It's writen in the third person. He is not making the claim, someone else is making it for him. So fake news. Much wow.
Isn't faking your CV up to and including inventing a PHD a resigning matter for a Party leader, Or am I just being old fashioned?
Is it? Has it ever been? People always say that this or that used to be a resigning matter but be honest who was the last party leader you can name who resigned over a fake CV?
Parliamentary by-elections in which the difference between the candidates in 2nd place and 5th place was less than 10%:
2016 Batley & Spen 3.7% 2016 Sleaford & North Hykeham 4.7% 2008 Haltemprice & Howden 5.2% 2012 Middlesbrough 5.5% 2012 Manchester Central 5.5% 1946 Combined Scottish Universities 5.6% 1996 Hemsworth 5.8% 1996 Barnsley East 6.3% 2011 Barnsley Central 7.0% 1990 Bootle (May) 7.7% 1994 Dagenham 7.8% 1990 Bootle (November) 8.0% 2009 Norwich North 8.5% 1994 Barking 9.9%
Apart from Norwich North, nearly all the others had extremely low scores for the rest, I think? It's not so much that 2nd to 5th were all contenders; more that they were all trounced?
It's writen in the third person. He is not making the claim, someone else is making it for him. So fake news. Much wow.
Isn't faking your CV up to and including inventing a PHD a resigning matter for a Party leader, Or am I just being old fashioned?
Is it? Has it ever been? People always say that this or that used to be a resigning matter but be honest who was the last party leader you can name who resigned over a fake CV?
It's writen in the third person. He is not making the claim, someone else is making it for him. So fake news. Much wow.
Isn't faking your CV up to and including inventing a PHD a resigning matter for a Party leader, Or am I just being old fashioned?
Is it? Has it ever been? People always say that this or that used to be a resigning matter but be honest who was the last party leader you can name who resigned over a fake CV?
There is a difference between gilding a lily and inventing one....
Excellent thread Mr Meeks.
Before the case started in the High Court, many commentators called it 'too close to call, but edged towards the appellant' - that subtlety appears to have been completely blown away in a hurricane of REMAIN optimism/hubris (delete as appropriate...)
It's writen in the third person. He is not making the claim, someone else is making it for him. So fake news. Much wow.
Isn't faking your CV up to and including inventing a PHD a resigning matter for a Party leader, Or am I just being old fashioned?
Is it? Has it ever been? People always say that this or that used to be a resigning matter but be honest who was the last party leader you can name who resigned over a fake CV?
Thanks, interesting piece. This stood out for me...
The Remain campaign, on the other hand, handed stickers and balloons out to everyone going in and out of tube stations across London. That might have made them feel good about themselves but it was a rookie error. Some 40 percent of people in London were leave voters, and they were reminding them to go and cast their votes.
My walk from Waterloo to Holborn was a surreal experience on 23 June. I was offered Vote Remain stickers three times and there were light aircraft flying over the city with Vote Remain banners. It's easy to be wise after the event, but I do wonder to what extent Remain lost because their activist base was skewed heavily to London.
Just to add... I think one danger for these initiatives is that they are seen as 'liberal'... particularly given the context they are coming out of. Important that they get influential conservatives on board.
Email spam was just annoying- people didn't see anti-spam stuff as a communist conspiracy against business. By contrast- fake news is probably quite popular... although hopefully people care if it is fake.
It's writen in the third person. He is not making the claim, someone else is making it for him. So fake news. Much wow.
Isn't faking your CV up to and including inventing a PHD a resigning matter for a Party leader, Or am I just being old fashioned?
Is it? Has it ever been? People always say that this or that used to be a resigning matter but be honest who was the last party leader you can name who resigned over a fake CV?
Not been on here for a long while. See the Scot Nats version 2.0 are even more obnoxious than previous incarnations though. Here's one for use most times a remoaner crawls out of their cesspit and quotes the Guardian-hopefully soon to be entering the great bankruptcy court of Fleet Street. https://youtu.be/c4zp2NucwsU
A really good piece and the sort of thing that your firm and the others should be publishing (clientised of course). Instead one gets Brexit crisis teams and lots of "thought leadership" which boils down to, we don't know because the branching possibilities are too difficult.
