Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » This may herald the departure of one of Corbyn’s staunchest al

124»

Comments

  • Options
    glwglw Posts: 9,549
    Floater said:

    Is it not slightly suspicious that the growth forecasts are now back to essentially what they were pre brexit.

    Whether or not it it suspicious it is certainly a bit embarrassing that they have proven so misleading. Not that I think this means the other side were right, my argument really is that nobody can model the effect of something like Brexit, it is not something you can forecast by extrapolating the long term trend or looking to a parallel in recent history.

    If in the long term the economy does well Leavers will say it is due to Brexit, and Remains will say that it is despite Brexit. On the other hand, if in the long term the economy does badly Leavers will say it is despite Brexit, and Remains will say that it is due to Brexit.

    I expect whatever happens all such explanations will be wrong. In the long term many other factors will come into play and Brexit might not even be the most important of them.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,971
    Floater said:

    Sean_F said:

    tlg86 said:

    isam said:

    "Lutfur Rahman: Disgraced ex-mayor 'trying to form new party'"

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-38855417

    Just seen the bit on the London part of the Sunday Politics. Jo Coburn mentioned that the people who brought the case against Rahman are facing bankruptcy over the costs of the case. That seems absurd to me, why should private citizens face financial ruin to do the job that the authorities should be doing in the first place?
    The authorities were more concerned in threatening the people who exposed Rahman:

    ' Disturbingly, some of that bullying has ​come from the Metropolitan Police.

    At 7am on Tuesday 27 January, six days before the election trial was due to start, three Met officers arrived on Mr Erlam’s doorstep to arrest him for “perverting the course of justice.”

    “I refused to open the door,” said Mr Erlam. “It was an illegal arrest – they had no grounds. Eventually, they went away. But I decided to leave in case they came back.”

    Mr Erlam spent the last week before the case living away from home to avoid the Met. “It was disruptive and distressing. To my mind the clear intention of the police was to discredit me just as the case started,” he said.

    “snip"

    ' One of the four East Londoners responsible for bringing down Lutfur Rahman, the former Mayor of Tower Hamlets, has accused the Metropolitan Police of corruption.

    Andy Erlam, the main petitioner, suggested that the authorities had sought to protect Rahman whilst others declined to take action against him for fear of accusations of racism.

    “Neither the Electoral Commission or the police were very helpful,” he told Radio 4’s Today programme.

    “In fact at times it seemed that the Metropolitan Police has been protecting Mr Rahman over the years.

    “Their investigation of electoral fraud seemed as if they were going through the motions.” '

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11560197/Lutfur-Rahman-petitioner-accuses-Met-Police-of-corruption.html

    There do seem to be similarities between the behaviour of the authorities re Rahman and that in Rotherham.

    I expect the phrase 'community relations' was often used.
    Eleven years ago, Councillor Peter Golds told me the phrase the police used to stonewall complainants was "It's a cultural matter."
    Can someone tell me when and why "cultural matters" overtook the rule of law?

    Apply the law equally to all - simples.

    Well, our spineless establishment finds it not so simple for some reason.
    9th April 1969

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/april/9/newsid_2523000/2523691.stm
  • Options
    nunununu Posts: 6,024



    So, he is right to ask, what the hell are Leavers so worked up about?

    Some Remainers are worried they will be proved wrong.

    Some Leavers are worried they won't be proved right.

    That explains much of it.
    I think that on the Leavers' side there is a lot of projection - shouting loud enough to reassure themselves that they made the right decision. I notice that when a Remainer makes a factual point it usually get ignored by many Leavers and the ad hominem attacks start instead of addressing the point raised.

    For Remainers, I think a lot of them are genuinely scared that the lunatics are running the asylum and financial armegeddon awaits once reality bites. Up to now, nothing has really changed - there has just been a lot of bluster and arm waving but if everything stopped here and nothing further happened we would still be full EU members with the single market, ECJ and the rest.

    The fun will really start when after Article 50 when the EU begins with the reported €50bn UK liabilities bill and Trump offers a US/UK Trade Deal so one-sided that no one in their right mind would sign it.

    Five years down the line we will know who was right. Frankly I am past caring...

    Thanks to Trump I am far less concerned about Brexit than I was. His first two weeks have shown that the UK and the EU need a strong relationship because none of us can rely on the man across the pond. The swivel-eyed cliff-edge brigade in Brussels and Westminster will not get their way. That is good news.

    Trump is good for the Dems also. They will regain more seats then they would have say under a Ted Cruz or Mike Pence presidency. Dem turnout would have still been low with the latter two during mid terns.
  • Options
    theakestheakes Posts: 842
    Here is one. Friend in Stoke tells me thay have received five leaflets so far from the Liberal Democrats in the Central by election. FIVE. Is something brewing?
  • Options
    Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    glw said:


    I believe that the world would be a much better place if we had less faith in market indices, growth figures, currency fluctuations and the like (none of which are truly predictive), and we instead used our supposedly brightest people to greater effect in making a better future (through science and technology) rather than the fool's errand of trying to predict the future.

    Absolutely spot on!
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,971
    theakes said:

    Here is one. Friend in Stoke tells me thay have received five leaflets so far from the Liberal Democrats in the Central by election. FIVE. Is something brewing?

    The people delivering the leaflets are dumping 5 in every letterbox to get out of doing the whole area?
  • Options
    Scottish Conservative surge klaxon:

    http://bit.ly/2lbF5c7

    Labour and the Conservatives have basically swapped places since the general election in Scotland, it suggests.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:



    So, he is right to ask, what the hell are Leavers so worked up about?

    Some Remainers are worried they will be proved wrong.

    Some Leavers are worried they won't be proved right.

    That explains much of it.
    I think that on the Leavers' side there is a lot of projection - shouting loud enough to reassure themselves that they made the right decision. I notice that when a Remainer makes a factual point it usually get ignored by many Leavers and the ad hominem attacks start instead of addressing the point raised.

    For Remainers, I think a lot of them are genuinely scared that the lunatics are running the asylum and financial armegeddon awaits once reality bites. Up to now, nothing has really changed - there has just been a lot of bluster and arm waving but if everything stopped here and nothing further happened we would still be full EU members with the single market, ECJ and the rest.

    The fun will really start when after Article 50 when the EU begins with the reported €50bn UK liabilities bill and Trump offers a US/UK Trade Deal so one-sided that no one in their right mind would sign it.

    Five years down the line we will know who was right. Frankly I am past caring...
    Shut the fuck up, then.
    Finally crawled out bed have you?
    I'm in Bangkok. I rose at 7.30. Made myself a coffee, sat in my hotel bed and went straight to work. In five hours I wrote 3,500 words - THREE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED WORDS. I've been here 17 days and I've basically written half a thriller in that time.

    I then went out and, exhausted, sunbathed for an hour, then had a swim. Then I went for lunch, spicy shrimp soup, then went back to my hotel and collapsed, and had a 3 hour siesta. Then I woke, and went to the gym for a work out, came back for a shower, did some brisk editing, and I'm now on soi 8 under the stars having a well earned drink. I've just finished my first G&T. Tomorrow I will do it all over again. And the day after that. And the day after that.

    And that, my friends, is how you write a thriller. You have to be relentless. Almost monastic. No distractions. You're allowed a hooker once every three days.
    Middle aged white males having sex with traffiked asian girls = fine and dandy. Its not Rotherham at all. No sir, not at all.
  • Options
    MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    isam said:

    STOKE BY ELECTION

    Any view on
    a) whether there will be a "Progressive Alliance"?
    b) Whether that would work?

    The Greens are pretty irrelevant in Stoke . Feedback on the Vote2012 website from other Lib Dems who have been to Stoke ( some more than once ) say the campaign is being hard fought and is going well .
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,922
    edited February 2017
    glw said:

    To be fair I wouldn't expect people blathering away on here to be any better than the "professionals" when it comes to economic forecasting. I genuinely do not understand why economic forecasting is taken seriously when the track record is so poor...

    ...The problem is that models generally do not feature things that do lead to large changes (the sorts of things that will end up in a history book); things like technological development, wars, famine, plague, Donald Trump being elected, etc. So the further ahead you forecast the worse the models are, as unpredicted events accumulate. Just extrapolating long term trends is money for old rope, and only works okay up until the point one of those change events occurs.

    I believe that the world would be a much better place if we had less faith in market indices, growth figures, currency fluctuations and the like (none of which are truly predictive), and we instead used our supposedly brightest people to greater effect in making a better future (through science and technology) rather than the fool's errand of trying to predict the future.

    You wouldn't believe how often models are not measured against reality. Forward accuracy is not necessarily the modeller's aim (backward accuracy is a different thing). Variability (lack of), plausibility and parsimony are much more valued.

    Why is economic forecasting taken so seriously? Because it gives a spurious mathematical cover to a decision that the economist's employer has already decided to take. Economics is not one of the most rigorous sciences.
  • Options
    DavidL said:

    Sean_F said:

    isam said:

    tlg86 said:

    isam said:

    "Lutfur Rahman: Disgraced ex-mayor 'trying to form new party'"

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-38855417

    Just seen the bit on the London part of the Sunday Politics. Jo Coburn mentioned that the people who brought the case against Rahman are facing bankruptcy over the costs of the case. That seems absurd to me, why should private citizens face financial ruin to do the job that the authorities should be doing in the first place?
    Seems crazy but I am sure one of the lawyers here will explain that its perfectly sensible!
    Even worse, until Michael Fallon became Defence Secretary, soldiers investigated by IHAT had to pay their own legal fees. At the same time, the MOD was financing Shiner et al to bring bogus allegations.
    That really is almost beyond belief. Our government, indeed our country, should be deeply ashamed at how these men have been treated.
    Your fellow SCON fitalass was very loud on the treatment of military personnel but lost all interest in the issue after May 2010.

