politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A cartoon ahead of tomorrow’s historic Trump-May meeting in Wa

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A cartoon ahead of tomorrow’s historic Trump-May meeting in Washington and tonight’s Local By-Election Preview

Kilmarnock East and Hurlford on East Ayrshire caused by the death of the sitting Scottish National Party member Result of council at last election (2012): Scottish National Party 15, Labour 14, Conservatives 2, Independent 1 (No Overall Control, Scottish National Party short by 2) Result of ward at last election (2012) : Emboldened denotes elected Scottish National Party 944, 1,126 (47%) Labour 1,054, 984 (46%) Conservative 326 (7%) EU Referendum Result (2016): REMAIN 33,891 (59%) LEAVE 23,942 (41%) on a turnout of 63% Candidates duly nominated: Fiona Campbell (SNP), Jon Herd (Con), Stephen McNamara (Scottish Libertarian Party), Dave Meecham (Lab) Weather at the close of polls: Cloudy, but dry 0°C Estimate: Scottish National Party HOLD

Read the full story here

JohnO

And furtively he slips into first place

JohnO

Like the wee sleekit timorous beastie he aspires to be.

Alanbrooke

JohnO said:

And furtively he slips into first place

like a quiet fart in a lift

John_M

Fourth like Labour in Copeland .

RobD

Glorious Fifth!

SimonStClare

Cheers Mr Hayfield - a quiet night by the looks of things.

Cartoon.

Considering all the possibilities regarding a vicar’s daughter and a cad – that’s pretty lame.

RobD

JohnO said:

And furtively he slips into first place

Front of the queue for your (rightly deserved) hereditary dukedom?

isam

A fitting song for the post Brexit, post Trump world... something for everyone depending on interpretation

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6zAT15vaFk

Essexit

Ukip being favourites in Stoke is barmy, right? It seems like there's been a monumental over-reaction to the Labour Leave voodoo poll.

Black_Rook

I've only just spotted the latest YouGov putting Labour on 24% - again. We now appear to have reached the point where Labour polling lower than Michael Foot in 1983 has become so commonplace that it is barely newsworthy.

GeoffM

Strange cartoon. I can't work out what it's trying to say - if anything.

Pong

Essexit said:

Ukip being favourites in Stoke is barmy, right? It seems like there's been a monumental over-reaction to the Labour Leave voodoo poll.

I'm assuming that whoever is betting on ukip has some private polling.

Or it maybe that Aaron Banks, or some other kipper punter is driving down the UKIP odds to try to get some media attention for Nuttall. It's a strategy that UKIP have used before.

Who knows?

brokenwheel

FPT

chestnut said:

Pong said:

isam said:

People wanting to back UKIP at 1.77 now on Betfair. There must be a poll

If we think nothing has changed, Lab at 2.42 is a must bet

According to Staggers, BMG just told Corbyn et al that what happened to labour in Scotland post-indyref is happening again post-brexit;

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2017/01/why-has-jeremy-corbyn-committed-labour-voting-article-50

Seems to imply a stoke BMG poll which isn't favourable for Lab.

Reading the detail of YG suggests this is correct.

If the subsamples are to be believed, they are on the verge of going third in London (can scarcely believe that but they managed to lose Glasgow), are struggling to hold onto second in Southern England as well and are already locked into third in Scotland.

The one crumb of comfort for them should be that when policy is looked at, Labour continue to lead in numerous areas in Scotland and a couple in the UK.

Their problem is that they are nowhere on the defining issues of the last three years. They need Brexit completion and the slaying of SIndy.

They need Theresa May and Ruth Davidson to get them back in the game.

I find Yougov's London crossbreaks tend to be a bit dodgy, Labour tend to be too low. Also the Lib Dem break here is out of line with previous yougov polls, the last 11 polls average at 12% (excluding don't knows) for the Libs with little variation. On the other hand their other crossbreaks tend to be fairly ok. In fact if it wasn't for a really dodgy crossbreak for the Rest of South in their final Yougov/STimes they would have pretty much nailed GE15.

The average of the crossbreaks are currently showing Labour sliding in the Midlands and as well as the North, with the Tories rising in the North to parity.

Usual caveats about crossbreaks apply,

Casino_Royale

Essexit said:

Ukip being favourites in Stoke is barmy, right? It seems like there's been a monumental over-reaction to the Labour Leave voodoo poll.

It's crazy but probably Labour canvassers or private polling.

But I'm absolutely laying UKIP at odds on.

Casino_Royale

Casino_Royale said:

Essexit said:

Ukip being favourites in Stoke is barmy, right? It seems like there's been a monumental over-reaction to the Labour Leave voodoo poll.

It's crazy but probably Labour canvassers or private polling.

But I'm absolutely laying UKIP at odds on.

Although having said that Snell has gifted quotes to UKIP from his past tweets.

isam

Casino_Royale said:

Essexit said:

Ukip being favourites in Stoke is barmy, right? It seems like there's been a monumental over-reaction to the Labour Leave voodoo poll.

It's crazy but probably Labour canvassers or private polling.

But I'm absolutely laying UKIP at odds on.

I think you are better off backing Lab than laying UKIP, unless you think LD or Cons have more than 2% chance between them

Essexit

isam said:

Casino_Royale said:

Essexit said:

Ukip being favourites in Stoke is barmy, right? It seems like there's been a monumental over-reaction to the Labour Leave voodoo poll.

It's crazy but probably Labour canvassers or private polling.

But I'm absolutely laying UKIP at odds on.

I think you are better off backing Lab than laying UKIP, unless you think LD or Cons have more than 2% chance between them

Sounds good. I've already put a fair bit on Labour and wanted to be covered against a Ukip win. But the bookies aren't getting a penny off me at 10/11.

