politicalbetting
Home› General

Howdy, Stranger!

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

Sign In Register

Categories

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The CON MPs using the Trump visit to oust Bercow have lost the

SystemSystem Posts: 12,264
edited February 2017 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The CON MPs using the Trump visit to oust Bercow have lost their critical facilities

With Bercow now facing a no confidence move Betway make it a 9/4 chance that he’ll not be in the role by the time of the Trump state visit.

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,069
    Correct
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,331
    Never really understood this extraordinary antipathy towards him. He obviously has a high opinion of himself, but I rate him as a good speaker.
  • UbarrowUbarrow Posts: 8
    According to the Guardian, he's also won his point and Trump will be coming during recess, at the weekend and will be kept out of sight as far as humanly possible!
  • ParistondaParistonda Posts: 1,843
    A half empty chamber or boycotts from MPs would have been a better demonstration against Trump. It would have been far more humiliating. As it is now, we never had confirmation that Trump wanted to give a speech, and it's all been discarded. Trump is no worse off from this, so it's not really achieved anything.

    I do not like Trump at all, and I don't generally dislike Bercow, but this does all seem to have been an ego trip for Bercow more than anything.
  • Chris_AChris_A Posts: 1,237
    Tories? Critical faculties? Yes Mine this is money for old rope.
  • TomsToms Posts: 2,478
    As long as what Bercow has done is legal---whatever that means here---then I support him.
    Although I'm no royalist, this petition expresses my feelings:
    https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/171928/
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,331
    Yes, the trouble with the wording is that it appears designed to spare HM's feelings. I would be more inclined to support it if it said 'because he's a racist, misogynist demagogue'.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382
    Tories for Trump looks a winner to me.
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    edited February 2017
    I agree with the thread header.

    This is really very bad for the Tories. I believe Bercow did over do it in what he said, however Trump is toxic in the UK. It is the wrong issue to try and depose Bercow. I actually think that it would be better to let Bercow see the rest of his remaining time without trying to oust him. After all the previous Speaker was removed in circumstances that were not the best advert for the House of Commons. To reject one Speaker is unfortunate but it looks odd to the public to have two ousted in a row.

    I have to say the recent stories in the press show the Tories are starting to get the whiff of being the Nasty party again. In the last couple of days we have seen a Tory Cllr describing Diane Abbott as an ape and a Tory party member burning £20 notes in Cambridge. Add to this policies that do not have a place in a civilised society and one has to wonder what the new PM has to do to show that the Tory party is not the Nasty party anymore.

  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 52,885
    ThomasNashe said:

    Never really understood this extraordinary antipathy towards him. He obviously has a high opinion of himself, but I rate him as a good speaker.

    It can't be tall poppy syndrome.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,830
    It was poor form by Bercow, very poor form, and needless as well even if one thinks his heart was in the right place given how he could have achieved the same end, but he has played it fairly well and the Tories fallen into the trap. The response has been disproportionate and unhelpful.
  • MonikerDiCanioMonikerDiCanio Posts: 5,792
    Bercow's nothing. Just ignore him would be the best and easiest policy.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    he has been a good Speaker but he is an odious man suffering from LMS.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,531
    More alternative fact muddle from P Nut.
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/10/ukip-leader-paul-nuttall-denies-lying-about-being-at-hillsborough-disaster
  • AlsoIndigoAlsoIndigo Posts: 1,852
    Hmm well that made my evening a little more interesting than usual

    http://www.phivolcs.dost.gov.ph/html/update_SOEPD/2017_Earthquake_Information/February/2017_0210_1403_B3F.html

    Epicentre about 45 miles from here. Shaking went on for about 10 seconds but happily didn't seem that violent. Seems to have been a couple of injuries close to the epicentre but nothing more serious. The interesting life you get living right on top of the Ring of Fire ;-)
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    edited February 2017
    As I said at the time, just ignoring him is by far the best option.

    BTW, how many MPs are backing the no confidence vote, at last count it was one.
  • AlsoIndigoAlsoIndigo Posts: 1,852
    ThomasNashe said:

    Never really understood this extraordinary antipathy towards him. He obviously has a high opinion of himself, but I rate him as a good speaker.

    To put it in political campaigning terms, his advantage is that he isnt Baron Martin of Springburn, his disadvantage is that he isn't Baroness Boothroyd, of Sandwell in the County of West Midlands ;)
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382
    UKIp leader Paul Nuttall denies lying about being at Hillsborough disaster.Why would he have to do that ?
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,454
    I think there is an excellent opportunity:


    Year Corbyn replaced as Labour Leader (Ladbrokes)
    2017 (Odds: 2.37)

    Jeremy Corbyn Exit Date (PaddyPower)
    2018 or later (Odds: 2.75)

    Anyone is feel free to point out why don't cover all of the options.

    Certainly I could see some trouble if Labour folded or Corbyn dies...
  • AlsoIndigoAlsoIndigo Posts: 1,852
    SimonStClare said:

    As I said at the time, just ignoring him is by far the best option.

    BTW, how many MPs are backing the no confidence vote, at last count it was one.

    Parliament went into recess the day the motion was laid. They are back on 20th Feb.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    Wouldn't surprise me if Bercow gets toppled solely for the reason that left wingers keep making convincing arguments for things, which they all agree with each other on, then lose the vote
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,376
    dixiedean said:

    More alternative fact muddle from P Nut.
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/10/ukip-leader-paul-nuttall-denies-lying-about-being-at-hillsborough-disaster

    'He claims to have been present, along with his father and two uncles, when 96 Liverpool fans were crushed to death, and has said only “scum of the earth” would suggest this was not true.'

    Doesn't sound like he's protesting too much.
    Not in the slightest.
  • MonikerDiCanioMonikerDiCanio Posts: 5,792
    dixiedean said:

    More alternative fact muddle from P Nut.
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/10/ukip-leader-paul-nuttall-denies-lying-about-being-at-hillsborough-disaster

    The Guardian's worried.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382
    dixiedean said:

    More alternative fact muddle from P Nut.
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/10/ukip-leader-paul-nuttall-denies-lying-about-being-at-hillsborough-disaster

    He becomes stranger by the day.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,387
    AlsoIndigo said:

    ThomasNashe said:

    Never really understood this extraordinary antipathy towards him. He obviously has a high opinion of himself, but I rate him as a good speaker.

    To put it in political campaigning terms, his advantage is that he isnt Baron Martin of Springburn, his disadvantage is that he isn't Baroness Boothroyd, of Sandwell in the County of West Midlands ;)
    County of West Midlands?!? What abomination is that?!?

    Half Worcestershire half Staffordshire.
  • TomsToms Posts: 2,478
    ThomasNashe said:

    Yes, the trouble with the wording is that it appears designed to spare HM's feelings. I would be more inclined to support it if it said 'because he's a racist, misogynist demagogue'.

