politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Conservative David Herdson wonders whether Theresa May’s merit

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Conservative David Herdson wonders whether Theresa May’s meritocracy is actually a mirage

Prime ministers are inevitably remembered for their great achievements and their great failings: Attlee’s welfare state, Thatcher’s Falklands, Thatcher’s Poll Tax, Blair’s Iraq, and so on. Theresa May’s first ministry will be defined by the success or failure of Brexit. If it’s a failure, her first ministry will be her only one.

Read the full story here

Moses_

Her great achievement is to be the second female PM.

It is still an achievement even as second.

Oh and err No 1 first etc....

FrancisUrquhart

Second...like Trump...I think....

RobD

FrancisUrquhart said:

Second...like Trump...I think....

for now...

CarlottaVance

Cui Bono? In this case at least it doesn't appear to be a CCHQ SPAD but a local (since 1992) Councillor:

http://www.wetherbynews.co.uk/news/politics/euro-seat-target-for-wetherby-councillor-procter-1-6315526

So i) it doesn't appear that someone 'rich or prominent' is benefiting at the expense of someone else so ii) probably more cock-up than conspiracy......and you've got to admire the dedication and ambition of a young father of three, the eldest of whom is disabled and whose wife has just had a heart attack.

RobD

Any polls due, only that I am sipping my drink just before takeoff!

peter_from_putney

RobD said:

Any polls due, only that I am sipping my drink just before takeoff!

Have a good flight Rob ..... a bit distracted tonight were we?

Dromedary

david_herdson said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

I think DNC and RNC should reopen nominations....350 million people and they got a giant racist douche and a lying turd sandwich to choose from.

Indeed. To think how much better it could have been had the nominees been Cruz v Sanders.

Much better.

Sandpit

Morning all. Gets up to watch cricket only to find they started early - and the buggers got two wickets already! 83/5

AndyJS

Sandpit said:

Morning all. Gets up to watch cricket only to find they started early - and the buggers got two wickets already! 83/5

Looks like Bangladesh have finally got their act together as a Test team after 16 years of playing at this level.

Live text:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/live/cricket/37487865

Morris_Dancer

Good morning, everyone.

Interesting piece, Mr. Herdson. When do we decide who gets the gig?

Dromedary

Moses_ said:

Her great achievement is to be the second female PM.

To recognise it, let's rename her "Fannie Mae".

Morris_Dancer

F1: will be watching P3 to see how Vettel does. May be worth a bet for pole each way.

The odds on Raikkonen/Ferrari have declined, although he's still (oddly) longer odds than either Red Bull for pole. I'm not sure that's backed up by track running, feels like a hangover from a strong period for Red Bull.

AndyJS

O/T:

Apparently new rules mean that England batsman have to wear helmets even when facing spin bowling. Seems a bit over-the-top to me.

JackW

I thought "Dickieleaks" was a generational difficulty ensuring gentleman of a certain vintage meandered to the bathroom during the night ....

You live and learn ....

tlg86

Another argument against the Regional List system.

Sandpit

England proving that the Banglas don't have a monopoly on batting collapses. Root and Bairstow the only pair with anything like a partnership, we're going to struggle to a 1st innings lead. 149/8.

Sandpit

Morris_Dancer said:

F1: will be watching P3 to see how Vettel does. May be worth a bet for pole each way.

The odds on Raikkonen/Ferrari have declined, although he's still (oddly) longer odds than either Red Bull for pole. I'm not sure that's backed up by track running, feels like a hangover from a strong period for Red Bull.

Your early calls on the Ferrari were good with hindsight. Alas, I didn't follow you. The Mercs will turn the engines up for qualy but the red cars will probably hold the second row.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Sandpit, thanks. If Hamilton's engine explodes, the bets will look lovely. Only suggested them after the discussion on the circuit (and, I think, you reminding the site it's a power circuit).

Bit too sleepy to commit yet, but Vettel 12 each way for pole could come off. That's effectively just under 4/1 for 2nd place (minus a stake, so 3/1, assuming he doesn't get pole).

TCPoliticalBetting

I agree with the theme of the article David, but why has the current Party Chairman not done the right thing? Mcloughlin looks more like a pale, male, who is very stale and past his best.

david_herdson

Morris_Dancer said:

Good morning, everyone.

Interesting piece, Mr. Herdson. When do we decide who gets the gig?

The Party Board is meeting on Monday. That would be the natural time although I don't know whether it's actually on the agenda (hence why I didn't mention it in the piece).

foxinsoxuk

TCPoliticalBetting said:

I agree with the theme of the article David, but why has the current Party Chairman not done the right thing? Mcloughlin looks more like a pale, male, who is very stale and past his best.

I find it hard to get excited about who to put on the gravy train 2 years before it stops due to Leavers on the line.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Herdson, cheers for that answer.

F1: another bet to consider would be Vettel top 3 (qualifying) at 1.8 on Betfair. Should be about 1.3 if practice is even remotely accurate. Poor odds, though, and close barriers to hit if he screws anything up.

JackW

New Hampshire - Pennsylvania - Michigan - Emerson College - Samples 500-600 - 23-26 Oct

NH - Clinton 46 .. Trump 43
PA - Clinton 48 .. Trump 43
MI - Clinton 50 .. Trump 43

http://media.wix.com/ugd/3bebb2_16b97664735d4325b018b7b608477434.pdf

JackW

Pennsylvania - Muhlenberg - Sample 420 - 20-26 Oct

Clinton 45 .. Trump 39

http://www.muhlenberg.edu/media/contentassets/pdf/about/polling/surveys/pennsylvania/PA-Pres_MidOct_Report.pdf

JackW

Arizona - Data Orbital - Sample 550 - 26-27 Oct

Clinton 40 .. Trump 42

https://gallery.mailchimp.com/5a280d25318f2afe3f311adb6/files/AZ_Statewide_LivePoll_Demographics_10_27.01.pdf

david_herdson

CarlottaVance said:

Cui Bono? In this case at least it doesn't appear to be a CCHQ SPAD but a local (since 1992) Councillor:

http://www.wetherbynews.co.uk/news/politics/euro-seat-target-for-wetherby-councillor-procter-1-6315526

So i) it doesn't appear that someone 'rich or prominent' is benefiting at the expense of someone else so ii) probably more cock-up than conspiracy......and you've got to admire the dedication and ambition of a young father of three, the eldest of whom is disabled and whose wife has just had a heart attack.