Ishmael_Z

Saddened that Tam Dalyell's death hasn't made a bigger stir. He deserves respect for having named the W Lothian question, if nothing else.

isam

Ishmael_Z said:

Saddened that Tam Dalyell's death hasn't made a bigger stir. He deserves respect for having named the W Lothian question, if nothing else.

Actually, it wasn't he who named it that...

Black_Rook

brokenwheel said:

FPT

chestnut said:

Pong said:

isam said:

People wanting to back UKIP at 1.77 now on Betfair. There must be a poll

If we think nothing has changed, Lab at 2.42 is a must bet

According to Staggers, BMG just told Corbyn et al that what happened to labour in Scotland post-indyref is happening again post-brexit;

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2017/01/why-has-jeremy-corbyn-committed-labour-voting-article-50

Seems to imply a stoke BMG poll which isn't favourable for Lab.

Reading the detail of YG suggests this is correct.

If the subsamples are to be believed, they are on the verge of going third in London (can scarcely believe that but they managed to lose Glasgow), are struggling to hold onto second in Southern England as well and are already locked into third in Scotland.

The one crumb of comfort for them should be that when policy is looked at, Labour continue to lead in numerous areas in Scotland and a couple in the UK.

Their problem is that they are nowhere on the defining issues of the last three years. They need Brexit completion and the slaying of SIndy.

They need Theresa May and Ruth Davidson to get them back in the game.

I find Yougov's London crossbreaks tend to be a bit dodgy, Labour tend to be too low. Also the Lib Dem break here is out of line with previous yougov polls, the last 11 polls average at 12% (excluding don't knows) for the Libs with little variation. On the other hand their other crossbreaks tend to be fairly ok. In fact if it wasn't for a really dodgy crossbreak for the Rest of South in their final Yougov/STimes they would have pretty much nailed GE15.

The average of the crossbreaks are currently showing Labour sliding in the Midlands and as well as the North, with the Tories rising in the North to parity.

Usual caveats about crossbreaks apply,

The London split looks like a rogue result, arising from the very small sub-sample used. The remaining regions are broadly in line with most recent YouGov results, as is the information on voter churn.

It continues to appear that the 2015 Tory vote is the most solid and the 2015 Lib Dem vote the softest (although, as with London, the Lib Dem figures tend to be a bit variable, presumably due to small sample size.) Again, the modest overall increase in Lib Dem support since the election appears primarily to be down to Labour 2015 voters crossing over to them in much greater numbers than the flow of ex-LDs moving in the opposite direction.

Omnium

CorbExit market has moved quite a bit.

FrankBooth

Some people think Theresa May is over-rated. I am certainly not a fan. However when one considers the idea of Boris, Gove or Leadsom visiting President Trump, or for true comic value Jeremy Corbyn, then her ratings are not so puzzling.

I'm sure Theresa will treat this like a first date, with the kind of savvy one would expect of an experienced woman. Goodness knows what the Tories what be looking to get up to, the stuff of a secret Russian tape recorder's dreams.

Roger

Labour using Shami Chakrabarti as their spokesperson on the three line whip. I can remember when she was feared and respected and her endorsements were sought.

FrankBooth

Sorry that should be Tory boys not Tories what.

another_richard

' Today, we are setting out our assessment of what would happen in the weeks and months after a vote to Leave on June 23.

It is clear that there would be an immediate and profound shock to our economy.

The analysis produced by the Treasury today shows that a vote to leave will push our economy into a recession that would knock 3.6 per cent off GDP and, over two years, put hundreds of thousands of people out of work right across the country, compared to the forecast for continued growth if we vote to remain in the EU.

In a more severe shock scenario, Treasury economists estimate that our economy could be hit by 6 per cent, there would be a deeper recession and unemployment would rise by even more. '

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/22/david-cameron-and-george-osborne-brexit-would-put-our-economy-in/

So a predicted 3.6% minimum immediate recession become 1.2% growth in reality.

Theuniondivvie

isam said:

Ishmael_Z said:

Saddened that Tam Dalyell's death hasn't made a bigger stir. He deserves respect for having named the W Lothian question, if nothing else.

Actually, it wasn't he who named it that...

Go on, tell us, you know you're dying to.

RobD

another_richard said:

' Today, we are setting out our assessment of what would happen in the weeks and months after a vote to Leave on June 23.

It is clear that there would be an immediate and profound shock to our economy.

The analysis produced by the Treasury today shows that a vote to leave will push our economy into a recession that would knock 3.6 per cent off GDP and, over two years, put hundreds of thousands of people out of work right across the country, compared to the forecast for continued growth if we vote to remain in the EU.

In a more severe shock scenario, Treasury economists estimate that our economy could be hit by 6 per cent, there would be a deeper recession and unemployment would rise by even more. '

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/22/david-cameron-and-george-osborne-brexit-would-put-our-economy-in/

So a predicted 3.6% minimum immediate recession become 1.2% growth in reality.

Somehow invoking Article 50 will make a difference

isam

Theuniondivvie said:

isam said:

Ishmael_Z said:

Saddened that Tam Dalyell's death hasn't made a bigger stir. He deserves respect for having named the W Lothian question, if nothing else.

Actually, it wasn't he who named it that...

Go on, tell us, you know you're dying to.

"You'll never believe me so..."

Ishmael_Z

isam said:

Ishmael_Z said:

Saddened that Tam Dalyell's death hasn't made a bigger stir. He deserves respect for having named the W Lothian question, if nothing else.

Actually, it wasn't he who named it that...

No, but we cannot refer to V*ldem*rt by name on here.

