Looking rough for the UUP. Weirdly John Stewart (2-1) (Still half a chance maybe) looking in better shape than Kennedy though (Looks complete toast to me)
Kind of on topic, can anyone access this link? If so, please feel free to read and criticise. If not, please let me know. I can't open it myself (though I do know what it should say).
It's a good piece (as one would expect!), but if I were a Labour moderate wondering whether to take the disinterested advice of the Chairman of Wakefield District Conservatives, I'd be worrying about three potential downsides:
- What happens if we try to dislodge Corbyn and fail again? - What would the effect on the party be if we win, but only by blocking a left-wing candidate from getting on to the ballot? - Can we get agreement on a single unifying candidate, or would we be in for yet another bruising and divisive contest?
I did try to forestall that by my (genuinely-held) view that the country needs an effective opposition.
However, to answer your questions:
1. If Labour MPs can persuade a Starmer or Benn to stand, and Corbyn then wins again, then that really is game up for 2020 and perhaps for good. That said, I don't think they would lose, for the reasons I mention. The much bigger risks are either that they don't stand at all or that they wimp out, do a deal to nominate a Corbyn-successor, and then lose to him/her.
2. It will clear out all the nutters who have paralysed Labour for the last two years. Bar the drop in income, that'd be a win-win.
3. Who knows? But it'd be a measure of Labour's maturity as to whether they could or not (as an aside, this is another good reason for challenging Corbyn directly: the threshold for nominations is higher so it lessens the likelihood of 2+ challengers being nominated.
A good article and I agree with it pretty well in its entirety. Good to see somebody else debunking the myth that Corbyn increased his margin of victory in 2016! Personally I am inclined to the view that it would be good for two or three candidates to challenge Corbyn so that if one or more were to stumble - as did Owen Smith last year - support can be easily transferred to one of the alternatives.
Eh? If the facts are as reported, fruit-picking is exactly the kind of low wage, low productivity industry kept alive by cheap immigrant labour that this country should no longer be in. It manages a dismal trifecta, using land, labour and capital inefficiently.
what industries should we be in?
This is the most pointless argument. The government has already agreed that we will need seasonal workers in agriculture, post Brexit.
And this will satisfy Brexit voters who thought they were keeping foreigners out?
No they didn't, you must have missed that the campaign was "Take Back Control".
I know you don't live here, so it is understandable you missed this.
No I didnt miss it. I also didn't miss that Leave.EU wasn't the official campaign, I assume that slipped your memory
If we're talking about Vote Leave, then you missed this as well then, not living in the UK?
Well in fairness even some leavers on here, myself included, criticised that sort of thing. But it clearly resonated with people and I think it will be harder to accomodate those it did appeal to than some think.
What was there to criticise? We were told, on the one hand, that the prospect of Turkey joining was universally loathed, to the extent hat clever Remainers here and abroad would ensure it never happened, and the talks was just us stringing them along; but on the other, that if Leavers made the point that they didn't much fancy Turkey, that was an indicator of their own illiberal loathsomeness? Is there anything wrong with not wanting an alliance with an impoverished crypto- (increasingly less crypto-) Islamic country 70 million strong with nothing to offer us at all? And led by bloody Erdogan? Is Viktor Orban not enough of a fascist nutter to ensure that that political tendency is already adequately represented in the EU?
Sympathies. It's like a Casualty ward in here, today.
Check out the last thread header, this is what Mike wrote
For the third Friday in a row I’m off to hospital this morning after being one of those who’ve added to this winter’s unprecedented demand on the NHS.
At the start of February after a heavy cold I woke one morning to discover both my ears had been bleeding and I’d lost 80-90% of my hearing. This was profoundly shocking, isolating and very worrying. I realised I needed the NHS at a time when the pressure on it was absolutely enormous.
I haven’t been disappointed. My GP got me an appointment within 24 hours to see an ENT specialist and I only had to wait four days for the first hospital visit. The treatment seems to be working.
I share this because those of us without health insurance totally rely on the NHS for situations like this which is why it is so politically important.
Wow. That's pretty frightening for Mr Smithson Senior, I'm glad the treatment seems to be working.
Whenever I go into a hospital, I ALWAYS think: one day I will go into a hospital AND NOT COME OUT
It's a scary and sobering thought, but also quite animating, and energising. Life is so fucking short. Enjoy it, even the boring bits.
I've laid a smidgen, at almost identical odds to my initial backing of Baroin. However, I also have a back at 65 and a lay at 11, so still rosy if he does get the nod.
Edited extra bit: a Juppe/Baroin-Macron second round would be splendid.
