Ooh. Do we have an actual serious story here, after all the false starts? If she did indeed try and bribe the FBI then she's surely toast, but it's not going to be that simple. It never is with Hillary.
Fat chance of any action before the election, or after. The DOJ is letting her off the hook because it would cause chaos to indict a candidate.
The DOJ is letting her off the hook because otherwise Trump would become President.
Not sure what would happen after the election has passed, though without 67 GOP senators to impeach her, Hillary will still stay in office until she loses the 2020 election as a lame duck.
Mixed metaphors there surely? She won't be a lame duck until 2024 and can't lose the election then when she is.
Hillary won't win re-election, Trump would be too old to run in 2020.
There's no guarantee Hillary won't win re-election, especially if the GOP continues to implode.
The Carpet Seller is unconventional. They don't want repeat trade. They either want you not to enter the shop in the first place or buy a **** carpet you'll hate. They don't want success.
This is where I think most Remainers are wrong.
Yes, this is not a repeat negotiation, it is a one-off. But the relationship with the UK will be ongoing and, in key areas such as security, will remain just as important as when we were in the EU. So no, the EU will not want an 'unsuccessful' negotiation.
They'll want one that publicly can be held up to discourage other defections, but which will preserve those aspects of the EU relation with the UK that will remain vital to them. And part of that will be economic too.
The Hillary emails story is one of the dullest stories ever. It is tear inducingly dull - beaten only by Wikileaks' output on anything at all
I tend to switch off when anything to do with Wikileaks comes up. First they were going to bring Hillary Clinton down so that Bernie Sanders could replace her before the first debate, then they moved the great man's speech to Berlin because of a "specific threat", now they issue tweets with 64-digit codes in them. About the only effect they've had on this election was to cause Debbie Wasserman Schultz's resignation. Only an extremely naive whistleblower - and whistleblowers aren't usually naive - would "leak" info to a centralised address run by bods whose aim in life seems to be to think of themselves as a world power as they do deals with the New York Times and the Guardian, stopping occasionally to swan about in the Frontline Club.
I'd always assumed Clinton would be a one term president. However Trump is so nuts we could easierly now seen a Trump Party GoP House Majority sweep in in 2018 on an impeachment ticket. After two years of horrific culture wars and at least one shutdown she could be narrowly reelected.
Agreed. When haggling, you have to be willing to walk away with no deal.
Which is where Cameron so utterly failed.
It's carpet haggling 1.01...
Carpet haggling 1.02 is "don't let on what type of carpet you want - nor how much you are prepared to pay". A lesson that the Remoaners need to learn. They are as idiotic as Cameron was.
More likely they're well aware of 1.02, but are just desperately trying anything to delay the triggering of Article 50 and/or send us into negotiations as weak and hamstrung as possible in the vain hope that they can find a way to throw a spanner in the works of Brexit. All rather sad.
The problem is that (a) we decided to buy the Carpet publiclly by referendum before deciding what 1.01 and 1.02 are ( b) We still haven't decided what 1.01 and 1.02 are and in a democracy can't really be kept secret from the Carpet Seller. ( c) Once A50 is invoked we have to buy a carpet at the end of two years. We can't walk away. Only the quality of the carpet is at stake. ( d ) 48% of hagglers didn't want to buy the Carpet in the first place. ( e) of the 52% that did want floor covering there were huge disagreement what sort. ( f ) The Carpet Seller is unconventional. They don't want repeat trade. They either want you not to enter the shop in the first place or buy a **** carpet you'll hate. They don't want success.
We have to buy a carpet but there's no guarantee which carpet we will buy.
And neither the buyer nor the seller wish to conduct their negotiations with megaphones across the marketplace full of other buyers and sellers.
Agreed. When haggling, you have to be willing to walk away with no deal.
Which is where Cameron so utterly failed.
It's carpet haggling 1.01...
Carpet haggling 1.02 is "don't let on what type of carpet you want - nor how much you are prepared to pay". A lesson that the Remoaners need to learn. They are as idiotic as Cameron was.
More likely they're well aware of 1.02, but are just desperately trying anything to delay the triggering of Article 50 and/or send us into negotiations as weak and hamstrung as possible in the vain hope that they can find a way to throw a spanner in the works of Brexit. All rather sad.
The problem is that (a) we decided to buy the Carpet publiclly by referendum before deciding what 1.01 and 1.02 are ( b) We still haven't decided what 1.01 and 1.02 are and in a democracy can't really be kept secret from the Carpet Seller. ( c) Once A50 is invoked we have to buy a carpet at the end of two years. We can't walk away. Only the quality of the carpet is at stake. ( d ) 48% of hagglers didn't want to buy the Carpet in the first place. ( e) of the 52% that did want floor covering there were huge disagreement what sort. ( f ) The Carpet Seller is unconventional. They don't want repeat trade. They either want you not to enter the shop in the first place or buy a **** carpet you'll hate. They don't want success.
(a) In hindsight, having Remain / EEA / Not EEA on the ballot might have been better, but we are where we are.
(b) Governments are entitled to keep some cards close to their chest. Cameron didn't spell out every detail before his 'renegotiation', just a few big-picture aims, which is what I'd expect from May/Davis.
(c) We can walk away (WTO rules). I think we both agree that's not desirable, but to get a good carpet we have to be clear we'll take no carpet rather than pay over the odds for a mediocre one.
(d) 52% did, and most of the 48% I know accept that we are buying a carpet and want the best one.
(e) see (a)
(f) Perhaps true - but a good argument for buying a good carpet if we can and sodding off rather than whatever the equivalent of Remain is in this now rather convoluted analogy.
Ooh. Do we have an actual serious story here, after all the false starts? If she did indeed try and bribe the FBI then she's surely toast, but it's not going to be that simple. It never is with Hillary.
Fat chance of any action before the election, or after. The DOJ is letting her off the hook because it would cause chaos to indict a candidate.
The DOJ is letting her off the hook because otherwise Trump would become President.
Not sure what would happen after the election has passed, though without 67 GOP senators to impeach her, Hillary will still stay in office until she loses the 2020 election as a lame duck.
Mixed metaphors there surely? She won't be a lame duck until 2024 and can't lose the election then when she is.
Hillary won't win re-election, Trump would be too old to run in 2020.
There's no guarantee Hillary won't win re-election, especially if the GOP continues to implode.
With multiple scandals, multiple wars, recession, civil strife, she is already unpopular.
She has a good chance to win this time because she is facing Trump, but has zero chance to win in 2020 because she will be facing all of the above without Trump.
It all depends what people mean by an early election. Next Spring is certainly very possible. Too late now. No one will want an election after the clocks go back plus the £ is too unsettled. The big problem is the shape of Brexit isn't in the Goldilocks Zone yet. For a successful Brexit election you need enough of an outline to claim a mandate but not enough of an outline to maximise opposition or get bogged down in the details. The other issue, May having ruled an election out, is you need a casus beli. You need either a Bruxelles or Parliamentary blockage to be cleared. But we won't get these ( if they happen ) till the middle of next year. ECA repeal isn't until the new session. Tusk's ' Hard Brexit or No Brexit ' wouldn't play until A50 is invoked.
The Earliest I can see is if the Supreme Court rules an Act of Parliament is needed to invoke A50. May tries to rush through a one clause bill then a pro Single Market Commons and Lords passes it but wth multiple Sunrise and Sunset clauses. May abandons it and goes to the country on the first Thursday in May. Or Mayday as the Sun will call it.
I'm well aware how many variables there are in scenario. It's highly speculative. And of course Governments can stage false flag casus beli very easierly. But in a curious way if May wants the option of an early election the Supreme Court mandating an A50 bill may be her best bet.
And what happens if Corbyn refuses to play ball with any wish by TM to call an election for May 4th next year?
Ooh. Do we have an actual serious story here, after all the false starts? If she did indeed try and bribe the FBI then she's surely toast, but it's not going to be that simple. It never is with Hillary.
Like lots of the dodgy stuff relating to the Clintons e.g. pay for play allegations, I am sure there won't be a smoking gun. Somebody is always the unlucky fall guy and will get chucked under the bus if required.
Its the advantage of knowing the system inside out. It reminds me of House of Cards (US edition)...
Her statement that she didn't understand the classification markings is an outright lie, if at the same time her number two at State is discussing them with the FBI.
I've said before that the RNC PAC would be mad not to run a spoof 'House of Cards' trailer from the final debate to Election Day.
If she truly *didn't* understand the classification markings, wouldn't that make her too stupid to Secretary of State?
In the eyes of most people, yes, but Mrs Slopey Shoulders will find some weasel words to get around it, probably involving Russian hackers and trying to shoot the messenger.
What would affect her is evidence of a straight up lie to the emails enquiry, alas I don't think we've got that yet.
I cant help thinking that the fact that the story is not only boring but is the sort of thing most people think whats the big deal about this or serve the authorities right for being so an*l, which is going to make it very difficult for a gun to smoke whatever is in it.
It all depends what people mean by an early election. Next Spring is certainly very possible. Too late now. No one will want an election after the clocks go back plus the £ is too unsettled. The big problem is the shape of Brexit isn't in the Goldilocks Zone yet. For a successful Brexit election you need enough of an outline to claim a mandate but not enough of an outline to maximise opposition or get bogged down in the details. The other issue, May having ruled an election out, is you need a casus beli. You need either a Bruxelles or Parliamentary blockage to be cleared. But we won't get these ( if they happen ) till the middle of next year. ECA repeal isn't until the new session. Tusk's ' Hard Brexit or No Brexit ' wouldn't play until A50 is invoked.
The Earliest I can see is if the Supreme Court rules an Act of Parliament is needed to invoke A50. May tries to rush through a one clause bill then a pro Single Market Commons and Lords passes it but wth multiple Sunrise and Sunset clauses. May abandons it and goes to the country on the first Thursday in May. Or Mayday as the Sun will call it.
I'm well aware how many variables there are in scenario. It's highly speculative. And of course Governments can stage false flag casus beli very easierly. But in a curious way if May wants the option of an early election the Supreme Court mandating an A50 bill may be her best bet.
And what happens if Corbyn refuses to play ball with any wish by TM to call an election for May 4th next year?
That said, and playing with electoral calculus, it is amazing how low Labour's support has to go before they are overtaken.
Even if you input a result of
45 Tories
20 Lib Dems
10 Labour
10 UKIP
5 Greens
Labour are STILL the second largest party!
FPTP will keep Labour alive for a long long time, even if it condemns them to semi-permanent opposition. Piquant.
At that level of swing calculators aren't worth anything.
Still, it would take an earthquake to dislodge Labour from its 100 safest seats. That earthquake might have been UKIP. Not any more. Labour aren't going to die out any time soon.
Remember they only died in Scotland coz there was a vivid alternative, the SNP. Lacking that, Labour in England will endure, and surely revive one day
Agreed. If the Liberals had an eye catching leader they could challenge well for centrist and centre left votes, particularly in areas where Labour are nowhere. Then the Tories would again be under threat from a Lib Lab pact.
Maybe not yet, but the Tories appear very likely indeed to lose their majority. More likely still is the unlikelihood of any other party winning an overall majority in 2020. For that reason, I keep asking for and getting 3.0 on Betfair on a "No Overall Majority" outcome at the next GE. Pretty close to being free money imho, at surprisingly good odds, albeit that one probably has to wait three and a half years to collect, unless deciding to trade out in the meantime. I sense that were Rod Crosby to return to PB.com, he'd be shouting the virtues of such a bet from the rooftops!
The Hillary emails story is one of the dullest stories ever. It is tear inducingly dull - beaten only by Wikileaks' output on anything at all
...the Frontline Club.
Wow, that's a name from the past. I did some work for them when they first opened, maybe a dozen years ago. Vaughan Smith set it up. What's it like these days, anyone been there recently?
Unless inflation goes absolutely crazy, I can't see it personally.
Most Brexit supporters are of an age where they can recall real inflation, while ultra-low interest rates of 0.25% have been terrible for the prudent.
It's also worth noting that outright owners who were heavily in favour of Leave and most likely to vote, account for a third of all households. They are safe from mortgage rate changes.
A great many also feel that house prices should fall for the benefit of their children and grandchildren who form generation rent.
People were told all the worst case scenarios - penury, world war 3, no one will talk to us or deal with us, back of the queue etc - and still voted Leave.
It's difficult to envisage all but the very softest leavers having a change of heart.
Yes, I think it's wishful thinking by Ganesh. However I do think it's possible, indeed probable, that public opinion will swing behind a Very Soft Brexit as the economic indicators go negative (and they will). There is already evidence of this in the ComRes poll showing voters emphasising trade.
But that could be me - a Soft Brexiteer - indulging my own wishful thinking!
What is this "Soft BrExit" of which you speak ?
We have to at least entertain the possibility that Tusk was speaking the truth, that is Hard BrExit or No BrExit. The later of which is a guaranteed election loss.
