Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Looks like Mike Smithson was right about his theory about the

2456710

Comments

  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,314
    AnneJGP said:

    Roger said:

    Is there anyone who can drag Diane Abbott away from the cameras? Things aren't looking good for Labour as it is and she must be shedding votes every moment she's on. Who cares whether the Tories fiddled their election expenses. It wouldn't have altered anything.

    I thought I was enjoying this but now I'm wondering whether I'm just having hysterics.
    You need to eat some popcorn to rebalance blood sugar caused by excess excitement.
  • Options
    Ishmael_Z said:

    TSE your May denialism makes you go to some very strange and dark places.

    Perhaps you'd feel more at peace if you came to terms with the emergence of May as the greatest Tory PM since Thatcher.

    Nonsense. Thatcher would have put up a candidate in Richmond Park, Mrs May is frit, as evidenced by her failure to debate Corbyn.
    Did you castigate Cameron for his yuge reluctance to debate with (in English English) the Milidweeb? What's different?
    Yes I did, and to his face.

    I said he shouldn't decline the opportunity to crush Ed Miliband like Carthage at Zama.
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    edited April 2017

    Jonathan said:

    RobD said:

    Mr. Calum, fewer than half, I'd guess (I think it was around 12 constituencies that were being looked at).

    Mr. Eagles, maybe.

    But May can lay the blame at Cameron's door. And that doesn't alter the fact it's her or Corbyn.

    Hard to say how it'll play. Charges during the election campaign would be... interesting.

    A bit like the FBI and Clinton's emails?
    May has a touch of Clinton about her and the poll leads to boot.
    I'm struggling, and failing, to imagine any two leading politicians more different than Clinton and May, (leaving aside Trump who's different from everyone, of course).
    One is a devious, lying bitch, what about the other ?
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,991

    Pulpstar said:

    kle4 said:

    How, exactly, does such a person stand under the banner of a leader they have so little faith in? I know Corbyn disliked Blair, but was he ever so bold in criticism? Has to be indy, surely?
    :Let's take Woodcock's reasoning backwards here :

    Through some miracle or other Labour get 270 seats, enough for a coalition or minority gov't with the SNP (They are one vote short).
    Farron says he can't countenance Corbyn as PM and will support for Hammond (May has resigned perhaps) to have the support of the house. But they are one vote short - the support of the Commons depends on Woodcock after taking all votes in the round into account - does he HONESTLY vote against the Labour Queens speech or abstain or some such if his is the neccesary vote ?
    His position is utterly ludicrous I'm afraid if he decides to run as a Labour & Coop candidate.
    We may see more of this. A lot more. Vote for me as a decent Labour MP, forget Corbyn, he'll be gone soon etc etc
    It's not a credible position.
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Surely a Jezza Tablet of Stone will cause the electorate to sweep him to a landslide victory as it did for Ed Mili .....

    Ooppps ....
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,314
    nunu said:

    Imagine a whole elction campaign like this.

    https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/854401993389092865

    I am. It is going to be something to behold.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,986

    Pulpstar said:

    kle4 said:

    How, exactly, does such a person stand under the banner of a leader they have so little faith in? I know Corbyn disliked Blair, but was he ever so bold in criticism? Has to be indy, surely?
    :Let's take Woodcock's reasoning backwards here :

    Through some miracle or other Labour get 270 seats, enough for a coalition or minority gov't with the SNP (They are one vote short).
    Farron says he can't countenance Corbyn as PM and will support for Hammond (May has resigned perhaps) to have the support of the house. But they are one vote short - the support of the Commons depends on Woodcock after taking all votes in the round into account - does he HONESTLY vote against the Labour Queens speech or abstain or some such if his is the neccesary vote ?
    His position is utterly ludicrous I'm afraid if he decides to run as a Labour & Coop candidate.
    We may see more of this. A lot more. Vote for me as a decent Labour MP, forget Corbyn, he'll be gone soon etc etc
    His position is constitutionally ludicrous though.
  • Options
    ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,008
    Serious question: anyone know anything about the LD operation in Islington North? I'm willing to help out to unseat Corbyn, if they can get a serious campaign going.
  • Options
    chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    edited April 2017
    What's the form with Corbyn departing?

    Does he have a stay of execution as leader for a period after the election whilst they organise the deckchairs? If so, when does he officially leave?

    I only ask because I've been on a July-Sept 2017 departure for some time. June 8th might be a little premature.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,314
    dr_spyn said:
    Imagine if his hero, Lenin, had had the same problem coming into the Finlandia station.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,131
    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    surbiton said:

    HYUFD said:

    The Tories spent a bit more than they should have in Cameron's 2015 election campaign in a few seats, I doubt it affects this election campaign that much beyond a few seats needing new candidates and agents

    £200,000 more.
    I doubt voters will care much beyond the seats concerned and even there I doubt it makes much difference, in US elections they spend far more and most of all it happened when Cameron was Tory leader not May
    LOL only a Tory could come out with that bollox. They are lying cheating toerags and should be jailed , banana republic does not describe it.
    While you came up with a highly partisan response from a cybernat, anyway it will be the voters who decide
  • Options
    Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981

    Ishmael_Z said:

    TSE your May denialism makes you go to some very strange and dark places.

    Perhaps you'd feel more at peace if you came to terms with the emergence of May as the greatest Tory PM since Thatcher.

    Nonsense. Thatcher would have put up a candidate in Richmond Park, Mrs May is frit, as evidenced by her failure to debate Corbyn.
    Did you castigate Cameron for his yuge reluctance to debate with (in English English) the Milidweeb? What's different?
    Yes I did, and to his face.

    I said he shouldn't decline the opportunity to crush Ed Miliband like Carthage at Zama.
    Respect.
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    surbiton said:

    FTSE drops 180 points. You would have expected big business to support the Tories.

    Look at the pound - rocketed today
    Bad for exports - the only thing that kept us going after June 23rd.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,414
    edited April 2017

    Serious question: anyone know anything about the LD operation in Islington North? I'm willing to help out to unseat Corbyn, if they can get a serious campaign going.

    The LibDems in Islington have a good, experienced team. They took a knock after losing everything in the last London locals but have gained a lot of new members (being Remania Central) and will be raring to get back at Labour in the GE. I expect the southern constituency will be their primary target however. And there'll clearly be pressure to privatise key seats like Hornsey and Bermondsey; deciding how many seats to target is going to be a tough call for the party this time!
  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,800
    edited April 2017
    malcolmg said:

    FPT
    Omnium said:

    » show previous quotes
    These ideas may individually get over the wire in their acceptance in Scotland, but they're far from accepted as a package.

