If the Greens can't do well here then they are probably destined to remain a 1 seat party for some considerable time.
The Greens - like Labour - would need to make a big issue of the LDs having been the 'Tories little helpers'.
Agreed - and that's why it was so important to pick Tim Farron not Norman Lamb in hindsight. Farron has many detractors, but he kept enough distance from the controversial coalition decisions to offer a clean break in enough people's eyes, and he's much harder to campaign against as a result.
To be honest , I don't think he has registered with many people at all. I still strongly suspect that LibDem participation in the Coalition will be toxic for them if only Labour and the Greens make a serious effort to remind voters.
The government stays in place until an alternative government is formed. If Her Maj is advised that Mr Corbyn is likely to have the confidence of the House, she'll appoint him as PM and he then has to win a vote of confidence to confirm it and prevent the GE happening. In practice, Her Majesty's advisors would take soundings and rapidly conclude that there's zero chance of Mr Corbyn having the confidence of the House. Hell, he hasn't even got the confidence of his own Shadow Cabinet!
That is far from clear constitutionally . The Balfour/Campbell-Bannerman precedent of December 1905 has been mentioned by some commentators as implying that Corbyn could be appointed as caretaker PM for the election period on the basis that May had already given up.
JustinSmallStraws seems to be refering to himself in the third person, now.
'Some commentators' indeed!
I've mentioned that instance before.
It is completely unknown how HM would act if a government No Confidenced itself. There is no real precedent though and it'd put the Palace in a very difficult position. If she refused to call Corbyn, she could be accused of partisanship; if she did, it'd look absurd.
snip.
Repeal of the ludicrous Fixed Term Act is the solution.
Can't one sentence be added to the FTPA saying it expires 30/03/2017 or something?
Robert Hazell thinks repeal is actually rather more difficult than it sounds:
"There is also brave talk about repealing the Fixed Term Parliaments Act: for example, in the backbench debate last October. But this is wishful thinking, because repeal would be far from straightforward. It would require legislation, which would have to pass both Houses, with particular difficulties in the Lords. The legislation would face technical and political difficulties. The political difficulty is that reverting to the status quo ante would confer on the Prime Minister the advantage of choosing the date of the next election."
B******l Road, Sandbanks (BPF543) The borrowers continue to await the planning decision including the adjacent site, which was expected by the end of February. The planning officer who was dealing with the decision is off on long term sick leave, and the borrowers are still waiting for the application to be reallocated to another officer.
Wanted to have a chat with you at some point about savingstream - lots of their loans appear to be past due, but perhaps I'm missing something. Was wondering whether they were worth investing with. Can you PM me if you are up for it?
"Today, Tuesday 7 March 2017, WikiLeaks begins its new series of leaks on the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency. Code-named "Vault 7" by WikiLeaks, it is the largest ever publication of confidential documents on the agency.
The first full part of the series, "Year Zero", comprises 8,761 documents and files from an isolated, high-security network situated inside the CIA's Center for Cyber Intelligence in Langley, Virgina. It follows an introductory disclosure last month of CIA targeting French political parties and candidates in the lead up to the 2012 presidential election...
Recently, the CIA lost control of the majority of its hacking arsenal including malware, viruses, trojans, weaponized "zero day" exploits, malware remote control systems and associated documentation. This extraordinary collection, which amounts to more than several hundred million lines of code, gives its possessor the entire hacking capacity of the CIA. The archive appears to have been circulated among former U.S. government hackers and contractors in an unauthorized manner, one of whom has provided WikiLeaks with portions of the archive.
If the Greens can't do well here then they are probably destined to remain a 1 seat party for some considerable time.
The Greens - like Labour - would need to make a big issue of the LDs having been the 'Tories little helpers'.
Agreed - and that's why it was so important to pick Tim Farron not Norman Lamb in hindsight. Farron has many detractors, but he kept enough distance from the controversial coalition decisions to offer a clean break in enough people's eyes, and he's much harder to campaign against as a result.
B******l Road, Sandbanks (BPF543) The borrowers continue to await the planning decision including the adjacent site, which was expected by the end of February. The planning officer who was dealing with the decision is off on long term sick leave, and the borrowers are still waiting for the application to be reallocated to another officer.
Wanted to have a chat with you at some point about savingstream - lots of their loans appear to be past due, but perhaps I'm missing something. Was wondering whether they were worth investing with. Can you PM me if you are up for it?
If the Greens can't do well here then they are probably destined to remain a 1 seat party for some considerable time.
The Greens - like Labour - would need to make a big issue of the LDs having been the 'Tories little helpers'.
Agreed - and that's why it was so important to pick Tim Farron not Norman Lamb in hindsight. Farron has many detractors, but he kept enough distance from the controversial coalition decisions to offer a clean break in enough people's eyes, and he's much harder to campaign against as a result.
To be honest , I don't think he has registered with many people at all. I still strongly suspect that LibDem participation in the Coalition will be toxic for them if only Labour and the Greens make a serious effort to remind voters.
I think the Coalition-time hostility to the Lib Dems from left-wing voters has mostly gone - but I'm not sure they have much that will APPEAL to them either. I still don't think, even if most Labour voters voted Remain, that they feel THAT strongly about it, and I especially don't think they'll feel that strongly about going back into the EU by 2020, when Brexit is pretty much a done deal. The Lib Dems will have to find something better as a USP if they want to pull back the erstwhile Red Liberals, IMO.
I'm also a bit surprised Labour and the Greens don't make more of Farron's past positions on gay rights, since that would probably do him a lot of damage with the voters he's targeting.
As with the best prime minister, I do wander how the DK value of that has evolved.
With inflation increasing, thereby bringing down real income growth, the honeymoon period will rapidly come to an end. The very people who support Brexit the most, will also feel the pinch the most. Where there votes will go, as Klopp says, who knows ?
If the Greens can't do well here then they are probably destined to remain a 1 seat party for some considerable time.
The Greens - like Labour - would need to make a big issue of the LDs having been the 'Tories little helpers'.
Agreed - and that's why it was so important to pick Tim Farron not Norman Lamb in hindsight. Farron has many detractors, but he kept enough distance from the controversial coalition decisions to offer a clean break in enough people's eyes, and he's much harder to campaign against as a result.
To be honest , I don't think he has registered with many people at all. I still strongly suspect that LibDem participation in the Coalition will be toxic for them if only Labour and the Greens make a serious effort to remind voters.