Canada are negotiating very significant trade access with no obligation on FoM.
Is that Hard, Soft, Remain?
The Spanish Foreign Minister was suggesting that option was open to us.
Canada didn't just vote to leave the EU.
I never think it is a good idea to underestimate the small mindedness of our EU "friends" when their unrealistic fantasy dream is under threat.
When many Leavers, particularly of the UKIP variety, regularly make it clear they want to bring down the EU is it really any surprise that the EU is reluctant to do us any favours? Whether we like it or not UKIP are the public face of Britain in the European Parliament, given their track record of winning friends and influencing people we'll be lucky if we get any deal at all.
Agreed. When haggling, you have to be willing to walk away with no deal.
Which is where Cameron so utterly failed.
It's carpet haggling 1.01...
Carpet haggling 1.02 is "don't let on what type of carpet you want - nor how much you are prepared to pay". A lesson that the Remoaners need to learn. They are as idiotic as Cameron was.
More likely they're well aware of 1.02, but are just desperately trying anything to delay the triggering of Article 50 and/or send us into negotiations as weak and hamstrung as possible in the vain hope that they can find a way to throw a spanner in the works of Brexit. All rather sad.
The problem is that (a) we decided to buy the Carpet publiclly by referendum before deciding what 1.01 and 1.02 are ( b) We still haven't decided what 1.01 and 1.02 are and in a democracy can't really be kept secret from the Carpet Seller. ( c) Once A50 is invoked we have to buy a carpet at the end of two years. We can't walk away. Only the quality of the carpet is at stake. ( d ) 48% of hagglers didn't want to buy the Carpet in the first place. ( e) of the 52% that did want floor covering there were huge disagreement what sort. ( f ) The Carpet Seller is unconventional. They don't want repeat trade. They either want you not to enter the shop in the first place or buy a **** carpet you'll hate. They don't want success.
(a) In hindsight, having Remain / EEA / Not EEA on the ballot might have been better, but we are where we are.
(b) Governments are entitled to keep some cards close to their chest. Cameron didn't spell out every detail before his 'renegotiation', just a few big-picture aims, which is what I'd expect from May/Davis.
(c) We can walk away (WTO rules). I think we both agree that's not desirable, but to get a good carpet we have to be clear we'll take no carpet rather than pay over the odds for a mediocre one.
(d) 52% did, and most of the 48% I know accept that we are buying a carpet and want the best one.
(e) see (a)
(f) Perhaps true - but a good argument for buying a good carpet if we can and sodding off rather than whatever the equivalent of Remain is in this now rather convoluted analogy.
So far we have had a failing marriage, membership of a golf club, eating smelly food in a office, and whether and how to get out of a car. Now I see we are buying a carpet. If anyone feels genuinely enlightened by these increasingly bizarre analogies into our country's future role in world affairs, please do not hold your peace....
It all depends what people mean by an early election. Next Spring is certainly very possible. Too late now. No one will want an election after the clocks go back plus the £ is too unsettled. The big problem is the shape of Brexit isn't in the Goldilocks Zone yet. For a successful Brexit election you need enough of an outline to claim a mandate but not enough of an outline to maximise opposition or get bogged down in the details. The other issue, May having ruled an election out, is you need a casus beli. You need either a Bruxelles or Parliamentary blockage to be cleared. But we won't get these ( if they happen ) till the middle of next year. ECA repeal isn't until the new session. Tusk's ' Hard Brexit or No Brexit ' wouldn't play until A50 is invoked.
The Earliest I can see is if the Supreme Court rules an Act of Parliament is needed to invoke A50. May tries to rush through a one clause bill then a pro Single Market Commons and Lords passes it but wth multiple Sunrise and Sunset clauses. May abandons it and goes to the country on the first Thursday in May. Or Mayday as the Sun will call it.
I'm well aware how many variables there are in scenario. It's highly speculative. And of course Governments can stage false flag casus beli very easierly. But in a curious way if May wants the option of an early election the Supreme Court mandating an A50 bill may be her best bet.
And what happens if Corbyn refuses to play ball with any wish by TM to call an election for May 4th next year?
Ooh. Do we have an actual serious story here, after all the false starts? If she did indeed try and bribe the FBI then she's surely toast, but it's not going to be that simple. It never is with Hillary.
Fat chance of any action before the election, or after. The DOJ is letting her off the hook because it would cause chaos to indict a candidate.
The DOJ is letting her off the hook because otherwise Trump would become President.
Not sure what would happen after the election has passed, though without 67 GOP senators to impeach her, Hillary will still stay in office until she loses the 2020 election as a lame duck.
Mixed metaphors there surely? She won't be a lame duck until 2024 and can't lose the election then when she is.
Hillary won't win re-election, Trump would be too old to run in 2020.
There's no guarantee Hillary won't win re-election, especially if the GOP continues to implode.
I think Hillary will be a good president, and will stand a decent chance of reelection in 2020, should she seek it
It all depends what people mean by an early election. Next Spring is certainly very possible. Too late now. No one will want an election after the clocks go back plus the £ is too unsettled. The big problem is the shape of Brexit isn't in the Goldilocks Zone yet. For a successful Brexit election you need enough of an outline to claim a mandate but not enough of an outline to maximise opposition or get bogged down in the details. The other issue, May having ruled an election out, is you need a casus beli. You need either a Bruxelles or Parliamentary blockage to be cleared. But we won't get these ( if they happen ) till the middle of next year. ECA repeal isn't until the new session. Tusk's ' Hard Brexit or No Brexit ' wouldn't play until A50 is invoked.
The Earliest I can see is if the Supreme Court rules an Act of Parliament is needed to invoke A50. May tries to rush through a one clause bill then a pro Single Market Commons and Lords passes it but wth multiple Sunrise and Sunset clauses. May abandons it and goes to the country on the first Thursday in May. Or Mayday as the Sun will call it.
I'm well aware how many variables there are in scenario. It's highly speculative. And of course Governments can stage false flag casus beli very easierly. But in a curious way if May wants the option of an early election the Supreme Court mandating an A50 bill may be her best bet.
And what happens if Corbyn refuses to play ball with any wish by TM to call an election for May 4th next year?
Corbyn has already shot his mouth off calling for an immeadiate GE and is, if we are frank, too thick to think strategically about the way ahead. But I agree Labour should set certain " tests " for a Brexit election. Blocking democracy would be impossible but saying the British people deserve to know X,Y,Z about Brexit policy before an election was granted could be pulled off.
Agreed. When haggling, you have to be willing to walk away with no deal.
Which is where Cameron so utterly failed.
It's carpet haggling 1.01...
Carpet haggling 1.02 is "don't let on what type of carpet you want - nor how much you are prepared to pay". A lesson that the Remoaners need to learn. They are as idiotic as Cameron was.
More likely they're well aware of 1.02, but are just desperately trying anything to delay the triggering of Article 50 and/or send us into negotiations as weak and hamstrung as possible in the vain hope that they can find a way to throw a spanner in the works of Brexit. All rather sad.
The problem is that (a) we decided to buy the Carpet publiclly by referendum before deciding what 1.01 and 1.02 are ( b) We still haven't decided what 1.01 and 1.02 are and in a democracy can't really be kept secret from the Carpet Seller. ( c) Once A50 is invoked we have to buy a carpet at the end of two years. We can't walk away. Only the quality of the carpet is at stake. ( d ) 48% of hagglers didn't want to buy the Carpet in the first place. ( e) of the 52% that did want floor covering there were huge disagreement what sort. ( f ) The Carpet Seller is unconventional. They don't want repeat trade. They either want you not to enter the shop in the first place or buy a **** carpet you'll hate. They don't want success.
(a) In hindsight, having Remain / EEA / Not EEA on the ballot might have been better, but we are where we are.
(b) Governments are entitled to keep some cards close to their chest. Cameron didn't spell out every detail before his 'renegotiation', just a few big-picture aims, which is what I'd expect from May/Davis.
(c) We can walk away (WTO rules). I think we both agree that's not desirable, but to get a good carpet we have to be clear we'll take no carpet rather than pay over the odds for a mediocre one.
(d) 52% did, and most of the 48% I know accept that we are buying a carpet and want the best one.
(e) see (a)
(f) Perhaps true - but a good argument for buying a good carpet if we can and sodding off rather than whatever the equivalent of Remain is in this now rather convoluted analogy.
So far we have had a failing marriage, membership of a golf club, eating smelly food in a office, and whether and how to get out of a car. Now I see we are buying a carpet. If anyone feels genuinely enlightened by these increasingly bizarre analogies into our country's future role in world affairs, please do not hold your peace....
I'd always assumed Clinton would be a one term president. However Trump is so nuts we could easierly now seen a Trump Party GoP House Majority sweep in in 2018 on an impeachment ticket. After two years of horrific culture wars and at least one shutdown she could be narrowly reelected.
The economy would be in worse shape by then, and the crisis in foreign policy will get worse too.
She has zero chance, she won't be facing Trump in 2020.
The GOP won't allow an independent to run in 2020, they will probably change the rules so that only those who have held elected positions will be allowed to run.
The only question is will America still exist by 2020 or will it implode before then, given that Hillary is a terrible manager.
Agreed. When haggling, you have to be willing to walk away with no deal.
Which is where Cameron so utterly failed.
It's carpet haggling 1.01...
Carpet haggling 1.02 is "don't let on what type of carpet you want - nor how much you are prepared to pay.
More likely they're well aware of 1.02, but are just desperately trying anything to delay the triggering of Article 50 and/or send us into negotiations as weak and hamstrung as possible in the vain hope that they can find a way to throw a spanner in the works of Brexit. All rather sad.
The problem is that (a) we decided to buy the Carpet publiclly by referendum before deciding what 1.01 and 1.02 are ( b) We still haven't decided what 1.01 and 1.02 are and in a democracy can't really be kept secret from the Carpet Seller. ( c) Once A50 is invoked we have to buy a carpet at the end of two years. We can't walk away. Only the quality of the carpet is at stake. ( d ) 48% of hagglers didn't want to buy the Carpet in the first place. ( e) of the 52% that did want floor covering there were huge disagreement what sort. ( f ) The Carpet Seller is unconventional. They don't want repeat trade. They either want you not to enter the shop in the first place or buy a **** carpet you'll hate. They don't want success.
(a) In hindsight, having Remain / EEA / Not EEA on the ballot might have been better
(b) Governments are entitled to keep some cards close to their chest. Cameron didn't spell out every detail before his 'renegotiation', just a few big-picture aims, which is what I'd expect from May/Davis.
(c) We can walk away (WTO rules). I think we both agree that's not desirable, but to get a good carpet we have to be clear we'll take no carpet rather than pay over the odds for a mediocre one.
(d) 52% did, and most of the 48% I know accept that we are buying a carpet and want the best one.
(e) see (a)
(f) Perhaps true - but a good argument for buying a good carpet if we can and sodding off rather than whatever the equivalent of Remain is in this now rather convoluted analogy.
So far we have had a failing marriage, membership of a golf club, eating smelly food in a office, and whether and how to get out of a car. Now I see we are buying a carpet. If anyone feels genuinely enlightened by these increasingly bizarre analogies into our country's future role in world affairs, please do not hold your peace....
It all depends what people mean by an early election. Next Spring is certainly very possible. Too late now. No one will want an election after the clocks go back plus the £ is too unsettled. The big problem is the shape of Brexit isn't in the Goldilocks Zone yet. For a successful Brexit election you need enough of an outline to claim a mandate but not enough of an outline to maximise opposition or get bogged down in the details. The other issue, May having ruled an election out, is you need a casus beli. You need either a Bruxelles or Parliamentary blockage to be cleared. But we won't get these ( if they happen ) till the middle of next year. ECA repeal isn't until the new session. Tusk's ' Hard Brexit or No Brexit ' wouldn't play until A50 is invoked.
The Earliest I can see is if the Supreme Court rules an Act of Parliament is needed to invoke A50. May tries to rush through a one clause bill then a pro Single Market Commons and Lords passes it but wth multiple Sunrise and Sunset clauses. May abandons it and goes to the country on the first Thursday in May. Or Mayday as the Sun will call it.
I'm well aware how many variables there are in scenario. It's highly speculative. And of course Governments can stage false flag casus beli very easierly. But in a curious way if May wants the option of an early election the Supreme Court mandating an A50 bill may be her best bet.
And what happens if Corbyn refuses to play ball with any wish by TM to call an election for May 4th next year?