    The relatively pragmatic Tories are far from your enemy if you want an independent Scotland. Your actual enemy is clearly the somewhat brighter bloke that lives next door.

    Nobody within miles is brighter than me so that one does not resonate.

    (The last line is malcolmg's.)

    As you must clearly live on a very remote island malcolmg then I wonder what light you might cast on these matters?

  • Options
    notmenotme Posts: 3,293
    kle4 said:

    murali_s said:

    So the Tories are a bunch of cheating, lying scumbags! We need independent election monitors in this country or it will truly become a banana republic one party state.

    They didn't fiddle the votes, they spent more than they were supposed to (allegedly) - a crime which deserves punishment, but not exactly stuffing ballot boxes.
    And that might not even be the case, in some cases it might amount to not accounting for national expenditure correctly in the local campaign, despite them not spending up to the limit.

    I know for a fact that one constabulary has submitted to the CPS but the battlebus made only one trip to that constituency and there was no overnight stays.
  • Options
    surbiton said:

    surbiton said:

    FTSE drops 180 points. You would have expected big business to support the Tories.

    Look at the pound - rocketed today
    Bad for exports - the only thing that kept us going after June 23rd.
    How is the current pound bad for exports even with its rise today
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    notme said:

    kle4 said:

    murali_s said:

    So the Tories are a bunch of cheating, lying scumbags! We need independent election monitors in this country or it will truly become a banana republic one party state.

    They didn't fiddle the votes, they spent more than they were supposed to (allegedly) - a crime which deserves punishment, but not exactly stuffing ballot boxes.
    And that might not even be the case, in some cases it might amount to not accounting for national expenditure correctly in the local campaign, despite them not spending up to the limit.

    I know for a fact that one constabulary has submitted to the CPS but the battlebus made only one trip to that constituency and there was no overnight stays.
    Would your views have been the same if it was the Labour Party who were the culprits ?
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,131
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    surbiton said:

    HYUFD said:

    The Tories spent a bit more than they should have in Cameron's 2015 election campaign in a few seats, I doubt it affects this election campaign that much beyond a few seats needing new candidates and agents

    £200,000 more.
    I doubt voters will care much beyond the seats concerned and even there I doubt it makes much difference, in US elections they spend far more
    If they broke the rules they should be punished, otherwise why bother having the damn things? If the rules are stupid they should changed, not ignored. And the issues were too systemic to have been accidental everywhere, if the charges are true, it would have been intentional.
    Personally I oppose election campaign limits but if the rules at the time of the 2015 campaign were broken then it is up the CPS to bring charges
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,991
    If Leicester can proceed further in the Champion's League, I'm putting money on Labour retaining their seat numbers.
  • Options
    justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    JackW said:

    It'll come down to whether the broadcasters have the bottle to empty chair the PM.

    They should invite her to all the debates. If she chooses to not attend, then fine. The opposition will have a couple of hours to discuss the merits of the government and all their good works .. :smile:

    The media should put a marker down that no party leader gets a veto on the debates.

    At one level I agree with that, but then I recall that the broadcasters failed to do this in the past when election debates were being mooted.As far back as 1966 the leaders failed to agree the terms of any debates, and this continued throughout the elections dominated by Thatcher, Major and Blair.There was an acceptance that the parties had the option of imposing a veto when it suited their interests. On what basis can the broadcasters seek now to impose their wishes on an unwilling part leader?
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,414
    edited April 2017
    A pressing task arising from the expenses investigation is for the electoral commission to issue something clarifying what rules it wants to apply in relation to the various issues investigated. So far I have seen nothing. Since all parties will now be urgently planning out their May/June campaigns, I would expect to see some updated guidance sharpish?
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,063
    HYUFD said:

    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    surbiton said:

    HYUFD said:

    The Tories spent a bit more than they should have in Cameron's 2015 election campaign in a few seats, I doubt it affects this election campaign that much beyond a few seats needing new candidates and agents

    £200,000 more.
    I doubt voters will care much beyond the seats concerned and even there I doubt it makes much difference, in US elections they spend far more and most of all it happened when Cameron was Tory leader not May
    LOL only a Tory could come out with that bollox. They are lying cheating toerags and should be jailed , banana republic does not describe it.
    While you came up with a highly partisan response from a cybernat, anyway it will be the voters who decide
    For sure , it will be Tories in England and SNP by wide margin in Scotland.
  • Options
    PeterCPeterC Posts: 1,274
    edited April 2017
    Omnium said:

    surbiton said:

    FTSE drops 180 points. You would have expected big business to support the Tories.

    Half of that was pre-anouncement.
    FTSE is inversely correlated to cable. Its to do with dollar earnings and nothing to do with support or otherwise for the Tories.
  • Options
    notmenotme Posts: 3,293
    calum said:
    no it isnt, it took me to the fourth paragraph to realise the headline had little to do with the story. She was sentenced for breaking a court injunction, not begging.
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,994

    surbiton said:

    surbiton said:

    FTSE drops 180 points. You would have expected big business to support the Tories.

    Look at the pound - rocketed today
    Bad for exports - the only thing that kept us going after June 23rd.
    How is the current pound bad for exports even with its rise today
    It isn't. But Surbiton long ago gave up any pretence of reason I am afraid. He is desperately clinging to anything that he believes might support his delusions that Brexit is a disaster. There really is no reasoning with him.
  • Options
    ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,008
    edited April 2017
    IanB2 said:

    Serious question: anyone know anything about the LD operation in Islington North? I'm willing to help out to unseat Corbyn, if they can get a serious campaign going.

