If there are more debates then I'd assume that UKIP won't feature. The Greens should probably be eliminated on the grounds that they are only competitive in Brighton.
The SNP and Plaid have their own regional debates to take part in and don't really fit well in a UK wide debate. However, the SNP probably deserve a special dispensation this time by virtue of the number of seats that they hold. The DUP probably have a better claim to a place than Plaid, given that they are more likely to hold the balance of power. However, including them would create issues with Sinn Fein, the Ulster Unionists and the SDLP.
My instinct would be to go for Lib, Lab, Con & SNP next time. If the SNP get smashed at the election, then I'd take the opportunity to revert to the traditional big three for the election after that. The 2010 debates were much more focussed and engaging to watch than the 2015 and 2017 versions.
Why do thein Dems get a free pass? Sub 10%, 12 seats, competitive in a dozen more perhaps.
12 seats is more than the DUP have and they proved themselves relevant.
If there are more debates then I'd assume that UKIP won't feature. The Greens should probably be eliminated on the grounds that they are only competitive in Brighton.
The SNP and Plaid have their own regional debates to take part in and don't really fit well in a UK wide debate. However, the SNP probably deserve a special dispensation this time by virtue of the number of seats that they hold. The DUP probably have a better claim to a place than Plaid, given that they are more likely to hold the balance of power. However, including them would create issues with Sinn Fein, the Ulster Unionists and the SDLP.
My instinct would be to go for Lib, Lab, Con & SNP next time. If the SNP get smashed at the election, then I'd take the opportunity to revert to the traditional big three for the election after that. The 2010 debates were much more focussed and engaging to watch than the 2015 and 2017 versions.
Why do thein Dems get a free pass? Sub 10%, 12 seats, competitive in a dozen more perhaps.
The threshold shouldn't be a fixed number of seats - a percentage is better - 10% of seats at the last election or 15% in 12 opinion polls in the 6 months preceding the election being called. Something like that.
The options below all seem prefabricated to artificially accommodate the Greens (1 seat) or the LibDems ("3 main parties" lololol).
If there are more debates then I'd assume that UKIP won't feature. The Greens should probably be eliminated on the grounds that they are only competitive in Brighton.
The SNP and Plaid have their own regional debates to take part in and don't really fit well in a UK wide debate. However, the SNP probably deserve a special dispensation this time by virtue of the number of seats that they hold. The DUP probably have a better claim to a place than Plaid, given that they are more likely to hold the balance of power. However, including them would create issues with Sinn Fein, the Ulster Unionists and the SDLP.
My instinct would be to go for Lib, Lab, Con & SNP next time. If the SNP get smashed at the election, then I'd take the opportunity to revert to the traditional big three for the election after that. The 2010 debates were much more focussed and engaging to watch than the 2015 and 2017 versions.
Why do thein Dems get a free pass? Sub 10%, 12 seats, competitive in a dozen more perhaps.
12 seats is more than the DUP have and they proved themselves relevant.
12/600+ doesn't really compare with the % of seats won that DUP have won/contested
So, which parties are going to be invited/expected to appear in the line-up next time?
Without an answer to that question it's far from clear the debates will take place at all.
If I were advising No 10, I'd suggest a pre-emptive strike, very publicly challenging Corbyn (or whoever is LOTO at the time) to a one-on-one debate, and let the broadcasters play catch-up. I wouldn't want a format where the entire thing is taken up with half a dozen leaders given a free rein to gang up on the government without any opportunity to hit back at the actual alternative government's position.
It would be meaningless as the current incumbent of Number 10 almost certainly isn't going to be the Conservative leader at the next election. Anyway, Corbyn would just say "I'd love to debate with you. Does that mean there's an election in the Autumn? Anyway, call me when you've finished your leadership infighting and set a date. Cheers."
Additionally, the broadcasters have a lot of cards to play here. So they'd basically say, "We need to comply with Ofcom impartiality rules. Exactly what that means for the 2022 debate (if it is 2022) depends on the political scene at the time so we're not going to limit the debate to two people now. The most we will do is set some objective rules around who gets an invitation. Now you guys can 'agree' what you like outside the broadcasting context... perhaps you want to live stream it on Mumsnet or something else outside traditional regulations, and see how big an audience you get. But we're the one with TV studios and the reach of tens of millions, and we'll contact you nearer the time with your invitations to OUR debates."
And that's the issue: commercial entities should not be actors in the political process.
If we have to have debates the format should be set out by law/agreed between the parties and the broadcasters compelled to show them as a condition of their licence
The devil is in the detail. Which parties? Which broadcasters?
The system used in the US is bipartisan but it's far easier there for the Republicans and Democrats to stitch it up between them, given how much smaller the third-parties are over there. Britain's strong regional parties and larger third parties make life much harder. So if the parties and broadcasters can't agree some kind of permanent commission then they'll have to continue to wing it each time.
If there are more debates then I'd assume that UKIP won't feature. The Greens should probably be eliminated on the grounds that they are only competitive in Brighton.
The SNP and Plaid have their own regional debates to take part in and don't really fit well in a UK wide debate. However, the SNP probably deserve a special dispensation this time by virtue of the number of seats that they hold. The DUP probably have a better claim to a place than Plaid, given that they are more likely to hold the balance of power. However, including them would create issues with Sinn Fein, the Ulster Unionists and the SDLP.
