The assumption is that she is running, but will only declare if Woolfe is ruled out.
Mr. Confused from Dubai here - didn't the nominations close on Sunday?
Yes, the assumption is that Diane James met the nomination conditions on the quiet. It's 50 signatures plus £5,000, which needn't be her money.
This is hillarious. She's just become the Betfair favourite - yet she's not declared herself, even though nominations closed yesterday.
Makes Labour's arguments over rules seem rather quaint. UKIP are clearly making up the rules as they go along!!
And they must all be looking on with awe at how the Tories did it from start to finish in little more than a fortnight.
Guido lists these as having been nominated
Jonathan Arnott
Phillip Broughton
Lisa Duffy
Bill Ethridge
Diane James
Liz Jones
Steven Woolfe
So Woolfe is on the shortlist and will be an even better leader than Farage, telegenic, northern, sharp and charismatic, basically everything Corbyn is not. With Labour likely to comfortably re-elect Farage and May to keep free movement with controls by this time next year I expect UKIP to be closer to Labour than Labour are to the Tories Corbyn better enjoy his victory, his honeymoon will be short once the first northern Labour seat falls to UKIP in a by election
No. The shortlist of candidates will only be officially announced tomorrow after the applications have been fully processed and the candidates vetted.
No-one is actually on the list at the moment. And given his failure to meet the deadline and his failure to declare his conviction, Woolfe is having a tricky couple of days.
Mr. Rentool, a friend of mine says that Lucy Verasamy is his favourite weathergirl, although the weather she predicts is never what he gets [possibly because he's American].
Not being a viewer of television I had no idea who Lucy Verasamy was. Now that I have used the magic of Google, I'd say she was my favourite weather forecaster too.
You may like this clip of Petroula forecasting in 2009.
Been away for a couple of days, what is this about Corbyn wanting there to be a commons vote every time we deploy the SAS? You know the SAS that we don't acknowledge their deployments or if they are involved in anything.
Jezbollah wanting to level the playing field?
It means he's a dangerous f***ing idiot, who has no idea of the role our special forces play in keeping Britain and the world safe. Not only that but he doesn't care that he has no idea, and doesn't think it's important that he should check these things before opening his stupid mouth.
There's a more sinister explanation as well. His IRA chums will know full well what the SAS are capable of. They would love to see the SAS's operational effectiveness neutralized as would other terrorist groups and their appeasers and justifiers and friends and supporters. It suits all these groups very well if the Labour leader comes up with or utters an idea such as this. And I don't think that either Corbyn or McDonnell are quite as naïve as some might think. If you think of the IRA and Hamas as freedom fighters why wouldn't you want to take action against people such as the SAS? If you think - as Corbyn reportedly said - that IS had some "good points" and that we should strive to understand them, why wouldn't you want to hobble the SAS's capability to turn IS operatives into spots on sand?
Hadn't thought of that. It really doesn't bear thinking about. Dangerous man with dangerous friends.
''But it's magnitude is unknown and probably depends on how much dominance media have in society and their reputation in it.''
I don;t know why, but I have a feeling Brits may be more reticent about right wing politics than Americans, and so the shy factor may be smaller.
99% of americans vote for right wing parties of a variety of flavours.
For historical reasons america doesn't have a left wing party of size, last time it was the Progressive party in the 1920's that gathered a significant share of the vote.
I would class the Democrats as Blairite, and relatively multilateral, and the Republicans a mix of UKIP+, corporatism and unilateralism. I think there's a left/right divide there.
What you don't hear much about in America is for state sponsored redistribution of income, but that's more about the type of country America is.
The only divide in america is between Cameroon conservatives (Democrats) and UKIP (Republicans).
There are no left wing parties of size in america, they where destroyed by successive red scares.
America is like an oversized Poland with a scattering of Londons.
The FT claims that there is likely to be a big argument over EU pensions. The EU pension scheme is a pay as you go scheme (ie no fund) which the member states guarantee. Pension contributions by employees (9%) are treated as EU revenue.
Will the UK be asked to pay up for their share of future EU pension payments (both to UK nationals and others)? There is apparently a precedent in the arrangements following the breakup of the League of Nations.
The assumption is that she is running, but will only declare if Woolfe is ruled out.
Mr. Confused from Dubai here - didn't the nominations close on Sunday?
Yes, the assumption is that Diane James met the nomination conditions on the quiet. It's 50 signatures plus £5,000, which needn't be her money.
This is hillarious. She's just become the Betfair favourite - yet she's not declared herself, even though nominations closed yesterday.
Makes Labour's arguments over rules seem rather quaint. UKIP are clearly making up the rules as they go along!!
And they must all be looking on with awe at how the Tories did it from start to finish in little more than a fortnight.
Guido lists these as having been nominated
Jonathan Arnott
Phillip Broughton
Lisa Duffy
Bill Ethridge
Diane James
Liz Jones
Steven Woolfe
So Woolfe is on the shortlist and will be an even better leader than Farage, telegenic, northern, sharp and charismatic, basically everything Corbyn is not. With Labour likely to comfortably re-elect Farage and May to keep free movement with controls by this time next year I expect UKIP to be closer to Labour than Labour are to the Tories Corbyn better enjoy his victory, his honeymoon will be short once the first northern Labour seat falls to UKIP in a by election
No. The shortlist of candidates will only be officially announced tomorrow after the applications have been fully processed and the candidates vetted.
No-one is actually on the list at the moment. And given his failure to meet the deadline and his failure to declare his conviction, Woolfe is having a tricky couple of days.
Clearly it has now been decided he did meet the deadline and this talk of a conviction has already been dismissed by many pbers. Regardless Woolfe and Corbyn should now win their respective leaderships and Corbyn will be easy prey for this Woolfe
Is Theresa May standing for the Labour leadership ? Seems a bit ambitious even for her.
If not then Smith should concentrate on the guy in the ring. He doesn't need to show he can beat the Tories. He needs to show he can beat Corbyn. Unless a lot more people start believing that he has no chance.
''But it's magnitude is unknown and probably depends on how much dominance media have in society and their reputation in it.''
I don;t know why, but I have a feeling Brits may be more reticent about right wing politics than Americans, and so the shy factor may be smaller.
99% of americans vote for right wing parties of a variety of flavours.
For historical reasons america doesn't have a left wing party of size, last time it was the Progressive party in the 1920's that gathered a significant share of the vote.
I would class the Democrats as Blairite, and relatively multilateral, and the Republicans a mix of UKIP+, corporatism and unilateralism. I think there's a left/right divide there.
What you don't hear much about in America is for state sponsored redistribution of income, but that's more about the type of country America is.
The only divide in america is between Cameroon conservatives (Democrats) and UKIP (Republicans).
There are no left wing parties of size in america, they where destroyed by successive red scares.
America is like an oversized Poland with a scattering of Londons.
Sorry, I disagree that the democrats are Conservative, of any sort. Their policies on school choice, unions, tax rises, affirmative action and identity politics show up that.
Been away for a couple of days, what is this about Corbyn wanting there to be a commons vote every time we deploy the SAS? You know the SAS that we don't acknowledge their deployments or if they are involved in anything.
Jezbollah wanting to level the playing field?
It means he's a dangerous f***ing idiot, who has no idea of the role our special forces play in keeping Britain and the world safe. Not only that but he doesn't care that he has no idea, and doesn't think it's important that he should check these things before opening his stupid mouth.
There's a more sinister explanation as well. His IRA chums will know full well what the SAS are capable of. They would love to see the SAS's operational effectiveness neutralized as would other terrorist groups and their appeasers and justifiers and friends and supporters. It suits all these groups very well if the Labour leader comes up with or utters an idea such as this. And I don't think that either Corbyn or McDonnell are quite as naïve as some might think. If you think of the IRA and Hamas as freedom fighters why wouldn't you want to take action against people such as the SAS? If you think - as Corbyn reportedly said - that IS had some "good points" and that we should strive to understand them, why wouldn't you want to hobble the SAS's capability to turn IS operatives into spots on sand?
Hadn't thought of that. It really doesn't bear thinking about. Dangerous man with dangerous friends.
TBH I think that’s at least two conspiracy theories too far. I don’t Corbyn’s got the ability to think that far ahead. Not quite so sure about McDonnell, though!
If the answer is, yes, we left before the job was done, then clearly the job was impossible and was never going to be done, so it doesn't even matter whether we there in the first place.
What was the job in the first place? When we went in on the ground I seem to recall it was to provide protection for the people doing reconstruction work and we would be there for three years. Then somehow it morphed into destroying the drug opium trade, but then very quickly it wasn't, but it was about defeating the taliban. Then it wasn't defeating the Taliban but creating the conditions for a democracy to emerge. Then it was about holding the ring whilst the Afghans could train up their own people to secure the country. Frankly, I don't think anyone ever knew what we were doing there or what we supposed to achieve.
Afghanistan 2006-14, thousands of lives wrecked, hundreds lost, billions of pounds spent and nobody knows why. The most stupid campaign ever fought by the British army.
Woolfe also outlined some excellent policies today on new grammars for boroughs with the lowest academic attainment and a trust with public and private backing to help young people from lower income families pay fees and living costs
Woolfe also outlined some excellent policies today on new grammars for boroughs with the lowest academic attainment and a trust with public and private backing to help young people from lower income families pay fees and living costs
Which is probably why he's being kept off the ballot paper.
Clearly, Nigel is still pulling the strings. He doesn't want a successor whom he either doesn't control or who doesn't look up to him as a Demi-God or, worse, might do better than him.
This megalomania and egoism has always been the least attractive thing about him.
Woolfe also outlined some excellent policies today on new grammars for boroughs with the lowest academic attainment and a trust with public and private backing to help young people from lower income families pay fees and living costs
Woolfe also outlined some excellent policies today on new grammars for boroughs with the lowest academic attainment and a trust with public and private backing to help young people from lower income families pay fees and living costs
Which is probably why he's being kept off the ballot paper.
Clearly, Nigel is still pulling the strings. He doesn't want a successor whom he either doesn't control or who doesn't look up to him as a Demi-God or, worse, might do better than him.
This megalomania and egoism has always been the least attractive thing about him.
So why was Nigel thunderously denouncing the NEC for being a bunch of numpties?
John McCain, 2008 GOP POTUS nominee, slams Trump over the Captain Khan affair :
“The Republican Party I know and love is the party of Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, Dwight D. Eisenhower, and Ronald Reagan.
I wear a bracelet bearing the name of a fallen hero, Matthew Stanley, which his mother, Lynn, gave me in 2007, at a town hall meeting in Wolfeboro, New Hampshire. His memory and the memory of our great leaders deserve better from me.
In recent days, Donald Trump disparaged a fallen soldier's parents. He has suggested that the likes of their son should not be allowed in the United States — to say nothing of entering its service. I cannot emphasize enough how deeply I disagree with Mr. Trump's statement. I hope Americans understand that the remarks do not represent the views of our Republican Party, its officers, or candidates.
Captain Khan's death in Iraq, on June 8th, 2004, was a shining example of the valor and bravery inculcated into our military. When a suicide bomber accelerated his vehicle toward a facility with hundreds of American soldiers, Captain Khan ordered his subordinates away from the danger.Then he ran toward it.The suicide bomber, striking prematurely, claimed the life of Captain Khan — and Captain Khan, through his selfless action and sacrifice, saved the lives of hundreds of his brothers and sisters.