Ardent Remainer Burnham flip flopping yet again and essentially doing "a Merkel" as soon as a ballot box hoves into sight.....
Brexit: Andy Burnham suggests UK may need to leave single market to rebuild North of England The frontrunner to be Greater Manchester’s first mayor wants to 'pick winners' to reverse deindustrialisation – which, he suggests, is not possible with EU state aid restrictions
Ardent Remainer Burnham flip flopping yet again and essentially doing "a Merkel" as soon as a ballot box hoves into sight.....
Brexit: Andy Burnham suggests UK may need to leave single market to rebuild North of England The frontrunner to be Greater Manchester’s first mayor wants to 'pick winners' to reverse deindustrialisation – which, he suggests, is not possible with EU state aid restrictions
Ardent Remainer Burnham flip flopping yet again and essentially doing "a Merkel" as soon as a ballot box hoves into sight.....
Brexit: Andy Burnham suggests UK may need to leave single market to rebuild North of England The frontrunner to be Greater Manchester’s first mayor wants to 'pick winners' to reverse deindustrialisation – which, he suggests, is not possible with EU state aid restrictions
If they choose this guy for mayor then the locals deserve everything thay will then get and in spades.
"Picking winners": crony capitalism comes to the uk and the US. Scary stuff.
It's hardly new to the US in a variety of disguised forms - in competition matters the EU has been robustly pro-competition. As far away from some sort of socialist conspiracy as is possible.
EVEN Corbyn can't take them to 15% surely................ talk about a low bar
Gordon Brown took Labour to 18% (while in government, admittedly), and he was a considerably more capable leader than Corbyn, though still unsuited to the job. If real elections, he managed even worse (or better, for those so inclined): 16% in the 2009 Europeans.
EVEN Corbyn can't take them to 15% surely................ talk about a low bar
Gordon Brown took Labour to 18% (while in government, admittedly), and he was a considerably more capable leader than Corbyn, though still unsuited to the job. If real elections, he managed even worse (or better, for those so inclined): 16% in the 2009 Europeans.
For Labour to go below 20, someone else has to go up. Can't see the Tories going above 50%. So what your talking about is UKIP and the LDs around 20 percent.
EVEN Corbyn can't take them to 15% surely................ talk about a low bar
Gordon Brown took Labour to 18% (while in government, admittedly), and he was a considerably more capable leader than Corbyn, though still unsuited to the job. If real elections, he managed even worse (or better, for those so inclined): 16% in the 2009 Europeans.
I tried once to see on Electoral Calculus at what point Labour drops below 100 seats*. Of course it depends where you reallocate the votes to, but distributing them fairly equally between Con, LD and UKIP with a few going Green, the point seems to be about 15%. Even on this low figure they would be the official opposition.
Ardent Remainer Burnham flip flopping yet again and essentially doing "a Merkel" as soon as a ballot box hoves into sight.....
Brexit: Andy Burnham suggests UK may need to leave single market to rebuild North of England The frontrunner to be Greater Manchester’s first mayor wants to 'pick winners' to reverse deindustrialisation – which, he suggests, is not possible with EU state aid restrictions
If they choose this guy for mayor then the locals deserve everything thay will then get and in spades.
"Picking winners": crony capitalism comes to the uk and the US. Scary stuff.
It's hardly new to the US in a variety of disguised forms - in competition matters the EU has been robustly pro-competition. As far away from some sort of socialist conspiracy as is possible.
And yet EDF and Deutsche Bahn are left untouched and billions of state aid is poured into Airbus?
EVEN Corbyn can't take them to 15% surely................ talk about a low bar
Gordon Brown took Labour to 18% (while in government, admittedly), and he was a considerably more capable leader than Corbyn, though still unsuited to the job. If real elections, he managed even worse (or better, for those so inclined): 16% in the 2009 Europeans.
For Labour to go below 20, someone else has to go up. Can't see the Tories going above 50%. So what your talking about is UKIP and the LDs around 20 percent.
Unlikely.