My instinct would be to go for Lib, Lab, Con & SNP next time. If the SNP get smashed at the election, then I'd take the opportunity to revert to the traditional big three for the election after that. The 2010 debates were much more focussed and engaging to watch than the 2015 and 2017 versions.
Why do thein Dems get a free pass? Sub 10%, 12 seats, competitive in a dozen more perhaps.
12 seats is more than the DUP have and they proved themselves relevant.
12/600+ doesn't really compare with the % of seats won that DUP have won/contested
Why does the number contested matter? It's not as if the DUP would have won West Bromwich East if they'd bothered to stand there.
Mr. Herdson, the Lib Dems aren't even the third party.
What criteria would you draw up for a formula to determine inclusion in a major debate?
Party leaders who are likely to be either PM/Deputy PM after the election.
So would allow the Tories, Lab, Lib Dems, and the SNP to appear.
Four seems a reasonable number.
And if a minor party says that it won't go into coalition with anyone ... that rules them out?
Bless, you actually think what a party and their leader say before an election is an unbreakable bond?
You mean like Cameron saying he would serve a full term?
Events dear boy, we've been through this before.
Only the terminally stupid expected to Cameron to continue if he lost the referendum.
He only said what he said before the vote about not resigning because people would have framed it as 'Vote Leave and get rid of Dave'
If he had continued, bell end Leavers (of which you are not) would have made his job impossible. They would have been banging on 'Dave couldn't get a good renegotiation, how will he get a good Brexit deal?'
If there are more debates then I'd assume that UKIP won't feature. The Greens should probably be eliminated on the grounds that they are only competitive in Brighton.
The SNP and Plaid have their own regional debates to take part in and don't really fit well in a UK wide debate. However, the SNP probably deserve a special dispensation this time by virtue of the number of seats that they hold. The DUP probably have a better claim to a place than Plaid, given that they are more likely to hold the balance of power. However, including them would create issues with Sinn Fein, the Ulster Unionists and the SDLP.
My instinct would be to go for Lib, Lab, Con & SNP next time. If the SNP get smashed at the election, then I'd take the opportunity to revert to the traditional big three for the election after that. The 2010 debates were much more focussed and engaging to watch than the 2015 and 2017 versions.
Why do thein Dems get a free pass? Sub 10%, 12 seats, competitive in a dozen more perhaps.
The threshold shouldn't be a fixed number of seats - a percentage is better - 10% of seats at the last election or 15% in 12 opinion polls in the 6 months preceding the election being called. Something like that.
The options below all seem prefabricated to artificially accommodate the Greens (1 seat) or the LibDems ("3 main parties" lololol).
That is just too subjective. Standing in more than 50% + 1 seat is fixed. It shows national coverage, and funding. Let's be honest who know whether the opinion polls are correct. I think the lib dms should be included because they are a national party. If the Greens and UKIP stand in 326 seats then they should be included.
So, which parties are going to be invited/expected to appear in the line-up next time?
Without an answer to that question it's far from clear the debates will take place at all.
If I were advising No 10, I'd suggest a pre-emptive strike, very publicly challenging Corbyn (or whoever is LOTO at the time) to a one-on-one debate, and let the broadcasters play catch-up. I wouldn't want a format where the entire thing is taken up with half a dozen leaders given a free rein to gang up on the government without any opportunity to hit back at the actual alternative government's position.
It would be meaningless as the current incumbent of Number 10 almost certainly isn't going to be the Conservative leader at the next election. Anyway, Corbyn would just say "I'd love to debate with you. Does that mean there's an election in the Autumn? Anyway, call me when you've finished your leadership infighting and set a date. Cheers."
Additionally, the broadcasters have a lot of cards to play here. So they'd basically say, "We need to comply with Ofcom impartiality rules. Exactly what that means for the 2022 debate (if it is 2022) depends on the political scene at the time so we're not going to limit the debate to two people now. The most we will do is set some objective rules around who gets an invitation. Now you guys can 'agree' what you like outside the broadcasting context... perhaps you want to live stream it on Mumsnet or something else outside traditional regulations, and see how big an audience you get. But we're the one with TV studios and the reach of tens of millions, and we'll contact you nearer the time with your invitations to OUR debates."
And that's the issue: commercial entities should not be actors in the political process.
If we have to have debates the format should be set out by law/agreed between the parties and the broadcasters compelled to show them as a condition of their licence
Commercial entities? You mean stupid newspapers that do nothing but cheerlead their preferred party.
Or how about broadcasters putting the leaders on the spot - giving them tough questions to answer. But not Theresa cos she was frit.
Mr. Herdson, the Lib Dems aren't even the third party.
What criteria would you draw up for a formula to determine inclusion in a major debate?
Party leaders who are likely to be either PM/Deputy PM after the election.
So would allow the Tories, Lab, Lib Dems, and the SNP to appear.
Four seems a reasonable number.
And if a minor party says that it won't go into coalition with anyone ... that rules them out?
Bless, you actually think what a party and their leader say before an election is an unbreakable bond?