Scripture tells us that 'Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. Captain Humayun Khan of the United States Army showed in his final moments that he was filled and motivated by this love. His name will live forever in American memory, as an example of true American greatness.
In the end, I am morally bound to speak only to the things that command my allegiance, and to which I have dedicated my life's work: the Republican Party, and more importantly, the United States of America. I will not refrain from doing my utmost by those lights simply because it may benefit others with whom I disagree.
I claim no moral superiority over Donald Trump. I have a long and well-known public and private record for which I will have to answer at the Final Judgment, and I repose my hope in the promise of mercy and the moderation of age. I challenge the nominee to set the example for what our country can and should represent. Arizona is watching. It is time for Donald Trump to set the example for our country and the future of the Republican Party. While our Party has bestowed upon him the nomination, it is not accompanied by unfettered license to defame those who are the best among us.
Lastly, I'd like to say to Mr. and Mrs. Khan: thank you for immigrating to America. We're a better country because of you. And you are certainly right; your son was the best of America, and the memory of his sacrifice will make us a better nation – and he will never be forgotten."
Jim Waterson UKIP leadership election is first-past-the-post with lots of candidates & only c40,000 voters. So new leader could win on, say, 30% of vote.
So UKIP is the last bastion standing against the relentless spread of AV
If there had been more about AV on PB I would have known this already.
By the look of it they are struggling with the 1832 Reform Act!
Everything went wrong after 1832. That was when the rot set in.
For the traditional landed classes and aristocracy it is.
There is also a good argument to say that parliament was, for a time, less representative post 1832 (until the 1860s) because the concept of 'virtual' representation was lost with the Great Reform Act.
Not really. It was the agricultural depression of the 1870s that killed them
Jim Waterson UKIP leadership election is first-past-the-post with lots of candidates & only c40,000 voters. So new leader could win on, say, 30% of vote.
So UKIP is the last bastion standing against the relentless spread of AV
If there had been more about AV on PB I would have known this already.
By the look of it they are struggling with the 1832 Reform Act!
Everything went wrong after 1832. That was when the rot set in.
For the traditional landed classes and aristocracy it is.
There is also a good argument to say that parliament was, for a time, less representative post 1832 (until the 1860s) because the concept of 'virtual' representation was lost with the Great Reform Act.
Not really. It was the agricultural depression of the 1870s that killed them
Corn law repeal and the widening of the franchise started "the rot" institutionally.
They've been eroded ever since. Death duties were a massive 20th Century blow. Economic change post WWI even worse.
I suppose you could add ejection of the hereditaries from the Lords, too, but that wasn't exactly the storming of the Bastille.
Woolfe also outlined some excellent policies today on new grammars for boroughs with the lowest academic attainment and a trust with public and private backing to help young people from lower income families pay fees and living costs
Woolfe also outlined some excellent policies today on new grammars for boroughs with the lowest academic attainment and a trust with public and private backing to help young people from lower income families pay fees and living costs
Which is probably why he's being kept off the ballot paper.
Clearly, Nigel is still pulling the strings. He doesn't want a successor whom he either doesn't control or who doesn't look up to him as a Demi-God or, worse, might do better than him.
This megalomania and egoism has always been the least attractive thing about him.
So why was Nigel thunderously denouncing the NEC for being a bunch of numpties?
''But it's magnitude is unknown and probably depends on how much dominance media have in society and their reputation in it.''
I don;t know why, but I have a feeling Brits may be more reticent about right wing politics than Americans, and so the shy factor may be smaller.
99% of americans vote for right wing parties of a variety of flavours.
For historical reasons america doesn't have a left wing party of size, last time it was the Progressive party in the 1920's that gathered a significant share of the vote.
I would class the Democrats as Blairite, and relatively multilateral, and the Republicans a mix of UKIP+, corporatism and unilateralism. I think there's a left/right divide there.
What you don't hear much about in America is for state sponsored redistribution of income, but that's more about the type of country America is.
The only divide in america is between Cameroon conservatives (Democrats) and UKIP (Republicans).
There are no left wing parties of size in america, they where destroyed by successive red scares.
America is like an oversized Poland with a scattering of Londons.
George McGovern, Jesse Jackson and Bernie Sanders, just some Democrats more leftwing than. Most pre Corbyn Labour leaders let alone Cameron. Tories may prefer Cameron to Trump, you are at least right only UKIP like him but McCain spoke at the Tory conference and don't forget the close relationship between Thatcher and Reagan and Major and Bush Snr, indeed conservative Republicans would have preferred Thatcher succeeded Reagan rather than Bush
John McCain, 2008 GOP POTUS nominee, slams Trump over the Captain Khan affair :
“The Republican Party I know and love is the party of Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, Dwight D. Eisenhower, and Ronald Reagan.
I wear a bracelet bearing the name of a fallen hero, Matthew Stanley, which his mother, Lynn, gave me
Captain Khan's death in Iraq, on June 8th, 2004, was a shining example of the valor and bravery inculcated into our military. When a suicide bomber accelerated his vehicle toward a facility with hundreds of American soldiers, Captain Khan ordered his subordinates away from the danger.Then he ran toward it.The suicide bomber, striking prematurely, claimed the life of Captain Khan — and Captain Khan, through his selfless action and sacrifice, saved the lives of hundreds of his brothers and sisters.
Scripture tells us that 'Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. Captain Humayun Khan of the United States Army showed in his final moments that he was filled and motivated by this love. His name will live forever in American memory, as an example of true American greatness.
In the end, I am morally bound to speak only to the things that command my allegiance, and to which I have dedicated my life's work: the Republican Party, and more importantly, the United States of America. I will not refrain from doing my utmost by those lights simply because it may benefit others with whom I disagree.
I claim no moral superiority over Donald Trump. I have a long and well-known public and private record for which I will have to answer at the Final Judgment, and I repose my hope in the promise of mercy and the moderation of age. I challenge the nominee to set the example for what our country can and should represent. Arizona is watching. It is time for Donald Trump to set the example for our country and the future of the Republican Party. While our Party has bestowed upon him the nomination, it is not accompanied by unfettered license to defame those who are the best among us.
Lastly, I'd like to say to Mr. and Mrs. Khan: thank you for immigrating to America. We're a better country because of you. And you are certainly right; your son was the best of America, and the memory of his sacrifice will make us a better nation – and he will never be forgotten."
So looks like Bob Dole may be the only living former GOP nominee voting for Trump
"Pregnant women and partners have been told to avoid travelling to the Miami area affected by the Zika virus, as 10 new cases are confirmed. The warning comes as officials confirm a total of 14 cases in the state, all thought to have been spread by local mosquitoes."
Woolfe also outlined some excellent policies today on new grammars for boroughs with the lowest academic attainment and a trust with public and private backing to help young people from lower income families pay fees and living costs
Woolfe also outlined some excellent policies today on new grammars for boroughs with the lowest academic attainment and a trust with public and private backing to help young people from lower income families pay fees and living costs
Which is probably why he's being kept off the ballot paper.
Clearly, Nigel is still pulling the strings. He doesn't want a successor whom he either doesn't control or who doesn't look up to him as a Demi-God or, worse, might do better than him.
This megalomania and egoism has always been the least attractive thing about him.
Farage backs Woolfe I believe, it is Carswell and Hamilton who oppose him. However the latter are not who UKIP need to listen to to challenge Labour in the Midlands and the North
The first call for the 2016/17 PB Fantasy Football League - "Political Betting All Stars".
I have just renewed the league from last year - those players already signed up for the game this season are therefore already signed up for this years PB League. You lucky people.
We had about a dozen players last season and most managed to comfortably beat the benchmark (TSE) including one poster who I don't think changed his/her team all season!
''But it's magnitude is unknown and probably depends on how much dominance media have in society and their reputation in it.''
I don;t know why, but I have a feeling Brits may be more reticent about right wing politics than Americans, and so the shy factor may be smaller.
99% of americans vote for right wing parties of a variety of flavours.
For historical reasons america doesn't have a left wing party of size, last time it was the Progressive party in the 1920's that gathered a significant share of the vote.
The Green Party is presently polling about 3% and Sanders very nearly won the Democratic nomination
If you can see it in historical terms, countries that their main enemies or oppressors where of a certain political orientation will tend to cast them as pariahs.
In the US and Eastern Europe left wing parties are social pariahs, the enemy being the USSR. In Western and Southern Europe right wing parties are social pariahs, the enemy being Nazi Germany.
Yet Front National leads the polls in France and Bernie Sanders polled rather better in general election polls in the U.S. than Corbyn does here
Mr. kle4, I thought much the same. The UK was there for longer than the duration of the Second World War. I especially liked the bit at the end of the report when the twonk referred to the Americans finishing what the British abandoned, or words to that effect. Does rather neglect the US-led coalition.
Been away for a couple of days, what is this about Corbyn wanting there to be a commons vote every time we deploy the SAS? You know the SAS that we don't acknowledge their deployments or if they are involved in anything.
Jezbollah wanting to level the playing field?
It means he's a dangerous f***ing idiot, who has no idea of the role our special forces play in keeping Britain and the world safe. Not only that but he doesn't care that he has no idea, and doesn't think it's important that he should check these things before opening his stupid mouth.
There's a more sinister explanation as well. His IRA chums will know full well what the SAS are capable of. They would love to see the SAS's operational effectiveness neutralized as would other terrorist groups and their appeasers and justifiers and friends and supporters. It suits all these groups very well if the Labour leader comes up with or utters an idea such as this. And I don't think that either Corbyn or McDonnell are quite as naïve as some might think. If you think of the IRA and Hamas as freedom fighters why wouldn't you want to take action against people such as the SAS? If you think - as Corbyn reportedly said - that IS had some "good points" and that we should strive to understand them, why wouldn't you want to hobble the SAS's capability to turn IS operatives into spots on sand?
Come on, what on earth does the IRA care about the SAS? They are too busy counting the profits to be made from the post-Brexit import-export business. The queen shook hands with Martin McGuinness so perhaps PB would like to give her a word about propriety.
If you think the IRA doesn't have a long memory and doesn't care about the SAS, I suggest you acquaint yourself with some Irish history. The fact that McGuinness has shaken the Queen's hand does not mean that the IRA wouldn't in future use violence if they thought it was in their interests to do so. It's both the Armalite and the ballot box not one or the other.
If the answer is, yes, we left before the job was done, then clearly the job was impossible and was never going to be done, so it doesn't even matter whether we there in the first place.
What was the job in the first place? When we went in on the ground I seem to recall it was to provide protection for the people doing reconstruction work and we would be there for three years. Then somehow it morphed into destroying the drug opium trade, but then very quickly it wasn't, but it was about defeating the taliban. Then it wasn't defeating the Taliban but creating the conditions for a democracy to emerge. Then it was about holding the ring whilst the Afghans could train up their own people to secure the country. Frankly, I don't think anyone ever knew what we were doing there or what we supposed to achieve.
Afghanistan 2006-14, thousands of lives wrecked, hundreds lost, billions of pounds spent and nobody knows why. The most stupid campaign ever fought by the British army.
Most British campaigns in that country have been disastrous.Does anyone know a serviceman who served there who thinks that it was all worth the effort? I don’t.