No, as it happens, the beneficiary wouldn't be a rich or famous person but that's not the point. The point is that the gilded wouldn't be treated in this way in the first place. The comparison is not with Procter; it's with Zac. Had Story been an ex-SPAD with good connections I very much doubt whether CCHQ would have thought about what to do for more than a few seconds.

Sandpit

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Sandpit, thanks. If Hamilton's engine explodes, the bets will look lovely. Only suggested them after the discussion on the circuit (and, I think, you reminding the site it's a power circuit).

Bit too sleepy to commit yet, but Vettel 12 each way for pole could come off. That's effectively just under 4/1 for 2nd place (minus a stake, so 3/1, assuming he doesn't get pole).

Yes, I'd expected the pace to come from Williams and FI, but they don't seem to be showing it yet. Like you I'll watch P3 and then take a look around.

DavidL

Well England are still batting but probably only due to the lunch break. They have won some test matches from some unlikely positions in the last couple of years but this would be right up there. Any serious runs from Tamim in the second innings and it is surely all over.

JackW

Battleground States - Survey Monkey - 20-28 Oct

TX - Clinton 40 .. Trump 47 - Sample 2,377
AZ - Clinton 42 .. Trump 43 - Sample 1,747
NV - Clinton 43 .. Trump 44 - Sample 1,104
GA - Clinton 44 .. Trump 44 - Sample 2,433
OH - Clinton 40 .. Trump 45 - Sample 1,980
FL - Clinton 47 .. Trump 44 - Sample 3,129
CO - Clinton 45 .. Trump 38 - Sample 1,731
NH - Clinton 48 .. Trump 36 - Sample 825
UT - Clinton 30 .. Trump 33 .. McMullin 27 - Sample 1,080
NC - Clinton 48 .. Trump 43 .. Sample 1,793

https://www.surveymonkey.com/elections/map?poll=sm-lv-cps

Sandpit

On topic, a good article from Mr Herdson. I read the original Con Home story (sic) a couple of days ago, and felt rather sorry for Alex - not only that the usual rules not being followed, but they were not being followed for spurious administrative reasons.

I could understand if in the intervening period, the candidate had been caught with his pants down or with a brown envelope of cash, but that's clearly not been the case here so I'm sure Mr Story can be rewarded appropriately with the seat he fought for as an MEP - for a couple of years anyway.

RochdalePioneers

On the US election this is Manna from Heaven for Trump. "I called her Crooked Hillary because she is. There's never been a presidential candidate under investigation by the FBI a week before an election - can you take the risk of putting a crook in the oval office?"

Hillarys support is soft - not a lot of enthusiasm according to the polls. Detach a few of them, make sure his supporters are incandescent with rage and he can do this.

DavidL

For me the e-mails are a disgrace but the real reason that Clinton is not fit to be President is set out most clearly in this Wall Street Journal article:http://www.wsj.com/articles/doesnt-clinton-embarrass-democrats-1477611135

The short version:

"Conflict of interest is the Clinton business model. And political influence is the product. That’s how Hillary and Bill managed to gross more than a Rolling Stones tour by delivering speeches. Looking at how successful Mrs. Clinton and her husband were in monetizing her position as secretary of state, why would any voter, of any party, want to see how much revenue she can squeeze from the Oval Office? "

Its a hell of a choice.

CarlottaVance

david_herdson said:

CarlottaVance said:

Cui Bono? In this case at least it doesn't appear to be a CCHQ SPAD but a local (since 1992) Councillor:

http://www.wetherbynews.co.uk/news/politics/euro-seat-target-for-wetherby-councillor-procter-1-6315526

So i) it doesn't appear that someone 'rich or prominent' is benefiting at the expense of someone else so ii) probably more cock-up than conspiracy......and you've got to admire the dedication and ambition of a young father of three, the eldest of whom is disabled and whose wife has just had a heart attack.

No, as it happens, the beneficiary wouldn't be a rich or famous person but that's not the point. The point is that the gilded wouldn't be treated in this way in the first place. The comparison is not with Procter; it's with Zac. Had Story been an ex-SPAD with good connections I very much doubt whether CCHQ would have thought about what to do for more than a few seconds.

I think you're over analysing this. The Tories are not putting up a candidate in Richmond because the local party don't want to and because it would split the vote letting in the Lib Dems - its got nothing to do with Zac's privileged background - and goodness knows, I'm no fan of the 'posh boys'.

For reasons we don't know it may simply be that the local party prefers a local councillor - Story did well in 2010 in Wakefield, but was not selected for 2015 - wonder why?

Morris_Dancer

Mr. L, it is a bit Corbyn and Blair.

Or Alien versus Predator (said it many times, but - whoever wins, we lose).

SquareRoot

DavidL said:

Well England are still batting but probably only due to the lunch break. They have won some test matches from some unlikely positions in the last couple of years but this would be right up there. Any serious runs from Tamim in the second innings and it is surely all over.

You might be right this time, but wouldn't it be better to think positively.

DavidL

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. L, it is a bit Corbyn and Blair.

Or Alien versus Predator (said it many times, but - whoever wins, we lose).

Its more like Corbyn and IDS, a choice the Tory party thankfully never gave the British people.

