politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » One and a half nations, how a longstanding trend has for now b

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » One and a half nations, how a longstanding trend has for now been checked

Picture: The current political map of the UK (via the BBC)

Read the full story here

IanB2

First! Unlike anyone right now.

TGOHF

First Loser - Like Jezza.

IanB2

The extra water was surely the principal reason for the sinking of the south? Creating lots of good harbours that came in very handy later.

Labour's position amongst the young and educated seems to me less precarious than Tory strength amongst the working classes? When Brexit disappoints, it will surely disappoint the workers most particularly, and then the Tories would appear to be high, like Scotland, and dry (unlike)?

CarlottaVance

Excellent tread Mr Meeks! as usual, when you stay away from you-know-what......

the public are restless for a new direction. They have rejected bloodless managerialism on every occasion that it has been offered to them. The parties would therefore do well to offer them something else.

Neither major party is well placed to do this - indeed Labour have a strong Cher tendency in their leadership, if not their supporters, and the Tories have the 'in-tray' to dwarf all 'in-trays' - possibly only exceeded by Labour in '45......not sure any of the smaller parties are well placed to exploit this either......

CarlottaVance

May have been missed in yesterday's hilarity - Labour Home Office team - no dissent there!

https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/880488894072061952

Nigelb

A good header, but missing a couple of points.
One, IanB2 describes - the Tories are in a bind from which it's not at all obvious how they escape without a period in opposition, a miraculously successful Brexit looking rather unlikely. The other is that Labour are far less likely to change leader than the Tories anytime soon, and when they do, the replacement is likely to be out of a similar utopian/Marxist mould.
There is a clear opportunity for a centrist party, but somehow I don't see the LibDems making any great breakthrough under the inspired leadership of old uncle Vince.

IanB2

The other interesting problem that the major parties face is that their patterns of support have both moved a long way from their traditional funders and power-brokers, unions and big business respectively.

JosiasJessop

IanB2 said:

The extra water was surely the principal reason for the sinking of the south? Creating lots of good harbours that came in very handy later.

(Snip)

No. As the ice melted, the water level rose. But that was not the south sinking. Also, whilst the ice melted quickly and the sea levels stabilised, the land in the south is continuing to sink.

The sinking occurs, as Alastair rightly says, because the landmass is still 'relaxing' after the last ice age. The north, released from the repressive yoke of countless tons of ice, is rising, which is causing the feckless south to sink into the mire.

It's called isostatic rebound:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-glacial_rebound

One little funny anecdote: I listen to a very good history podcast. At least it's good for history, not so good on science. The presenter mused that the reason the site of the Battle of Hastings was on the top of a hill was that the sea level had gone down through this process.

Despite Battle being on the south coast, which is sinking ...

IanB2

Nigelb said:

A good header, but missing a couple of points.
One, IanB2 describes - the Tories are in a bind from which it's not at all obvious how they escape without a period in opposition, a miraculously successful Brexit looking rather unlikely. The other is that Labour are far less likely to change leader than the Tories anytime soon, and when they do, the replacement is likely to be out of a similar utopian/Marxist mould.
There is a clear opportunity for a centrist party, but somehow I don't see the LibDems making any great breakthrough under the inspired leadership of old uncle Vince.

I share your concern about Vince. The most rosy scenario is that Vince recognises that his role is to provide an apprenticeship and transitional period for his deputy, assuming she wants to step up in the first place. However, humility and selflessness do not appear to be Vince's most obvious characteristics.

The centre faces the challenge of how to recapture its radicalism, after the damage of the coalition years. Liberals in particular used to be driven by a very strong desire to change the world - their image of splitting the difference between the two larger parties was always thrust upon them by the voters rather than part of the self-image. Coalition has dented this dramatically but, like Macron, the LDs need to try and become the radical centre once again, championing the interests of the young in particular. Radical centerism would be hugely less risky than radical left or right. Again, Vince would appear to be the last person to go in this direction. It already feels to me that we will be treading water waiting for Vince to move on.

IanB2

JosiasJessop said:

IanB2 said:

The extra water was surely the principal reason for the sinking of the south? Creating lots of good harbours that came in very handy later.

(Snip)

No. As the ice melted, the water level rose. But that was not the south sinking. Also, whilst the ice melted quickly and the sea levels stabilised, the land in the south is continuing to sink.

The sinking occurs, as Alastair rightly says, because the landmass is still 'relaxing' after the last ice age. The north, released from the repressive yoke of countless tons of ice, is rising, which is causing the feckless south to sink into the mire.

It's called isostatic rebound:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-glacial_rebound

One little funny anecdote: I listen to a very good history podcast. At least it's good for history, not so good on science. The presenter mused that the reason the site of the Battle of Hastings was on the top of a hill was that the sea level had gone down through this process.

Despite Battle being on the south coast, which is sinking ...

I notice that the rising is twice as fast as the sinking!

The idea that the Normans had time to walk up a nearby hill whilst they were waiting for Harold to walk all the way back from York never occurred to him?

JosiasJessop

IanB2 said:

JosiasJessop said:

IanB2 said:

The extra water was surely the principal reason for the sinking of the south? Creating lots of good harbours that came in very handy later.

(Snip)

No. As the ice melted, the water level rose. But that was not the south sinking. Also, whilst the ice melted quickly and the sea levels stabilised, the land in the south is continuing to sink.

The sinking occurs, as Alastair rightly says, because the landmass is still 'relaxing' after the last ice age. The north, released from the repressive yoke of countless tons of ice, is rising, which is causing the feckless south to sink into the mire.

It's called isostatic rebound:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-glacial_rebound

One little funny anecdote: I listen to a very good history podcast. At least it's good for history, not so good on science. The presenter mused that the reason the site of the Battle of Hastings was on the top of a hill was that the sea level had gone down through this process.

Despite Battle being on the south coast, which is sinking ...

I notice that the rising is twice as fast as the sinking!

The idea that the Normans had time to walk up a nearby hill whilst they were waiting for Harold to walk all the way back from York never occurred to him?

Evidently not. He's an American, so he's not that familiar with the UK.

And as we saw in that documentary Robin Hood, Prince of Thieves: you can land at Dover, have lunch at Hadrian's Wall, and be in Sherwood Forest for supper. So it appears as well as sinking and rising, the UK's enlarged massively in the last seven hundred years ...

foxinsoxuk

IanB2 said:

Nigelb said:

A good header, but missing a couple of points.
One, IanB2 describes - the Tories are in a bind from which it's not at all obvious how they escape without a period in opposition, a miraculously successful Brexit looking rather unlikely. The other is that Labour are far less likely to change leader than the Tories anytime soon, and when they do, the replacement is likely to be out of a similar utopian/Marxist mould.
There is a clear opportunity for a centrist party, but somehow I don't see the LibDems making any great breakthrough under the inspired leadership of old uncle Vince.

I share your concern about Vince. The most rosy scenario is that Vince recognises that his role is to provide an apprenticeship and transitional period for his deputy, assuming she wants to step up in the first place. However, humility and selflessness do not appear to be Vince's most obvious characteristics.

The centre faces the challenge of how to recapture its radicalism, after the damage of the coalition years. Liberals in particular used to be driven by a very strong desire to change the world - their image of splitting the difference between the two larger parties was always thrust upon them by the voters rather than part of the self-image. Coalition has dented this dramatically but, like Macron, the LDs need to try and become the radical centre once again, championing the interests of the young in particular. Radical centerism would be hugely less risky than radical left or right. Again, Vince would appear to be the last person to go in this direction. It already feels to me that we will be treading water waiting for Vince to move on.

Vince is a poor choice for leader. Still 20 days to the deadline to stand.

DavidL

I agree with Alastair that it must be a good thing that the major parties have at least some representation in parts of the electorate where they were apparently facing extinction but I fear it is optimistic to think that this will result in a realignment of their thinking.

The Tories under May seem quite hostile to the interests of Inner city concerns, hence their further retreat in London. Labour, in contrast, seems obsessed with the values of Islington to an extent that some northerners have trouble working out what they are talking about. Neither party has the talent in their current leadership to broaden their current coalition. The one that does successfully will win the next landslide.

JosiasJessop

foxinsoxuk said:

IanB2 said:

Nigelb said:

A good header, but missing a couple of points.
One, IanB2 describes - the Tories are in a bind from which it's not at all obvious how they escape without a period in opposition, a miraculously successful Brexit looking rather unlikely. The other is that Labour are far less likely to change leader than the Tories anytime soon, and when they do, the replacement is likely to be out of a similar utopian/Marxist mould.
There is a clear opportunity for a centrist party, but somehow I don't see the LibDems making any great breakthrough under the inspired leadership of old uncle Vince.

I share your concern about Vince. The most rosy scenario is that Vince recognises that his role is to provide an apprenticeship and transitional period for his deputy, assuming she wants to step up in the first place. However, humility and selflessness do not appear to be Vince's most obvious characteristics.

The centre faces the challenge of how to recapture its radicalism, after the damage of the coalition years. Liberals in particular used to be driven by a very strong desire to change the world - their image of splitting the difference between the two larger parties was always thrust upon them by the voters rather than part of the self-image. Coalition has dented this dramatically but, like Macron, the LDs need to try and become the radical centre once again, championing the interests of the young in particular. Radical centerism would be hugely less risky than radical left or right. Again, Vince would appear to be the last person to go in this direction. It already feels to me that we will be treading water waiting for Vince to move on.