The 'mood' that I pick up from discussions on here, as well as by-election results, is that the Lib Dems have come dramatically back into contention these last 12 months. So it's somewhat surprising to see them still marooned on 8%. Maybe what's happening is that that 8% is becoming more enthusiastic in its support now it has a cause to rally around (i.e. opposition to Brexit) - and is therefore very good at getting its vote out - but that it has not yet got to the point of convincing many of the remaining 92% to get on board. Which would make sense - while there are many Remainers, the number of Euro-enthusiasts has always been pretty small (as, it should be said, is the number of Euro-rejectionists; most people could see the positives and negatives and were neither entirely positive nor entirely negative about Europe). The Lib Dems may be convincing subscribers to the New European, but are not yet convincing the majority that they are replacing Labour as the non-Conservative party.
"Today, Tuesday 7 March 2017, WikiLeaks begins its new series of leaks on the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency. Code-named "Vault 7" by WikiLeaks, it is the largest ever publication of confidential documents on the agency.
The first full part of the series, "Year Zero", comprises 8,761 documents and files from an isolated, high-security network situated inside the CIA's Center for Cyber Intelligence in Langley, Virgina. It follows an introductory disclosure last month of CIA targeting French political parties and candidates in the lead up to the 2012 presidential election...
Recently, the CIA lost control of the majority of its hacking arsenal including malware, viruses, trojans, weaponized "zero day" exploits, malware remote control systems and associated documentation. This extraordinary collection, which amounts to more than several hundred million lines of code, gives its possessor the entire hacking capacity of the CIA. The archive appears to have been circulated among former U.S. government hackers and contractors in an unauthorized manner, one of whom has provided WikiLeaks with portions of the archive.
So to the Guardian et al...will this make them heroes again, or still baddies? After all, initially they were heroes and so was Snowden for leaking this kind of info...
If the Greens can't do well here then they are probably destined to remain a 1 seat party for some considerable time.
The Greens - like Labour - would need to make a big issue of the LDs having been the 'Tories little helpers'.
Agreed - and that's why it was so important to pick Tim Farron not Norman Lamb in hindsight. Farron has many detractors, but he kept enough distance from the controversial coalition decisions to offer a clean break in enough people's eyes, and he's much harder to campaign against as a result.
To be honest , I don't think he has registered with many people at all. I still strongly suspect that LibDem participation in the Coalition will be toxic for them if only Labour and the Greens make a serious effort to remind voters.
I think the Coalition-time hostility to the Lib Dems from left-wing voters has mostly gone - but I'm not sure they have much that will APPEAL to them either. I still don't think, even if most Labour voters voted Remain, that they feel THAT strongly about it, and I especially don't think they'll feel that strongly about going back into the EU by 2020, when Brexit is pretty much a done deal. The Lib Dems will have to find something better as a USP if they want to pull back the erstwhile Red Liberals, IMO.
Very few people who were students in 2010-1 are still students now.
If the Greens can't do well here then they are probably destined to remain a 1 seat party for some considerable time.
The Greens - like Labour - would need to make a big issue of the LDs having been the 'Tories little helpers'.
Agreed - and that's why it was so important to pick Tim Farron not Norman Lamb in hindsight. Farron has many detractors, but he kept enough distance from the controversial coalition decisions to offer a clean break in enough people's eyes, and he's much harder to campaign against as a result.
To be honest , I don't think he has registered with many people at all. I still strongly suspect that LibDem participation in the Coalition will be toxic for them if only Labour and the Greens make a serious effort to remind voters.
I think the Coalition-time hostility to the Lib Dems from left-wing voters has mostly gone - but I'm not sure they have much that will APPEAL to them either. I still don't think, even if most Labour voters voted Remain, that they feel THAT strongly about it, and I especially don't think they'll feel that strongly about going back into the EU by 2020, when Brexit is pretty much a done deal. The Lib Dems will have to find something better as a USP if they want to pull back the erstwhile Red Liberals, IMO.
I agree with you in respect of Brexit and feel the issue is already far less salient at elections than the commentariat has talked itself into believing. Re - the Coalition I think you underestimate the bitterness felt by many left of centre voters to the LibDems on that - indeed quite a few of their former voters are now committed Corbynites. I voted LibDem myself in 2001 and 2005 - and whilst I have no time for Corbyn , I would not contemplate voting LibDem again -not even in Tory/ LibDem marginals like Eastbourne or St Ives.
If the Greens can't do well here then they are probably destined to remain a 1 seat party for some considerable time.
The Greens - like Labour - would need to make a big issue of the LDs having been the 'Tories little helpers'.
Agreed - and that's why it was so important to pick Tim Farron not Norman Lamb in hindsight. Farron has many detractors, but he kept enough distance from the controversial coalition decisions to offer a clean break in enough people's eyes, and he's much harder to campaign against as a result.
To be honest , I don't think he has registered with many people at all. I still strongly suspect that LibDem participation in the Coalition will be toxic for them if only Labour and the Greens make a serious effort to remind voters.
The 'mood' that I pick up from discussions on here, as well as by-election results, is that the Lib Dems have come dramatically back into contention these last 12 months. So it's somewhat surprising to see them still marooned on 8%. Maybe what's happening is that that 8% is becoming more enthusiastic in its support now it has a cause to rally around (i.e. opposition to Brexit) - and is therefore very good at getting its vote out - but that it has not yet got to the point of convincing many of the remaining 92% to get on board. Which would make sense - while there are many Remainers, the number of Euro-enthusiasts has always been pretty small (as, it should be said, is the number of Euro-rejectionists; most people could see the positives and negatives and were neither entirely positive nor entirely negative about Europe). The Lib Dems may be convincing subscribers to the New European, but are not yet convincing the majority that they are replacing Labour as the non-Conservative party.
There has been a change.
Brexit has provided some people with a reason to vote Lib Dem. This is significant because it is the first positive reason people have had to vote Lib Dem since 2010.
But they must not carried away. All their problems still remain.
They have 9 MPs and are the 4th party, so are not challenging for any role in parliament and they get no oxygen. And there is no evidence or reason for left and Labour voters to forgive them for the coalition.
If the Greens can't do well here then they are probably destined to remain a 1 seat party for some considerable time.
The Greens - like Labour - would need to make a big issue of the LDs having been the 'Tories little helpers'.