@Lucian_Fletcher Don't worry about it, my money my choices. The demolition job you gave me in the last (Non pb) diplomacy game was alot more painful ! "Babblers and Schemers 1900"
Kind of on topic, can anyone access this link? If so, please feel free to read and criticise. If not, please let me know. I can't open it myself (though I do know what it should say).
It's a good piece (as one would expect!), but if I were a Labour moderate wondering whether to take the disinterested advice of the Chairman of Wakefield District Conservatives, I'd be worrying about three potential downsides:
- What happens if we try to dislodge Corbyn and fail again? - What would the effect on the party be if we win, but only by blocking a left-wing candidate from getting on to the ballot? - Can we get agreement on a single unifying candidate, or would we be in for yet another bruising and divisive contest?
I did try to forestall that by my (genuinely-held) view that the country needs an effective opposition.
However, to answer your questions:
1. If Labour MPs can persuade a Starmer or Benn to stand, and Corbyn then wins again, then that really is game up for 2020 and perhaps for good. That said, I don't think they would lose, for the reasons I mention. The much bigger risks are either that they don't stand at all or that they wimp out, do a deal to nominate a Corbyn-successor, and then lose to him/her.
2. It will clear out all the nutters who have paralysed Labour for the last two years. Bar the drop in income, that'd be a win-win.
3. Who knows? But it'd be a measure of Labour's maturity as to whether they could or not (as an aside, this is another good reason for challenging Corbyn directly: the threshold for nominations is higher so it lessens the likelihood of 2+ challengers being nominated.
A good article and I agree with it pretty well in its entirety. Good to see somebody else debunking the myth that Corbyn increased his margin of victory in 2016! Personally I am inclined to the view that it would be good for two or three candidates to challenge Corbyn so that if one or more were to stumble - as did Owen Smith last year - support can be easily transferred to one of the alternatives.
The danger with that is that the 'left' candidate wins a sizable lead on the first round and despite then losing due to being transfer-adverse, gains some kind of moral victory for having 'won' on first preferences.
Sympathies. It's like a Casualty ward in here, today.
Check out the last thread header, this is what Mike wrote
For the third Friday in a row I’m off to hospital this morning after being one of those who’ve added to this winter’s unprecedented demand on the NHS.
At the start of February after a heavy cold I woke one morning to discover both my ears had been bleeding and I’d lost 80-90% of my hearing. This was profoundly shocking, isolating and very worrying. I realised I needed the NHS at a time when the pressure on it was absolutely enormous.
I haven’t been disappointed. My GP got me an appointment within 24 hours to see an ENT specialist and I only had to wait four days for the first hospital visit. The treatment seems to be working.
I share this because those of us without health insurance totally rely on the NHS for situations like this which is why it is so politically important.
Wow. That's pretty frightening for Mr Smithson Senior, I'm glad the treatment seems to be working.
Whenever I go into a hospital, I ALWAYS think: one day I will go into a hospital AND NOT COME OUT
It's a scary and sobering thought, but also quite animating, and energising. Life is so fucking short. Enjoy it, even the boring bits.
My bet is on your not dying in hospital
I'd like to die like Atilla the Hun. Or Lord Palmerston.
I want to die on my 100th birthday, and I want my wife to be so upset, that she cancels her 21st birthday party as a mark of respect.
Eh? Fruit-picking is exactly the kind of low wage, low productivity industry kept alive by cheap immigrant labour that this country should no longer be in. It manages a dismal trifecta, using land, labour and capital inefficiently.
You want to create a Singapore for 60 million then?
Do I want to create a confident, successful, wealthy nation for 60 million?
Yes. Don't you?
And, I'm with you!
Singapore is 94% more wealthy per person than the UK, better education, better healthcare, and taxis only half the level in the UK, I would copy there economic position in a jot!!!
Singapore is basically the equivalent of central London, if you include Malaysia too (which Singapore used to be part of) you get the equivalent of the UK and a rather different story
Sinn Fein coming first will be a depressing moment in the history of Northern Ireland; that said, I don't think it presages the end of the Union. I'm pretty sure recent polls show declining Catholic enthusiasm for unification, while the Protestants are almost universally opposed.
If it is tied between the DUP and SF that means neither will give an inch to the other and a UUP + SDLP + Alliance deal is not impossible with Mike Nesbitt as First Minister
I don't think that's possible, is it? Doesn't the Stormont House agreement reserve the FM/DFM positions for the largest party in each of the two respective sections?
As I've asked before which section do the Alliance come in? The GFA seems to be perpetuating sectarian divide rather than ending it.
Sympathies. It's like a Casualty ward in here, today.
Check out the last thread header, this is what Mike wrote
For the third Friday in a row I’m off to hospital this morning after being one of those who’ve added to this winter’s unprecedented demand on the NHS.