Vince is a poor choice for leader. Still 20 days to the deadline to stand.

As someone who finds himself trapped politically between the Lib Dems and the Conservatives, I fail to see what Vince would bring to the table policywise that I'd like. But perhaps he'll surprise me, or perhaps I'm not the sort of voter he'll aim for.

DavidL

I think and have always thought that Uncle Vince was seriously overrated, like Josias he is absolutely not the sort of Lib Dem that would tempt me further back towards the Lib Dems. But the first priority for the Lib Dems is to get back into the national conversation, something Farron never managed, and he might just manage that.

It is unfortunate that Clegg, who was by far the most capable of doing this, has now lost his seat. It brings to mind the similar set back that Labour suffered when Ed Balls lost his. With Osborne and of course Cameron also opting out all 3 parties seem to have diminished their already modest talent pools significantly. Even the SNP lost Salmond and Robertson.

I struggle to recall a time when there was so little talent in politics. With the challenges we are facing as a nation that is indeed unfortunate.

daodao

foxinsoxuk said:

IanB2 said:

Nigelb said:

A good header, but missing a couple of points.
One, IanB2 describes - the Tories are in a bind from which it's not at all obvious how they escape without a period in opposition, a miraculously successful Brexit looking rather unlikely. The other is that Labour are far less likely to change leader than the Tories anytime soon, and when they do, the replacement is likely to be out of a similar utopian/Marxist mould.
There is a clear opportunity for a centrist party, but somehow I don't see the LibDems making any great breakthrough under the inspired leadership of old uncle Vince.

I share your concern about Vince. The most rosy scenario is that Vince recognises that his role is to provide an apprenticeship and transitional period for his deputy, assuming she wants to step up in the first place. However, humility and selflessness do not appear to be Vince's most obvious characteristics.

The centre faces the challenge of how to recapture its radicalism, after the damage of the coalition years. Liberals in particular used to be driven by a very strong desire to change the world - their image of splitting the difference between the two larger parties was always thrust upon them by the voters rather than part of the self-image. Coalition has dented this dramatically but, like Macron, the LDs need to try and become the radical centre once again, championing the interests of the young in particular. Radical centerism would be hugely less risky than radical left or right. Again, Vince would appear to be the last person to go in this direction. It already feels to me that we will be treading water waiting for Vince to move on.

Vince is a poor choice for leader. Still 20 days to the deadline to stand.

VC is OK as an interim leader, but not for the long-term, and it would be best for the LDs if he steps down by 2020. However, it hardly matters, as the LDs are going backwards despite gaining 4 seats at GE2017. There are now only a handful of other seats (beyond the 12 that they hold) where they would be in realistic contention at the next GE, and that is assuming that there won't be significant boundary changes that undermine selective seat targetting.

As for the despicable Umunna, why was he trying to undermine his own party? Remaining in the single market is not Brexit. Corbyn had no choice but to sack the front bench rebels; at least Zeichner recognised that he couldn't stay and resigned before being sacked.

williamglenn

JosiasJessop said:

As someone who finds himself trapped politically between the Lib Dems and the Conservatives, I fail to see what Vince would bring to the table policywise that I'd like. But perhaps he'll surprise me, or perhaps I'm not the sort of voter he'll aim for.

He ticks the right boxes for this era:

- Not obviously mad
- Not a student politician
- Not a Marxist

Pulpstar

Cable offers the radical dynamism of 08 Obama, Trudeau, or Macron. *Hopefully

IanB2

DavidL said:

I think and have always thought that Uncle Vince was seriously overrated, like Josias he is absolutely not the sort of Lib Dem that would tempt me further back towards the Lib Dems. But the first priority for the Lib Dems is to get back into the national conversation, something Farron never managed, and he might just manage that.

It is unfortunate that Clegg, who was by far the most capable of doing this, has now lost his seat. It brings to mind the similar set back that Labour suffered when Ed Balls lost his. With Osborne and of course Cameron also opting out all 3 parties seem to have diminished their already modest talent pools significantly. Even the SNP lost Salmond and Robertson.

I struggle to recall a time when there was so little talent in politics. With the challenges we are facing as a nation that is indeed unfortunate.

I don't agree about Clegg, despite appreciating his ability and skills. Politicians never recover from a big reputational mistake, as May will doubtless discover. The LDs need to put the past behind them, and having Clegg dragging his legacy around like an old man chained to a heavy stone was doing neither him nor the party any favours. And the man who compromised too far can never be the person to (re)discover radical centralism.

currystar

DavidL said:

I think and have always thought that Uncle Vince was seriously overrated, like Josias he is absolutely not the sort of Lib Dem that would tempt me further back towards the Lib Dems. But the first priority for the Lib Dems is to get back into the national conversation, something Farron never managed, and he might just manage that.

It is unfortunate that Clegg, who was by far the most capable of doing this, has now lost his seat. It brings to mind the similar set back that Labour suffered when Ed Balls lost his. With Osborne and of course Cameron also opting out all 3 parties seem to have diminished their already modest talent pools significantly. Even the SNP lost Salmond and Robertson.

I struggle to recall a time when there was so little talent in politics. With the challenges we are facing as a nation that is indeed unfortunate.

I think the 24 hour news media put people off from going into politics

IanB2

williamglenn said:

JosiasJessop said:

As someone who finds himself trapped politically between the Lib Dems and the Conservatives, I fail to see what Vince would bring to the table policywise that I'd like. But perhaps he'll surprise me, or perhaps I'm not the sort of voter he'll aim for.

He ticks the right boxes for this era:

- Not obviously mad
- Not a student politician
- Not a Marxist

A suggestion that Mrs May is mad?

Pulpstar

williamglenn said:

JosiasJessop said:

As someone who finds himself trapped politically between the Lib Dems and the Conservatives, I fail to see what Vince would bring to the table policywise that I'd like. But perhaps he'll surprise me, or perhaps I'm not the sort of voter he'll aim for.

He ticks the right boxes for this era:

- Not obviously mad
- Not a student politician
- Not a Marxist

Dull competence is a very nice market outside the Tory brand though ;/

Pulpstar

Niche

DavidL

daodao said:

foxinsoxuk said:

IanB2 said:

Nigelb said:

Vince is a poor choice for leader. Still 20 days to the deadline to stand.

VC is OK as an interim leader, but not for the long-term, and it would be best for the LDs if he steps down by 2020. However, it hardly matters, as the LDs are going backwards despite gaining 4 seats at GE2017. There are now only a handful of other seats (beyond the 12 that they hold) where they would be in realistic contention at the next GE, and that is assuming that there won't be significant boundary changes that undermine selective seat targetting.

As for the despicable Umunna, why was he trying to undermine his own party? Remaining in the single market is not Brexit. Corbyn had no choice but to sack the front bench rebels; at least Zeichner recognised that he couldn't stay and resigned before being sacked.

Umunna seems to be setting himself up as the leader of the internal opposition to Corbyn. This amendment consolidated that role and he does now seem well placed to be the next candidate for that wing of the party.

This tactic, however, assumes ongoing Corbyn weakness which after the unexpectedly good election result does not exist. For internal Labour opposition it is now a waiting game. Corbyn is untouchable for as long as he wants or is able to stay. It is fanciful to think he will not use that position to consolidate the grip of his wing of the party. For that reason I do not fancy Umunna's chances.

logical_song

Labour and Lib Dems increase the vote in two by-elections

Britain Elects‏ @britainelects 7h7 hours ago
William Morris (Waltham Forest) result:

LAB 68.4% (+11.5)
GRN 18.6% (+1.8)
CON 13.0% (+6.2)
LDEM NA (-7.4)
TUSC NA (-4.3)
UKIP NA (-7.8)

Britain Elects‏ @britainelects 7h7 hours ago
Hedge End Grange Park (Eastleigh):

LDEM 56.5% (+15.5)
CON 26.7% (-10.9)
LAB 12.2% (+0.9)
GRN 3.5% (+3.5)
UKIP 1.2% (-9.0)

williamglenn

IanB2 said:

DavidL said:

I think and have always thought that Uncle Vince was seriously overrated, like Josias he is absolutely not the sort of Lib Dem that would tempt me further back towards the Lib Dems. But the first priority for the Lib Dems is to get back into the national conversation, something Farron never managed, and he might just manage that.

It is unfortunate that Clegg, who was by far the most capable of doing this, has now lost his seat. It brings to mind the similar set back that Labour suffered when Ed Balls lost his. With Osborne and of course Cameron also opting out all 3 parties seem to have diminished their already modest talent pools significantly. Even the SNP lost Salmond and Robertson.

I struggle to recall a time when there was so little talent in politics. With the challenges we are facing as a nation that is indeed unfortunate.

I don't agree about Clegg, despite appreciating his ability and skills. Politicians never recover from a big reputational mistake, as May will doubtless discover. The LDs need to put the past behind them, and having Clegg dragging his legacy around like an old man chained to a heavy stone was doing neither him nor the party any favours. And the man who compromised too far can never be the person to (re)discover radical centralism.