DavidL

SquareRoot said:

DavidL said:

Well England are still batting but probably only due to the lunch break. They have won some test matches from some unlikely positions in the last couple of years but this would be right up there. Any serious runs from Tamim in the second innings and it is surely all over.

You might be right this time, but wouldn't it be better to think positively.

I am not sure that directly affects their performance but I certainly want them to do well. Woakes and Rashid fighting hard on a nightmare of a pitch. Need a lot more of this.

fox327

The conservatives operate on this basis all the time in terms of the voluntary party. They also now have far fewer members than Labour. This is not a coincidence.

david_herdson

DavidL said:

For me the e-mails are a disgrace but the real reason that Clinton is not fit to be President is set out most clearly in this Wall Street Journal article:http://www.wsj.com/articles/doesnt-clinton-embarrass-democrats-1477611135

The short version:

"Conflict of interest is the Clinton business model. And political influence is the product. That’s how Hillary and Bill managed to gross more than a Rolling Stones tour by delivering speeches. Looking at how successful Mrs. Clinton and her husband were in monetizing her position as secretary of state, why would any voter, of any party, want to see how much revenue she can squeeze from the Oval Office? "

Its a hell of a choice.

Better a crook than a thin-skinned egomaniac. You can impeach a crook. God knows what Trump might do the first time he gets embarrassed in an international stand-off.

JohnLilburne

SquareRoot said:

DavidL said:

Well England are still batting but probably only due to the lunch break. They have won some test matches from some unlikely positions in the last couple of years but this would be right up there. Any serious runs from Tamim in the second innings and it is surely all over.

You might be right this time, but wouldn't it be better to think positively.

Surely that only matters if DavidL is a member of the England cricket team.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. 327, welcome to the site.

Hard to know if that's an external observation, the voice of experience, or a political adversary attacking a rival.

MarqueeMark

fox327 said:

The conservatives operate on this basis all the time in terms of the voluntary party. They also now have far fewer members than Labour. This is not a coincidence.

Labour has been made unelectable by the decision of its greater membership.

DavidL

david_herdson said:

DavidL said:

For me the e-mails are a disgrace but the real reason that Clinton is not fit to be President is set out most clearly in this Wall Street Journal article:http://www.wsj.com/articles/doesnt-clinton-embarrass-democrats-1477611135

The short version:

"Conflict of interest is the Clinton business model. And political influence is the product. That’s how Hillary and Bill managed to gross more than a Rolling Stones tour by delivering speeches. Looking at how successful Mrs. Clinton and her husband were in monetizing her position as secretary of state, why would any voter, of any party, want to see how much revenue she can squeeze from the Oval Office? "

Its a hell of a choice.

Better a crook than a thin-skinned egomaniac. You can impeach a crook. God knows what Trump might do the first time he gets embarrassed in an international stand-off.

I probably agree but the WSJ is spot on. Clearly the GOP is embarrassed by Trump but why are Dems not embarrassed by Hilary? She is corrupt, deeply corrupt. And that is very dangerous to a democracy, especially if people are seen to get away with it.

JackW

Battleground States - Pulse Research/ESA - Samples All 525 - All 25-27 Oct

NC - Clinton 47 .. Trump 44
NH - Clinton 47 .. Trump 39
PA - Clinton 47 .. Trump 40
FL - Clinton 42 .. Trump 48
OH - Clinton 46 .. Trump 42
NV - Clinton 43 .. Trump 42

http://www.allianceesapoll.com/new-poll-results.html

SquareRoot

JohnLilburne said:

SquareRoot said:

DavidL said:

Well England are still batting but probably only due to the lunch break. They have won some test matches from some unlikely positions in the last couple of years but this would be right up there. Any serious runs from Tamim in the second innings and it is surely all over.

You might be right this time, but wouldn't it be better to think positively.

Surely that only matters if DavidL is a member of the England cricket team.

I don't think so, if you are a supporter, its not much fun watching, thinking your team is going to lose all the time! either you are glass half full or a glass half empty, optimism wins every time, otherwise life would be miserable.

DavidL

JackW said:

Battleground States - Pulse Research/ESA - Samples All 525 - All 25-27 Oct

NC - Clinton 47 .. Trump 44
NH - Clinton 47 .. Trump 39
PA - Clinton 47 .. Trump 40
FL - Clinton 42 .. Trump 48
OH - Clinton 46 .. Trump 42
NV - Clinton 43 .. Trump 42

http://www.allianceesapoll.com/new-poll-results.html

Surprising scores in both FL and OH. One each.

david_herdson

CarlottaVance said:

david_herdson said:

CarlottaVance said:

Cui Bono? In this case at least it doesn't appear to be a CCHQ SPAD but a local (since 1992) Councillor:

http://www.wetherbynews.co.uk/news/politics/euro-seat-target-for-wetherby-councillor-procter-1-6315526

So i) it doesn't appear that someone 'rich or prominent' is benefiting at the expense of someone else so ii) probably more cock-up than conspiracy......and you've got to admire the dedication and ambition of a young father of three, the eldest of whom is disabled and whose wife has just had a heart attack.

No, as it happens, the beneficiary wouldn't be a rich or famous person but that's not the point. The point is that the gilded wouldn't be treated in this way in the first place. The comparison is not with Procter; it's with Zac. Had Story been an ex-SPAD with good connections I very much doubt whether CCHQ would have thought about what to do for more than a few seconds.

I think you're over analysing this. The Tories are not putting up a candidate in Richmond because the local party don't want to and because it would split the vote letting in the Lib Dems - its got nothing to do with Zac's privileged background - and goodness knows, I'm no fan of the 'posh boys'.

For reasons we don't know it may simply be that the local party prefers a local councillor - Story did well in 2010 in Wakefield, but was not selected for 2015 - wonder why?