At the start of February after a heavy cold I woke one morning to discover both my ears had been bleeding and I’d lost 80-90% of my hearing. This was profoundly shocking, isolating and very worrying. I realised I needed the NHS at a time when the pressure on it was absolutely enormous.
I haven’t been disappointed. My GP got me an appointment within 24 hours to see an ENT specialist and I only had to wait four days for the first hospital visit. The treatment seems to be working.
I share this because those of us without health insurance totally rely on the NHS for situations like this which is why it is so politically important.
Wow. That's pretty frightening for Mr Smithson Senior, I'm glad the treatment seems to be working.
Whenever I go into a hospital, I ALWAYS think: one day I will go into a hospital AND NOT COME OUT
It's a scary and sobering thought, but also quite animating, and energising. Life is so fucking short. Enjoy it, even the boring bits.
My bet is on your not dying in hospital
I'd like to die like Atilla the Hun. Or Lord Palmerston.
President Felix Faure died from a stroke (official version) but at the hands of his mistress.
If it is tied between the DUP and SF that means neither will give an inch to the other and a UUP + SDLP + Alliance deal is not impossible with Mike Nesbitt as First Minister
I don't think that's possible, is it? Doesn't the Stormont House agreement reserve the FM/DFM positions for the largest party in each of the two respective sections?
As I've asked before which section do the Alliance come in? The GFA seems to be perpetuating sectarian divide rather than ending it.
DUP and UUP presently tied on seats with SF at 9 each, 8 for DUP 1 for UUP and 9 for SF and SDLP on 0 so deadlock between Unionists and Nationalists but Alliance has 2 in middle
Kind of on topic, can anyone access this link? If so, please feel free to read and criticise. If not, please let me know. I can't open it myself (though I do know what it should say).
It's a good piece (as one would expect!), but if I were a Labour moderate wondering whether to take the disinterested advice of the Chairman of Wakefield District Conservatives, I'd be worrying about three potential downsides:
- What happens if we try to dislodge Corbyn and fail again? - What would the effect on the party be if we win, but only by blocking a left-wing candidate from getting on to the ballot? - Can we get agreement on a single unifying candidate, or would we be in for yet another bruising and divisive contest?
I did try to forestall that by my (genuinely-held) view that the country needs an effective opposition.
However, to answer your questions:
1. If Labour MPs can persuade a Starmer or Benn to stand, and Corbyn then wins again, then that really is game up for 2020 and perhaps for good. That said, I don't think they would lose, for the reasons I mention. The much bigger risks are either that they don't stand at all or that they wimp out, do a deal to nominate a Corbyn-successor, and then lose to him/her.
2. It will clear out all the nutters who have paralysed Labour for the last two years. Bar the drop in income, that'd be a win-win.
3. Who knows? But it'd be a measure of Labour's maturity as to whether they could or not (as an aside, this is another good reason for challenging Corbyn directly: the threshold for nominations is higher so it lessens the likelihood of 2+ challengers being nominated.
A good article and I agree with it pretty well in its entirety. Good to see somebody else debunking the myth that Corbyn increased his margin of victory in 2016! Personally I am inclined to the view that it would be good for two or three candidates to challenge Corbyn so that if one or more were to stumble - as did Owen Smith last year - support can be easily transferred to one of the alternatives.
The danger with that is that the 'left' candidate wins a sizable lead on the first round and despite then losing due to being transfer-adverse, gains some kind of moral victory for having 'won' on first preferences.
I am not too worried about that . Ed Milliband did not lead on first preferences in 2010. Nor did Harman for the Deputy Leadership in 2007. May I ask whether you believe the conditions already exist for a successful challenge this year - or are we talking about 2018?
Mr. Eagles, think you're confusing causes and effects, there.
The SNP rose to dominance long before the referendum on the EU. The Northern Irish situation is caused by domestic daftness.
Had we voted to Remain, then there would be no second Scottish independence referendum.
1) There probably won't be 2) If there is, No will probably win again 3) I'd rather it didn't come to it, but ultimately I'd prefer to be in an England and Wales (and NI?) outside the EU than a UK within it
How do people assess Baroin's chances of replacing Fillon? Still over 30 on Betfair for the presidency.
Close to zero ?
It is a possibility.
Juppe said he would only accept the candidacy if he received the full backing of the Party and Fillon.
Fillon's chosen successor would be Baroin rather than Juppe, so some horse-trading may take place. Hope it doesn't come to pass though, even though I am 30k green on Baroin in the winners market, my potential winnings on the subsiduary markets with Juppe in place, give me better opportunities for trading.
Having considered the matter carefully, I would prefer not to die.