    Yes he's a berk in strictest Cockney. But he is head of state and should be allowed to come here, although we might want to recommend adding a straitjacket to the entourage.
    I'm afraid we will suck up to him. Money, you know, counts.
  • perdixperdix Posts: 1,806
    The_Taxman said:

    I agree with the thread header.

    This is really very bad for the Tories. I believe Bercow did over do it in what he said, however Trump is toxic in the UK. It is the wrong issue to try and depose Bercow. I actually think that it would be better to let Bercow see the rest of his remaining time without trying to oust him. After all the previous Speaker was removed in circumstances that were not the best advert for the House of Commons. To reject one Speaker is unfortunate but it looks odd to the public to have two ousted in a row.

    I have to say the recent stories in the press show the Tories are starting to get the whiff of being the Nasty party again. In the last couple of days we have seen a Tory Cllr describing Diane Abbott as an ape and a Tory party member burning £20 notes in Cambridge. Add to this policies that do not have a place in a civilised society and one has to wonder what the new PM has to do to show that the Tory party is not the Nasty party anymore.

    Any opportunity for a lefty smear in the absence of any ability to act like an opposition.

  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    Yorkcity said:

    dixiedean said:

    More alternative fact muddle from P Nut.
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/10/ukip-leader-paul-nuttall-denies-lying-about-being-at-hillsborough-disaster

    He becomes stranger by the day.
    This unbiased site seems to think he is lying

    https://skwawkbox.org/2017/01/17/ukips-paul-nuttall-on-video-committing-unforgivable-sin-hillsborough/
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,454
    isam said:

    Yorkcity said:

    dixiedean said:

    More alternative fact muddle from P Nut.
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/10/ukip-leader-paul-nuttall-denies-lying-about-being-at-hillsborough-disaster

    He becomes stranger by the day.
    This unbiased site seems to think he is lying

    https://skwawkbox.org/2017/01/17/ukips-paul-nuttall-on-video-committing-unforgivable-sin-hillsborough/
    I mean, if he was either inside or outside, then the story is nothing. If he wasn't there on the other hand... but that would have been too bold a claim even for a politican.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,646
    SandyRentool said:

    AlsoIndigo said:

    ThomasNashe said:

    Never really understood this extraordinary antipathy towards him. He obviously has a high opinion of himself, but I rate him as a good speaker.

    To put it in political campaigning terms, his advantage is that he isnt Baron Martin of Springburn, his disadvantage is that he isn't Baroness Boothroyd, of Sandwell in the County of West Midlands ;)
    County of West Midlands?!? What abomination is that?!?

    Half Worcestershire half Staffordshire.
    Almost as bad as Tyne and Wear!
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382
    isam said:

    Yorkcity said:

    dixiedean said:

    More alternative fact muddle from P Nut.
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/10/ukip-leader-paul-nuttall-denies-lying-about-being-at-hillsborough-disaster

    He becomes stranger by the day.
    This unbiased site seems to think he is lying

    https://skwawkbox.org/2017/01/17/ukips-paul-nuttall-on-video-committing-unforgivable-sin-hillsborough/
    Islam I really hope he is not.I read today that Liverpool FC have banned Sun reporters from attending the ground and press conferences on request of the families.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,654
    isam said:

    Yorkcity said:

    dixiedean said:

    More alternative fact muddle from P Nut.
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/10/ukip-leader-paul-nuttall-denies-lying-about-being-at-hillsborough-disaster

    He becomes stranger by the day.
    This unbiased site seems to think he is lying

    https://skwawkbox.org/2017/01/17/ukips-paul-nuttall-on-video-committing-unforgivable-sin-hillsborough/
    I think he was there at the 87/88 FA cup semi where there was clearly some crushing from the vids. He's started off the interview with "people like me", and lead himself into the lie near the end of the interview.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Awesome...

    @PolhomeEditor: So 3 Labour whips - whose job it is to enforce party discipline - have been let off for, er, voting against the whip.
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    Scott_P said:

    Awesome...

    @PolhomeEditor: So 3 Labour whips - whose job it is to enforce party discipline - have been let off for, er, voting against the whip.

    I’m shocked – Corbyn has now rendered every subsequent 3 line whip as meaningless.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    edited February 2017
    Pulpstar said:

    isam said:

    Yorkcity said:

    dixiedean said:

    More alternative fact muddle from P Nut.
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/10/ukip-leader-paul-nuttall-denies-lying-about-being-at-hillsborough-disaster

    He becomes stranger by the day.
    This unbiased site seems to think he is lying

    https://skwawkbox.org/2017/01/17/ukips-paul-nuttall-on-video-committing-unforgivable-sin-hillsborough/
    I think he was there at the 87/88 FA cup semi where there was clearly some crushing from the vids. He's started off the interview with "people like me", and lead himself into the lie near the end of the interview.
    All we can say for sure is that he says he was there, and was saying it back in 2012

    http://www.paulnuttallmep.com/hillsborough-inquiry-welcomed/

    whereas people who have no way of knowing either way, and have a lot to gain from leading people to think he is lying, are insinuating that he wasn't there
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    edited February 2017
    Fairford North on Cotswold (Con defence, caused by resignation of sitting member)
    Result: Liberal Democrat 610 (68% +40%), Conservative 270 (30% -21%), Green Party 16 (2%, no candidate in 2015)
    Liberal Democrat GAIN from Conservative with a majority of 340 (38%) on a swing of 30.5% from Conservative to Liberal Democrat

    When Harry put up the local by-elections thread, I suggested that his prediction of a Tory win doubtful. Someone wrote in saying because UKIP was not putting up a candidate , this would help the Tories.

    My foot, it did! Tories are toxic. This is even before the £60bn "bill" for Brexit is divulged to the British people.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Scott_P said:

    Awesome...

    @PolhomeEditor: So 3 Labour whips - whose job it is to enforce party discipline - have been let off for, er, voting against the whip.

    Democracy in action !!
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @PolhomeEditor: All Labour MPs who broke the 3-line whip on the Article 50 bill to be given formal warnings, but all frontbenchers will keep their jobs.

    The Labour Party as a Parliamentary force is dead. It is an ex-party.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited February 2017
    "Are we witnessing the strange, lingering death of Labour England?
    In Stoke-on-Trent, Matthew Engel finds a party struggling to answer the simplest questions"

    https://www.ft.com/content/bcfe0106-edee-11e6-930f-061b01e23655

    (The article is available to everyone through a Google search).
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    FFS

    @ChrisMasonBBC: Letters are being sent to the rebels who sit on the frontbench insisting they must "comply with the whip" in the future.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,554
    edited February 2017
    Scott_P said:

    Awesome...

    @PolhomeEditor: So 3 Labour whips - whose job it is to enforce party discipline - have been let off for, er, voting against the whip.