For me, it's Clegg's past dissembling about the EU which makes him completely unsuited to play that role. His debate performance against Farage a couple of years ago is still providing ammunition to the Brexiteers even now.

What made Macron stand out is his confidence not to apologise for his opinions.

IanB2

DavidL said:

daodao said:

foxinsoxuk said:

IanB2 said:

Nigelb said:

Vince is a poor choice for leader. Still 20 days to the deadline to stand.

VC is OK as an interim leader, but not for the long-term, and it would be best for the LDs if he steps down by 2020. However, it hardly matters, as the LDs are going backwards despite gaining 4 seats at GE2017. There are now only a handful of other seats (beyond the 12 that they hold) where they would be in realistic contention at the next GE, and that is assuming that there won't be significant boundary changes that undermine selective seat targetting.

As for the despicable Umunna, why was he trying to undermine his own party? Remaining in the single market is not Brexit. Corbyn had no choice but to sack the front bench rebels; at least Zeichner recognised that he couldn't stay and resigned before being sacked.

Umunna seems to be setting himself up as the leader of the internal opposition to Corbyn. This amendment consolidated that role and he does now seem well placed to be the next candidate for that wing of the party.

This tactic, however, assumes ongoing Corbyn weakness which after the unexpectedly good election result does not exist. For internal Labour opposition it is now a waiting game. Corbyn is untouchable for as long as he wants or is able to stay. It is fanciful to think he will not use that position to consolidate the grip of his wing of the party. For that reason I do not fancy Umunna's chances.

The LibDems are waiting under Vince, the moderate Labour people are waiting (though not probably for Umunna) and sensible Tories are waiting and hoping that Brexit isn't the car crash it would appear. We are in a sad limbo at a very critical time.

DavidL

currystar said:

DavidL said:

I think and have always thought that Uncle Vince was seriously overrated, like Josias he is absolutely not the sort of Lib Dem that would tempt me further back towards the Lib Dems. But the first priority for the Lib Dems is to get back into the national conversation, something Farron never managed, and he might just manage that.

It is unfortunate that Clegg, who was by far the most capable of doing this, has now lost his seat. It brings to mind the similar set back that Labour suffered when Ed Balls lost his. With Osborne and of course Cameron also opting out all 3 parties seem to have diminished their already modest talent pools significantly. Even the SNP lost Salmond and Robertson.

I struggle to recall a time when there was so little talent in politics. With the challenges we are facing as a nation that is indeed unfortunate.

I think the 24 hour news media put people off from going into politics

I agree. The Social Media impact on the quality of life and (lack of) privacy cannot be underrated either. A friend of mine who is an MSP has complained that he could spend virtually every waking hour dealing with social media contacts if he was so minded. And yet failure to do so carries its own risks.

logical_song

Pulpstar said:

Cable offers the radical dynamism of 08 Obama, Trudeau, or Macron. *Hopefully

Trudeau and Macron's victories were both outstanding.

IanB2

logical_song said:

Pulpstar said:

Cable offers the radical dynamism of 08 Obama, Trudeau, or Macron. *Hopefully

Trudeau and Macron's victories were both outstanding.

The most positive scenario for the LibDems is that someone young and dynamic like Swinson or Moran is able to position the party as a refreshing change from an aging Corbyn and whichever tired Tory gets to take over from May. The question for Vince is how he takes the party anywhere towards that prospect. Sadly the truth is that he simply needs to sit in the chair whilst his juniors build their experience and judgement.

felix

logical_song said:

Labour and Lib Dems increase the vote in two by-elections

Britain Elects‏ @britainelects 7h7 hours ago
William Morris (Waltham Forest) result:

LAB 68.4% (+11.5)
GRN 18.6% (+1.8)
CON 13.0% (+6.2)
LDEM NA (-7.4)
TUSC NA (-4.3)
UKIP NA (-7.8)

Britain Elects‏ @britainelects 7h7 hours ago
Hedge End Grange Park (Eastleigh):

LDEM 56.5% (+15.5)
CON 26.7% (-10.9)
LAB 12.2% (+0.9)
GRN 3.5% (+3.5)
UKIP 1.2% (-9.0)

Correction: LDs increase their vote in one by-election while falling in another as did the Tories.

IanB2

felix said:

logical_song said:

Labour and Lib Dems increase the vote in two by-elections

Britain Elects‏ @britainelects 7h7 hours ago
William Morris (Waltham Forest) result:

LAB 68.4% (+11.5)
GRN 18.6% (+1.8)
CON 13.0% (+6.2)
LDEM NA (-7.4)
TUSC NA (-4.3)
UKIP NA (-7.8)

Britain Elects‏ @britainelects 7h7 hours ago
Hedge End Grange Park (Eastleigh):

LDEM 56.5% (+15.5)
CON 26.7% (-10.9)
LAB 12.2% (+0.9)
GRN 3.5% (+3.5)
UKIP 1.2% (-9.0)

Correction: LDs increase their vote in one by-election while falling in another as did the Tories.

Not standing at all does make the fall unavoidable!

IanB2

Just catching up on last night's QT, with an interesting panel. Judging from the audience, Brexit is becoming even more divisive as an issue.

foxinsoxuk

williamglenn said:

IanB2 said:

DavidL said:

I think and have always thought that Uncle Vince was seriously overrated, like Josias he is absolutely not the sort of Lib Dem that would tempt me further back towards the Lib Dems. But the first priority for the Lib Dems is to get back into the national conversation, something Farron never managed, and he might just manage that.

It is unfortunate that Clegg, who was by far the most capable of doing this, has now lost his seat. It brings to mind the similar set back that Labour suffered when Ed Balls lost his. With Osborne and of course Cameron also opting out all 3 parties seem to have diminished their already modest talent pools significantly. Even the SNP lost Salmond and Robertson.

I struggle to recall a time when there was so little talent in politics. With the challenges we are facing as a nation that is indeed unfortunate.

I don't agree about Clegg, despite appreciating his ability and skills. Politicians never recover from a big reputational mistake, as May will doubtless discover. The LDs need to put the past behind them, and having Clegg dragging his legacy around like an old man chained to a heavy stone was doing neither him nor the party any favours. And the man who compromised too far can never be the person to (re)discover radical centralism.

For me, it's Clegg's past dissembling about the EU which makes him completely unsuited to play that role. His debate performance against Farage a couple of years ago is still providing ammunition to the Brexiteers even now.

What made Macron stand out is his confidence not to apologise for his opinions.

Macron is like Corbyn in that. He is not afraid of standing up for unpopular opinions. It does make for a contrast with more mealy mouthed politicians.

I cannot see what Vince brings to the LD leadership. I would far rather that Lamb will reconsider standing, but if not will vote for whoever stands against Vince.

foxinsoxuk

IanB2 said:

Just catching up on last night's QT, with an interesting panel. Judging from the audience, Brexit is becoming even more divisive as an issue.

Whatever comes out of Brexit is going to disappoint a of of people. Brexit can never achieve so many incompatible things.

Hastings seemed keen on hard Brexit. Perhaps there will be plenty of jobs created servicing the vast lorry parks and customs houses. I cannot see much other advantage to them.

I have an uncle there. It is a profoundly depressing spot, though some nearby places are pleasant enough.

Alanbrooke

Nats being international and civic I see

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/30/nicola-sturgeon-urged-bar-english-soldiers-students-scotland/

Roger

CarlottaVance said:

May have been missed in yesterday's hilarity - Labour Home Office team - no dissent there!

https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/880488894072061952

It seems pretty clear that Chuka has started his manoeuvres. He's calculated that without the suport in both parliament and in the country of the 'Remainers' Corbyn is dead in the water. This early attempt at smoking him out was very clever.

Chuka now has an army of 40-and that's just on the Labour side-and if Corbyn looks like a Brexiteer Momentum and his youth vote will melt like ice on an anvil.

IanB2

foxinsoxuk said:

williamglenn said:

IanB2 said:

DavidL said:

I think and have always thought that Uncle Vince was seriously overrated, like Josias he is absolutely not the sort of Lib Dem that would tempt me further back towards the Lib Dems. But the first priority for the Lib Dems is to get back into the national conversation, something Farron never managed, and he might just manage that.

It is unfortunate that Clegg, who was by far the most capable of doing this, has now lost his seat. It brings to mind the similar set back that Labour suffered when Ed Balls lost his. With Osborne and of course Cameron also opting out all 3 parties seem to have diminished their already modest talent pools significantly. Even the SNP lost Salmond and Robertson.

I struggle to recall a time when there was so little talent in politics. With the challenges we are facing as a nation that is indeed unfortunate.

I don't agree about Clegg, despite appreciating his ability and skills. Politicians never recover from a big reputational mistake, as May will doubtless discover. The LDs need to put the past behind them, and having Clegg dragging his legacy around like an old man chained to a heavy stone was doing neither him nor the party any favours. And the man who compromised too far can never be the person to (re)discover radical centralism.

For me, it's Clegg's past dissembling about the EU which makes him completely unsuited to play that role. His debate performance against Farage a couple of years ago is still providing ammunition to the Brexiteers even now.