Really? Even when the physical and mental infirmity of old age wraps round you, almost as tight as the shroud? When every day makes you more of a shadow of the man you used to be?
Immortality without vigour does not seem like much of a prize.
Mr. Eagles, think you're confusing causes and effects, there.
The SNP rose to dominance long before the referendum on the EU. The Northern Irish situation is caused by domestic daftness.
Had we voted to Remain, then there would be no second Scottish independence referendum.
1) There probably won't be 2) If there is, No will probably win again 3) I'd rather it didn't come to it, but ultimately I'd be in an England and Wales (and NI?) outside the EU than a UK within it
I'd rather be in a UK in the EU than in and England and Wales alone out of the EU, but the EventuAl victory of the Nats seemed inevitable to me.
If voting remain would have guaranteed the continuation of the uk I'd have voted that way.
Sinn Fein coming first will be a depressing moment in the history of Northern Ireland; that said, I don't think it presages the end of the Union. I'm pretty sure recent polls show declining Catholic enthusiasm for unification, while the Protestants are almost universally opposed.
Even if SF come first, which is still not likely, the SDLP came last so there is no nationalist majority. Of course the end of the Union in NI means Unionist paramilitaries returning to violence just as direct rule from Westminster previously meant IRA violence so power sharing at Stormont must continue in some form
Having considered the matter carefully, I would prefer not to die.
Really? Even when the physical and mental infirmity of old age wraps round you, almost as tight as the shroud? When every day makes you more of a shadow of the man you used to be?
Immortality without vigour does not seem like much of a prize.
Mr Dancer and you take a very gloomy view of the possibilities.
I prefer to imagine myself being downloaded into a computer aged 80 or so.
Having considered the matter carefully, I would prefer not to die.
Really? Even when the physical and mental infirmity of old age wraps round you, almost as tight as the shroud? When every day makes you more of a shadow of the man you used to be?
Immortality without vigour does not seem like much of a prize.
Mr Dancer and you take a very gloomy view of the possibilities.
I prefer to imagine myself being downloaded into a computer aged 80 or so.
Sympathies. It's like a Casualty ward in here, today.
Check out the last thread header, this is what Mike wrote
For the third Friday in a row I’m off to hospital this morning after being one of those who’ve added to this winter’s unprecedented demand on the NHS.
At the start of February after a heavy cold I woke one morning to discover both my ears had been bleeding and I’d lost 80-90% of my hearing. This was profoundly shocking, isolating and very worrying. I realised I needed the NHS at a time when the pressure on it was absolutely enormous.
I haven’t been disappointed. My GP got me an appointment within 24 hours to see an ENT specialist and I only had to wait four days for the first hospital visit. The treatment seems to be working.
I share this because those of us without health insurance totally rely on the NHS for situations like this which is why it is so politically important.
Wow. That's pretty frightening for Mr Smithson Senior, I'm glad the treatment seems to be working.
Whenever I go into a hospital, I ALWAYS think: one day I will go into a hospital AND NOT COME OUT
It's a scary and sobering thought, but also quite animating, and energising. Life is so fucking short. Enjoy it, even the boring bits.
My bet is on your not dying in hospital
I'd like to die like Atilla the Hun. Or Lord Palmerston.
President Felix Faure died from a stroke (official version) but at the hands of his mistress.
Sympathies. It's like a Casualty ward in here, today.
Check out the last thread header, this is what Mike wrote
For the third Friday in a row I’m off to hospital this morning after being one of those who’ve added to this winter’s unprecedented demand on the NHS.
At the start of February after a heavy cold I woke one morning to discover both my ears had been bleeding and I’d lost 80-90% of my hearing. This was profoundly shocking, isolating and very worrying. I realised I needed the NHS at a time when the pressure on it was absolutely enormous.
I haven’t been disappointed. My GP got me an appointment within 24 hours to see an ENT specialist and I only had to wait four days for the first hospital visit. The treatment seems to be working.
I share this because those of us without health insurance totally rely on the NHS for situations like this which is why it is so politically important.
Wow. That's pretty frightening for Mr Smithson Senior, I'm glad the treatment seems to be working.
Whenever I go into a hospital, I ALWAYS think: one day I will go into a hospital AND NOT COME OUT
It's a scary and sobering thought, but also quite animating, and energising. Life is so fucking short. Enjoy it, even the boring bits.
My bet is on your not dying in hospital
I'd like to die like Atilla the Hun. Or Lord Palmerston.
I want to die on my 100th birthday, and I want my wife to be so upset, that she cancels her 21st birthday party as a mark of respect.