You mean like Cameron saying he would serve a full term?
Events dear boy, we've been through this before.
Only the terminally stupid expected to Cameron to continue if he lost the referendum.
He only said what he said before the vote about not resigning because people would have framed it as 'Vote Leave and get rid of Dave'
If he had continued, bell end Leavers (of which you are not) would have made his job impossible. They would have been banging on 'Dave couldn't get a good renegotiation, how will he get a good Brexit deal?'
Labour Leave did frame it as 'Vote Leave and get rid of Dave' (and George too!). We got to have our cake and eat it.
The problem wasn't just skipping the debate, it was the fact that skipping the debate reinforced an existing impression that she was avoiding the public and even avoiding interviews. What's more, it wasn't just her personally - with the honourable exception of Amber Rudd, cabinet ministers seemed to be AWOL during the campaign.
Locally, Anna Soubry boycotted all the debates too - perhaps was a general Tory instruction?
It wasn't down to the cabinet ministers to be AWOL, Mrs May wanted the election to be about her.
Yeah, well she got her wish - bigtime.
Retrospectively, the real problem for Mrs May was the impression that she was using the general election to create an effective dictatorship, with herself in charge. A lot of people people held their noses (as Mrs Toynbee once expressed it) and voted Labour in order to stop this. And Labour have now taken this as an endorsement of their extreme Socialist position. Mrs May is a very stupid woman. She has brought the country to where we are now.
Whilst I don't disagree, I do find the speed with which political history is being rewritten very dizzying. It's only about 12 weeks since Mrs May was near-universally regarded as a political genius who had boldly taken the initiative and caught her opponents off-guard, and whose character and positioning was such that she was reaching deep into Labour seats in the North.
"A political genius who had boldly taken the initiative", eh? Hardly that. More a lying scumbag. She said on numerous occasions that the next election would be in 2020, that there would be no cut and run, etc etc She is worse that Blair with his lies about Iraq.
That's a good point well made. Much worse than Blair and Iraq.
I think we should have a minute's silence for all of the soldiers who died in the 2017 Election Campaign.
If there are more debates then I'd assume that UKIP won't feature. The Greens should probably be eliminated on the grounds that they are only competitive in Brighton.
The SNP and Plaid have their own regional debates to take part in and don't really fit well in a UK wide debate. However, the SNP probably deserve a special dispensation this time by virtue of the number of seats that they hold. The DUP probably have a better claim to a place than Plaid, given that they are more likely to hold the balance of power. However, including them would create issues with Sinn Fein, the Ulster Unionists and the SDLP.
My instinct would be to go for Lib, Lab, Con & SNP next time. If the SNP get smashed at the election, then I'd take the opportunity to revert to the traditional big three for the election after that. The 2010 debates were much more focussed and engaging to watch than the 2015 and 2017 versions.
Why do thein Dems get a free pass? Sub 10%, 12 seats, competitive in a dozen more perhaps.
12 seats is more than the DUP have and they proved themselves relevant.
12/600+ doesn't really compare with the % of seats won that DUP have won/contested
Why does the number contested matter? It's not as if the DUP would have won West Bromwich East if they'd bothered to stand there.
They only won slightly fewer than the LDs and seeing as they stood in about 600 fewer seats, I would say that makes them equal.
The debates should just be Tory vs Labour. The others can have their own programme but its crazy to say that the LDs get equal billing with parties that get 20 times their seat numbers
If there are more debates then I'd assume that UKIP won't feature. The Greens should probably be eliminated on the grounds that they are only competitive in Brighton.
The SNP and Plaid have their own regional debates to take part in and don't really fit well in a UK wide debate. However, the SNP probably deserve a special dispensation this time by virtue of the number of seats that they hold. The DUP probably have a better claim to a place than Plaid, given that they are more likely to hold the balance of power. However, including them would create issues with Sinn Fein, the Ulster Unionists and the SDLP.
My instinct would be to go for Lib, Lab, Con & SNP next time. If the SNP get smashed at the election, then I'd take the opportunity to revert to the traditional big three for the election after that. The 2010 debates were much more focussed and engaging to watch than the 2015 and 2017 versions.
Why do thein Dems get a free pass? Sub 10%, 12 seats, competitive in a dozen more perhaps.
The threshold shouldn't be a fixed number of seats - a percentage is better - 10% of seats at the last election or 15% in 12 opinion polls in the 6 months preceding the election being called. Something like that.
The options below all seem prefabricated to artificially accommodate the Greens (1 seat) or the LibDems ("3 main parties" lololol).
That is just too subjective. Standing in more than 50% + 1 seat is fixed. It shows national coverage, and funding. Let's be honest who know whether the opinion polls are correct. I think the lib dms should be included because they are a national party. If the Greens and UKIP stand in 326 seats then they should be included.
Actually I agree with your formulation completely.
I'll pony up the £163k to get enough candidates up. Then I'll get my hour of fame on stage ... live on national tv.
You lot can all bet on how many minutes in to the debate that I will declare my really quite unhealthy obsession with Sophy Ridge, get my cock out on stage and start swinging it around. It'll be worth every penny.
Let's just hope that she's actually moderating that debate. Otherwise it'll be odd.