Woolfe also outlined some excellent policies today on new grammars for boroughs with the lowest academic attainment and a trust with public and private backing to help young people from lower income families pay fees and living costs
Woolfe also outlined some excellent policies today on new grammars for boroughs with the lowest academic attainment and a trust with public and private backing to help young people from lower income families pay fees and living costs
Which is probably why he's being kept off the ballot paper.
Clearly, Nigel is still pulling the strings. He doesn't want a successor whom he either doesn't control or who doesn't look up to him as a Demi-God or, worse, might do better than him.
This megalomania and egoism has always been the least attractive thing about him.
I thought Farage was massively behind Woolfe. He is his man
It is Carswell et al who are interested in keeping Woolfe off the list.
Woolfe also outlined some excellent policies today on new grammars for boroughs with the lowest academic attainment and a trust with public and private backing to help young people from lower income families pay fees and living costs
Woolfe also outlined some excellent policies today on new grammars for boroughs with the lowest academic attainment and a trust with public and private backing to help young people from lower income families pay fees and living costs
Which is probably why he's being kept off the ballot paper.
Clearly, Nigel is still pulling the strings. He doesn't want a successor whom he either doesn't control or who doesn't look up to him as a Demi-God or, worse, might do better than him.
This megalomania and egoism has always been the least attractive thing about him.
So why was Nigel thunderously denouncing the NEC for being a bunch of numpties?
And so one wonders who gave the BBC the story about Woolfe's previous drink driving conviction, which it seems he overlooked to declare when he applied.
Woolfe also outlined some excellent policies today on new grammars for boroughs with the lowest academic attainment and a trust with public and private backing to help young people from lower income families pay fees and living costs
Woolfe also outlined some excellent policies today on new grammars for boroughs with the lowest academic attainment and a trust with public and private backing to help young people from lower income families pay fees and living costs
Which is probably why he's being kept off the ballot paper.
Clearly, Nigel is still pulling the strings. He doesn't want a successor whom he either doesn't control or who doesn't look up to him as a Demi-God or, worse, might do better than him.
This megalomania and egoism has always been the least attractive thing about him.
So why was Nigel thunderously denouncing the NEC for being a bunch of numpties?
And one wonders who gave the BBC the story about Woolfe's previous drink driving conviction, which it seems he overlooked to declare when he applied.
George W Bush had a drink driving conviction, did not stop him being elected US President
Jim Waterson UKIP leadership election is first-past-the-post with lots of candidates & only c40,000 voters. So new leader could win on, say, 30% of vote.
So UKIP is the last bastion standing against the relentless spread of AV
If there had been more about AV on PB I would have known this already.
By the look of it they are struggling with the 1832 Reform Act!
Everything went wrong after 1832. That was when the rot set in.
For the traditional landed classes and aristocracy it is.
There is also a good argument to say that parliament was, for a time, less representative post 1832 (until the 1860s) because the concept of 'virtual' representation was lost with the Great Reform Act.
Not really. It was the agricultural depression of the 1870s that killed them
Corn law repeal and the widening of the franchise started "the rot" institutionally.
They've been eroded ever since. Death duties were a massive 20th Century blow. Economic change post WWI even worse.
I suppose you could add ejection of the hereditaries from the Lords, too, but that wasn't exactly the storming of the Bastille.
A lot of landed families did very well out of the repeal of the corn laws - it was only those who didn't understand who were opposed.
The 1870s saw the break up of the great estates, the breaking of trusts to sell assets. The other big blow was the high casualty rate in WWI - whole lines were wiped out causing havoic among the entailed estates. Death duties were managable - always have been with careful planning; economic change has been a benefit in many cases.
Woolfe also outlined some excellent policies today on new grammars for boroughs with the lowest academic attainment and a trust with public and private backing to help young people from lower income families pay fees and living costs
Woolfe also outlined some excellent policies today on new grammars for boroughs with the lowest academic attainment and a trust with public and private backing to help young people from lower income families pay fees and living costs
Which is probably why he's being kept off the ballot paper.
Clearly, Nigel is still pulling the strings. He doesn't want a successor whom he either doesn't control or who doesn't look up to him as a Demi-God or, worse, might do better than him.
This megalomania and egoism has always been the least attractive thing about him.
So why was Nigel thunderously denouncing the NEC for being a bunch of numpties?
Was he? Hasn't he stuffed them with his men?
@JohnM : Nigel thunderously denouncing the NEC for being a bunch of numpties @Casino_Royale : Hasn't he stuffed them with his men?
''But it's magnitude is unknown and probably depends on how much dominance media have in society and their reputation in it.''
I don;t know why, but I have a feeling Brits may be more reticent about right wing politics than Americans, and so the shy factor may be smaller.
99% of americans vote for right wing parties of a variety of flavours.
For historical reasons america doesn't have a left wing party of size, last time it was the Progressive party in the 1920's that gathered a significant share of the vote.
The Green Party is presently polling about 3% and Sanders very nearly won the Democratic nomination
If you can see it in historical terms, countries that their main enemies or oppressors where of a certain political orientation will tend to cast them as pariahs.
In the US and Eastern Europe left wing parties are social pariahs, the enemy being the USSR. In Western and Southern Europe right wing parties are social pariahs, the enemy being Nazi Germany.
Yet Front National leads the polls in France and Bernie Sanders polled rather better in general election polls in the U.S. than Corbyn does here
Sanders demonstrates that there is a long-unrepresented left wing constituency in US politics, which doubtless underpins the strength of distress they felt at seeing what could be a once-only chance go by. I sense a lot of Corbyn's people feel the same, having waited so long in the cold, which strengthens their resolve to hang on to control.
Roosevelt's New Deal wasn't the sort of thing a Conservative party would have been doing, however. Indeed from what I recall of US political history the striking thing is how both the positions and the geography of the two parties' support has dramatically shifted over the years, much more so than during the same period in the UK.
No his cause is hopeless, as is he which would be the inevitable conclusion of anyone watching his floundering interview on Channel 4. Basically not the Messiah just the naughty boy or a "Smithite" as he put it himself in his own untrustworthy way.
The nightmare for the Conservatives would be a Labour split and the development of a non-socialist party of the centre or centre left. This wouldn't be because of the Labour MPs and activists who would join it or even the few Conservatives it might tempt but (as was the case with the SDP) the large number of previously inactive people who would join and support such a party.
So many of those who joined the SDP in 1981-82 weren't members of a party but considered the SDP something they wanted to be part of. Politically green as grass but not lacking in enthusiasm, they would be a far more potent threat than anything Labour, UKIP or the LDs can currently manage.
Will it happen ? It might but not now - it might take another 12 months or more as setting up a new party isn't easy especially for those who have spent decades in other parties.
The 2017 County Council elections will be most informative - the 2018 London locals arguably more so.
Mr. Llama, think I've been to most of those places at one time or another.
York Minster is a fantastic building. Steps are bloody steep, though.
I agree about York Minster, but it was a very long time ago that we visited it. Be that as it may, Herself has seen those photos and has declared Yorkshire is where we shall be spending our next holiday once the cat has gone through the great cat-flap (can't go on holiday while he is still alive in case something happens to him and we can't put him in gaol because he wouldn't like it).
Mr Llama: have you thought of getting a cat sitter?
The nightmare for the Conservatives would be a Labour split and the development of a non-socialist party of the centre or centre left. This wouldn't be because of the Labour MPs and activists who would join it or even the few Conservatives it might tempt but (as was the case with the SDP) the large number of previously inactive people who would join and support such a party.
So many of those who joined the SDP in 1981-82 weren't members of a party but considered the SDP something they wanted to be part of. Politically green as grass but not lacking in enthusiasm, they would be a far more potent threat than anything Labour, UKIP or the LDs can currently manage.
Will it happen ? It might but not now - it might take another 12 months or more as setting up a new party isn't easy especially for those who have spent decades in other parties.
The 2017 County Council elections will be most informative - the 2018 London locals arguably more so.
I don't think that is a nightmare for the Conservatives when they also hold the centre, unless such a new party allied with the LDs it might well come 5th behind the Tories, Corbyn Labour and UKIP and the Liberal Democrats
No his cause is hopeless, as is he which would be the inevitable conclusion of anyone watching his floundering interview on Channel 4. Basically not the Messiah just the naughty boy or a "Smithite" as he put it himself in his own untrustworthy way.
Hopeless or apocalyptic, that is Labour's choice in a nutshell
The nightmare for the Conservatives would be a Labour split and the development of a non-socialist party of the centre or centre left. This wouldn't be because of the Labour MPs and activists who would join it or even the few Conservatives it might tempt but (as was the case with the SDP) the large number of previously inactive people who would join and support such a party.
So many of those who joined the SDP in 1981-82 weren't members of a party but considered the SDP something they wanted to be part of. Politically green as grass but not lacking in enthusiasm, they would be a far more potent threat than anything Labour, UKIP or the LDs can currently manage.
Will it happen ? It might but not now - it might take another 12 months or more as setting up a new party isn't easy especially for those who have spent decades in other parties.
The 2017 County Council elections will be most informative - the 2018 London locals arguably more so.
The key electoral question is whether its support would be sufficiently geographically concentrated to break through under First Past the(re isn't a) Post. Or alternatively whether it could reach sufficiently high a level of support to be breaking through everywhere.
Without one or the other it would face the same handful-of-seats plus tons of second places that befell the Alliance in 1983.
Since there is probably 20% support for a Corbyn type left party, the question isn't really what appeal the new entity has to former Labour voters (the residue of Labour support would have to be taken for granted), but whether its appeal to 'soft Tories' would be strong enough to put a big dent in Conservative support. The problem here is that the suggested entity would be founded by a bunch of disgruntled Labour MPs, at a time when neither wing of Labour is particularly credible or popular.
Even the SDP brought in a good degree of former Tory support (look at all the SDP'ers who ended up back with the Tories, Truss, Greening, Finklestein et al), even if the top names were all Labour.
Unless Brexit turns very sour - which is several years away even if it happens - or unless May re-introduces the poll tax or some similar brainwave - it is hard to see a new centre party pulling much from the Tories right now.
Jim Waterson UKIP leadership election is first-past-the-post with lots of candidates & only c40,000 voters. So new leader could win on, say, 30% of vote.
So UKIP is the last bastion standing against the relentless spread of AV
If there had been more about AV on PB I would have known this already.
By the look of it they are struggling with the 1832 Reform Act!
Everything went wrong after 1832. That was when the rot set in.
For the traditional landed classes and aristocracy it is.
There is also a good argument to say that parliament was, for a time, less representative post 1832 (until the 1860s) because the concept of 'virtual' representation was lost with the Great Reform Act.
Not really. It was the agricultural depression of the 1870s that killed them
Corn law repeal and the widening of the franchise started "the rot" institutionally.
They've been eroded ever since. Death duties were a massive 20th Century blow. Economic change post WWI even worse.
I suppose you could add ejection of the hereditaries from the Lords, too, but that wasn't exactly the storming of the Bastille.
A lot of landed families did very well out of the repeal of the corn laws - it was only those who didn't understand who were opposed.
The 1870s saw the break up of the great estates, the breaking of trusts to sell assets. The other big blow was the high casualty rate in WWI - whole lines were wiped out causing havoic among the entailed estates. Death duties were managable - always have been with careful planning; economic change has been a benefit in many cases.