    She was not alone in that aboutface.
  • Options
    PongPong Posts: 4,693
    edited February 2017
    theakes said:

    Here is one. Friend in Stoke tells me thay have received five leaflets so far from the Liberal Democrats in the Central by election. FIVE. Is something brewing?

    That doesn't surprise me. I used to live close to Tristram Hunt's constituency office in the middle of stoke.

    Every evening when I got in from work, I'd be picking up 10-15 fast food leaflets from the other side of the letter box. Basically, the row after row of pretty much identical, tightly packed terraced houses with postboxes out onto the street make SOT central ridiculously easy to leaflet.

    A single volunteer/activist could deliver over a thousand an hour.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    isam said:

    STOKE BY ELECTION

    Any view on
    a) whether there will be a "Progressive Alliance"?
    b) Whether that would work?

    No need. It is perceived rto be a two hore race and the tactical voters will know what to do already, as they will in Copeland. Both Labour candidates are more in line with LD than their own leader.
  • Options

    Scottish Conservative surge klaxon:

    http://bit.ly/2lbF5c7

    Labour and the Conservatives have basically swapped places since the general election in Scotland, it suggests.

    Unionist churn I guess.
    Kezia's attempt to consolidate red, white & blue SLab seems to have gone down like the Hindenburg.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:



    So, he is right to ask, what the hell are Leavers so worked up about?

    Some Remainers are worried they will be proved wrong.

    Some Leavers are worried they won't be proved right.

    That explains much of it.
    I think that on the Leavers' side there is a lot of projection - shouting loud enough to reassure themselves that they made the right decision. I notice that when a Remainer makes a factual point it usually get ignored by many Leavers and the ad hominem attacks start instead of addressing the point raised.

    For Remainers, I think a lot of them are genuinely scared that the lunatics are running the asylum and financial armegeddon awaits once reality bites. Up to now, nothing has really changed - there has just been a lot of bluster and arm waving but if everything stopped here and nothing further happened we would still be full EU members with the single market, ECJ and the rest

    Five years down the line we will know who was right. Frankly I am past caring...
    Shut the fuck up, then.
    Finally crawled out bed have you?
    I'm in Bangkok. I rose at 7.30. Made myself a coffee, sat in my hotel bed and went straight to work. In five hours I wrote 3,500 words - THREE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED WORDS. I've been here 17 days and I've basically written half a thriller in that time.

    I then went out and, exhausted, sunbathed for an hour, then had a swim. Then I went for lunch, spicy shrimp soup, then went back to my hotel and collapsed, and had a 3 hour siesta. Then I woke, and went to the gym for a work out, came back for a shower, did some brisk editing, and I'm now on soi 8 under the stars having a well earned drink. I've just finished my first G&T. Tomorrow I will do it all over again. And the day after that. And the day after that.

    And that, my friends, is how you write a thriller. You have to be relentless. Almost monastic. No distractions. You're allowed a hooker once every three days.
    Middle aged white males having sex with traffiked asian girls = fine and dandy. Its not Rotherham at all. No sir, not at all.
    I said you're "allowed". I was giving permission to beta minus males such as yourself who haven't had sex with anyone but the wife for 47 years. Come out here and have some fun.

    Personally I have plenty of fun in England. So it's just gin and juice for me.
    Are the Bangkok police as effficient as the SYP about cultural sensitivities?

    Enjoy your evening.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,896

    Thanks to Trump I am far less concerned about Brexit than I was. His first two weeks have shown that the UK and the EU need a strong relationship because none of us can rely on the man across the pond. The swivel-eyed cliff-edge brigade in Brussels and Westminster will not get their way. That is good news.

    Personally I have no clue as to how it will play out, but no one seems to have any interest in discussing it in a rational way. Raise the topic and it just seems to cue a shouting match.

    I am already tired of the whole thing and the huge increase in intolerance that seems to be infecting the UK. I am fortunate to have dual citizenship which means my children do as well and my other half can travel the EU as the spouse of an EU national. In short, I stand to lose nothing except the pride I formerly had in my country and that did actually hurt.

    Watching Brexit and Trump has actually made me, a centre-right person politically, believe that maybe "more Europe" is the solution. Maybe rather than Brexit, what we need is a fully reformed Federal EU with enforceable borders, a common currency, the Council of Ministers abolished, an upper chamber and the Commission fully subservient to the EU parliament.

    Oh well... what happens, happens.
    Nothing has happened to diminish my pride in my country. Quite the reverse, in fact.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,137

    isam said:

    STOKE BY ELECTION

    Any view on
    a) whether there will be a "Progressive Alliance"?
    b) Whether that would work?

    The Greens are pretty irrelevant in Stoke . Feedback on the Vote2012 website from other Lib Dems who have been to Stoke ( some more than once ) say the campaign is being hard fought and is going well .
    = bad news for Labour?
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,896
    DavidL said:

    Sean_F said:

    isam said:

    tlg86 said:

    isam said:

    "Lutfur Rahman: Disgraced ex-mayor 'trying to form new party'"

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-38855417

    Just seen the bit on the London part of the Sunday Politics. Jo Coburn mentioned that the people who brought the case against Rahman are facing bankruptcy over the costs of the case. That seems absurd to me, why should private citizens face financial ruin to do the job that the authorities should be doing in the first place?
    Seems crazy but I am sure one of the lawyers here will explain that its perfectly sensible!
    Even worse, until Michael Fallon became Defence Secretary, soldiers investigated by IHAT had to pay their own legal fees. At the same time, the MOD was financing Shiner et al to bring bogus allegations.
    That really is almost beyond belief. Our government, indeed our country, should be deeply ashamed at how these men have been treated.
    Apparently, the Commons Defence Select Committee will publish a damning report on IHAT.

    I don't know why anyone would join the armed forces, given the way they're treated.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    SeanT said:

    Shut the fuck up, then.

    *cough*

    So what’s bugging them? Why do they, the winners, keep lashing out whenever one of the losers doubts or questions their plans? You can almost see the veins standing out on their necks as they rail against the people who didn’t win the referendum.
  • Options
    glwglw Posts: 9,549
    viewcode said:

    You wouldn't believe how often models are not measured against reality. Forward accuracy is not necessarily the modeller's aim (backward accuracy is a different thing). Variability (lack of), plausibility and parsimony are much more valued.

    I would believe it, a company I once worked for did CFD (computational fluid dynamics) for clients, and it took a hell of a lot of tinkering to get the results "right". In fact more often than not the model blew up and the first run, or few runs, would be binned.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited February 2017
    Interesting article in the Observer:

    "Trump is no fascist. He is a champion for the forgotten millions
    Obama promised solutions but let the people down. Is it any surprise that they voted for real change?
    Only a corrupt political establishment could have provoked a political revolt of this scale. Instead of blaming Trump’s rise on racism or xenophobia, blame it on those who never saw this coming and still don’t understand why so many Americans would rather have Donald Trump in the White House than suffer the rule of their elites."

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/feb/05/trump-not-fascist-champion-for-forgotten-millions
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,882
    It can't be true! Surely Diane isn't going to betray her former lover?

    I've always thought of *that* trip behind the "Iron Curtain" in the 70's as like Omar Sharif and Julie Christie...
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,922
    glw said:

    viewcode said:

    You wouldn't believe how often models are not measured against reality. Forward accuracy is not necessarily the modeller's aim (backward accuracy is a different thing). Variability (lack of), plausibility and parsimony are much more valued.

    I would believe it, a company I once worked for did CFD (computational fluid dynamics) for clients, and it took a hell of a lot of tinkering to get the results "right". In fact more often than not the model blew up and the first run, or few runs, would be binned.
    Amen
  • Options
    glwglw Posts: 9,549
    edited February 2017
    AndyJS said:

    Interesting article in the Observer:

    "Trump is no fascist. He is a champion for the forgotten millions
    Obama promised solutions but let the people down. Is it any surprise that they voted for real change?
    Only a corrupt political establishment could have provoked a political revolt of this scale. Instead of blaming Trump’s rise on racism or xenophobia, blame it on those who never saw this coming and still don’t understand why so many Americans would rather have Donald Trump in the White House than suffer the rule of their elites."

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/feb/05/trump-not-fascist-champion-for-forgotten-millions

    In many ways, the 2016 election wasn’t just a referendum on Obama’s eight years in the White House, it was a rejection of the entire political system that gave us Iraq, the financial crisis, a botched healthcare law and shocking income inequality during a slow economic recovery. From Akron to Alaska, millions of Americans had simply lost confidence in their leaders and the institutions that were supposed to serve them. In their desperation, they turned to a man who had no regard for the elites – and no use for them.

    That's something I keep saying, and to be honest it's not really my idea there are quite a few commentators who believe Trump is as much a rejection of traditional Republican politics as he is of the Democrats.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    SeanT said:

    There's "railing against". And there's "winding up hysterical Remoaners in a cruel but enjoyable fashion, like poking the lunatics in Bedlam."