That I do know the answer for: Wakefield was not allowed to select until well into 2015, so as to prevent splitting the effort of the local party with the target of Morley & Outwood. Story had already been selected for Leeds NW (if only just) by the time that Wakefield was allowed to select.

But there's not supposed to be discretion in these matters; the offer of the position goes to the next candidate on the list. While it's true that the party has to authorise that nomination, this is a blanket yes-or-no as to whether the person is fit to take up the position at all, not about which order in which they do. (Also, the decision is not one for the local party - it's all decided in London). The provision to withhold authorisation was included in the legislation so as to prevent candidates who had, say, defected or grossly embarrassed their party in some way; it was never intended as a back-door means by which to parachute someone in or exclude someone else arbitrarily - and even if it was, the party has no fair reason to exclude Story.

You're right about the reason for not putting up a candidate in Richmond (a reason which I alluded to in the intro); the question now will be whether he's allowed back into the Tory ranks if he wins. That would be the contrast between the two cases if he is.

MaxPB

DavidL said:

david_herdson said:

DavidL said:

For me the e-mails are a disgrace but the real reason that Clinton is not fit to be President is set out most clearly in this Wall Street Journal article:http://www.wsj.com/articles/doesnt-clinton-embarrass-democrats-1477611135

The short version:

"Conflict of interest is the Clinton business model. And political influence is the product. That’s how Hillary and Bill managed to gross more than a Rolling Stones tour by delivering speeches. Looking at how successful Mrs. Clinton and her husband were in monetizing her position as secretary of state, why would any voter, of any party, want to see how much revenue she can squeeze from the Oval Office? "

Its a hell of a choice.

Better a crook than a thin-skinned egomaniac. You can impeach a crook. God knows what Trump might do the first time he gets embarrassed in an international stand-off.

I probably agree but the WSJ is spot on. Clearly the GOP is embarrassed by Trump but why are Dems not embarrassed by Hilary? She is corrupt, deeply corrupt. And that is very dangerous to a democracy, especially if people are seen to get away with it.

The smarter ones are tbh and they voted for Bernie in the primaries. It's also why there is no real enthusiasm for Clinton, most people know she's s crook and privately realise she's not going to be a good POTUS, but still the alternative is on the level of an escaped mental patient.

JackW

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. 327, welcome to the site.

Shame on you for exhibiting shocking PB institutional sexism !!

@fox327 might be Mrs, Ms or trangender ....

or a lizard person from Finchley Road !!

david_herdson

fox327 said:

The conservatives operate on this basis all the time in terms of the voluntary party. They also now have far fewer members than Labour. This is not a coincidence.

And that is the challenge for May to sort out if she's serious about the fairness agenda. I don't believe that she's been personally involved so far but come Monday, she will be; she has a seat on the Board and could make the weight of her position felt if she so chose.

Out of interest, you write as if you have direct knowledge - what's your background in this regard?

JackW

DavidL said:

JackW said:

Battleground States - Pulse Research/ESA - Samples All 525 - All 25-27 Oct

NC - Clinton 47 .. Trump 44
NH - Clinton 47 .. Trump 39
PA - Clinton 47 .. Trump 40
FL - Clinton 42 .. Trump 48
OH - Clinton 46 .. Trump 42
NV - Clinton 43 .. Trump 42

http://www.allianceesapoll.com/new-poll-results.html

Surprising scores in both FL and OH. One each.

Quite so. If they were reversed you'd say this set of polls were broadly on the mark, perhaps the Clinton Nevada lead a tad low.

david_herdson

MaxPB said:

DavidL said:

david_herdson said:

DavidL said:

For me the e-mails are a disgrace but the real reason that Clinton is not fit to be President is set out most clearly in this Wall Street Journal article:http://www.wsj.com/articles/doesnt-clinton-embarrass-democrats-1477611135

The short version:

"Conflict of interest is the Clinton business model. And political influence is the product. That’s how Hillary and Bill managed to gross more than a Rolling Stones tour by delivering speeches. Looking at how successful Mrs. Clinton and her husband were in monetizing her position as secretary of state, why would any voter, of any party, want to see how much revenue she can squeeze from the Oval Office? "

Its a hell of a choice.

Better a crook than a thin-skinned egomaniac. You can impeach a crook. God knows what Trump might do the first time he gets embarrassed in an international stand-off.

I probably agree but the WSJ is spot on. Clearly the GOP is embarrassed by Trump but why are Dems not embarrassed by Hilary? She is corrupt, deeply corrupt. And that is very dangerous to a democracy, especially if people are seen to get away with it.

The smarter ones are tbh and they voted for Bernie in the primaries. It's also why there is no real enthusiasm for Clinton, most people know she's s crook and privately realise she's not going to be a good POTUS, but still the alternative is on the level of an escaped mental patient.

What is extraordinary is that the Democrats didn't have a meaningful choice beyond Hillary or Sanders. Any quality governor or senator (or vice-president!) who'd chosen to stand would now be coasting to the White House

DavidL

SquareRoot said:

JohnLilburne said:

SquareRoot said:

DavidL said:

Well England are still batting but probably only due to the lunch break. They have won some test matches from some unlikely positions in the last couple of years but this would be right up there. Any serious runs from Tamim in the second innings and it is surely all over.

You might be right this time, but wouldn't it be better to think positively.

Surely that only matters if DavidL is a member of the England cricket team.

I don't think so, if you are a supporter, its not much fun watching, thinking your team is going to lose all the time! either you are glass half full or a glass half empty, optimism wins every time, otherwise life would be miserable.

I don't think they are going to lose all the time. I am full of admiration for the fight in this team. As is epitomised by Woakes and Rashid at the moment. This is a really gutsy partnership.