Mr. Herdson, the Lib Dems aren't even the third party.
What criteria would you draw up for a formula to determine inclusion in a major debate?
Party leaders who are likely to be either PM/Deputy PM after the election.
So would allow the Tories, Lab, Lib Dems, and the SNP to appear.
Four seems a reasonable number.
And if a minor party says that it won't go into coalition with anyone ... that rules them out?
Bless, you actually think what a party and their leader say before an election is an unbreakable bond?
You mean like Cameron saying he would serve a full term?
Events dear boy, we've been through this before.
Only the terminally stupid expected to Cameron to continue if he lost the referendum.
He only said what he said before the vote about not resigning because people would have framed it as 'Vote Leave and get rid of Dave'
If he had continued, bell end Leavers (of which you are not) would have made his job impossible. They would have been banging on 'Dave couldn't get a good renegotiation, how will he get a good Brexit deal?'
He should have stayed. He made an uncertain situation worse by quitting. If that makes me a terminally stupid bell end in your eyes, well...
(1) May ducked out of one, because she was frit (2) May told a woman who hadn't had a pay rise for years that there was no "magic money tree" (3) Corbyn was much better than expected (4) Paxman was a dick
From that I conclude (a) they're important, (b) most people pay little attention to politics until the final weeks of an election campaign, and, (c) being shit at debates or trying to avoid them will no longer wash.
Ergo, if you're a PM or candidate to be one, get better at doing debates.
(1) May ducked out of one, because she was frit (2) May told a woman who hadn't had a pay rise for years that there was no "magic money tree" (3) Corbyn was much better than expected (4) Paxman was a dick
From that I conclude (a) they're important, (b) most people pay little attention to politics until the final weeks of an election campaign, and, (c) being shit at debates or trying to avoid them will no longer wash.
Ergo, if you're a PM or candidate to be one, get better at doing debates.
Even if you're poor at debating, I'm sure you get more credit for attending than if you don't attend.
I'd conclude from this that Sinn Fein no longer consider that a functioning Assembly suits their interests. They are making demands which they know full well neither the British government nor Unionists would concede.
If there are more debates then I'd assume that UKIP won't feature. The Greens should probably be eliminated on the grounds that they are only competitive in Brighton.
The SNP and Plaid have their own regional debates to take part in and don't really fit well in a UK wide debate. However, the SNP probably deserve a special dispensation this time by virtue of the number of seats that they hold. The DUP probably have a better claim to a place than Plaid, given that they are more likely to hold the balance of power. However, including them would create issues with Sinn Fein, the Ulster Unionists and the SDLP.
My instinct would be to go for Lib, Lab, Con & SNP next time. If the SNP get smashed at the election, then I'd take the opportunity to revert to the traditional big three for the election after that. The 2010 debates were much more focussed and engaging to watch than the 2015 and 2017 versions.
Why do thein Dems get a free pass? Sub 10%, 12 seats, competitive in a dozen more perhaps.
12 seats is more than the DUP have and they proved themselves relevant.
12/600+ doesn't really compare with the % of seats won that DUP have won/contested
Why does the number contested matter? It's not as if the DUP would have won West Bromwich East if they'd bothered to stand there.
They only won slightly fewer than the LDs and seeing as they stood in about 600 fewer seats, I would say that makes them equal.
The debates should just be Tory vs Labour. The others can have their own programme but its crazy to say that the LDs get equal billing with parties that get 20 times their seat numbers
Until recently the DUP had an MP in Basingstoke.
When was the last LibDem MP from NI?
On that basis only one of them is truly a UK-wide party and it isn't the dead parrots.
If there are more debates then I'd assume that UKIP won't feature. The Greens should probably be eliminated on the grounds that they are only competitive in Brighton.
The SNP and Plaid have their own regional debates to take part in and don't really fit well in a UK wide debate. However, the SNP probably deserve a special dispensation this time by virtue of the number of seats that they hold. The DUP probably have a better claim to a place than Plaid, given that they are more likely to hold the balance of power. However, including them would create issues with Sinn Fein, the Ulster Unionists and the SDLP.
My instinct would be to go for Lib, Lab, Con & SNP next time. If the SNP get smashed at the election, then I'd take the opportunity to revert to the traditional big three for the election after that. The 2010 debates were much more focussed and engaging to watch than the 2015 and 2017 versions.
Why do thein Dems get a free pass? Sub 10%, 12 seats, competitive in a dozen more perhaps.
12 seats is more than the DUP have and they proved themselves relevant.
12/600+ doesn't really compare with the % of seats won that DUP have won/contested
Why does the number contested matter? It's not as if the DUP would have won West Bromwich East if they'd bothered to stand there.
They only won slightly fewer than the LDs and seeing as they stood in about 600 fewer seats, I would say that makes them equal.
The debates should just be Tory vs Labour. The others can have their own programme but its crazy to say that the LDs get equal billing with parties that get 20 times their seat numbers
Until recently the DUP had an MP in Basingstoke.
When was the last LibDem MP from NI?
On that basis only one of them is truly a UK-wide party and it isn't the dead parrots.