    You don't seem to discern the difference.

    I am adept at "poking the lunatics in Bedlam." And the Brexiteers respond every time.

    It's almost Pavlovian

    So let me make the first conciliatory move. I, a Remainer, accept that Brexit may not prove a mistake. Ball’s in your court, Leavers: can you accept that it may?
  • Options
    MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    edited February 2017

    isam said:

    STOKE BY ELECTION

    Any view on
    a) whether there will be a "Progressive Alliance"?
    b) Whether that would work?

    The Greens are pretty irrelevant in Stoke . Feedback on the Vote2012 website from other Lib Dems who have been to Stoke ( some more than once ) say the campaign is being hard fought and is going well .
    = bad news for Labour?
    and possibly for UKIP too . As Pong posts Stoke Central is an easy seat to deliver leaflets to and to canvas ( no long drive ways before you can knock on the door . I am sure that by polling day the voters will see that there are 3 parties in serious contention . .
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,896
    edited February 2017
    Sean_F said:

    DavidL said:

    Sean_F said:

    isam said:

    tlg86 said:

    isam said:

    "Lutfur Rahman: Disgraced ex-mayor 'trying to form new party'"

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-38855417

    Just seen the bit on the London part of the Sunday Politics. Jo Coburn mentioned that the people who brought the case against Rahman are facing bankruptcy over the costs of the case. That seems absurd to me, why should private citizens face financial ruin to do the job that the authorities should be doing in the first place?
    Seems crazy but I am sure one of the lawyers here will explain that its perfectly sensible!
    Even worse, until Michael Fallon became Defence Secretary, soldiers investigated by IHAT had to pay their own legal fees. At the same time, the MOD was financing Shiner et al to bring bogus allegations.
    That really is almost beyond belief. Our government, indeed our country, should be deeply ashamed at how these men have been treated.
    Apparently, the Commons Defence Select Committee will publish a damning report on IHAT.

    I don't know why anyone would join the armed forces, given the way they're treated.
    Thinking it about it further, I do wonder if some key civil servants are actively treacherous. Incompetence really seems too kind a way of describing this scandal and the treatment of service personnel who served in Northern Ireland.
  • Options
    SeanT said:

    Scott_P said:

    SeanT said:

    Shut the fuck up, then.

    *cough*

    So what’s bugging them? Why do they, the winners, keep lashing out whenever one of the losers doubts or questions their plans? You can almost see the veins standing out on their necks as they rail against the people who didn’t win the referendum.
    There's "railing against". And there's "winding up hysterical Remoaners in a cruel but enjoyable fashion, like poking the lunatics in Bedlam."

    You don't seem to discern the difference.
    Scott's thoughts from the end of June are worth remembering:

    ' Watch the markets, and the evening news. The Brexiteers are already mumbling about "staying in" as much as they think their useful idiots will swallow

    In a few weeks people will be begging for "in" '

    ' Ok, here's an idea

    May and Boris fight the leadership on an in/out ticket

    May wins, tells Brussels we are staying. Osborne as chancellor. "Punishment" budget in the Autumn to start clearing up the mess '

    Interesting that Scott was saying that there was a 'mess' which needed clearing up when he now claims nothing was meant to change until A50 is triggered.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,356
    edited February 2017
    SeanT said:

    Scottish Conservative surge klaxon:

    http://bit.ly/2lbF5c7

    Labour and the Conservatives have basically swapped places since the general election in Scotland, it suggests.

    That really is an incredible table. Labour have gone from 45% to 15% in four years. From virtual hegemony to almost Lib-Dem-like irrelevance. In four years. This is unprecedented in modern British politics I think?

    Can they possibly recover? Hard to see a way, unless the SNP call an early, badly timed indyref, lose it, and then split up in acrimony. That's just about Labour's only hope.
    The Conservatives have done well and I am pretty chuffed about it but the reality is that it is the SNP who have replaced Labour and have a similarly unhealthy hegemony to what Labour used to have. This is now the completely dominant fact in the appointments of our army of office holders. Whilst these used to be universally held by Labour outriders they are now SNP supporters.

    This is the price we pay from not having a truly functioning democracy north of the border. It is a high one.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    Interesting that Scott was saying that there was a 'mess' which needed clearing up when he now claims nothing was meant to change until A50 is triggered.

    That's not true

    I expected "like the British people" that article 50 would be triggered
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,283
    edited February 2017
    glw said:

    AndyJS said:

    Interesting article in the Observer:

    "Trump is no fascist. He is a champion for the forgotten millions
    Obama promised solutions but let the people down. Is it any surprise that they voted for real change?
    Only a corrupt political establishment could have provoked a political revolt of this scale. Instead of blaming Trump’s rise on racism or xenophobia, blame it on those who never saw this coming and still don’t understand why so many Americans would rather have Donald Trump in the White House than suffer the rule of their elites."

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/feb/05/trump-not-fascist-champion-for-forgotten-millions

    In many ways, the 2016 election wasn’t just a referendum on Obama’s eight years in the White House, it was a rejection of the entire political system that gave us Iraq, the financial crisis, a botched healthcare law and shocking income inequality during a slow economic recovery. From Akron to Alaska, millions of Americans had simply lost confidence in their leaders and the institutions that were supposed to serve them. In their desperation, they turned to a man who had no regard for the elites – and no use for them.

    That's something I keep saying, and to be honest it's not really my idea there are quite a few commentators who believe Trump is as much a rejection of traditional Republican politics as he is of the Democrats.
    But oddly the article in question says middle america is railing against Dodd-Frank. This makes no sense to me as the act is about trying to stop Wall St plunging into another financial crisis. Later in same article the elites of Wall St are attacked. So which is it?
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    SeanT said:

    How can you find Brexit "shameful"?

    We voted out because people like Nigel Farage didn't like hearing foreign voices on the train

    Frankly I would be concerned about anyone who did not find that shameful
  • Options
    SeanT said:

    Sean_F said:

    Thanks to Trump I am far less concerned about Brexit than I was. His first two weeks have shown that the UK and the EU need a strong relationship because none of us can rely on the man across the pond. The swivel-eyed cliff-edge brigade in Brussels and Westminster will not get their way. That is good news.

    Personally I have no clue as to how it will play out, but no one seems to have any interest in discussing it in a rational way. Raise the topic and it just seems to cue a shouting match.

    I am already tired of the whole thing and the huge increase in intolerance that seems to be infecting the UK. I am fortunate to have dual citizenship which means my children do as well and my other half can travel the EU as the spouse of an EU national. In short, I stand to lose nothing except the pride I formerly had in my country and that did actually hurt.

    Watching Brexit and Trump has actually made me, a centre-right person politically, believe that maybe "more Europe" is the solution. Maybe rather than Brexit, what we need is a fully reformed Federal EU with enforceable borders, a common currency, the Council of Ministers abolished, an upper chamber and the Commission fully subservient to the EU parliament.

    Oh well... what happens, happens.
    Nothing has happened to diminish my pride in my country. Quite the reverse, in fact.
    I am literally bewildered by apparently sane, even educated people, who somehow think that Brexit has diminished or even "shamed" the country. I just can't get inside the mindset. And I do try.

    It's great fun to provoke and enrage them, and all too easy, nonetheless the perplexity remains. How can you find Brexit "shameful"? What kind of grotesque mental dwarf thinks that? We had a democratic vote with a fantastic turnout and we decided, as a nation, to quit a trading bloc with superstate ambitions, so we can once more govern ourselves as we have done, pretty much since Alfred the Great, more than a thousand years ago.

    That's it. That's what we did. We didn't elect Vlad the Impaler in the hope we would burn welsh children with hot iron pincers.
    You see nothing wrong with pandering to xenophobia to secure victory. Indeed, you see nothing wrong with being gratuitously unpleasant to Muslims and, while you believe that Britain is too full to receive immigrants from Europe, it is not too full to receive immigrants from former white colonies. In that light, your perplexity is easily understood.
  • Options
    DavidL said:

    SeanT said:

    Scottish Conservative surge klaxon:

    http://bit.ly/2lbF5c7

    Labour and the Conservatives have basically swapped places since the general election in Scotland, it suggests.

    That really is an incredible table. Labour have gone from 45% to 15% in four years. From virtual hegemony to almost Lib-Dem-like irrelevance. In four years. This is unprecedented in modern British politics I think?

    Can they possibly recover? Hard to see a way, unless the SNP call an early, badly timed indyref, lose it, and then split up in acrimony. That's just about Labour's only hope.
    The Conservatives have done well and I am pretty chuffed about it but the reality is that it is the SNP who have replaced Labour and have a similarly unhealthy hegemony to what Labour used to do. This is now the completely dominant fact in the appointments of our army of office holders. Whilst these used to be universally held by Labour outriders they are now SNP supporters.

    This is the price we pay from not having a truly functioning democracy north of the border. It is a high one.
    What electoral change would you suggest to return Scotland's democracy to full utility?
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,896
    SeanT said:

    Sean_F said:

    Thanks to Trump I am far less concerned about Brexit than I was. His first two weeks have shown that the UK and the EU need a strong relationship because none of us can rely on the man across the pond. The swivel-eyed cliff-edge brigade in Brussels and Westminster will not get their way. That is good news.