    The LibDems in Islington have a good, experienced team. They took a knock after losing everything in the last London locals but have gained a lot of new members (being Remania Central) and will be raring to get back at Labour in the GE. I expect the southern constituency will be their primary target however.
    Thanks. Frankly not really bothered whether Thornberry survives or not. But I could see Corbyn still hanging on as leader even after Lab are reduced to a rump. The only way to prevent that would be him losing his seat as well.
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300

    Pulpstar said:

    kle4 said:

    How, exactly, does such a person stand under the banner of a leader they have so little faith in? I know Corbyn disliked Blair, but was he ever so bold in criticism? Has to be indy, surely?
    :Let's take Woodcock's reasoning backwards here :

    Through some miracle or other Labour get 270 seats, enough for a coalition or minority gov't with the SNP (They are one vote short).
    Farron says he can't countenance Corbyn as PM and will support for Hammond (May has resigned perhaps) to have the support of the house. But they are one vote short - the support of the Commons depends on Woodcock after taking all votes in the round into account - does he HONESTLY vote against the Labour Queens speech or abstain or some such if his is the neccesary vote ?
    His position is utterly ludicrous I'm afraid if he decides to run as a Labour & Coop candidate.
    We may see more of this. A lot more. Vote for me as a decent Labour MP, forget Corbyn, he'll be gone soon etc etc
    Question is, will we see the same sort of thing from Tory remainers?
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,063
    Omnium said:

    malcolmg said:

    FPT
    Omnium said:

    » show previous quotes
    These ideas may individually get over the wire in their acceptance in Scotland, but they're far from accepted as a package.

    The relatively pragmatic Tories are far from your enemy if you want an independent Scotland. Your actual enemy is clearly the somewhat brighter bloke that lives next door.

    Nobody within miles is brighter than me so that one does not resonate.

    (The last line is malcolmg's.)

    As you must clearly live on a very remote island malcolmg then I wonder what light you might cast on these matters?

    Omnium , highly populated area for sure , I don't usually like to blow my own trumpet , but I am a bit of an intergalatic megastar, brighter than your average bear for sure.
    It will be SNP by a very very wide margin in Scotland , negated by the supine Tory victory in England and will lead to independence for sure as England moves ever rightwards.
  • Options
    RogerRoger Posts: 18,894
    Poor Kezia. John Snow is asking her impossible questions to which the only answer is she needs Corbyn to be run over by a bus. Of course she knows he's hopeless and unelectable but what can she say?
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,787
    Another Cameron/Osborne mess....
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,063
    Roger said:

    Poor Kezia. John Snow is asking her impossible questions to which the only answer is she needs Corbyn to be run over by a bus. Of course she knows he's hopeless and unelectable but what can she say?

    She is just as unelectable and hopeless.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,130

    Another Cameron/Osborne mess....

    Is Nick Timothy in the clear?
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,994
    On topic, I know a few people on the previous thread were attacking Crick and the CPS over this but if the law was broken then those who broke it should answer in court. Lots of people were shouting about a 'banana republic' postal voting system back in 2005. If true, then this is just as bad if not worse.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,414

    surbiton said:

    surbiton said:

    FTSE drops 180 points. You would have expected big business to support the Tories.

    Look at the pound - rocketed today
    Bad for exports - the only thing that kept us going after June 23rd.
    How is the current pound bad for exports even with its rise today
    It isn't. But Surbiton long ago gave up any pretence of reason I am afraid. He is desperately clinging to anything that he believes might support his delusions that Brexit is a disaster. There really is no reasoning with him.
    Nevertheless since the referendum there has been a very strong inverse correlation between the £/$ and the FTSE, whether you look at time intervals of hours, days or weeks.
  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,800
    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    FTSE drops 180 points. You would have expected big business to support the Tories.

    Coz the £ rose, you dork.
    SeanT, you are many things, but a wise currency analyst you are most certainly not. Mr surbiton also has no claims. I confess that I too don't, but I do know enough to spot you two.
  • Options
    notmenotme Posts: 3,293
    surbiton said:

    notme said:

    kle4 said:

    murali_s said:

    So the Tories are a bunch of cheating, lying scumbags! We need independent election monitors in this country or it will truly become a banana republic one party state.

    They didn't fiddle the votes, they spent more than they were supposed to (allegedly) - a crime which deserves punishment, but not exactly stuffing ballot boxes.
    And that might not even be the case, in some cases it might amount to not accounting for national expenditure correctly in the local campaign, despite them not spending up to the limit.

    I know for a fact that one constabulary has submitted to the CPS but the battlebus made only one trip to that constituency and there was no overnight stays.
    Would your views have been the same if it was the Labour Party who were the culprits ?
    it depends what they did. If Mens Rea can be shown by the participants then they should be prosecuted, whatever the party. I'm just saying of the only example i know a few of the facts for, and in that case the error was administrative and certainly not had any impact on the election result. If this still passed the standard necessary for files to be sent to the CPS i suspect then with the exception of maybe one or two constituencies the rest is hot air.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,131
    malcolmg said:

    Omnium said:

    malcolmg said:

    FPT
    Omnium said:

    » show previous quotes
    These ideas may individually get over the wire in their acceptance in Scotland, but they're far from accepted as a package.

    The relatively pragmatic Tories are far from your enemy if you want an independent Scotland. Your actual enemy is clearly the somewhat brighter bloke that lives next door.

    Nobody within miles is brighter than me so that one does not resonate.

    (The last line is malcolmg's.)

    As you must clearly live on a very remote island malcolmg then I wonder what light you might cast on these matters?

    Omnium , highly populated area for sure , I don't usually like to blow my own trumpet , but I am a bit of an intergalatic megastar, brighter than your average bear for sure.
    It will be SNP by a very very wide margin in Scotland , negated by the supine Tory victory in England and will lead to independence for sure as England moves ever rightwards.
    It is a Westminster election so has no real impact on the independence debate and indeed there is a possibility will actually lose seats
  • Options
    malcolmg said:

    Omnium said:

    malcolmg said:

    FPT
    Omnium said:

    » show previous quotes
    These ideas may individually get over the wire in their acceptance in Scotland, but they're far from accepted as a package.

    The relatively pragmatic Tories are far from your enemy if you want an independent Scotland. Your actual enemy is clearly the somewhat brighter bloke that lives next door.

    Nobody within miles is brighter than me so that one does not resonate.

    (The last line is malcolmg's.)

    As you must clearly live on a very remote island malcolmg then I wonder what light you might cast on these matters?

    Omnium , highly populated area for sure , I don't usually like to blow my own trumpet , but I am a bit of an intergalatic megastar, brighter than your average bear for sure.
    It will be SNP by a very very wide margin in Scotland , negated by the supine Tory victory in England and will lead to independence for sure as England moves ever rightwards.
    Evening Malc - I do not think Theresa May intends to move anywhere other than the centre ground vacated by Corbyn and a sensible EFTA like Brexit
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,130
    Would any shifts in NI be expected based on the result of the Assembly elections?
  • Options
    ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,008

    On topic, I know a few people on the previous thread were attacking Crick and the CPS over this but if the law was broken then those who broke it should answer in court. Lots of people were shouting about a 'banana republic' postal voting system back in 2005. If true, then this is just as bad if not worse.