Agreed - and that's why it was so important to pick Tim Farron not Norman Lamb in hindsight. Farron has many detractors, but he kept enough distance from the controversial coalition decisions to offer a clean break in enough people's eyes, and he's much harder to campaign against as a result.
To be honest , I don't think he has registered with many people at all. I still strongly suspect that LibDem participation in the Coalition will be toxic for them if only Labour and the Greens make a serious effort to remind voters.
The Lib Dems may be convincing subscribers to the New European, but are not yet convincing the majority that they are replacing Labour as the non-Conservative party.
I would imagine that the two things any party aspiring to power must show are: 1. Respect for the Brexit result; and 2. Not be financially / economically batshit crazy. Which somewhat rules out LDs and Labour right now. The Labour batshit crazy problem may not last however. If they elect themselves a moderate leaver to replace the Mrs Rochester crowd running the party today they could be back in contention in England.
If the Greens can't do well here then they are probably destined to remain a 1 seat party for some considerable time.
The Greens - like Labour - would need to make a big issue of the LDs having been the 'Tories little helpers'.
Agreed - and that's why it was so important to pick Tim Farron not Norman Lamb in hindsight. Farron has many detractors, but he kept enough distance from the controversial coalition decisions to offer a clean break in enough people's eyes, and he's much harder to campaign against as a result.
To be honest , I don't think he has registered with many people at all. I still strongly suspect that LibDem participation in the Coalition will be toxic for them if only Labour and the Greens make a serious effort to remind voters.
I think the Coalition-time hostility to the Lib Dems from left-wing voters has mostly gone - but I'm not sure they have much that will APPEAL to them either. I still don't think, even if most Labour voters voted Remain, that they feel THAT strongly about it, and I especially don't think they'll feel that strongly about going back into the EU by 2020, when Brexit is pretty much a done deal. The Lib Dems will have to find something better as a USP if they want to pull back the erstwhile Red Liberals, IMO.
I agree with you in respect of Brexit and feel the issue is already far less salient at elections than the commentariat has talked itself into believing. Re - the Coalition I think you underestimate the bitterness felt by many left of centre voters to the LibDems on that - indeed quite a few of their former voters are now committed Corbynites. I voted LibDem myself in 2001 and 2005 - and whilst I have no time for Corbyn , I would not contemplate voting LibDem again -not even in Tory/ LibDem marginals like Eastbourne or St Ives.
No-one could accuse you of sticking to chronology in your small straw grasping.
Gorton isn't rock solid safe because they nearly won in the 50s.
George's ticking time-bomb legacy: Insidious steal taxes. Deeply flawed gimmicks. Failed saving schemes. George Osborne was fired months ago - but on the eve of the Budget, a damning analysis exposes the poisonous inheritance he left Britain
I grew steadily less impressed with Osborne over time.
He would have made a decent Labour chancellor I suppose.
I thought the most cutting obssrvation:e Tellingly, when Theresa May dumped him from her Cabinet last summer after the failure of his misguided Project Fear during the EU referendum campaign, she suggested he might like to spend some time ‘getting to know your party’. Instead, Osborne has spent more time boosting his bank balance. Last year, his extra-parliamentary earnings — mostly thanks to speeches to financial fat cats across the world — were £628,000. Meanwhile, his successors have to defuse all the explosive devices he planted and fight the fires he started.
In fact, are you Theresa?
You do seem to obsess about posters' identities.....we've discussed this before....have you sought help?
Quite ironic given Bojabob has trouble remembering their own identity
I don't think I am obsessed by anyone's identity – I couldn't care less who you or anyone else is – I just wonder if Carlotta is in fact Theresa May, given her views are identical to those of Theresa May. What are the chances of such a coincidence in a finite universe?
You say you couldn't care less about it, but then proceed to ask the same question again.
I haven't asked you who you are, ever, as far as I recall. I'm merely interested as to whether Carlotta is in fact Theresa May. Wouldn't having the PM on here be interesting to most PBers?
I'd be concerned about her judgement both in spending time on here she could be spending more usefully in other areas, but also for venturing below the line on a political article, in itself a sure sign of skewed judgement.
Carlotta said here that Theresa has a good sex life with her hubby.
If the Greens can't do well here then they are probably destined to remain a 1 seat party for some considerable time.
The Greens - like Labour - would need to make a big issue of the LDs having been the 'Tories little helpers'.
Agreed - and that's why it was so important to pick Tim Farron not Norman Lamb in hindsight. Farron has many detractors, but he kept enough distance from the controversial coalition decisions to offer a clean break in enough people's eyes, and he's much harder to campaign against as a result.
To be honest , I don't think he has registered with many people at all. I still strongly suspect that LibDem participation in the Coalition will be toxic for them if only Labour and the Greens make a serious effort to remind voters.
I think the Coalition-time hostility to the Lib Dems from left-wing voters has mostly gone - but I'm not sure they have much that will APPEAL to them either. I still don't think, even if most Labour voters voted Remain, that they feel THAT strongly about it, and I especially don't think they'll feel that strongly about going back into the EU by 2020, when Brexit is pretty much a done deal. The Lib Dems will have to find something better as a USP if they want to pull back the erstwhile Red Liberals, IMO.
I agree with you in respect of Brexit and feel the issue is already far less salient at elections than the commentariat has talked itself into believing. Re - the Coalition I think you underestimate the bitterness felt by many left of centre voters to the LibDems on that - indeed quite a few of their former voters are now committed Corbynites. I voted LibDem myself in 2001 and 2005 - and whilst I have no time for Corbyn , I would not contemplate voting LibDem again -not even in Tory/ LibDem marginals like Eastbourne or St Ives.
Personally, I'm a fully paid-up Labour member, and even I would probably vote LibDem if I lived in a Tory/LD marginal! (Whereas I wouldn't have done in 2015)
If the Greens can't do well here then they are probably destined to remain a 1 seat party for some considerable time.
The Greens - like Labour - would need to make a big issue of the LDs having been the 'Tories little helpers'.
Agreed - and that's why it was so important to pick Tim Farron not Norman Lamb in hindsight. Farron has many detractors, but he kept enough distance from the controversial coalition decisions to offer a clean break in enough people's eyes, and he's much harder to campaign against as a result.
To be honest , I don't think he has registered with many people at all. I still strongly suspect that LibDem participation in the Coalition will be toxic for them if only Labour and the Greens make a serious effort to remind voters.