I'm not sure if Stratton Mills took the Liberal whip, when he defected from the UUP to Alliance. For that matter, did Naomi Long take the Lib Dem whip from 2010-15.
Re the saga of Betfair's bounced cheque: the £1,000 has finally turned up in my bank account, three weeks and two days since my original withdrawal request.
They only won slightly fewer than the LDs and seeing as they stood in about 600 fewer seats, I would say that makes them equal. The debates should just be Tory vs Labour. The others can have their own programme but its crazy to say that the LDs get equal billing with parties that get 20 times their seat numbers
But because of the broken nature of our electoral system, a large number of Lib Dem (and Green Party) supporters felt they had to vote for their local Labour candidate in order to prevent the TMay dictatorship.
The number of seats means nothing under our broken electoral system.
Re the saga of Betfair's bounced cheque: the £1,000 has finally turned up in my bank account, three weeks and two days since my original withdrawal request.
On the TV Debates, I agree, but these things are going to be really tough for the sitting PM. If its a 5 or 6 way bun-fight, then all the opposition leaders will be looking to tear pieces out of the PM, especially if (at the moment) we have an inbalance in left and right parties.
If there are more debates then I'd assume that UKIP won't feature. The Greens should probably be eliminated on the grounds that they are only competitive in Brighton.
The SNP and Plaid have their own regional debates to take part in and don't really fit well in a UK wide debate. However, the SNP probably deserve a special dispensation this time by virtue of the number of seats that they hold. The DUP probably have a better claim to a place than Plaid, given that they are more likely to hold the balance of power. However, including them would create issues with Sinn Fein, the Ulster Unionists and the SDLP.
My instinct would be to go for Lib, Lab, Con & SNP next time. If the SNP get smashed at the election, then I'd take the opportunity to revert to the traditional big three for the election after that. The 2010 debates were much more focussed and engaging to watch than the 2015 and 2017 versions.
Why do thein Dems get a free pass? Sub 10%, 12 seats, competitive in a dozen more perhaps.
12 seats is more than the DUP have and they proved themselves relevant.
12/600+ doesn't really compare with the % of seats won that DUP have won/contested
Why does the number contested matter? It's not as if the DUP would have won West Bromwich East if they'd bothered to stand there.
They only won slightly fewer than the LDs and seeing as they stood in about 600 fewer seats, I would say that makes them equal.
The debates should just be Tory vs Labour. The others can have their own programme but its crazy to say that the LDs get equal billing with parties that get 20 times their seat numbers
Until recently the DUP had an MP in Basingstoke.
When was the last LibDem MP from NI?
On that basis only one of them is truly a UK-wide party and it isn't the dead parrots.
I'm not sure if Stratton Mills took the Liberal whip, when he defected from the UUP to Alliance. For that matter, did Naomi Long take the Lib Dem whip from 2010-15.
According to wiki ... Naomi Long didn't.
It would have been annoying if she'd been the one to ruin my point as I helped with the TUV campaign that year and my guy got more votes than Peter Robinson lost by.
Only the terminally stupid expected to Cameron to continue if he lost the referendum. He only said what he said before the vote about not resigning because people would have framed it as 'Vote Leave and get rid of Dave' If he had continued, bell end Leavers (of which you are not) would have made his job impossible. They would have been banging on 'Dave couldn't get a good renegotiation, how will he get a good Brexit deal?'
He should have stayed. He made an uncertain situation worse by quitting. If that makes me a terminally stupid bell end in your eyes, well...
As one of the "terminally stupid", I expected the Prime Minister of our country to speak the truth and make clear his intentions.
His behaviour during the Referendum campaign was despicable, but I though he had standards....
Re the saga of Betfair's bounced cheque: the £1,000 has finally turned up in my bank account, three weeks and two days since my original withdrawal request.
Mazel tov.
I trust u will be charging them 5% commission?
I did suggest that they might like to make an ex-gratia payment for the aggro. They've offered me a £10 free bet, an offer which I haven't fallen over myself to grab.
Re the saga of Betfair's bounced cheque: the £1,000 has finally turned up in my bank account, three weeks and two days since my original withdrawal request.
Re the saga of Betfair's bounced cheque: the £1,000 has finally turned up in my bank account, three weeks and two days since my original withdrawal request.
And how many kneecaps did you have to remove?
I used their 'escalation' procedure (which basically comprises sending them an email to a particular email address), and to be fair to them they did phone me within a couple of hours of that. Even so, it still took a few more days for them to send me the dosh.
I'm struggling to think of what May did that was right during the campaign.
I still think calling the election was the right decision, given the evidence available at the time. But almost everything went wrong after that.
It was probably inevitable that Corbyn would always have surged, but she could have held onto almost all the seats she lost, and gained a good dozen more, and got into the 360-365 seat bracket, just through competence and a slim, focussed, barnacle-free manifesto.
If there are more debates then I'd assume that UKIP won't feature. The Greens should probably be eliminated on the grounds that they are only competitive in Brighton.
The SNP and Plaid have their own regional debates to take part in and don't really fit well in a UK wide debate. However, the SNP probably deserve a special dispensation this time by virtue of the number of seats that they hold. The DUP probably have a better claim to a place than Plaid, given that they are more likely to hold the balance of power. However, including them would create issues with Sinn Fein, the Ulster Unionists and the SDLP.