    Spot on. And Crick has demonstrated real - and only too rare - tenacity. We need more journalists like him.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,787

    Another Cameron/Osborne mess....

    Is Nick Timothy in the clear?
    Has he been charged?
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,986

    Would any shifts in NI be expected based on the result of the Assembly elections?

    Hmm Shinners might do well..
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,063
    edited April 2017

    malcolmg said:

    Omnium said:

    malcolmg said:

    FPT
    Omnium said:

    » show previous quotes
    These ideas may individually get over the wire in their acceptance in Scotland, but they're far from accepted as a package.

    The relatively pragmatic Tories are far from your enemy if you want an independent Scotland. Your actual enemy is clearly the somewhat brighter bloke that lives next door.

    Nobody within miles is brighter than me so that one does not resonate.

    (The last line is malcolmg's.)

    As you must clearly live on a very remote island malcolmg then I wonder what light you might cast on these matters?

    Omnium , highly populated area for sure , I don't usually like to blow my own trumpet , but I am a bit of an intergalatic megastar, brighter than your average bear for sure.
    It will be SNP by a very very wide margin in Scotland , negated by the supine Tory victory in England and will lead to independence for sure as England moves ever rightwards.
    Evening Malc - I do not think Theresa May intends to move anywhere other than the centre ground vacated by Corbyn and a sensible EFTA like Brexit
    Evening Big_G, you will be happy man today.

    PS: Would not surprise me to hear that a presidential palace is being planned.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,991

    Would any shifts in NI be expected based on the result of the Assembly elections?

    Fermanangh and South Tyrone?
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,618
    Thanks Mrs May, I needed to transfer some money this Friday. Just did it now instead and got a nice little bonus.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,787
    1h
    Ellie Price‏ @EllieJPrice
    Lots of desk-banging, clapping and cheering at the 1922 committee meeting addressed by Theresa May. Happy, if somewhat surprised, campers.
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Once again the world's of professional wrestling and politics cross over

    https://twitter.com/zacksabrejr/status/854331283069186048
  • Options
    PongPong Posts: 4,693
    edited April 2017
    notme said:

    calum said:
    no it isnt, it took me to the fourth paragraph to realise the headline had little to do with the story. She was sentenced for breaking a court injunction, not begging.
    dear god.

    And the PM calls herself a Christian.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,063
    What happened to TGOHF, I have yet to hear from him re whether he would back up his ridiculous mince about SNP losing more than 10 setas. I see he like most frothers is all mouth and no trousers, no backbone to back up his garbage and bet on it.
  • Options
    Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981

    On topic, I know a few people on the previous thread were attacking Crick and the CPS over this but if the law was broken then those who broke it should answer in court. Lots of people were shouting about a 'banana republic' postal voting system back in 2005. If true, then this is just as bad if not worse.

    Fine, but the CPS should prosecute, or not. It should not make statements, nor hold press conferences, about its intentions or decisions; that merely creates prejudice and achieves nothing at all except to get the DPP on prime time telly.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,989
    malcolmg said:

    What happened to TGOHF, I have yet to hear from him re whether he would back up his ridiculous mince about SNP losing more than 10 setas. I see he like most frothers is all mouth and no trousers, no backbone to back up his garbage and bet on it.

    He probably hadn't priced in a 2017 election :p
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,060
    Will Arron Banks keep his deposit?
  • Options
    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    Omnium said:

    malcolmg said:

    FPT
    Omnium said:

    » show previous quotes
    These ideas may individually get over the wire in their acceptance in Scotland, but they're far from accepted as a package.

    The relatively pragmatic Tories are far from your enemy if you want an independent Scotland. Your actual enemy is clearly the somewhat brighter bloke that lives next door.

    Nobody within miles is brighter than me so that one does not resonate.

    (The last line is malcolmg's.)

    As you must clearly live on a very remote island malcolmg then I wonder what light you might cast on these matters?

    Omnium , highly populated area for sure , I don't usually like to blow my own trumpet , but I am a bit of an intergalatic megastar, brighter than your average bear for sure.
    It will be SNP by a very very wide margin in Scotland , negated by the supine Tory victory in England and will lead to independence for sure as England moves ever rightwards.
    Evening Malc - I do not think Theresa May intends to move anywhere other than the centre ground vacated by Corbyn and a sensible EFTA like Brexit
    Evening Big_G, you will be happy man today.
    In some ways as I believe she needs a mandate but talk of a landslide is premature and at present I expect a majority of between 60 and 80. I also think the success or otherwise of indy2 will largely depend on TM achieving a good trading deal
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,618
    rcs1000 said:

    Will Arron Banks keep his deposit?

    No. Most people don't know who he is.
  • Options
    YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    But, the CPS has not said that the 30 individuals are all Tories.

    At least one saintly LibDem has been involved in dodgy electoral spending claims:

    https://tinyurl.com/hjrwa5p

    “ The party has been fined the maximum levy of £20,000 for the breaches, while the case against the party’s top campaign official has been referred to the police. The commission found that 307 payments totalling £184,676 were missing from the party’s spending return.”

  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    justin124 said:

    JackW said:

    It'll come down to whether the broadcasters have the bottle to empty chair the PM.

    They should invite her to all the debates. If she chooses to not attend, then fine. The opposition will have a couple of hours to discuss the merits of the government and all their good works .. :smile:

    The media should put a marker down that no party leader gets a veto on the debates.

    At one level I agree with that, but then I recall that the broadcasters failed to do this in the past when election debates were being mooted.As far back as 1966 the leaders failed to agree the terms of any debates, and this continued throughout the elections dominated by Thatcher, Major and Blair.There was an acceptance that the parties had the option of imposing a veto when it suited their interests. On what basis can the broadcasters seek now to impose their wishes on an unwilling part leader?
    The broadcasters wish to invite party leaders to a debate. One party leader seeks to invalidate the debates.

    Ergo :

    If I invite some LibDems to view the dungeons of Auchentennach Castle and all but Mark Senior agree that such an educational and gastronomic tour de force is preferable to a lecture on the merits of bar charts, then with regret Mark doesn't get a veto.
  • Options
    ToryJimToryJim Posts: 3,452
    rcs1000 said:

    Will Arron Banks keep his deposit?

