cruz doing a Gove on Trump only helps Trump, is starting be to shared by others in the media:

    https://twitter.com/matthewjdowd/status/756106221367726080

    As I said, people may like or may not like Caesar, but they definitely don't like Brutus.

    To be fair to Cruz though he never pretended to support Trump unlike Gove with Boris. Cruz gave Trump his congratulations but just refused to endorse him. Of the convention so far I think Scott Walker gave the best speech and if Trump-Pence loses I could see a Cruz v Walker battle in 2020 for the GOP nomination
    Walker was an excellent Reagan/Thatcherite governor taking on vested interests and would make a great President IMO.
    Please not again.

    I warned against betting on Walker back then, he is a controversial, unpopular and bland governor who mismanaged his state.
    The only thing he had to say was that he tackled the teachers unions in 2011.

    His whole campaign imploded like it was made out of straw.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    kle4 said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Hard not to love Ruth Davidson:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-36854959

    I should watch some First Minister's Questions at some point, although I fear the grown up nature of the place will put this PB Tory right off! :p
    It's all the applause I find off putting.
    Ugh. And it's a hemicycle. Double ugh :p:D
    I'm with you on that one - applause may one day need to be accepted (outside of the rare occasions it is now) but hemicycles? Never.

    In all seriousness, I know the lack of applause generally is only a convention, it's not a big deal, but it always sounds so pathetic when people try to justify being permitted to applause all the time if they go too big with the justification, and try to make it seem like a harmless convention is some grand barrier on our political culture. It actually makes more sense to just ask what does it matter than to make it seem like a grand reform, which some make the mistake of doing - I believe Carswell complained about being told not to Periscope in such terms, and looked an idiot for doing so.
    Hemicircles are the rule in most legislatures, it does not force people into opposing camps the way opposing benches do.

    Perfectly possible to have fierce divisions though, witness the US Senate.
  • Options
    tpfkartpfkar Posts: 1,548
    Speedy said:

    nunu said:

    tpfkar said:

    I was leafleting in one of these yesterday in the sunshine -LDs seemed optimistic. Will post which later!

    Lib dems have been doing excellent in by elections recently. Should continue to gain seats off the Tories.
    Labour should easily hold in momentum heartlands of Hackney and Islington.
    LD will gain Exmouth tonight, logically.

    Everything looks predictable except Southcore.
    We'll see. I was out in Westone in Northampton. For some context, Brian Markham has been the councillor in most of the ward for most of the past 25 years!
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Speedy said:

    HYUFD said:

    Speedy said:

    It seems my view that Cruz doing a Gove on Trump only helps Trump, is starting be to shared by others in the media:

    https://twitter.com/matthewjdowd/status/756106221367726080

    As I said, people may like or may not like Caesar, but they definitely don't like Brutus.

    To be fair to Cruz though he never pretended to support Trump unlike Gove with Boris. Cruz gave Trump his congratulations but just refused to endorse him. Of the convention so far I think Scott Walker gave the best speech and if Trump-Pence loses I could see a Cruz v Walker battle in 2020 for the GOP nomination
    Walker was an excellent Reagan/Thatcherite governor taking on vested interests and would make a great President IMO.
    Please not again.

    I warned against betting on Walker back then, he is a controversial, unpopular and bland governor who mismanaged his state.
    The only thing he had to say was that he tackled the teachers unions in 2011.

    His whole campaign imploded like it was made out of straw.
    Good leaders tend to be controversial. Controversial and bland is a very odd combination, I wouldn't call him bland. As for unpopular he won his state repeatedly despite massive campaigns against him from the unions.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,430

    kle4 said:

    Freggles said:

    What is the point of these small, insignificant, fractured ultra-left parties like 'People for Profit'?

    There's no point, they're just full of people who lack even the basic social skills to exist in a larger group. Hence the difference between the CPGB and the CPGB-ML, to pick just one example.