Both are targetting Labour voters in their own way.
If there's one thing we should have learned these last two years, it's that 'unlikely' is probably not as unlikely as we think.
(I agree that 45% is pretty much ceiling for Con in govt) so gains from Lab will have to come from elsewhere.
It's writen in the third person. He is not making the claim, someone else is making it for him. So fake news. Much wow.
Isn't faking your CV up to and including inventing a PHD a resigning matter for a Party leader, Or am I just being old fashioned?
Is it? Has it ever been? People always say that this or that used to be a resigning matter but be honest who was the last party leader you can name who resigned over a fake CV?
IDS was undermined by claims of embellishment, and Andrea Leadsom was swift-boated on her apparently honest CV before she could become leader. Though isn't the very notion of party leaders even having a CV a recent one?
EVEN Corbyn can't take them to 15% surely................ talk about a low bar
Gordon Brown took Labour to 18% (while in government, admittedly), and he was a considerably more capable leader than Corbyn, though still unsuited to the job. If real elections, he managed even worse (or better, for those so inclined): 16% in the 2009 Europeans.
For Labour to go below 20, someone else has to go up. Can't see the Tories going above 50%. So what your talking about is UKIP and the LDs around 20 percent.
Unlikely.
I agree, its not going to happen. I expect the DNV may go up though.
For all its shamelessness, Andy Burnham is looking astute. Protectionism is the new Populsim and can rebuild support in the North. A Red Brexit, rather than a white or blue one.
In other news, gunshots in Sarajevo, the Czar has mobilised, German trains are running and the Grand Fleet prepared to sail...
Just to add... I think one danger for these initiatives is that they are seen as 'liberal'... particularly given the context they are coming out of. Important that they get influential conservatives on board.
Email spam was just annoying- people didn't see anti-spam stuff as a communist conspiracy against business. By contrast- fake news is probably quite popular... although hopefully people care if it is fake.
An interesting read, but anything that relies on 'fact checkers' ends up being used by propagandists and censors for nefarious means. It's no co-incidence that all the talk of "Fake News" started the day after the US election.
EVEN Corbyn can't take them to 15% surely................ talk about a low bar
Gordon Brown took Labour to 18% (while in government, admittedly), and he was a considerably more capable leader than Corbyn, though still unsuited to the job. If real elections, he managed even worse (or better, for those so inclined): 16% in the 2009 Europeans.
I tried once to see on Electoral Calculus at what point Labour drops below 100 seats*. Of course it depends where you reallocate the votes to, but distributing them fairly equally between Con, LD and UKIP with a few going Green, the point seems to be about 15%. Even on this low figure they would be the official opposition.
*In a 650 seat HoC
There is a point where UNS breaks, and it's probably above 15%.
EVEN Corbyn can't take them to 15% surely................ talk about a low bar
Gordon Brown took Labour to 18% (while in government, admittedly), and he was a considerably more capable leader than Corbyn, though still unsuited to the job. If real elections, he managed even worse (or better, for those so inclined): 16% in the 2009 Europeans.
I tried once to see on Electoral Calculus at what point Labour drops below 100 seats*. Of course it depends where you reallocate the votes to, but distributing them fairly equally between Con, LD and UKIP with a few going Green, the point seems to be about 15%. Even on this low figure they would be the official opposition.
*In a 650 seat HoC
I think the Greens would get more than "a few". (Votes, not seats, that is.)
It's writen in the third person. He is not making the claim, someone else is making it for him. So fake news. Much wow.
Isn't faking your CV up to and including inventing a PHD a resigning matter for a Party leader, Or am I just being old fashioned?
Is it? Has it ever been? People always say that this or that used to be a resigning matter but be honest who was the last party leader you can name who resigned over a fake CV?
IDS was undermined by claims of embellishment, and Andrea Leadsom was swift-boated on her apparently honest CV before she could become leader. Though isn't the very notion of party leaders even having a CV a recent one?
EVEN Corbyn can't take them to 15% surely................ talk about a low bar
Gordon Brown took Labour to 18% (while in government, admittedly), and he was a considerably more capable leader than Corbyn, though still unsuited to the job. If real elections, he managed even worse (or better, for those so inclined): 16% in the 2009 Europeans.