    He can afford to lose it many times over....
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,128
    rcs1000 said:

    AndyJS said:

    John Hemming expecting to stand again for Yardley against Jess Phillips:

    ""John Hemming‏Verified account @johnhemming4mp 3h3 hours ago
    Replying to @noaxnow

    Thank you for that. I expect to be confirmed as candidate for June 8th some time later today."

    twitter.com/johnhemming4mp/with_replies"

    Read more: http://vote-2012.proboards.com/posts/recent#ixzz4eccwGHaR

    It's not an impossible LibDem gain. It's the most pro-Remain part of Birmingham. Could Hemming go from 10,500 to 13,000 votes? Yes. Will that be enough? Probably not (Jess got 17,000 votes last time). But if it's a truly horrible Labour campaign, then he might just edge it.

    Birmingham Yardley was over 60% Leave.
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,956
    JackW said:

    justin124 said:

    JackW said:

    It'll come down to whether the broadcasters have the bottle to empty chair the PM.

    They should invite her to all the debates. If she chooses to not attend, then fine. The opposition will have a couple of hours to discuss the merits of the government and all their good works .. :smile:

    The media should put a marker down that no party leader gets a veto on the debates.

    At one level I agree with that, but then I recall that the broadcasters failed to do this in the past when election debates were being mooted.As far back as 1966 the leaders failed to agree the terms of any debates, and this continued throughout the elections dominated by Thatcher, Major and Blair.There was an acceptance that the parties had the option of imposing a veto when it suited their interests. On what basis can the broadcasters seek now to impose their wishes on an unwilling part leader?
    The broadcasters wish to invite party leaders to a debate. One party leader seeks to invalidate the debates.

    Ergo :

    If I invite some LibDems to view the dungeons of Auchentennach Castle and all but Mark Senior agree that such an educational and gastronomic tour de force is preferable to a lecture on the merits of bar charts, then with regret Mark doesn't get a veto.
    But if Mark is the main event for the crowds, then surprise surprise the people putting on the show might be a little less excited about it.

    I hate the debatification of British politics. People should be encouraged to do more than sit on the sofa and make a snap decision.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,988
    Pong said:

    notme said:

    calum said:
    no it isnt, it took me to the fourth paragraph to realise the headline had little to do with the story. She was sentenced for breaking a court injunction, not begging.
    dear god.

    And the PM calls herself a Christian.
    Seems harsh, but given buzzfeeds form she'll probably turn out to be a hybrid of Myra Hindley & Rose West
  • Options
    TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,388
    David Miliband in to 8/1 to be next leader! Absolutely stonking mad.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,061
    IanB2 said:

    A pressing task arising from the expenses investigation is for the electoral commission to issue something clarifying what rules it wants to apply in relation to the various issues investigated. So far I have seen nothing. Since all parties will now be urgently planning out their May/June campaigns, I would expect to see some updated guidance sharpish?

    That's potentially a really important point. If the law is unclear as to what is national or local spending (as some on here have suggested in the past), then guidance is vital.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,063
    SeanT said:

    MaxPB said:

    Thanks Mrs May, I needed to transfer some money this Friday. Just did it now instead and got a nice little bonus.

    Grrr. I'm about to get wheelbarrows of foreign cash poured over me, in the next couple of weeks or so, and this rise in the £ is easily costing me four figures.

    I do not expect sympathy.
    Keep it there till brexit and the pound plummets
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,414
    edited April 2017

    rcs1000 said:

    AndyJS said:

    John Hemming expecting to stand again for Yardley against Jess Phillips:

    ""John Hemming‏Verified account @johnhemming4mp 3h3 hours ago
    Replying to @noaxnow

    Thank you for that. I expect to be confirmed as candidate for June 8th some time later today."

    twitter.com/johnhemming4mp/with_replies"

    Read more: http://vote-2012.proboards.com/posts/recent#ixzz4eccwGHaR

    It's not an impossible LibDem gain. It's the most pro-Remain part of Birmingham. Could Hemming go from 10,500 to 13,000 votes? Yes. Will that be enough? Probably not (Jess got 17,000 votes last time). But if it's a truly horrible Labour campaign, then he might just edge it.

    Birmingham Yardley was over 60% Leave.
    If they pitch it right, the soft Brexit and vote on the deal line appeals to a lot of soft leave voters, also. Those huge local swings in places like Sunderland, Rotherham and Oldham didn't come just from Remain voters.

    Besides, in terms of the population likely to participate in the 2017 GE, you can probably knock off 5% from the leave vote in most seats and shift it across to the Remain vote, to adjust for the bunch of 2016 Leave voters who haven't before and probably won't again participate in voting for actual politicians.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,986

    rcs1000 said:

    AndyJS said:

    John Hemming expecting to stand again for Yardley against Jess Phillips:

    ""John Hemming‏Verified account @johnhemming4mp 3h3 hours ago
    Replying to @noaxnow

    Thank you for that. I expect to be confirmed as candidate for June 8th some time later today."

    twitter.com/johnhemming4mp/with_replies"

    Read more: http://vote-2012.proboards.com/posts/recent#ixzz4eccwGHaR

    It's not an impossible LibDem gain. It's the most pro-Remain part of Birmingham. Could Hemming go from 10,500 to 13,000 votes? Yes. Will that be enough? Probably not (Jess got 17,000 votes last time). But if it's a truly horrible Labour campaign, then he might just edge it.

    Birmingham Yardley was over 60% Leave.
    Bang on 60% according to Hanretty's spreadsheet.

    That said I think it could well be a Lib Dem gain.
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,128
    To save me reading thousands of comments could someone give a summary of any interesting developments in the last eight hours please.

    :wink:
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,060

    rcs1000 said:

    AndyJS said:

    John Hemming expecting to stand again for Yardley against Jess Phillips:

    ""John Hemming‏Verified account @johnhemming4mp 3h3 hours ago
    Replying to @noaxnow

    Thank you for that. I expect to be confirmed as candidate for June 8th some time later today."

    twitter.com/johnhemming4mp/with_replies"

    Read more: http://vote-2012.proboards.com/posts/recent#ixzz4eccwGHaR

    It's not an impossible LibDem gain. It's the most pro-Remain part of Birmingham. Could Hemming go from 10,500 to 13,000 votes? Yes. Will that be enough? Probably not (Jess got 17,000 votes last time). But if it's a truly horrible Labour campaign, then he might just edge it.

    Birmingham Yardley was over 60% Leave.
    Yes, I misread a Birmingham Post article. Embarrassingly.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,618
    edited April 2017
    SeanT said:

    MaxPB said:

    Thanks Mrs May, I needed to transfer some money this Friday. Just did it now instead and got a nice little bonus.