My instinct would be to go for Lib, Lab, Con & SNP next time. If the SNP get smashed at the election, then I'd take the opportunity to revert to the traditional big three for the election after that. The 2010 debates were much more focussed and engaging to watch than the 2015 and 2017 versions.
Why do thein Dems get a free pass? Sub 10%, 12 seats, competitive in a dozen more perhaps.
12 seats is more than the DUP have and they proved themselves relevant.
12/600+ doesn't really compare with the % of seats won that DUP have won/contested
Why does the number contested matter? It's not as if the DUP would have won West Bromwich East if they'd bothered to stand there.
They only won slightly fewer than the LDs and seeing as they stood in about 600 fewer seats, I would say that makes them equal.
The debates should just be Tory vs Labour. The others can have their own programme but its crazy to say that the LDs get equal billing with parties that get 20 times their seat numbers
Until recently the DUP had an MP in Basingstoke.
When was the last LibDem MP from NI?
On that basis only one of them is truly a UK-wide party and it isn't the dead parrots.
I'm not sure if Stratton Mills took the Liberal whip, when he defected from the UUP to Alliance. For that matter, did Naomi Long take the Lib Dem whip from 2010-15.
No she didn't. Silly woman gave up the only chance an Alliance MP will have to sit on the government benches this lifetime.
Re the saga of Betfair's bounced cheque: the £1,000 has finally turned up in my bank account, three weeks and two days since my original withdrawal request.
And how many kneecaps did you have to remove?
I used their 'escalation' procedure (which basically comprises sending them an email to a particular email address), and to be fair to them they did phone me within a couple of hours of that. Even so, it still took a few more days for them to send me the dosh.
Have you pointed out how much dosh you've earnt for them so far ?
I'm struggling to think of what May did that was right during the campaign.
I still think calling the election was the right decision, given the evidence available at the time. But almost everything went wrong after that.
It was probably inevitable that Corbyn would always have surged, but she could have held onto almost all the seats she lost, and gained a good dozen more, and got into the 360-365 seat bracket, just through competence and a slim, focussed, barnacle-free manifesto.
I think the lesson is that you must always fight a campaign on the basis that it's neck and neck, even if it isn't. Labour gave no quarter in 1997 and 2001.
Fingers crossed. This will be a fantastic result if it happens.
The National Day of Catalonia is the day after Gibraltar National Day (10th/11th Sept) and we always swap representatives and delegates.
Spanish soldiers and civil guards would march in, the moment they declared independence.
Very Franco-ist. The optics would be terrible. Even more effective if there were a martyr or two created. It would just take one Guardia with an itchy trigger finger.
It'd be the beginning of the end of Spain as a nation (woohoo!) and the lighting of a big signal bonfire for independence movements all over the place.
If there are more debates then I'd assume that UKIP won't feature. The Greens should probably be eliminated on the grounds that they are only competitive in Brighton.
The SNP and Plaid have their own regional debates to take part in and don't really fit well in a UK wide debate. However, the SNP probably deserve a special dispensation this time by virtue of the number of seats that they hold. The DUP probably have a better claim to a place than Plaid, given that they are more likely to hold the balance of power. However, including them would create issues with Sinn Fein, the Ulster Unionists and the SDLP.
My instinct would be to go for Lib, Lab, Con & SNP next time. If the SNP get smashed at the election, then I'd take the opportunity to revert to the traditional big three for the election after that. The 2010 debates were much more focussed and engaging to watch than the 2015 and 2017 versions.
Why do thein Dems get a free pass? Sub 10%, 12 seats, competitive in a dozen more perhaps.
12 seats is more than the DUP have and they proved themselves relevant.
12/600+ doesn't really compare with the % of seats won that DUP have won/contested
Why does the number contested matter? It's not as if the DUP would have won West Bromwich East if they'd bothered to stand there.
They only won slightly fewer than the LDs and seeing as they stood in about 600 fewer seats, I would say that makes them equal.
The debates should just be Tory vs Labour. The others can have their own programme but its crazy to say that the LDs get equal billing with parties that get 20 times their seat numbers
Until recently the DUP had an MP in Basingstoke.
When was the last LibDem MP from NI?
On that basis only one of them is truly a UK-wide party and it isn't the dead parrots.
I'm not sure if Stratton Mills took the Liberal whip, when he defected from the UUP to Alliance. For that matter, did Naomi Long take the Lib Dem whip from 2010-15.
No she didn't. Silly woman gave up the only chance an Alliance MP will have to sit on the government benches this lifetime.
Weird decision, not taking the whip of a party that is all but identical in terms of outlook.
Fingers crossed. This will be a fantastic result if it happens.
The National Day of Catalonia is the day after Gibraltar National Day (10th/11th Sept) and we always swap representatives and delegates.
Spanish soldiers and civil guards would march in, the moment they declared independence.
Very Franco-ist. The optics would be terrible. Even more effective if there were a martyr or two created. It would just take one Guardia with an itchy trigger finger.
It'd be the beginning of the end of Spain as a nation (woohoo!) and the lighting of a big signal bonfire for independence movements all over the place.