    Personally I have no clue as to how it will play out, but no one seems to have any interest in discussing it in a rational way. Raise the topic and it just seems to cue a shouting match.

    I am already tired of the whole thing and the huge increase in intolerance that seems to be infecting the UK. I am fortunate to have dual citizenship which means my children do as well and my other half can travel the EU as the spouse of an EU national. In short, I stand to lose nothing except the pride I formerly had in my country and that did actually hurt.

    Watching Brexit and Trump has actually made me, a centre-right person politically, believe that maybe "more Europe" is the solution. Maybe rather than Brexit, what we need is a fully reformed Federal EU with enforceable borders, a common currency, the Council of Ministers abolished, an upper chamber and the Commission fully subservient to the EU parliament.

    Oh well... what happens, happens.
    Nothing has happened to diminish my pride in my country. Quite the reverse, in fact.
    I am literally bewildered by apparently sane, even educated people, who somehow think that Brexit has diminished or even "shamed" the country. I just can't get inside the mindset. And I do try.

    It's great fun to provoke and enrage them, and all too easy, nonetheless the perplexity remains. How can you find Brexit "shameful"? What kind of grotesque mental dwarf thinks that? We had a democratic vote with a fantastic turnout and we decided, as a nation, to quit a trading bloc with superstate ambitions, so we can once more govern ourselves as we have done, pretty much since Alfred the Great, more than a thousand years ago.

    That's it. That's what we did. We didn't elect Vlad the Impaler in the hope we would burn welsh children with hot iron pincers.
    I can fully understand someone thinking it was a bad decision, as I would think that electing a Labour government was a bad decision. But, "shameful?". That's hyperbole.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    SeanT said:

    No. On Brexit you're just a sad fucking nutter. And a loser. Sorry.

    It's a shame because on other subjects you are sound and even amusing.

    I am also sound, and even amusing, on Brexit.

    And after your next inevitable mood swing that will be obvious to you.

    I await your eventual apology with relish.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,971

    isam said:

    STOKE BY ELECTION

    Any view on
    a) whether there will be a "Progressive Alliance"?
    b) Whether that would work?

    The Greens are pretty irrelevant in Stoke . Feedback on the Vote2012 website from other Lib Dems who have been to Stoke ( some more than once ) say the campaign is being hard fought and is going well .
    = bad news for Labour?
    and possibly for UKIP too . As Pong posts Stoke Central is an easy seat to deliver leaflets to and to canvas ( no long drive ways before you can knock on the door . I am sure that by polling day the voters will see that there are 3 parties in serious contention . .
    So two anti Brexit candidates against a pro Brexit. How does Lib Dem taking votes off Labour hurt UKIP exactly?
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    SeanT said:

    And that, my friends, is how you write a thriller. You have to be relentless. Almost monastic. No distractions. You're allowed a hooker once every three days.

    I admire how you prostitute yourself for the sake of art ....

  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,221
    Floater said:

    Sean_F said:

    tlg86 said:

    isam said:



    At 7am on Tuesday 27 January, six days before the election trial was due to start, three Met officers arrived on Mr Erlam’s doorstep to arrest him for “perverting the course of justice.”

    “I refused to open the door,” said Mr Erlam. “It was an illegal arrest – they had no grounds. Eventually, they went away. But I decided to leave in case they came back.”

    Mr Erlam spent the last week before the case living away from home to avoid the Met. “It was disruptive and distressing. To my mind the clear intention of the police was to discredit me just as the case started,” he said.

    “snip"

    ' One of the four East Londoners responsible for bringing down Lutfur Rahman, the former Mayor of Tower Hamlets, has accused the Metropolitan Police of corruption.

    Andy Erlam, the main petitioner, suggested that the authorities had sought to protect Rahman whilst others declined to take action against him for fear of accusations of racism.

    “Neither the Electoral Commission or the police were very helpful,” he told Radio 4’s Today programme.

    “In fact at times it seemed that the Metropolitan Police has been protecting Mr Rahman over the years.

    “Their investigation of electoral fraud seemed as if they were going through the motions.” '

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11560197/Lutfur-Rahman-petitioner-accuses-Met-Police-of-corruption.html

    There do seem to be similarities between the behaviour of the authorities re Rahman and that in Rotherham.

    I expect the phrase 'community relations' was often used.
    Eleven years ago, Councillor Peter Golds told me the phrase the police used to stonewall complainants was "It's a cultural matter."
    Can someone tell me when and why "cultural matters" overtook the rule of law?

    Apply the law equally to all - simples.

    Well, our spineless establishment finds it not so simple for some reason.
    The answer to your question is very simple: when certain people within the "culture" used or threatened to use or warned that unspecified "others" would or might use violence.

    So for the sake of a quiet life the authorities looked the other way.

    Overlaid on top were the mistaken beliefs that:-
    1. all cultures are equal or equally worthy of respect;
    2. an accusation of someone not white was likely motivated by racism
    3. being accused of racism was the worst secular sin around, practically a mortal sin in traditional religious eschatology;
    4. turning a blind eye to crimes was a mark of tolerance; and
    5. the ironic and rather condescending assumption that people from other cultures are either not capable of or should not be expected to comply with British laws and mores.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,356

    DavidL said:

    SeanT said:

    Scottish Conservative surge klaxon:

    http://bit.ly/2lbF5c7

    Labour and the Conservatives have basically swapped places since the general election in Scotland, it suggests.

    That really is an incredible table. Labour have gone from 45% to 15% in four years. From virtual hegemony to almost Lib-Dem-like irrelevance. In four years. This is unprecedented in modern British politics I think?

    Can they possibly recover? Hard to see a way, unless the SNP call an early, badly timed indyref, lose it, and then split up in acrimony. That's just about Labour's only hope.
    The Conservatives have done well and I am pretty chuffed about it but the reality is that it is the SNP who have replaced Labour and have a similarly unhealthy hegemony to what Labour used to do. This is now the completely dominant fact in the appointments of our army of office holders. Whilst these used to be universally held by Labour outriders they are now SNP supporters.

    This is the price we pay from not having a truly functioning democracy north of the border. It is a high one.
    What electoral change would you suggest to return Scotland's democracy to full utility?
    I honestly don't know. The SNP look set to be at least as dominant as Labour used to be for the next decade. I think we need to accept that reality and insist on our office holders being more independent and independently appointed. As an example the First Minister interviewed the last 2 candidates for Lord President of the Court of Session. Never happened before. Should not happen again. The message sent to the Judiciary was loud, clear and unhealthy.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,971
    Scott_P said:

    SeanT said:

    How can you find Brexit "shameful"?

    We voted out because people like Nigel Farage didn't like hearing foreign voices on the train

    Frankly I would be concerned about anyone who did not find that shameful
    Make Asian Muslims a minority in Lahore and ask those left how they like it
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,521
    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    DavidL said:

    Sean_F said:

    isam said:

    tlg86 said:

    isam said:

    "Lutfur Rahman: Disgraced ex-mayor 'trying to form new party'"

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-38855417

    Just seen the bit on the London part of the Sunday Politics. Jo Coburn mentioned that the people who brought the case against Rahman are facing bankruptcy over the costs of the case. That seems absurd to me, why should private citizens face financial ruin to do the job that the authorities should be doing in the first place?
    Seems crazy but I am sure one of the lawyers here will explain that its perfectly sensible!
    Even worse, until Michael Fallon became Defence Secretary, soldiers investigated by IHAT had to pay their own legal fees. At the same time, the MOD was financing Shiner et al to bring bogus allegations.
    That really is almost beyond belief. Our government, indeed our country, should be deeply ashamed at how these men have been treated.
    Apparently, the Commons Defence Select Committee will publish a damning report on IHAT.

    I don't know why anyone would join the armed forces, given the way they're treated.
    Thinking it about it further, I do wonder if some key civil servants are actively treacherous. Incompetence really seems too kind a way of describing this scandal and the treatment of service personnel who served in Northern Ireland.
    I was told the following story - A moderately senior officer (old money background) responded to the repeated legal... investigations of soldiers who had been under his command by offering them the use of his family's lawyers - a very distinguished bunch apparently. They went through the "allegations" like a chainsaw through cheese.

    Certain civil servants demanded that he be *ordered* by the army chain of command to withdraw his legal assistance.
  • Options
    glwglw Posts: 9,549

    But oddly the article in question says middle america is railing against Dodd-Frank. This makes no sense to me as the act is about trying to stop Wall St plunging into another financial crisis. Later in same article the elites of Wall St are attacked. So which is it?

    Oh I'm not defending what Trump is doing, merely saying that people were that pissed off with politics as it has been done for the last few decades that they would even vote for Donald Trump.

  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,763
    edited February 2017
    glw said:


    In many ways, the 2016 election wasn’t just a referendum on Obama’s eight years in the White House, it was a rejection of the entire political system that gave us Iraq, the financial crisis, a botched healthcare law and shocking income inequality during a slow economic recovery. From Akron to Alaska, millions of Americans had simply lost confidence in their leaders and the institutions that were supposed to serve them. In their desperation, they turned to a man who had no regard for the elites – and no use for them.

    That's something I keep saying, and to be honest it's not really my idea there are quite a few commentators who believe Trump is as much a rejection of traditional Republican politics as he is of the Democrats.