The right hon. Gentleman is afraid of an election is he? Oh, if I were going to cut and run I'd have gone after the Falklands. Afraid? Frightened? Frit? Couldn't take it? Couldn't stand it? - M. H. Thatcher, PMQs, 19/4/83
It all depends what people mean by an early election. Next Spring is certainly very possible. Too late now. No one will want an election after the clocks go back plus the £ is too unsettled. The big problem is the shape of Brexit isn't in the Goldilocks Zone yet. For a successful Brexit election you need enough of an outline to claim a mandate but not enough of an outline to maximise opposition or get bogged down in the details. The other issue, May having ruled an election out, is you need a casus beli. You need either a Bruxelles or Parliamentary blockage to be cleared. But we won't get these ( if they happen ) till the middle of next year. ECA repeal isn't until the new session. Tusk's ' Hard Brexit or No Brexit ' wouldn't play until A50 is invoked.
The Earliest I can see is if the Supreme Court rules an Act of Parliament is needed to invoke A50. May tries to rush through a one clause bill then a pro Single Market Commons and Lords passes it but wth multiple Sunrise and Sunset clauses. May abandons it and goes to the country on the first Thursday in May. Or Mayday as the Sun will call it.
I'm well aware how many variables there are in scenario. It's highly speculative. And of course Governments can stage false flag casus beli very easierly. But in a curious way if May wants the option of an early election the Supreme Court mandating an A50 bill may be her best bet.
And what happens if Corbyn refuses to play ball with any wish by TM to call an election for May 4th next year?
Usually true, but it is a core tenet of Corbynism that winning elections is not what it's all about. Which would Jezza rather, a complete electoral pasting in May 2017 followed by oblivion, or 3 more years in the limelight having his vanity pandered to?
4 May would be an auspicious day for an election. It would inevitably be known as the Star Wars election. With a bit of luck the British public would come back from the dark side.
It all depends what people mean by an early election. Next Spring is certainly very possible. Too late now. No one will want an election after the clocks go back plus the £ is too unsettled. The big problem is the shape of Brexit isn't in the Goldilocks Zone yet. For a successful Brexit election you need enough of an outline to claim a mandate but not enough of an outline to maximise opposition or get bogged down in the details. The other issue, May having ruled an election out, is you need a casus beli. You need either a Bruxelles or Parliamentary blockage to be cleared. But we won't get these ( if they happen ) till the middle of next year. ECA repeal isn't until the new session. Tusk's ' Hard Brexit or No Brexit ' wouldn't play until A50 is invoked.
The Earliest I can see is if the Supreme Court rules an Act of Parliament is needed to invoke A50. May tries to rush through a one clause bill then a pro Single Market Commons and Lords passes it but wth multiple Sunrise and Sunset clauses. May abandons it and goes to the country on the first Thursday in May. Or Mayday as the Sun will call it.
I'm well aware how many variables there are in scenario. It's highly speculative. And of course Governments can stage false flag casus beli very easierly. But in a curious way if May wants the option of an early election the Supreme Court mandating an A50 bill may be her best bet.
And what happens if Corbyn refuses to play ball with any wish by TM to call an election for May 4th next year?
Usually true, but it is a core tenet of Corbynism that winning elections is not what it's all about. Which would Jezza rather, a complete electoral pasting in May 2017 followed by oblivion, or 3 more years in the limelight having his vanity pandered to?
"I wasn't the best because I won elections quickly. I was the best because the Selectorate loved me. Win the Selectorate, and you will win your freedom!"
Agreed. When haggling, you have to be willing to walk away with no deal.
Which is where Cameron so utterly failed.
It's carpet haggling 1.01...
Carpet haggling 1.02 is "don't let on what type of carpet you want - nor how much you are prepared to pay". A lesson that the Remoaners need to learn. They are as idiotic as Cameron was.
More likely they're well aware of 1.02, but are just desperately trying anything to delay the triggering of Article 50 and/or send us into negotiations as weak and hamstrung as possible in the vain hope that they can find a way to throw a spanner in the works of Brexit. All rather sad.
The problem is that (a) we decided to buy the Carpet publiclly by referendum before deciding what 1.01 and 1.02 are ( b) We still haven't decided what 1.01 and 1.02 are and in a democracy can't really be kept secret from the Carpet Seller. ( c) Once A50 is invoked we have to buy a carpet at the end of two years. We can't walk away. Only the quality of the carpet is at stake. ( d ) 48% of hagglers didn't want to buy the Carpet in the first place. ( e) of the 52% that did want floor covering there were huge disagreement what sort. ( f ) The Carpet Seller is unconventional. They don't want repeat trade. They either want you not to enter the shop in the first place or buy a **** carpet you'll hate. They don't want success.
(a) In hindsight, having Remain / EEA / Not EEA on the ballot might have been better, but we are where we are.
(b) Governments are entitled to keep some cards close to their chest. Cameron didn't spell out every detail before his 'renegotiation', just a few big-picture aims, which is what I'd expect from May/Davis.
(c) We can walk away (WTO rules). I think we both agree that's not desirable, but to get a good carpet we have to be clear we'll take no carpet rather than pay over the odds for a mediocre one.
(d) 52% did, and most of the 48% I know accept that we are buying a carpet and want the best one.
(e) see (a)
(f) Perhaps true - but a good argument for buying a good carpet if we can and sodding off rather than whatever the equivalent of Remain is in this now rather convoluted analogy.
So far we have had a failing marriage, membership of a golf club, eating smelly food in a office, and whether and how to get out of a car. Now I see we are buying a carpet. If anyone feels genuinely enlightened by these increasingly bizarre analogies into our country's future role in world affairs, please do not hold your peace....
That said, and playing with electoral calculus, it is amazing how low Labour's support has to go before they are overtaken.
Even if you input a result of
45 Tories
20 Lib Dems
10 Labour
10 UKIP
5 Greens
Labour are STILL the second largest party!
FPTP will keep Labour alive for a long long time, even if it condemns them to semi-permanent opposition. Piquant.
At that level of swing calculators aren't worth anything.
Still, it would take an earthquake to dislodge Labour from its 100 safest seats. That earthquake might have been UKIP. Not any more. Labour aren't going to die out any time soon.
Remember they only died in Scotland coz there was a vivid alternative, the SNP. Lacking that, Labour in England will endure, and surely revive one day
Agreed. If the Liberals had an eye catching leader they could challenge well for centrist and centre left votes, particularly in areas where Labour are nowhere. Then the Tories would again be under threat from a Lib Lab pact.
Maybe not yet, but the Tories appear very likely indeed to lose their majority. More likely still is the unlikelihood of any other party winning an overall majority in 2020. For that reason, I keep asking for and getting 3.0 on Betfair on a "No Overall Majority" outcome at the next GE. Pretty close to being free money imho, at surprisingly good odds, albeit that one probably has to wait three and a half years to collect, unless deciding to trade out in the meantime. I sense that were Rod Crosby to return to PB.com, he'd be shouting the virtues of such a bet from the rooftops!
I for years, well 15 months, have been saying the 2020GE will have almost the same result as the 2015GE.
It all depends what people mean by an early election. Next Spring is certainly very possible. Too late now. No one will want an election after the clocks go back plus the £ is too unsettled. The big problem is the shape of Brexit isn't in the Goldilocks Zone yet. For a successful Brexit election you need enough of an outline to claim a mandate but not enough of an outline to maximise opposition or get bogged down in the details. The other issue, May having ruled an election out, is you need a casus beli. You need either a Bruxelles or Parliamentary blockage to be cleared. But we won't get these ( if they happen ) till the middle of next year. ECA repeal isn't until the new session. Tusk's ' Hard Brexit or No Brexit ' wouldn't play until A50 is invoked.
The Earliest I can see is if the Supreme Court rules an Act of Parliament is needed to invoke A50. May tries to rush through a one clause bill then a pro Single Market Commons and Lords passes it but wth multiple Sunrise and Sunset clauses. May abandons it and goes to the country on the first Thursday in May. Or Mayday as the Sun will call it.
I'm well aware how many variables there are in scenario. It's highly speculative. And of course Governments can stage false flag casus beli very easierly. But in a curious way if May wants the option of an early election the Supreme Court mandating an A50 bill may be her best bet.
And what happens if Corbyn refuses to play ball with any wish by TM to call an election for May 4th next year?
Especially if the alternative is voting for the Tories in a confidence vote.
Governing parties look a lot worse than frit if they try to promote no confidence votes in themselves. They look fecking ridiculous and would be hammered by the electorate for behaving like arses.
Carpet haggling 1.02 is "don't let on what type of carpet you want - nor how much you are prepared to pay". A lesson that the Remoaners need to learn. They are as idiotic as Cameron was.
More likely they're well aware of 1.02, but are just desperately trying anything to delay the triggering of Article 50 and/or send us into negotiations as weak and hamstrung as possible in the vain hope that they can find a way to throw a spanner in the works of Brexit. All rather sad.
The problem is that (a) we decided to buy the Carpet publiclly by referendum before deciding what 1.01 and 1.02 are ( b) We still haven't decided what 1.01 and 1.02 are and in a democracy can't really be kept secret from the Carpet Seller. ( c) Once A50 is invoked we have to buy a carpet at the end of two years. We can't walk away. Only the quality of the carpet is at stake. ( d ) 48% of hagglers didn't want to buy the Carpet in the first place. ( e) of the 52% that did want floor covering there were huge disagreement what sort. ( f ) The Carpet Seller is unconventional. They don't want repeat trade. They either want you not to enter the shop in the first place or buy a **** carpet you'll hate. They don't want success.
(a) In hindsight, having Remain / EEA / Not EEA on the ballot might have been better, but we are where we are.
(b) Governments are entitled to keep some cards close to their chest. Cameron didn't spell out every detail before his 'renegotiation', just a few big-picture aims, which is what I'd expect from May/Davis.
(c) We can walk away (WTO rules). I think we both agree that's not desirable, but to get a good carpet we have to be clear we'll take no carpet rather than pay over the odds for a mediocre one.
(d) 52% did, and most of the 48% I know accept that we are buying a carpet and want the best one.
(e) see (a)
(f) Perhaps true - but a good argument for buying a good carpet if we can and sodding off rather than whatever the equivalent of Remain is in this now rather convoluted analogy.
So far we have had a failing marriage, membership of a golf club, eating smelly food in a office, and whether and how to get out of a car. Now I see we are buying a carpet. If anyone feels genuinely enlightened by these increasingly bizarre analogies into our country's future role in world affairs, please do not hold your peace....
Bizarre analogies are what makes PB what It is.
Surely you meant to tell us what PB is like..... ?
It all depends what people mean by an early election. Next Spring is certainly very possible. Too late now. No one will want an election after the clocks go back plus the £ is too unsettled. The big problem is the shape of Brexit isn't in the Goldilocks Zone yet. For a successful Brexit election you need enough of an outline to claim a mandate but not enough of an outline to maximise opposition or get bogged down in the details. The other issue, May having ruled an election out, is you need a casus beli. You need either a Bruxelles or Parliamentary blockage to be cleared. But we won't get these ( if they happen ) till the middle of next year. ECA repeal isn't until the new session. Tusk's ' Hard Brexit or No Brexit ' wouldn't play until A50 is invoked.
The Earliest I can see is if the Supreme Court rules an Act of Parliament is needed to invoke A50. May tries to rush through a one clause bill then a pro Single Market Commons and Lords passes it but wth multiple Sunrise and Sunset clauses. May abandons it and goes to the country on the first Thursday in May. Or Mayday as the Sun will call it.
I'm well aware how many variables there are in scenario. It's highly speculative. And of course Governments can stage false flag casus beli very easierly. But in a curious way if May wants the option of an early election the Supreme Court mandating an A50 bill may be her best bet.
And what happens if Corbyn refuses to play ball with any wish by TM to call an election for May 4th next year?
If oppositions are calling for an election every time the govt is in trouble, then they'd look like real muppets for not agreeing to one when offered. But this is Corbyn we're talking about.
The FTPA was designed around a coalition government, and it served that purpose well. It doesn't work in a 'normal' Parliament with a small government majority.
It all depends what people mean by an early election. Next Spring is certainly very possible. Too late now. No one will want an election after the clocks go back plus the £ is too unsettled. The big problem is the shape of Brexit isn't in the Goldilocks Zone yet. For a successful Brexit election you need enough of an outline to claim a mandate but not enough of an outline to maximise opposition or get bogged down in the details. The other issue, May having ruled an election out, is you need a casus beli. You need either a Bruxelles or Parliamentary blockage to be cleared. But we won't get these ( if they happen ) till the middle of next year. ECA repeal isn't until the new session. Tusk's ' Hard Brexit or No Brexit ' wouldn't play until A50 is invoked.
The Earliest I can see is if the Supreme Court rules an Act of Parliament is needed to invoke A50. May tries to rush through a one clause bill then a pro Single Market Commons and Lords passes it but wth multiple Sunrise and Sunset clauses. May abandons it and goes to the country on the first Thursday in May. Or Mayday as the Sun will call it.
I'm well aware how many variables there are in scenario. It's highly speculative. And of course Governments can stage false flag casus beli very easierly. But in a curious way if May wants the option of an early election the Supreme Court mandating an A50 bill may be her best bet.