Alanbrooke

Rotherham goes back to type.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3884026/The-Asian-sex-grooming-scandal-Rotherham-continues-court-given-lifetime-anonymity-four-men-preyed-vulnerable-girl-years-going-on.html

Sandpit

DavidL said:

SquareRoot said:

DavidL said:

Well England are still batting but probably only due to the lunch break. They have won some test matches from some unlikely positions in the last couple of years but this would be right up there. Any serious runs from Tamim in the second innings and it is surely all over.

You might be right this time, but wouldn't it be better to think positively.

I am not sure that directly affects their performance but I certainly want them to do well. Woakes and Rashid fighting hard on a nightmare of a pitch. Need a lot more of this.

Woakes and Rashid doing a good job to grind out something approachable a respectable score here, shame they have to carry the can for Duckett, Cook and Ballance.

Finely poised match here, but anyone with Day 4 tickets is likely to be very disappointed. Hope everyone laid the draw at 2.8 yesterday morning.

DavidL

Sandpit said:

DavidL said:

SquareRoot said:

DavidL said:

Well England are still batting but probably only due to the lunch break. They have won some test matches from some unlikely positions in the last couple of years but this would be right up there. Any serious runs from Tamim in the second innings and it is surely all over.

You might be right this time, but wouldn't it be better to think positively.

I am not sure that directly affects their performance but I certainly want them to do well. Woakes and Rashid fighting hard on a nightmare of a pitch. Need a lot more of this.

Woakes and Rashid doing a good job to grind out something approachable a respectable score here, shame they have to carry the can for Duckett, Cook and Ballance.

Finely poised match here, but anyone with Day 4 tickets is likely to be very disappointed. Hope everyone laid the draw at 2.8 yesterday morning.

The big thing England have in their favour is that they believe. Does BD? Even the last match will have hurt them in that respect.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. W, patriarchy helped us to the largest sea empire in world history

Hmm. Quite tempted by XCOM 2. But, I only got Tomb Raider a short time ago. And I do need to get some work done. The agony of choice.

If Raikkonen (or Perez...) could win this race, it would prove most helpful.

Sandpit

Alanbrooke said:

Rotherham goes back to type.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3884026/The-Asian-sex-grooming-scandal-Rotherham-continues-court-given-lifetime-anonymity-four-men-preyed-vulnerable-girl-years-going-on.html

Is there no way that the DCLG cannot replace Rotherham social services in its entirety. It's clearly unfit for purpose and has been captured by those more interested in preserving their own reputation, than carrying out their primary duty to protect the vulnerable.

The same can also be said of SY Police - they need to be disbanded and replaced, as happened with the RUC in the '90s.

MarqueeMark

MaxPB said:

DavidL said:

david_herdson said:

DavidL said:

For me the e-mails are a disgrace but the real reason that Clinton is not fit to be President is set out most clearly in this Wall Street Journal article:http://www.wsj.com/articles/doesnt-clinton-embarrass-democrats-1477611135

The short version:

"Conflict of interest is the Clinton business model. And political influence is the product. That’s how Hillary and Bill managed to gross more than a Rolling Stones tour by delivering speeches. Looking at how successful Mrs. Clinton and her husband were in monetizing her position as secretary of state, why would any voter, of any party, want to see how much revenue she can squeeze from the Oval Office? "

Its a hell of a choice.

Better a crook than a thin-skinned egomaniac. You can impeach a crook. God knows what Trump might do the first time he gets embarrassed in an international stand-off.

I probably agree but the WSJ is spot on. Clearly the GOP is embarrassed by Trump but why are Dems not embarrassed by Hilary? She is corrupt, deeply corrupt. And that is very dangerous to a democracy, especially if people are seen to get away with it.

The smarter ones are tbh and they voted for Bernie in the primaries. It's also why there is no real enthusiasm for Clinton, most people know she's s crook and privately realise she's not going to be a good POTUS, but still the alternative is on the level of an escaped mental patient.

Wonder if there will be a marked move in the polls to Trump in the next couple of days as we get the phenomenon of shy Clintonites?

Frankly, I'm surprised anybody would be admitting to pollsters that they will vote for either of them.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Sandpit, curious, given men accused of rape generally have their names plastered over the papers even if they're totally exonerated and the claim is found to have been made maliciously.

Edited extra bit: just realised this probably sounds very mild. South Yorkshire Police and Rotherham's local government being horrendous is just so typical that it's not remotely surprising.

Which is quite a worrying state of affairs.

Sandpit

DavidL said:

Sandpit said:

DavidL said:

SquareRoot said:

DavidL said:

Well England are still batting but probably only due to the lunch break. They have won some test matches from some unlikely positions in the last couple of years but this would be right up there. Any serious runs from Tamim in the second innings and it is surely all over.

You might be right this time, but wouldn't it be better to think positively.

I am not sure that directly affects their performance but I certainly want them to do well. Woakes and Rashid fighting hard on a nightmare of a pitch. Need a lot more of this.

Woakes and Rashid doing a good job to grind out something approachable a respectable score here, shame they have to carry the can for Duckett, Cook and Ballance.

Finely poised match here, but anyone with Day 4 tickets is likely to be very disappointed. Hope everyone laid the draw at 2.8 yesterday morning.

The big thing England have in their favour is that they believe. Does BD? Even the last match will have hurt them in that respect.

Very true. Watching England's numbers 9 and 10 grinding out a 50 partnership really won't be good for their morale either. Only 15 behind now.

MarqueeMark

RochdalePioneers said:

On the US election this is Manna from Heaven for Trump. "I called her Crooked Hillary because she is. There's never been a presidential candidate under investigation by the FBI a week before an election - can you take the risk of putting a crook in the oval office?"

Hillarys support is soft - not a lot of enthusiasm according to the polls. Detach a few of them, make sure his supporters are incandescent with rage and he can do this.

It comes to something when Donald Trump's USP is that he is not under investigation by the FBI.

But both he and Hillary are on America's Least Wanted list.

Sandpit

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Sandpit, curious, given men accused of rape generally have their names plastered over the papers even if they're totally exonerated and the claim is found to have been made maliciously.