The other day I actually did have an Atilla the Hun-esque moment. I was on the job (or just finishing off, as it were), and the old ticker was beating so fast I thought, oo-er
It's usually a subarachnoid haemorrhage rather than cardiac collapse that delivers the coup de grace whilst in the saddle. You feel a hammer blow to the base of the posterior skull and then curtains.
Having considered the matter carefully, I would prefer not to die.
Really? Even when the physical and mental infirmity of old age wraps round you, almost as tight as the shroud? When every day makes you more of a shadow of the man you used to be?
Immortality without vigour does not seem like much of a prize.
Perhaps he wants to become Mr Slant, of Discworld fame.
1155 FILLON François 464 MACRON Emmanuel 334 HAMON Benoît 314 ARTHAUD Nathalie 205 DUPONT-AIGNAN Nicolas 163 CHEMINADE Jacques 136 MELENCHON Jean-Luc 84 LE PEN Marine 70 LASSALLE Jean 60 ASSELINEAU François 36 POUTOU Philippe
The other day I actually did have an Atilla the Hun-esque moment. I was on the job (or just finishing off, as it were), and the old ticker was beating so fast I thought, oo-er
I've just finished reading a fascinating book on effective communication and motivating people, called Made to Stick by Heath and Heath.
Given the sporadic debates on here that, one way or another, berate a segment of the electorate for voting against their self-interests or (worse still) being too thick to know what their self-interests are, I thought my notes from the Chapter "Emotional" might be of interest. [The text in square brackets are my additions]:
"In 1998, Donald Kinder (U Michigan) found that the effects of self-interest on political views was ‘trifling’. This was true on issues as divers as racial busing, anti-drinking ordnances, and bilingual education. Self-interest turns out to be quite unimportant.
"Self-interest does matter, quite a bit, when the effects of a public policy are significant, tangible and immediate. Self-interest shapes what we pay attention to, even if it doesn’t dictate our stance.
"But: 1. Principles – equality, individualism, ideals about government, human rights and the like – matter to us, even when they violate our immediate self-interest. [surely there is an element of long-term vs short-term interest conflict at play here, in that we consider our beliefs in say human rights as worth the immediate opportunity cost in the long-term] 2. Group interest is often a better predictor of political opinions than self-interest. Our group affiliation may be based on race, class, religion, gender, region, political party, industry or countless other dimensions of difference.
"James March, Stanford, notes that we use two basic models to make decisions. 1. The rational agent – calculating consequences, we choose the alternative that yields the most value to us 2. Identity – There are no calculations, only norms and principles. People ask themselves three questions: Who am I? What kind of situation is this? And what do people like me doe in this kind of situation? [This kind of decision-making is what is behind culture – it provides us with a guide to make decisions even when we do not have the information or knowledge to calculate as a rational agent. What would x do in this situation?]"
NI: Until expiry EU/EEA: Until 70 (or 3 years if you move here after age 67) Gib/IoM/Jersey/Guernsey/"Designated countries"*: 12 months, must then apply to exchange for a GB licence All other countries: 12 months, must then pass the GB theory and practical tests.
*: Andorra, Australia, Barbados, British Virgin Islands, Canada, Falkland Islands, Faroe Islands, Hong Kong, Japan, Monaco, New Zealand, Republic of Korea, Singapore, South Africa, Switzerland, Zimbabwe.
Philip McGuigan (SF) @ 8/15 North Antrim £63.47 Jemma Dolan (SF) @ 15/8 Fermanagh and South Tyrone £22.85 Nichola Mallon (SDLP) @ evens Belfast North £21.58 John Stewart (UUP) @ 2/1 East Antrim £11.00
30 years ago Ulster was mired in sectarian violence, and there were British troops toting machine guns on British streets, to keep the Union together, and stop our fellow Brits slaughtering each other
Now Northern Ireland has really close elections, Gerry Adams does amusing tweets, and Great Britain is still here, somehow.
Long may it continue. I just hope I and others are still up for the (non-violent) fight. The EU lost us in part because it treated the idea it needed to justify it's existence continually with utter contempt, and we need to justify too.
Having considered the matter carefully, I would prefer not to die.
Really? Even when the physical and mental infirmity of old age wraps round you, almost as tight as the shroud? When every day makes you more of a shadow of the man you used to be?
Immortality without vigour does not seem like much of a prize.
Mr Dancer and you take a very gloomy view of the possibilities.
I prefer to imagine myself being downloaded into a computer aged 80 or so.
I always wonder about that. You close your eyes for the last time; is the machine with your memories that then wakes up really you?
Having considered the matter carefully, I would prefer not to die.
Really? Even when the physical and mental infirmity of old age wraps round you, almost as tight as the shroud? When every day makes you more of a shadow of the man you used to be?