    I realise that. But it's a rejection of a political system that gave us Iraq, by someone who may well give us Iran and China instead. A rejection of a band-aid healthcare reform,which will probably be replaced by a system that provides less coverage at a higher cost. A rejection of shocking income inequality during a slow economic recovery in favour of someone who is committed to more inequality and who may not oversee an economic recovery of any kind. None of this is difficult to work out. Trump just makes real problems worse. So does Brexit. So will Le Pen, if she gets elected.

  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,896
    Scott_P said:

    SeanT said:

    How can you find Brexit "shameful"?

    We voted out because people like Nigel Farage didn't like hearing foreign voices on the train

    Frankly I would be concerned about anyone who did not find that shameful
    How do you know that?
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,038
    edited February 2017

    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    DavidL said:

    Sean_F said:

    isam said:

    tlg86 said:

    isam said:

    "Lutfur Rahman: Disgraced ex-mayor 'trying to form new party'"

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-38855417

    Just seen the bit on the London part of the Sunday Politics. Jo Coburn mentioned that the people who brought the case against Rahman are facing bankruptcy over the costs of the case. That seems absurd to me, why should private citizens face financial ruin to do the job that the authorities should be doing in the first place?
    Seems crazy but I am sure one of the lawyers here will explain that its perfectly sensible!
    Even worse, until Michael Fallon became Defence Secretary, soldiers investigated by IHAT had to pay their own legal fees. At the same time, the MOD was financing Shiner et al to bring bogus allegations.
    That really is almost beyond belief. Our government, indeed our country, should be deeply ashamed at how these men have been treated.
    Apparently, the Commons Defence Select Committee will publish a damning report on IHAT.

    I don't know why anyone would join the armed forces, given the way they're treated.
    Thinking it about it further, I do wonder if some key civil servants are actively treacherous. Incompetence really seems too kind a way of describing this scandal and the treatment of service personnel who served in Northern Ireland.
    I was told the following story - A moderately senior officer (old money background) responded to the repeated legal... investigations of soldiers who had been under his command by offering them the use of his family's lawyers - a very distinguished bunch apparently. They went through the "allegations" like a chainsaw through cheese.

    Certain civil servants demanded that he be *ordered* by the army chain of command to withdraw his legal assistance.
    And was he? Did he?
  • Options
    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    Sean_F said:

    Thanks to Trump I am far less concerned about Brexit than I was. His first two weeks have shown that the UK and the EU need a strong relationship because none of us can rely on the man across the pond. The swivel-eyed cliff-edge brigade in Brussels and Westminster will not get their way. That is good news.

    Personally I have no clue as to how it will play out, but no one seems to have any interest in discussing it in a rational way. Raise the topic and it just seems to cue a shouting match.

    I am already tired of the whole thing and the huge increase in intolerance that seems to be infecting the UK. I am fortunate to have dual citizenship which means my children do as well and my other half can travel the EU as the spouse of an EU national. In short, I stand to lose nothing except the pride I formerly had in my country and that did actually hurt.

    Watching Brexit and Trump has actually made me, a centre-right person politically, believe that maybe "more Europe" is the solution. Maybe rather than Brexit, what we need is a fully reformed Federal EU with enforceable borders, a common currency, the Council of Ministers abolished, an upper chamber and the Commission fully subservient to the EU parliament.

    Oh well... what happens, happens.
    Nothing has happened to diminish my pride in my country. Quite the reverse, in fact.
    I am literally bewildered by apparently sane, even educated people, who somehow think that Brexit has diminished or even "shamed" the country. I just can't get inside the mindset. And I do try.

    It's great fun to provoke and enrage them, and all too easy, nonetheless the perplexity remains. How can you find Brexit "shameful"? What kind of grotesque mental dwarf thinks that? We had a democratic vote with a fantastic turnout and we decided, as a nation, to quit a trading bloc with superstate ambitions, so we can once more govern ourselves as we have done, pretty much since Alfred the Great, more than a thousand years ago.

    That's it. That's what we did. We didn't elect Vlad the Impaler in the hope we would burn welsh children with hot iron pincers.
    You see nothing wrong with pandering to xenophobia to secure victory. Indeed, you see nothing wrong with being gratuitously unpleasant to Muslims and, while you believe that Britain is too full to receive immigrants from Europe, it is not too full to receive immigrants from former white colonies. In that light, your perplexity is easily understood.
    I think those recent reports of apparent alien intelligence on Planet Meeks, circling star system Butt-Hurt, have been grossly overstated.
    Saves responding I suppose.
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    glw said:

    AndyJS said:

    Interesting article in the Observer:

    "Trump is no fascist. He is a champion for the forgotten millions
    Obama promised solutions but let the people down. Is it any surprise that they voted for real change?
    Only a corrupt political establishment could have provoked a political revolt of this scale. Instead of blaming Trump’s rise on racism or xenophobia, blame it on those who never saw this coming and still don’t understand why so many Americans would rather have Donald Trump in the White House than suffer the rule of their elites."

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/feb/05/trump-not-fascist-champion-for-forgotten-millions

    In many ways, the 2016 election wasn’t just a referendum on Obama’s eight years in the White House, it was a rejection of the entire political system that gave us Iraq, the financial crisis, a botched healthcare law and shocking income inequality during a slow economic recovery. From Akron to Alaska, millions of Americans had simply lost confidence in their leaders and the institutions that were supposed to serve them. In their desperation, they turned to a man who had no regard for the elites – and no use for them.

    That's something I keep saying, and to be honest it's not really my idea there are quite a few commentators who believe Trump is as much a rejection of traditional Republican politics as he is of the Democrats.
    If it was a referendum Trump lost by almost 3 million votes.
  • Options
    MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    isam said:

    isam said:

    STOKE BY ELECTION

    Any view on
    a) whether there will be a "Progressive Alliance"?
    b) Whether that would work?

    The Greens are pretty irrelevant in Stoke . Feedback on the Vote2012 website from other Lib Dems who have been to Stoke ( some more than once ) say the campaign is being hard fought and is going well .
    = bad news for Labour?
    and possibly for UKIP too . As Pong posts Stoke Central is an easy seat to deliver leaflets to and to canvas ( no long drive ways before you can knock on the door . I am sure that by polling day the voters will see that there are 3 parties in serious contention . .
    So two anti Brexit candidates against a pro Brexit. How does Lib Dem taking votes off Labour hurt UKIP exactly?
    In last weeks Rotherham by election the Lib Dems took lots of votes of Labour and it did not help UKIP as they took quite a few off them too .
  • Options
    glwglw Posts: 9,549
    JackW said:

    If it was a referendum Trump lost by almost 3 million votes.

    That someone like Trump came within three million votes of Clinton is not a ringing endorsement of American politics. Both Republicans and Democrats should be asking "how the hell did that happen?" and "what can we do better in future?"
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,971

    isam said:

    isam said:

    STOKE BY ELECTION

    Any view on
    a) whether there will be a "Progressive Alliance"?
    b) Whether that would work?

    The Greens are pretty irrelevant in Stoke . Feedback on the Vote2012 website from other Lib Dems who have been to Stoke ( some more than once ) say the campaign is being hard fought and is going well .
    = bad news for Labour?
    and possibly for UKIP too . As Pong posts Stoke Central is an easy seat to deliver leaflets to and to canvas ( no long drive ways before you can knock on the door . I am sure that by polling day the voters will see that there are 3 parties in serious contention . .
    So two anti Brexit candidates against a pro Brexit. How does Lib Dem taking votes off Labour hurt UKIP exactly?
    In last weeks Rotherham by election the Lib Dems took lots of votes of Labour and it did not help UKIP as they took quite a few off them too .
    Hmm fair enough. My view is that the better the Lib Dems do, the better for UKIP, but we shall see
  • Options
    John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503

    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    DavidL said:

    Sean_F said:

    isam said:

    tlg86 said:

    isam said:

    "Lutfur Rahman: Disgraced ex-mayor 'trying to form new party'"

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-38855417

    Just seen the bit on the London part of the Sunday Politics. Jo Coburn mentioned that the people who brought the case against Rahman are facing bankruptcy over the costs of the case. That seems absurd to me, why should private citizens face financial ruin to do the job that the authorities should be doing in the first place?
    Seems crazy but I am sure one of the lawyers here will explain that its perfectly sensible!
    Even worse, until Michael Fallon became Defence Secretary, soldiers investigated by IHAT had to pay their own legal fees. At the same time, the MOD was financing Shiner et al to bring bogus allegations.
    That really is almost beyond belief. Our government, indeed our country, should be deeply ashamed at how these men have been treated.
    Apparently, the Commons Defence Select Committee will publish a damning report on IHAT.

    I don't know why anyone would join the armed forces, given the way they're treated.
    Thinking it about it further, I do wonder if some key civil servants are actively treacherous. Incompetence really seems too kind a way of describing this scandal and the treatment of service personnel who served in Northern Ireland.
    I was told the following story - A moderately senior officer (old money background) responded to the repeated legal... investigations of soldiers who had been under his command by offering them the use of his family's lawyers - a very distinguished bunch apparently. They went through the "allegations" like a chainsaw through cheese.

    Certain civil servants demanded that he be *ordered* by the army chain of command to withdraw his legal assistance.
    Many people fall into the same basic error; they assume the MoD is on the same side as the Armed Forces. Having been involved on the periphery of defence procurement, all the evidence is that this is not the case :).
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,896
    edited February 2017
    glw said:

    JackW said:

    If it was a referendum Trump lost by almost 3 million votes.