Big_G_NorthWales

Reports a supplier has withdrawn from a 100 million deal with a German car manufacturer due to the new America First policy apparently putting fear in Germany over their car industry

another_richard

' UK professionals from working-class backgrounds are paid £6,800 less on average each year than those from more affluent families, a study has found.

The class pay gap was highest in finance at £13,713, the research by the Social Mobility Commission concluded.

The medical profession saw the next highest gap at £10,218, followed by information technology at £4,736.

It found the gap was partly caused by differences in educational background, along with the tendency of middle-class professionals to work in bigger firms and move to London for work.

But even when professionals had the same educational attainment, role and experience, those from poorer families were paid an average of £2,242 less, the Social Mobility Commission's study found. '

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-38744122

I suspect if this pay differential was on differences of sex or race we'd have been inundated with howls of outrage from various 'right-on' people.

John_M

another_richard said:

' UK professionals from working-class backgrounds are paid £6,800 less on average each year than those from more affluent families, a study has found.

The class pay gap was highest in finance at £13,713, the research by the Social Mobility Commission concluded.

The medical profession saw the next highest gap at £10,218, followed by information technology at £4,736.

It found the gap was partly caused by differences in educational background, along with the tendency of middle-class professionals to work in bigger firms and move to London for work.

But even when professionals had the same educational attainment, role and experience, those from poorer families were paid an average of £2,242 less, the Social Mobility Commission's study found. '

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-38744122

I suspect if this pay differential was on differences of sex or race we'd have been inundated with howls of outrage from various 'right-on' people.

They should learn to talk proper like what I do.

brokenwheel

Black_Rook said:

brokenwheel said:

FPT

chestnut said:

Pong said:

isam said:

People wanting to back UKIP at 1.77 now on Betfair. There must be a poll

If we think nothing has changed, Lab at 2.42 is a must bet

According to Staggers, BMG just told Corbyn et al that what happened to labour in Scotland post-indyref is happening again post-brexit;

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2017/01/why-has-jeremy-corbyn-committed-labour-voting-article-50

Seems to imply a stoke BMG poll which isn't favourable for Lab.

Reading the detail of YG suggests this is correct.

If the subsamples are to be believed, they are on the verge of going third in London (can scarcely believe that but they managed to lose Glasgow), are struggling to hold onto second in Southern England as well and are already locked into third in Scotland.

The one crumb of comfort for them should be that when policy is looked at, Labour continue to lead in numerous areas in Scotland and a couple in the UK.

Their problem is that they are nowhere on the defining issues of the last three years. They need Brexit completion and the slaying of SIndy.

They need Theresa May and Ruth Davidson to get them back in the game.

I find Yougov's London crossbreaks tend to be a bit dodgy, Labour tend to be too low. Also the Lib Dem break here is out of line with previous yougov polls, the last 11 polls average at 12% (excluding don't knows) for the Libs with little variation. On the other hand their other crossbreaks tend to be fairly ok. In fact if it wasn't for a really dodgy crossbreak for the Rest of South in their final Yougov/STimes they would have pretty much nailed GE15.

The average of the crossbreaks are currently showing Labour sliding in the Midlands and as well as the North, with the Tories rising in the North to parity.

Usual caveats about crossbreaks apply,

The London split looks like a rogue result, arising from the very small sub-sample used. The remaining regions are broadly in line with most recent YouGov results, as is the information on voter churn.

Yeah there was a double sample size Yougov poll in 19-21 Sep which had a far more reasonable ~40% Labour, ~34% Tory.

GeoffM

another_richard said:

'
The class pay gap was highest in finance at £13,713, the research by the Social Mobility Commission concluded.

There's a "Social Mobility Commission?"

I've just spotted a way to save a few million quid a year.

another_richard

If I was in the SNP I would be analysing what the Treasury predictions were of the finances of an independent Scotland:

' New analysis produced by the Treasury today shows the Scottish Government’s deficit forecast for the first year of independence is billions of pounds out of step with all other recent forecasts.

Scottish Secretary Alistair Carmichael said this was further evidence that Scottish Government Ministers will say anything to try and win the independence referendum. '

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/hm-treasury-analyse-scottish-governments-defecit-forecast

And then making adjustments comparable to the Treasury's 'Vote to Leave' prediction and reality.

Roger

another_richard said:

' UK professionals from working-class backgrounds are paid £6,800 less on average each year than those from more affluent families, a study has found.

The class pay gap was highest in finance at £13,713, the research by the Social Mobility Commission concluded.

The medical profession saw the next highest gap at £10,218, followed by information technology at £4,736.

It found the gap was partly caused by differences in educational background, along with the tendency of middle-class professionals to work in bigger firms and move to London for work.

But even when professionals had the same educational attainment, role and experience, those from poorer families were paid an average of £2,242 less, the Social Mobility Commission's study found. '

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-38744122

I suspect if this pay differential was on differences of sex or race we'd have been inundated with howls of outrage from various 'right-on' people.

That doesn't make sense.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Reports a supplier has withdrawn from a 100 million deal with a German car manufacturer due to the new America First policy apparently putting fear in Germany over their car industry

Is it possible you could post a link when you bring this stream of non stop of Euro collapse onto the board. Better and further particulars would be interesting. If your posts stood alone I would now assume the Euro had collapsed and Germany was bankrupt.

RobD

Roger said:

another_richard said:

' UK professionals from working-class backgrounds are paid £6,800 less on average each year than those from more affluent families, a study has found.

The class pay gap was highest in finance at £13,713, the research by the Social Mobility Commission concluded.

The medical profession saw the next highest gap at £10,218, followed by information technology at £4,736.

It found the gap was partly caused by differences in educational background, along with the tendency of middle-class professionals to work in bigger firms and move to London for work.