Immortality without vigour does not seem like much of a prize.
Mr Dancer and you take a very gloomy view of the possibilities.
I prefer to imagine myself being downloaded into a computer aged 80 or so.
I always wonder about that. You close your eyes for the last time; is the machine with your memories that then wakes up really you?
Same with teleportation. Star trek answered it with 'no, but let's ignore the implications'.
Having considered the matter carefully, I would prefer not to die.
Really? Even when the physical and mental infirmity of old age wraps round you, almost as tight as the shroud? When every day makes you more of a shadow of the man you used to be?
Immortality without vigour does not seem like much of a prize.
Mr Dancer and you take a very gloomy view of the possibilities.
I prefer to imagine myself being downloaded into a computer aged 80 or so.
I always wonder about that. You close your eyes for the last time; is the machine with your memories that then wakes up really you?
It's a question that DataMeeks will no doubt ponder with his v2.0 consciousness at great length.
Having considered the matter carefully, I would prefer not to die.
Really? Even when the physical and mental infirmity of old age wraps round you, almost as tight as the shroud? When every day makes you more of a shadow of the man you used to be?
Immortality without vigour does not seem like much of a prize.
Mr Dancer and you take a very gloomy view of the possibilities.
I prefer to imagine myself being downloaded into a computer aged 80 or so.
I always wonder about that. You close your eyes for the last time; is the machine with your memories that then wakes up really you?
It's a question that DataMeeks will no doubt ponder with his v2.0 consciousness at great length.
I suppose the important thing is that the rest of humanity continues to benefit from your presence, in one shape or another.
It's a good piece (as one would expect!), but if I were a Labour moderate wondering whether to take the disinterested advice of the Chairman of Wakefield District Conservatives, I'd be worrying about three potential downsides:
- What happens if we try to dislodge Corbyn and fail again? - What would the effect on the party be if we win, but only by blocking a left-wing candidate from getting on to the ballot? - Can we get agreement on a single unifying candidate, or would we be in for yet another bruising and divisive contest?
I did try to forestall that by my (genuinely-held) view that the country needs an effective opposition.
However, to answer your questions:
1. If Labour MPs can persuade a Starmer or Benn to stand, and Corbyn then wins again, then that really is game up for 2020 and perhaps for good. That said, I don't think they would lose, for the reasons I mention. The much bigger risks are either that they don't stand at all or that they wimp out, do a deal to nominate a Corbyn-successor, and then lose to him/her.
2. It will clear out all the nutters who have paralysed Labour for the last two years. Bar the drop in income, that'd be a win-win.
3. Who knows? But it'd be a measure of Labour's maturity as to whether they could or not (as an aside, this is another good reason for challenging Corbyn directly: the threshold for nominations is higher so it lessens the likelihood of 2+ challengers being nominated.
A good article and I agree with it pretty well in its entirety. Good to see somebody else debunking the myth that Corbyn increased his margin of victory in 2016! Personally I am inclined to the view that it would be good for two or three candidates to challenge Corbyn so that if one or more were to stumble - as did Owen Smith last year - support can be easily transferred to one of the alternatives.
The danger with that is that the 'left' candidate wins a sizable lead on the first round and despite then losing due to being transfer-adverse, gains some kind of moral victory for having 'won' on first preferences.
I am not too worried about that. Ed Milliband did not lead on first preferences in 2010. Nor did Harman for the Deputy Leadership in 2007. May I ask whether you believe the conditions already exist for a successful challenge this year - or are we talking about 2018?
My guess is that they're probably already just about in place but it'd be far better tactically to wait until next year (although of course, the more that the evidence becomes incontrovertible, the more damage is done).
Having considered the matter carefully, I would prefer not to die.
Really? Even when the physical and mental infirmity of old age wraps round you, almost as tight as the shroud? When every day makes you more of a shadow of the man you used to be?
Immortality without vigour does not seem like much of a prize.
Mr Dancer and you take a very gloomy view of the possibilities.
I prefer to imagine myself being downloaded into a computer aged 80 or so.
I always wonder about that. You close your eyes for the last time; is the machine with your memories that then wakes up really you?
It's a question that DataMeeks will no doubt ponder with his v2.0 consciousness at great length.
I suppose the important thing is that the rest of humanity continues to benefit from your presence, in one shape or another.
I'm sure that pb will look forward to the fifteenth rerun of the Brexit referendum in 2154.
For the record, I'm currently on the fence about that one.
Eh? Fruit-picking is exactly the kind of low wage, low productivity industry kept alive by cheap immigrant labour that this country should no longer be in. It manages a dismal trifecta, using land, labour and capital inefficiently.
You want to create a Singapore for 60 million then?