The 'mood' that I pick up from discussions on here, as well as by-election results, is that the Lib Dems have come dramatically back into contention these last 12 months. So it's somewhat surprising to see them still marooned on 8%. Maybe what's happening is that that 8% is becoming more enthusiastic in its support now it has a cause to rally around (i.e. opposition to Brexit) - and is therefore very good at getting its vote out - but that it has not yet got to the point of convincing many of the remaining 92% to get on board. Which would make sense - while there are many Remainers, the number of Euro-enthusiasts has always been pretty small (as, it should be said, is the number of Euro-rejectionists; most people could see the positives and negatives and were neither entirely positive nor entirely negative about Europe). The Lib Dems may be convincing subscribers to the New European, but are not yet convincing the majority that they are replacing Labour as the non-Conservative party.
Most of their Local By election success is probably explained by the sheer scale of the effort the LibDems are making in those areas relative to the other parties. They are also very good at taking advantage of the special circumstances surrounding such elections.
Can't help but feel that No. 10 have played a blinder recently.
Getting Labour to appear divided on Brexit just before the Copeland by-election. Getting Labour to be more vehemently against Grammars than Tories are pro them. Getting Corbyn to sound frit about an early election.
If the Greens can't do well here then they are probably destined to remain a 1 seat party for some considerable time.
The Greens - like Labour - would need to make a big issue of the LDs having been the 'Tories little helpers'.
Agreed - and that's why it was so important to pick Tim Farron not Norman Lamb in hindsight. Farron has many detractors, but he kept enough distance from the controversial coalition decisions to offer a clean break in enough people's eyes, and he's much harder to campaign against as a result.
To be honest , I don't think he has registered with many people at all. I still strongly suspect that LibDem participation in the Coalition will be toxic for them if only Labour and the Greens make a serious effort to remind voters.
I think the Coalition-time hostility to the Lib Dems from left-wing voters has mostly gone - but I'm not sure they have much that will APPEAL to them either. I still don't think, even if most Labour voters voted Remain, that they feel THAT strongly about it, and I especially don't think they'll feel that strongly about going back into the EU by 2020, when Brexit is pretty much a done deal. The Lib Dems will have to find something better as a USP if they want to pull back the erstwhile Red Liberals, IMO.
I agree with you in respect of Brexit and feel the issue is already far less salient at elections than the commentariat has talked itself into believing. Re - the Coalition I think you underestimate the bitterness felt by many left of centre voters to the LibDems on that - indeed quite a few of their former voters are now committed Corbynites. I voted LibDem myself in 2001 and 2005 - and whilst I have no time for Corbyn , I would not contemplate voting LibDem again -not even in Tory/ LibDem marginals like Eastbourne or St Ives.
Personally, I'm a fully paid-up Labour member, and even I would probably vote LibDem if I lived in a Tory/LD marginal! (Whereas I wouldn't have done in 2015)
If you declared that in public , you would - rightly - face expulsion!
Carlotta said here that Theresa has a good sex life with her hubby.
FWIW, Carlotta has said in the past that she's been a friend of Philip and Theresa since they were all at university together. A little indiscreet, possibly, if she made that comment (I didn't see it) but plausible that she might know.
George's ticking time-bomb legacy: Insidious steal taxes. Deeply flawed gimmicks. Failed saving schemes. George Osborne was fired months ago - but on the eve of the Budget, a damning analysis exposes the poisonous inheritance he left Britain
I grew steadily less impressed with Osborne over time.
He would have made a decent Labour chancellor I suppose.
I thought the most cutting obssrvation:e Tellingly, when Theresa May dumped him from her Cabinet last summer after the failure of his misguided Project Fear during the EU referendum campaign, she suggested he might like to spend some time ‘getting to know your party’. Instead, Osborne has spent more time boosting his bank balance. Last year, his extra-parliamentary earnings — mostly thanks to speeches to financial fat cats across the world — were £628,000. Meanwhile, his successors have to defuse all the explosive devices he planted and fight the fires he started.
In fact, are you Theresa?
You do seem to obsess about posters' identities.....we've discussed this before....have you sought help?
Quite ironic given Bojabob has trouble remembering their own identity
I don't think I am obsessed by anyone's identity – I couldn't care less who you or anyone else is – I just wonder if Carlotta is in fact Theresa May, given her views are identical to those of Theresa May. What are the chances of such a coincidence in a finite universe?
You say you couldn't care less about it, but then proceed to ask the same question again.
I haven't asked you who you are, ever, as far as I recall. I'm merely interested as to whether Carlotta is in fact Theresa May. Wouldn't having the PM on here be interesting to most PBers?
I'd be concerned about her judgement both in spending time on here she could be spending more usefully in other areas, but also for venturing below the line on a political article, in itself a sure sign of skewed judgement.
Carlotta said here that Theresa has a good sex life with her hubby.
If the Greens can't do well here then they are probably destined to remain a 1 seat party for some considerable time.
The Greens - like Labour - would need to make a big issue of the LDs having been the 'Tories little helpers'.
Agreed - and that's why it was so important to pick Tim Farron not Norman Lamb in hindsight. Farron has many detractors, but he kept enough distance from the controversial coalition decisions to offer a clean break in enough people's eyes, and he's much harder to campaign against as a result.
To be honest , I don't think he has registered with many people at all. I still strongly suspect that LibDem participation in the Coalition will be toxic for them if only Labour and the Greens make a serious effort to remind voters.
I think the Coalition-time hostility to the Lib Dems from left-wing voters has mostly gone - but I'm not sure they have much that will APPEAL to them either. I still don't think, even if most Labour voters voted Remain, that they feel THAT strongly about it, and I especially don't think they'll feel that strongly about going back into the EU by 2020, when Brexit is pretty much a done deal. The Lib Dems will have to find something better as a USP if they want to pull back the erstwhile Red Liberals, IMO.
I agree with you in respect of Brexit and feel the issue is already far less salient at elections than the commentariat has talked itself into believing. Re - the Coalition I think you underestimate the bitterness felt by many left of centre voters to the LibDems on that - indeed quite a few of their former voters are now committed Corbynites. I voted LibDem myself in 2001 and 2005 - and whilst I have no time for Corbyn , I would not contemplate voting LibDem again -not even in Tory/ LibDem marginals like Eastbourne or St Ives.