But even when professionals had the same educational attainment, role and experience, those from poorer families were paid an average of £2,242 less, the Social Mobility Commission's study found. '

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-38744122

I suspect if this pay differential was on differences of sex or race we'd have been inundated with howls of outrage from various 'right-on' people.

That doesn't make sense.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Reports a supplier has withdrawn from a 100 million deal with a German car manufacturer due to the new America First policy apparently putting fear in Germany over their car industry

Is it possible you could post a link when you bring this stream of non stop of Euro collapse onto the board. Better and further particulars would be interesting. If your posts stood alone I would now assume the Euro had collapsed and Germany was bankrupt.

A quick googling revealed this

https://global.handelsblatt.com/companies-markets/german-car-parts-supplier-first-trump-victim-690802

another_richard

GeoffM said:

another_richard said:

'
The class pay gap was highest in finance at £13,713, the research by the Social Mobility Commission concluded.

There's a "Social Mobility Commission?"

I've just spotted a way to save a few million quid a year.

It would reappear under a different name but with the same people and even more funding.

Quangos are for life.

DecrepitJohnL

another_richard said:

' UK professionals from working-class backgrounds are paid £6,800 less on average each year than those from more affluent families, a study has found.

The class pay gap was highest in finance at £13,713, the research by the Social Mobility Commission concluded.

The medical profession saw the next highest gap at £10,218, followed by information technology at £4,736.

It found the gap was partly caused by differences in educational background, along with the tendency of middle-class professionals to work in bigger firms and move to London for work.

But even when professionals had the same educational attainment, role and experience, those from poorer families were paid an average of £2,242 less, the Social Mobility Commission's study found. '

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-38744122

I suspect if this pay differential was on differences of sex or race we'd have been inundated with howls of outrage from various 'right-on' people.

Re doctors and class, I vaguely recall being told some decades ago that the "better" the school a consultant went to, the higher up the body he specialised. If Foxinsoxuk is around, could he tell us if the neurosurgeons have posher accents than the rectal surgeons?

RobD

Trumps favourability numbers aren't doing too badly

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/political_updates/prez_track_jan26

Malmesbury

another_richard said:

GeoffM said:

another_richard said:

'
The class pay gap was highest in finance at £13,713, the research by the Social Mobility Commission concluded.

There's a "Social Mobility Commission?"

I've just spotted a way to save a few million quid a year.

It would reappear under a different name but with the same people and even more funding.

Quangos are for life.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCbfMkh940Q

Sean_F

Casino_Royale said:

Essexit said:

Ukip being favourites in Stoke is barmy, right? It seems like there's been a monumental over-reaction to the Labour Leave voodoo poll.

It's crazy but probably Labour canvassers or private polling.

But I'm absolutely laying UKIP at odds on.

Stoke is a Labour hold, for the time being.

FrancisUrquhart

RobD said:

Roger said:

another_richard said:

' UK professionals from working-class backgrounds are paid £6,800 less on average each year than those from more affluent families, a study has found.

The class pay gap was highest in finance at £13,713, the research by the Social Mobility Commission concluded.

The medical profession saw the next highest gap at £10,218, followed by information technology at £4,736.

It found the gap was partly caused by differences in educational background, along with the tendency of middle-class professionals to work in bigger firms and move to London for work.

But even when professionals had the same educational attainment, role and experience, those from poorer families were paid an average of £2,242 less, the Social Mobility Commission's study found. '

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-38744122

I suspect if this pay differential was on differences of sex or race we'd have been inundated with howls of outrage from various 'right-on' people.

That doesn't make sense.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Reports a supplier has withdrawn from a 100 million deal with a German car manufacturer due to the new America First policy apparently putting fear in Germany over their car industry

Is it possible you could post a link when you bring this stream of non stop of Euro collapse onto the board. Better and further particulars would be interesting. If your posts stood alone I would now assume the Euro had collapsed and Germany was bankrupt.

A quick googling revealed this

https://global.handelsblatt.com/companies-markets/german-car-parts-supplier-first-trump-victim-690802

Interesting it is Tesla who cancelled the order and elon musk is on an advisory board that recently spoke with trump and obviously gets billions from US government....starts to add 2 and 2...

Essexit

another_richard said:

If I was in the SNP I would be analysing what the Treasury predictions were of the finances of an independent Scotland:

' New analysis produced by the Treasury today shows the Scottish Government’s deficit forecast for the first year of independence is billions of pounds out of step with all other recent forecasts.

Scottish Secretary Alistair Carmichael said this was further evidence that Scottish Government Ministers will say anything to try and win the independence referendum. '

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/hm-treasury-analyse-scottish-governments-defecit-forecast

And then making adjustments comparable to the Treasury's 'Vote to Leave' prediction and reality.

So they'd use the wrongness of the Brexit predictions to argue the wrongness of Scottish secession predictions, whilst hyperventilating about Brexit being terrible for the Scottish economy, basing their claims on, er, Brexit predictions? Their heads would explode.

Toms

This is not election relevant, but I find this site fascinating; the national grid is red-lining seriously and wind is providing about ten percent of the total.
http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/

GeoffM

another_richard said:

GeoffM said:

another_richard said:

'
The class pay gap was highest in finance at £13,713, the research by the Social Mobility Commission concluded.

There's a "Social Mobility Commission?"

I've just spotted a way to save a few million quid a year.

It would reappear under a different name but with the same people and even more funding.

Quangos are for life.

Yep, good point - you're spot on there.

Sean_F

DecrepitJohnL said:

another_richard said:

' UK professionals from working-class backgrounds are paid £6,800 less on average each year than those from more affluent families, a study has found.