    My favourite is the fantastically ill named Left Unity. Which I believe itself had a split in at least one place, with a former Left Unity comrade standing as an indy against the other Left Unity candidate.
    I have a friend who is in Left Unity. It is real Life of Brian splitters stuff, constant infighting. Lovely detailed policy making though. Castles in the air!
    Indeed, and more bizarre, is that these people might as well join Corbyn's Labour. But I guess there is some minor doctrinal difference they have with his left-over Bennism.
  • Options
    saddenedsaddened Posts: 2,245
    Omnium said:

    saddened said:

    Omnium said:

    "A serviceman that was threatened with a knife..." (no dead perp)

    I know there are all sorts of service-people, standing orders and the like, but we'll finish up with "A Regiment that was threatened with a gun" (no dead perps)



    What is this supposed to mean?
    What it means is that I think we'd like our armed services personnel to be able to deal with knife threats. We actually employ them to deal with threats that are much more extreme.

    I'm old and slow and not very tough. If someone threatens me with a knife though I'll make sure they work out where to stick it.
    Utter drivel.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,990
    kle4 said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Hard not to love Ruth Davidson:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-36854959

    I should watch some First Minister's Questions at some point, although I fear the grown up nature of the place will put this PB Tory right off! :p
    It's all the applause I find off putting.
    Ugh. And it's a hemicycle. Double ugh :p:D
    I'm with you on that one - applause may one day need to be accepted (outside of the rare occasions it is now) but hemicycles? Never.

    In all seriousness, I know the lack of applause generally is only a convention, it's not a big deal, but it always sounds so pathetic when people try to justify being permitted to applause all the time if they go too big with the justification, and try to make it seem like a harmless convention is some grand barrier on our political culture. It actually makes more sense to just ask what does it matter than to make it seem like a grand reform, which some make the mistake of doing - I believe Carswell complained about being told not to Periscope in such terms, and looked an idiot for doing so.
    Would have thought a filthy neutral such as yourself would love hemicycles?

    (I jest, of course) :D
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,273
    There may be trouble ahead
    But while there's moonlight
    And music and love and romance
    Let's face the music and dance

    https://twitter.com/MirrorPolitics/status/756229105654329344
  • Options
    Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    BBC news

    Jeremy Corbyn has dismissed an offer from challenger Owen Smith of becoming party president in the event his rival wins the Labour leadership.
    He told BBC Newsnight it was "a job that doesn't exist" and compared the role to that of "director of football".
    He also said his attitude to rebels who opposed his leadership would be one of "charity" rather than "malice"
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,990

    There may be trouble ahead
    But while there's moonlight
    And music and love and romance
    Let's face the music and dance

    twitter.com/MirrorPolitics/status/756229105654329344

    Poor form. Not a single pun! I am disappointed... :p
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,631

    There may be trouble ahead
    But while there's moonlight
    And music and love and romance
    Let's face the music and dance

    https://twitter.com/MirrorPolitics/status/756229105654329344

    French voters to Hollande: get out of our government as soon as possible.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    kle4 said:

    Freggles said:

    What is the point of these small, insignificant, fractured ultra-left parties like 'People for Profit'?

    There's no point, they're just full of people who lack even the basic social skills to exist in a larger group. Hence the difference between the CPGB and the CPGB-ML, to pick just one example.

    My favourite is the fantastically ill named Left Unity. Which I believe itself had a split in at least one place, with a former Left Unity comrade standing as an indy against the other Left Unity candidate.
    I have a friend who is in Left Unity. It is real Life of Brian splitters stuff, constant infighting. Lovely detailed policy making though. Castles in the air!
    Indeed, and more bizarre, is that these people might as well join Corbyn's Labour. But I guess there is some minor doctrinal difference they have with his left-over Bennism.
    I must ask next time I see her. I think she is just rather suspicious of Labour generally as capitalist roaders.
  • Options
    Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    RobD said:

    There may be trouble ahead
    But while there's moonlight
    And music and love and romance
    Let's face the music and dance

    twitter.com/MirrorPolitics/status/756229105654329344

    Poor form. Not a single pun! I am disappointed... :p
    There may be trouble ahead
    But while there's moonlight
    And music and love and romance
    Let's take the piss out of France
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,146
    One of the people in that photograph spends a hundred grand a year on their hair.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    One of the people in that photograph spends a hundred grand a year on their hair.
    I find that a little implausible. It is €2000 per week or €300 per day. Even Wayne Rooney cannot spend so much on hair.
  • Options
    TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,388

    One of the people in that photograph spends a hundred grand a year on their hair.
    I find that a little implausible. It is €2000 per week or €300 per day. Even Wayne Rooney cannot spend so much on hair.
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/13/bad-hair-days-for-francois-hollande-over-10000-coiffeur-bill
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    One of the people in that photograph spends a hundred grand a year on their hair.
    I find that a little implausible. It is €2000 per week or €300 per day. Even Wayne Rooney cannot spend so much on hair.
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/13/bad-hair-days-for-francois-hollande-over-10000-coiffeur-bill
    Presumably he has other clients at the Elysee palace...
  • Options
    Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039

    One of the people in that photograph spends a hundred grand a year on their hair.
    I find that a little implausible. It is €2000 per week or €300 per day. Even Wayne Rooney cannot spend so much on hair.
    It's clearly a sinecure.
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    THE TIMES: Cameron's honours list blocked by Whitehall #tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers https://t.co/yYefMyMZVV
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    One of the people in that photograph spends a hundred grand a year on their hair.
    I find that a little implausible. It is €2000 per week or €300 per day. Even Wayne Rooney cannot spend so much on hair.
    It's clearly a sinecure.
    Or an alopecia-cure!
  • Options
    MP_SEMP_SE Posts: 3,642
    PlatoSaid said:

    THE TIMES: Cameron's honours list blocked by Whitehall #tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers https://t.co/yYefMyMZVV

    Good. The days of Cameron's chumocracy are over.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,048
    RobD said:

    kle4 said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Hard not to love Ruth Davidson:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-36854959

    I should watch some First Minister's Questions at some point, although I fear the grown up nature of the place will put this PB Tory right off! :p
    It's all the applause I find off putting.
    Ugh. And it's a hemicycle. Double ugh :p:D
    I'm with you on that one - applause may one day need to be accepted (outside of the rare occasions it is now) but hemicycles? Never.

    In all seriousness, I know the lack of applause generally is only a convention, it's not a big deal, but it always sounds so pathetic when people try to justify being permitted to applause all the time if they go too big with the justification, and try to make it seem like a harmless convention is some grand barrier on our political culture. It actually makes more sense to just ask what does it matter than to make it seem like a grand reform, which some make the mistake of doing - I believe Carswell complained about being told not to Periscope in such terms, and looked an idiot for doing so.
    Would have thought a filthy neutral such as yourself would love hemicycles?

    Without clear adversarial benches for others to sit on, how can I sit on the crossbenches?

    There may be trouble ahead
    But while there's moonlight
    And music and love and romance
    Let's face the music and dance

    https://twitter.com/MirrorPolitics/status/756229105654329344

    Well, it's not as though it costs him any to be seen to be taking a hard line with us.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    I see that my junior colleagues are doing well at crowdfunding their courtcase against Hunts new contract. Hunt ambushed them with a demand for a deposit against costs, but they seem to have it covered.

    Whatever the merits of the case (the judge said it has merit and deserves its day in court), it does show how the Establishment stifles legal challenges:

    https://www.crowdjustice.co.uk/case/nhs/
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,048
    edited July 2016

    kle4 said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Hard not to love Ruth Davidson:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-36854959

    I should watch some First Minister's Questions at some point, although I fear the grown up nature of the place will put this PB Tory right off! :p
    It's all the applause I find off putting.
    Ugh. And it's a hemicycle. Double ugh :p:D
    I'm with you on that one - applause may one day need to be accepted (outside of the rare occasions it is now) but hemicycles? Never.