It is interesting to note the resilience of some of the old families. The three biggest landowners in West Sussex a hundred years ago are still the three biggest landowners today. Furthermore, the dual carriageway of the A27 still stops either side of Arundel - allegedly the old, old Duke of Norfolk didn't want it going through his meadows and it never has.
Been away for a couple of days, what is this about Corbyn wanting there to be a commons vote every time we deploy the SAS? You know the SAS that we don't acknowledge their deployments or if they are involved in anything.
Jezbollah wanting to level the playing field?
It means he's a dangerous f***ing idiot, who has no idea of the role our special forces play in keeping Britain and the world safe. Not only that but he doesn't care that he has no idea, and doesn't think it's important that he should check these things before opening his stupid mouth.
There's a more sinister explanation as well. His IRA chums will know full well what the SAS are capable of. They would love to see the SAS's operational effectiveness neutralized as would other terrorist groups and their appeasers and justifiers and friends and supporters. It suits all these groups very well if the Labour leader comes up with or utters an idea such as this. And I don't think that either Corbyn or McDonnell are quite as naïve as some might think. If you think of the IRA and Hamas as freedom fighters why wouldn't you want to take action against people such as the SAS? If you think - as Corbyn reportedly said - that IS had some "good points" and that we should strive to understand them, why wouldn't you want to hobble the SAS's capability to turn IS operatives into spots on sand?
Hadn't thought of that. It really doesn't bear thinking about. Dangerous man with dangerous friends.
TBH I think that’s at least two conspiracy theories too far. I don’t Corbyn’s got the ability to think that far ahead. Not quite so sure about McDonnell, though!
Corbyn may be a fool but he's dangerous. His views are dangerous and his friends, the people with whom he associates are dangerous. Just because he looks as if he sleeps in his clothes, speaks softly and has an allotment does not mean that he's a harmless fool.
The fact that after a few weeks when men, women, children have been massacred and an elderly priest butchered like an animal next to his altar, an act calculated to desecrate Christianity, after arrests and charges in Belgium, arrests in Germany, a suicide bombing and the security services here warning of the terror plots they are trying to foil and their fears that something similar will happen here Corbyn's priority is to hobble one of the few services we rely on to protect us tells us all we need to know not just about his priorities but about his default instincts. And what they tell me is not a good story. Quite the opposite.
Jim Waterson UKIP leadership election is first-past-the-post with lots of candidates & only c40,000 voters. So new leader could win on, say, 30% of vote.
So UKIP is the last bastion standing against the relentless spread of AV
If there had been more about AV on PB I would have known this already.
By the look of it they are struggling with the 1832 Reform Act!
Everything went wrong after 1832. That was when the rot set in.
For the traditional landed classes and aristocracy it is.
There is also a good argument to say that parliament was, for a time, less representative post 1832 (until the 1860s) because the concept of 'virtual' representation was lost with the Great Reform Act.
Not really. It was the agricultural depression of the 1870s that killed them
Corn law repeal and the widening of the franchise started "the rot" institutionally.
They've been eroded ever since. Death duties were a massive 20th Century blow. Economic change post WWI even worse.
I suppose you could add ejection of the hereditaries from the Lords, too, but that wasn't exactly the storming of the Bastille.
A lot of landed families did very well out of the repeal of the corn laws - it was only those who didn't understand who were opposed.
The 1870s saw the break up of the great estates, the breaking of trusts to sell assets. The other big blow was the high casualty rate in WWI - whole lines were wiped out causing havoic among the entailed estates. Death duties were managable - always have been with careful planning; economic change has been a benefit in many cases.
For you. Nigel gets to the NEC part at the end of the article.
No his cause is hopeless, as is he which would be the inevitable conclusion of anyone watching his floundering interview on Channel 4. Basically not the Messiah just the naughty boy or a "Smithite" as he put it himself in his own untrustworthy way.
Hopeless or apocalyptic, that is Labour's choice in a nutshell
it is certainly unfortunate -- given his misogynistic language & attitudes -- that Owen’s main opponents are all women (Theresa, Leanne, Nicola).
I am not actually sure that Owen is an improvement on Jeremy, even judged on the narrow grounds of electability.
''But it's magnitude is unknown and probably depends on how much dominance media have in society and their reputation in it.''
I don;t know why, but I have a feeling Brits may be more reticent about right wing politics than Americans, and so the shy factor may be smaller.
99% of americans vote for right wing parties of a variety of flavours.
For historical reasons america doesn't have a left wing party of size, last time it was the Progressive party in the 1920's that gathered a significant share of the vote.
The Green Party is presently polling about 3% and Sanders very nearly won the Democratic nomination
If you can see it in historical terms, countries that their main enemies or oppressors where of a certain political orientation will tend to cast them as pariahs.
In the US and Eastern Europe left wing parties are social pariahs, the enemy being the U
Yet
Sanders demonstrates that there is a long-unrepresented left wing constituency in US politics, which doubtless underpins the strength of distress they felt at seeing what could be a once-only chance go by. I sense a lot of Corbyn's people feel the same, having waited so long in the cold, which strengthens their resolve to hang on to control.
Roosevelt's New Deal wasn't the sort of thing a Conservative party would have been doing, however. Indeed from what I recall of US political history the striking thing is how both the positions and the geography of the two parties' support has dramatically shifted over the years, much more so than during the same period in the UK.
Indeed, in the 1950s and the early 1960s there was almost no difference between a northeastern Republican and a northeastern Democrat and a southern Republican and a southern Democrat and both parties won in both regions. In the 1960 election for instance Nixon won 5 southern states and 3 northerneastern states and JFK 6 southern states and 8 northeastern states. In the 2004 presidential election by contrast Bush won every southern state and Kerry every northeastern state. It was conservative Democrats moving to the Republicans after the civil rights act in 1964 and moderate Republicans moving to the Democrats as the party became increasingly taken over by southern populists and evangelicals which produced the big ideological divide. As the conservative Democrats left the party the liberals also gained in relative influence instead, as shown in the 1968 and 1972 elections. Trump is basically a descendant of southern conservative Democrat George Wallace, Hillary of moderate Republican Nixon and Sanders of radical liberals Eugene McCarthy and George McGovern
No his cause is hopeless, as is he which would be the inevitable conclusion of anyone watching his floundering interview on Channel 4. Basically not the Messiah just the naughty boy or a "Smithite" as he put it himself in his own untrustworthy way.
Hopeless or apocalyptic, that is Labour's choice in a nutshell
it is certainly unfortunate -- given his misogynistic language & attitudes -- that Owen’s main opponents are all women (Theresa, Leanne, Nicola).
I am not actually sure that Owen is an improvement on Jeremy, even judged on the narrow grounds of electability.
+1... The anagram Hits women really doesn't help either....
No his cause is hopeless, as is he which would be the inevitable conclusion of anyone watching his floundering interview on Channel 4. Basically not the Messiah just the naughty boy or a "Smithite" as he put it himself in his own untrustworthy way.
Hopeless or apocalyptic, that is Labour's choice in a nutshell
it is certainly unfortunate -- given his misogynistic language & attitudes -- that Owen’s main opponents are all women (Theresa, Leanne, Nicola).
I am not actually sure that Owen is an improvement on Jeremy, even judged on the narrow grounds of electability.
A dead parrot would be an improvement on Jeremy in terms of electability, that is how low Labour have fallen
The nightmare for the Conservatives would be a Labour split and the development of a non-socialist party of the centre or centre left. This wouldn't be because of the Labour MPs and activists who would join it or even the few Conservatives it might tempt but (as was the case with the SDP) the large number of previously inactive people who would join and support such a party.
So many of those who joined the SDP in 1981-82 weren't members of a party but considered the SDP something they wanted to be part of. Politically green as grass but not lacking in enthusiasm, they would be a far more potent threat than anything Labour, UKIP or the LDs can currently manage.
Will it happen ? It might but not now - it might take another 12 months or more as setting up a new party isn't easy especially for those who have spent decades in other parties.
The 2017 County Council elections will be most informative - the 2018 London locals arguably more so.
I don't think that is a nightmare for the Conservatives when they also hold the centre, unless such a new party allied with the LDs it might well come 5th behind the Tories, Corbyn Labour and UKIP and the Liberal Democrats
Yes indeed, if it is just David Lammy and some other malcontents, without much of a party base, trying to peddle whatever Blairism is nowadays (foreign interventions and rejoining the EU?) around the council estates.
We on PB - just as the MPs at Westminster - are starting with questions of tactics, touching on strategy on a good day, when really the debate should start from the question what is a left of centre (but not far left) party actually for in the financially-strapped 21st century? That moderate Labour has supposedly been wrestling with this question for some time but not got much beyond "we're not Tories" and "we'll borrow a little more and invest a little more" is the nub of the matter.
The nightmare for the Conservatives would be a Labour split and the development of a non-socialist party of the centre or centre left. This wouldn't be because of the Labour MPs and activists who would join it or even the few Conservatives it might tempt but (as was the case with the SDP) the large number of previously inactive people who would join and support such a party.
So many of those who joined the SDP in 1981-82 weren't members of a party but considered the SDP something they wanted to be part of. Politically green as grass but not lacking in enthusiasm, they would be a far more potent threat than anything Labour, UKIP or the LDs can currently manage.
Will it happen ? It might but not now - it might take another 12 months or more as setting up a new party isn't easy especially for those who have spent decades in other parties.
The 2017 County Council elections will be most informative - the 2018 London locals arguably more so.
I don't think that is a nightmare for the Conservatives when they also hold the centre, unless such a new party allied with the LDs it might well come 5th behind the Tories, Corbyn Labour and UKIP and the Liberal Democrats
Yes indeed, if it is just David Lammy and some other malcontents, without much of a party base, trying to peddle whatever Blairism is nowadays (foreign interventions and rejoining the EU?) around the council estates.
We on PB - just as the MPs at Westminster - are starting with questions of tactics, touching on strategy on a good day, when really the debate should start from the question what is a left of centre (but not far left) party actually for in the financially-strapped 21st century? That moderate Labour has supposedly been wrestling with this question for some time but not got much beyond "we're not Tories" and "we'll borrow a little more and invest a little more" is the nub of the matter.
Yes, just crunched Smith's numbers this afternoon. Across a full parliamentary term, it would (assuming ALL money was disbursed, which is a big assumption), amount to a stimulus of ~2.2%. Not exactly a rocket.
No his cause is hopeless, as is he which would be the inevitable conclusion of anyone watching his floundering interview on Channel 4. Basically not the Messiah just the naughty boy or a "Smithite" as he put it himself in his own untrustworthy way.
Hopeless or apocalyptic, that is Labour's choice in a nutshell
it is certainly unfortunate -- given his misogynistic language & attitudes -- that Owen’s main opponents are all women (Theresa, Leanne, Nicola).
I am not actually sure that Owen is an improvement on Jeremy, even judged on the narrow grounds of electability.
A dead parrot would be an improvement on Jeremy in terms of electability, that is how low Labour have fallen
Mr. Llama, think I've been to most of those places at one time or another.
York Minster is a fantastic building. Steps are bloody steep, though.
I agree about York Minster, but it was a very long time ago that we visited it. Be that as it may, Herself has seen those photos and has declared Yorkshire is where we shall be spending our next holiday once the cat has gone through the great cat-flap (can't go on holiday while he is still alive in case something happens to him and we can't put him in gaol because he wouldn't like it).