    Grrr. I'm about to get wheelbarrows of foreign cash poured over me, in the next couple of weeks or so, and this rise in the £ is easily costing me four figures.

    I do not expect sympathy.
    I earn in CHF so overall stronger Sterling isn't great for when I want to repatriate the money, but that's not going to be for a while and I'd resigned myself to getting a rate of about 1.40 at that time anyway. This is a nice bonus because I'm about to shift 6 figures from my savings in the UK to Switzerland so I can pay for my house to be refurbished.
  • Options
    murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,042
    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    FTSE drops 180 points. You would have expected big business to support the Tories.

    Coz the £ rose, you dork.
    To a certain degree, yes. General global weakness in equities probably more of a factor.
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,128
    rcs1000 said:

    Will Arron Banks keep his deposit?

    I think he can afford to lose it.

    The big question is does Banks standing making it less or more likely that Carswell is re-elected.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,991
    Mortimer said:

    JackW said:

    justin124 said:

    JackW said:

    It'll come down to whether the broadcasters have the bottle to empty chair the PM.

    They should invite her to all the debates. If she chooses to not attend, then fine. The opposition will have a couple of hours to discuss the merits of the government and all their good works .. :smile:

    The media should put a marker down that no party leader gets a veto on the debates.

    At one level I agree with that, but then I recall that the broadcasters failed to do this in the past when election debates were being mooted.As far back as 1966 the leaders failed to agree the terms of any debates, and this continued throughout the elections dominated by Thatcher, Major and Blair.There was an acceptance that the parties had the option of imposing a veto when it suited their interests. On what basis can the broadcasters seek now to impose their wishes on an unwilling part leader?
    The broadcasters wish to invite party leaders to a debate. One party leader seeks to invalidate the debates.

    Ergo :

    If I invite some LibDems to view the dungeons of Auchentennach Castle and all but Mark Senior agree that such an educational and gastronomic tour de force is preferable to a lecture on the merits of bar charts, then with regret Mark doesn't get a veto.
    But if Mark is the main event for the crowds, then surprise surprise the people putting on the show might be a little less excited about it.

    I hate the debatification of British politics. People should be encouraged to do more than sit on the sofa and make a snap decision.
    It's more than they'd get without the debates - base it off a leaflet through the door and stupid PEBs?
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,061
    Mortimer said:

    JackW said:

    justin124 said:

    JackW said:

    It'll come down to whether the broadcasters have the bottle to empty chair the PM.

    They should invite her to all the debates. If she chooses to not attend, then fine. The opposition will have a couple of hours to discuss the merits of the government and all their good works .. :smile:

    The media should put a marker down that no party leader gets a veto on the debates.

    At one level I agree with that, but then I recall that the broadcasters failed to do this in the past when election debates were being mooted.As far back as 1966 the leaders failed to agree the terms of any debates, and this continued throughout the elections dominated by Thatcher, Major and Blair.There was an acceptance that the parties had the option of imposing a veto when it suited their interests. On what basis can the broadcasters seek now to impose their wishes on an unwilling part leader?
    The broadcasters wish to invite party leaders to a debate. One party leader seeks to invalidate the debates.

    Ergo :

    If I invite some LibDems to view the dungeons of Auchentennach Castle and all but Mark Senior agree that such an educational and gastronomic tour de force is preferable to a lecture on the merits of bar charts, then with regret Mark doesn't get a veto.
    But if Mark is the main event for the crowds, then surprise surprise the people putting on the show might be a little less excited about it.

    (Snip)
    From the little I've read about executions in the middle ages and beyond, it didn't particularly matter who was being executed (at least to the viewers): it was good entertainment for the whole family.
  • Options
    TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,388
    Suggestion that all Lab MPs would have to be confirmed (or not) as candidates earlier - surely that can't be right?!
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Sky News reporting that the Prime Minister telephoned Her Majesty last night on her intentions.

    Well I suppose it's better than a text message.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,991

    To save me reading thousands of comments could someone give a summary of any interesting developments in the last eight hours please.

    :wink:

    https://twitter.com/ThePoke/status/854304758818938882
  • Options
    MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    One curious point re election expenses is that if Gorton is postponed , Labour and the Lib Dems will already have exceeded the GE expenses for that constituency . The allowed expenses for a by election are much higher than a GE .
    I presume the EC will make a special dispensation to allow for thi quirk .
  • Options

    IanB2 said:

    A pressing task arising from the expenses investigation is for the electoral commission to issue something clarifying what rules it wants to apply in relation to the various issues investigated. So far I have seen nothing. Since all parties will now be urgently planning out their May/June campaigns, I would expect to see some updated guidance sharpish?

    That's potentially a really important point. If the law is unclear as to what is national or local spending (as some on here have suggested in the past), then guidance is vital.
    I think we can all agree the ambiguity needs urgent clarification but could that not also have the effect of making any potential charges unsafe as it is an admission of the ambiguity
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,291
    edited April 2017
    dr_spyn said:
    Somebody joked earlier he would probably manage to miss even voting for himself....Then get stuck on a rammed pack train again...
  • Options
    HaroldOHaroldO Posts: 1,185
    SeanT said:

    Oh god. Peter Mandelson lecturing us on political mores and electoral principles.

    Could have been worse, could have been old Allie Campbell.
  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,800
    malcolmg said:

    Omnium said:

    malcolmg said:

    FPT
    Omnium said:

    » show previous quotes
    These ideas may individually get over the wire in their acceptance in Scotland, but they're far from accepted as a package.

    The relatively pragmatic Tories are far from your enemy if you want an independent Scotland. Your actual enemy is clearly the somewhat brighter bloke that lives next door.

    Nobody within miles is brighter than me so that one does not resonate.

    (The last line is malcolmg's.)

    As you must clearly live on a very remote island malcolmg then I wonder what light you might cast on these matters?

    Omnium , highly populated area for sure , I don't usually like to blow my own trumpet , but I am a bit of an intergalatic megastar, brighter than your average bear for sure.
    It will be SNP by a very very wide margin in Scotland , negated by the supine Tory victory in England and will lead to independence for sure as England moves ever rightwards.
    Oh well. I didn't realise I was dealing with an intergalactic megastar. If only I'd been told.

    Are you actually saying that English voters don't count? ("Supine", really?)
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,414
    murali_s said:

    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    FTSE drops 180 points. You would have expected big business to support the Tories.