    In all seriousness, I know the lack of applause generally is only a convention, it's not a big deal, but it always sounds so pathetic when people try to justify being permitted to applause all the time if they go too big with the justification, and try to make it seem like a harmless convention is some grand barrier on our political culture. It actually makes more sense to just ask what does it matter than to make it seem like a grand reform, which some make the mistake of doing - I believe Carswell complained about being told not to Periscope in such terms, and looked an idiot for doing so.
    Hemicircles are the rule in most legislatures, it does not force people into opposing camps the way opposing benches do.

    Perfectly possible to have fierce divisions though, witness the US Senate.
    I know it's more common - personally I don't think the layout of the chairs matters all that much in terms of affecting behaviours, therefore I see no reason to break with tradition for Westminster. When it comes to conventions and the question of change, I ask what harm there is in the existing set up and how will it be improved by a different model. I am unconvinced having rows facing each other 'forces' anything, so I don't see how hemicycles 'solves' anything.
  • Options
    fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,279
    William_H said:

    It seems rather ridiculous to talk about a one party state when they don't even have a majority in the Scottish parliament

    It was the very fact that the SNP Government was beginning to take on the appearance of a one party state that cost them their majority at Holyrood just a couple of months ago. Ruth Davidson and the Scottish Conservatives ran a very successful election campaign by offering to be a strong opposition, and they dramatically increased their number of MSP's as a result.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Corbyn had a reedy voice back in the early 80s.
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,452
    Scott_P said:
    The Tories have already had their leadership contest! Labours' contest is going to drag on for another NINE WEEKS!!!
  • Options
    nunununu Posts: 6,024
    When is the trump speech?
  • Options
    TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,388

    I see that my junior colleagues are doing well at crowdfunding their courtcase against Hunts new contract. Hunt ambushed them with a demand for a deposit against costs, but they seem to have it covered.

    Whatever the merits of the case (the judge said it has merit and deserves its day in court), it does show how the Establishment stifles legal challenges:

    https://www.crowdjustice.co.uk/case/nhs/

    You can't "ambush" someone with an order for security for costs under Part 25, which I assume is what has happened. It is money that would have been required for costs in any event, had an appropriate order for costs been made at the end.
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    nunu said:

    When is the trump speech?

    About 3am our time
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    Independent
    Meet the shadow chancellor's new chief of staff: Jeremy Corbyn's son https://t.co/z4LyjiX0H2
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,422
    Moses_ said:

    BBC news

    Jeremy Corbyn has dismissed an offer from challenger Owen Smith of becoming party president in the event his rival wins the Labour leadership.
    He told BBC Newsnight it was "a job that doesn't exist" and compared the role to that of "director of football".
    He also said his attitude to rebels who opposed his leadership would be one of "charity" rather than "malice"

    In the sense that they'll need it, perhaps.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    I see that my junior colleagues are doing well at crowdfunding their courtcase against Hunts new contract. Hunt ambushed them with a demand for a deposit against costs, but they seem to have it covered.

    Whatever the merits of the case (the judge said it has merit and deserves its day in court), it does show how the Establishment stifles legal challenges:

    https://www.crowdjustice.co.uk/case/nhs/

    You can't "ambush" someone with an order for security for costs under Part 25, which I assume is what has happened. It is money that would have been required for costs in any event, had an appropriate order for costs been made at the end.
    Hunt increased the demand from £30 000 to £150 000 the day before the hearing. Looking to price the awkward squad out of court rather than fight the case on its merits. Rich mans justice.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,146
    edited July 2016

    WTAF?

    When is the Labour MPs' parents' evening?
  • Options
    nunununu Posts: 6,024
    PlatoSaid said:

    nunu said:

    When is the trump speech?

    About 3am our time
    Oh god.......
  • Options
    MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    Tandridge Warlingham West Con hold

    Con 367 LDem 218 UKIP 64
  • Options
    ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133

    I see that my junior colleagues are doing well at crowdfunding their courtcase against Hunts new contract. Hunt ambushed them with a demand for a deposit against costs, but they seem to have it covered.