The class pay gap was highest in finance at £13,713, the research by the Social Mobility Commission concluded.

The medical profession saw the next highest gap at £10,218, followed by information technology at £4,736.

It found the gap was partly caused by differences in educational background, along with the tendency of middle-class professionals to work in bigger firms and move to London for work.

But even when professionals had the same educational attainment, role and experience, those from poorer families were paid an average of £2,242 less, the Social Mobility Commission's study found. '

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-38744122

I suspect if this pay differential was on differences of sex or race we'd have been inundated with howls of outrage from various 'right-on' people.

Re doctors and class, I vaguely recall being told some decades ago that the "better" the school a consultant went to, the higher up the body he specialised. If Foxinsoxuk is around, could he tell us if the neurosurgeons have posher accents than the rectal surgeons?

You need quite a bit of money to get into some professional occupations.

DanSmith

RobD said:

Trumps favourability numbers aren't doing too badly

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/political_updates/prez_track_jan26

That kills quite a few narratives.

Scott_P

@SkyNewsBreak: White House says President Trump wants to pay for a wall along the Mexican border with a tax that would be part of a reform package

another_richard

Even if Labour does lose both Copeland and Stoke Central (and I can't believe they are) they still won't have matched their achievement between 1970 and 1974 when they lost THREE seats in byelections while being in Opposition:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rochdale_by-election,_1972

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln_by-election,_1973

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasgow_Govan_by-election,_1973

And they still went on to win the following general election.

isam

DanSmith said:

RobD said:

Trumps favourability numbers aren't doing too badly

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/political_updates/prez_track_jan26

That kills quite a few narratives.

Jesus, Obama fell off a cliff in 09!

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/obama_approval_index_history

John_M

Toms said:

This is not election relevant, but I find this site fascinating; the national grid is red-lining seriously and wind is providing about ten percent of the total.
http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/

Ah just can't do it captain, I doon't have the poower!

I wish you hadn't posted that, I'm afraid to put the kettle on now.

Malmesbury

FrancisUrquhart said:

RobD said:

Roger said:

another_richard said:

' UK professionals from working-class backgrounds are paid £6,800 less on average each year than those from more affluent families, a study has found.

The class pay gap was highest in finance at £13,713, the research by the Social Mobility Commission concluded.

The medical profession saw the next highest gap at £10,218, followed by information technology at £4,736.

It found the gap was partly caused by differences in educational background, along with the tendency of middle-class professionals to work in bigger firms and move to London for work.

But even when professionals had the same educational attainment, role and experience, those from poorer families were paid an average of £2,242 less, the Social Mobility Commission's study found. '

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-38744122

I suspect if this pay differential was on differences of sex or race we'd have been inundated with howls of outrage from various 'right-on' people.

That doesn't make sense.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Reports a supplier has withdrawn from a 100 million deal with a German car manufacturer due to the new America First policy apparently putting fear in Germany over their car industry

Is it possible you could post a link when you bring this stream of non stop of Euro collapse onto the board. Better and further particulars would be interesting. If your posts stood alone I would now assume the Euro had collapsed and Germany was bankrupt.

A quick googling revealed this

https://global.handelsblatt.com/companies-markets/german-car-parts-supplier-first-trump-victim-690802

Interesting it is Tesla who cancelled the order and elon musk is on an advisory board that recently spoke with trump and obviously gets billions from US government....starts to add 2 and 2...

Tesla and SpaceX have both had a policy of progressive "in-sourcing" of components - since they started.

They contract out components at first, while in house teams work on perfecting their own designs.

Yes, the exact reverse of how other companies work. Musk bases this on the following -

1) Everything that you do every day *is* your core business
2) Why should someone else make a profit on your core business

Traditional outsourcing relies on the idea that because you can change contracts etc, you can bargain prices down, or even end product lines etc without internal company resistance. In practise this is far from proven....

ThomasNashe

Scott_P said:

@SkyNewsBreak: White House says President Trump wants to pay for a wall along the Mexican border with a tax that would be part of a reform package

Presumably a tax to be levied on Mexicans only?

Malmesbury

ThomasNashe said:

Scott_P said:

@SkyNewsBreak: White House says President Trump wants to pay for a wall along the Mexican border with a tax that would be part of a reform package

Presumably a tax to be levied on Mexicans only?

Tarrifs on manufactured goods from Mexico probably.

another_richard

isam said:

DanSmith said:

RobD said:

Trumps favourability numbers aren't doing too badly

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/political_updates/prez_track_jan26

That kills quite a few narratives.

Jesus, Obama fell off a cliff in 09!

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/obama_approval_index_history

Obama is someone who was well thought of before he had power and will be well thought after he has had power but not when he did have power.

People like the concept of Obama but not the reality.

RobD

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/news/2017/01/26/2701-MATT-GALLERY-WEB-P1-large_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqqVzuuqpFlyLIwiB6NTmJwfSVWeZ_vEN7c6bHu2jJnT8.png

[insert usual PB comment about Matt being great]

Toms

John_M said:

Toms said:

This is not election relevant, but I find this site fascinating; the national grid is red-lining seriously and wind is providing about ten percent of the total.
http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/

Ah just can't do it captain, I doon't have the poower!

I wish you hadn't posted that, I'm afraid to put the kettle on now.

Go on. Be a devil. I think they lower the frequency when demand is high. I guess that lowers the power delivered to a given device. Your kettle will take a little longer to boil. But crumbs we are running a bit close to the knuckle.

another_richard

Essexit said:

another_richard said:

If I was in the SNP I would be analysing what the Treasury predictions were of the finances of an independent Scotland:

' New analysis produced by the Treasury today shows the Scottish Government’s deficit forecast for the first year of independence is billions of pounds out of step with all other recent forecasts.