And what happens if Corbyn refuses to play ball with any wish by TM to call an election for May 4th next year?
Corbyn has already shot his mouth off calling for an immeadiate GE and is, if we are frank, too thick to think strategically about the way ahead. But I agree Labour should set certain " tests " for a Brexit election. Blocking democracy would be impossible but saying the British people deserve to know X,Y,Z about Brexit policy before an election was granted could be pulled off.
But Corbyn has not shot his mouth off as much as TM re-election timing. I don't think there is a hope in hell that he would meekly bow to the calling of an election if the Tories stil had a lead of 10% plus. At the very least he would force her down the humiliating avenue of having to table a No Confidence vote in her own Government. That in turn would bring us to the possibility of a repeat of the Balfour/Campbel-Bannerman scenario with TM's Government having to step aside with Corbyn becoming caretaker PM for the election campaign period. Now that would be an interesting scenario!
Agreed. When haggling, you have to be willing to walk away with no deal.
Which is where Cameron so utterly failed.
It's carpet haggling 1.01...
Carpet haggling 1.02 is "don't let on what type of carpet you want - nor how much you are prepared to pay". A lesson that the Remoaners need to learn. They are as idiotic as Cameron was.
More likely they're well aware of 1.02, but are just desperately trying anything to delay the triggering of Article 50 and/or send us into negotiations as weak and hamstrung as possible in the vain hope that they can find a way to throw a spanner in the works of Brexit. All rather sad.
The problem is that (a) we decided to buy the Carpet publiclly by referendum before deciding what 1.01 and 1.02 are ( b) We still haven't decided what 1.01 and 1.02 are and in a democracy can't really be kept secret from the Carpet Seller. ( c) Once A50 is invoked we have to buy a carpet at the end of two years. We can't walk away. Only the quality of the carpet is at stake. ( d ) 48% of hagglers didn't want to buy the Carpet in the first place. ( e) of the 52% that did want floor covering there were huge disagreement what sort. ( f ) The Carpet Seller is unconventional. They don't want repeat trade. They either want you not to enter the shop in the first place or buy a **** carpet you'll hate. They don't want success.
(a) In hindsight, having Remain / EEA / Not EEA on the ballot might have been better, but we are where we are.
(b) Governments are entitled to keep some cards close to their chest. Cameron didn't spell out every detail before his 'renegotiation', just a few big-picture aims, which is what I'd expect from May/Davis.
(c) We can walk away (WTO rules). I think we both agree that's not desirable, but to get a good carpet we have to be clear we'll take no carpet rather than pay over the odds for a mediocre one.
(d) 52% did, and most of the 48% I know accept that we are buying a carpet and want the best one.
(e) see (a)
(f) Perhaps true - but a good argument for buying a good carpet if we can and sodding off rather than whatever the equivalent of Remain is in this now rather convoluted analogy.
So far we have had a failing marriage, membership of a golf club, eating smelly food in a office, and whether and how to get out of a car. Now I see we are buying a carpet. If anyone feels genuinely enlightened by these increasingly bizarre analogies into our country's future role in world affairs, please do not hold your peace....
The PB anecdote is a feature of the site. We even have them in the leaders from time to time!
The Hillary emails story is one of the dullest stories ever. It is tear inducingly dull - beaten only by Wikileaks' output on anything at all
I tend to switch off when anything to do with Wikileaks comes up. First they were going to bring Hillary Clinton down so that Bernie Sanders could replace her before the first debate, then they moved the great man's speech to Berlin because of a "specific threat", now they issue tweets with 64-digit codes in them. About the only effect they've had on this election was to cause Debbie Wasserman Schultz's resignation. Only an extremely naive whistleblower - and whistleblowers aren't usually naive - would "leak" info to a centralised address run by bods whose aim in life seems to be to think of themselves as a world power as they do deals with the New York Times and the Guardian, stopping occasionally to swan about in the Frontline Club.
The Hillary emails story is one of the dullest stories ever. It is tear inducingly dull - beaten only by Wikileaks' output on anything at all
...the Frontline Club.
Wow, that's a name from the past. I did some work for them when they first opened, maybe a dozen years ago. Vaughan Smith set it up. What's it like these days, anyone been there recently?
Is it that restaurant in Paddington? I ate there a few years ago - not only was it very good it had a niche market in those days, being the only place in W2 which didn't carry a major health risk to its patrons
4 May would be an auspicious day for an election. It would inevitably be known as the Star Wars election. With a bit of luck the British public would come back from the dark side.
If the GoP tighten the primary rules on Trump like candidates the next Trump can run as an independent. Equally if Hillary is a disaster the next Sanders can challenger her in the primary. Herding the atomised cats of 21st century democracy into a two party system won't get any easier. I'm just suggesting the value in the betting may be counter intuitive. Bet on the GoP retaking the House and Senate in '18 after a Hillary landslide in '16. Bet on Hillary's reelection in '20 after the democrats are shellacked in the '18 midterms.
4 May would be an auspicious day for an election. It would inevitably be known as the Star Wars election. With a bit of luck the Remoaning Minnies would come back from the dark side.
[Sunil and TSE confront each other, after the former has learnt that the latter has turned to the Daft Side]
Sunil: You have allowed this Europhile Chancellor to twist your mind, until now, until now you've become the very thing you swore to destroy.
TSE: Don't lecture me, Sunil! I see through the lies of the LEAVE campaign. I do not fear the European Union as you do. I have brought peace, freedom, justice, and security to my new Empire!
Sunil: Your new Empire?
TSE: Don't make me MODERATE you.
Sunil: TSE, my allegiance is to the Republic Monarchy, to democracy!
TSE: If you're not with me, then you're my enemy.
Sunil:[realizing that TSE is consumed by evil and there's no reasoning with him anymore] Only a Europhile deals in absolutes. [draws his lightsaber] I will do what I must!
TSE: You will try! [draws his own lightsaber and confronts Sunil!]
[later during a pause in the battle]
Sunil: I have failed you, TSE. I have failed you.
TSE: I should have known the LEAVERS were plotting to take over. Chancellor Osborne has showed me the true ways of the Force.
Sunil: TSE, Chancellor Osborne is evil! The Europhiles are evil. The Daft Side of the Force is an evil presence.
TSE: From my point of view, it is the LEAVERS who are evil.
Sunil: Well, then you really are lost!
TSE:[raises his lightsaber] This is the end for you... my former master.
[the battle resumes, but even later on, Sunil manages to reach a vantage point overlooking TSE]
Sunil: It's over TSE, I have the high ground!
TSE: You MISUNDERESTIMATE my power!
Sunil: Don't try it!
[TSE leaps at Sunil, but the latter anticipates his move and promptly lightsabers TSE's rather fetching Red Shoes of Power off, leaving him writhing in pain on the ground, crippled and bereft of his Force abilities!]
Sunil: You were the chosen one! It was said that you would destroy the Europhiles, not join them! You were to bring balance to PoliticalBetting.com, not leave it in Daftness!
TSE:[shouts] I HATE you!
Sunil: You were my brother, TSE. I loved you.
[Sunil, unable to bring himself to finish off poor TSE, walks away from the scene, disconsolate...
That said, and playing with electoral calculus, it is amazing how low Labour's support has to go before they are overtaken.
Even if you input a result of
45 Tories
20 Lib Dems
10 Labour
10 UKIP
5 Greens
Labour are STILL the second largest party!
FPTP will keep Labour alive for a long long time, even if it condemns them to semi-permanent opposition. Piquant.
At that level of swing calculators aren't worth anything.
Still, it would take an earthquake to dislodge Labour from its 100 safest seats. That earthquake might have been UKIP. Not any more. Labour aren't going to die out any time soon.
Remember they only died in Scotland coz there was a vivid alternative, the SNP. Lacking that, Labour in England will endure, and surely revive one day
Agreed. If the Liberals had an eye catching leader they could challenge well for centrist and centre left votes, particularly in areas where Labour are nowhere. Then the Tories would again be under threat from a Lib Lab pact.
Maybe not yet, but the Tories appear very likely indeed to lose their majority. More likely still is the unlikelihood of any other party winning an overall majority in 2020. For that reason, I keep asking for and getting 3.0 on Betfair on a "No Overall Majority" outcome at the next GE. Pretty close to being free money imho, at surprisingly good odds, albeit that one probably has to wait three and a half years to collect, unless deciding to trade out in the meantime. I sense that were Rod Crosby to return to PB.com, he'd be shouting the virtues of such a bet from the rooftops!
Sadly he would also shout certain other things from the rooftops, hence why he is no longer on PB.
More likely they're well aware of 1.02, but are just desperately trying anything to delay the triggering of Article 50 and/or send us into negotiations as weak and hamstrung as possible in the vain hope that they can find a way to throw a spanner in the works of Brexit. All rather sad.
The problem is that (a) we decided to buy the Carpet publiclly by referendum before deciding what 1.01 and 1.02 are ( b) We still haven't decided what 1.01 and 1.02 are and in a democracy can't really be kept secret from the Carpet Seller. ( c) Once A50 is invoked we have to buy a carpet at the end of two years. We can't walk away. Only the quality of the carpet is at stake. ( d ) 48% of hagglers didn't want to buy the Carpet in the first place. ( e) of the 52% that did want floor covering there were huge disagreement what sort. ( f ) The Carpet Seller is unconventional. They don't want repeat trade. They either want you not to enter the shop in the first place or buy a **** carpet you'll hate. They don't want success.
(a) In hindsight, having Remain / EEA / Not EEA on the ballot might have been better, but we are where we are.
(b) Governments are entitled to keep some cards close to their chest. Cameron didn't spell out every detail before his 'renegotiation', just a few big-picture aims, which is what I'd expect from May/Davis.
(c) We can walk away (WTO rules). I think we both agree that's not desirable, but to get a good carpet we have to be clear we'll take no carpet rather than pay over the odds for a mediocre one.
(d) 52% did, and most of the 48% I know accept that we are buying a carpet and want the best one.
(e) see (a)
(f) Perhaps true - but a good argument for buying a good carpet if we can and sodding off rather than whatever the equivalent of Remain is in this now rather convoluted analogy.
So far we have had a failing marriage, membership of a golf club, eating smelly food in a office, and whether and how to get out of a car. Now I see we are buying a carpet. If anyone feels genuinely enlightened by these increasingly bizarre analogies into our country's future role in world affairs, please do not hold your peace....
Bizarre analogies are what makes PB what It is.
Bizarre (and obscure) analogies are to PB what Harpagus was to Cyrus the Great.
Carpet haggling 1.02 is "don't let on what type of carpet you want - nor how much you are prepared to pay". A lesson that the Remoaners need to learn. They are as idiotic as Cameron was.
More likely they're well aware of 1.02, but are just desperately trying anything to delay the triggering of Article 50 and/or send us into negotiations as weak and hamstrung as possible in the vain hope that they can find a way to throw a spanner in the works of Brexit. All rather sad.
The problem is that (a) we decided to buy the e Carpet Seller. ( c) Once A50 is invoked we have to buy a carpet at the end of two years. We can't walk away. Only the quality of the carpet is at stake. ( d ) 48% of hagglers didn't want to buy the Carpet in the first place. ( e) of the 52% that did want floor covering there were huge disagreement what sort. ( f ) The Carpet Seller is unconventional. They don't want repeat trade. They either want you not to enter the shop in the first place or buy a **** carpet you'll hate. They don't want success.
(a) In hindsight, having Remain / EEA / Not EEA on the ballot might have been better, but we are where we are.
(b) Governments are entitled to keep some cards close to their chest. Cameron didn't spell out every detail before his 'renegotiation', just a few big-picture aims, which is what I'd expect from May/Davis.
(c) We can walk away (WTO rules). I think we both agree that's not desirable, but to get a good carpet we have to be clear we'll take no carpet rather than pay over the odds for a mediocre one.
(d) 52% did, and most of the 48% I know accept that we are buying a carpet and want the best one.
(e) see (a)
(f) Perhaps true - but a good argument for buying a good carpet if we can and sodding off rather than whatever the equivalent of Remain is in this now rather convoluted analogy.
So far we have had a failing marriage, membership of a golf club, eating smelly food in a office, and whether and how to get out of a car. Now I see we are buying a carpet. If anyone feels genuinely enlightened by these increasingly bizarre analogies into our country's future role in world affairs, please do not hold your peace....
Bizarre analogies are what makes PB what It is.
Surely you meant to tell us what PB is like..... ?
Fair point. Leaving the EU is like the Brownsea Island camping trip for the Boy Scouts in 1907. A smallish unit of adventurous people and from this great things will arise.
That said, and playing with electoral calculus, it is amazing how low Labour's support has to go before they are overtaken.
Even if you input a result of
45 Tories
20 Lib Dems
10 Labour
10 UKIP
5 Greens
Labour are STILL the second largest party!