Personally, I'm a fully paid-up Labour member, and even I would probably vote LibDem if I lived in a Tory/LD marginal! (Whereas I wouldn't have done in 2015)
If you declared that in public , you would - rightly - face expulsion!
Quite the stickler for rules given you're not a member of any party, right?
Can't help but feel that No. 10 have played a blinder recently.
Getting Labour to appear divided on Brexit just before the Copeland by-election. Getting Labour to be more vehemently against Grammars than Tories are pro them. Getting Corbyn to sound frit about an early election.
To be fair, given Jezza manages to balls up his tax return stunt TWO YEARS RUNNING and turn it into a negative story about his own team's competence, you aren't exactly playing against an Alex Ferguson led Man Utd.
Can't help but feel that No. 10 have played a blinder recently.
Getting Labour to appear divided on Brexit just before the Copeland by-election. Getting Labour to be more vehemently against Grammars than Tories are pro them. Getting Corbyn to sound frit about an early election.
To be fair, given Jezza manages to balls up his tax return stunt TWO YEARS RUNNING and turn it into a negative story about his own team's competence, you aren't exactly playing against an Alex Ferguson led Man Utd.
If the Greens can't do well here then they are probably destined to remain a 1 seat party for some considerable time.
The Greens - like Labour - would need to make a big issue of the LDs having been the 'Tories little helpers'.
Agreed - and that's why it was so important to pick Tim Farron not Norman Lamb in hindsight. Farron has many detractors, but he kept enough distance from the controversial coalition decisions to offer a clean break in enough people's eyes, and he's much harder to campaign against as a result.
To be honest , I don't think he has registered with many people at all. I still strongly suspect that LibDem participation in the Coalition will be toxic for them if only Labour and the Greens make a serious effort to remind voters.
I think the Coalition-time hostility to the Lib Dems from left-wing voters has mostly gone - but I'm not sure they have much that will APPEAL to them either. I still don't think, even if most Labour voters voted Remain, that they feel THAT strongly about it, and I especially don't think they'll feel that strongly about going back into the EU by 2020, when Brexit is pretty much a done deal. The Lib Dems will have to find something better as a USP if they want to pull back the erstwhile Red Liberals, IMO.
I agree with you in respect of Brexit and feel the issue is already far less salient at elections than the commentariat has talked itself into believing. Re - the Coalition I think you underestimate the bitterness felt by many left of centre voters to the LibDems on that - indeed quite a few of their former voters are now committed Corbynites. I voted LibDem myself in 2001 and 2005 - and whilst I have no time for Corbyn , I would not contemplate voting LibDem again -not even in Tory/ LibDem marginals like Eastbourne or St Ives.
Personally, I'm a fully paid-up Labour member, and even I would probably vote LibDem if I lived in a Tory/LD marginal! (Whereas I wouldn't have done in 2015)
If you declared that in public , you would - rightly - face expulsion!
Quite the stickler for rules given you're not a member of any party, right?
I ceased to be a member of the Labour Party at the end of 1996. The only campaigning activity I have engaged in since that time was for Craig Murray as an Independent candidate at the July 2009 Norwich North by election.
I thought hawkings had been proved wrong on his two big theories about science... if so, based on track record...
All Hawking's theories await experimental verification.
(This is one reason why he has not won a Nobel prize, the Nobel committee being traditionally reluctant to award prizes in pure theory).
Hawking is fond of making bets in support of his hypotheses, and he has felt obliged to pay out on a couple (I think the black hole information paradox was one and the other had something to do with whether time was reversible, though I know bugger all about physics and may have them both arse about face).
As with the best prime minister, I do wander how the DK value of that has evolved.
With inflation increasing, thereby bringing down real income growth, the honeymoon period will rapidly come to an end. The very people who support Brexit the most, will also feel the pinch the most. Where there votes will go, as Klopp says, who knows ?
You realise that inflation is below the target? I had a long chat with the chancellor some years ago about the difference between different types of inflation. Inflation caused by events or changes such as currency changes or oil price changes are one offs. They create a spike for those figures. If a 10% currency devaluation causes prices to increase by 5%, that 5% is once. It's not a further 5% the following year. It drops out off the system. The problem is when you get into a spiral of increasing prices and increasing wage demands to compensate.
If the Greens can't do well here then they are probably destined to remain a 1 seat party for some considerable time.
The Greens - like Labour - would need to make a big issue of the LDs having been the 'Tories little helpers'.
Agreed - and that's why it was so important to pick Tim Farron not Norman Lamb in hindsight. Farron has many detractors, but he kept enough distance from the controversial coalition decisions to offer a clean break in enough people's eyes, and he's much harder to campaign against as a result.
To be honest , I don't think he has registered with many people at all. I still strongly suspect that LibDem participation in the Coalition will be toxic for them if only Labour and the Greens make a serious effort to remind voters.
I think the Coalition-time hostility to the Lib Dems from left-wing voters has mostly gone - but I'm not sure they have much that will APPEAL to them either. I still don't think, even if most Labour voters voted Remain, that they feel THAT strongly about it, and I especially don't think they'll feel that strongly about going back into the EU by 2020, when Brexit is pretty much a done deal. The Lib Dems will have to find something better as a USP if they want to pull back the erstwhile Red Liberals, IMO.
I agree with you in respect of Brexit and feel the issue is already far less salient at elections than the commentariat has talked itself into believing. Re - the Coalition I think you underestimate the bitterness felt by many left of centre voters to the LibDems on that - indeed quite a few of their former voters are now committed Corbynites. I voted LibDem myself in 2001 and 2005 - and whilst I have no time for Corbyn , I would not contemplate voting LibDem again -not even in Tory/ LibDem marginals like Eastbourne or St Ives.
Personally, I'm a fully paid-up Labour member, and even I would probably vote LibDem if I lived in a Tory/LD marginal! (Whereas I wouldn't have done in 2015)
If you declared that in public , you would - rightly - face expulsion!
Quite the stickler for rules given you're not a member of any party, right?
I ceased to be a member of the Labour Party at the end of 1996. The only campaigning activity I have engaged in since that time was for Craig Murray as an Independent candidate at the July 2009 Norwich North by election.
His party name according to Wikipedia was interesting.