    Whatever the merits of the case (the judge said it has merit and deserves its day in court), it does show how the Establishment stifles legal challenges:

    https://www.crowdjustice.co.uk/case/nhs/

    You can't "ambush" someone with an order for security for costs under Part 25, which I assume is what has happened. It is money that would have been required for costs in any event, had an appropriate order for costs been made at the end.
    Hunt increased the demand from £30 000 to £150 000 the day before the hearing. Looking to price the awkward squad out of court rather than fight the case on its merits. Rich mans justice.
    Personally?

    In any case, if it hadn't been justified the court wouldn't have allowed it.
  • Options
    MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    Gwynedd is Plaid hold
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    I see that my junior colleagues are doing well at crowdfunding their courtcase against Hunts new contract. Hunt ambushed them with a demand for a deposit against costs, but they seem to have it covered.

    Whatever the merits of the case (the judge said it has merit and deserves its day in court), it does show how the Establishment stifles legal challenges:

    https://www.crowdjustice.co.uk/case/nhs/

    You can't "ambush" someone with an order for security for costs under Part 25, which I assume is what has happened. It is money that would have been required for costs in any event, had an appropriate order for costs been made at the end.
    Hunt increased the demand from £30 000 to £150 000 the day before the hearing. Looking to price the awkward squad out of court rather than fight the case on its merits. Rich mans justice.
    Personally?

    In any case, if it hadn't been justified the court wouldn't have allowed it.
    The court has allowed it. The case now goes to court in September.
  • Options
    MyBurningEarsMyBurningEars Posts: 3,651
    kle4 said:

    Freggles said:

    What is the point of these small, insignificant, fractured ultra-left parties like 'People for Profit'?

    There's no point, they're just full of people who lack even the basic social skills to exist in a larger group. Hence the difference between the CPGB and the CPGB-ML, to pick just one example.

    My favourite is the fantastically ill named Left Unity. Which I believe itself had a split in at least one place, with a former Left Unity comrade standing as an indy against the other Left Unity candidate.
    http://leftunity.org/communist-platform-statement-on-the-candidacy-of-steve-freeman/

    1. Steve Freeman has announced that he is a parliamentary candidates in Bermondsey and Old Southwark for the May 7 general election. He is standing as a Republican Socialist. He is therefore opposing Kingsley Abrams, a candidate jointly backed by the Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition and Left Unity. Politically this amounts to sabotage.

    2. Comrade Abrams is a former local councillor and was the official Labour candidate in the 2001 general election. He lost to Simon Hughes, but got 30% of the vote. Comrade Abrams fell foul of the Labour Party machine after speaking out against austerity. He describes himself as old Labour and recently resigned from the party after 30 years of membership. Comrade Abrams then offered to stand under the banner of Tusc and LU – an offer that was eagerly accepted at both a local and national level. Southwark LU officially endorsed him on February 25.

    3. Though comrade Abrams is not a member of LU, he is without doubt the right candidate to back. He is not only challenging Simon Hughes once again, but mainstream Labour hopeful Nick Coyle. His central slogan is ‘No to austerity’.

    4. Comrade Freeman is a member of Left Unity. Till recently he was in charge of its constitutional commission and put himself forward for its national council in internal elections. His criticisms of old Labour and Tusc are well founded. The idea of a Labour Party mark II is illusory and doomed to fail. However, comrade Freeman’s ‘republican socialism’ amounts to little more than a leftwing version of English nationalism.

    5. Even if he advocated a politically principled socialist programme comrade Freeman would be wrong to stand. The left in Britain is woefully weak and dividing of our forces in the general election can only but damage our cause. Political criticism is perfectly legitimate – indeed it is required. But when it comes to the May 7 general election our motto should be ‘Unity in action’.

    6. We urge comrade Freeman to behave in a responsible manner and immediately step down as a candidate. If he refuses then it is clear that the national council is duty-bound to initiate disciplinary proceedings against him under clause 18(a) of the constitution.
This discussion has been closed.