I tried once to see on Electoral Calculus at what point Labour drops below 100 seats*. Of course it depends where you reallocate the votes to, but distributing them fairly equally between Con, LD and UKIP with a few going Green, the point seems to be about 15%. Even on this low figure they would be the official opposition.
*In a 650 seat HoC
There is a point where UNS breaks, and it's probably above 15%.
Especially where the changes in the Labour vote are quite specific types of people rather than a general change in support. They could well lose a couple of hundred deposits yet retain most of their seats in metropolitan areas.
F1: not sure whether I'd prefer a Bottas or Wehrlein seat (I'd be annoyed by someone else getting it). Wehrlein's a smaller instant payout, Bottas would be quite good for an 8/1 (well, 7/1 taking off the stake for the non-each way aspect) top 3 title race bet. Hmm.
If Bottas gets it I might back Red Bull for the Constructors'.
EVEN Corbyn can't take them to 15% surely................ talk about a low bar
Gordon Brown took Labour to 18% (while in government, admittedly), and he was a considerably more capable leader than Corbyn, though still unsuited to the job. If real elections, he managed even worse (or better, for those so inclined): 16% in the 2009 Europeans.
I tried once to see on Electoral Calculus at what point Labour drops below 100 seats*. Of course it depends where you reallocate the votes to, but distributing them fairly equally between Con, LD and UKIP with a few going Green, the point seems to be about 15%. Even on this low figure they would be the official opposition.
*In a 650 seat HoC
I think the Greens would get more than "a few". (Votes, not seats, that is.)
A few %, rather than a few votes, in my highly contentious assumptions.
Nontheless, the concentration of Labour votes means that even 15% is not an extinguishing event for Labour. If only we had AV instead of FPTP...
EVEN Corbyn can't take them to 15% surely................ talk about a low bar
Gordon Brown took Labour to 18% (while in government, admittedly), and he was a considerably more capable leader than Corbyn, though still unsuited to the job. If real elections, he managed even worse (or better, for those so inclined): 16% in the 2009 Europeans.
For Labour to go below 20, someone else has to go up. Can't see the Tories going above 50%. So what your talking about is UKIP and the LDs around 20 percent.
Unlikely.
I agree, its not going to happen. I expect the DNV may go up though.
For all its shamelessness, Andy Burnham is looking astute. Protectionism is the new Populsim and can rebuild support in the North. A Red Brexit, rather than a white or blue one.
In other news, gunshots in Sarajevo, the Czar has mobilised, German trains are running and the Grand Fleet prepared to sail...
Just to counter the 'it can't happen' theme - which isn't to say it will - what would an accumulator on:
- LD sub-10 seats - Scot Lab 0-1 seats - Brexit - Corbyn Lab leader, 2015 - Trump US president - Leicester City English champions
have returned?
If we assume SNP+Plaid+Greens+Others at 10, then might a split like
It's writen in the third person. He is not making the claim, someone else is making it for him. So fake news. Much wow.
Isn't faking your CV up to and including inventing a PHD a resigning matter for a Party leader, Or am I just being old fashioned?
Is it? Has it ever been? People always say that this or that used to be a resigning matter but be honest who was the last party leader you can name who resigned over a fake CV?
IDS was undermined by claims of embellishment, and Andrea Leadsom was swift-boated on her apparently honest CV before she could become leader. Though isn't the very notion of party leaders even having a CV a recent one?
The point is that what Leadsom published was true. What then happened was swift-boating: people (including the chap in your link; and, tbf, including some of her supportters) exaggerating her claims and then pointing out the exaggerated version was false.
From what I remember, most of the City types here were satisfied by it. The key is that City titles are generally far too grandiose. Leadsom's CV is filled with terms like Senior and Managing Director which are at best high middle-rank executive positions, a couple of floors below the C-suite. So her enemies (and some of her friends) said, "look -- she was MD of a City firm -- so she ran a bank or allocated billions of pounds in investment funds -- but she didn't so she's a liar".