    Not really a surprise...remember this is a man whose approach to a mass shooter on the ramage is to offer them a cuppa and a chat than order for them to be neutralised.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    SandyRentool said:

    AlsoIndigo said:

    ThomasNashe said:

    Never really understood this extraordinary antipathy towards him. He obviously has a high opinion of himself, but I rate him as a good speaker.

    To put it in political campaigning terms, his advantage is that he isnt Baron Martin of Springburn, his disadvantage is that he isn't Baroness Boothroyd, of Sandwell in the County of West Midlands ;)
    County of West Midlands?!? What abomination is that?!?

    Half Worcestershire half Staffordshire.
    Most of the West Midlands used to be Warwickshire.
  • JobabobJobabob Posts: 3,807
    MonikerDiCanio said:

    Bercow's nothing. Just ignore him would be the best and easiest policy.

    Correct. Twice in three days I find myself agreeing with you. Someone call a doctor!
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    The_Taxman said:

    I agree with the thread header.

    This is really very bad for the Tories. I believe Bercow did over do it in what he said, however Trump is toxic in the UK. It is the wrong issue to try and depose Bercow. I actually think that it would be better to let Bercow see the rest of his remaining time without trying to oust him. After all the previous Speaker was removed in circumstances that were not the best advert for the House of Commons. To reject one Speaker is unfortunate but it looks odd to the public to have two ousted in a row.

    I have to say the recent stories in the press show the Tories are starting to get the whiff of being the Nasty party again. In the last couple of days we have seen a Tory Cllr describing Diane Abbott as an ape and a Tory party member burning £20 notes in Cambridge. Add to this policies that do not have a place in a civilised society and one has to wonder what the new PM has to do to show that the Tory party is not the Nasty party anymore.

    Another speech by Theresa May attacking the nasty party ?
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Toms said:

    As long as what Bercow has done is legal---whatever that means here---then I support him.
    Although I'm no royalist, this petition expresses my feelings:
    https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/171928/

    Bercow is a Hero. We want a statue built in his honour.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Scott_P said:

    FFS

    @ChrisMasonBBC: Letters are being sent to the rebels who sit on the frontbench insisting they must "comply with the whip" in the future.

    Many did. They voted with the Whips !
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    surbiton said:

    Toms said:

    As long as what Bercow has done is legal---whatever that means here---then I support him.
    Although I'm no royalist, this petition expresses my feelings:
    https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/171928/

    Bercow is a Hero. We want a statue built in his honour.
    A garden gnome?
  • stodgestodge Posts: 14,063
    surbiton said:

    Fairford North on Cotswold (Con defence, caused by resignation of sitting member)
    Result: Liberal Democrat 610 (68% +40%), Conservative 270 (30% -21%), Green Party 16 (2%, no candidate in 2015)
    Liberal Democrat GAIN from Conservative with a majority of 340 (38%) on a swing of 30.5% from Conservative to Liberal Democrat

    When Harry put up the local by-elections thread, I suggested that his prediction of a Tory win doubtful. Someone wrote in saying because UKIP was not putting up a candidate , this would help the Tories.

    My foot, it did! Tories are toxic. This is even before the £60bn "bill" for Brexit is divulged to the British people.

    Excellent performance here by the team here and in North Norfolk. The usual snide comments from the usual suspects notwithstanding, the way back for the LDs will be literally a seat at a time slowly building and growing and it will take time.

    No one in the party is under any illusion there is any "quick fix" - each election fought and won is part of that journey. In some areas, recovery is built on a campaigning history but new areas, which had not previously been fertile territory for the Party, are appearing as a group of activists, often post-2015 GE members, are getting together and working a Council seat.

    That's how it happens - the right people in the right place at the right time.

  • TomsToms Posts: 2,478
    Toms said:

    ThomasNashe said:

    Yes, the trouble with the wording is that it appears designed to spare HM's feelings. I would be more inclined to support it if it said 'because he's a racist, misogynist demagogue'.

    Yes he's a berk in strictest Cockney. But he is head of state and should be allowed to come here, although we might want to recommend adding a straitjacket to the entourage.
    I'm afraid we will suck up to him. Money, you know, counts.
    For absolute clarity (I have a simple mind) I'm referring here to the donald.
  • rural_voterrural_voter Posts: 2,038
    SimonStClare said:

    Scott_P said:

    Awesome...

    @PolhomeEditor: So 3 Labour whips - whose job it is to enforce party discipline - have been let off for, er, voting against the whip.

    I’m shocked – Corbyn has now rendered every subsequent 3 line whip as meaningless.
    I've always disagreed with three-line whips, but this is as if the Labour party has a commission to write new episodes of The Thick of It.
  • JobabobJobabob Posts: 3,807
    @ThomasNashe

    Yeah. Me too. My wife (a socialist monarchist) was amazed I hadn't signed the petition. I said, I couldn't give a toss if his visit embarrasses Britain's richest welfare claimant.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    rural_voter said:

    I've always disagreed with three-line whips, but this is as if the Labour party has a commission to write new episodes of The Thick of It.

    Did you see this thread?

    https://twitter.com/theobertram/status/830073157402894336

    Contains a story that featured essentially verbatim in TTOI
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,241
    Ubarrow said:

    According to the Guardian, he's also won his point and Trump will be coming during recess, at the weekend and will be kept out of sight as far as humanly possible!

    Even before Bercow’s intervention, government ministers are believed to have concluded that the level of objection among MPs of all parties after Trump’s executive order banning arrivals from seven mainly Muslim countries made a parliamentary invitation too politically hazardous to justify. The leader of the Commons, David Lidington, is said to have reached this conclusion before the Speaker made his own opposition public in the chamber on Monday.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/10/british-officials-drop-plans-donald-trump-address-parliament-queen-elizabeth

    As some of us posted at the time.....just like George W Bush's state visit.......
  • Hertsmere_PubgoerHertsmere_Pubgoer Posts: 3,476
    CarlottaVance said:

    Ubarrow said:

    According to the Guardian, he's also won his point and Trump will be coming during recess, at the weekend and will be kept out of sight as far as humanly possible!

    Even before Bercow’s intervention, government ministers are believed to have concluded that the level of objection among MPs of all parties after Trump’s executive order banning arrivals from seven mainly Muslim countries made a parliamentary invitation too politically hazardous to justify. The leader of the Commons, David Lidington, is said to have reached this conclusion before the Speaker made his own opposition public in the chamber on Monday.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/10/british-officials-drop-plans-donald-trump-address-parliament-queen-elizabeth

    As some of us posted at the time.....just like George W Bush's state visit.......
    I wonder if Bercow already knew this and jumped in to get his moment as the centre of attention.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,241
    Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Ubarrow said:

    According to the Guardian, he's also won his point and Trump will be coming during recess, at the weekend and will be kept out of sight as far as humanly possible!