Mr Llama: have you thought of getting a cat sitter?
Oh, yes, Mrs Free, but neither of us could properly relax and both of us would feel awfully guilty if something happened while we were away. Thomas is about nineteen now (a rescue so we are not sure of exact age) and, whilst according to our nice German lady vet he is in "remarkably good physical condition for his age" he is getting a bit daft. So all in all it is easier and best if Herself and I don't both go away at the same time.
No his cause is hopeless, as is he which would be the inevitable conclusion of anyone watching his floundering interview on Channel 4. Basically not the Messiah just the naughty boy or a "Smithite" as he put it himself in his own untrustworthy way.
Hopeless or apocalyptic, that is Labour's choice in a nutshell
it is certainly unfortunate -- given his misogynistic language & attitudes -- that Owen’s main opponents are all women (Theresa, Leanne, Nicola).
I am not actually sure that Owen is an improvement on Jeremy, even judged on the narrow grounds of electability.
A dead parrot would be an improvement on Jeremy in terms of electability, that is how low Labour have fallen
No his cause is hopeless, as is he which would be the inevitable conclusion of anyone watching his floundering interview on Channel 4. Basically not the Messiah just the naughty boy or a "Smithite" as he put it himself in his own untrustworthy way.
Hopeless or apocalyptic, that is Labour's choice in a nutshell
it is certainly unfortunate -- given his misogynistic language & attitudes -- that Owen’s main opponents are all women (Theresa, Leanne, Nicola).
I am not actually sure that Owen is an improvement on Jeremy, even judged on the narrow grounds of electability.
A dead parrot would be an improvement on Jeremy in terms of electability, that is how low Labour have fallen
But she pulled out
Yes, I expect parrot heaven with plenty of cashew nuts on tap is far more appealing than leading the Marxist tribute act that is Corbyn Labour
Labour to win Most Seats at the Next General Election appears most generously priced with Betfair Exchange at present. Earlier this evening I succeeded in getting a few quid on at 6.25 (6.0 net) and there's still over £100 to be had at 5.6 (5.37 net). This is way ahead of the bookies' odds which range between a very paltry 3.0 (from BetVictor) and 4.0. With 3 years and 9 months to go before the next scheduled GE, it's difficult to imagine that there won't be a handsome trading profit to be realised with Betfair, somewhere along the line.
George W Bush had a drink driving conviction, did not stop him being elected US President
And when did that story leak ?!? ....
Indeed but it did not prevent his victory, even if it clearly hampered his final score
The point being there was no time for the story to develop legs. If the story had emerged at the weekend prior it would probably have lost Florida for Bush and thus the Presidency.
So many of those who joined the SDP in 1981-82 weren't members of a party but considered the SDP something they wanted to be part of. Politically green as grass but not lacking in enthusiasm, they would be a far more potent threat than anything Labour, UKIP or the LDs can currently manage.
Will it happen ? It might but not now - it might take another 12 months or more as setting up a new party isn't easy especially for those who have spent decades in other parties.
The 2017 County Council elections will be most informative - the 2018 London locals arguably more so.
I don't think that is a nightmare for the Conservatives when they also hold the centre, unless such a new party allied with the LDs it might well come 5th behind the Tories, Corbyn Labour and UKIP and the Liberal Democrats
Yes indeed, if it is just David Lammy and some other malcontents, without much of a party base, trying to peddle whatever Blairism is nowadays (foreign interventions and rejoining the EU?) around the council estates.
We on PB - just as the MPs at Westminster - are starting with questions of tactics, touching on strategy on a good day, when really the debate should start from the question what is a left of centre (but not far left) party actually for in the financially-strapped 21st century? That moderate Labour has supposedly been wrestling with this question for some time but not got much beyond "we're not Tories" and "we'll borrow a little more and invest a little more" is the nub of the matter.
Yes, just crunched Smith's numbers this afternoon. Across a full parliamentary term, it would (assuming ALL money was disbursed, which is a big assumption), amount to a stimulus of ~2.2%. Not exactly a rocket.
*edit for crimes against grammar*
Looking back at the coalition years, the remarkable thing is despite all of the screams from Labour about austerity cuts, and five years of gurning and hand gestures from Mr Balls, the actual trajectory of spending reductions under the 2010-15 government was almost precisely in line with what Labour, rather than the Tories, had originally recommended. I think this is a lot due to the LibDem influence behind the scenes, which they knew would be too explosive to take direct credit for whilst the coalition was still underway. It also made and makes it difficult for Labour to formulate anything that looks dramatically different by way of economic policy.
The nightmare for the Conservatives would be a Labour split and the development of a non-socialist party of the centre or centre left. This wouldn't be because of the Labour MPs and activists who would join it or even the few Conservatives it might tempt but (as was the case with the SDP) the large number of previously inactive people who would join and support such a party.
So many of those who joined the SDP in 1981-82 weren't members of a party but considered the SDP something they wanted to be part of. Politically green as grass but not lacking in enthusiasm, they would be a far more potent threat than anything Labour, UKIP or the LDs can currently manage.
Will it happen ? It might but not now - it might take another 12 months or more as setting up a new party isn't easy especially for those who have spent decades in other parties.
The 2017 County Council elections will be most informative - the 2018 London locals arguably more so.
I don't think that is a nightmare for the Conservatives when they also hold the centre, unless such a new party allied with the LDs it might well come 5th behind the Tories, Corbyn Labour and UKIP and the Liberal Democrats
Yes indeed, if it is just David Lammy and some other malcontents, without much of a party base, trying to peddle whatever Blairism is nowadays (foreign interventions and rejoining the EU?) around the council estates.
We on PB - just as the MPs at Westminster - are starting with questions of tactics, touching on strategy on a good day, when really the debate should start from the question what is a left of centre (but not far left) party actually for in the financially-strapped 21st century? That moderate Labour has supposedly been wrestling with this question for some time but not got much beyond "we're not Tories" and "we'll borrow a little more and invest a little more" is the nub of the matter.
Indeed, at the present moment moderate Labour's best hope is to be out of power for a decade and that is their best case scenario. At the moment Corbyn Labour has the inner cities, UKIP working class towns and depressed seaside resorts and the Tories the shires and the suburbs and the centre, even the LDs have their heritage to fall back on in the South West and the Highlands, there is very little room for a New Labour 2 Party
George W Bush had a drink driving conviction, did not stop him being elected US President
And when did that story leak ?!? ....
Indeed but it did not prevent his victory, even if it clearly hampered his final score
The point being there was no time for the story to develop legs. If the story had emerged at the weekend prior it would probably have lost Florida for Bush and thus the Presidency.
And such things are probably most damaging during the selection process, when there are still similarly minded alternative candidates on offer.
Woolfe also outlined some excellent policies today on new grammars for boroughs with the lowest academic attainment and a trust with public and private backing to help young people from lower income families pay fees and living costs
Woolfe also outlined some excellent policies today on new grammars for boroughs with the lowest academic attainment and a trust with public and private backing to help young people from lower income families pay fees and living costs
Which is probably why he's being kept off the ballot paper.
Clearly, Nigel is still pulling the strings. He doesn't want a successor whom he either doesn't control or who doesn't look up to him as a Demi-God or, worse, might do better than him.
This megalomania and egoism has always been the least attractive thing about him.
So why was Nigel thunderously denouncing the NEC for being a bunch of numpties?
And so one wonders who gave the BBC the story about Woolfe's previous drink driving conviction, which it seems he overlooked to declare when he applied.
Is the issue not that he previously stood for a PCC election, for which the conviction would have disqualified him if it had been noted at the time - and therefore was a breach of electoral law not to have declared it.
It would be an internal UKIP matter how they conduct their leadership election, so he can't be disqualified from that because of a conviction, although he can be outed as a liar and breaker of electoral law - which should disqualify him in the eyes of the UKIP membership.
Labour to win Most Seats at the Next General Election appears most generously priced with Betfair Exchange at present. Earlier this evening I succeeded in getting a few quid on at 6.25 (6.0 net) and there's still over £100 to be had at 5.6 (5.37 net). This is way ahead of the bookies' odds which range between a very paltry 3.0 (from BetVictor) and 4.0. With 3 years and 9 months to go before the next scheduled GE, it's difficult to imagine that there won't be a handsome trading profit to be realised with Betfair, somewhere along the line.
Woolfe also outlined some excellent policies today on new grammars for boroughs with the lowest academic attainment and a trust with public and private backing to help young people from lower income families pay fees and living costs
Woolfe also outlined some excellent policies today on new grammars for boroughs with the lowest academic attainment and a trust with public and private backing to help young people from lower income families pay fees and living costs
Which is probably why he's being kept off the ballot paper.
Clearly, Nigel is still pulling the strings. He doesn't want a successor whom he either doesn't control or who doesn't look up to him as a Demi-God or, worse, might do better than him.
This megalomania and egoism has always been the least attractive thing about him.
So why was Nigel thunderously denouncing the NEC for being a bunch of numpties?
And so one wonders who gave the BBC the story about Woolfe's previous drink driving conviction, which it seems he overlooked to declare when he applied.
Is the issue not that he previously stood for a PCC election, for which the conviction would have disqualified him if it had been noted at the time - and therefore was a breach of electoral law not to have declared it.
It would be an internal UKIP matter how they conduct their leadership election, so he can't be disqualified from that because of a conviction, although he can be outed as a liar and breaker of electoral law - which should disqualify him in the eyes of the UKIP membership.
It should also raise a few questions at the Bar Council...
Woolfe also outlined some excellent policies today on new grammars for boroughs with the lowest academic attainment and a trust with public and private backing to help young people from lower income families pay fees and living costs
Woolfe also outlined some excellent policies today on new grammars for boroughs with the lowest academic attainment and a trust with public and private backing to help young people from lower income families pay fees and living costs
Which is probably why he's being kept off the ballot paper.
Clearly, Nigel is still pulling the strings. He doesn't want a successor whom he either doesn't control or who doesn't look up to him as a Demi-God or, worse, might do better than him.
This megalomania and egoism has always been the least attractive thing about him.
So why was Nigel thunderously denouncing the NEC for being a bunch of numpties?
And so one wonders who gave the BBC the story about Woolfe's previous drink driving conviction, which it seems he overlooked to declare when he applied.
Is the issue not that he previously stood for a PCC election, for which the conviction would have disqualified him if it had been noted at the time - and therefore was a breach of electoral law not to have declared it.
It would be an internal UKIP matter how they conduct their leadership election, so he can't be disqualified from that because of a conviction, although he can be outed as a liar and breaker of electoral law - which should disqualify him in the eyes of the UKIP membership.
Which makes me wonder whether, rather than incompetently missing his train or oversleeping before sending the email, as we all thought earlier, he actually chose to walk round the block a few times with his application papers in his pocket? For surely he had a hint this was coming...
The nightmare for the Conservatives would be a Labour split and the development of a non-socialist party of the centre or centre left. This wouldn't be because of the Labour MPs and activists who would join it or even the few Conservatives it might tempt but (as was the case with the SDP) the large number of previously inactive people who would join and support such a party.
So many of those who joined the SDP in 1981-82 weren't members of a party but considered the SDP something they wanted to be part of. Politically green as grass but not lacking in enthusiasm, they would be a far more potent threat than anything Labour, UKIP or the LDs can currently manage.