Edited extra bit: just realised this probably sounds very mild. South Yorkshire Police and Rotherham's local government being horrendous is just so typical that it's not remotely surprising.

Which is quite a worrying state of affairs.

The argument made (and accepted) is that the men haven't been found guilty and to name them risks identifying the minor female victim. That sort of argument is only usually made where there is a close family relationship involved, such as a man accused of raping his sister or daughter, which clearly isn't the case here. Like with most of these stories as reported by journalists. One gets the impression that there is a key piece of evidence missing from the reporting, otherwise the judgement makes no sense. Christopher Booker from the Sunday Telegraph is probably on this, it will be interesting what he has to say tomorrow.

IanB2

Two politicians from the party of leavers quarrelling over who gets to be Euro MEP for the fag end of Britain''s membership? Are we supposed to get excited (or even be interested)?

If the Conservatives has any sense they would leave it vacant.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Sandpit, cheers for posting that.

It may simply be taking account of 'cultural sensitivities', no?

MaxPB

IanB2 said:

Two politicians from the party of leavers quarrelling over who gets to be Euro MEP for the fag end of Britain''s membership? Are we supposed to get excited (or even be interested)?

If the Conservatives has any sense they would leave it vacant.

Might need the votes for our A50 deal.

SandyRentool

Picking up on last night's discussion, I type this as I am eating my Oatibix.

Sandpit

MarqueeMark said:

RochdalePioneers said:

On the US election this is Manna from Heaven for Trump. "I called her Crooked Hillary because she is. There's never been a presidential candidate under investigation by the FBI a week before an election - can you take the risk of putting a crook in the oval office?"

Hillarys support is soft - not a lot of enthusiasm according to the polls. Detach a few of them, make sure his supporters are incandescent with rage and he can do this.

It comes to something when Donald Trump's USP is that he is not under investigation by the FBI.

But both he and Hillary are on America's Least Wanted list.

I still live in hope that there is a way found to somehow postpone the whole thing, select new candidates and start again!

Really America, a quarter of a billion eligible candidates yet we end up with a "choice" between the utterly corrupt and the sexist narcissist?

SquareRoot

Sandpit said:

DavidL said:

Sandpit said:

DavidL said:

SquareRoot said:

DavidL said:

Well England are still batting but probably only due to the lunch break. They have won some test matches from some unlikely positions in the last couple of years but this would be right up there. Any serious runs from Tamim in the second innings and it is surely all over.

You might be right this time, but wouldn't it be better to think positively.

I am not sure that directly affects their performance but I certainly want them to do well. Woakes and Rashid fighting hard on a nightmare of a pitch. Need a lot more of this.

Woakes and Rashid doing a good job to grind out something approachable a respectable score here, shame they have to carry the can for Duckett, Cook and Ballance.

Finely poised match here, but anyone with Day 4 tickets is likely to be very disappointed. Hope everyone laid the draw at 2.8 yesterday morning.

The big thing England have in their favour is that they believe. Does BD? Even the last match will have hurt them in that respect.

Very true. Watching England's numbers 9 and 10 grinding out a 50 partnership really won't be good for their morale either. Only 15 behind now.

now 6.. the power of positive thinking!

weejonnie

SandyRentool said:

Picking up on last night's discussion, I type this as I am eating my Oatibix.

I'll be having mine in half an hour. Maybe we should find out if the manufacturers will sponsor the website.

SquareRoot

Sandpit said:

DavidL said:

SquareRoot said:

DavidL said:

Well England are still batting but probably only due to the lunch break. They have won some test matches from some unlikely positions in the last couple of years but this would be right up there. Any serious runs from Tamim in the second innings and it is surely all over.

You might be right this time, but wouldn't it be better to think positively.

I am not sure that directly affects their performance but I certainly want them to do well. Woakes and Rashid fighting hard on a nightmare of a pitch. Need a lot more of this.

Woakes and Rashid doing a good job to grind out something approachable a respectable score here, shame they have to carry the can for Duckett, Cook and Ballance.

Finely poised match here, but anyone with Day 4 tickets is likely to be very disappointed. Hope everyone laid the draw at 2.8 yesterday morning.

Should have picked the natural opener Hammed and stuck with him.. The Ozzies did it with Hughes and he turned out ok,. his first tour to the UK was a nighmare

DavidL

LEVEL! What an effort.

MarqueeMark

SandyRentool said:

Picking up on last night's discussion, I type this as I am eating my Oatibix.

Oatibix. For people who can't be arsed to make porridge.....

SquareRoot

DavidL said:

LEVEL! What an effort.

a lead of 25-40 could be crucial..

DavidL

SquareRoot said:

DavidL said:

LEVEL! What an effort.

a lead of 25-40 could be crucial..

BD just look so demoralised now. Not going to help their batting.

Nigelb

One thing that slightly puzzles me about the email saga - from the FBI director's statements , it's not clear at all whether any of the new emails are either from Clinton or implicate her in any way. (The "re-opening the investigation into Clinton" iseems to be entirely Republican spin on the announcement.)
Over and above Comey's statement, there's a great deal of "reportedly" peppered around press accounts ("no classified material has yet been found" -Fox News- etc), but nothing concrete.
Clinton has now challenged the FBI to reveal all the information. I'm guessing they won't, because 'ongoing investigatio', and that might well now change before Election Day.
Thoughts ?

SandyRentool

MarqueeMark said:

SandyRentool said:

Picking up on last night's discussion, I type this as I am eating my Oatibix.

Oatibix. For people who can't be arsed to make porridge.....

I didn't realise you worked in advertising!

However, this morning you are correct on how I felt when I made my breakfast selection.

Sandpit

DavidL said:

LEVEL! What an effort.

Fantastic from Woakes and Rashid, two English bowlers rescuing the game with the bat. Again.