Do I want to create a confident, successful, wealthy nation for 60 million?
Yes. Don't you?
And, I'm with you!
Singapore is 94% more wealthy per person than the UK, better education, better healthcare, and taxis only half the level in the UK, I would copy there economic position in a jot!!!
Singapore is basically the equivalent of central London, if you include Malaysia too (which Singapore used to be part of) you get the equivalent of the UK and a rather different story
Singapore, is wealthy and successful, because it has adopted a very free economy, the total tax take is only 20% of GDP, it has almost no import tariffs, the interest rate is set by the market, not civil servants.
It is also about the size of London, in area and population, ish, but when you look at how fast the economy has grown and continues to grow, it is clearly more than just being a city state.
The union looks pretty safe on that basis. I don't think a campaign would change many minds and it would be very ugly.
Hmm. Looks a bit iffy, that poll. From a blog called "endgameinulster"?
Some polls are much more pro-Union than that:
"If such a poll is held, a clear majority of people, 63%, say they will vote for Northern Ireland to remain in the UK, while only 22% would support a United Ireland."
Golly, surely that would be a big symbolic moment?
Has there been any analysis of the NI election through the Brexit lens? I'm guessing it must have had some effect.
Brexit really has shaken the kaleidoscope of politics in four parts of the UK.
Just think if it were to happen, two secessionist parties would have the most seats in 2 out of the 3 devolved parliaments/assemblies.
The English Democrats' moment has surely arrived.
Shame on you for forgetting Plaid Cymru!
Wales seems to have gone weirdly kippery..
Wales will be part of the Kingdom of England once more.
It would still be a Principality within the Kingdom
According to last census, only 72% of the people living in Wales were actually born in Wales. As a lot of children will be born in Wales but have non-welsh parents, I imagine the % of voters born in Wales will be closer to 2/3.
Hard to see a Welsh Independence campaign taking off given those nos.
Sympathies. It's like a Casualty ward in here, today.
Check out the last thread header, this is what Mike wrote
For the third Friday in a row I’m off to hospital this morning after being one of those who’ve added to this winter’s unprecedented demand on the NHS.
.
My bet is on your not dying in hospital
I'd like to die like Atilla the Hun. Or Lord Palmerston.
I want to die on my 100th birthday, and I want my wife to be so upset, that she cancels her 21st birthday party as a mark of respect.
I want to die sometime in my late 80s or early 90s, a late summer's day somewhere in the north of England, dozing off gently after a hearty lunch,an inconsequential end-of-rubber test match ambling towards a happy conclusion on the radio, the chatter children and grandchildren from elsewhere in the building, maybe the shout of the odd great-grandchild...
Alright, I wouldn't wish the discovery of their dead father on my children. But as a way to round off a life, it seems pretty unbeatable.
Comments
Looking rough for the UUP. Weirdly John Stewart (2-1) (Still half a chance maybe) looking in better shape than Kennedy though (Looks complete toast to me)
DUP 27.9%
Sinn Fein 26.9%
209,832 vs 202,237 votes
Fermanagh & South Tyrone is the one missing
Personally I am inclined to the view that it would be good for two or three candidates to challenge Corbyn so that if one or more were to stumble - as did Owen Smith last year - support can be easily transferred to one of the alternatives.
Expect the DUP to have most first prefs, just.
Edited extra bit: a Juppe/Baroin-Macron second round would be splendid.
"Babblers and Schemers 1900"
Just think if it were to happen, two secessionist parties would have the most seats in 2 out of the 3 devolved parliaments/assemblies.
I think you'll lose some money, not all of it but some as you are on under evens.
The SNP rose to dominance long before the referendum on the EU. The Northern Irish situation is caused by domestic daftness.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-21345997
May I ask whether you believe the conditions already exist for a successful challenge this year - or are we talking about 2018?
2) If there is, No will probably win again
3) I'd rather it didn't come to it, but ultimately I'd prefer to be in an England and Wales (and NI?) outside the EU than a UK within it
Juppe said he would only accept the candidacy if he received the full backing of the Party and Fillon.
Fillon's chosen successor would be Baroin rather than Juppe, so some horse-trading may take place. Hope it doesn't come to pass though, even though I am 30k green on Baroin in the winners market, my potential winnings on the subsiduary markets with Juppe in place, give me better opportunities for trading.
Immortality without vigour does not seem like much of a prize.
If voting remain would have guaranteed the continuation of the uk I'd have voted that way.
I prefer to imagine myself being downloaded into a computer aged 80 or so.