FPTP will keep Labour alive for a long long time, even if it condemns them to semi-permanent opposition. Piquant.
At that level of swing calculators aren't worth anything.
Still, it would take an earthquake to dislodge Labour from its 100 safest seats. That earthquake might have been UKIP. Not any more. Labour aren't going to die out any time soon.
Remember they only died in Scotland coz there was a vivid alternative, the SNP. Lacking that, Labour in England will endure, and surely revive one day
Agreed. If the Liberals had an eye catching leader they could challenge well for centrist and centre left votes, particularly in areas where Labour are nowhere. Then the Tories would again be under threat from a Lib Lab pact.
Maybe not yet, but the Tories appear very likely indeed to lose their majority. More likely still is the unlikelihood of any other party winning an overall majority in 2020. For that reason, I keep asking for and getting 3.0 on Betfair on a "No Overall Majority" outcome at the next GE. Pretty close to being free money imho, at surprisingly good odds, albeit that one probably has to wait three and a half years to collect, unless deciding to trade out in the meantime. I sense that were Rod Crosby to return to PB.com, he'd be shouting the virtues of such a bet from the rooftops!
I don't think Rod's methodology predicts hung Parliaments when the governing party is 12 points ahead in mid-term
It all depends what people mean by an early election. Next Spring is certainly very possible. Too late now. No one will want an election after the clocks go back plus the £ is too unsettled. The big problem is the shape of Brexit isn't in the Goldilocks Zone yet. For a successful Brexit election you need enough of an outline to claim a mandate but not enough of an outline to maximise opposition or get bogged down in the details. The other issue, May having ruled an election out, is you need a casus beli. You need either a Bruxelles or Parliamentary blockage to be cleared. But we won't get these ( if they happen ) till the middle of next year. ECA repeal isn't until the new session. Tusk's ' Hard Brexit or No Brexit ' wouldn't play until A50 is invoked.
The Earliest I can see is if the Supreme Court rules an Act of Parliament is needed to invoke A50. May tries to rush through a one clause bill then a pro Single Market Commons and Lords passes it but wth multiple Sunrise and Sunset clauses. May abandons it and goes to the country on the first Thursday in May. Or Mayday as the Sun will call it.
I'm well aware how many variables there are in scenario. It's highly speculative. And of course Governments can stage false flag casus beli very easierly. But in a curious way if May wants the option of an early election the Supreme Court mandating an A50 bill may be her best bet.
And what happens if Corbyn refuses to play ball with any wish by TM to call an election for May 4th next year?
The right hon. Gentleman is afraid of an election is he? Oh, if I were going to cut and run I'd have gone after the Falklands. Afraid? Frightened? Frit? Couldn't take it? Couldn't stand it? - M. H. Thatcher, PMQs, 19/4/83
That was Thatcher in fishwife mode. The public would not be interested in why Corbyn might effectively delay an election. At the end of the day they simply would have to remind people who introduced the FTA - that would suffice I think. TM could be accused of trying to play fast & loose with the Constitution for electoral gain.
It all depends what people mean by an early election. Next Spring is certainly very possible. Too late now. No one will want an election after the clocks go back plus the £ is too unsettled. The big problem is the shape of Brexit isn't in the Goldilocks Zone yet. For a successful Brexit election you need enough of an outline to claim a mandate but not enough of an outline to maximise opposition or get bogged down in the details. The other issue, May having ruled an election out, is you need a casus beli. You need either a Bruxelles or Parliamentary blockage to be cleared. But we won't get these ( if they happen ) till the middle of next year. ECA repeal isn't until the new session. Tusk's ' Hard Brexit or No Brexit ' wouldn't play until A50 is invoked.
The Earliest I can see is if the Supreme Court rules an Act of Parliament is needed to invoke A50. May tries to rush through a one clause bill then a pro Single Market Commons and Lords passes it but wth multiple Sunrise and Sunset clauses. May abandons it and goes to the country on the first Thursday in May. Or Mayday as the Sun will call i. And of course Governments can stage false flag casus beli very easierly. But in a curious way if May wants the option of an early election the Supreme Court mandating an A50 bill may be her best bet.
And what happens if Corbyn refuses to play ball with any wish by TM to call an election for May 4th next year?
Corbyn has already shot his mouth off calling for an immeadiate GE and is, if we are frank, too thick to think strategically about the way ahead. But I agree Labour should set certain " tests " for a Brexit election. Blocking democracy would be impossible but saying the British people deserve to know X,Y,Z about Brexit policy before an election was granted could be pulled off.
But Corbyn has not shot his mouth off as much as TM re-election timing. I don't think there is a hope in hell that he would meekly bow to the calling of an election if the Tories stil had a lead of 10% plus. At the very least he would force her down the humiliating avenue of having to table a No Confidence vote in her own Government. That in turn would bring us to the possibility of a repeat of the Balfour/Campbel-Bannerman scenario with TM's Government having to step aside with Corbyn becoming caretaker PM for the election campaign period. Now that would be an interesting scenario!
I'm not an expert but I think the Cabinet manual says May can only resign when she can advise HM who her successor will be. As the Commons wouldn't have expressed confidence in a replacement for 14 days due to the Conservative majority May would be PM still when the automatic dissolution kicked in.
It all depends what people mean by an early election. Next Spring is certainly very possible. Too late now. No one will want an election after the clocks go back plus the £ is too unsettled. The big problem is the shape of Brexit isn't in the Goldilocks Zone yet. For a successful Brexit election you need enough of an outline to claim a mandate but not enough of an outline to maximise opposition or get bogged down in the details. The other issue, May having ruled an election out, is you need a casus beli. You need either a Bruxelles or Parliamentary blockage to be cleared. But we won't get these ( if they happen ) till the middle of next year. ECA repeal isn't until the new session. Tusk's ' Hard Brexit or No Brexit ' wouldn't play until A50 is invoked.
The Earliest I can see is if the Supreme Court rules an Act of Parliament is needed to invoke A50. May tries to rush through a one clause bill then a pro Single Market Commons and Lords passes it but wth multiple Sunrise and Sunset clauses. May abandons it and goes to the country on the first Thursday in May. Or Mayday as the Sun will call it.
I'm well aware how many variables there are in scenario. It's highly speculative. And of course Governments can stage false flag casus beli very easierly. But in a curious way if May wants the option of an early election the Supreme Court mandating an A50 bill may be her best bet.
And what happens if Corbyn refuses to play ball with any wish by TM to call an election for May 4th next year?
The right hon. Gentleman is afraid of an election is he? Oh, if I were going to cut and run I'd have gone after the Falklands. Afraid? Frightened? Frit? Couldn't take it? Couldn't stand it? - M. H. Thatcher, PMQs, 19/4/83
That was Thatcher in fishwife mode. The public would not be interested in why Corbyn might effectively delay an election. At the end of the day they simply would have to remind people who introduced the FTA - that would suffice I think. TM could be accused of trying to play fast & loose with the Constitution for electoral gain.
Not really. Labour members didn't join the party to keep the Tories in power.
It all depends what people mean by an early election. Next Spring is certainly very possible. Too late now. No one will want an election after the clocks go back plus the £ is too unsettled. The big problem is the shape of Brexit isn't in the Goldilocks Zone yet. For a successful Brexit election you need enough of an outline to claim a mandate but not enough of an outline to maximise opposition or get bogged down in the details. The other issue, May having ruled an election out, is you need a casus beli. You need either a Bruxelles or Parliamentary blockage to be cleared. But we won't get these ( if they happen ) till the middle of next year. ECA repeal isn't until the new session. Tusk's ' Hard Brexit or No Brexit ' wouldn't play until A50 is invoked.
The Earliest I can see is if the Supreme Court rules an Act of Parliament is needed to invoke A50. May tries to rush through a one clause bill then a pro Single Market Commons and Lords passes it but wth multiple Sunrise and Sunset clauses. May abandons it and goes to the country on the first Thursday in May. Or Mayday as the Sun will call it.
I'm well aware how many variables there are in scenario. It's highly speculative. And of course Governments can stage false flag casus beli very easierly. But in a curious way if May wants the option of an early election the Supreme Court mandating an A50 bill may be her best bet.
And what happens if Corbyn refuses to play ball with any wish by TM to call an election for May 4th next year?
The right hon. Gentleman is afraid of an election is he? Oh, if I were going to cut and run I'd have gone after the Falklands. Afraid? Frightened? Frit? Couldn't take it? Couldn't stand it? - M. H. Thatcher, PMQs, 19/4/83
The Hillary emails story is one of the dullest stories ever. It is tear inducingly dull - beaten only by Wikileaks' output on anything at all
I tend to switch off when anything to do with Wikileaks comes up. First they were going to bring Hillary Clinton down so that Bernie Sanders could replace her before the first debate, then they moved the great man's speech to Berlin because of a "specific threat", now they issue tweets with 64-digit codes in them. About the only effect they've had on this election was to cause Debbie Wasserman Schultz's resignation. Only an extremely naive whistleblower - and whistleblowers aren't usually naive - would "leak" info to a centralised address run by bods whose aim in life seems to be to think of themselves as a world power as they do deals with the New York Times and the Guardian, stopping occasionally to swan about in the Frontline Club.
The Hillary emails story is one of the dullest stories ever. It is tear inducingly dull - beaten only by Wikileaks' output on anything at all
...the Frontline Club.
Wow, that's a name from the past. I did some work for them when they first opened, maybe a dozen years ago. Vaughan Smith set it up. What's it like these days, anyone been there recently?
Is it that restaurant in Paddington? I ate there a few years ago - not only was it very good it had a niche market in those days, being the only place in W2 which didn't carry a major health risk to its patrons
That's the one. Was set up as a club for journalists, their talks are supposed to be very good as well as the food.
If the GoP tighten the primary rules on Trump like candidates the next Trump can run as an independent. Equally if Hillary is a disaster the next Sanders can challenger her in the primary. Herding the atomised cats of 21st century democracy into a two party system won't get any easier. I'm just suggesting the value in the betting may be counter intuitive. Bet on the GoP retaking the House and Senate in '18 after a Hillary landslide in '16. Bet on Hillary's reelection in '20 after the democrats are shellacked in the '18 midterms.
While I think the latest HRC revelation is not a game-changer, it is likely to provide some queasiness (amongst independents, in particular) about giving her too much power. "Quid pro quo" is also a catchy phrase which sticks in peoples' minds.Thus, I do not think that there will be a clean sweep for the Democrats of the House and Senate and the Presidency - I think too many Americans distrust her to allow her to have such untrammelled power.
Interestingly, while (as you would expect) Fox has it as top billing, CBS has it as their top story on their website with a non-to helpful headline (ABC has it way down the page; NBC roll it into a general story about the e-mails; and CNN has it fairly down the list as well).
I am feeling very left out...Am I the only person that hasn't been approached to become a secret operative? It seems a very common story these days among those who get their collar felt.
It all depends what people mean by an early election. Next Spring is certainly very possible. Too late now. No one will want an election after the clocks go back plus the £ is too unsettled. The big problem is the shape of Brexit isn't in the Goldilocks Zone yet. For a successful Brexit election you need enough of an outline to claim a mandate but not enough of an outline to maximise opposition or get bogged down in the details. The other issue, May having ruled an election out, is you need a casus beli. You need either a Bruxelles or Parliamentary blockage to be cleared. But we won't get these ( if they happen ) till the middle of next year. ECA repeal isn't until the new session. Tusk's ' Hard Brexit or No Brexit ' wouldn't play until A50 is invoked.
The Earliest I can see is if the Supreme Court rules an Act of Parliament is needed to invoke A50. May tries to rush through a one clause bill then a pro Single Market Commons and Lords passes it but wth multiple Sunrise and Sunset clauses. May abandons it and goes to the country on the first Thursday in May. Or Mayday as the Sun will call it.
I'm well aware how many variables there are in scenario. It's highly speculative. And of course Governments can stage false flag casus beli very easierly. But in a curious way if May wants the option of an early election the Supreme Court mandating an A50 bill may be her best bet.
And what happens if Corbyn refuses to play ball with any wish by TM to call an election for May 4th next year?
The right hon. Gentleman is afraid of an election is he? Oh, if I were going to cut and run I'd have gone after the Falklands. Afraid? Frightened? Frit? Couldn't take it? Couldn't stand it? - M. H. Thatcher, PMQs, 19/4/83
Just been watching an old rerun of Goodnight Sweetheart.
What is scary is that that HoC exchange is nearly as long ago as WW2 was when said TV programme was made and certainly longer ago than WW2 was when dads army was made....
My father has spent the past month in Arizona. He likes to talk so thought he would ask people about what they thought about the election. His feedback is that - unsurprisingly - the people he spoke to are tearing their hair out about for whom to vote - "they don't like her and he is a nutjob" - but he sensed that dislike for HRC was slightly more intense.