I think you underestimate Spanish resolve. These people are no push over.
If there are more debates then I'd assume that UKIP won't feature. The Greens should probably be eliminated on the grounds that they are only competitive in Brighton.
The SNP and Plaid have their own regional debates to take part in and don't really fit well in a UK wide debate. However, the SNP probably deserve a special dispensation this time by virtue of the number of seats that they hold. The DUP probably have a better claim to a place than Plaid, given that they are more likely to hold the balance of power. However, including them would create issues with Sinn Fein, the Ulster Unionists and the SDLP.
My instinct would be to go for Lib, Lab, Con & SNP next time. If the SNP get smashed at the election, then I'd take the opportunity to revert to the traditional big three for the election after that. The 2010 debates were much more focussed and engaging to watch than the 2015 and 2017 versions.
Why do thein Dems get a free pass? Sub 10%, 12 seats, competitive in a dozen more perhaps.
12 seats is more than the DUP have and they proved themselves relevant.
12/600+ doesn't really compare with the % of seats won that DUP have won/contested
Why does the number contested matter? It's not as if the DUP would have won West Bromwich East if they'd bothered to stand there.
They only won slightly fewer than the LDs and seeing as they stood in about 600 fewer seats, I would say that makes them equal.
The debates should just be Tory vs Labour. The others can have their own programme but its crazy to say that the LDs get equal billing with parties that get 20 times their seat numbers
Until recently the DUP had an MP in Basingstoke.
When was the last LibDem MP from NI?
On that basis only one of them is truly a UK-wide party and it isn't the dead parrots.
I'm not sure if Stratton Mills took the Liberal whip, when he defected from the UUP to Alliance. For that matter, did Naomi Long take the Lib Dem whip from 2010-15.
No she didn't. Silly woman gave up the only chance an Alliance MP will have to sit on the government benches this lifetime.
That seems daft. After all, the SDLP always took the Labour whip.
Only the terminally stupid expected to Cameron to continue if he lost the referendum. He only said what he said before the vote about not resigning because people would have framed it as 'Vote Leave and get rid of Dave' If he had continued, bell end Leavers (of which you are not) would have made his job impossible. They would have been banging on 'Dave couldn't get a good renegotiation, how will he get a good Brexit deal?'
He should have stayed. He made an uncertain situation worse by quitting. If that makes me a terminally stupid bell end in your eyes, well...
As one of the "terminally stupid", I expected the Prime Minister of our country to speak the truth and make clear his intentions.
His behaviour during the Referendum campaign was despicable, but I though he had standards....
It seems like a parent not approving of a child's prospective choice of partner because it isn't the safe option they prefer, then refusing to give any support to the couple when they get together and laughing when it goes wrong and everyone's miserable
I'm struggling to think of what May did that was right during the campaign.
I still think calling the election was the right decision, given the evidence available at the time. But almost everything went wrong after that.
It was probably inevitable that Corbyn would always have surged, but she could have held onto almost all the seats she lost, and gained a good dozen more, and got into the 360-365 seat bracket, just through competence and a slim, focussed, barnacle-free manifesto.
I think the lesson is that you must always fight a campaign on the basis that it's neck and neck, even if it isn't. Labour gave no quarter in 1997 and 2001.
Than which there is probably no better lesson to learn from June.
Quote from a N Iegislator (in waiting): "He's such a dickhead".
Quite obvious that both Foster and O'Neill couldn't give two hoots what Brokenshire says or does. He obviously looks crap and out of his depth. But in all honesty just where is his leverage. Since the Gov't has a deal with the DUP now, he carries about as much weight as a sackful of rocking horse manure.
F1: with tiny sums (obviously this won't be included in the race weekend records) I've backed each Force India and Williams driver to win, odds varying from 201 to 501.
Red Bull, all else being equal, will lose out. The circuit, as far as I remember, is all about straight line speed. So, if the top two teams suffer misfortune or incompetence, it won't be Red Bull but the Pink Panthers or Williams who benefit. [Unless it's wet, then back Verstappen].
Red Bulls are in the 20s. I'd have them in the 50s and Perez around 67, or something like that. Also because the Red Bulls are fundamentally less reliable than the Force Indias.
Anyway, odds against, but this sort of thing only needs to come off once every few years to be very green overall.
Quote from a N Iegislator (in waiting): "He's such a dickhead".
Quite obvious that both Foster and O'Neill couldn't give two hoots what Brokenshire says or does. He obviously looks crap and out of his depth. But in all honesty just where is his leverage. Since the Gov't has a deal with the DUP now, he carries about as much weight as a sackful of rocking horse manure.
I don't think it matters in any case. Sinn Fein are seeking the Moon on a stick, as their price for participating in the Executive, and the DUP have no incentive to oblige them.
Fingers crossed. This will be a fantastic result if it happens.
The National Day of Catalonia is the day after Gibraltar National Day (10th/11th Sept) and we always swap representatives and delegates.
Spanish soldiers and civil guards would march in, the moment they declared independence.
Very Franco-ist. The optics would be terrible. Even more effective if there were a martyr or two created. It would just take one Guardia with an itchy trigger finger.