    Even before Bercow’s intervention, government ministers are believed to have concluded that the level of objection among MPs of all parties after Trump’s executive order banning arrivals from seven mainly Muslim countries made a parliamentary invitation too politically hazardous to justify. The leader of the Commons, David Lidington, is said to have reached this conclusion before the Speaker made his own opposition public in the chamber on Monday.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/10/british-officials-drop-plans-donald-trump-address-parliament-queen-elizabeth

    As some of us posted at the time.....just like George W Bush's state visit.......
    I wonder if Bercow already knew this and jumped in to get his moment as the centre of attention.
    https://youtu.be/ch6r9Otc75k

    For Bercow's many fans on here......
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    AndyJS said:

    "Are we witnessing the strange, lingering death of Labour England?
    In Stoke-on-Trent, Matthew Engel finds a party struggling to answer the simplest questions"

    https://www.ft.com/content/bcfe0106-edee-11e6-930f-061b01e23655

    (The article is available to everyone through a Google search).

    Paints a v depressing picture of Labour, although maybe the journo was annoyed at the lack of access to any Labour member, let alone the candidate, and wrote the article with that bias
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,726
    CarlottaVance said:

    Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Ubarrow said:

    According to the Guardian, he's also won his point and Trump will be coming during recess, at the weekend and will be kept out of sight as far as humanly possible!

    Even before Bercow’s intervention, government ministers are believed to have concluded that the level of objection among MPs of all parties after Trump’s executive order banning arrivals from seven mainly Muslim countries made a parliamentary invitation too politically hazardous to justify. The leader of the Commons, David Lidington, is said to have reached this conclusion before the Speaker made his own opposition public in the chamber on Monday.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/10/british-officials-drop-plans-donald-trump-address-parliament-queen-elizabeth

    As some of us posted at the time.....just like George W Bush's state visit.......
    I wonder if Bercow already knew this and jumped in to get his moment as the centre of attention.
    https://youtu.be/ch6r9Otc75k

    For Bercow's many fans on here......
    That's brilliant. And he describes Bercow perfectly without ever mentioning his name. :)
  • Y0kelY0kel Posts: 2,307
    Trumps pal Mike Flynn might be in a spot of bother over his friendly chats with Russians.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    stodge said:

    surbiton said:

    Fairford North on Cotswold (Con defence, caused by resignation of sitting member)
    Result: Liberal Democrat 610 (68% +40%), Conservative 270 (30% -21%), Green Party 16 (2%, no candidate in 2015)
    Liberal Democrat GAIN from Conservative with a majority of 340 (38%) on a swing of 30.5% from Conservative to Liberal Democrat

    When Harry put up the local by-elections thread, I suggested that his prediction of a Tory win doubtful. Someone wrote in saying because UKIP was not putting up a candidate , this would help the Tories.

    My foot, it did! Tories are toxic. This is even before the £60bn "bill" for Brexit is divulged to the British people.

    Excellent performance here by the team here and in North Norfolk. The usual snide comments from the usual suspects notwithstanding, the way back for the LDs will be literally a seat at a time slowly building and growing and it will take time.

    No one in the party is under any illusion there is any "quick fix" - each election fought and won is part of that journey. In some areas, recovery is built on a campaigning history but new areas, which had not previously been fertile territory for the Party, are appearing as a group of activists, often post-2015 GE members, are getting together and working a Council seat.

    That's how it happens - the right people in the right place at the right time.

    I think the Brexit fallout is underestimated. There will be no deal, as this government cannot politically accept the legacy payments [ £40bn - 60bn ], depending on who do you believe.

    Therefore, no agreement - result: WTO rules plus a court case. It is surprising how little attention has been paid regarding WTO tariffs. They come out with silly remarks like free trade with the US. There is hardly any tariff between the US and the EU today anyway!

    Fertile territory for the Liberals. Surprisingly many Socialists will support the free trade Liberals.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,531
    surbiton said:

    Fairford North on Cotswold (Con defence, caused by resignation of sitting member)
    Result: Liberal Democrat 610 (68% +40%), Conservative 270 (30% -21%), Green Party 16 (2%, no candidate in 2015)
    Liberal Democrat GAIN from Conservative with a majority of 340 (38%) on a swing of 30.5% from Conservative to Liberal Democrat

    When Harry put up the local by-elections thread, I suggested that his prediction of a Tory win doubtful. Someone wrote in saying because UKIP was not putting up a candidate , this would help the Tories.

    My foot, it did! Tories are toxic. This is even before the £60bn "bill" for Brexit is divulged to the British people.

    That was me! It probably did help them, but nowhere near enough!
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,241
    Richard_Tyndall said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Ubarrow said:

    According to the Guardian, he's also won his point and Trump will be coming during recess, at the weekend and will be kept out of sight as far as humanly possible!

    Even before Bercow’s intervention, government ministers are believed to have concluded that the level of objection among MPs of all parties after Trump’s executive order banning arrivals from seven mainly Muslim countries made a parliamentary invitation too politically hazardous to justify. The leader of the Commons, David Lidington, is said to have reached this conclusion before the Speaker made his own opposition public in the chamber on Monday.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/10/british-officials-drop-plans-donald-trump-address-parliament-queen-elizabeth

    As some of us posted at the time.....just like George W Bush's state visit.......
    I wonder if Bercow already knew this and jumped in to get his moment as the centre of attention.
    https://youtu.be/ch6r9Otc75k

    For Bercow's many fans on here......
    That's brilliant. And he describes Bercow perfectly without ever mentioning his name. :)
    I thought I'd better mention Neil's target in case some of Bercow's fans missed it.....
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,925
    surbiton said:

    Fairford North on Cotswold (Con defence, caused by resignation of sitting member)
    Result: Liberal Democrat 610 (68% +40%), Conservative 270 (30% -21%), Green Party 16 (2%, no candidate in 2015)
    Liberal Democrat GAIN from Conservative with a majority of 340 (38%) on a swing of 30.5% from Conservative to Liberal Democrat

    When Harry put up the local by-elections thread, I suggested that his prediction of a Tory win doubtful. Someone wrote in saying because UKIP was not putting up a candidate , this would help the Tories.

    My foot, it did! Tories are toxic. This is even before the £60bn "bill" for Brexit is divulged to the British people.

    Would you like to make a prediction of the national equivalent votes that the Conservatives and LibDems receive in the May local elections ?

    To help you I'll point out that the LibDems had over 20% at every round of local elections in non general election years from 1993 to 2009.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    another_richard said:

    surbiton said:

    Fairford North on Cotswold (Con defence, caused by resignation of sitting member)
    Result: Liberal Democrat 610 (68% +40%), Conservative 270 (30% -21%), Green Party 16 (2%, no candidate in 2015)
    Liberal Democrat GAIN from Conservative with a majority of 340 (38%) on a swing of 30.5% from Conservative to Liberal Democrat

    When Harry put up the local by-elections thread, I suggested that his prediction of a Tory win doubtful. Someone wrote in saying because UKIP was not putting up a candidate , this would help the Tories.

    My foot, it did! Tories are toxic. This is even before the £60bn "bill" for Brexit is divulged to the British people.