Perhaps slightly bizarrely, given the polling, he has gone from thinking HRC was a shoo-in six weeks ago to now not knowing who will win (point of reference - his past performance, in the UK anyway, is good: he got me into both a Conservative majority and a Brexit win).
It all depends what people mean by an early election. Next Spring is certainly very possible. Too late now. No one will want an election after the clocks go back plus the £ is too unsettled. The big problem is the shape of Brexit isn't in the Goldilocks Zone yet. For a successful Brexit election you need enough of an outline to claim a mandate but not enough of an outline to maximise opposition or get bogged down in the details. The other issue, May having ruled an election out, is you need a casus beli. You need either a Bruxelles or Parliamentary blockage to be cleared. But we won't get these ( if they happen ) till the middle of next year. ECA repeal isn't until the new session. Tusk's ' Hard Brexit or No Brexit ' wouldn't play until A50 is invoked.
The Earliest I can see is if the Supreme Court rules an Act of Parliament is needed to invoke A50. May tries to rush through a one clause bill then a pro Single Market Commons and Lords passes it but wth multiple Sunrise and Sunset clauses. May abandons it and goes to the country on the first Thursday in May. Or Mayday as the Sun will call it.
I'm well aware how many variables there are in scenario. It's highly speculative. And of course Governments can stage false flag casus beli very easierly. But in a curious way if May wants the option of an early election the Supreme Court mandating an A50 bill may be her best bet.
And what happens if Corbyn refuses to play ball with any wish by TM to call an election for May 4th next year?
The right hon. Gentleman is afraid of an election is he? Oh, if I were going to cut and run I'd have gone after the Falklands. Afraid? Frightened? Frit? Couldn't take it? Couldn't stand it? - M. H. Thatcher, PMQs, 19/4/83
That was Thatcher in fishwife mode. The public would not be interested in why Corbyn might effectively delay an election. At the end of the day they simply would have to remind people who introduced the FTA - that would suffice I think. TM could be accused of trying to play fast & loose with the Constitution for electoral gain.
Not really. Labour members didn't join the party to keep the Tories in power.
They didn't vote for Corbyn as the leader most likely to oust them from power. Are you saying that if Corbyn declined a GE gambit he would be c challenged for the leadership?
4 May would be an auspicious day for an election. It would inevitably be known as the Star Wars election. With a bit of luck the Remoaning Minnies would come back from the dark side.
[Sunil and TSE confront each other, after the former has learnt that the latter has turned to the Daft Side]
Sunil: You have allowed this Europhile Chancellor to twist your mind, until now, until now you've become the very thing you swore to destroy.
TSE: Don't lecture me, Sunil! I see through the lies of the LEAVE campaign. I do not fear the European Union as you do. I have brought peace, freedom, justice, and security to my new Empire!
Sunil: Your new Empire?
TSE: Don't make me MODERATE you.
Sunil: TSE, my allegiance is to the Republic Monarchy, to democracy!
TSE: If you're not with me, then you're my enemy.
Sunil:[realizing that TSE is consumed by evil and there's no reasoning with him anymore] Only a Europhile deals in absolutes. [draws his lightsaber] I will do what I must!
TSE: You will try! [draws his own lightsaber and confronts Sunil!]
[later during a pause in the battle]
Sunil: I have failed you, TSE. I have failed you.
TSE: I should have known the LEAVERS were plotting to take over. Chancellor Osborne has showed me the true ways of the Force.
Sunil: TSE, Chancellor Osborne is evil! The Europhiles are evil. The Daft Side of the Force is an evil presence.
TSE: From my point of view, it is the LEAVERS who are evil.
Sunil: Well, then you really are lost!
TSE:[raises his lightsaber] This is the end for you... my former master.
[the battle resumes, but even later on, Sunil manages to reach a vantage point overlooking TSE]
Sunil: It's over TSE, I have the high ground!
TSE: You MISUNDERESTIMATE my power!
Sunil: Don't try it!
[TSE leaps at Sunil, but the latter anticipates his move and promptly lightsabers TSE's rather fetching Red Shoes of Power off, leaving him writhing in pain on the ground, crippled and bereft of his Force abilities!]
Sunil: You were the chosen one! It was said that you would destroy the Europhiles, not join them! You were to bring balance to PoliticalBetting.com, not leave it in Daftness!
TSE:[shouts] I HATE you!
Sunil: You were my brother, TSE. I loved you.
[Sunil, unable to bring himself to finish off poor TSE, walks away from the scene, disconsolate...
It all depends what people mean by an early election. Next Spring is certainly very possible. Too late now. No one will want an election after the clocks go back plus the £ is too unsettled. The big problem is the shape of Brexit isn't in the Goldilocks Zone yet. For a successful Brexit election you need enough of an outline to claim a mandate but not enough of an outline to maximise opposition or get bogged down in the details. The other issue, May having ruled an election out, is you need a casus beli. You need either a Bruxelles or Parliamentary blockage to be cleared. But we won't get these ( if they happen ) till the middle of next year. ECA repeal isn't until the new session. Tusk's ' Hard Brexit or No Brexit ' wouldn't play until A50 is invoked.
The Earliest I can see is if the Supreme Court rules an Act of Parliament is needed to invoke A50. May tries to rush through a one clause bill then a pro Single Market Commons and Lords passes it but wth multiple Sunrise and Sunset clauses. May abandons it and goes to the country on the first Thursday in May. Or Mayday as the Sun will call it.
I'm well aware how many variables there are in scenario. It's highly speculative. And of course Governments can stage false flag casus beli very easierly. But in a curious way if May wants the option of an early election the Supreme Court mandating an A50 bill may be her best bet.
And what happens if Corbyn refuses to play ball with any wish by TM to call an election for May 4th next year?
The right hon. Gentleman is afraid of an election is he? Oh, if I were going to cut and run I'd have gone after the Falklands. Afraid? Frightened? Frit? Couldn't take it? Couldn't stand it? - M. H. Thatcher, PMQs, 19/4/83
Just been watching an old rerun of Goodnight Sweetheart.
What is scary is that that HoC exchange is nearly as long ago as WW2 was when said TV programme was made and certainly longer ago than WW2 was when dads army was made....
I think you need some maths lessons mate. Goodnight Sweetheart was made in the 1990s, so 50+ years after WW2. Maggie's HoC exchange was a mere 33 years ago.
It all depends what people mean by an early election. Next Spring is certainly very possible. Too late now. No one will want an election after the clocks go back plus the £ is too unsettled. The big problem is the shape of Brexit isn't in the Goldilocks Zone yet. For a successful Brexit election you need enough of an outline to claim a mandate but not enough of an outline to maximise opposition or get bogged down in the details. The other issue, May having ruled an election out, is you need a casus beli. You need either a Bruxelles or Parliamentary blockage to be cleared. But we won't get these ( if they happen ) till the middle of next year. ECA repeal isn't until the new session. Tusk's ' Hard Brexit or No Brexit ' wouldn't play until A50 is invoked.
The Earliest I can see is if the Supreme Court rules an Act of Parliament is needed to invoke A50. May tries to rush through a one clause bill then a pro Single Market Commons and Lords passes it but wth multiple Sunrise and Sunset clauses. May abandons it and goes to the country on the first Thursday in May. Or Mayday as the Sun will call it.
I'm well aware how many variables there are in scenario. It's highly speculative. And of course Governments can stage false flag casus beli very easierly. But in a curious way if May wants the option of an early election the Supreme Court mandating an A50 bill may be her best bet.
And what happens if Corbyn refuses to play ball with any wish by TM to call an election for May 4th next year?
The right hon. Gentleman is afraid of an election is he? Oh, if I were going to cut and run I'd have gone after the Falklands. Afraid? Frightened? Frit? Couldn't take it? Couldn't stand it? - M. H. Thatcher, PMQs, 19/4/83
I am feeling very left out...Am I the only person that hasn't been approached to become a secret operative? It seems a very common story these days among those who get their collar felt.
It all depends what people mean by an early election. Next Spring is certainly very possible. Too late now. No one will want an election after the clocks go back plus the £ is too unsettled. The big problem is the shape of Brexit isn't in the Goldilocks Zone yet. For a successful Brexit election you need enough of an outline to claim a mandate but not enough of an outline to maximise opposition or get bogged down in the details. The other issue, May having ruled an election out, is you need a casus beli. You need either a Bruxelles or Parliamentary blockage to be cleared. But we won't get these ( if they happen ) till the middle of next year. ECA repeal isn't until the new session. Tusk's ' Hard Brexit or No Brexit ' wouldn't play until A50 is invoked.
The Earliest I can see is if the Supreme Court rules an Act of Parliament is needed to invoke A50. May tries to rush through a one clause bill then a pro Single Market Commons and Lords passes it but wth multiple Sunrise and Sunset clauses. May abandons it and goes to the country on the first Thursday in May. Or Mayday as the Sun will call it.
I'm well aware how many variables there are in scenario. It's highly speculative. And of course Governments can stage false flag casus beli very easierly. But in a curious way if May wants the option of an early election the Supreme Court mandating an A50 bill may be her best bet.
And what happens if Corbyn refuses to play ball with any wish by TM to call an election for May 4th next year?
The right hon. Gentleman is afraid of an election is he? Oh, if I were going to cut and run I'd have gone after the Falklands. Afraid? Frightened? Frit? Couldn't take it? Couldn't stand it? - M. H. Thatcher, PMQs, 19/4/83
Just been watching an old rerun of Goodnight Sweetheart.
What is scary is that that HoC exchange is nearly as long ago as WW2 was when said TV programme was made and certainly longer ago than WW2 was when dads army was made....
I think you need some maths lessons mate. Goodnight Sweetheart was made in the 1990s, so 50+ years after WW2. Maggie's HoC exchange was a mere 33 years ago.
Just checked - it started in 93. So 48 years after. 33 years is a stretch indeed for almost but it is just under 75% of the way there which is almost as bad.
And only five more years between WW2 and that speech than between now and that speech.
I am feeling very left out...Am I the only person that hasn't been approached to become a secret operative? It seems a very common story these days among those who get their collar felt.
It all depends what people mean by an early election. Next Spring is certainly very possible. Too late now. No one will want an election after the clocks go back plus the £ is too unsettled. The big problem is the shape of Brexit isn't in the Goldilocks Zone yet. For a successful Brexit election you need enough of an outline to claim a mandate but not enough of an outline to maximise opposition or get bogged down in the details. The other issue, May having ruled an election out, is you need a casus beli. You need either a Bruxelles or Parliamentary blockage to be cleared. But we won't get these ( if they happen ) till the middle of next year. ECA repeal isn't until the new session. Tusk's ' Hard Brexit or No Brexit ' wouldn't play until A50 is invoked.
The Earliest I can see is if the Supreme Court rules an Act of Parliament is needed to invoke A50. May tries to rush through a one clause bill then a pro Single Market Commons and Lords passes it but wth multiple Sunrise and Sunset clauses. May abandons it and goes to the country on the first Thursday in May. Or Mayday as the Sun will call it.
I'm well aware how many variables there are in scenario. It's highly speculative. And of course Governments can stage false flag casus beli very easierly. But in a curious way if May wants the option of an early election the Supreme Court mandating an A50 bill may be her best bet.
And what happens if Corbyn refuses to play ball with any wish by TM to call an election for May 4th next year?
The right hon. Gentleman is afraid of an election is he? Oh, if I were going to cut and run I'd have gone after the Falklands. Afraid? Frightened? Frit? Couldn't take it? Couldn't stand it? - M. H. Thatcher, PMQs, 19/4/83
That was Thatcher in fishwife mode. The public would not be interested in why Corbyn might effectively delay an election. At the end of the day they simply would have to remind people who introduced the FTA - that would suffice I think. TM could be accused of trying to play fast & loose with the Constitution for electoral gain.
Not really. Labour members didn't join the party to keep the Tories in power.
They didn't vote for Corbyn as the leader most likely to oust them from power. Are you saying that if Corbyn declined a GE gambit he would be c challenged for the leadership?
Yes, absolutely. Besides its not his choice, every Labour MP who voted against an early election and in favour of keeping the Tories in power would be signing their own career's death warrant.
I'm startled someone as credible as @Peter_from_Putney is predicting.a Hung Parliament. I'd like to read a thread on it.
The path to PB fame: find ten 10/1 long shots. Tip them one at a time. Save all your posts. The one that comes in will keep you in free drinks for many a year....
It all depends what people mean by an early election. Next Spring is certainly very possible. Too late now. No one will want an election after the clocks go back plus the £ is too unsettled. The big problem is the shape of Brexit isn't in the Goldilocks Zone yet. For a successful Brexit election you need enough of an outline to claim a mandate but not enough of an outline to maximise opposition or get bogged down in the details. The other issue, May having ruled an election out, is you need a casus beli. You need either a Bruxelles or Parliamentary blockage to be cleared. But we won't get these ( if they happen ) till the middle of next year. ECA repeal isn't until the new session. Tusk's ' Hard Brexit or No Brexit ' wouldn't play until A50 is invoked.