Scottish Secretary Alistair Carmichael said this was further evidence that Scottish Government Ministers will say anything to try and win the independence referendum. '

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/hm-treasury-analyse-scottish-governments-defecit-forecast

And then making adjustments comparable to the Treasury's 'Vote to Leave' prediction and reality.

So they'd use the wrongness of the Brexit predictions to argue the wrongness of Scottish secession predictions, whilst hyperventilating about Brexit being terrible for the Scottish economy, basing their claims on, er, Brexit predictions? Their heads would explode.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublethink

RobD

Toms said:

John_M said:

Toms said:

This is not election relevant, but I find this site fascinating; the national grid is red-lining seriously and wind is providing about ten percent of the total.
http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/

Ah just can't do it captain, I doon't have the poower!

I wish you hadn't posted that, I'm afraid to put the kettle on now.

Go on. Be a devil. I think they lower the frequency when demand is high. I guess that lowers the power delivered to a given device. Your kettle will take a little longer to boil. But crumbs we are running a bit close to the knuckle.

Is the red bit actually 90% of total capacity or something, or is it just an arbitrary number?

Toms

RobD said:

Toms said:

John_M said:

Toms said:

This is not election relevant, but I find this site fascinating; the national grid is red-lining seriously and wind is providing about ten percent of the total.
http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/

Ah just can't do it captain, I doon't have the poower!

I wish you hadn't posted that, I'm afraid to put the kettle on now.

Go on. Be a devil. I think they lower the frequency when demand is high. I guess that lowers the power delivered to a given device. Your kettle will take a little longer to boil. But crumbs we are running a bit close to the knuckle.

Is the red bit actually 90% of total capacity or something, or is it just an arbitrary number?

Dunno I'm afraid. I think there may be some explanation given on that site. Must have a look.

AndyJS

Sean_F said:

Casino_Royale said:

Essexit said:

Ukip being favourites in Stoke is barmy, right? It seems like there's been a monumental over-reaction to the Labour Leave voodoo poll.

It's crazy but probably Labour canvassers or private polling.

But I'm absolutely laying UKIP at odds on.

Stoke is a Labour hold, for the time being.

Why do you think Stoke is a Labour hold? I think they could lose it while holding Copeland.

John_M

RobD said:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/news/2017/01/26/2701-MATT-GALLERY-WEB-P1-large_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqqVzuuqpFlyLIwiB6NTmJwfSVWeZ_vEN7c6bHu2jJnT8.png

[insert usual PB comment about Matt being great]

Don't let Innocent see that cartoon! It's his worst nightmare.

RobD

Interesting to note that none of the open cycle gas turbines are being used (top right). That would be a warning sign that the demand is truly exceeding supply.

RobD

Toms said:

RobD said:

Toms said:

John_M said:

Toms said:

This is not election relevant, but I find this site fascinating; the national grid is red-lining seriously and wind is providing about ten percent of the total.
http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/

Ah just can't do it captain, I doon't have the poower!

I wish you hadn't posted that, I'm afraid to put the kettle on now.

Go on. Be a devil. I think they lower the frequency when demand is high. I guess that lowers the power delivered to a given device. Your kettle will take a little longer to boil. But crumbs we are running a bit close to the knuckle.

Is the red bit actually 90% of total capacity or something, or is it just an arbitrary number?

Dunno I'm afraid. I think there may be some explanation given on that site. Must have a look.

Hovering over some of the dials gives some info. It states what the amber region is, for instance, but not the red.

ydoethur

another_richard said:

Even if Labour does lose both Copeland and Stoke Central (and I can't believe they are) they still won't have matched their achievement between 1970 and 1974 when they lost THREE seats in byelections while being in Opposition:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rochdale_by-election,_1972

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln_by-election,_1973

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasgow_Govan_by-election,_1973

And they still went on to win the following general election.

But those were lost to parties other than the government.

In the vanishingly unlikely scenario that Labour lose both these seats to TM, that will be the first time a party of opposition has ceded two seats to the government (especially in a second term) since Gaitskell's attempts to hold the party together during a bitter civil war in the early 1960s.

It should also be noted that one of those by-election defeats - Bristol South-East - Labour actually won the vote but the candidate was ineligible for the seat so his rival was declared the winner.

isam

AndyJS said:

Sean_F said:

Casino_Royale said:

Essexit said:

Ukip being favourites in Stoke is barmy, right? It seems like there's been a monumental over-reaction to the Labour Leave voodoo poll.

It's crazy but probably Labour canvassers or private polling.

But I'm absolutely laying UKIP at odds on.

Stoke is a Labour hold, for the time being.

Why do you think Stoke is a Labour hold? I think they could lose it while holding Copeland.

Whoever wins, it has to be one of the best betting heats for ages

Range of traded prices on Betfair

UKIP 4.9-1.74
Labour 2.46-1.55
LD 85-6.4
Con 160-9.4

glw

John_M said:

another_richard said:

' UK professionals from working-class backgrounds are paid £6,800 less on average each year than those from more affluent families, a study has found.

The class pay gap was highest in finance at £13,713, the research by the Social Mobility Commission concluded.

The medical profession saw the next highest gap at £10,218, followed by information technology at £4,736.

It found the gap was partly caused by differences in educational background, along with the tendency of middle-class professionals to work in bigger firms and move to London for work.

But even when professionals had the same educational attainment, role and experience, those from poorer families were paid an average of £2,242 less, the Social Mobility Commission's study found. '

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-38744122

I suspect if this pay differential was on differences of sex or race we'd have been inundated with howls of outrage from various 'right-on' people.