    Would you like to make a prediction of the national equivalent votes that the Conservatives and LibDems receive in the May local elections ?

    To help you I'll point out that the LibDems had over 20% at every round of local elections in non general election years from 1993 to 2009.
    Over 20%. That was easy.

    Every Thursday from now on, you can predict Liberal gains wherever there is a straight fight between the Libs and the Tories.
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    surbiton said:

    Fairford North on Cotswold (Con defence, caused by resignation of sitting member)
    Result: Liberal Democrat 610 (68% +40%), Conservative 270 (30% -21%), Green Party 16 (2%, no candidate in 2015)
    Liberal Democrat GAIN from Conservative with a majority of 340 (38%) on a swing of 30.5% from Conservative to Liberal Democrat

    When Harry put up the local by-elections thread, I suggested that his prediction of a Tory win doubtful. Someone wrote in saying because UKIP was not putting up a candidate , this would help the Tories.

    My foot, it did! Tories are toxic. This is even before the £60bn "bill" for Brexit is divulged to the British people.

    Lib Dems got extra 90 votes, didn't they?

  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,968
    CarlottaVance said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Ubarrow said:

    According to the Guardian, he's also won his point and Trump will be coming during recess, at the weekend and will be kept out of sight as far as humanly possible!

    Even before Bercow’s intervention, government ministers are believed to have concluded that the level of objection among MPs of all parties after Trump’s executive order banning arrivals from seven mainly Muslim countries made a parliamentary invitation too politically hazardous to justify. The leader of the Commons, David Lidington, is said to have reached this conclusion before the Speaker made his own opposition public in the chamber on Monday.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/10/british-officials-drop-plans-donald-trump-address-parliament-queen-elizabeth

    As some of us posted at the time.....just like George W Bush's state visit.......
    I wonder if Bercow already knew this and jumped in to get his moment as the centre of attention.
    https://youtu.be/ch6r9Otc75k

    For Bercow's many fans on here......
    That's brilliant. And he describes Bercow perfectly without ever mentioning his name. :)
    I thought I'd better mention Neil's target in case some of Bercow's fans missed it.....
    Surely that should be Bercow's 'fan', singular ?
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    chestnut said:

    surbiton said:

    Fairford North on Cotswold (Con defence, caused by resignation of sitting member)
    Result: Liberal Democrat 610 (68% +40%), Conservative 270 (30% -21%), Green Party 16 (2%, no candidate in 2015)
    Liberal Democrat GAIN from Conservative with a majority of 340 (38%) on a swing of 30.5% from Conservative to Liberal Democrat

    When Harry put up the local by-elections thread, I suggested that his prediction of a Tory win doubtful. Someone wrote in saying because UKIP was not putting up a candidate , this would help the Tories.

    My foot, it did! Tories are toxic. This is even before the £60bn "bill" for Brexit is divulged to the British people.

    Lib Dems got extra 90 votes, didn't they?

    What happened to the Tories ? They stayed at home. Why ?
  • TomsToms Posts: 2,478
    JosiasJessop said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Ubarrow said:

    According to the Guardian, he's also won his point and Trump will be coming during recess, at the weekend and will be kept out of sight as far as humanly possible!

    Even before Bercow’s intervention, government ministers are believed to have concluded that the level of objection among MPs of all parties after Trump’s executive order banning arrivals from seven mainly Muslim countries made a parliamentary invitation too politically hazardous to justify. The leader of the Commons, David Lidington, is said to have reached this conclusion before the Speaker made his own opposition public in the chamber on Monday.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/10/british-officials-drop-plans-donald-trump-address-parliament-queen-elizabeth

    As some of us posted at the time.....just like George W Bush's state visit.......
    I wonder if Bercow already knew this and jumped in to get his moment as the centre of attention.
    https://youtu.be/ch6r9Otc75k

    For Bercow's many fans on here......
    That's brilliant. And he describes Bercow perfectly without ever mentioning his name. :)
    I thought I'd better mention Neil's target in case some of Bercow's fans missed it.....
    Surely that should be Bercow's 'fan', singular ?
    His mother? No, I don't believe Neil mentions the most telling fact of all---that Bercow is not clubbable.
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    surbiton said:

    chestnut said:

    surbiton said:

    Fairford North on Cotswold (Con defence, caused by resignation of sitting member)
    Result: Liberal Democrat 610 (68% +40%), Conservative 270 (30% -21%), Green Party 16 (2%, no candidate in 2015)
    Liberal Democrat GAIN from Conservative with a majority of 340 (38%) on a swing of 30.5% from Conservative to Liberal Democrat

    When Harry put up the local by-elections thread, I suggested that his prediction of a Tory win doubtful. Someone wrote in saying because UKIP was not putting up a candidate , this would help the Tories.

    My foot, it did! Tories are toxic. This is even before the £60bn "bill" for Brexit is divulged to the British people.

    Lib Dems got extra 90 votes, didn't they?

    What happened to the Tories ? They stayed at home. Why ?
    Because the bins aren't worth voting over?
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,726
    surbiton said:

    stodge said:

    surbiton said:

    Fairford North on Cotswold (Con defence, caused by resignation of sitting member)
    Result: Liberal Democrat 610 (68% +40%), Conservative 270 (30% -21%), Green Party 16 (2%, no candidate in 2015)
    Liberal Democrat GAIN from Conservative with a majority of 340 (38%) on a swing of 30.5% from Conservative to Liberal Democrat

    When Harry put up the local by-elections thread, I suggested that his prediction of a Tory win doubtful. Someone wrote in saying because UKIP was not putting up a candidate , this would help the Tories.

    My foot, it did! Tories are toxic. This is even before the £60bn "bill" for Brexit is divulged to the British people.

    Excellent performance here by the team here and in North Norfolk. The usual snide comments from the usual suspects notwithstanding, the way back for the LDs will be literally a seat at a time slowly building and growing and it will take time.

    No one in the party is under any illusion there is any "quick fix" - each election fought and won is part of that journey. In some areas, recovery is built on a campaigning history but new areas, which had not previously been fertile territory for the Party, are appearing as a group of activists, often post-2015 GE members, are getting together and working a Council seat.

    That's how it happens - the right people in the right place at the right time.

    I think the Brexit fallout is underestimated. There will be no deal, as this government cannot politically accept the legacy payments [ £40bn - 60bn ], depending on who do you believe.

    Therefore, no agreement - result: WTO rules plus a court case. It is surprising how little attention has been paid regarding WTO tariffs. They come out with silly remarks like free trade with the US. There is hardly any tariff between the US and the EU today anyway!

    Fertile territory for the Liberals. Surprisingly many Socialists will support the free trade Liberals.
    The average EU tariff under the WTO agreements is 3.9%. Currency movements have far more impact on trade than WTO tariff rates. In fact on a very basic level the drop in Sterling since we left has already compensated for WTO regulated tariffs three times over.
  • Hertsmere_PubgoerHertsmere_Pubgoer Posts: 3,476
    Off Topic. Is @TSE in a bar in Potters Bar tonight? Someone has just put Gina Gee on the jukebox.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,689
    The_Taxman said:

    I agree with the thread header.