This bit of that article struck me as particularly perceptive:
..even if MPs can hasten regime change, Corbyn’s replacement will end up being someone prepared to praise his legacy. The price of ditching the leader will be an absence of serious inquest into the reasons why he needed ditching in the first place. A spell of unity will be bought with deferral of arguments about markets, trade, defence, immigration, public sector reform and all the other issues that make Labour unity impossible to sustain for long
As with the best prime minister, I do wander how the DK value of that has evolved.
With inflation increasing, thereby bringing down real income growth, the honeymoon period will rapidly come to an end. The very people who support Brexit the most, will also feel the pinch the most. Where there votes will go, as Klopp says, who knows ?
You realise that inflation is below the target? I had a long chat with the chancellor some years ago about the difference between different types of inflation. Inflation caused by events or changes such as currency changes or oil price changes are one offs. They create a spike for those figures. If a 10% currency devaluation causes prices to increase by 5%, that 5% is once. It's not a further 5% the following year. It drops out off the system. The problem is when you get into a spiral of increasing prices and increasing wage demands to compensate.
Indeed. It is why I still can't imagine an interest rate rise until late 2018.
If the Greens can't do well here then they are probably destined to remain a 1 seat party for some considerable time.
The Greens - like Labour - would need to make a big issue of the LDs having been the 'Tories little helpers'.
Agreed - and that's why it was so important to pick Tim Farron not Norman Lamb in hindsight. clean break in enough people's eyes, and he's much harder to campaign against as a result.
I think the Coalition-time hostility to the Lib Dems from left-wing voters has mostly gone - but I'm not sure they have much that will APPEAL to them either. I still don't think, even if most Labour voters voted Remain, that they feel THAT strongly about it, and I especially don't think they'll feel that strongly about going back into the EU by 2020, when Brexit is pretty much a done deal. The Lib Dems will have to find something better as a USP if they want to pull back the erstwhile Red Liberals, IMO.
I agree with you in respect of Brexit and feel the issue is already far less salient at elections than the commentariat has talked itself into believing. Re - the Coalition I think you underestimate the bitterness felt by many left of centre voters to the LibDems on that - indeed quite a few of their former voters are now committed Corbynites. I voted LibDem myself in 2001 and 2005 - and whilst I have no time for Corbyn , I would not contemplate voting LibDem again -not even in Tory/ LibDem marginals like Eastbourne or St Ives.
Personally, I'm a fully paid-up Labour member, and even I would probably vote LibDem if I lived in a Tory/LD marginal! (Whereas I wouldn't have done in 2015)
If you declared that in public , you would - rightly - face expulsion!
Quite the stickler for rules given you're not a member of any party, right?
I ceased to be a member of the Labour Party at the end of 1996. The only campaigning activity I have engaged in since that time was for Craig Murray as an Independent candidate at the July 2009 Norwich North by election.
His party name according to Wikipedia was interesting.
The point I made about being expelled is one which I would apply to all parties.If a person is prepared to vote against the party of which he is a member , he/she should be deprived of membership.
I think you can argue that the Owen Smith challenge prolonged Corbyn leadership. Particularly that it was initially attempted in such an underhand and ludicrous manner.
Incidentally, now that the Republicans are clear that they won't be dumping Fillon, am I the only one who now thinks he's the favourite to win? For me, as flawed as he is, he seems the least implausible.
I think Le Pen will do better than her current polling in the first round, but even so, it's near impossible to see a path to 50% for her in the run-off.
Macron to me just seems so unlikely. His platform is just literally the exact opposite of virtually every electoral success in the West over the past couple of years. My suspicion is that he's currently still getting some support just on the basis of being a new fresh face who'll "shake things up", and that he'll fade once the specifics of his platform get more scrutiny.
Hamon IN THEORY might have more of a chance than he's being rated by the commentariat - he's not THAT far behind making the second round on current polling, there's surely a chance he could squeeze Melenchon a bit and he could benefit if Macron fades in the way I think he will, and he would probably scrape a win over Le Pen in the run-off if he got there. However, again, even though on paper I can see the path for him, it just instinctively seems so unlikely.
By process of elimination, Fillon is the one who I have the easiest time imagining getting over the line.
If the Greens can't do well here then they are probably destined to remain a 1 seat party for some considerable time.
The Greens - like Labour - would need to make a big issue of the LDs having been the 'Tories little helpers'.
Agreed - and that's why it was so important to pick Tim Farron not Norman Lamb in hindsight. Farron has many detractors, but he kept enough distance from the controversial coalition decisions to offer a clean break in enough people's eyes, and he's much harder to campaign against as a result.
To be honest , I don't think he has registered with many people at all. I still strongly suspect that LibDem participation in the Coalition will be toxic for them if only Labour and the Greens make a serious effort to remind voters.
The 'mood' that I pick up from discussions on here, as well as by-election results, is that the Lib Dems have come dramatically back into contention these last 12 months. So it's somewhat surprising to see them still marooned on 8%. Maybe what's happening is that that 8% is becoming more enthusiastic in its support now it has a cause to rally around (i.e. opposition to Brexit) - and is therefore very good at getting its vote out - but that it has not yet got to the point of convincing many of the remaining 92% to get on board. Which would make sense - while there are many Remainers, the number of Euro-enthusiasts has always been pretty small (as, it should be said, is the number of Euro-rejectionists; most people could see the positives and negatives and were neither entirely positive nor entirely negative about Europe). The Lib Dems may be convincing subscribers to the New European, but are not yet convincing the majority that they are replacing Labour as the non-Conservative party.
Most of their Local By election success is probably explained by the sheer scale of the effort the LibDems are making in those areas relative to the other parties. They are also very good at taking advantage of the special circumstances surrounding such elections.
You wouldn't consider that the very small numbers of people who actually voted in these local by-elections might be significant. From what I see on here most of these elections are about how about 1,200 people voted. I would be very hesitant to translate any party's progress at a national level on such thin gruel.
LORDS DIVISION RESULT: AMENDMENT 1 - 2ND REFERENDUM (ON FINAL DEAL) For - 131 Against - 336 Government wins. Lab (front bench at least) abstained.
Isn’t that one of the Brexit bill amendments, touted as a being a loss for the Gov’t?
No the loss will be on a 'meaningful vote' in parliament, not on a second referendum commitment.
Mr. Glenn, On the basis of that post, you might be able to answer a question that has been puzzling me. What would constitute a "meaningful vote"? The Crown in Parliament always has supremacy and so every vote is meaningful, and Parliament always has the ability to say yes or no to anything the executive propose, if it wants to. So I am struggling with this idea that a law needs to be passed to ensure that Parliament has a meaningful vote on a particular issue.