What made Macron stand out is his confidence not to apologise for his opinions.

Macron is like Corbyn in that. He is not afraid of standing up for unpopular opinions. It does make for a contrast with more mealy mouthed politicians.

I cannot see what Vince brings to the LD leadership. I would far rather that Lamb will reconsider standing, but if not will vote for whoever stands against Vince.

It is most likely that no-one will, sadly.

Roger

OT. It is extraordinary that people-even the really stupid ones on here- couldn't see what was obvious; that as well as being a misogynist and a hopeless president he was also an odious human being.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/29/opinion/ive-overestimated-donald-trump.html

rkrkrk

Roger said:

CarlottaVance said:

May have been missed in yesterday's hilarity - Labour Home Office team - no dissent there!

https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/880488894072061952

It seems pretty clear that Chuka has started his manoeuvres. He's calculated that without the suport in both parliament and in the country of the 'Remainers' Corbyn is dead in the water. This early attempt at smoking him out was very clever.

Chuka now has an army of 40-and that's just on the Labour side-and if Corbyn looks like a Brexiteer Momentum and his youth vote will melt like ice on an anvil.

I was hoping for a more united Labour party this parliament. So much for that...

Mortimer

Tremendously insightful post Alastair. Thanks.

SquareRoot

rkrkrk said:

Roger said:

CarlottaVance said:

May have been missed in yesterday's hilarity - Labour Home Office team - no dissent there!

https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/880488894072061952

It seems pretty clear that Chuka has started his manoeuvres. He's calculated that without the suport in both parliament and in the country of the 'Remainers' Corbyn is dead in the water. This early attempt at smoking him out was very clever.

Chuka now has an army of 40-and that's just on the Labour side-and if Corbyn looks like a Brexiteer Momentum and his youth vote will melt like ice on an anvil.

I was hoping for a more united Labour party this parliament. So much for that...

its going to be fun. Corbyn is going to have some trouble of his own.

JosiasJessop

Roger said:

OT. It is extraordinary that people-even the really stupid ones on here- couldn't see what was obvious; that as well as being a misogynist and a hopeless president he was also an odious human being.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/29/opinion/ive-overestimated-donald-trump.html

Before he was elected, there was little doubt that Trump was a nasty little man. But that does not automatically mean he'll be a bad president.

However, I see little reason to think he isn't a terrible president, and that he's rapidly degrading the very office he holds.

As an aside, I think JFK was an absolutely terrible presidential candidate and president, a small man and a liar whose mistruths brought us to the brink of nuclear war. Yet he's now lauded as a great president, so what do I know?

Morris_Dancer

Good morning, everyone.

IanB2

JosiasJessop said:

Roger said:

OT. It is extraordinary that people-even the really stupid ones on here- couldn't see what was obvious; that as well as being a misogynist and a hopeless president he was also an odious human being.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/29/opinion/ive-overestimated-donald-trump.html

Before he was elected, there was little doubt that Trump was a nasty little man. But that does not automatically mean he'll be a bad president.

However, I see little reason to think he isn't a terrible president, and that he's rapidly degrading the very office he holds.

As an aside, I think JFK was an absolutely terrible presidential candidate and president, a small man and a liar whose mistruths brought us to the brink of nuclear war. Yet he's now lauded as a great president, so what do I know?

Indeed. Most senior politicians are unpleasant people; Trump just doesn't bother to hide it by projecting a false personality toward voters. This feels a lot worse; whether it actually is, time will tell.

foxinsoxuk

Roger said:

CarlottaVance said:

May have been missed in yesterday's hilarity - Labour Home Office team - no dissent there!

https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/880488894072061952

It seems pretty clear that Chuka has started his manoeuvres. He's calculated that without the suport in both parliament and in the country of the 'Remainers' Corbyn is dead in the water. This early attempt at smoking him out was very clever.

Chuka now has an army of 40-and that's just on the Labour side-and if Corbyn looks like a Brexiteer Momentum and his youth vote will melt like ice on an anvil.

I think the Labour campaigners are not that bothered by Brexit, but Chuka does seem to be setting himself up as Remaniac in Chief for when things go pearshaped. It is though more for national purposes rather than internal Labour ones. No one is bothered by current Labour party policy, because Brexit is going to be wholly owned by the Tories and DUP. He is setting up the "I told you so" vote for a post Brexit GE.

Roger

rkrkrk said:

Roger said:

CarlottaVance said:

May have been missed in yesterday's hilarity - Labour Home Office team - no dissent there!

https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/880488894072061952

It seems pretty clear that Chuka has started his manoeuvres. He's calculated that without the suport in both parliament and in the country of the 'Remainers' Corbyn is dead in the water. This early attempt at smoking him out was very clever.

Chuka now has an army of 40-and that's just on the Labour side-and if Corbyn looks like a Brexiteer Momentum and his youth vote will melt like ice on an anvil.

I was hoping for a more united Labour party this parliament. So much for that...

It won't happen because he is hopeless and however much he can excite a crowd at Glatonbury he needs some administrative and leadership skills and he has none. I'm afraid he's more doomed than even Theresa

PClipp

JosiasJessop said:

foxinsoxuk said:

IanB2 said:

I share your concern about Vince. The most rosy scenario is that Vince recognises that his role is to provide an apprenticeship and transitional period for his deputy, assuming she wants to step up in the first place. However, humility and selflessness do not appear to be Vince's most obvious characteristics.
The centre faces the challenge of how to recapture its radicalism, after the damage of the coalition years. Liberals in particular used to be driven by a very strong desire to change the world - their image of splitting the difference between the two larger parties was always thrust upon them by the voters rather than part of the self-image. Coalition has dented this dramatically but, like Macron, the LDs need to try and become the radical centre once again, championing the interests of the young in particular. Radical centerism would be hugely less risky than radical left or right. Again, Vince would appear to be the last person to go in this direction. It already feels to me that we will be treading water waiting for Vince to move on.

Vince is a poor choice for leader. Still 20 days to the deadline to stand.

As someone who finds himself trapped politically between the Lib Dems and the Conservatives, I fail to see what Vince would bring to the table policywise that I'd like. But perhaps he'll surprise me, or perhaps I'm not the sort of voter he'll aim for.

Your worries are groundless, I think, Mr Jessop. Unlike the Conservative Party, Lib Dems do not wait for their leader to have a brilliant new idea while running through the cornfields. There is a structure and process for developing policy. It might be a good idea to wait and see what the Lib Dems discuss at their Conference in Bournemouth in September. It is not just the Lib Dem leader who matters.

logical_song

felix said:

logical_song said:

Labour and Lib Dems increase the vote in two by-elections

Britain Elects‏ @britainelects 7h7 hours ago
William Morris (Waltham Forest) result:

LAB 68.4% (+11.5)
GRN 18.6% (+1.8)
CON 13.0% (+6.2)
LDEM NA (-7.4)
TUSC NA (-4.3)
UKIP NA (-7.8)

Britain Elects‏ @britainelects 7h7 hours ago
Hedge End Grange Park (Eastleigh):

LDEM 56.5% (+15.5)
CON 26.7% (-10.9)
LAB 12.2% (+0.9)
GRN 3.5% (+3.5)
UKIP 1.2% (-9.0)

Correction: LDs increase their vote in one by-election while falling in another as did the Tories.

Sorry it was badly worded. I meant that in seats held by those two parties they increased their winning percentages ( to 68.4% and 56.5%). What happened to the also-rans in such a case is not that important.

MarkSenior

felix said:

logical_song said:

Labour and Lib Dems increase the vote in two by-elections

Britain Elects‏ @britainelects 7h7 hours ago
William Morris (Waltham Forest) result:

LAB 68.4% (+11.5)
GRN 18.6% (+1.8)
CON 13.0% (+6.2)
LDEM NA (-7.4)
TUSC NA (-4.3)
UKIP NA (-7.8)

Britain Elects‏ @britainelects 7h7 hours ago
Hedge End Grange Park (Eastleigh):

LDEM 56.5% (+15.5)
CON 26.7% (-10.9)
LAB 12.2% (+0.9)
GRN 3.5% (+3.5)
UKIP 1.2% (-9.0)

Correction: LDs increase their vote in one by-election while falling in another as did the Tories.

No figures but the other two by election results were

Durham Dawdon Labour hold in straight contest between Labour and Seaham Community
West Lancs Derby OWL gain from Conservative

Slackbladder

foxinsoxuk said:

Roger said:

CarlottaVance said:

May have been missed in yesterday's hilarity - Labour Home Office team - no dissent there!

https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/880488894072061952

It seems pretty clear that Chuka has started his manoeuvres. He's calculated that without the suport in both parliament and in the country of the 'Remainers' Corbyn is dead in the water. This early attempt at smoking him out was very clever.

Chuka now has an army of 40-and that's just on the Labour side-and if Corbyn looks like a Brexiteer Momentum and his youth vote will melt like ice on an anvil.

I think the Labour campaigners are not that bothered by Brexit, but Chuka does seem to be setting himself up as Remaniac in Chief for when things go pearshaped. It is though more for national purposes rather than internal Labour ones. No one is bothered by current Labour party policy, because Brexit is going to be wholly owned by the Tories and DUP. He is setting up the "I told you so" vote for a post Brexit GE.