    This is really very bad for the Tories. I believe Bercow did over do it in what he said, however Trump is toxic in the UK. It is the wrong issue to try and depose Bercow. I actually think that it would be better to let Bercow see the rest of his remaining time without trying to oust him. After all the previous Speaker was removed in circumstances that were not the best advert for the House of Commons. To reject one Speaker is unfortunate but it looks odd to the public to have two ousted in a row.

    I have to say the recent stories in the press show the Tories are starting to get the whiff of being the Nasty party again. In the last couple of days we have seen a Tory Cllr describing Diane Abbott as an ape and a Tory party member burning £20 notes in Cambridge. Add to this policies that do not have a place in a civilised society and one has to wonder what the new PM has to do to show that the Tory party is not the Nasty party anymore.

    The new PM who according to Opinium is the most popular since Thatcher and on a net basis even more so! The Tory in Cambridge was expelled from CUCA but was also a relative of Sturgeon's and backed Yes in indyref
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,587
    CarlottaVance said:

    <

    For Bercow's many fans on here......

    Andrew Neil implies Bercow is pompous and self-satisfied? Pot. Kettle. Black.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,925
    edited February 2017
    another_richard said:

    surbiton said:

    Fairford North on Cotswold (Con defence, caused by resignation of sitting member)
    Result: Liberal Democrat 610 (68% +40%), Conservative 270 (30% -21%), Green Party 16 (2%, no candidate in 2015)
    Liberal Democrat GAIN from Conservative with a majority of 340 (38%) on a swing of 30.5% from Conservative to Liberal Democrat

    When Harry put up the local by-elections thread, I suggested that his prediction of a Tory win doubtful. Someone wrote in saying because UKIP was not putting up a candidate , this would help the Tories.

    My foot, it did! Tories are toxic. This is even before the £60bn "bill" for Brexit is divulged to the British people.

    Would you like to make a prediction of the national equivalent votes that the Conservatives and LibDems receive in the May local elections ?

    To help you I'll point out that the LibDems had over 20% at every round of local elections in non general election years from 1993 to 2009.
    Of course the LibDems were pretty unpopular and had lost much of their former support by 2015 and they had suffered huge losses in the local elections whilst in government.

    But so had the Conservatives in 1997.

    Now lets see how many councillors the Conservatives gained in opposition at the May local elections:

    1998 +256
    1999 +1344
    2000 +256
    2001 +121

    Similarly these are the councillor gains for Labour at the May local elections whilst in Opposition:

    2011 +857
    2012 +823
    2013 +291
    2014 +324

    About 2000 gains for each but we never had PM Hague or PM EdM - rather the subsequent general elections were dismal failures for both the Conservatives and Labour.

    So far we've had the 2016 local elections for the LibDems to begin their recovery in and they achieved a gain of 45 councillors.

    They've got a very long way to go.

    All data from Wikipedia:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_local_elections,_2011
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    As was previously written about an earlier hobbit's heroics: all about the hills the hosts of Mordor raged.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    surbiton said:

    stodge said:

    surbiton said:

    Fairford North on Cotswold (Con defence, caused by resignation of sitting member)
    Result: Liberal Democrat 610 (68% +40%), Conservative 270 (30% -21%), Green Party 16 (2%, no candidate in 2015)
    Liberal Democrat GAIN from Conservative with a majority of 340 (38%) on a swing of 30.5% from Conservative to Liberal Democrat

    When Harry put up the local by-elections thread, I suggested that his prediction of a Tory win doubtful. Someone wrote in saying because UKIP was not putting up a candidate , this would help the Tories.

    My foot, it did! Tories are toxic. This is even before the £60bn "bill" for Brexit is divulged to the British people.

    Excellent performance here by the team here and in North Norfolk. The usual snide comments from the usual suspects notwithstanding, the way back for the LDs will be literally a seat at a time slowly building and growing and it will take time.

    No one in the party is under any illusion there is any "quick fix" - each election fought and won is part of that journey. In some areas, recovery is built on a campaigning history but new areas, which had not previously been fertile territory for the Party, are appearing as a group of activists, often post-2015 GE members, are getting together and working a Council seat.

    That's how it happens - the right people in the right place at the right time.

    I think the Brexit fallout is underestimated. There will be no deal, as this government cannot politically accept the legacy payments [ £40bn - 60bn ], depending on who do you believe.

    Therefore, no agreement - result: WTO rules plus a court case. It is surprising how little attention has been paid regarding WTO tariffs. They come out with silly remarks like free trade with the US. There is hardly any tariff between the US and the EU today anyway!

    Fertile territory for the Liberals. Surprisingly many Socialists will support the free trade Liberals.
    Nonsense. It was always the case that some very complicated unwinding of obligations was going to have to be done as a result of our leaving the EU, with big-looking numbers involved. These are worst-case, think of a number and double it type figures (and as rcs pointed out last thread, to the extent that they are pension obligations they are probably gross figures with no discount applied to take account of the time before they fall due) and the killer point is this: they are not penalty clause type claims which would simply not arise if we stayed in, they are commensurate with what our obligations would have been had we stayed in, with the difference that they are finite while if we stayed they would be open ended. So if we can't afford the cost of getting out, we certainly can't afford the cost of staying in.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,689
    surbiton said:

    stodge said:

    surbiton said:

    Fairford North on Cotswold (Con defence, caused by resignation of sitting member)
    Result: Liberal Democrat 610 (68% +40%), Conservative 270 (30% -21%), Green Party 16 (2%, no candidate in 2015)
    Liberal Democrat GAIN from Conservative with a majority of 340 (38%) on a swing of 30.5% from Conservative to Liberal Democrat

    When Harry put up the local by-elections thread, I suggested that his prediction of a Tory win doubtful. Someone wrote in saying because UKIP was not putting up a candidate , this would help the Tories.

    My foot, it did! Tories are toxic. This is even before the £60bn "bill" for Brexit is divulged to the British people.

    Excellent performance here by the team here and in North Norfolk. The usual snide comments from the usual suspects notwithstanding, the way back for the LDs will be literally a seat at a time slowly building and growing and it will take time.

    No one in the party is under any illusion there is any "quick fix" - each election fought and won is part of that journey. In some areas, recovery is built on a campaigning history but new areas, which had not previously been fertile territory for the Party, are appearing as a group of activists, often post-2015 GE members, are getting together and working a Council seat.

    That's how it happens - the right people in the right place at the right time.

    I think the Brexit fallout is underestimated. There will be no deal, as this government cannot politically accept the legacy payments [ £40bn - 60bn ], depending on who do you believe.