    That someone like Trump came within three million votes of Clinton is not a ringing endorsement of American politics. Both Republicans and Democrats should be asking "how the hell did that happen?" and "what can we do better in future?"
    It's striking how all of Clinton's majority (and more) came from one State, California. Bush, in 2000, led by 750,000 outside California. Trump led by 1.3m.
  • Options
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    SeanT said:

    Scottish Conservative surge klaxon:

    http://bit.ly/2lbF5c7

    Labour and the Conservatives have basically swapped places since the general election in Scotland, it suggests.

    That really is an incredible table. Labour have gone from 45% to 15% in four years. From virtual hegemony to almost Lib-Dem-like irrelevance. In four years. This is unprecedented in modern British politics I think?

    Can they possibly recover? Hard to see a way, unless the SNP call an early, badly timed indyref, lose it, and then split up in acrimony. That's just about Labour's only hope.
    The Conservatives have done well and I am pretty chuffed about it but the reality is that it is the SNP who have replaced Labour and have a similarly unhealthy hegemony to what Labour used to do. This is now the completely dominant fact in the appointments of our army of office holders. Whilst these used to be universally held by Labour outriders they are now SNP supporters.

    This is the price we pay from not having a truly functioning democracy north of the border. It is a high one.
    What electoral change would you suggest to return Scotland's democracy to full utility?
    I honestly don't know. The SNP look set to be at least as dominant as Labour used to be for the next decade. I think we need to accept that reality and insist on our office holders being more independent and independently appointed. As an example the First Minister interviewed the last 2 candidates for Lord President of the Court of Session. Never happened before. Should not happen again. The message sent to the Judiciary was loud, clear and unhealthy.
    Isn't that just a consequence of the unconscious sway of the establishment, which as you say was Labour, and in turn (before both our times I imagine) was previously Conservative & Unionist? I agree institutions of all sorts should on principle be striving for non partisanship & independence (I would!), but if the will isn't there..
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,100
    If Assange is right and Macron is hit with damaging allegations as much as Fillon has been it could well be Hamon who ends up in the run-off with Le Pen, in which case all bets are off!
  • Options
    Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669

    glw said:

    AndyJS said:

    Interesting article in the Observer:

    "Trump is no fascist. He is a champion for the forgotten millions
    Obama promised solutions but let the people down. Is it any surprise that they voted for real change?
    Only a corrupt political establishment could have provoked a political revolt of this scale. Instead of blaming Trump’s rise on racism or xenophobia, blame it on those who never saw this coming and still don’t understand why so many Americans would rather have Donald Trump in the White House than suffer the rule of their elites."

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/feb/05/trump-not-fascist-champion-for-forgotten-millions

    In many ways, the 2016 election wasn’t just a referendum on Obama’s eight years in the White House, it was a rejection of the entire political system that gave us Iraq, the financial crisis, a botched healthcare law and shocking income inequality during a slow economic recovery. From Akron to Alaska, millions of Americans had simply lost confidence in their leaders and the institutions that were supposed to serve them. In their desperation, they turned to a man who had no regard for the elites – and no use for them.

    That's something I keep saying, and to be honest it's not really my idea there are quite a few commentators who believe Trump is as much a rejection of traditional Republican politics as he is of the Democrats.
    But oddly the article in question says middle america is railing against Dodd-Frank. This makes no sense to me as the act is about trying to stop Wall St plunging into another financial crisis. Later in same article the elites of Wall St are attacked. So which is it?
    I agree with @GLW comments. What else is happening is that Trump is doing exactly what he said he'd do on the campaign trail, from building the wall to immigration to Obamacare. The courts holding up his immigration executive order also plays into his anti-establishment meme.

    Dodd Frank was like Obamacare - long and involved and most not knowing what was in it when it was passed.. What it has done -and like Obamacare it is a poster child for the law of Unintended Consequences - is put thousands of small and regional banks out of business, due to huge compliance costs and enormous obstacles to lending.

    Unlike Obama, an unrepentant left wing ideologue, Trump is a pragmatist and not really ideological at all. Some of what he says could pass the lips of Bernie Sanders. The republican party is adjusting to him on the fly.
  • Options

    Thanks to Trump I am far less concerned about Brexit than I was. His first two weeks have shown that the UK and the EU need a strong relationship because none of us can rely on the man across the pond. The swivel-eyed cliff-edge brigade in Brussels and Westminster will not get their way. That is good news.

    Personally I have no clue as to how it will play out, but no one seems to have any interest in discussing it in a rational way. Raise the topic and it just seems to cue a shouting match.

    I am already tired of the whole thing and the huge increase in intolerance that seems to be infecting the UK. I am fortunate to have dual citizenship which means my children do as well and my other half can travel the EU as the spouse of an EU national. In short, I stand to lose nothing except the pride I formerly had in my country and that did actually hurt.

    Watching Brexit and Trump has actually made me, a centre-right person politically, believe that maybe "more Europe" is the solution. Maybe rather than Brexit, what we need is a fully reformed Federal EU with enforceable borders, a common currency, the Council of Ministers abolished, an upper chamber and the Commission fully subservient to the EU parliament.

    Oh well... what happens, happens.
    You may as well defect and become a citizen of EIRE.

    You fly its flag, now hold the UK in contempt, and would prefer a federal Europe.

    What's stopping you?
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @AndyEMorrison: Polls moving in the correct direction following the tax grab budget (Panelbase)
    SNP 47% (-3%)
    Con 27% (+6%)
    Lab 15% (-1%)
    LD 4% (-1%)
  • Options
    Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    Sean_F said:

    glw said:

    JackW said:

    If it was a referendum Trump lost by almost 3 million votes.

    That someone like Trump came within three million votes of Clinton is not a ringing endorsement of American politics. Both Republicans and Democrats should be asking "how the hell did that happen?" and "what can we do better in future?"
    It's striking how all of Clinton's majority (and more) came from one State, California.
    She had a majority of about 2.6 million in California, and 1.5 million in New York.
  • Options
    brokenwheelbrokenwheel Posts: 3,352
    edited February 2017
    isam said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    STOKE BY ELECTION

    Any view on
    a) whether there will be a "Progressive Alliance"?
    b) Whether that would work?

    The Greens are pretty irrelevant in Stoke . Feedback on the Vote2012 website from other Lib Dems who have been to Stoke ( some more than once ) say the campaign is being hard fought and is going well .
    = bad news for Labour?
    and possibly for UKIP too . As Pong posts Stoke Central is an easy seat to deliver leaflets to and to canvas ( no long drive ways before you can knock on the door . I am sure that by polling day the voters will see that there are 3 parties in serious contention . .
    So two anti Brexit candidates against a pro Brexit. How does Lib Dem taking votes off Labour hurt UKIP exactly?
    In last weeks Rotherham by election the Lib Dems took lots of votes of Labour and it did not help UKIP as they took quite a few off them too .
    Hmm fair enough. My view is that the better the Lib Dems do, the better for UKIP, but we shall see
    Many "UKIP" votes are NOTA, as are "Lib Dems". UKIP needs to hold onto those NOTA votes as much as possible to stand a chance. In that sense the Lib Dems are fishing in the same pool.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,896
    Tim_B said:

    Sean_F said:

    glw said:

    JackW said:

    If it was a referendum Trump lost by almost 3 million votes.

    That someone like Trump came within three million votes of Clinton is not a ringing endorsement of American politics. Both Republicans and Democrats should be asking "how the hell did that happen?" and "what can we do better in future?"
    It's striking how all of Clinton's majority (and more) came from one State, California.
    She had a majority of about 2.6 million in California, and 1.5 million in New York.
    It's now 4.3 m in California.
  • Options
    Scott_P said:

    Interesting that Scott was saying that there was a 'mess' which needed clearing up when he now claims nothing was meant to change until A50 is triggered.

    That's not true

    I expected "like the British people" that article 50 would be triggered
    Read what you wrote:

    ' Ok, here's an idea

    May and Boris fight the leadership on an in/out ticket

    May wins, tells Brussels we are staying. Osborne as chancellor. "Punishment" budget in the Autumn to start clearing up the mess '

    A50 was not going to be triggered because May would become PM on an In ticket.

    Yet there was still to be a mess which a 'punishment' budget was necessary to begin to clear up.

    Now stop denying the truth - you expected the Leave vote to bring disaster in and of itself and A50 - which people didn't expect to be triggered immediately - was an irrelevance.

    Are you really that bitter that the economy didn't fall into recession from a Leave vote ?

    Personally I'm delighted - I'm many thousands of pounds better off from the stock market having gone up. And that's something I willingly admit I didn't expect.

  • Options
    MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    isam said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    STOKE BY ELECTION

    Any view on
    a) whether there will be a "Progressive Alliance"?
    b) Whether that would work?