They should learn to talk proper like what I do.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uz9_YfIQaz4

Scott_P

Toms said:

Go on. Be a devil. I think they lower the frequency when demand is high. I guess that lowers the power delivered to a given device. Your kettle will take a little longer to boil. But crumbs we are running a bit close to the knuckle.

It's more prosaic than that. As the load goes up the turbines run slower (they have to work harder). At some point they will bring more turbine capacity online and speed everything up again

Toms

Scott_P said:

Toms said:

Go on. Be a devil. I think they lower the frequency when demand is high. I guess that lowers the power delivered to a given device. Your kettle will take a little longer to boil. But crumbs we are running a bit close to the knuckle.

It's more prosaic than that. As the load goes up the turbines run slower (they have to work harder). At some point they will bring more turbine capacity online and speed everything up again

Your optimism is noted. I think I'll use gas for my tea brewing.

Scott_P

Toms said:

Your optimism is noted.

Assuming there is spare turbine capacity available...

Sean_F

AndyJS said:

Sean_F said:

Casino_Royale said:

Essexit said:

Ukip being favourites in Stoke is barmy, right? It seems like there's been a monumental over-reaction to the Labour Leave voodoo poll.

It's crazy but probably Labour canvassers or private polling.

But I'm absolutely laying UKIP at odds on.

Stoke is a Labour hold, for the time being.

Why do you think Stoke is a Labour hold? I think they could lose it while holding Copeland.

It's very hard for the Opposition to lose a by-election, unless a third party is running rampant. UKIP aren't. Their efforts may still result in a decent vote share, but no more. It's not a seat that's amenable to the Lib Dems, either.

Scott_P

@OKnox: Via pool: White House's @PressSec says Trump is asking Congress to approve 20% tax on all imports from Mexico to pay for "the wall."

RobD

Scott_P said:

@OKnox: Via pool: White House's @PressSec says Trump is asking Congress to approve 20% tax on all imports from Mexico to pay for "the wall."

Just thank God himself we don't share a land border with the US

williamglenn

Scott_P said:

@OKnox: Via pool: White House's @PressSec says Trump is asking Congress to approve 20% tax on all imports from Mexico to pay for "the wall."

Are we skipping the 'renegotiate NAFTA' stage?

Gallowgate

Trump is going to run out of campaign promises to keep at this rate.

foxinsoxuk

ydoethur said:

another_richard said:

Even if Labour does lose both Copeland and Stoke Central (and I can't believe they are) they still won't have matched their achievement between 1970 and 1974 when they lost THREE seats in byelections while being in Opposition:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rochdale_by-election,_1972

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln_by-election,_1973

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasgow_Govan_by-election,_1973

And they still went on to win the following general election.

But those were lost to parties other than the government.

In the vanishingly unlikely scenario that Labour lose both these seats to TM, that will be the first time a party of opposition has ceded two seats to the government (especially in a second term) since Gaitskell's attempts to hold the party together during a bitter civil war in the early 1960s.

It should also be noted that one of those by-election defeats - Bristol South-East - Labour actually won the vote but the candidate was ineligible for the seat so his rival was declared the winner.

That Labour civil war was shortly followed by Labour winning the 1964, 1966, narrowly losing 1970, and winning both the 1974 elections.

Indeed the prognosis looks good if both are lost!

RobD

Gallowgate said:

Trump is going to run out of campaign promises to keep at this rate.

Yes, it is surprising just how much he has signed off on in such a short period!

Mortimer

Gallowgate said:

Trump is going to run out of campaign promises to keep at this rate.

'Lock her up'?

I really can't see that one happening...

Mortimer

foxinsoxuk said:

ydoethur said:

another_richard said:

Even if Labour does lose both Copeland and Stoke Central (and I can't believe they are) they still won't have matched their achievement between 1970 and 1974 when they lost THREE seats in byelections while being in Opposition:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rochdale_by-election,_1972

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln_by-election,_1973

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasgow_Govan_by-election,_1973

And they still went on to win the following general election.

But those were lost to parties other than the government.

In the vanishingly unlikely scenario that Labour lose both these seats to TM, that will be the first time a party of opposition has ceded two seats to the government (especially in a second term) since Gaitskell's attempts to hold the party together during a bitter civil war in the early 1960s.

It should also be noted that one of those by-election defeats - Bristol South-East - Labour actually won the vote but the candidate was ineligible for the seat so his rival was declared the winner.

That Labour civil war was shortly followed by Labour winning the 1964, 1966, narrowly losing 1970, and winning both the 1974 elections.

Indeed the prognosis looks good if both are lost!

In La La Land perhaps.

And back in the real world, the prognosis looks bladdy awful.

Scott_P

@PGourevitch: White House confirms: American taxpayers pay for the wall -- plain and simple twitter.com/philiprucker/s…

foxinsoxuk

Mortimer said:

foxinsoxuk said:

ydoethur said:

another_richard said:

Even if Labour does lose both Copeland and Stoke Central (and I can't believe they are) they still won't have matched their achievement between 1970 and 1974 when they lost THREE seats in byelections while being in Opposition:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rochdale_by-election,_1972

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln_by-election,_1973

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasgow_Govan_by-election,_1973

And they still went on to win the following general election.

But those were lost to parties other than the government.

In the vanishingly unlikely scenario that Labour lose both these seats to TM, that will be the first time a party of opposition has ceded two seats to the government (especially in a second term) since Gaitskell's attempts to hold the party together during a bitter civil war in the early 1960s.

It should also be noted that one of those by-election defeats - Bristol South-East - Labour actually won the vote but the candidate was ineligible for the seat so his rival was declared the winner.

That Labour civil war was shortly followed by Labour winning the 1964, 1966, narrowly losing 1970, and winning both the 1974 elections.