    Therefore, no agreement - result: WTO rules plus a court case. It is surprising how little attention has been paid regarding WTO tariffs. They come out with silly remarks like free trade with the US. There is hardly any tariff between the US and the EU today anyway!

    Fertile territory for the Liberals. Surprisingly many Socialists will support the free trade Liberals.
    May will try for a Swiss/Canada style deal but if the EU want tariffs they will get tariffs, starting with the German car industry and French wine. I also can't see many Socialists amongst the white working class rallying behind a LD platform of keeping unlimited immigration from the EU and paying £60 billion to the EU for the privilege!
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,726
    NickPalmer said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    <

    For Bercow's many fans on here......

    Andrew Neil implies Bercow is pompous and self-satisfied? Pot. Kettle. Black.
    Not really. Andrew Neil at least has a good line in self deprecation and a modicum of intelligence. He also commands the respect of most politicians - or at least he frightens them. None of those things can be said about the Bercow.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,925
    surbiton said:

    another_richard said:

    surbiton said:

    Fairford North on Cotswold (Con defence, caused by resignation of sitting member)
    Result: Liberal Democrat 610 (68% +40%), Conservative 270 (30% -21%), Green Party 16 (2%, no candidate in 2015)
    Liberal Democrat GAIN from Conservative with a majority of 340 (38%) on a swing of 30.5% from Conservative to Liberal Democrat

    When Harry put up the local by-elections thread, I suggested that his prediction of a Tory win doubtful. Someone wrote in saying because UKIP was not putting up a candidate , this would help the Tories.

    My foot, it did! Tories are toxic. This is even before the £60bn "bill" for Brexit is divulged to the British people.

    Would you like to make a prediction of the national equivalent votes that the Conservatives and LibDems receive in the May local elections ?

    To help you I'll point out that the LibDems had over 20% at every round of local elections in non general election years from 1993 to 2009.
    Over 20%. That was easy.

    Every Thursday from now on, you can predict Liberal gains wherever there is a straight fight between the Libs and the Tories.
    Thanks for the answer.

    RCS predicted 18% (I think)
    Mark Senior is going to respond when he's looked into LibDem candidate selection

    If there's anyone else who would like to give their prediction of the LibDem NEV in the May local elections please feel free to do so.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    AlastairMeeks said:

    As was previously written about an earlier hobbit's heroics: all about the hills the hosts of Mordor raged.

    I do hope this is not the fate of the Speaker:

    ""Precious, precious, precious!" Gollum cried. "My Precious! O my Precious!" And with that, even as his eyes were lifted up to gloat on his prize, he stepped too far, toppled, wavered for a moment on the brink, and then with a shriek he fell. Out of the depths came his last wail precious, and he was gone.”
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,726
    edited February 2017
    Ishmael_Z said:

    Nonsense. It was always the case that some very complicated unwinding of obligations was going to have to be done as a result of our leaving the EU, with big-looking numbers involved. These are worst-case, think of a number and double it type figures (and as rcs pointed out last thread, to the extent that they are pension obligations they are probably gross figures with no discount applied to take account of the time before they fall due) and the killer point is this: they are not penalty clause type claims which would simply not arise if we stayed in, they are commensurate with what our obligations would have been had we stayed in, with the difference that they are finite while if we stayed they would be open ended. So if we can't afford the cost of getting out, we certainly can't afford the cost of staying in.

    £40 billion is just under three years gross contributions, or 4 years net contributions. So what the Eurofanatics are saying is that because we don't want to pay the equivalent of 3 or 4 years contributions we should instead carry on paying contributions for ever.

    Not their brightest argument.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 20,062
    There's at last a clear way back for the Libs being the only party still representing the 48% Remainers. Fun watching the other two parties parting like the Red Sea to let them through. I can't imagine another time when the stars are in such alignment that they find themselves up against such ugly beasts again.
  • Hertsmere_PubgoerHertsmere_Pubgoer Posts: 3,476
    Richard_Tyndall said:

    NickPalmer said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    <

    For Bercow's many fans on here......

    Andrew Neil implies Bercow is pompous and self-satisfied? Pot. Kettle. Black.
    Not really. Andrew Neil at least has a good line in self deprecation and a modicum of intelligence. He also commands the respect of most politicians - or at least he frightens them. None of those things can be said about the Bercow.
    Didn't Nick vote for Bercow?
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,726
    Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    NickPalmer said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    <

    For Bercow's many fans on here......

    Andrew Neil implies Bercow is pompous and self-satisfied? Pot. Kettle. Black.
    Not really. Andrew Neil at least has a good line in self deprecation and a modicum of intelligence. He also commands the respect of most politicians - or at least he frightens them. None of those things can be said about the Bercow.
    Didn't Nick vote for Bercow?
    I am a friend of Nick's off PB so this is not in anyway intended as an insult but I don't think even he would consider himself one of life's natural rebels.
  • glwglw Posts: 10,010
    HYUFD said:

    May will try for a Swiss/Canada style deal but if the EU want tariffs they will get tariffs, starting with the German car industry and French wine. I also can't see many Socialists amongst the white working class rallying behind a LD platform of keeping unlimited immigration from the EU and paying £60 billion to the EU for the privilege!

    Even if it was £60 billion, which is likely not to be the case, it wouldn't be £60 billion up front, and we would likely take on some of the obligations directly rather than pay the EU. Of course the usual suspects are already getting in a tizz, as they do about every tiny little thing that they hope can throw a spanner in the works. Meanwhile Remainers ignore what Tusk says as he basically f*cked up their plans.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,689
    Democrats lead PPP's first generic House poll for 2018 49% to 41%
    https://twitter.com/ppppolls/status/830063249060159489
  • glwglw Posts: 10,010
    Richard_Tyndall said:

    £40 billion is just under three years gross contributions, or 4 years net contributions. So what the Eurofanatics are saying is that because we don't want to pay the equivalent of 3 or 4 years contributions we should instead carry on paying contributions for ever.

    Not their brightest argument.

    Exactly, they can't afford the mortgage but still want to buy the house.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,689
    glw said:

    HYUFD said:

    May will try for a Swiss/Canada style deal but if the EU want tariffs they will get tariffs, starting with the German car industry and French wine. I also can't see many Socialists amongst the white working class rallying behind a LD platform of keeping unlimited immigration from the EU and paying £60 billion to the EU for the privilege!

    Even if it was £60 billion, which is likely not to be the case, it wouldn't be £60 billion up front, and we would likely take on some of the obligations directly rather than pay the EU. Of course the usual suspects are already getting in a tizz, as they do about every tiny little thing that they hope can throw a spanner in the works. Meanwhile Remainers ignore what Tusk says as he basically f*cked up their plans.
    Yes it is more ideology than reality
  • nunununu Posts: 6,024
    HYUFD said:

    Democrats lead PPP's first generic House poll for 2018 49% to 41%
    https://twitter.com/ppppolls/status/830063249060159489

    I think Dems will gain the House but......