Morning. That's a very good long read about the pivotal moments of the campaign, informative and well written by Politico.
Interesting analysis, but not convinced about the writing; much longer than it needed to be and some sections were padded out with stuff we didn't need to read to get to the point.
EVEN Corbyn can't take them to 15% surely................ talk about a low bar
Gordon Brown took Labour to 18% (while in government, admittedly), and he was a considerably more capable leader than Corbyn, though still unsuited to the job. If real elections, he managed even worse (or better, for those so inclined): 16% in the 2009 Europeans.
I tried once to see on Electoral Calculus at what point Labour drops below 100 seats*. Of course it depends where you reallocate the votes to, but distributing them fairly equally between Con, LD and UKIP with a few going Green, the point seems to be about 15%. Even on this low figure they would be the official opposition.
*In a 650 seat HoC
I think the Greens would get more than "a few". (Votes, not seats, that is.)
A few %, rather than a few votes, in my highly contentious assumptions.
Nontheless, the concentration of Labour votes means that even 15% is not an extinguishing event for Labour. If only we had AV instead of FPTP...
It remains a scandal that our system rewards generously a party with narrow if deep appeal in a few locations whilst penalising to the point of extinction a party with shallower but broad appeal to people up and down the country.
Ardent Remainer Burnham flip flopping yet again and essentially doing "a Merkel" as soon as a ballot box hoves into sight.....
Brexit: Andy Burnham suggests UK may need to leave single market to rebuild North of England The frontrunner to be Greater Manchester’s first mayor wants to 'pick winners' to reverse deindustrialisation – which, he suggests, is not possible with EU state aid restrictions
If they choose this guy for mayor then the locals deserve everything thay will then get and in spades.
"Picking winners": crony capitalism comes to the uk and the US. Scary stuff.
It's hardly new to the US in a variety of disguised forms - in competition matters the EU has been robustly pro-competition. As far away from some sort of socialist conspiracy as is possible.
And yet EDF and Deutsche Bahn are left untouched and billions of state aid is poured into Airbus?
The big subsidy with EDF was surely the building of the nuclear power stations in the 1970s and 80s when it was under state ownership. I don't think it's received much, if any, since. Indeed, you could make the case that EDF regulation prevents it from earning an economic return on its assets. A sort of reverse subsidy.
One or two people on here salivating at the prospect of the extinction of the Labour Party it would appear so nothing unusual in that.
I wouldn't take the S&NH result or even a YouGov poll as symptomatic of anything new and dramatic. Labour is still able to win and win big in some of its heartlands and I'd need to see some evidence of a big loss in the 2018 London local elections to convince me we were in anything like a different phase.
As in the 1980s, Labour has been driven back to its heartlands - the question of its recovery and renewal, which seems so obvious to many of us not in support of the Party, seems less obvious to those who do back it.
The problem remains, as it has since 2008 (arguably), the absence of a coherent alternative economic strategy. The centre-right embraced austerity as the response to years of big Government spending and profligacy but now seems to be abandoning that in favour of big Government spending in the name of reflation.
The re-emergence of protectionism in some quarters in a mistaken belief that can somehow "protect" domestic jobs threatens a free trade concensus which has lasted decades. The world is changing perhaps more rapidly and unexpectedly than most predicted but it requires audacious and nimble thinking to keep up with that and while the Right aren't covering themselves in glory on that front, the Left has said almost nothing.
The reaction to the LEAVE vote and to the Trump victory doesn't need to be instant and inflammatory - it ought to be measured and reflective while at the same time reminding those who have followed the LEAVE and Trump banners that their expectations need to be met and considering the response when (inevitably) they aren't.
EVEN Corbyn can't take them to 15% surely................ talk about a low bar
Gordon Brown took Labour to 18% (while in government, admittedly), and he was a considerably more capable leader than Corbyn, though still unsuited to the job. If real elections, he managed even worse (or better, for those so inclined): 16% in the 2009 Europeans.
I tried once to see on Electoral Calculus at what point Labour drops below 100 seats*. Of course it depends where you reallocate the votes to, but distributing them fairly equally between Con, LD and UKIP with a few going Green, the point seems to be about 15%. Even on this low figure they would be the official opposition.