    Coz the £ rose, you dork.
    To a certain degree, yes. General global weakness in equities probably more of a factor.
    The Dow is down 0.6% and the FTSE 2.5%, suggesting most of the Uk fall was domestic. £/$ is up 2.3%, so there's your explanation. I am up about £1200 on the day so very happy with Mrs May.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,991
    edited April 2017
    SeanT said:

    Oh god. Peter Mandelson lecturing us on political mores and electoral principles.

    I'm sure he knows a lot about them, in an academic sense.
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Mortimer said:

    JackW said:

    justin124 said:

    JackW said:

    It'll come down to whether the broadcasters have the bottle to empty chair the PM.

    They should invite her to all the debates. If she chooses to not attend, then fine. The opposition will have a couple of hours to discuss the merits of the government and all their good works .. :smile:

    The media should put a marker down that no party leader gets a veto on the debates.

    At one level I agree with that, but then I recall that the broadcasters failed to do this in the past when election debates were being mooted.As far back as 1966 the leaders failed to agree the terms of any debates, and this continued throughout the elections dominated by Thatcher, Major and Blair.There was an acceptance that the parties had the option of imposing a veto when it suited their interests. On what basis can the broadcasters seek now to impose their wishes on an unwilling part leader?
    The broadcasters wish to invite party leaders to a debate. One party leader seeks to invalidate the debates.

    Ergo :

    If I invite some LibDems to view the dungeons of Auchentennach Castle and all but Mark Senior agree that such an educational and gastronomic tour de force is preferable to a lecture on the merits of bar charts, then with regret Mark doesn't get a veto.
    But if Mark is the main event for the crowds, then surprise surprise the people putting on the show might be a little less excited about it.

    I hate the debatification of British politics. People should be encouraged to do more than sit on the sofa and make a snap decision.
    The debates are in addition to rather than a replacement for the whole campaign.
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,894

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    Omnium said:

    malcolmg said:

    FPT
    Omnium said:

    » show previous quotes
    These ideas may individually get over the wire in their acceptance in Scotland, but they're far from accepted as a package.

    The relatively pragmatic Tories are far from your enemy if you want an independent Scotland. Your actual enemy is clearly the somewhat brighter bloke that lives next door.

    Nobody within miles is brighter than me so that one does not resonate.

    (The last line is malcolmg's.)

    As you must clearly live on a very remote island malcolmg then I wonder what light you might cast on these matters?

    Omnium , highly populated area for sure , I don't usually like to blow my own trumpet , but I am a bit of an intergalatic megastar, brighter than your average bear for sure.
    It will be SNP by a very very wide margin in Scotland , negated by the supine Tory victory in England and will lead to independence for sure as England moves ever rightwards.
    Evening Malc - I do not think Theresa May intends to move anywhere other than the centre ground vacated by Corbyn and a sensible EFTA like Brexit
    Evening Big_G, you will be happy man today.
    In some ways as I believe she needs a mandate but talk of a landslide is premature and at present I expect a majority of between 60 and 80. I also think the success or otherwise of indy2 will largely depend on TM achieving a good trading deal
    Isn't a "landslide" 80 or above?
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,128
    Pulpstar said:

    rcs1000 said:

    AndyJS said:

    John Hemming expecting to stand again for Yardley against Jess Phillips:

    ""John Hemming‏Verified account @johnhemming4mp 3h3 hours ago
    Replying to @noaxnow

    Thank you for that. I expect to be confirmed as candidate for June 8th some time later today."

    twitter.com/johnhemming4mp/with_replies"

    Read more: http://vote-2012.proboards.com/posts/recent#ixzz4eccwGHaR

    It's not an impossible LibDem gain. It's the most pro-Remain part of Birmingham. Could Hemming go from 10,500 to 13,000 votes? Yes. Will that be enough? Probably not (Jess got 17,000 votes last time). But if it's a truly horrible Labour campaign, then he might just edge it.

    Birmingham Yardley was over 60% Leave.
    Bang on 60% according to Hanretty's spreadsheet.

    That said I think it could well be a Lib Dem gain.
    Possibly, but I think Hemming would have maxed out the tactical and personal votes in 2015.

    He'll need to get a fair lump straight from Labour.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,989

    One curious point re election expenses is that if Gorton is postponed , Labour and the Lib Dems will already have exceeded the GE expenses for that constituency . The allowed expenses for a by election are much higher than a GE .
    I presume the EC will make a special dispensation to allow for thi quirk .

    That would be sensible, although doesn't the spending limit only cover the election period, so it wouldn't matter anyway?
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,414

    One curious point re election expenses is that if Gorton is postponed , Labour and the Lib Dems will already have exceeded the GE expenses for that constituency . The allowed expenses for a by election are much higher than a GE .
    I presume the EC will make a special dispensation to allow for thi quirk .

    No, since the short campaign expenses period hasn't started yet, so no-one has officially spent anything as far as GE2017 is concerned. The timing rules for by elections are different.
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,358
    edited April 2017
    Leicester just gone 1 down - 0 - 2 Atletico
  • Options
    Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    JackW said:

    justin124 said:

    JackW said:

    It'll come down to whether the broadcasters have the bottle to empty chair the PM.

    They should invite her to all the debates. If she chooses to not attend, then fine. The opposition will have a couple of hours to discuss the merits of the government and all their good works .. :smile:

    The media should put a marker down that no party leader gets a veto on the debates.

    At one level I agree with that, but then I recall that the broadcasters failed to do this in the past when election debates were being mooted.As far back as 1966 the leaders failed to agree the terms of any debates, and this continued throughout the elections dominated by Thatcher, Major and Blair.There was an acceptance that the parties had the option of imposing a veto when it suited their interests. On what basis can the broadcasters seek now to impose their wishes on an unwilling part leader?
    The broadcasters wish to invite party leaders to a debate. One party leader seeks to invalidate the debates.