    The Greens are pretty irrelevant in Stoke . Feedback on the Vote2012 website from other Lib Dems who have been to Stoke ( some more than once ) say the campaign is being hard fought and is going well .
    = bad news for Labour?
    and possibly for UKIP too . As Pong posts Stoke Central is an easy seat to deliver leaflets to and to canvas ( no long drive ways before you can knock on the door . I am sure that by polling day the voters will see that there are 3 parties in serious contention . .
    So two anti Brexit candidates against a pro Brexit. How does Lib Dem taking votes off Labour hurt UKIP exactly?
    In last weeks Rotherham by election the Lib Dems took lots of votes of Labour and it did not help UKIP as they took quite a few off them too .
    Hmm fair enough. My view is that the better the Lib Dems do, the better for UKIP, but we shall see
    In the Rotherham by election the Labour vote fell by 60% and the UKIP vote by 55% from its previous level
  • Options
    It's quite simple: if you don't like the UK, and hold its people in contempt, piss off and live somewhere else.
  • Options
    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:



    So, he is right to ask, what the hell are Leavers so worked up about?

    Some Remainers are worried they will be proved wrong.

    Some Leavers are worried they won't be proved right.

    That explains much of it.
    I think that on the Leavers' side there is a lot of projection - shouting loud enough to reassure themselves that they made the right decision. I notice that when a Remainer makes a factual point it usually get ignored by many Leavers and the ad hominem attacks start instead of addressing the point raised.

    For Remainers, I think a lot ofmarket, ECJ and the rest

    Five years down the line we will know who was right. Frankly I am past caring...
    Shut the fuck up, then.
    Finally crawled out bed have you?
    I'm in Bangkok. I rose at 7.30. a thriller. You have to be relentless. Almost monastic. No distractions. You're allowed a hooker once every three days.
    Middle aged white males having sex with traffiked asian girls = fine and dandy. Its not Rotherham at all. No sir, not at all.
    I said you're "allowed". I was giving permission to beta minus males such as yourself who haven't had sex with anyone but the wife for 47 years. Come out here and have some fun.

    Personally I have plenty of fun in England. So it's just gin and juice for me.
    Are the Bangkok police as effficient as the SYP about cultural sensitivities?

    Enjoy your evening.
    I'm right aren't I? You haven't fucked anyone apart from your wife FOR DECADES. Indeed, my guess is you now sleep in separate bedrooms. And sex is a kind of embarrassingly unmentionable thing that happened in the past, and you both blush and hastily move on when it gets referenced on TV.

    Go on. You can tell us. We're all friends. Share your pain. I've got plenty of long-married friends in the same boat, this kind of secret, shameful, quietly painful celibacy. It's what happens.

    A true alpha male would surely not be so insecure as to need to proclaim it relentlessly. The ones I know just are. I am a beta who has only had sex with his wife for the last 25 years and worked hard with her to create a happy home for three kids who never had to worry either of us would abandon them. I helped build a business; I imagine Mr Foxinsox has saved quite a number of lives. It takes all sorts.


  • Options



    So, he is right to ask, what the hell are Leavers so worked up about?

    Some Remainers are worried they will be proved wrong.

    Some Leavers are worried they won't be proved right.

    That explains much of it.
    I think that on the Leavers' side there is a lot of projection - shouting loud enough to reassure themselves that they made the right decision. I notice that when a Remainer makes a factual point it usually get ignored by many Leavers and the ad hominem attacks start instead of addressing the point raised.

    For Remainers, I think a lot of them are genuinely scared that the lunatics are running the asylum and financial armegeddon awaits once reality bites. Up to now, nothing has really changed - there has just been a lot of bluster and arm waving but if everything stopped here and nothing further happened we would still be full EU members with the single market, ECJ and the rest.

    The fun will really start when after Article 50 when the EU begins with the reported €50bn UK liabilities bill and Trump offers a US/UK Trade Deal so one-sided that no one in their right mind would sign it.

    Five years down the line we will know who was right. Frankly I am past caring...
    You sound very much like you're not past caring.

    Personally, I think you need to calm down, and get a grip.
  • Options
    Tim_B said:

    Sean_F said:

    glw said:

    JackW said:

    If it was a referendum Trump lost by almost 3 million votes.

    That someone like Trump came within three million votes of Clinton is not a ringing endorsement of American politics. Both Republicans and Democrats should be asking "how the hell did that happen?" and "what can we do better in future?"
    It's striking how all of Clinton's majority (and more) came from one State, California.
    She had a majority of about 2.6 million in California, and 1.5 million in New York.
    4.3 million in CA according to Wikipedia:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2016
  • Options

    NEW THREAD

  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,356

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    SeanT said:

    Scottish Conservative surge klaxon:

    http://bit.ly/2lbF5c7

    Labour and the Conservatives have basically swapped places since the general election in Scotland, it suggests.

    That really is an incredible table. Labour have gone from 45% to 15% in four years. From virtual hegemony to almost Lib-Dem-like irrelevance. In four years. This is unprecedented in modern British politics I think?

    Can they possibly recover? Hard to see a way, unless the SNP call an early, badly timed indyref, lose it, and then split up in acrimony. That's just about Labour's only hope.
    The Conservatives have done well and I am pretty chuffed about it but the reality is that it is the SNP who have replaced Labour and have a similarly unhealthy hegemony to what Labour used to do. This is now the completely dominant fact in the appointments of our army of office holders. Whilst these used to be universally held by Labour outriders they are now SNP supporters.

    This is the price we pay from not having a truly functioning democracy north of the border. It is a high one.
    What electoral change would you suggest to return Scotland's democracy to full utility?
    I honestly don't know. The SNP look set to be at least as dominant as Labour used to be for the next decade. I think we need to accept that reality and insist on our office holders being more independent and independently appointed. As an example the First Minister interviewed the last 2 candidates for Lord President of the Court of Session. Never happened before. Should not happen again. The message sent to the Judiciary was loud, clear and unhealthy.
    Isn't that just a consequence of the unconscious sway of the establishment, which as you say was Labour, and in turn (before both our times I imagine) was previously Conservative & Unionist? I agree institutions of all sorts should on principle be striving for non partisanship & independence (I would!), but if the will isn't there..
    Oh yes, I agree. In countries where power changes regularly these problems tend to resolve themselves. In countries where 1 party is dominant it is more of a problem. I am not suggesting the SNP is worse than any other.
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,038
    O/T Wales are getting tries now. Good. I do hate to see Rugby matches won by penalty kicks. Seems against the spirit of the game, somehow.
  • Options
    Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    edited February 2017

    You may as well defect and become a citizen of EIRE.

    I have been one since the day I was born. That is how it works....

    You fly its flag, now hold the UK in contempt, and would prefer a federal Europe.

    Putting words in my mouth? I never said I hold the UK in contempt. Please refer me to the post where I allegedly did so.

    I said that I had lost my pride in the UK as a country. I find it less tolerant than it was before and the fact that some people seem to view Brexit as permission to be outwardly racist is not something I can look upon with pride.

    Contempt? No.... pity might be closer

    What's stopping you?

    Absolutely nothing. I will be spending less time in the UK as of next year, it just takes time to organise stuff.


  • Options

    isam said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    STOKE BY ELECTION

    Any view on
    a) whether there will be a "Progressive Alliance"?
    b) Whether that would work?

    The Greens are pretty irrelevant in Stoke . Feedback on the Vote2012 website from other Lib Dems who have been to Stoke ( some more than once ) say the campaign is being hard fought and is going well .
    = bad news for Labour?
    and possibly for UKIP too . As Pong posts Stoke Central is an easy seat to deliver leaflets to and to canvas ( no long drive ways before you can knock on the door . I am sure that by polling day the voters will see that there are 3 parties in serious contention . .
    So two anti Brexit candidates against a pro Brexit. How does Lib Dem taking votes off Labour hurt UKIP exactly?
    In last weeks Rotherham by election the Lib Dems took lots of votes of Labour and it did not help UKIP as they took quite a few off them too .
    Hmm fair enough. My view is that the better the Lib Dems do, the better for UKIP, but we shall see
    In the Rotherham by election the Labour vote fell by 60% and the UKIP vote by 55% from its previous level
    What NEV are you expecting the LibDems to get in the May local elections if I may ask ?

    The LibDems average over 25% in non election years between 1993 and 2009.
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    If Assange is right and Macron is hit with damaging allegations as much as Fillon has been it could well be Hamon who ends up in the run-off with Le Pen, in which case all bets are off!
    This is a book that you need to stay green on as it looks like this election will be another rollercoaster. Personally, I think Le Pen will win. I have no idea who her opponent will be. My ideal betting result would be Hamon or Sarkozy win as I would be shovelling money into my pockets.
  • Options

    You may as well defect and become a citizen of EIRE.

    I have been one since the day I was born. That is how it works....

    You fly its flag, now hold the UK in contempt, and would prefer a federal Europe.

    Putting words in my mouth? I never said I hold the UK in contempt. Please refer me to the post where I allegedly did so.

    I said that I had lost my pride in the UK as a country. I find it less tolerant than it was before and the fact that some people seem to view Brexit as permission to be outwardly racist is not something I can look upon with pride.

    Contempt? No.... pity might be closer

    What's stopping you?

    Absolutely nothing. I will be spending less time in the UK as of next year, it just takes time to organise stuff.


    Its perfectly clear from your posts on here you hold the UK in contempt: the bile and hyperbole oozes out. The UK is no less tolerant than it was before - that is just media rubbish and huge exaggeration over a handful of incidents post referendum - and I haven't encountered anyone who now thinks they have permission to be outwardly racist, or spoken to anyone that has.

    Get a grip.