    1) big Gerrymandering in GOP's favour.

    2) conservative's turnout better than liberals

    3) Repubs will introduce big voter supression

    4) polls have been wrong before and often underestimate Republicans.....2010 polls had Dems winning but they didn't.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,554
    HYUFD said:

    Democrats lead PPP's first generic House poll for 2018 49% to 41%
    https://twitter.com/ppppolls/status/830063249060159489

    Fake news ....everybody knows trump is super popular, as are all his policies and as a result so are the republicans.
  • walterwwalterw Posts: 71
    Testt
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,376
    edited February 2017
    Speaking of Mordor.

    https://twitter.com/RangersFC/status/830160838816325632

    Definitely time for a change before Celtic get too far ahead.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,733
    nunu said:

    HYUFD said:

    Democrats lead PPP's first generic House poll for 2018 49% to 41%
    https://twitter.com/ppppolls/status/830063249060159489

    I think Dems will gain the House but......

    1) big Gerrymandering in GOP's favour.

    2) conservative's turnout better than liberals

    3) Repubs will introduce big voter supression

    4) polls have been wrong before and often underestimate Republicans.....2010 polls had Dems winning but they didn't.
    5) Democrats will screw up.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,689
    nunu said:

    HYUFD said:

    Democrats lead PPP's first generic House poll for 2018 49% to 41%
    https://twitter.com/ppppolls/status/830063249060159489

    I think Dems will gain the House but......

    1) big Gerrymandering in GOP's favour.

    2) conservative's turnout better than liberals

    3) Repubs will introduce big voter supression

    4) polls have been wrong before and often underestimate Republicans.....2010 polls had Dems winning but they didn't.
    1. Only to an extent if the Dems are only a point or two ahead, 8 points ahead and they definitely win
    2. 2018 liberal turnout will likely be higher to protest against Trump, conservative turnout lower relatively as they have little enthusiasm for Ryan or McConnell and no Obama to protest against
    3. Makes little difference except in rock solid Democratic districts anyway
    4. Final 2010 polls actually had the GOP winning the House on average
    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/generic_congressional_vote-2170.html
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,733
    another_richard said:

    surbiton said:

    another_richard said:

    surbiton said:

    Fairford North on Cotswold (Con defence, caused by resignation of sitting member)
    Result: Liberal Democrat 610 (68% +40%), Conservative 270 (30% -21%), Green Party 16 (2%, no candidate in 2015)
    Liberal Democrat GAIN from Conservative with a majority of 340 (38%) on a swing of 30.5% from Conservative to Liberal Democrat

    When Harry put up the local by-elections thread, I suggested that his prediction of a Tory win doubtful. Someone wrote in saying because UKIP was not putting up a candidate , this would help the Tories.

    My foot, it did! Tories are toxic. This is even before the £60bn "bill" for Brexit is divulged to the British people.

    Would you like to make a prediction of the national equivalent votes that the Conservatives and LibDems receive in the May local elections ?

    To help you I'll point out that the LibDems had over 20% at every round of local elections in non general election years from 1993 to 2009.
    Over 20%. That was easy.

    Every Thursday from now on, you can predict Liberal gains wherever there is a straight fight between the Libs and the Tories.
    Thanks for the answer.

    RCS predicted 18% (I think)
    Mark Senior is going to respond when he's looked into LibDem candidate selection

    If there's anyone else who would like to give their prediction of the LibDem NEV in the May local elections please feel free to do so.
    From June 1997, the Conservatives gained in local by-elections, sometimes with huge swings. All it meant was they were getting back the seats they should never have lost. Ditto the Lib Dems. They hold 1,900 seats. From 1993-2010, they held 4-5,000.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,689
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    HYUFD said:

    Democrats lead PPP's first generic House poll for 2018 49% to 41%
    https://twitter.com/ppppolls/status/830063249060159489

    Fake news ....everybody knows trump is super popular, as are all his policies and as a result so are the republicans.
    Trump's win is great for him and his supporters but the worst possible result for the Republican Party, they are now at risk of losing the House in 2018, the Senate in 2020 and scores of state legislatures and governorships. Had Hillary won in 2016 the GOP would be likely to have increased their majority in Congress in 2018
  • SirNorfolkPassmoreSirNorfolkPassmore Posts: 7,206
    HYUFD said:

    Democrats lead PPP's first generic House poll for 2018 49% to 41%
    https://twitter.com/ppppolls/status/830063249060159489

    PPP has a heavy Democrat bias historically. I'd like to believe it but it will require much more evidence. I dismiss it when Plato trumpets a big Rasmussen poll on Trump favour ability, ignoring the other polls. And I'll dismiss this too.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,689
    Sean_F said:

    nunu said:

    HYUFD said:

    Democrats lead PPP's first generic House poll for 2018 49% to 41%
    https://twitter.com/ppppolls/status/830063249060159489

    I think Dems will gain the House but......

    1) big Gerrymandering in GOP's favour.

    2) conservative's turnout better than liberals

    3) Repubs will introduce big voter supression

    4) polls have been wrong before and often underestimate Republicans.....2010 polls had Dems winning but they didn't.
    5) Democrats will screw up.
    Nothing the Democrats do will make the slightest difference if Trump's approval rating is underwater, they will make big gains regardless
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,689
    SirNorfolkPassmore said:

    HYUFD said:

    Democrats lead PPP's first generic House poll for 2018 49% to 41%
    https://twitter.com/ppppolls/status/830063249060159489

    PPP has a heavy Democrat bias historically. I'd like to believe it but it will require much more evidence. I dismiss it when Plato trumpets a big Rasmussen poll on Trump favour ability, ignoring the other polls. And I'll dismiss this too.
    It probably exaggerates the Democrats lead a little but an 8% lead would be as big as Pelosi had in 2006 when she won the House then. We wait and see what other pollsters show
  • FregglesFreggles Posts: 3,486
    glw said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    £40 billion is just under three years gross contributions, or 4 years net contributions. So what the Eurofanatics are saying is that because we don't want to pay the equivalent of 3 or 4 years contributions we should instead carry on paying contributions for ever.

    Not their brightest argument.

    Exactly, they can't afford the mortgage but still want to buy the house.
    We can afford the mortgage, we can't afford to continue paying it while paying for a room at Trump Towers as well, with the risk of homelessness if we are not polite enough
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,587
    Richard_Tyndall said:


    Didn't Nick vote for Bercow?

    I am a friend of Nick's off PB so this is not in anyway intended as an insult but I don't think even he would consider himself one of life's natural rebels.

    Fair comment :). But I do positively like Bercow. H is far more helpful to backbenchers than Boothroyd (who had a few favourites who were called again and again), and much more willing to have a bit of fun (including at his own expense) than Martin. Typcal Bercow put-down of an over-long speech - "The Honourable Member has so many interesting thoughts that we would be grateful if he were able to save some of them for later..." - even the victim laughed.
This discussion has been closed.