He's also setting himself up as the anti -Corbyneer in chief. That might not end well for him. He'll certainly have a target on his back.

Slackbladder

IanB2 said:

Just catching up on last night's QT, with an interesting panel. Judging from the audience, Brexit is becoming even more divisive as an issue.

Politics in general is. Look at Trump in America or the general election here, Peopl being abused and attacked as we heard from the MP in PMQs.

There's a posionous atmosphere out there on both sides, and the middle ground is being hollowed out.

CarlottaVance

Alanbrooke said:

Nats being international and civic I see

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/30/nicola-sturgeon-urged-bar-english-soldiers-students-scotland/

Their proposals included introducing laws forcing all media outlets to provide “impartial coverage”, removing from sale newspapers that had an anti-independence bias and establishing a publicly-funded TV channel that supported separation.

CarlottaVance

Still can't get the idea out of my mind of Mrs May channeling Cher.....

Blue_rog

Not sure if the BBC report on the cladding adds much to the conversation. The cladding was changed from the original specified but for one with the same classification. Saved £250k. In all normal circumstances this would be regarded as good management. I'd like to see the results if the original panels were subjected to the same tests. If there's a significant difference in fire retardence then the classification needs to be challenged, not the original decision that was made in good faith.

foxinsoxuk

PClipp said:

JosiasJessop said:

foxinsoxuk said:

IanB2 said:

I share your concern about Vince. The most rosy scenario is

Vince is a poor choice for leader. Still 20 days to the deadline to stand.

As someone who finds himself trapped politically between the Lib Dems and the Conservatives, I fail to see what Vince would bring to the table policywise that I'd like. But perhaps he'll surprise me, or perhaps I'm not the sort of voter he'll aim for.

Your worries are groundless, I think, Mr Jessop. Unlike the Conservative Party, Lib Dems do not wait for their leader to have a brilliant new idea while running through the cornfields. There is a structure and process for developing policy. It might be a good idea to wait and see what the Lib Dems discuss at their Conference in Bournemouth in September. It is not just the Lib Dem leader who matters.

Yes, good point. We are a democratic party in policy formulation. I may head to conference myself to try to pull out of my depression at the state of UK politrix.

Slackbladder said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Roger said:

CarlottaVance said:

May have been missed in yesterday's hilarity - Labour Home Office team - no dissent there!

https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/880488894072061952

It seems pretty clear that Chuka has started his manoeuvres. He's calculated that without the suport in both parliament and in the country of the 'Remainers' Corbyn is dead in the water. This early attempt at smoking him out was very clever.

Chuka now has an army of 40-and that's just on the Labour side-and if Corbyn looks like a Brexiteer Momentum and his youth vote will melt like ice on an anvil.

I think the Labour campaigners are not that bothered by Brexit, but Chuka does seem to be setting himself up as Remaniac in Chief for when things go pearshaped. It is though more for national purposes rather than internal Labour ones. No one is bothered by current Labour party policy, because Brexit is going to be wholly owned by the Tories and DUP. He is setting up the "I told you so" vote for a post Brexit GE.

He's also setting himself up as the anti -Corbyneer in chief. That might not end well for him. He'll certainly have a target on his back.

He is canny to have broken with Jezza over an issue that many activists will back.

Slackbladder

CarlottaVance said:

Still can't get the idea out of my mind of Mrs May channeling Cher.....

Does she beleive in life after love?

Or maybe she wishes she could 'turn back time'?

rkrkrk

Roger said:

rkrkrk said:

Roger said:

CarlottaVance said:

May have been missed in yesterday's hilarity - Labour Home Office team - no dissent there!

https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/880488894072061952

It seems pretty clear that Chuka has started his manoeuvres. He's calculated that without the suport in both parliament and in the country of the 'Remainers' Corbyn is dead in the water. This early attempt at smoking him out was very clever.

Chuka now has an army of 40-and that's just on the Labour side-and if Corbyn looks like a Brexiteer Momentum and his youth vote will melt like ice on an anvil.

I was hoping for a more united Labour party this parliament. So much for that...

It won't happen because he is hopeless and however much he can excite a crowd at Glatonbury he needs some administrative and leadership skills and he has none. I'm afraid he's more doomed than even Theresa

Surely the strong election result for Labour has debunked the idea that he has no leadership skills and is hopeless?

Personally I think there has been a dramatic improvement in the political operation since he started as opposition leader.

macisback

PClipp said:

JosiasJessop said:

foxinsoxuk said:

IanB2 said:

I share your concern about Vince. The most rosy scenario is that Vince recognises that his role is to provide an apprenticeship and transitional period for his deputy, assuming she wants to step up in the first place. However, humility and selflessness do not appear to be Vince's most obvious characteristics.
The centre faces the challenge of how to recapture its radicalism, after the damage of the coalition years. Liberals in particular used to be driven by a very strong desire to change the world - their image of splitting the difference between the two larger parties was always thrust upon them by the voters rather than part of the self-image. Coalition has dented this dramatically but, like Macron, the LDs need to try and become the radical centre once again, championing the interests of the young in particular. Radical centerism would be hugely less risky than radical left or right. Again, Vince would appear to be the last person to go in this direction. It already feels to me that we will be treading water waiting for Vince to move on.

Vince is a poor choice for leader. Still 20 days to the deadline to stand.

As someone who finds himself trapped politically between the Lib Dems and the Conservatives, I fail to see what Vince would bring to the table policywise that I'd like. But perhaps he'll surprise me, or perhaps I'm not the sort of voter he'll aim for.

Your worries are groundless, I think, Mr Jessop. Unlike the Conservative Party, Lib Dems do not wait for their leader to have a brilliant new idea while running through the cornfields. There is a structure and process for developing policy. It might be a good idea to wait and see what the Lib Dems discuss at their Conference in Bournemouth in September. It is not just the Lib Dem leader who matters.

That developing policy needs to be Liberal then they might get into the arguments again and gain some support back from the big two, huge opportunity there. Finding a more sensible stance on the EU Exit would give them a massive boost as well.

Nigelb

PClipp said:

JosiasJessop said:

foxinsoxuk said:

IanB2 said:

I share your concern about Vince. The most rosy scenario is that Vince recognises that his role is to provide an apprenticeship and transitional period for his deputy, assuming she wants to step up in the first place. However, humility and selflessness do not appear to be Vince's most obvious characteristics.
The centre faces the challenge of how to recapture its radicalism, after the damage of the coalition years. Liberals in particular used to be driven by a very strong desire to change the world - their image of splitting the difference between the two larger parties was always thrust upon them by the voters rather than part of the self-image. Coalition has dented this dramatically but, like Macron, the LDs need to try and become the radical centre once again, championing the interests of the young in particular. Radical centerism would be hugely less risky than radical left or right. Again, Vince would appear to be the last person to go in this direction. It already feels to me that we will be treading water waiting for Vince to move on.

Vince is a poor choice for leader. Still 20 days to the deadline to stand.

As someone who finds himself trapped politically between the Lib Dems and the Conservatives, I fail to see what Vince would bring to the table policywise that I'd like. But perhaps he'll surprise me, or perhaps I'm not the sort of voter he'll aim for.

Your worries are groundless, I think, Mr Jessop. Unlike the Conservative Party, Lib Dems do not wait for their leader to have a brilliant new idea while running through the cornfields. There is a structure and process for developing policy. It might be a good idea to wait and see what the Lib Dems discuss at their Conference in Bournemouth in September. It is not just the Lib Dem leader who matters.

Yep, the country is holding its breath for the LibDem conference discussion...

JosiasJessop

IanB2 said:

JosiasJessop said:

Roger said:

OT. It is extraordinary that people-even the really stupid ones on here- couldn't see what was obvious; that as well as being a misogynist and a hopeless president he was also an odious human being.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/29/opinion/ive-overestimated-donald-trump.html

Before he was elected, there was little doubt that Trump was a nasty little man. But that does not automatically mean he'll be a bad president.

However, I see little reason to think he isn't a terrible president, and that he's rapidly degrading the very office he holds.

As an aside, I think JFK was an absolutely terrible presidential candidate and president, a small man and a liar whose mistruths brought us to the brink of nuclear war. Yet he's now lauded as a great president, so what do I know?

Indeed. Most senior politicians are unpleasant people; Trump just doesn't bother to hide it by projecting a false personality toward voters. This feels a lot worse; whether it actually is, time will tell.

I fundamentally disagree with this, though I've never met a senior politician to know if I'm right to disagree.

I think Cameron, Miliband and even Blair are probably pleasant people; broad-minded and accepting of other views and perspectives, even if they disagree with them. Or perhaps they really are unpleasant, and are successful at projecting an opposite image.

Three I see as being actively unpleasant are Leadsom, Brown and Corbyn (though hopefully Leadsom never becomes a 'senior politician' and remains a nonentity).

I'm undecided on May: I find it hard to put a finger on her personality. Her period at the Home Office: the department of hard choices, certainly has not helped her image. But on the other hand she's a hillwalker, and they're never bad people.

AlastairMeeks

CarlottaVance said:

Still can't get the idea out of my mind of Mrs May channeling Cher.....