The Banglas in the field look completely demoralised, out to 3.3 on Betfair now too.

MarqueeMark

Sandpit said:

MarqueeMark said:

RochdalePioneers said:

On the US election this is Manna from Heaven for Trump. "I called her Crooked Hillary because she is. There's never been a presidential candidate under investigation by the FBI a week before an election - can you take the risk of putting a crook in the oval office?"

Hillarys support is soft - not a lot of enthusiasm according to the polls. Detach a few of them, make sure his supporters are incandescent with rage and he can do this.

It comes to something when Donald Trump's USP is that he is not under investigation by the FBI.

But both he and Hillary are on America's Least Wanted list.

I still live in hope that there is a way found to somehow postpone the whole thing, select new candidates and start again!

Really America, a quarter of a billion eligible candidates yet we end up with a "choice" between the utterly corrupt and the sexist narcissist?

Maybe if Congress passed a bill, putting the clocks back two years? Obama stays in place for two more years, the whole candidate selection process starts again from scratch. Then when the new President is elected, Congress puts the clock forward two years. We end up with a two-year President, but if they are any good, they can get re-elected.

Sorted, America.

IanB2

weejonnie said:

SandyRentool said:

Picking up on last night's discussion, I type this as I am eating my Oatibix.

I'll be having mine in half an hour. Maybe we should find out if the manufacturers will sponsor the website.

I am with Argclu; you can't beat porridge first thing in the morning.

AndyJS

Viv Richards went through his entire career without wearing a helmet. And he only retired about 20 years ago. Now you can't even wear a cap while facing spin bowling.

Nigelb

Sandpit said:

DavidL said:

LEVEL! What an effort.

Fantastic from Woakes and Rashid, two English bowlers rescuing the game with the bat. Again.

The Banglas in the field look completely demoralised, out to 3.3 on Betfair now too.

Rashid has 10 first class centuries to his name - and Woakes must surely be the strongest number nine in test cricket ?

Nigelb

Nigelb said:

One thing that slightly puzzles me about the email saga - from the FBI director's statements , it's not clear at all whether any of the new emails are either from Clinton or implicate her in any way. (The "re-opening the investigation into Clinton" iseems to be entirely Republican spin on the announcement.)
Over and above Comey's statement, there's a great deal of "reportedly" peppered around press accounts ("no classified material has yet been found" -Fox News- etc), but nothing concrete.
Clinton has now challenged the FBI to reveal all the information. I'm guessing they won't, because 'ongoing investigatio', and that might well now change before Election Day.
Thoughts ?

Should read might well NOT change before...

weejonnie

England now building a commanding lead.

Sandpit

Nigelb said:

Sandpit said:

DavidL said:

LEVEL! What an effort.

Fantastic from Woakes and Rashid, two English bowlers rescuing the game with the bat. Again.

The Banglas in the field look completely demoralised, out to 3.3 on Betfair now too.

Rashid has 10 first class centuries to his name - and Woakes must surely be the strongest number nine in test cricket ?

That's probably right. England are very lucky with the depth of their batting at the moment, has got them out of the poo several times in the last couple of years.

I believe this isn't by accident though, the coaches have worked as much with the bowlers on their batting, as their bowling - in situations like this it can literally turn the match around.

Damn, Woakes goes swiping high at the bouncer.

Nigelb

MarqueeMark said:

Sandpit said:

MarqueeMark said:

RochdalePioneers said:

On the US election this is Manna from Heaven for Trump. "I called her Crooked Hillary because she is. There's never been a presidential candidate under investigation by the FBI a week before an election - can you take the risk of putting a crook in the oval office?"

Hillarys support is soft - not a lot of enthusiasm according to the polls. Detach a few of them, make sure his supporters are incandescent with rage and he can do this.

It comes to something when Donald Trump's USP is that he is not under investigation by the FBI.

But both he and Hillary are on America's Least Wanted list.

I still live in hope that there is a way found to somehow postpone the whole thing, select new candidates and start again!

Really America, a quarter of a billion eligible candidates yet we end up with a "choice" between the utterly corrupt and the sexist narcissist?

Maybe if Congress passed a bill, putting the clocks back two years? Obama stays in place for two more years, the whole candidate selection process starts again from scratch. Then when the new President is elected, Congress puts the clock forward two years. We end up with a two-year President, but if they are any good, they can get re-elected.

Sorted, America.

What about Supreme Court nominations ?
And when they select Trump and Clinton again ?

ydoethur

Miaow

'That was an epically awful ball, the sort of delivery that Steve Smith takes wickets with.'

DavidL

Woakes somewhat fortunate there. Not at all sure that was a no ball.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. L, maybe they're letting the Woakey win.

Philip_Thompson

Sandpit said:

DavidL said:

LEVEL! What an effort.

Fantastic from Woakes and Rashid, two English bowlers rescuing the game with the bat. Again.

The Banglas in the field look completely demoralised, out to 3.3 on Betfair now too.

The tail being capable of wagging seems to be one of the biggest changes that has caused England to be much more successful than in the past. Growing up Down Under in the nineties it always seemed for English cricket to basically be 5 Out is then All Out.

MarqueeMark

Nigelb said:

MarqueeMark said:

Sandpit said:

MarqueeMark said:

RochdalePioneers said:

On the US election this is Manna from Heaven for Trump. "I called her Crooked Hillary because she is. There's never been a presidential candidate under investigation by the FBI a week before an election - can you take the risk of putting a crook in the oval office?"

Hillarys support is soft - not a lot of enthusiasm according to the polls. Detach a few of them, make sure his supporters are incandescent with rage and he can do this.

It comes to something when Donald Trump's USP is that he is not under investigation by the FBI.

But both he and Hillary are on America's Least Wanted list.

I still live in hope that there is a way found to somehow postpone the whole thing, select new candidates and start again!