First preferences
DUP 28.1 (-1.1)
SF 27.9 (+3.9)
UUP 12.9 (+0.3)
SDLP 11.9 (-0.1)
Alliance 9.1 (+2.1)
TUV 2.6 (-0.9)
Greens 2.3 (-0.4)
PBP 1.8 (-0.2)
A Conservative win in 2020 would suffice. 'Scotland is not represented in London! The vast majority of Scottish MPs aren't in government!'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39157934
Perhaps he wants to become Mr Slant, of Discworld fame.
1155 FILLON François
464 MACRON Emmanuel
334 HAMON Benoît
314 ARTHAUD Nathalie
205 DUPONT-AIGNAN Nicolas
163 CHEMINADE Jacques
136 MELENCHON Jean-Luc
84 LE PEN Marine
70 LASSALLE Jean
60 ASSELINEAU François
36 POUTOU Philippe
105 OTHERS
All over a post office I believe.
Given the sporadic debates on here that, one way or another, berate a segment of the electorate for voting against their self-interests or (worse still) being too thick to know what their self-interests are, I thought my notes from the Chapter "Emotional" might be of interest. [The text in square brackets are my additions]:
"In 1998, Donald Kinder (U Michigan) found that the effects of self-interest on political views was ‘trifling’. This was true on issues as divers as racial busing, anti-drinking ordnances, and bilingual education. Self-interest turns out to be quite unimportant.
"Self-interest does matter, quite a bit, when the effects of a public policy are significant, tangible and immediate. Self-interest shapes what we pay attention to, even if it doesn’t dictate our stance.
"But:
1. Principles – equality, individualism, ideals about government, human rights and the like – matter to us, even when they violate our immediate self-interest. [surely there is an element of long-term vs short-term interest conflict at play here, in that we consider our beliefs in say human rights as worth the immediate opportunity cost in the long-term]
2. Group interest is often a better predictor of political opinions than self-interest. Our group affiliation may be based on race, class, religion, gender, region, political party, industry or countless other dimensions of difference.
"James March, Stanford, notes that we use two basic models to make decisions.
1. The rational agent – calculating consequences, we choose the alternative that yields the most value to us
2. Identity – There are no calculations, only norms and principles. People ask themselves three questions: Who am I? What kind of situation is this? And what do people like me doe in this kind of situation? [This kind of decision-making is what is behind culture – it provides us with a guide to make decisions even when we do not have the information or knowledge to calculate as a rational agent. What would x do in this situation?]"
https://www.gov.uk/driving-nongb-licence/y/a-resident-of-great-britain/full-car-and-or-motorcycle
NI: Until expiry
EU/EEA: Until 70 (or 3 years if you move here after age 67)
Gib/IoM/Jersey/Guernsey/"Designated countries"*: 12 months, must then apply to exchange for a GB licence
All other countries: 12 months, must then pass the GB theory and practical tests.
*: Andorra, Australia, Barbados, British Virgin Islands, Canada, Falkland Islands, Faroe Islands, Hong Kong, Japan, Monaco, New Zealand, Republic of Korea, Singapore, South Africa, Switzerland, Zimbabwe.
They were promised the only way they'd remain in the EU/members of the single market was if they rejected independence.
http://endgameinulster.blogspot.co.uk/2017/01/lucid-talk-opinion-poll.html?m=1
The union looks pretty safe on that basis. I don't think a campaign would change many minds and it would be very ugly.
Jemma Dolan (SF) @ 15/8 Fermanagh and South Tyrone £22.85
Nichola Mallon (SDLP) @ evens Belfast North £21.58
John Stewart (UUP) @ 2/1 East Antrim £11.00
The still live bets I think
Nationalist parties often morph into pressure groups. See UKIP.
https://capx.co/did-the-dark-lords-of-data-really-win-it-for-trump/
For the record, I'm currently on the fence about that one.
Cant remember the exact situation, but there were three old men in a room and a bomb was heading for the building I think...
"I'm too young to die"
"I'm too old to die!"
"I'm too scared to die!!"
Where do they want Northern Ireland to be, politically speaking.
United Ireland outside the EU
It is also about the size of London, in area and population, ish, but when you look at how fast the economy has grown and continues to grow, it is clearly more than just being a city state.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZVjKlBCvhg
No SDLP, so should benefit Sinn Fein (and UUP very) slightly.
They'll be lowish in number though as I think most will go to the other Alliance candidate.
http://www.jpr.org.uk/documents/2011 Census results - Initial insights into Jewish neighbourhoods.pdf
As a lot of children will be born in Wales but have non-welsh parents, I imagine the % of voters born in Wales will be closer to 2/3.
Hard to see a Welsh Independence campaign taking off given those nos.
Alright, I wouldn't wish the discovery of their dead father on my children. But as a way to round off a life, it seems pretty unbeatable.