Indeed the prognosis looks good if both are lost!

In La La Land perhaps.

And back in the real world, the prognosis looks bladdy awful.

History does not always repeat, but losing byelections is not a great predictor of the subsequent GE.

Big_G_NorthWales

Some reception for Theresa

tlg86

RobD said:

Scott_P said:

@OKnox: Via pool: White House's @PressSec says Trump is asking Congress to approve 20% tax on all imports from Mexico to pay for "the wall."

Just thank God himself we don't share a land border with the US

We do. The Kennedy Memorial at Runnymede.

tlg86

May speaking - on Sky News now.

isam

foxinsoxuk said:

ydoethur said:

another_richard said:

Even if Labour does lose both Copeland and Stoke Central (and I can't believe they are) they still won't have matched their achievement between 1970 and 1974 when they lost THREE seats in byelections while being in Opposition:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rochdale_by-election,_1972

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln_by-election,_1973

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasgow_Govan_by-election,_1973

And they still went on to win the following general election.

But those were lost to parties other than the government.

In the vanishingly unlikely scenario that Labour lose both these seats to TM, that will be the first time a party of opposition has ceded two seats to the government (especially in a second term) since Gaitskell's attempts to hold the party together during a bitter civil war in the early 1960s.

It should also be noted that one of those by-election defeats - Bristol South-East - Labour actually won the vote but the candidate was ineligible for the seat so his rival was declared the winner.

That Labour civil war was shortly followed by Labour winning the 1964, 1966, narrowly losing 1970, and winning both the 1974 elections.

Indeed the prognosis looks good if both are lost!

Whoever follows Corbyn, McDonnell and Abbott cannot fail to look, sound and be received better than those three clowns. Alcoholics have to hit rock bottom, and Labour are doing that now I reckon.

Then again, some alcoholics die

Scott_P

@paulhutcheon: Now it's Americans who are going to pay for the wall twitter.com/ap/status/8247…

Big_G_NorthWales

Now being applauded by a standing ovation

Scott_P

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Now being applauded by a standing ovation

@tnewtondunn: Theresa May gets 30 second standing ovation from Republican congressmen, largely for not cancelling her Trump visit. pic.twitter.com/mtQ7BG9rkh

ThomasNashe

Early days, but I'm not convinced that the fabled 'checks and balances' designed to prevent autocratic rule are functioning quite as well as they should.

foxinsoxuk

another_richard said:

isam said:

DanSmith said:

RobD said:

Trumps favourability numbers aren't doing too badly

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/political_updates/prez_track_jan26

That kills quite a few narratives.

Jesus, Obama fell off a cliff in 09!

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/obama_approval_index_history

Obama is someone who was well thought of before he had power and will be well thought after he has had power but not when he did have power.

People like the concept of Obama but not the reality.

Didn't Obama have 60% approval when he left office, compared to the incoming Trump on 40%?

tlg86

This is like that IDS conference speech when the members kept giving him North Korean style standing ovations.

Scott_P

tlg86 said:

This is like that IDS conference speech when the members kept giving him North Korean style standing ovations.

Don't tell Mark...

Scott_P

@tnewtondunn: "The United Nations – in need of reform, but vital still...", says PM. No GOP standing ovation for that line. Silence.

Scott_P

https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/824720314173190144

ThomasNashe

isam said:

foxinsoxuk said:

ydoethur said:

another_richard said:

Even if Labour does lose both Copeland and Stoke Central (and I can't believe they are) they still won't have matched their achievement between 1970 and 1974 when they lost THREE seats in byelections while being in Opposition:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rochdale_by-election,_1972

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln_by-election,_1973

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasgow_Govan_by-election,_1973

And they still went on to win the following general election.

But those were lost to parties other than the government.

In the vanishingly unlikely scenario that Labour lose both these seats to TM, that will be the first time a party of opposition has ceded two seats to the government (especially in a second term) since Gaitskell's attempts to hold the party together during a bitter civil war in the early 1960s.

It should also be noted that one of those by-election defeats - Bristol South-East - Labour actually won the vote but the candidate was ineligible for the seat so his rival was declared the winner.

That Labour civil war was shortly followed by Labour winning the 1964, 1966, narrowly losing 1970, and winning both the 1974 elections.

Indeed the prognosis looks good if both are lost!

Whoever follows Corbyn, McDonnell and Abbott cannot fail to look, sound and be received better than those three clowns. Alcoholics have to hit rock bottom, and Labour are doing that now I reckon.

Then again, some alcoholics die

Lay off the booze now. Bring in Starmer, Creasy and Jarvis - but it has to happen soon.

Freggles

Overseas development? Sounds Communist. Clap for tanks and bombs though

Freggles

They are clearly not used to speeches with sentences of more than six words.

Jobabob

Sean_F said:

AndyJS said:

Sean_F said:

Casino_Royale said:

Essexit said:

Ukip being favourites in Stoke is barmy, right? It seems like there's been a monumental over-reaction to the Labour Leave voodoo poll.

It's crazy but probably Labour canvassers or private polling.

But I'm absolutely laying UKIP at odds on.

Stoke is a Labour hold, for the time being.

Why do you think Stoke is a Labour hold? I think they could lose it while holding Copeland.

It's very hard for the Opposition to lose a by-election, unless a third party is running rampant. UKIP aren't. Their efforts may still result in a decent vote share, but no more. It's not a seat that's amenable to the Lib Dems, either.

Ideally Labour will lose both byelections. Any Labour footsoldiers with any sense and care for the future of the party should be working hard to ensure a brace of defeats.

Scott_P

https://twitter.com/ianssmart/status/824720960993591296