I have to admit that it's easier to imagine her running through a wheatfield than straddling the gun on a battleship.

JosiasJessop

rkrkrk said:

Roger said:

rkrkrk said:

Roger said:

CarlottaVance said:

May have been missed in yesterday's hilarity - Labour Home Office team - no dissent there!

https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/880488894072061952

It seems pretty clear that Chuka has started his manoeuvres. He's calculated that without the suport in both parliament and in the country of the 'Remainers' Corbyn is dead in the water. This early attempt at smoking him out was very clever.

Chuka now has an army of 40-and that's just on the Labour side-and if Corbyn looks like a Brexiteer Momentum and his youth vote will melt like ice on an anvil.

I was hoping for a more united Labour party this parliament. So much for that...

It won't happen because he is hopeless and however much he can excite a crowd at Glatonbury he needs some administrative and leadership skills and he has none. I'm afraid he's more doomed than even Theresa

Surely the strong election result for Labour has debunked the idea that he has no leadership skills and is hopeless?

Personally I think there has been a dramatic improvement in the political operation since he started as opposition leader.

LOL. No. His leadership skills are non-existent: witness yesterday's mess. He's proven himself a good campaigner, but those skills are very different from leadership.

He's basically a cult. You either follow him or p*ss off.

TheScreamingEagles

AlastairMeeks said:

CarlottaVance said:

Still can't get the idea out of my mind of Mrs May channeling Cher.....

I have to admit that it's easier to imagine her running through a wheatfield than straddling the gun on a battleship.

Or the outfit Cher wore in that video.

IanB2

rkrkrk said:

Roger said:

rkrkrk said:

Roger said:

CarlottaVance said:

May have been missed in yesterday's hilarity - Labour Home Office team - no dissent there!

https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/880488894072061952

It seems pretty clear that Chuka has started his manoeuvres. He's calculated that without the suport in both parliament and in the country of the 'Remainers' Corbyn is dead in the water. This early attempt at smoking him out was very clever.

Chuka now has an army of 40-and that's just on the Labour side-and if Corbyn looks like a Brexiteer Momentum and his youth vote will melt like ice on an anvil.

I was hoping for a more united Labour party this parliament. So much for that...

It won't happen because he is hopeless and however much he can excite a crowd at Glatonbury he needs some administrative and leadership skills and he has none. I'm afraid he's more doomed than even Theresa

Surely the strong election result for Labour has debunked the idea that he has no leadership skills and is hopeless?

Personally I think there has been a dramatic improvement in the political operation since he started as opposition leader.

It does depend on the team around him. A leader like Reagan lacked many of the key skills but stuck to what he did best and allowed others to do some of the lifting. Corbyn is weakened by having such poor allies.

TheScreamingEagles

I said on election night that I struggled to comprehend a world where the Tories held Mansfield and Labour held Canterbury, still do.

AlastairMeeks

TheScreamingEagles said:

AlastairMeeks said:

CarlottaVance said:

Still can't get the idea out of my mind of Mrs May channeling Cher.....

I have to admit that it's easier to imagine her running through a wheatfield than straddling the gun on a battleship.

Or the outfit Cher wore in that video.

She should give it a go. It would transform her public image.

IanB2

JosiasJessop said:

IanB2 said:

JosiasJessop said:

Roger said:

OT. It is extraordinary that people-even the really stupid ones on here- couldn't see what was obvious; that as well as being a misogynist and a hopeless president he was also an odious human being.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/29/opinion/ive-overestimated-donald-trump.html

Before he was elected, there was little doubt that Trump was a nasty little man. But that does not automatically mean he'll be a bad president.

However, I see little reason to think he isn't a terrible president, and that he's rapidly degrading the very office he holds.

As an aside, I think JFK was an absolutely terrible presidential candidate and president, a small man and a liar whose mistruths brought us to the brink of nuclear war. Yet he's now lauded as a great president, so what do I know?

Indeed. Most senior politicians are unpleasant people; Trump just doesn't bother to hide it by projecting a false personality toward voters. This feels a lot worse; whether it actually is, time will tell.

I fundamentally disagree with this, though I've never met a senior politician to know if I'm right to disagree.

I think Cameron, Miliband and even Blair are probably pleasant people; broad-minded and accepting of other views and perspectives, even if they disagree with them. Or perhaps they really are unpleasant, and are successful at projecting an opposite image.

Three I see as being actively unpleasant are Leadsom, Brown and Corbyn (though hopefully Leadsom never becomes a 'senior politician' and remains a nonentity).

I'm undecided on May: I find it hard to put a finger on her personality. Her period at the Home Office: the department of hard choices, certainly has not helped her image. But on the other hand she's a hillwalker, and they're never bad people.

TBF perhaps I should have said 'many' rather than 'most'. Obama was clearly a decent guy, through and through; Bush and both Clintons, clearly not, Kennedy not. Not convinced about Cameron or Blair; Brown, definitely not. Boris certainly not. Clegg was decent, Miliband probably was. Examples of very decent people in politics reaching the top are the exception IMO.

AlastairMeeks

IanB2 said:

JosiasJessop said:

IanB2 said:

JosiasJessop said:

Roger said:

OT. It is extraordinary that people-even the really stupid ones on here- couldn't see what was obvious; that as well as being a misogynist and a hopeless president he was also an odious human being.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/29/opinion/ive-overestimated-donald-trump.html

Before he was elected, there was little doubt that Trump was a nasty little man. But that does not automatically mean he'll be a bad president.

However, I see little reason to think he isn't a terrible president, and that he's rapidly degrading the very office he holds.

As an aside, I think JFK was an absolutely terrible presidential candidate and president, a small man and a liar whose mistruths brought us to the brink of nuclear war. Yet he's now lauded as a great president, so what do I know?

Indeed. Most senior politicians are unpleasant people; Trump just doesn't bother to hide it by projecting a false personality toward voters. This feels a lot worse; whether it actually is, time will tell.

I fundamentally disagree with this, though I've never met a senior politician to know if I'm right to disagree.

I think Cameron, Miliband and even Blair are probably pleasant people; broad-minded and accepting of other views and perspectives, even if they disagree with them. Or perhaps they really are unpleasant, and are successful at projecting an opposite image.

Three I see as being actively unpleasant are Leadsom, Brown and Corbyn (though hopefully Leadsom never becomes a 'senior politician' and remains a nonentity).

I'm undecided on May: I find it hard to put a finger on her personality. Her period at the Home Office: the department of hard choices, certainly has not helped her image. But on the other hand she's a hillwalker, and they're never bad people.

TBF perhaps I should have said 'many' rather than 'most'. Obama was clearly a decent guy, through and through; Bush and both Clintons, clearly not, Kennedy not. Not convinced about Cameron or Blair; Brown, definitely not. Boris certainly not. Clegg was decent, Miliband probably was. Examples of very decent people in politics reaching the top are the exception IMO.

I would say the opposite, that most politicians are decent and well-meaning, including most of those that you don't like. That doesn't mean they're any good.

Slackbladder

I'm sure all those on the left will now be calling Merkel an anti-homophobic bigot in the same way they do with the DUP....

GeoffM

IanB2 said:

JosiasJessop said:

IanB2 said:

JosiasJessop said:

Roger said:

OT. It is extraordinary that people-even the really stupid ones on here- couldn't see what was obvious; that as well as being a misogynist and a hopeless president he was also an odious human being.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/29/opinion/ive-overestimated-donald-trump.html

Before he was elected, there was little doubt that Trump was a nasty little man. But that does not automatically mean he'll be a bad president.

However, I see little reason to think he isn't a terrible president, and that he's rapidly degrading the very office he holds.

As an aside, I think JFK was an absolutely terrible presidential candidate and president, a small man and a liar whose mistruths brought us to the brink of nuclear war. Yet he's now lauded as a great president, so what do I know?

Indeed. Most senior politicians are unpleasant people; Trump just doesn't bother to hide it by projecting a false personality toward voters. This feels a lot worse; whether it actually is, time will tell.

I fundamentally disagree with this, though I've never met a senior politician to know if I'm right to disagree.

I think Cameron, Miliband and even Blair are probably pleasant people; broad-minded and accepting of other views and perspectives, even if they disagree with them. Or perhaps they really are unpleasant, and are successful at projecting an opposite image.

Three I see as being actively unpleasant are Leadsom, Brown and Corbyn (though hopefully Leadsom never becomes a 'senior politician' and remains a nonentity).

I'm undecided on May: I find it hard to put a finger on her personality. Her period at the Home Office: the department of hard choices, certainly has not helped her image. But on the other hand she's a hillwalker, and they're never bad people.

TBF perhaps I should have said 'many' rather than 'most'. Obama was clearly a decent guy, through and through; Bush and both Clintons, clearly not, Kennedy not. Not convinced about Cameron or Blair; Brown, definitely not. Boris certainly not. Clegg was decent, Miliband probably was. Examples of very decent people in politics reaching the top are the exception IMO.

It's more about your opinion of the individual's politics. You use the word "clearly" as if 'decency' in these cases were an obvious and self-evident fact.