LORDS DIVISION RESULT: AMENDMENT 1 - 2ND REFERENDUM (ON FINAL DEAL) For - 131 Against - 336 Government wins. Lab (front bench at least) abstained.
Isn’t that one of the Brexit bill amendments, touted as a being a loss for the Gov’t?
No the loss will be on a 'meaningful vote' in parliament, not on a second referendum commitment.
Mr. Glenn, On the basis of that post, you might be able to answer a question that has been puzzling me. What would constitute a "meaningful vote"? The Crown in Parliament always has supremacy and so every vote is meaningful, and Parliament always has the ability to say yes or no to anything the executive propose, if it wants to. So I am struggling with this idea that a law needs to be passed to ensure that Parliament has a meaningful vote on a particular issue.
A "meaningful vote" in this case is surely one where a loss would mean the government is forced to go back to the negotiating table, until they come up with a deal that parliament can approve.
If the Greens can't do well here then they are probably destined to remain a 1 seat party for some considerable time.
The Greens - like Labour - would need to make a big issue of the LDs having been the 'Tories little helpers'.
Agreed - and that's why it was so important to pick Tim Farron not Norman Lamb in hindsight. clean break in enough people's eyes, and he's much harder to campaign against as a result.
I think the Coalition-time hostility to the Lib Dems from left-wing voters has mostly gone - but I'm not sure they have much that will APPEAL to them either. I still don't think, even if most Labour voters voted Remain, that they feel THAT strongly about it, and I especially don't think they'll feel that strongly about going back into the EU by 2020, when Brexit is pretty much a done deal. The Lib Dems will have to find something better as a USP if they want to pull back the erstwhile Red Liberals, IMO.
I agree with you in respect of Brexit and feel the issue is already far less salient at elections than the commentariat has talked itself into believing. Re - the Coalition I think you underestimate the bitterness felt by many left of centre voters to the LibDems on that - indeed quite a few of their former voters are now committed Corbynites. I voted LibDem myself in 2001 and 2005 - and whilst I have no time for Corbyn , I would not contemplate voting LibDem again -not even in Tory/ LibDem marginals like Eastbourne or St Ives.
Personally, I'm a fully paid-up Labour member, and even I would probably vote LibDem if I lived in a Tory/LD marginal! (Whereas I wouldn't have done in 2015)
If you declared that in public , you would - rightly - face expulsion!
Quite the stickler for rules given you're not a member of any party, right?
I ceased to be a member of the Labour Party at the end of 1996. The only campaigning activity I have engaged in since that time was for Craig Murray as an Independent candidate at the July 2009 Norwich North by election.
His party name according to Wikipedia was interesting.
The point I made about being expelled is one which I would apply to all parties.If a person is prepared to vote against the party of which he is a member , he/she should be deprived of membership.
If the Greens can't do well here then they are probably destined to remain a 1 seat party for some considerable time.
The Greens - like Labour - would need to make a big issue of the LDs having been the 'Tories little helpers'.
To be honest , I don't think he has registered with many people at all. I still strongly suspect that LibDem participation in the Coalition will be toxic for them if only Labour and the Greens make a serious effort to remind voters.
The 'mood' that I pick up from discussions on here, as well as by-election results, is that the Lib Dems have come dramatically back into contention these last 12 months. So it's somewhat surprising to see them still marooned on 8%. Maybe what's happening is that that 8% is becoming more enthusiastic in its support now it has a cause to rally around (i.e. opposition to Brexit) - and is therefore very good at getting its vote out - but that it has not yet got to the point of convincing many of the remaining 92% to get on board. Which would make sense - while there are many Remainers, the number of Euro-enthusiasts has always been pretty small (as, it should be said, is the number of Euro-rejectionists; most people could see the positives and negatives and were neither entirely positive nor entirely negative about Europe). The Lib Dems may be convincing subscribers to the New European, but are not yet convincing the majority that they are replacing Labour as the non-Conservative party.
Most of their Local By election success is probably explained by the sheer scale of the effort the LibDems are making in those areas relative to the other parties. They are also very good at taking advantage of the special circumstances surrounding such elections.
You wouldn't consider that the very small numbers of people who actually voted in these local by-elections might be significant. From what I see on here most of these elections are about how about 1,200 people voted. I would be very hesitant to translate any party's progress at a national level on such thin gruel.
Yes - the low turnout is very significant. The Libdems make FAR more effort than the other parties and so manage to get a much higher percentage of their supporters to the polling station.They also derive some benefit from party loyalties being a good less firm at Local Elections compared with a Parliamentary election.
LORDS DIVISION RESULT: AMENDMENT 1 - 2ND REFERENDUM (ON FINAL DEAL) For - 131 Against - 336 Government wins. Lab (front bench at least) abstained.
Isn’t that one of the Brexit bill amendments, touted as a being a loss for the Gov’t?
No the loss will be on a 'meaningful vote' in parliament, not on a second referendum commitment.
Mr. Glenn, On the basis of that post, you might be able to answer a question that has been puzzling me. What would constitute a "meaningful vote"? The Crown in Parliament always has supremacy and so every vote is meaningful, and Parliament always has the ability to say yes or no to anything the executive propose, if it wants to. So I am struggling with this idea that a law needs to be passed to ensure that Parliament has a meaningful vote on a particular issue.
Yes, to be honest my personal view is that all these amendments are nonsense. The act is just to authorise May to invoke article 50 and nothing more.
The only significant thing about such an amendment is that it affects the choreography of planned events and the psychology of the players.
He has a hard core of support, just as Le Pen does. On this morning's latest poll, he would have to gain just 3% in popularity and Macron lose the same, in order to qualify. Not sure a 3% increase in popularity would signal that he has become popular enough to to persuade enough of the 71% who do not think he should be running at all, to vote for him 2nd round.
It would be very tight and would come down to turnout. I would not want to be laying at odds much less than evens on either of them in that scenario.
That poll has Fillon winning by 58% to 42% in the second round, not very different from the 60% / 40% figures for a Macron/Le Pen second round. Although I'm a bit sceptical of these hypothetical match-ups, that does suggest that I'm right that the anti-Le Pen motive would trump other considerations.
Seems so. I almost feel sorry for her.