Really America, a quarter of a billion eligible candidates yet we end up with a "choice" between the utterly corrupt and the sexist narcissist?

Maybe if Congress passed a bill, putting the clocks back two years? Obama stays in place for two more years, the whole candidate selection process starts again from scratch. Then when the new President is elected, Congress puts the clock forward two years. We end up with a two-year President, but if they are any good, they can get re-elected.

Sorted, America.

What about Supreme Court nominations ?
And when they select Trump and Clinton again ?

You REALLY think that Clinton and Trump would get within a million miles of the nomination if we did this all again? Surely somebody decent would crawl out from the shadows - if only the VP choices.....

The Supreme Court nominations wouldn't be an issue because they wouldn't be dead yet (according to their death certificates....).

ydoethur

I've just caught up with overnight events.

I'm starting to think that my sixth formers - who suggested (not very seriously) Trump shoot Clinton so she is dead, he is executed and Kaine gets swept to the WH on a sympathy vote - had the right idea. Certainly it's hard to see how that could be a worse outcome than one of these two pathetic excuses for human beings actually winning.

ydoethur

Philip_Thompson said:

Sandpit said:

DavidL said:

LEVEL! What an effort.

Fantastic from Woakes and Rashid, two English bowlers rescuing the game with the bat. Again.

The Banglas in the field look completely demoralised, out to 3.3 on Betfair now too.

The tail being capable of wagging seems to be one of the biggest changes that has caused England to be much more successful than in the past. Growing up Down Under in the nineties it always seemed for English cricket to basically be 5 Out is then All Out.

An exaggeration Mr Thompson.

Growing up in England we knew full well that it was Atherton out, all out.

Sandpit

DavidL said:

Woakes somewhat fortunate there. Not at all sure that was a no ball.

He got a lucky reprieve there. That was a fair bouncer, what was left of the Banglas' morale is quickly evaporating!

Nigelb

MarqueeMark said:

Nigelb said:

MarqueeMark said:

Sandpit said:

MarqueeMark said:

RochdalePioneers said:

On the US election this is Manna from Heaven for Trump. "I called her Crooked Hillary because she is. There's never been a presidential candidate under investigation by the FBI a week before an election - can you take the risk of putting a crook in the oval office?"

Hillarys support is soft - not a lot of enthusiasm according to the polls. Detach a few of them, make sure his supporters are incandescent with rage and he can do this.

It comes to something when Donald Trump's USP is that he is not under investigation by the FBI.

But both he and Hillary are on America's Least Wanted list.

I still live in hope that there is a way found to somehow postpone the whole thing, select new candidates and start again!

Really America, a quarter of a billion eligible candidates yet we end up with a "choice" between the utterly corrupt and the sexist narcissist?

Maybe if Congress passed a bill, putting the clocks back two years? Obama stays in place for two more years, the whole candidate selection process starts again from scratch. Then when the new President is elected, Congress puts the clock forward two years. We end up with a two-year President, but if they are any good, they can get re-elected.

Sorted, America.

What about Supreme Court nominations ?
And when they select Trump and Clinton again ?

You REALLY think that Clinton and Trump would get within a million miles of the nomination if we did this all again? Surely somebody decent would crawl out from the shadows - if only the VP choices.....

The Supreme Court nominations wouldn't be an issue because they wouldn't be dead yet (according to their death certificates....).

I would not be at all surprised.

There is already an SC nomination which has been (unprecedentedly and illegitimately) held up for over seven months. And no one else needs to die; most SC Justices retire from office.

DavidL

Sandpit said:

DavidL said:

Woakes somewhat fortunate there. Not at all sure that was a no ball.

He got a lucky reprieve there. That was a fair bouncer, what was left of the Banglas' morale is quickly evaporating!

Not a bouncer but a full toss. Truly dreadful ball but a legal one.

Nigelb

Sandpit said:

DavidL said:

Woakes somewhat fortunate there. Not at all sure that was a no ball.

He got a lucky reprieve there. That was a fair bouncer, what was left of the Banglas' morale is quickly evaporating!

No; it was borderline between full toss and beamer. To be honest, I'd have ruled it a full toss.

SquareRoot

DavidL said:

Sandpit said:

DavidL said:

Woakes somewhat fortunate there. Not at all sure that was a no ball.

He got a lucky reprieve there. That was a fair bouncer, what was left of the Banglas' morale is quickly evaporating!

Not a bouncer but a full toss. Truly dreadful ball but a legal one.

I am not watching, but would this pitch be reported if it was in County cricket.. seems like it to me

ThreeQuidder

Sandpit said:

Nigelb said:

Sandpit said:

DavidL said:

LEVEL! What an effort.

Fantastic from Woakes and Rashid, two English bowlers rescuing the game with the bat. Again.

The Banglas in the field look completely demoralised, out to 3.3 on Betfair now too.

Rashid has 10 first class centuries to his name - and Woakes must surely be the strongest number nine in test cricket ?

That's probably right. England are very lucky with the depth of their batting at the moment, has got them out of the poo several times in the last couple of years.

I believe this isn't by accident though, the coaches have worked as much with the bowlers on their batting, as their bowling - in situations like this it can literally turn the match around.

Runs scored by the tail count just as much as runs scored by the specialist batsmen. And I would imagine that once players are top professionals picked for their country, it might be easier to coach a bowler from an average of 15 to 25 than a batsman from an average of 40 to 45.

Sandpit

DavidL said:

Sandpit said:

DavidL said:

Woakes somewhat fortunate there. Not at all sure that was a no ball.

He got a lucky reprieve there. That was a fair bouncer, what was left of the Banglas' morale is quickly evaporating!

Not a bouncer but a full toss. Truly dreadful ball but a legal one.

Ah, I thought it bounced. Just seen replay now and it was a little more borderline. Should have just got out of the way rather than swinging at it though.