*In a 650 seat HoC
There is a point where UNS breaks, and it's probably above 15%.
Especially where the changes in the Labour vote are quite specific types of people rather than a general change in support. They could well lose a couple of hundred deposits yet retain most of their seats in metropolitan areas.
I've just done some back-of-a-word doc calculations and I reckon that 100 MPs might just be possible off a 15% national share but it's pushing it.
100 seats x 45% avg vote share x 50% turnout (all won) 332 seats x 15% avg vote share x 65% turnout (none won, no lost deposits) 200 seats x 4% avg vote share x 65% turnout (all lost deposits).
One or two people on here salivating at the prospect of the extinction of the Labour Party it would appear so nothing unusual in that.
I wouldn't take the S&NH result or even a YouGov poll as symptomatic of anything new and dramatic. Labour is still able to win and win big in some of its heartlands and I'd need to see some evidence of a big loss in the 2018 London local elections to convince me we were in anything like a different phase.
One or two people on here salivating at the prospect of the extinction of the Labour Party it would appear so nothing unusual in that.
I wouldn't take the S&NH result or even a YouGov poll as symptomatic of anything new and dramatic. Labour is still able to win and win big in some of its heartlands and I'd need to see some evidence of a big loss in the 2018 London local elections to convince me we were in anything like a different phase.
Is Michael Gove undertaking therapy via public statement or something? This story of how May was right to sack him and he regrets how he knifed Boris reads like a man coming to grips with himself.
One or two people on here salivating at the prospect of the extinction of the Labour Party it would appear so nothing unusual in that.
I wouldn't take the S&NH result or even a YouGov poll as symptomatic of anything new and dramatic. Labour is still able to win and win big in some of its heartlands and I'd need to see some evidence of a big loss in the 2018 London local elections to convince me we were in anything like a different phase.
This is already German policy (for 2025, I think) - a ban on the sale of all fossil fuel powered cars. Banning new diesel car sales, which recently seemed a mad Greenpeace idea, is looking quite likely in a lot of countries.
Comments
2016 Batley & Spen 3.7%
2016 Sleaford & North Hykeham 4.7%
2008 Haltemprice & Howden 5.2%
2012 Middlesbrough 5.5%
2012 Manchester Central 5.5%
1946 Combined Scottish Universities 5.6%
1996 Hemsworth 5.8%
1996 Barnsley East 6.3%
2011 Barnsley Central 7.0%
1990 Bootle (May) 7.7%
1994 Dagenham 7.8%
1990 Bootle (November) 8.0%
2009 Norwich North 8.5%
1994 Barking 9.9%
Excellent thread Mr Meeks.
Before the case started in the High Court, many commentators called it 'too close to call, but edged towards the appellant' - that subtlety appears to have been completely blown away in a hurricane of REMAIN optimism/hubris (delete as appropriate...)
http://www.politico.eu/article/how-to-win-a-referendum-brexit-inside-story-vote-leave-campaign/
The Remain campaign, on the other hand, handed stickers and balloons out to everyone going in and out of tube stations across London. That might have made them feel good about themselves but it was a rookie error. Some 40 percent of people in London were leave voters, and they were reminding them to go and cast their votes.
My walk from Waterloo to Holborn was a surreal experience on 23 June. I was offered Vote Remain stickers three times and there were light aircraft flying over the city with Vote Remain banners. It's easy to be wise after the event, but I do wonder to what extent Remain lost because their activist base was skewed heavily to London.
https://medium.com/@SunilPaul/we-can-fix-it-saving-the-truth-from-the-internet-7bec83df150d#.4fmqypbrd
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-a6HNXtdvVQ
Email spam was just annoying- people didn't see anti-spam stuff as a communist conspiracy against business. By contrast- fake news is probably quite popular... although hopefully people care if it is fake.