And what happens if Corbyn refuses to play ball with any wish by TM to call an election for May 4th next year?
Corbyn has already shot his mouth off calling for an immeadiate GE and is, if we are frank, too thick to think strategically about the way ahead. But I agree Labour should set certain " tests " for a Brexit election. Blocking democracy would be impossible but saying the British people deserve to know X,Y,Z about Brexit policy before an election was granted could be pulled off.
But Corbyn has not shot his mouth off as much as TM re-election timing. I don't think there is a hope in hell that he would meekly bow to the calling of an election if the Tories stil had a lead of 10% plus. At the very least he would force her down the humiliating avenue of having to table a No Confidence vote in her own Government. That in turn would bring us to the possibility of a repeat of the Balfour/Campbel-Bannerman scenario with TM's Government having to step aside with Corbyn becoming caretaker PM for the election campaign period. Now that would be an interesting scenario!
I'm not an expert but I think the Cabinet manual says May can only resign when she can advise HM who her successor will be. As the Commons wouldn't have expressed confidence in a replacement for 14 days due to the Conservative majority May would be PM still when the automatic dissolution kicked in.
I don't think the Cabinet manual has any constitutional force at all per se - it is merely advice to a sitting PM drawn up by civil servants in 2010.. Constitutional precedents - eg December 1905 -would certainly override that.
It all depends what people mean by an early election. Next Spring is certainly very possible. Too late now. No one will want an election after the clocks go back plus the £ is too unsettled. The big problem is the shape of Brexit isn't in the Goldilocks Zone yet. For a successful Brexit election you need enough of an outline to claim a mandate but not enough of an outline to maximise opposition or get bogged down in the details. The other issue, May having ruled an election out, is you need a casus beli. You need either a Bruxelles or Parliamentary blockage to be cleared. But we won't get these ( if they happen ) till the middle of next year. ECA repeal isn't until the new session. Tusk's ' Hard Brexit or No Brexit ' wouldn't play until A50 is invoked.
And what happens if Corbyn refuses to play ball with any wish by TM to call an election for May 4th next year?
Corbyn has already shot his mouth off calling for an immeadiate GE and is, if we are frank, too thick to think strategically about the way ahead. But I agree Labour should set certain " tests " for a Brexit election. Blocking democracy would be impossible but saying the British people deserve to know X,Y,Z about Brexit policy before an election was granted could be pulled off.
But Corbyn has not shot his mouth off as much as TM re-election timing. I don't think there is a hope in hell that he would meekly bow to the calling of an election if the Tories stil had a lead of 10% plus. At the very least he would force her down the humiliating avenue of having to table a No Confidence vote in her own Government. That in turn would bring us to the possibility of a repeat of the Balfour/Campbel-Bannerman scenario with TM's Government having to step aside with Corbyn becoming caretaker PM for the election campaign period. Now that would be an interesting scenario!
I'm not an expert but I think the Cabinet manual says May can only resign when she can advise HM who her successor will be. As the Commons wouldn't have expressed confidence in a replacement for 14 days due to the Conservative majority May would be PM still when the automatic dissolution kicked in.
I don't think the Cabinet has any constitutional force at all - it is merely advice to a sitting PM by civil servants.. Constitutional precedents - eg December 1905 -would certainly override that.
'Precedent' from 1905 would not override the advice of the cabinet secretary. That small straw is broken I'm afraid Justin.
It all depends what people mean by an early election. Next Spring is certainly very possible. Too late now. No one will want an election after the clocks go back plus the £ is too unsettled. The big problem is the shape of Brexit isn't in the Goldilocks Zone yet. For a successful Brexit election you need enough of an outline to claim a mandate but not enough of an outline to maximise opposition or get bogged down in the details. The other issue, May having ruled an election out, is you need a casus beli. You need either a Bruxelles or Parliamentary blockage to be cleared. But we won't get these ( if they happen ) till the middle of next year. ECA repeal isn't until the new session. Tusk's ' Hard Brexit or No Brexit ' wouldn't play until A50 is invoked.
And what happens if Corbyn refuses to play ball with any wish by TM to call an election for May 4th next year?
Corbyn has already shot his mouth off calling for an immeadiate GE and is, if we are frank, too thick to think strategically about the way ahead. But I agree Labour should set certain " tests " for a Brexit election. Blocking democracy would be impossible but saying the British people deserve to know X,Y,Z about Brexit policy before an election was granted could be pulled off.
But Corbyn has not shot his mouth off as much as TM re-election timing. I don't think there is a hope in hell that he would meekly bow to the calling of an election if the Tories stil had a lead of 10% plus. At the very least he would force her down the humiliating avenue of having to table a No Confidence vote in her own Government. That in turn would bring us to the possibility of a repeat of the Balfour/Campbel-Bannerman scenario with TM's Government having to step aside with Corbyn becoming caretaker PM for the election campaign period. Now that would be an interesting scenario!
I'm not an expert but I think the Cabinet manual says May can only resign when she can advise HM who her successor will be. As the Commons wouldn't have expressed confidence in a replacement for 14 days due to the Conservative majority May would be PM still when the automatic dissolution kicked in.
I don't think the Cabinet manual has any constitutional force at all per se - it is merely advice to a sitting PM drawn up by civil servants in 2010.. Constitutional precedents - eg December 1905 -would certainly override that.
As Labour would not be able to command the confidence of the house, Corbyn wouldn't be PM.
I'm startled someone as credible as @Peter_from_Putney is predicting.a Hung Parliament. I'd like to read a thread on it.
The path to PB fame: find ten 10/1 long shots. Tip them one at a time. Save all your posts. The one that comes in will keep you in free drinks for many a year....
LOL I often wonder that about OGH's famous Obama 50/1 prediction. Yes its an incredible result in isolation but considering how many hundreds if not thousands of tips/questions over the years of this site the odds are surely that one was bound to happen. Was it a stroke of genius or just a form of positivity bias where we forget all the predictions that never came true?
I'm startled someone as credible as @Peter_from_Putney is predicting.a Hung Parliament. I'd like to read a thread on it.
The path to PB fame: find ten 10/1 long shots. Tip them one at a time. Save all your posts. The one that comes in will keep you in free drinks for many a year....
LOL I often wonder that about OGH's famous Obama 50/1 prediction. Yes its an incredible result in isolation but considering how many hundreds if not thousands of tips/questions over the years of this site the odds are surely that one was bound to happen. Was it a stroke of genius or just a form of positivity bias where we forget all the predictions that never came true?
I've had many more winners than losers, my tips and following others, guess I should enjoy it will it lasts.
Just checked - it started in 93. So 48 years after. 33 years is a stretch indeed for almost but it is just under 75% of the way there which is almost as bad.
And only five more years between WW2 and that speech than between now and that speech.
#gettingold
Years ago there was a weekly programme on the television that looked at in documentary/news terms what has happened 25 years ago that week. It was called, if memory serves, "All Our Yesterdays". I remember watching it in the sixties when episode after episode seemed to be taken up with what happened in North Africa.
Could be an interesting format to reintroduce now.
It all depends what people mean by an early election. Next Spring is certainly very possible. Too late now. No one will want an election after the clocks go back plus the £ is too unsettled. The big problem is the shape of Brexit isn't in the Goldilocks Zone yet. For a successful Brexit election you need enough of an outline to claim a mandate but not enough of an outline to maximise opposition or get bogged down in the details. The other issue, May having ruled an election out, is you need a casus beli. You need either a Bruxelles or Parliamentary blockage to be cleared. But we won't get these ( if they happen ) till the middle of next year. ECA repeal isn't until the new session. Tusk's ' Hard Brexit or No Brexit ' wouldn't play until A50 is invoked.
And what happens if Corbyn refuses to play ball with any wish by TM to call an election for May 4th next year?
But Corbyn has not shot his mouth off as much as TM re-election timing. I don't think there is a hope in hell that he would meekly bow to the calling of an election if the Tories stil had a lead of 10% plus. At the very least he would force her down the humiliating avenue of having to table a No Confidence vote in her own Government. That in turn would bring us to the possibility of a repeat of the Balfour/Campbel-Bannerman scenario with TM's Government having to step aside with Corbyn becoming caretaker PM for the election campaign period. Now that would be an interesting scenario!
I'm not an expert but I think the Cabinet manual says May can only resign when she can advise HM who her successor will be. As the Commons wouldn't have expressed confidence in a replacement for 14 days due to the Conservative majority May would be PM still when the automatic dissolution kicked in.
I don't think the Cabinet manual has any constitutional force at all per se - it is merely advice to a sitting PM drawn up by civil servants in 2010.. Constitutional precedents - eg December 1905 -would certainly override that.
As Labour would not be able to command the confidence of the house, Corbyn wouldn't be PM.
But neither did Campbell-Bannerman in December 1905 - in fact the Tories still had a majority of circa 100. He called an election - and Corbyn would have to do likewise.
Am I just blind....I can't see any mention of the jungle "children" arriving in the UK on the BBC website. All I can find is an article about the number of children there complete with tot on a trike, rather than the photos on the other new outlets showing "children" that all look older than some people claiming their pensions.
Given that the jungle children is a daily story on the BBC website, I would presume it would be the top story.
I'm startled someone as credible as @Peter_from_Putney is predicting.a Hung Parliament. I'd like to read a thread on it.
The path to PB fame: find ten 10/1 long shots. Tip them one at a time. Save all your posts. The one that comes in will keep you in free drinks for many a year....
LOL I often wonder that about OGH's famous Obama 50/1 prediction. Yes its an incredible result in isolation but considering how many hundreds if not thousands of tips/questions over the years of this site the odds are surely that one was bound to happen. Was it a stroke of genius or just a form of positivity bias where we forget all the predictions that never came true?
A bit of both. We all got Corbyn at 100/1 first time around, @AndyJS' EU referendum spreadsheet saw lots of 10/1 bets on what was almost a dead cert when the results started coming in. Collectively PB must be good at spotting value odds in politics markets.
On which subject, Shadsy at Ladbrokes currently has 7/2 for Hillary to win by less than 5% of the national vote.
As Labour would not be able to command the confidence of the house, Corbyn wouldn't be PM.
But neither did Campbell-Bannerman in December 1905 - in fact the Tories still had a majority of circa 100. He called an election - and Corbyn would have to do likewise.
Was that ever voted on in a way that the FTPA stipulates? The Act states:
"If the House of Commons resolves "That this House has no confidence in Her Majesty's Government", an early general election is held, unless the House of Commons subsequently resolves "That this House has confidence in Her Majesty's Government". This second resolution must be made within fourteen days of the first."
Corbyn wouldn't win such a vote, and therefore wouldn't become Prime Minister.
It all depends what people mean by an early election. Next Spring is certainly very possible. Too late now. No one will want an election after the clocks go back plus the £ is too unsettled. The big problem is the shape of Brexit isn't in the Goldilocks Zone yet. For a successful Brexit election you need enough of an outline to claim a mandate but not enough of an outline to maximise opposition or get bogged down in the details. The other issue, May having ruled an election out, is you need a casus beli. You need either a Bruxelles or Parliamentary blockage to be cleared. But we won't get these ( if they happen ) till the middle of next year. ECA repeal isn't until the new session. Tusk's ' Hard Brexit or No Brexit ' wouldn't play until A50 is invoked.
And what happens if Corbyn refuses to play ball with any wish by TM to call an election for May 4th next year?
Corbyn has already shot his mouth off calling for an immeadiate GE and is, if we are frank, too thick to think strategically about the way ahead. But I agree Labour should set certain " tests " for a Brexit election. Blocking democracy would be impossible but saying the British people deserve to know X,Y,Z about Brexit policy before an election was granted could be pulled off.
I'm not an expert but I think the Cabinet manual says May can only resign when she can advise HM who her successor will be. As the Commons wouldn't have expressed confidence in a replacement for 14 days due to the Conservative majority May would be PM still when the automatic dissolution kicked in.
I don't think the Cabinet has any constitutional force at all - it is merely advice to a sitting PM by civil servants.. Constitutional precedents - eg December 1905 -would certainly override that.
'Precedent' from 1905 would not override the advice of the cabinet secretary. That small straw is broken I'm afraid Justin.
I believe - apologies to him if I am wrong - that David Herdson has made a similar point to my own on this. The Cabinet Secretary at the end of the day does not determine what is proper constitutional practice. Few of them have even been legally trained.
I'm startled someone as credible as @Peter_from_Putney is predicting.a Hung Parliament. I'd like to read a thread on it.
The path to PB fame: find ten 10/1 long shots. Tip them one at a time. Save all your posts. The one that comes in will keep you in free drinks for many a year....