Will it happen ? It might but not now - it might take another 12 months or more as setting up a new party isn't easy especially for those who have spent decades in other parties.
The 2017 County Council elections will be most informative - the 2018 London locals arguably more so.
I don't think that is a nightmare for the Conservatives when they also hold the centre, unless such a new party allied with the LDs it might well come 5th behind the Tories, Corbyn Labour and UKIP and the Liberal Democrats
Yes indeed, if it is just David Lammy and some other malcontents, without much of a party base, trying to peddle whatever Blairism is nowadays (foreign interventions and rejoining the EU?) around the council estates.
We on PB - just as the MPs at Westminster - are starting with questions of tactics, touching on strategy on a good day, when really the debate should start from the question what is a left of centre (but not far left) party actually for in the financially-strapped 21st century? That moderate Labour has supposedly been wrestling with this question for some time but not got much beyond "we're not Tories" and "we'll borrow a little more and invest a little more" is the nub of the matter.
So if Labour can't work out what they are for after all this time then perhaps they don't have a purpose any longer, perhaps they should admit that the world that called them into being has gone and they should now go too.
That will not happen, of course, so Labour will plug along desperately pretending that they are a social movement with a support base that retracts further into identity politics.
Woolfe also outlined some excellent policies today on new grammars for boroughs with the lowest academic attainment and a trust with public and private backing to help young people from lower income families pay fees and living costs
Woolfe also outlined some excellent policies today on new grammars for boroughs with the lowest academic attainment and a trust with public and private backing to help young people from lower income families pay fees and living costs
Which is probably why he's being kept off the ballot paper.
Clearly, Nigel is still pulling the strings. He doesn't want a successor whom he either doesn't control or who doesn't look up to him as a Demi-God or, worse, might do better than him.
This megalomania and egoism has always been the least attractive thing about him.
So why was Nigel thunderously denouncing the NEC for being a bunch of numpties?
And so one wonders who gave the BBC the story about Woolfe's previous drink driving conviction, which it seems he overlooked to declare when he applied.
Is the issue not that he previously stood for a PCC election, for which the conviction would have disqualified him if it had been noted at the time - and therefore was a breach of electoral law not to have declared it.
It would be an internal UKIP matter how they conduct their leadership election, so he can't be disqualified from that because of a conviction, although he can be outed as a liar and breaker of electoral law - which should disqualify him in the eyes of the UKIP membership.
Bringing the party into disrepute is normally good enough to eliminate a candidate.
Mr. Llama, think I've been to most of those places at one time or another.
York Minster is a fantastic building. Steps are bloody steep, though.
I agree about York Minster, but it was a very long time ago that we visited it. Be that as it may, Herself has seen those photos and has declared Yorkshire is where we shall be spending our next holiday once the cat has gone through the great cat-flap (can't go on holiday while he is still alive in case something happens to him and we can't put him in gaol because he wouldn't like it).
Mr Llama: have you thought of getting a cat sitter?
Oh, yes, Mrs Free, but neither of us could properly relax and both of us would feel awfully guilty if something happened while we were away. Thomas is about nineteen now (a rescue so we are not sure of exact age) and, whilst according to our nice German lady vet he is in "remarkably good physical condition for his age" he is getting a bit daft. So all in all it is easier and best if Herself and I don't both go away at the same time.
Goodness me: what a fine age Thomas is. Must be all that wonderful Waitrose food you spoil him with! My last two cats both lived until they were 20. I am fortunate that there is always a member of the extended family around to care for our pets when we are away.
No his cause is hopeless, as is he which would be the inevitable conclusion of anyone watching his floundering interview on Channel 4. Basically not the Messiah just the naughty boy or a "Smithite" as he put it himself in his own untrustworthy way.
Hopeless or apocalyptic, that is Labour's choice in a nutshell
it is certainly unfortunate -- given his misogynistic language & attitudes -- that Owen’s main opponents are all women (Theresa, Leanne, Nicola).
I am not actually sure that Owen is an improvement on Jeremy, even judged on the narrow grounds of electability.
A dead parrot would be an improvement on Jeremy in terms of electability, that is how low Labour have fallen
I think it is wrong to say that Labour has fallen. That would be saying that it wasn't their fault. This mess is entirely of their own creation.
No his cause is hopeless, as is he which would be the inevitable conclusion of anyone watching his floundering interview on Channel 4. Basically not the Messiah just the naughty boy or a "Smithite" as he put it himself in his own untrustworthy way.
Hopeless or apocalyptic, that is Labour's choice in a nutshell
it is certainly unfortunate -- given his misogynistic language & attitudes -- that Owen’s main opponents are all women (Theresa, Leanne, Nicola).
I am not actually sure that Owen is an improvement on Jeremy, even judged on the narrow grounds of electability.
A dead parrot would be an improvement on Jeremy in terms of electability, that is how low Labour have fallen
I think it is wrong to say that Labour has fallen. That would be saying that it wasn't their fault. This mess is entirely of their own creation.
Indeed, even the Tories replaced IDS after 2 years. To elect an incapable leader once is unfortunate, to re-elect them is unforgiveable
Woolfe also outlined some excellent policies today on new grammars for boroughs with the lowest academic attainment and a trust with public and private backing to help young people from lower income families pay fees and living costs
Woolfe also outlined some excellent policies today on new grammars for boroughs with the lowest academic attainment and a trust with public and private backing to help young people from lower income families pay fees and living costs
Which is probably why he's being kept off the ballot paper.
Clearly, Nigel is still pulling the strings. He doesn't want a successor whom he either doesn't control or who doesn't look up to him as a Demi-God or, worse, might do better than him.
This megalomania and egoism has always been the least attractive thing about him.
So why was Nigel thunderously denouncing the NEC for being a bunch of numpties?
And so one wonders who gave the BBC the story about Woolfe's previous drink driving conviction, which it seems he overlooked to declare when he applied.
Is the issue not that he previously stood for a PCC election, for which the conviction would have disqualified him if it had been noted at the time - and therefore was a breach of electoral law not to have declared it.
It would be an internal UKIP matter how they conduct their leadership election, so he can't be disqualified from that because of a conviction, although he can be outed as a liar and breaker of electoral law - which should disqualify him in the eyes of the UKIP membership.
One would have thought so, Mr. Pit, but standards in public life these days are so low.
No his cause is hopeless, as is he which would be the inevitable conclusion of anyone watching his floundering interview on Channel 4. Basically not the Messiah just the naughty boy or a "Smithite" as he put it himself in his own untrustworthy way.
Hopeless or apocalyptic, that is Labour's choice in a nutshell
it is certainly unfortunate -- given his misogynistic language & attitudes -- that Owen’s main opponents are all women (Theresa, Leanne, Nicola).
I am not actually sure that Owen is an improvement on Jeremy, even judged on the narrow grounds of electability.
A dead parrot would be an improvement on Jeremy in terms of electability, that is how low Labour have fallen
I am not sure that is correct.
My independent (formerly LibDem) councillor has sent round a number of emails to people in the council ward very supportive of Corbyn. He argues that Jeremy has been pilloried by the media and not given a fair chance by the PLP.
I mention this, and the Councillor's background, to show that there is at least some sympathy for Jeremy from sources other than the usual suspects on the hard left..
It is not possible to lead a parliamentary party that does not want to be led. Jeremy has been dealt an impossible hand.
My own opinion is that Jeremy deserved support from the PLP for at least two years (given the strength of his mandate). They failed him. He didn’t fail them.
Is Owen better? No way.
Owen’s Parliamentary expenses (2010-2015) are £ 150,681 (excluding office costs). Jeremy’s are £ 5 618.
I don’t find Owen Smith at all likeable -- he represents the most detestable features of the South Wales Labour party. He is greedy, thuggish & misogynistic.
No his cause is hopeless, as is he which would be the inevitable conclusion of anyone watching his floundering interview on Channel 4. Basically not the Messiah just the naughty boy or a "Smithite" as he put it himself in his own untrustworthy way.
Hopeless or apocalyptic, that is Labour's choice in a nutshell
it is certainly unfortunate -- given his misogynistic language & attitudes -- that Owen’s main opponents are all women (Theresa, Leanne, Nicola).
I am not actually sure that Owen is an improvement on Jeremy, even judged on the narrow grounds of electability.
A dead parrot would be an improvement on Jeremy in terms of electability, that is how low Labour have fallen
I think it is wrong to say that Labour has fallen. That would be saying that it wasn't their fault. This mess is entirely of their own creation.
I suggest that if you throw yourself off a building you will find that you have fallen....
All of the key mistakes were made by the so-called moderates who are now so unhappy. They were the numpties that lent Corbyn their nominations 'just to widen the debate'. They were the ones that changed the rules to sell votes at £3 each. They were the ones that went along with abstaining on the benefit cuts thus giving Corbyn his Sanders moment. And they are the ones who have made such an unbelievable mess of trying to replace Corbyn which, had it been written as a story, would never until now have been believed. And they still continue to dig.
The nightmare for the Conservatives would be a Labour split and the development of a non-socialist party of the centre or centre left. This wouldn't be because of the Labour MPs and activists who would join it or even the few Conservatives it might tempt but (as was the case with the SDP) the large number of previously inactive people who would join and support such a party.
So many of those who joined the SDP in 1981-82 weren't members of a party but considered the SDP something they wanted to be part of. Politically green as grass but not lacking in enthusiasm, they would be a far more potent threat than anything Labour, UKIP or the LDs can currently manage.
Will it happen ? It might but not now - it might take another 12 months or more as setting up a new party isn't easy especially for those who have spent decades in other parties.
The 2017 County Council elections will be most informative - the 2018 London locals arguably more so.
I don't think that is a nightmare for the Conservatives when they also hold the centre, unless such a new party allied with the LDs it might well come 5th behind the Tories, Corbyn Labour and UKIP and the Liberal Democrats
Yes indeed, if it is just David Lammy and some other malcontents, without much of a party base, trying to peddle whatever Blairism is nowadays (foreign interventions and rejoining the EU?) around the council estates.
We on PB - just as the MPs at Westminster - are starting with questions of tactics, touching on strategy on a good day, when really the debate should start from the question what is a left of centre (but not far left) party actually for in the financially-strapped 21st century? That moderate Labour has supposedly been wrestling with this question for some time but not got much beyond "we're not Tories" and "we'll borrow a little more and invest a little more" is the nub of the matter.
So if Labour can't work out what they are for after all this time then perhaps they don't have a purpose any longer, perhaps they should admit that the world that called them into being has gone and they should now go too.
That will not happen, of course, so Labour will plug along desperately pretending that they are a social movement with a support base that retracts further into identity politics.
It's the old saw. Politicians know what needs to be done, they just don't know how to be reelected once they've done it. Almost half the country takes out more than they put in. It's not sustainable. We're addicted to universal benefits (some multi-generational race memory of the horrors of '30s means testing?) that we can't afford. I could rant, but I shan't .
The nightmare for the Conservatives would be a Labour split and the development of a non-socialist party of the centre or centre left. This wouldn't be because of the Labour MPs and activists who would join it or even the few Conservatives it might tempt but (as was the case with the SDP) the large number of previously inactive people who would join and support such a party.
So many of those who joined the SDP in 1981-82 weren't members of a party but considered the SDP something they wanted to be part of. Politically green as grass but not lacking in enthusiasm, they would be a far more potent threat than anything Labour, UKIP or the LDs can currently manage.