40% for Le Pen already would be just 5% behind Trumps total and over double her father's total in 2002, even that result would show how she has transformed the FN from a minor to a major party
In 2002, Le Pen père's score increased from 17% to 18% from R1 to R2. Current polling suggests that Le Pen fille's score would rise from 26% to 40% or 42%. That's a huge degree of detoxification in the minds of many who vote for other parties.
Personally I am taking all hypothetical R2 polls with a mountain of salt. There's never been a TV debate prior to R1 before. That changes everything. Look at the primaries.
Wouldn't it be interesting if when the latest batch of nominations are released today, Francois Baroin turns out to have picked up a fair few. Or Jean-Louis Borloo.
Comments
Wikileaks
RELEASE: CIA Vault 7 Year Zero decryption passphrase:
SplinterItIntoAThousandPiecesAndScatterItIntoTheWinds
This is a JFK quote about what he wanted to do to the CIA
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/
"Today, Tuesday 7 March 2017, WikiLeaks begins its new series of leaks on the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency. Code-named "Vault 7" by WikiLeaks, it is the largest ever publication of confidential documents on the agency.
The first full part of the series, "Year Zero", comprises 8,761 documents and files from an isolated, high-security network situated inside the CIA's Center for Cyber Intelligence in Langley, Virgina. It follows an introductory disclosure last month of CIA targeting French political parties and candidates in the lead up to the 2012 presidential election...
Recently, the CIA lost control of the majority of its hacking arsenal including malware, viruses, trojans, weaponized "zero day" exploits, malware remote control systems and associated documentation. This extraordinary collection, which amounts to more than several hundred million lines of code, gives its possessor the entire hacking capacity of the CIA. The archive appears to have been circulated among former U.S. government hackers and contractors in an unauthorized manner, one of whom has provided WikiLeaks with portions of the archive.
Maybe what's happening is that that 8% is becoming more enthusiastic in its support now it has a cause to rally around (i.e. opposition to Brexit) - and is therefore very good at getting its vote out - but that it has not yet got to the point of convincing many of the remaining 92% to get on board. Which would make sense - while there are many Remainers, the number of Euro-enthusiasts has always been pretty small (as, it should be said, is the number of Euro-rejectionists; most people could see the positives and negatives and were neither entirely positive nor entirely negative about Europe).
The Lib Dems may be convincing subscribers to the New European, but are not yet convincing the majority that they are replacing Labour as the non-Conservative party.
Copeland might be a good outside bet "Following representations from the Honourable Member for Copeland..." (pause for riotous cheers)
AMENDMENT 1 - 2ND REFERENDUM (ON FINAL DEAL)
For - 131
Against - 336
Government wins.
Lab (front bench at least) abstained.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/07/angry-jeremy-corbyn-snaps-presenter-repeatedly-refusing-say/
Brexit has provided some people with a reason to vote Lib Dem. This is significant because it is the first positive reason people have had to vote Lib Dem since 2010.
But they must not carried away. All their problems still remain.
They have 9 MPs and are the 4th party, so are not challenging for any role in parliament and they get no oxygen. And there is no evidence or reason for left and Labour voters to forgive them for the coalition.
1. Respect for the Brexit result; and
2. Not be financially / economically batshit crazy.
Which somewhat rules out LDs and Labour right now. The Labour batshit crazy problem may not last however. If they elect themselves a moderate leaver to replace the Mrs Rochester crowd running the party today they could be back in contention in England.
Gorton isn't rock solid safe because they nearly won in the 50s.
Brexit is less salient than the Coalition.
Getting Labour to appear divided on Brexit just before the Copeland by-election.
Getting Labour to be more vehemently against Grammars than Tories are pro them.
Getting Corbyn to sound frit about an early election.
(This is one reason why he has not won a Nobel prize, the Nobel committee being traditionally reluctant to award prizes in pure theory).
https://twitter.com/AdamBienkov/status/839015533412495361
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/10654762/The-man-who-proved-Stephen-Hawking-wrong.html
..even if MPs can hasten regime change, Corbyn’s replacement will end up being someone prepared to praise his legacy. The price of ditching the leader will be an absence of serious inquest into the reasons why he needed ditching in the first place. A spell of unity will be bought with deferral of arguments about markets, trade, defence, immigration, public sector reform and all the other issues that make Labour unity impossible to sustain for long
BMZ will
force a good trade dealmake their cars outside the UK insteadWith regard to his opinions of Corbyn, is Hawking actually a member of the Labour party (as opposed to a Labour voter)?
If not, then I am not even sure his opinion even matters.
https://twitter.com/liambyrnemp/status/839111723890126848
Despite Brexit
Particularly that it was initially attempted in such an underhand and ludicrous manner.
I think Le Pen will do better than her current polling in the first round, but even so, it's near impossible to see a path to 50% for her in the run-off.
Macron to me just seems so unlikely. His platform is just literally the exact opposite of virtually every electoral success in the West over the past couple of years. My suspicion is that he's currently still getting some support just on the basis of being a new fresh face who'll "shake things up", and that he'll fade once the specifics of his platform get more scrutiny.
Hamon IN THEORY might have more of a chance than he's being rated by the commentariat - he's not THAT far behind making the second round on current polling, there's surely a chance he could squeeze Melenchon a bit and he could benefit if Macron fades in the way I think he will, and he would probably scrape a win over Le Pen in the run-off if he got there. However, again, even though on paper I can see the path for him, it just instinctively seems so unlikely.
By process of elimination, Fillon is the one who I have the easiest time imagining getting over the line.
More amendments still to come.
Big amendment is on need for parliament to approve final deal - vote expected at approx 5pm.
Crossbenchers voted 86-13 against a 2nd referendum. So Govt would have won easily even if Lab had voted for a 2nd referendum.
222 out of 252 Con Peers present - another massive turnout. 2 Con rebels - Altmann and Wheatcroft.
31 Lab Peers voted despite front bench abstaining.
https://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/business-papers/lords/lords-divisions/
The only significant thing about such an amendment is that it affects the choreography of planned events and the psychology of the players.
NEW THREAD
https://twitter.com/rosiesoapstar/status/839115602635665408
Personally I am taking all hypothetical R2 polls with a mountain of salt. There's never been a TV debate prior to R1 before. That changes everything. Look at the primaries.
Wouldn't it be interesting if when the latest batch of nominations are released today, Francois Baroin turns out to have picked up a fair few. Or Jean-Louis Borloo.