LOL I often wonder that about OGH's famous Obama 50/1 prediction. Yes its an incredible result in isolation but considering how many hundreds if not thousands of tips/questions over the years of this site the odds are surely that one was bound to happen. Was it a stroke of genius or just a form of positivity bias where we forget all the predictions that never came true?
I've had many more winners than losers, my tips and following others, guess I should enjoy it will it lasts.
When this site was primarily about betting, and had some serious punters amongst its contributors, there were indeed some jolly good tips to be found on politics and the geegees (blessed be the name of StJohn who gave me my best ever day at the races).
It all depends what people mean by an early election. Next Spring is certainly very possible. Too late now. No one will want an election after the clocks go back plus the £ is too unsettled. The big problem is the shape of Brexit isn't in the Goldilocks Zone yet. For a successful Brexit election you need enough of an outline to claim a mandate but not enough of an outline to maximise opposition or get bogged down in the details. The other issue, May having ruled an election out, is you need a casus beli. You need either a Bruxelles or Parliamentary blockage to be cleared. But we won't get these ( if they happen ) till the middle of next year. ECA repeal isn't until the new session. Tusk's ' Hard Brexit or No Brexit ' wouldn't play until A50 is invoked.
And what happens if Corbyn refuses to play ball with any wish by TM to call an election for May 4th next year?
Corbyn has already shot his mouth off calling for an immeadiate GE and is, if we are frank, too thick to think strategically about the way ahead. But I agree Labour should set certain " tests " for a Brexit election. Blocking democracy would be impossible but saying the British people deserve to know X,Y,Z about Brexit policy before an election was granted could be pulled off.
I'm not an expert but I think the Cabinet manual says May can only resign when she can advise HM who her successor will be. As the Commons wouldn't have expressed confidence in a replacement for 14 days due to the Conservative majority May would be PM still when the automatic dissolution kicked in.
I don't think the Cabinet has any constitutional force at all - it is merely advice to a sitting PM by civil servants.. Constitutional precedents - eg December 1905 -would certainly override that.
'Precedent' from 1905 would not override the advice of the cabinet secretary. That small straw is broken I'm afraid Justin.
I believe - apologies to him if I am wrong - that David Herdson has made a similar point to my own on this. The Cabinet Secretary at the end of the day does not determine what is proper constitutional practice. Few of them have even been legally trained.
British constitutional practice is to make it up as you go along. You don't need to be legally trained to do that
I'm startled someone as credible as @Peter_from_Putney is predicting.a Hung Parliament. I'd like to read a thread on it.
The path to PB fame: find ten 10/1 long shots. Tip them one at a time. Save all your posts. The one that comes in will keep you in free drinks for many a year....
LOL I often wonder that about OGH's famous Obama 50/1 prediction. Yes its an incredible result in isolation but considering how many hundreds if not thousands of tips/questions over the years of this site the odds are surely that one was bound to happen. Was it a stroke of genius or just a form of positivity bias where we forget all the predictions that never came true?
That's a very good point. It's worth noting you only need to back ~30x 50/1 shots for it to be more likely than not that one of them will win.
Having said that - and having followed this site on and off since 2008 - following every single one of mike's tips and placing proportional stakes on each bet would have almost certainly made an overall profit.
As Labour would not be able to command the confidence of the house, Corbyn wouldn't be PM.
But neither did Campbell-Bannerman in December 1905 - in fact the Tories still had a majority of circa 100. He called an election - and Corbyn would have to do likewise.
Was that ever voted on in a way that the FTPA stipulates? The Act states:
"If the House of Commons resolves "That this House has no confidence in Her Majesty's Government", an early general election is held, unless the House of Commons subsequently resolves "That this House has confidence in Her Majesty's Government". This second resolution must be made within fourteen days of the first."
Corbyn wouldn't win such a vote, and therefore wouldn't become Prime Minister.
That does not necessarily follow from what you have quoted there. There would have to be an election certainly - but there are constitutional scholars who argue that if the Government is defeated on this vote the Leader of the Opposition should be invited to put together a majority in Parliament , and becomes caretaker PM whilst he tries to do so. Of course he would fail, - and an election would then follow - but he remains caretaker PM til Polling Day.
There seems to be a bit of a misapprehension amongst some posters here.
Mrs May is moving left of Cameron, not right of Cameron, a move much facilitated by the welcome collapse of UKIP.
Admittedly she's doing her best to confuse the enemy with a nonsensical diversionary feint on grammar schools, but her tanks are dashing for the centre-ground, not the right flank of the battleground.
It all depends what people mean by an early election. Next Spring is certainly very possible. Too late now. No one will want an election after the clocks go back plus the £ is too unsettled. The big problem is the shape of Brexit isn't in the Goldilocks Zone yet. For a successful Brexit election you need enough of an outline to claim a mandate but not enough of an outline to maximise opposition or get bogged down in the details. The other issue, May having ruled an election out, is you need a casus beli. You need either a Bruxelles or Parliamentary blockage to be cleared. But we won't get these ( if they happen ) till the middle of next year. ECA repeal isn't until the new session. Tusk's ' Hard Brexit or No Brexit ' wouldn't play until A50 is invoked.
And what happens if Corbyn refuses to play ball with any wish by TM to call an election for May 4th next year?
Corbyn has already shot his mouth off calling for an immeadiate GE and is, if we are frank, too thick to think strategically about the way ahead. But I agree Labour should set certain " tests " for a Brexit election. Blocking democracy would be impossible but saying the British people deserve to know X,Y,Z about Brexit policy before an election was granted could be pulled off.
I'm not an expert but I think the Cabinet manual says May can only resign when she can advise HM who her successor will be. As the Commons wouldn't have expressed confidence in a replacement for 14 days due to the Conservative majority May would be PM still when the automatic dissolution kicked in.
I don't think the Cabinet has any constitutional force at all - it is merely advice to a sitting PM by civil servants.. Constitutional precedents - eg December 1905 -would certainly override that.
'Precedent' from 1905 would not override the advice of the cabinet secretary. That small straw is broken I'm afraid Justin.
I believe - apologies to him if I am wrong - that David Herdson has made a similar point to my own on this. The Cabinet Secretary at the end of the day does not determine what is proper constitutional practice. Few of them have even been legally trained.
British constitutional practice is to make it up as you go along. You don't need to be legally trained to do that
Comments
Yes, this is not a repeat negotiation, it is a one-off. But the relationship with the UK will be ongoing and, in key areas such as security, will remain just as important as when we were in the EU. So no, the EU will not want an 'unsuccessful' negotiation.
They'll want one that publicly can be held up to discourage other defections, but which will preserve those aspects of the EU relation with the UK that will remain vital to them. And part of that will be economic too.
(b) Governments are entitled to keep some cards close to their chest. Cameron didn't spell out every detail before his 'renegotiation', just a few big-picture aims, which is what I'd expect from May/Davis.
(c) We can walk away (WTO rules). I think we both agree that's not desirable, but to get a good carpet we have to be clear we'll take no carpet rather than pay over the odds for a mediocre one.
(d) 52% did, and most of the 48% I know accept that we are buying a carpet and want the best one.
(e) see (a)
(f) Perhaps true - but a good argument for buying a good carpet if we can and sodding off rather than whatever the equivalent of Remain is in this now rather convoluted analogy.
She has a good chance to win this time because she is facing Trump, but has zero chance to win in 2020 because she will be facing all of the above without Trump.
For that reason, I keep asking for and getting 3.0 on Betfair on a "No Overall Majority" outcome at the next GE. Pretty close to being free money imho, at surprisingly good odds, albeit that one probably has to wait three and a half years to collect, unless deciding to trade out in the meantime.
I sense that were Rod Crosby to return to PB.com, he'd be shouting the virtues of such a bet from the rooftops!
She has zero chance, she won't be facing Trump in 2020.
The GOP won't allow an independent to run in 2020, they will probably change the rules so that only those who have held elected positions will be allowed to run.
The only question is will America still exist by 2020 or will it implode before then, given that Hillary is a terrible manager.
The FTPA was designed around a coalition government, and it served that purpose well. It doesn't work in a 'normal' Parliament with a small government majority.
Sunil: You have allowed this Europhile Chancellor to twist your mind, until now, until now you've become the very thing you swore to destroy.
TSE: Don't lecture me, Sunil! I see through the lies of the LEAVE campaign. I do not fear the European Union as you do. I have brought peace, freedom, justice, and security to my new Empire!
Sunil: Your new Empire?
TSE: Don't make me MODERATE you.
Sunil: TSE, my allegiance is to the
RepublicMonarchy, to democracy!TSE: If you're not with me, then you're my enemy.
Sunil: [realizing that TSE is consumed by evil and there's no reasoning with him anymore] Only a Europhile deals in absolutes.
[draws his lightsaber] I will do what I must!
TSE: You will try!
[draws his own lightsaber and confronts Sunil!]
[later during a pause in the battle]
Sunil: I have failed you, TSE. I have failed you.
TSE: I should have known the LEAVERS were plotting to take over. Chancellor Osborne has showed me the true ways of the Force.
Sunil: TSE, Chancellor Osborne is evil! The Europhiles are evil. The Daft Side of the Force is an evil presence.
TSE: From my point of view, it is the LEAVERS who are evil.
Sunil: Well, then you really are lost!
TSE: [raises his lightsaber] This is the end for you... my former master.
[the battle resumes, but even later on, Sunil manages to reach a vantage point overlooking TSE]
Sunil: It's over TSE, I have the high ground!
TSE: You MISUNDERESTIMATE my power!
Sunil: Don't try it!
[TSE leaps at Sunil, but the latter anticipates his move and promptly lightsabers TSE's rather fetching Red Shoes of Power off, leaving him writhing in pain on the ground, crippled and bereft of his Force abilities!]
Sunil: You were the chosen one! It was said that you would destroy the Europhiles, not join them! You were to bring balance to PoliticalBetting.com, not leave it in Daftness!
TSE: [shouts] I HATE you!
Sunil: You were my brother, TSE. I loved you.
[Sunil, unable to bring himself to finish off poor TSE, walks away from the scene, disconsolate...
To Be Continued....]
Must be a high chance he will be persuaded to come back in the circumstances
' TM could be accused of trying to play fast & loose with the Constitution for electoral gain.'
Wow that issue would get voters going to the polls in their droves.
Interestingly, while (as you would expect) Fox has it as top billing, CBS has it as their top story on their website with a non-to helpful headline (ABC has it way down the page; NBC roll it into a general story about the e-mails; and CNN has it fairly down the list as well).
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3844990/Boney-M-singer-s-brother-explosives-home-spurned-MI5.html
What is scary is that that HoC exchange is nearly as long ago as WW2 was when said TV programme was made and certainly longer ago than WW2 was when dads army was made....
'Rubbish so far, probably 'cos @TSE is there. '
And that's being polite .
My father has spent the past month in Arizona. He likes to talk so thought he would ask people about what they thought about the election. His feedback is that - unsurprisingly - the people he spoke to are tearing their hair out about for whom to vote - "they don't like her and he is a nutjob" - but he sensed that dislike for HRC was slightly more intense.
Perhaps slightly bizarrely, given the polling, he has gone from thinking HRC was a shoo-in six weeks ago to now not knowing who will win (point of reference - his past performance, in the UK anyway, is good: he got me into both a Conservative majority and a Brexit win).
Carpet analogies?
*tiptoes gently away*
Rep. Bob Brady (D-Penn.) tells me what Philly Dems will do if Trump poll watchers challenge them (cc @jmartNYT) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/10/17/rigged-election-talk-didnt-start-with-trump/ …
And only five more years between WW2 and that speech than between now and that speech.
#gettingold
I laid woolf at short odds.
Unfortunately, around the same time, I also backed labour to 2nd in witney @ 5/2 - which now looks like a sure loser.
money come money go.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDAinHgaViI
Could be an interesting format to reintroduce now.
#gettingoldisnotsobad
Given that the jungle children is a daily story on the BBC website, I would presume it would be the top story.
On which subject, Shadsy at Ladbrokes currently has 7/2 for Hillary to win by less than 5% of the national vote.
"If the House of Commons resolves "That this House has no confidence in Her Majesty's Government", an early general election is held, unless the House of Commons subsequently resolves "That this House has confidence in Her Majesty's Government". This second resolution must be made within fourteen days of the first."
Corbyn wouldn't win such a vote, and therefore wouldn't become Prime Minister.
"In an insane world, it was the sanest choice" - Sarah Connor on Brexit
Having said that - and having followed this site on and off since 2008 - following every single one of mike's tips and placing proportional stakes on each bet would have almost certainly made an overall profit.
Mrs May is moving left of Cameron, not right of Cameron, a move much facilitated by the welcome collapse of UKIP.
Admittedly she's doing her best to confuse the enemy with a nonsensical diversionary feint on grammar schools, but her tanks are dashing for the centre-ground, not the right flank of the battleground.
The feint seems to be working.