Will it happen ? It might but not now - it might take another 12 months or more as setting up a new party isn't easy especially for those who have spent decades in other parties.
The 2017 County Council elections will be most informative - the 2018 London locals arguably more so.
I don't think that is a nightmare for the Conservatives when they also hold the centre, unless such a new party allied with the LDs it might well come 5th behind the Tories, Corbyn Labour and UKIP and the Liberal Democrats
Yes indeed, if it is just David Lammy and some other malcontents, without much of a party base, trying to peddle whatever Blairism is nowadays (foreign interventions and rejoining the EU?) around the council estates.
We on PB - just as the MPs at Westminster - are starting with questions of tactics, touching on strategy on a good day, when really the debate should start from the question what is a left of centre (but not far left) party actually for in the financially-strapped 21st century? That moderate Labour has supposedly been wrestling with this question for some time but not got much beyond "we're not Tories" and "we'll borrow a little more and invest a little more" is the nub of the matter.
So if Labour can't work out what they are for after all this time then perhaps they don't have a purpose any longer, perhaps they should admit that the world that called them into being has gone and they should now go too.
That will not happen, of course, so Labour will plug along desperately pretending that they are a social movement with a support base that retracts further into identity politics.
There is a perfectly respectable if questionable cause to be for in British politics, which is: Not Tories. It is time-honoured and it is worth a lot of votes. Alex Salmond learned that the clever way. Nick Clegg, the hard way.
Woolfe also outlined some excellent policies today on new grammars for boroughs with the lowest academic attainment and a trust with public and private backing to help young people from lower income families pay fees and living costs
Woolfe also outlined some excellent policies today on new grammars for boroughs with the lowest academic attainment and a trust with public and private backing to help young people from lower income families pay fees and living costs
Which is probably why he's being kept off the ballot paper.
Clearly, Nigel is still pulling the strings. He doesn't want a successor whom he either doesn't control or who doesn't look up to him as a Demi-God or, worse, might do better than him.
This megalomania and egoism has always been the least attractive thing about him.
So why was Nigel thunderously denouncing the NEC for being a bunch of numpties?
And one wonders who gave the BBC the story about Woolfe's previous drink driving conviction, which it seems he overlooked to declare when he applied.
George W Bush had a drink driving conviction, did not stop him being elected US President
He followed this by becoming a born again Christian and teetotal. Has Woolfe?
Woolfe also outlined some excellent policies today on new grammars for boroughs with the lowest academic attainment and a trust with public and private backing to help young people from lower income families pay fees and living costs
Woolfe also outlined some excellent policies today on new grammars for boroughs with the lowest academic attainment and a trust with public and private backing to help young people from lower income families pay fees and living costs
Which is probably why he's being kept off the ballot paper.
Clearly, Nigel is still pulling the strings. He doesn't want a successor whom he either doesn't control or who doesn't look up to him as a Demi-God or, worse, might do better than him.
This megalomania and egoism has always been the least attractive thing about him.
So why was Nigel thunderously denouncing the NEC for being a bunch of numpties?
And so one wonders who gave the BBC the story about Woolfe's previous drink driving conviction, which it seems he overlooked to declare when he applied.
Is the issue not that he previously stood for a PCC election, for which the conviction would have disqualified him if it had been noted at the time - and therefore was a breach of electoral law not to have declared it.
It would be an internal UKIP matter how they conduct their leadership election, so he can't be disqualified from that because of a conviction, although he can be outed as a liar and breaker of electoral law - which should disqualify him in the eyes of the UKIP membership.
The average white working class voter is not going to care less whether Woolfe should have been disqualified for having had a few too many to drink once when driving which disqualified him from an election virtually nobody votes in anyway. Yes, Woolfe may have made a mistake but don't we all?
They will catch 5 to 10 seconds of clips of Woolfe, a Moss Side Lad made good whose brother played for Bolton Wanderers, and 5 to 10 seconds of clips of Corbyn, a prep school boy brought up in a large house in Shropshire who has no understanding of their lives other than bleating about Marxist revolution and it will be no contest
What I want to know was what was a mid 30s lawyer (I believe with a hedge fund?) doing riding around on a scooter, like a drunken deliveroo delivery person?
No his cause is hopeless, as is he which would be the inevitable conclusion of anyone watching his floundering interview on Channel 4. Basically not the Messiah just the naughty boy or a "Smithite" as he put it himself in his own untrustworthy way.
Hopeless or apocalyptic, that is Labour's choice in a nutshell
it is certainly unfortunate -- given his misogynistic language & attitudes -- that Owen’s main opponents are all women (Theresa, Leanne, Nicola).
I am not actually sure that Owen is an improvement on Jeremy, even judged on the narrow grounds of electability.
A dead parrot would be an improvement on Jeremy in terms of electability, that is how low Labour have fallen
I am not sure that is correct.
My independent (formerly LibDem) councillor has sent round a number of emails to people in the council ward very supportive of Corbyn. He argues that Jeremy has been pilloried by the media and not given a fair chance by the PLP.
I mention this, and the Councillor's background, to show that there is at least some sympathy for Jeremy from sources other than the usual suspects on the hard left..
It is not possible to lead a parliamentary party that does not want to be led. Jeremy has been dealt an impossible hand.
My own opinion is that Jeremy deserved support from the PLP for at least two years (given the strength of his mandate). They failed him. He didn’t fail them.
Is Owen better? No way.
Owen’s Parliamentary expenses (2010-2015) are £ 150,681 (excluding office costs). Jeremy’s are £ 5 618.
I don’t find Owen Smith at all likeable -- he represents the most detestable features of the South Wales Labour party. He is greedy, thuggish & misogynistic.
God help Labour.
I would agree myself - if the only choices available were Corbyn or the machine politicians of the Labour right, I would be tempted with Corbyn - at least I would know he was sincere and at least there would be the prospect of some change.
I wish we had PR. There is a perfectly respectable place for a genuine left party that would pull in 15-25% of the vote, and would either provide challenging opposition to a centre-right government or, if it had a share of power itself, could see some of its platform introduced whilst having all the truly unacceptable or nutty stuff screened out by its coalition partner.
Woolfe also outlined some excellent policies today on new grammars for boroughs with the lowest academic attainment and a trust with public and private backing to help young people from lower income families pay fees and living costs
Woolfe also outlined some excellent policies today on new grammars for boroughs with the lowest academic attainment and a trust with public and private backing to help young people from lower income families pay fees and living costs
Which is probably why he's being kept off the ballot paper.
Clearly, Nigel is still pulling the strings. He doesn't want a successor whom he either doesn't control or who doesn't look up to him as a Demi-God or, worse, might do better than him.
This megalomania and egoism has always been the least attractive thing about him.
So why was Nigel thunderously denouncing the NEC for being a bunch of numpties?
And so one wonders who gave the BBC the story about Woolfe's previous drink driving conviction, which it seems he overlooked to declare when he applied.
Is the issue not that he previously stood for a PCC election, for which the conviction would have disqualified him if it had been noted at the time - and therefore was a breach of electoral law not to have declared it.
It would be an internal UKIP matter how they conduct their leadership election, so he can't be disqualified from that because of a conviction, although he can be outed as a liar and breaker of electoral law - which should disqualify him in the eyes of the UKIP membership.
It should also raise a few questions at the Bar Council...
Ooh, had forgotten he was one of those. I guess he would have to declare a conviction with them when it occurred, would that particular offence have disqualified him from the Bar? (Obviously not the other sort of bar, or he wouldn't have been done for drink driving!)
Oooh, interesting rumour that James Allison wants to link up with Alonso again so might go to McLaren for the start of next season. Would be a big catch for them. I could see McLaren do whatever it takes to keep Alonso for one extra season. Their improvement this year has been decent and they are the 4th highest scoring team over the last four races. Next year the engine development restrictions are gone and McLaren's aero plans beat the RBR aero plans with the FIA. Could be a strong season for them.
No his cause is hopeless, as is he which would be the inevitable conclusion of anyone watching his floundering interview on Channel 4. Basically not the Messiah just the naughty boy or a "Smithite" as he put it himself in his own untrustworthy way.
Hopeless or apocalyptic, that is Labour's choice in a nutshell
it is certainly unfortunate -- given his misogynistic language & attitudes -- that Owen’s main opponents are all women (Theresa, Leanne, Nicola).
I am not actually sure that Owen is an improvement on Jeremy, even judged on the narrow grounds of electability.
A dead parrot would be an improvement on Jeremy in terms of electability, that is how low Labour have fallen
I am not sure that is correct.
My independent (formerly LibDem) councillor has sent round a number of emails to people in the council ward very supportive of Corbyn. He argues that Jeremy has been pilloried by the media and not given a fair chance by the PLP.
I mention this, and the Councillor's background, to show that there is at least some sympathy for Jeremy from sources other than the usual suspects on the hard left..
It is not possible to lead a parliamentary party that does not want to be led. Jeremy has been dealt an impossible hand.
My own opinion is that Jeremy deserved support from the PLP for at least two years (given the strength of his mandate). They failed him. He didn’t fail them.
Is Owen better? No way.
Owen’s Parliamentary expenses (2010-2015) are £ 150,681 (excluding office costs). Jeremy’s are £ 5 618.
I don’t find Owen Smith at all likeable -- he represents the most detestable features of the South Wales Labour party. He is greedy, thuggish & misogynistic.
God help Labour.
I'm an ex-LD (I was so LD I even casted my vote for the LD in the 2009 euros, despite being a euroskeptic). Last year I supported grudgingly Yvette Cooper, but switched to Corbyn because of the distasteful and appalling behaviour of his opponents.
Over the course of the past year I have become so angry by the behaviour of the PLP, I would really support their mass deselection despite being myself a more middle of the road type. They are such bad losers and backstabbers they just invite you to kick them in the balls.
Jim Waterson UKIP leadership election is first-past-the-post with lots of candidates & only c40,000 voters. So new leader could win on, say, 30% of vote.
So UKIP is the last bastion standing against the relentless spread of AV
If there had been more about AV on PB I would have known this already.
By the look of it they are struggling with the 1832 Reform Act!
Everything went wrong after 1832. That was when the rot set in.
For the traditional landed classes and aristocracy it is.
There is also a good argument to say that parliament was, for a time, less representative post 1832 (until the 1860s) because the concept of 'virtual' representation was lost with the Great Reform Act.
Not really. It was the agricultural depression of the 1870s that killed them
Corn law repeal and the widening of the franchise started "the rot" institutionally.
They've been eroded ever since. Death duties were a massive 20th Century blow. Economic change post WWI even worse.
I suppose you could add ejection of the hereditaries from the Lords, too, but that wasn't exactly the storming of the Bastille.
A lot of landed families did very well out of the repeal of the corn laws - it was only those who didn't understand who were opposed.
The 1870s saw the break up of the great estates, the breaking of trusts to sell assets. The other big blow was the high casualty rate in WWI - whole lines were wiped out causing havoic among the entailed estates. Death duties were managable - always have been with careful planning; economic change has been a benefit in many cases.
It is interesting to note the resilience of some of the old families. The three biggest landowners in West Sussex a hundred years ago are still the three biggest landowners today. Furthermore, the dual carriageway of the A27 still stops either side of Arundel - allegedly the old, old Duke of Norfolk didn't want it going through his meadows and it never has.