I strongly disagree with your assessment of the first four and it's only your fifth - JFK - that I agree with you wasn't really a good man. JFK and Brown are the only ones we agree on.

rkrkrk

JosiasJessop said:

rkrkrk said:

Roger said:

rkrkrk said:

Roger said:

CarlottaVance said:

May have been missed in yesterday's hilarity - Labour Home Office team - no dissent there!

https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/880488894072061952

It seems pretty clear that Chuka has started his manoeuvres. He's calculated that without the suport in both parliament and in the country of the 'Remainers' Corbyn is dead in the water. This early attempt at smoking him out was very clever.

Chuka now has an army of 40-and that's just on the Labour side-and if Corbyn looks like a Brexiteer Momentum and his youth vote will melt like ice on an anvil.

I was hoping for a more united Labour party this parliament. So much for that...

It won't happen because he is hopeless and however much he can excite a crowd at Glatonbury he needs some administrative and leadership skills and he has none. I'm afraid he's more doomed than even Theresa

Surely the strong election result for Labour has debunked the idea that he has no leadership skills and is hopeless?

Personally I think there has been a dramatic improvement in the political operation since he started as opposition leader.

LOL. No. His leadership skills are non-existent: witness yesterday's mess. He's proven himself a good campaigner, but those skills are very different from leadership.

He's basically a cult. You either follow him or p*ss off.

I've never been that clear on what makes or defines leadership.
He decisively lost a vote of no confidence a while back.
Now I think he would win - or at least come very close.
Doesn't that show leadership?

TheScreamingEagles

AlastairMeeks said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

AlastairMeeks said:

CarlottaVance said:

Still can't get the idea out of my mind of Mrs May channeling Cher.....

I have to admit that it's easier to imagine her running through a wheatfield than straddling the gun on a battleship.

Or the outfit Cher wore in that video.

She should give it a go. It would transform her public image.

Well that feels like an outline of a thread.

Slackbladder

TheScreamingEagles said:

AlastairMeeks said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

AlastairMeeks said:

CarlottaVance said:

Still can't get the idea out of my mind of Mrs May channeling Cher.....

I have to admit that it's easier to imagine her running through a wheatfield than straddling the gun on a battleship.

Or the outfit Cher wore in that video.

She should give it a go. It would transform her public image.

Well that feels like an outline of a thread.

Or just get General Boles on it..

Slackbladder

rkrkrk said:

JosiasJessop said:

rkrkrk said:

Roger said:

rkrkrk said:

Roger said:

CarlottaVance said:

May have been missed in yesterday's hilarity - Labour Home Office team - no dissent there!

https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/880488894072061952

It seems pretty clear that Chuka has started his manoeuvres. He's calculated that without the suport in both parliament and in the country of the 'Remainers' Corbyn is dead in the water. This early attempt at smoking him out was very clever.

Chuka now has an army of 40-and that's just on the Labour side-and if Corbyn looks like a Brexiteer Momentum and his youth vote will melt like ice on an anvil.

I was hoping for a more united Labour party this parliament. So much for that...

It won't happen because he is hopeless and however much he can excite a crowd at Glatonbury he needs some administrative and leadership skills and he has none. I'm afraid he's more doomed than even Theresa

Surely the strong election result for Labour has debunked the idea that he has no leadership skills and is hopeless?

Personally I think there has been a dramatic improvement in the political operation since he started as opposition leader.

LOL. No. His leadership skills are non-existent: witness yesterday's mess. He's proven himself a good campaigner, but those skills are very different from leadership.

He's basically a cult. You either follow him or p*ss off.

I've never been that clear on what makes or defines leadership.
He decisively lost a vote of no confidence a while back.
Now I think he would win - or at least come very close.
Doesn't that show leadership?

It shows stubboness.

CarlottaVance

Slackbladder said:

I'm sure all those on the left will now be calling Merkel an anti-homophobic bigot in the same way they do with the DUP....

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2017/05/02/fact-check-what-actually-is-theresa-mays-record-on-lgbt-rights/

Roger

foxinsoxuk said:

Roger said:

CarlottaVance said:

May have been missed in yesterday's hilarity - Labour Home Office team - no dissent there!

https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/880488894072061952

It seems pretty clear that Chuka has started his manoeuvres. He's calculated that without the suport in both parliament and in the country of the 'Remainers' Corbyn is dead in the water. This early attempt at smoking him out was very clever.

Chuka now has an army of 40-and that's just on the Labour side-and if Corbyn looks like a Brexiteer Momentum and his youth vote will melt like ice on an anvil.

I think the Labour campaigners are not that bothered by Brexit, but Chuka does seem to be setting himself up as Remaniac in Chief for when things go pearshaped. It is though more for national purposes rather than internal Labour ones. No one is bothered by current Labour party policy, because Brexit is going to be wholly owned by the Tories and DUP. He is setting up the "I told you so" vote for a post Brexit GE.

I wrote a longish reply but it got chewed and all that remains is this article! The heroic 49

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-labour-corbyn-single-market-rebellion-mps-fired-sacked-list-full-chuka-umunna-amendment-a7815616.html

CarlottaVance

ABBA did make it onto Mrs May's desert island:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04pr6q9/segments

NickPalmer

Slackbladder said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Roger said:

CarlottaVance said:

May have been missed in yesterday's hilarity - Labour Home Office team - no dissent there!

https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/880488894072061952

It seems pretty clear that Chuka has started his manoeuvres. He's calculated that without the suport in both parliament and in the country of the 'Remainers' Corbyn is dead in the water. This early attempt at smoking him out was very clever.

Chuka now has an army of 40-and that's just on the Labour side-and if Corbyn looks like a Brexiteer Momentum and his youth vote will melt like ice on an anvil.

I think the Labour campaigners are not that bothered by Brexit, but Chuka does seem to be setting himself up as Remaniac in Chief for when things go pearshaped. It is though more for national purposes rather than internal Labour ones. No one is bothered by current Labour party policy, because Brexit is going to be wholly owned by the Tories and DUP. He is setting up the "I told you so" vote for a post Brexit GE.

He's also setting himself up as the anti -Corbyneer in chief. That might not end well for him. He'll certainly have a target on his back.

Certainly it vindicates Corbyn's decision not to take up his offer to return to the Shadow Cabinet - preesumably he'd have resigned again. I think any appointee should be asked whether they're prepared to stay on for the forseeable future despite whatever unease they may feel about the Brexit position.

Opposing Brexit matters very much to some of the Labour vote, especially the traditional middle-class vote (like me), which is well-represented in the PLP. Corbyn is as usual exactly what he says he is - he'd mildly prefer us to be members of the EU but as you say of the campaigners he's not that bothered. The nature of Brexit and what we make of it is much more relevant for him, and going to the stake for single market membership seems to him an odd and probably impractical idea.

Most voters are also in oh-well-let's-get-on-with-it mood, mingled with apprehension. Labour's position is probably closest of the main parties in that, but clearly reemergence of splits isn't helpful.

Alistair's piece is good, as usual. An underlying issue is that most floating voters don't seem to think in left-right terms any more. They genuinely float around, looking for politicians who catch their eye.

justin124

IanB2 said:

DavidL said:

I think and have always thought that Uncle Vince was seriously overrated, like Josias he is absolutely not the sort of Lib Dem that would tempt me further back towards the Lib Dems. But the first priority for the Lib Dems is to get back into the national conversation, something Farron never managed, and he might just manage that.

It is unfortunate that Clegg, who was by far the most capable of doing this, has now lost his seat. It brings to mind the similar set back that Labour suffered when Ed Balls lost his. With Osborne and of course Cameron also opting out all 3 parties seem to have diminished their already modest talent pools significantly. Even the SNP lost Salmond and Robertson.

I struggle to recall a time when there was so little talent in politics. With the challenges we are facing as a nation that is indeed unfortunate.

I don't agree about Clegg, despite appreciating his ability and skills. Politicians never recover from a big reputational mistake, as May will doubtless discover. The LDs need to put the past behind them, and having Clegg dragging his legacy around like an old man chained to a heavy stone was doing neither him nor the party any favours. And the man who compromised too far can never be the person to (re)discover radical centralism.

Politicians can recover their reputations provided they are given the time to do so. Churchill is an obvious example , and in my own lifetime Harold Wilson is perhaps another. Wilson's standing collapsed in 1967 and remained very low throughout 1968 and much of 1969. He then rebounded strongly to such an extent that it was a great surprise when he failed to lead Labour to victory in 1970.Even that was not the end of him - as we know he returned to office in 1974.

Slackbladder

CarlottaVance said:

Slackbladder said:

I'm sure all those on the left will now be calling Merkel an anti-homophobic bigot in the same way they do with the DUP....

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2017/05/02/fact-check-what-actually-is-theresa-mays-record-on-lgbt-rights/

As that article says, she, as most politicans have changed over the last 20 years as society as a whole has changed, so whilst you could have said she was homophobic back around 2002, thats only matching a lot of society then as well.

DecrepitJohnL

Slackbladder said:

I'm sure all those on the left will now be calling Merkel an anti-homophobic bigot in the same way they do with the DUP....

Your prejudices are showing. Why not ask what conservative gays and civil libertarians think of Chancellor Merkel? In any case it is all yesterday's news given her overnight conversion to the cause of German gay marriage.