    I can't think of a poster who has fallen further in my eyes over the last nine months than you have.
  • Options
    MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699

    isam said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    STOKE BY ELECTION

    Any view on
    a) whether there will be a "Progressive Alliance"?
    b) Whether that would work?

    The Greens are pretty irrelevant in Stoke . Feedback on the Vote2012 website from other Lib Dems who have been to Stoke ( some more than once ) say the campaign is being hard fought and is going well .
    = bad news for Labour?
    and possibly for UKIP too . As Pong posts Stoke Central is an easy seat to deliver leaflets to and to canvas ( no long drive ways before you can knock on the door . I am sure that by polling day the voters will see that there are 3 parties in serious contention . .
    So two anti Brexit candidates against a pro Brexit. How does Lib Dem taking votes off Labour hurt UKIP exactly?
    In last weeks Rotherham by election the Lib Dems took lots of votes of Labour and it did not help UKIP as they took quite a few off them too .
    Hmm fair enough. My view is that the better the Lib Dems do, the better for UKIP, but we shall see
    In the Rotherham by election the Labour vote fell by 60% and the UKIP vote by 55% from its previous level
    What NEV are you expecting the LibDems to get in the May local elections if I may ask ?

    The LibDems average over 25% in non election years between 1993 and 2009.
    Good question which I have not given any thought too so far . Ask me again when the nominations for May elections are in .
  • Options

    O/T Wales are getting tries now. Good. I do hate to see Rugby matches won by penalty kicks. Seems against the spirit of the game, somehow.

    Especially penalties kicked from the other half.
  • Options
    PongPong Posts: 4,693
    edited February 2017
    HYUFD said:

    If Assange is right and Macron is hit with damaging allegations as much as Fillon has been it could well be Hamon who ends up in the run-off with Le Pen, in which case all bets are off!
    Hmm, not sure if he already has compromising info or is just directing the 4channer types to hack Macron and the people close to him and dump whatever they find on wikileaks.

    Assanges modus operandi is to create smoke in the hope that there's fire.
  • Options
    TudorRoseTudorRose Posts: 1,662

    HYUFD said:

    If Assange is right and Macron is hit with damaging allegations as much as Fillon has been it could well be Hamon who ends up in the run-off with Le Pen, in which case all bets are off!
    This is a book that you need to stay green on as it looks like this election will be another rollercoaster. Personally, I think Le Pen will win. I have no idea who her opponent will be. My ideal betting result would be Hamon or Sarkozy win as I would be shovelling money into my pockets.
    I'm on Sarkozy. Juppe has said he doesn't want to be plan B, and Sarkozy's votes transferred to Fillon so the reverse is probable in the event of a re-run primary.
  • Options

    You may as well defect and become a citizen of EIRE.

    I have been one since the day I was born. That is how it works....

    You fly its flag, now hold the UK in contempt, and would prefer a federal Europe.

    Putting words in my mouth? I never said I hold the UK in contempt. Please refer me to the post where I allegedly did so.

    I said that I had lost my pride in the UK as a country. I find it less tolerant than it was before and the fact that some people seem to view Brexit as permission to be outwardly racist is not something I can look upon with pride.

    Contempt? No.... pity might be closer

    What's stopping you?

    Absolutely nothing. I will be spending less time in the UK as of next year, it just takes time to organise stuff.


    And you will be no loss. Good riddance as far as I am concerned.
  • Options

    isam said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    STOKE BY ELECTION

    Any view on
    a) whether there will be a "Progressive Alliance"?
    b) Whether that would work?

    The Greens are pretty irrelevant in Stoke . Feedback on the Vote2012 website from other Lib Dems who have been to Stoke ( some more than once ) say the campaign is being hard fought and is going well .
    = bad news for Labour?
    and possibly for UKIP too . As Pong posts Stoke Central is an easy seat to deliver leaflets to and to canvas ( no long drive ways before you can knock on the door . I am sure that by polling day the voters will see that there are 3 parties in serious contention . .
    So two anti Brexit candidates against a pro Brexit. How does Lib Dem taking votes off Labour hurt UKIP exactly?
    In last weeks Rotherham by election the Lib Dems took lots of votes of Labour and it did not help UKIP as they took quite a few off them too .
    Hmm fair enough. My view is that the better the Lib Dems do, the better for UKIP, but we shall see
    In the Rotherham by election the Labour vote fell by 60% and the UKIP vote by 55% from its previous level
    What NEV are you expecting the LibDems to get in the May local elections if I may ask ?

    The LibDems average over 25% in non election years between 1993 and 2009.
    Good question which I have not given any thought too so far . Ask me again when the nominations for May elections are in .
    Thanks for the reply.

    With Labour in disarray, UKIP purposeless and the Remain voters to target the LibDems do have a great opportunity for recovery.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,062
    DavidL said:

    SeanT said:

    Scottish Conservative surge klaxon:

    http://bit.ly/2lbF5c7

    Labour and the Conservatives have basically swapped places since the general election in Scotland, it suggests.

    That really is an incredible table. Labour have gone from 45% to 15% in four years. From virtual hegemony to almost Lib-Dem-like irrelevance. In four years. This is unprecedented in modern British politics I think?

    Can they possibly recover? Hard to see a way, unless the SNP call an early, badly timed indyref, lose it, and then split up in acrimony. That's just about Labour's only hope.
    The Conservatives have done well and I am pretty chuffed about it but the reality is that it is the SNP who have replaced Labour and have a similarly unhealthy hegemony to what Labour used to have. This is now the completely dominant fact in the appointments of our army of office holders. Whilst these used to be universally held by Labour outriders they are now SNP supporters.

    This is the price we pay from not having a truly functioning democracy north of the border. It is a high one.
    How do you make that out David, we are enslaved by a party that had 30% ish of UK vote yet you think democracy is not available in Scotland where all the also rans have been given free tickets to parliament when in fact they should have a handful of whingers at best.
    Fact that Tories are hated and only get in parliamnet due to getting losers list seats is the undemocratic thing.
  • Options
    TudorRose said:

    HYUFD said:

    If Assange is right and Macron is hit with damaging allegations as much as Fillon has been it could well be Hamon who ends up in the run-off with Le Pen, in which case all bets are off!
    This is a book that you need to stay green on as it looks like this election will be another rollercoaster. Personally, I think Le Pen will win. I have no idea who her opponent will be. My ideal betting result would be Hamon or Sarkozy win as I would be shovelling money into my pockets.
    I'm on Sarkozy. Juppe has said he doesn't want to be plan B, and Sarkozy's votes transferred to Fillon so the reverse is probable in the event of a re-run primary.
    My book is a complete mess. Still, as long as Fillon hangs on there's no need to panic.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,049

    isam said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    STOKE BY ELECTION

    Any view on
    a) whether there will be a "Progressive Alliance"?
    b) Whether that would work?

    The Greens are pretty irrelevant in Stoke . Feedback on the Vote2012 website from other Lib Dems who have been to Stoke ( some more than once ) say the campaign is being hard fought and is going well .
    = bad news for Labour?
    and possibly for UKIP too . As Pong posts Stoke Central is an easy seat to deliver leaflets to and to canvas ( no long drive ways before you can knock on the door . I am sure that by polling day the voters will see that there are 3 parties in serious contention . .
    So two anti Brexit candidates against a pro Brexit. How does Lib Dem taking votes off Labour hurt UKIP exactly?
    In last weeks Rotherham by election the Lib Dems took lots of votes of Labour and it did not help UKIP as they took quite a few off them too .
    Hmm fair enough. My view is that the better the Lib Dems do, the better for UKIP, but we shall see
    In the Rotherham by election the Labour vote fell by 60% and the UKIP vote by 55% from its previous level
    What NEV are you expecting the LibDems to get in the May local elections if I may ask ?

    The LibDems average over 25% in non election years between 1993 and 2009.
    The LDs are a long way from that level now (and there are now four players for votes, not three). A reasonable comeback for them would be for them to get to the high teens, say 18% or so.
  • Options
    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    STOKE BY ELECTION

    Any view on
    a) whether there will be a "Progressive Alliance"?
    b) Whether that would work?

    The Greens are pretty irrelevant in Stoke . Feedback on the Vote2012 website from other Lib Dems who have been to Stoke ( some more than once ) say the campaign is being hard fought and is going well .
    = bad news for Labour?
    and possibly for UKIP too . As Pong posts Stoke Central is an easy seat to deliver leaflets to and to canvas ( no long drive ways before you can knock on the door . I am sure that by polling day the voters will see that there are 3 parties in serious contention . .
    So two anti Brexit candidates against a pro Brexit. How does Lib Dem taking votes off Labour hurt UKIP exactly?
    In last weeks Rotherham by election the Lib Dems took lots of votes of Labour and it did not help UKIP as they took quite a few off them too .
    Hmm fair enough. My view is that the better the Lib Dems do, the better for UKIP, but we shall see
    In the Rotherham by election the Labour vote fell by 60% and the UKIP vote by 55% from its previous level
    What NEV are you expecting the LibDems to get in the May local elections if I may ask ?

    The LibDems average over 25% in non election years between 1993 and 2009.
    The LDs are a long way from that level now (and there are now four players for votes, not three). A reasonable comeback for them would be for them to get to the high teens, say 18% or so.
    So not enormous LibDem gains all over the country.

    You seem to be in disagreement with your dad.
This discussion has been closed.