    Ergo :

    If I invite some LibDems to view the dungeons of Auchentennach Castle and all but Mark Senior agree that such an educational and gastronomic tour de force is preferable to a lecture on the merits of bar charts, then with regret Mark doesn't get a veto.
    It's like Game of Thrones and similar tales of quasi-medieval derring do; the guy with the smaller army challenges his opponent to settle things by single combat cos it's his best shot at victory, and the other guy naturally refuses cos what's in it for him, and the first guy calls the other guy a coward. It is pure convention. Note that it is also very capable of biting the challenger fatally in the arse (Miliband 2015) and that even the greatest of actor-politicians literally debated mano a mano with a chair, and lost (Eastwood 2012).
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,130
    edited April 2017
    An interesting article in the Guardian based on the premise that May has called the election because she thinks she needs to show the EU that Brexit means Brexit in order to avoid being given a bad deal. If true I think she badly misunderstands why a 'good deal' in her terms isn't on offer, which has nothing do to with persuasion.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/18/mays-real-reason-for-calling-election-to-show-eu-that-brexit-really-means-brexit
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,991
    GIN1138 said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    Omnium said:

    malcolmg said:

    FPT
    Omnium said:

    » show previous quotes
    These ideas may individually get over the wire in their acceptance in Scotland, but they're far from accepted as a package.

    The relatively pragmatic Tories are far from your enemy if you want an independent Scotland. Your actual enemy is clearly the somewhat brighter bloke that lives next door.

    Nobody within miles is brighter than me so that one does not resonate.

    (The last line is malcolmg's.)

    As you must clearly live on a very remote island malcolmg then I wonder what light you might cast on these matters?

    Omnium , highly populated area for sure , I don't usually like to blow my own trumpet , but I am a bit of an intergalatic megastar, brighter than your average bear for sure.
    It will be SNP by a very very wide margin in Scotland , negated by the supine Tory victory in England and will lead to independence for sure as England moves ever rightwards.
    Evening Malc - I do not think Theresa May intends to move anywhere other than the centre ground vacated by Corbyn and a sensible EFTA like Brexit
    Evening Big_G, you will be happy man today.
    In some ways as I believe she needs a mandate but talk of a landslide is premature and at present I expect a majority of between 60 and 80. I also think the success or otherwise of indy2 will largely depend on TM achieving a good trading deal
    Isn't a "landslide" 80 or above?
    The very upper end of my initial 60-80 prediction.
  • Options
    MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,584
    SeanT said:

    MaxPB said:

    Thanks Mrs May, I needed to transfer some money this Friday. Just did it now instead and got a nice little bonus.

    Grrr. I'm about to get wheelbarrows of foreign cash poured over me, in the next couple of weeks or so, and this rise in the £ is easily costing me four figures.

    I do not expect sympathy.

    You don't have to take it in GBP today. You can leave it in foreign currency for now surely?

    It's easy to have US$ and Euro accounts with your bank.

  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,989
    How many sleeps until June 8?
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,563
    calum said:
    Yet another example of the death of "discretion" in the justice system.

    Ironic that it was removed in the name of fairness, really.
  • Options
    MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    IanB2 said:

    One curious point re election expenses is that if Gorton is postponed , Labour and the Lib Dems will already have exceeded the GE expenses for that constituency . The allowed expenses for a by election are much higher than a GE .
    I presume the EC will make a special dispensation to allow for thi quirk .

    No, since the short campaign expenses period hasn't started yet, so no-one has officially spent anything as far as GE2017 is concerned. The timing rules for by elections are different.
    They have already exceeded the long campaign GE expenses limits
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,131

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    Omnium said:

    malcolmg said:

    FPT
    Omnium said:

    » show previous quotes
    These ideas may individually get over the wire in their acceptance in Scotland, but they're far from accepted as a package.

    The relatively pragmatic Tories are far from your enemy if you want an independent Scotland. Your actual enemy is clearly the somewhat brighter bloke that lives next door.

    Nobody within miles is brighter than me so that one does not resonate.

    (The last line is malcolmg's.)

    As you must clearly live on a very remote island malcolmg then I wonder what light you might cast on these matters?

    Omnium , highly populated area for sure , I don't usually like to blow my own trumpet , but I am a bit of an intergalatic megastar, brighter than your average bear for sure.
    It will be SNP by a very very wide margin in Scotland , negated by the supine Tory victory in England and will lead to independence for sure as England moves ever rightwards.
    Evening Malc - I do not think Theresa May intends to move anywhere other than the centre ground vacated by Corbyn and a sensible EFTA like Brexit
    Evening Big_G, you will be happy man today.
    In some ways as I believe she needs a mandate but talk of a landslide is premature and at present I expect a majority of between 60 and 80. I also think the success or otherwise of indy2 will largely depend on TM achieving a good trading deal
    I don't, as in some ways the harder the Brexit the even harder it will be for an independent Scotland to trade with rUK, though it does now look like May is aiming for some kind of transition deal anyway which Sturgeon will find hard to argue against
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,130
    RobD said:

    How many sleeps until June 8?

    You should manage 5 or 6.
  • Options
    Ishmael_Z said:

    JackW said:

    justin124 said:

    JackW said:

    It'll come down to whether the broadcasters have the bottle to empty chair the PM.

    They should invite her to all the debates. If she chooses to not attend, then fine. The opposition will have a couple of hours to discuss the merits of the government and all their good works .. :smile:

    The media should put a marker down that no party leader gets a veto on the debates.

    At one level I agree with that, but then I recall that the broadcasters failed to do this in the past when election debates were being mooted.As far back as 1966 the leaders failed to agree the terms of any debates, and this continued throughout the elections dominated by Thatcher, Major and Blair.There was an acceptance that the parties had the option of imposing a veto when it suited their interests. On what basis can the broadcasters seek now to impose their wishes on an unwilling part leader?
    The broadcasters wish to invite party leaders to a debate. One party leader seeks to invalidate the debates.

    Ergo :

    If I invite some LibDems to view the dungeons of Auchentennach Castle and all but Mark Senior agree that such an educational and gastronomic tour de force is preferable to a lecture on the merits of bar charts, then with regret Mark doesn't get a veto.
    It's like Game of Thrones and similar tales of quasi-medieval derring do; the guy with the smaller army challenges his opponent to settle things by single combat cos it's his best shot at victory, and the other guy naturally refuses cos what's in it for him, and the first guy calls the other guy a coward. It is pure convention. Note that it is also very capable of biting the challenger fatally in the arse (Miliband 2015) and that even the greatest of actor-politicians literally debated mano a mano with a chair, and lost (Eastwood 2012).
    CAESAR
    He calls me “boy” and chides as he had power
    To beat me out of Egypt. My messenger
    He hath whipped with rods, dares me to personal combat,
    Caesar to Antony. Let the old ruffian know
    I have many other ways to die, meantime
    Laugh at his challenge.

    Antony & Cleopatra: Act iv Scene i
This discussion has been closed.