Edit: sorry if your anti-homophobic joke went over my head.

NickPalmer

IanB2 said:

Indeed. Most senior politicians are unpleasant people; Trump just doesn't bother to hide it by projecting a false personality toward voters. This feels a lot worse; whether it actually is, time will tell.

That's a view that surprised me. I know all the current and recent party leaders well enough to have an opinion on what they're like - none of them seem to me actually unpleasant, unless you count Galloway. For example, May is criticised for being remote, but I've not heard it said that she's personally nasty, and the nephew of a friend works for her and says she's a great boss. And even Corbyn's strongest opponents don't usually say he's unpleasant.

Roger

rkrkrk said:

JosiasJessop said:

rkrkrk said:

Roger said:

rkrkrk said:

Roger said:

CarlottaVance said:

May have been missed in yesterday's hilarity - Labour Home Office team - no dissent there!

https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/880488894072061952

It seems pretty clear that Chuka has started his manoeuvres. He's calculated that without the suport in both parliament and in the country of the 'Remainers' Corbyn is dead in the water. This early attempt at smoking him out was very clever.

Chuka now has an army of 40-and that's just on the Labour side-and if Corbyn looks like a Brexiteer Momentum and his youth vote will melt like ice on an anvil.

I was hoping for a more united Labour party this parliament. So much for that...

It won't happen because he is hopeless and however much he can excite a crowd at Glatonbury he needs some administrative and leadership skills and he has none. I'm afraid he's more doomed than even Theresa

Surely the strong election result for Labour has debunked the idea that he has no leadership skills and is hopeless?

Personally I think there has been a dramatic improvement in the political operation since he started as opposition leader.

LOL. No. His leadership skills are non-existent: witness yesterday's mess. He's proven himself a good campaigner, but those skills are very different from leadership.

He's basically a cult. You either follow him or p*ss off.

I've never been that clear on what makes or defines leadership.
He decisively lost a vote of no confidence a while back.
Now I think he would win - or at least come very close.
Doesn't that show leadership?

Having at best half his party having confidence in him when every instinct says it's in their interest to do so? That's unprecedented and pathetic. Even Maggie did better than half when she was washed up and certain to lose the next election.

rottenborough

NickPalmer said:

IanB2 said:

Indeed. Most senior politicians are unpleasant people; Trump just doesn't bother to hide it by projecting a false personality toward voters. This feels a lot worse; whether it actually is, time will tell.

That's a view that surprised me. I know all the current and recent party leaders well enough to have an opinion on what they're like - none of them seem to me actually unpleasant, unless you count Galloway. For example, May is criticised for being remote, but I've not heard it said that she's personally nasty, and the nephew of a friend works for her and says she's a great boss. And even Corbyn's strongest opponents don't usually say he's unpleasant.

Not sure George Osborne would agree with that!

CarlottaVance

Slackbladder said:

CarlottaVance said:

Slackbladder said:

I'm sure all those on the left will now be calling Merkel an anti-homophobic bigot in the same way they do with the DUP....

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2017/05/02/fact-check-what-actually-is-theresa-mays-record-on-lgbt-rights/

As that article says, she, as most politicans have changed over the last 20 years as society as a whole has changed, so whilst you could have said she was homophobic back around 2002, thats only matching a lot of society then as well.

The contrast with Merkel will no doubt pass unremarked....

CarlottaVance

DecrepitJohnL said:

Slackbladder said:

I'm sure all those on the left will now be calling Merkel an anti-homophobic bigot in the same way they do with the DUP....

her overnight conversion to the cause of German gay marriage

Merkel voted against.

another_richard

DavidL said:

I think and have always thought that Uncle Vince was seriously overrated, like Josias he is absolutely not the sort of Lib Dem that would tempt me further back towards the Lib Dems. But the first priority for the Lib Dems is to get back into the national conversation, something Farron never managed, and he might just manage that.

It is unfortunate that Clegg, who was by far the most capable of doing this, has now lost his seat. It brings to mind the similar set back that Labour suffered when Ed Balls lost his. With Osborne and of course Cameron also opting out all 3 parties seem to have diminished their already modest talent pools significantly. Even the SNP lost Salmond and Robertson.

I struggle to recall a time when there was so little talent in politics. With the challenges we are facing as a nation that is indeed unfortunate.

But what achievements did this now departed top talent manage ?

Clegg - the great student tuition fees betrayal and the consequent crippling of the LibDems

Balls - the brains behind the Brownian economy, the political titan who failed against Alistair Darling, failed against George Osborne, failed against Andrea Jenkyns

Osborne - vast over-borrowing, a housing bubble and intergenerational unfairness and Budgets which disintegrated within hours

Cameron - Middle Eastern meddling and EU negotiation a disaster and what happened to his 'Big Society'

Even the SNP boys lost the thing which really mattered and are now far from being able to have a second go.

rkrkrk

Roger said:

rkrkrk said:

JosiasJessop said:

rkrkrk said:

Roger said:

rkrkrk said:

Roger said:

CarlottaVance said:

May have been missed in yesterday's hilarity - Labour Home Office team - no dissent there!

https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/880488894072061952

It seems pretty clear that Chuka has started his manoeuvres. He's calculated that without the suport in both parliament and in the country of the 'Remainers' Corbyn is dead in the water. This early attempt at smoking him out was very clever.

Chuka now has an army of 40-and that's just on the Labour side-and if Corbyn looks like a Brexiteer Momentum and his youth vote will melt like ice on an anvil.

I was hoping for a more united Labour party this parliament. So much for that...

It won't happen because he is hopeless and however much he can excite a crowd at Glatonbury he needs some administrative and leadership skills and he has none. I'm afraid he's more doomed than even Theresa

Surely the strong election result for Labour has debunked the idea that he has no leadership skills and is hopeless?

Personally I think there has been a dramatic improvement in the political operation since he started as opposition leader.

LOL. No. His leadership skills are non-existent: witness yesterday's mess. He's proven himself a good campaigner, but those skills are very different from leadership.

He's basically a cult. You either follow him or p*ss off.

I've never been that clear on what makes or defines leadership.
He decisively lost a vote of no confidence a while back.
Now I think he would win - or at least come very close.
Doesn't that show leadership?

Having at best half his party having confidence in him when every instinct says it's in their interest to do so? That's unprecedented and pathetic. Even Maggie did better than half when she was washed up and certain to lose the next election.

I see your point - but when he started he couldn't even get 35 MPs to say they supported him, and basically relied on sympathy votes to get into the race. So it's progress I guess...

Slackbladder

DecrepitJohnL said:

Slackbladder said:

I'm sure all those on the left will now be calling Merkel an anti-homophobic bigot in the same way they do with the DUP....

Your prejudices are showing. Why not ask what conservative gays and civil libertarians think of Chancellor Merkel? In any case it is all yesterday's news given her overnight conversion to the cause of German gay marriage.

Edit: sorry if your anti-homophobic joke went over my head.

I'm not sure. Just amusing that Merkel votes against gay marriage (although allowing the vote) but I expect she won't be viewed in the same way as other people which have.

another_richard

Thanks for those people who explained about FOBTs.

I now understand why betting shops continue to increase.

DecrepitJohnL

Blue_rog said:

Not sure if the BBC report on the cladding adds much to the conversation. The cladding was changed from the original specified but for one with the same classification. Saved £250k. In all normal circumstances this would be regarded as good management. I'd like to see the results if the original panels were subjected to the same tests. If there's a significant difference in fire retardence then the classification needs to be challenged, not the original decision that was made in good faith.

Does it matter? And I mean that as a serious question. Was the problem that the cladding burned or that it acted as a chimney to spread the fire between floors? If the latter then the issue of flammability is secondary and they need to check air gaps between the cladding and the tower.

CarlottaVance

https://twitter.com/acgrayling/status/880571660067385346

Roger

CarlottaVance said:

https://twitter.com/acgrayling/status/880571660067385346

I'm with Grayling

logical_song

CarlottaVance said:

ABBA did make it onto Mrs May's desert island:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04pr6q9/segments

"The Winner Takes It All"?

CarlottaVance

https://twitter.com/Mike_Fabricant/status/880530226702319616

isam

CarlottaVance said:

https://twitter.com/Mike_Fabricant/status/880530226702319616

Check out the side bar lies too "Cops Kill Edson" - Wasn't he found with loads of plastic packages in his throat?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/edson-edir-da-costa-death-justice-protests-metropolitan-police-stop-ipcc-swallowed-packages-a7811066.html

SW version

https://socialistworker.co.uk/art/44893/Exclusive:+I+was+there,+I+saw+what+happened,+says+witness+in+Edson+Da+Costa+case

HYUFD

IanB2 said:

The extra water was surely the principal reason for the sinking of the south? Creating lots of good harbours that came in very handy later.

Labour's position amongst the young and educated seems to me less precarious than Tory strength amongst the working classes? When Brexit disappoints, it will surely disappoint the workers most particularly, and then the Tories would appear to be high, like Scotland, and dry (unlike)?

The Tories won ABC1s by 4% and also C2DEs by 2%

JackW

German parliament gay marriage vote passed - 393-226

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-40441712

TheScreamingEagles

How nice does that map look with all that blue in Scotland.