Indeed a friend if mine (tongue firmly in cheek) was complaining that he had to go out to work (he is a partner in a private equity firm) as his family was down to their last stately home (having sold 6 over the last 100 years) and he didn't want to lose that one as it was the original farm on which their fortune was based.
The best known one (National Trust these days) is not so far from you in West Sussex
Woolfe also outlined some excellent policies today on new grammars for boroughs with the lowest academic attainment and a trust with public and private backing to help young people from lower income families pay fees and living costs
Woolfe also outlined some excellent policies today on new grammars for boroughs with the lowest academic attainment and a trust with public and private backing to help young people from lower income families pay fees and living costs
Which is probably why he's being kept off the ballot paper.
Clearly, Nigel is still pulling the strings. He doesn't want a successor whom he either doesn't control or who doesn't look up to him as a Demi-God or, worse, might do better than him.
This megalomania and egoism has always been the least attractive thing about him.
So why was Nigel thunderously denouncing the NEC for being a bunch of numpties?
And one wonders who gave the BBC the story about Woolfe's previous drink driving conviction, which it seems he overlooked to declare when he applied.
George W Bush had a drink driving conviction, did not stop him being elected US President
That is absolutely not the point, which is that he failed to declare the conviction when standing for police commissioner in 2012. That is at least on a par with Creases Huhne's indiscretion, and will be his downfall.
It's the old saw. Politicians know what needs to be done, they just don't know how to be reelected once they've done it. Almost half the country takes out more than they put in. It's not sustainable. We're addicted to universal benefits (some multi-generational race memory of the horrors of '30s means testing?) that we can't afford. I could rant, but I shan't .
Rant away, dear boy, you speak more sense than nearly all of our politicians. The idea of multi-generational memory of 1930s means testing is very interesting and comes back, perhaps, to what I have been nagging on about of late - the Labour Party is time-expired. Labour's world has gone but in its policies it keeps trying to drag us back to re-fight old wars. Perhaps once it expires as an electoral force we might be able to move on and look at the problems of the 21st century and, God knows, there are enough of them
Comments
No-one is actually on the list at the moment. And given his failure to meet the deadline and his failure to declare his conviction, Woolfe is having a tricky couple of days.
She's scorchio...
http://data.cnbc.com/quotes/@CL.1
There are no left wing parties of size in america, they where destroyed by successive red scares.
America is like an oversized Poland with a scattering of Londons.
Will the UK be asked to pay up for their share of future EU pension payments (both to UK nationals and others)? There is apparently a precedent in the arrangements following the breakup of the League of Nations.
If not then Smith should concentrate on the guy in the ring. He doesn't need to show he can beat the Tories. He needs to show he can beat Corbyn. Unless a lot more people start believing that he has no chance.
And Sanders is very definitively left wing.
Afghanistan 2006-14, thousands of lives wrecked, hundreds lost, billions of pounds spent and nobody knows why. The most stupid campaign ever fought by the British army.
Clearly, Nigel is still pulling the strings. He doesn't want a successor whom he either doesn't control or who doesn't look up to him as a Demi-God or, worse, might do better than him.
This megalomania and egoism has always been the least attractive thing about him.
They've been eroded ever since. Death duties were a massive 20th Century blow. Economic change post WWI even worse.
I suppose you could add ejection of the hereditaries from the Lords, too, but that wasn't exactly the storming of the Bastille.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpAOwJvTOio
"Pregnant women and partners have been told to avoid travelling to the Miami area affected by the Zika virus, as 10 new cases are confirmed.
The warning comes as officials confirm a total of 14 cases in the state, all thought to have been spread by local mosquitoes."
http://news.sky.com/story/zika-health-experts-warn-on-travel-in-miami-10519654
The first call for the 2016/17 PB Fantasy Football League - "Political Betting All Stars".
I have just renewed the league from last year - those players already signed up for the game this season are therefore already signed up for this years PB League. You lucky people.
We had about a dozen players last season and most managed to comfortably beat the benchmark (TSE) including one poster who I don't think changed his/her team all season!
The code for this league is 843320-227121
https://fantasy.premierleague.com/
http://www.breitbart.com/jerusalem/2016/08/01/pa-president-abbas-fatah-party-publishes-cartoon-with-jew-bombing-muslim-world/
It is Carswell et al who are interested in keeping Woolfe off the list.
The 1870s saw the break up of the great estates, the breaking of trusts to sell assets. The other big blow was the high casualty rate in WWI - whole lines were wiped out causing havoic among the entailed estates. Death duties were managable - always have been with careful planning; economic change has been a benefit in many cases.
@Casino_Royale : Hasn't he stuffed them with his men?
Those two claims are not mutually exclusive...
Roosevelt's New Deal wasn't the sort of thing a Conservative party would have been doing, however. Indeed from what I recall of US political history the striking thing is how both the positions and the geography of the two parties' support has dramatically shifted over the years, much more so than during the same period in the UK.
The nightmare for the Conservatives would be a Labour split and the development of a non-socialist party of the centre or centre left. This wouldn't be because of the Labour MPs and activists who would join it or even the few Conservatives it might tempt but (as was the case with the SDP) the large number of previously inactive people who would join and support such a party.
So many of those who joined the SDP in 1981-82 weren't members of a party but considered the SDP something they wanted to be part of. Politically green as grass but not lacking in enthusiasm, they would be a far more potent threat than anything Labour, UKIP or the LDs can currently manage.
Will it happen ? It might but not now - it might take another 12 months or more as setting up a new party isn't easy especially for those who have spent decades in other parties.
The 2017 County Council elections will be most informative - the 2018 London locals arguably more so.
Without one or the other it would face the same handful-of-seats plus tons of second places that befell the Alliance in 1983.
Since there is probably 20% support for a Corbyn type left party, the question isn't really what appeal the new entity has to former Labour voters (the residue of Labour support would have to be taken for granted), but whether its appeal to 'soft Tories' would be strong enough to put a big dent in Conservative support. The problem here is that the suggested entity would be founded by a bunch of disgruntled Labour MPs, at a time when neither wing of Labour is particularly credible or popular.
Even the SDP brought in a good degree of former Tory support (look at all the SDP'ers who ended up back with the Tories, Truss, Greening, Finklestein et al), even if the top names were all Labour.
Unless Brexit turns very sour - which is several years away even if it happens - or unless May re-introduces the poll tax or some similar brainwave - it is hard to see a new centre party pulling much from the Tories right now.
The fact that after a few weeks when men, women, children have been massacred and an elderly priest butchered like an animal next to his altar, an act calculated to desecrate Christianity, after arrests and charges in Belgium, arrests in Germany, a suicide bombing and the security services here warning of the terror plots they are trying to foil and their fears that something similar will happen here Corbyn's priority is to hobble one of the few services we rely on to protect us tells us all we need to know not just about his priorities but about his default instincts. And what they tell me is not a good story. Quite the opposite.
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/08/01/ukip-needs-to-play-the-long-game-and-bypass-the-total-amateurs-on-the-national-executive-committee/
I am not actually sure that Owen is an improvement on Jeremy, even judged on the narrow grounds of electability.
http://www.dw.com/en/opinion-an-absurd-threat-from-ankara/a-19442448
https://twitter.com/robwoodyard1/status/759603314304704513
https://twitter.com/harryallen/status/759609081262903296
We on PB - just as the MPs at Westminster - are starting with questions of tactics, touching on strategy on a good day, when really the debate should start from the question what is a left of centre (but not far left) party actually for in the financially-strapped 21st century? That moderate Labour has supposedly been wrestling with this question for some time but not got much beyond "we're not Tories" and "we'll borrow a little more and invest a little more" is the nub of the matter.
*edit for crimes against grammar*
Labour to win Most Seats at the Next General Election appears most generously priced with Betfair Exchange at present. Earlier this evening I succeeded in getting a few quid on at 6.25 (6.0 net) and there's still over £100 to be had at 5.6 (5.37 net). This is way ahead of the bookies' odds which range between a very paltry 3.0 (from BetVictor) and 4.0.
With 3 years and 9 months to go before the next scheduled GE, it's difficult to imagine that there won't be a handsome trading profit to be realised with Betfair, somewhere along the line.
DYOR.
It would be an internal UKIP matter how they conduct their leadership election, so he can't be disqualified from that because of a conviction, although he can be outed as a liar and breaker of electoral law - which should disqualify him in the eyes of the UKIP membership.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5W-HAhwhXWg
Now look at Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_United_States_presidential_election,_2016
Where is the opinion poll for the 22-26th July? on the Reuters website?
That will not happen, of course, so Labour will plug along desperately pretending that they are a social movement with a support base that retracts further into identity politics.
https://twitter.com/PpollingNumbers/status/760188364956008448
That's the largest lead for Hillary ever recorded by that pollster.
http://polling.reuters.com/#poll/TM651Y15_13/filters/LIKELY:1
Their dodgy unstable methodology is the reason why I cast Reuters Polling as untrustworthy.
My independent (formerly LibDem) councillor has sent round a number of emails to people in the council ward very supportive of Corbyn. He argues that Jeremy has been pilloried by the media and not given a fair chance by the PLP.
I mention this, and the Councillor's background, to show that there is at least some sympathy for Jeremy from sources other than the usual suspects on the hard left..
It is not possible to lead a parliamentary party that does not want to be led. Jeremy has been dealt an impossible hand.
My own opinion is that Jeremy deserved support from the PLP for at least two years (given the strength of his mandate). They failed him. He didn’t fail them.
Is Owen better? No way.
Owen’s Parliamentary expenses (2010-2015) are £ 150,681 (excluding office costs). Jeremy’s are £ 5 618.
I don’t find Owen Smith at all likeable -- he represents the most detestable features of the South Wales Labour party. He is greedy, thuggish & misogynistic.
God help Labour.
All of the key mistakes were made by the so-called moderates who are now so unhappy. They were the numpties that lent Corbyn their nominations 'just to widen the debate'. They were the ones that changed the rules to sell votes at £3 each. They were the ones that went along with abstaining on the benefit cuts thus giving Corbyn his Sanders moment. And they are the ones who have made such an unbelievable mess of trying to replace Corbyn which, had it been written as a story, would never until now have been believed. And they still continue to dig.
Yes, Woolfe may have made a mistake but don't we all?
They will catch 5 to 10 seconds of clips of Woolfe, a Moss Side Lad made good whose brother played for Bolton Wanderers, and 5 to 10 seconds of clips of Corbyn, a prep school boy brought up in a large house in Shropshire who has no understanding of their lives other than bleating about Marxist revolution and it will be no contest
I wish we had PR. There is a perfectly respectable place for a genuine left party that would pull in 15-25% of the vote, and would either provide challenging opposition to a centre-right government or, if it had a share of power itself, could see some of its platform introduced whilst having all the truly unacceptable or nutty stuff screened out by its coalition partner.
new thread
Last year I supported grudgingly Yvette Cooper, but switched to Corbyn because of the distasteful and appalling behaviour of his opponents.
Over the course of the past year I have become so angry by the behaviour of the PLP, I would really support their mass deselection despite being myself a more middle of the road type.
They are such bad losers and backstabbers they just invite you to kick them in the balls.
The best known one (National Trust these days) is not so far from you in West Sussex