10 Crucial Decisions That Reshaped America
Nothing about the most dramatic campaign in memory was a foregone conclusion. The inside story of the pivotal choices that got us to President Trump.
https://youtu.be/c4zp2NucwsU
http://forward.com/culture/356537/why-times-trump-cover-is-a-subversive-work-of-political-art/?attribution=home-hero-item-img-1
Brexit: Andy Burnham suggests UK may need to leave single market to rebuild North of England
The frontrunner to be Greater Manchester’s first mayor wants to 'pick winners' to reverse deindustrialisation – which, he suggests, is not possible with EU state aid restrictions
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-single-market-andy-burnham-labour-north-england-industry-uk-eu-a7466181.html
If they choose this guy for mayor then the locals deserve everything thay will then get and in spades.
Unlikely.
*In a 650 seat HoC
If there's one thing we should have learned these last two years, it's that 'unlikely' is probably not as unlikely as we think.
(I agree that 45% is pretty much ceiling for Con in govt) so gains from Lab will have to come from elsewhere.
For all its shamelessness, Andy Burnham is looking astute. Protectionism is the new Populsim and can rebuild support in the North. A Red Brexit, rather than a white or blue one.
In other news, gunshots in Sarajevo, the Czar has mobilised, German trains are running and the Grand Fleet prepared to sail...
1 minute to go anyway.
Anyway, there'll be another one.
F1: not sure whether I'd prefer a Bottas or Wehrlein seat (I'd be annoyed by someone else getting it). Wehrlein's a smaller instant payout, Bottas would be quite good for an 8/1 (well, 7/1 taking off the stake for the non-each way aspect) top 3 title race bet. Hmm.
If Bottas gets it I might back Red Bull for the Constructors'.
Nontheless, the concentration of Labour votes means that even 15% is not an extinguishing event for Labour. If only we had AV instead of FPTP...
- LD sub-10 seats
- Scot Lab 0-1 seats
- Brexit
- Corbyn Lab leader, 2015
- Trump US president
- Leicester City English champions
have returned?
If we assume SNP+Plaid+Greens+Others at 10, then might a split like
Con 40
Lab 19
UKIP 16
LD 15
be completely unreasonable?
From what I remember, most of the City types here were satisfied by it. The key is that City titles are generally far too grandiose. Leadsom's CV is filled with terms like Senior and Managing Director which are at best high middle-rank executive positions, a couple of floors below the C-suite. So her enemies (and some of her friends) said, "look -- she was MD of a City firm -- so she ran a bank or allocated billions of pounds in investment funds -- but she didn't so she's a liar".
One or two people on here salivating at the prospect of the extinction of the Labour Party it would appear so nothing unusual in that.
I wouldn't take the S&NH result or even a YouGov poll as symptomatic of anything new and dramatic. Labour is still able to win and win big in some of its heartlands and I'd need to see some evidence of a big loss in the 2018 London local elections to convince me we were in anything like a different phase.
As in the 1980s, Labour has been driven back to its heartlands - the question of its recovery and renewal, which seems so obvious to many of us not in support of the Party, seems less obvious to those who do back it.
The problem remains, as it has since 2008 (arguably), the absence of a coherent alternative economic strategy. The centre-right embraced austerity as the response to years of big Government spending and profligacy but now seems to be abandoning that in favour of big Government spending in the name of reflation.
The re-emergence of protectionism in some quarters in a mistaken belief that can somehow "protect" domestic jobs threatens a free trade concensus which has lasted decades. The world is changing perhaps more rapidly and unexpectedly than most predicted but it requires audacious and nimble thinking to keep up with that and while the Right aren't covering themselves in glory on that front, the Left has said almost nothing.
The reaction to the LEAVE vote and to the Trump victory doesn't need to be instant and inflammatory - it ought to be measured and reflective while at the same time reminding those who have followed the LEAVE and Trump banners that their expectations need to be met and considering the response when (inevitably) they aren't.
I can't comment on either EDF or DB but the EADS/Airbus launch investment is on commercial terms.
100 seats x 45% avg vote share x 50% turnout (all won)
332 seats x 15% avg vote share x 65% turnout (none won, no lost deposits)
200 seats x 4% avg vote share x 65% turnout (all lost deposits).
https://twitter.com/indypolitics/status/807508012755746817
RussianTory agent?http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38267368