It'd be the beginning of the end of Spain as a nation (woohoo!) and the lighting of a big signal bonfire for independence movements all over the place.
I think you underestimate Spanish resolve. These people are no push over.
I said the "beginning of the end" rather than "the end" as, yes, the Spanish are as stubborn as a mule.
But the sight of blood and the optics of repression of a democratic vote by force will sow seeds.
Only the terminally stupid expected to Cameron to continue if he lost the referendum. He only said what he said before the vote about not resigning because people would have framed it as 'Vote Leave and get rid of Dave' If he had continued, bell end Leavers (of which you are not) would have made his job impossible. They would have been banging on 'Dave couldn't get a good renegotiation, how will he get a good Brexit deal?'
He should have stayed. He made an uncertain situation worse by quitting. If that makes me a terminally stupid bell end in your eyes, well...
As one of the "terminally stupid", I expected the Prime Minister of our country to speak the truth and make clear his intentions.
His behaviour during the Referendum campaign was despicable, but I though he had standards....
From the party of Nick Clegg and abolishing tuition fees, I find that incredibly touching.
If there are more debates then I'd assume that UKIP won't feature. The Greens should probably be eliminated on the grounds that they are only competitive in Brighton.
The SNP and Plaid have their own regional debates to take part in and don't really fit well in a UK wide debate. However, the SNP probably deserve a special dispensation this time by virtue of the number of seats that they hold. The DUP probably have a better claim to a place than Plaid, given that they are more likely to hold the balance of power. However, including them would create issues with Sinn Fein, the Ulster Unionists and the SDLP.
My instinct would be to go for Lib, Lab, Con & SNP next time. If the SNP get smashed at the election, then I'd take the opportunity to revert to the traditional big three for the election after that. The 2010 debates were much more focussed and engaging to watch than the 2015 and 2017 versions.
Why do thein Dems get a free pass? Sub 10%, 12 seats, competitive in a dozen more perhaps.
12 seats is more than the DUP have and they proved themselves relevant.
12/600+ doesn't really compare with the % of seats won that DUP have won/contested
Why does the number contested matter? It's not as if the DUP would have won West Bromwich East if they'd bothered to stand there.
They only won slightly fewer than the LDs and seeing as they stood in about 600 fewer seats, I would say that makes them equal.
The debates should just be Tory vs Labour. The others can have their own programme but its crazy to say that the LDs get equal billing with parties that get 20 times their seat numbers
Until recently the DUP had an MP in Basingstoke.
When was the last LibDem MP from NI?
On that basis only one of them is truly a UK-wide party and it isn't the dead parrots.
I'm not sure if Stratton Mills took the Liberal whip, when he defected from the UUP to Alliance. For that matter, did Naomi Long take the Lib Dem whip from 2010-15.
No she didn't. Silly woman gave up the only chance an Alliance MP will have to sit on the government benches this lifetime.
That seems daft. After all, the SDLP always took the Labour whip.
Totally stupid. Alliance are great at whining in a holier than thou attitude from the sidelines.
Quote from a N Iegislator (in waiting): "He's such a dickhead".
Quite obvious that both Foster and O'Neill couldn't give two hoots what Brokenshire says or does. He obviously looks crap and out of his depth. But in all honesty just where is his leverage. Since the Gov't has a deal with the DUP now, he carries about as much weight as a sackful of rocking horse manure.
Think he still has more than he realises or is willing to use.
The public here would support the MLAs and their staff having their salaries binned. The phone ins are almost unanimous. Nobody is impressed.
Fingers crossed. This will be a fantastic result if it happens.
The National Day of Catalonia is the day after Gibraltar National Day (10th/11th Sept) and we always swap representatives and delegates.
How will it be fantastic? The Catalan separatists are the SNP of Spain.
In any case, it's unconstitutional.
To be fair, Geoff lives in a place that has been under almost constant threat from Spain for decades. Even if that threat were not military it has still made life incredibly difficult for the people of Gibraltar. I don't think there would be many there who would be sorry to see Spain in a constitutional crisis.
He should have stayed. He made an uncertain situation worse by quitting. If that makes me a terminally stupid bell end in your eyes, well...
As one of the "terminally stupid", I expected the Prime Minister of our country to speak the truth and make clear his intentions. His behaviour during the Referendum campaign was despicable, but I though he had standards....
From the party of Nick Clegg and abolishing tuition fees, I find that incredibly touching.
Just trying to clear up the mess that Labour left behind. After all, it was Labour who introduced tuition fees in the first place.
And it was you Tories who were hell bent on putting them up.
Still, blame the Lib Dems for everything. We are used to it.
Why can`t you Tories/ Labour even have the gets to stand up for your own policies?
I'm struggling to think of what May did that was right during the campaign.
I still think calling the election was the right decision, given the evidence available at the time. But almost everything went wrong after that.
It was probably inevitable that Corbyn would always have surged, but she could have held onto almost all the seats she lost, and gained a good dozen more, and got into the 360-365 seat bracket, just through competence and a slim, focussed, barnacle-free manifesto.
May handled the terrorist incidents wel,l as one would expect from an experienced previous Home Secretary.
That completely takes the wind out of the sails of those who have been claiming UKIP is a nasty party.
The headline might as well have been "18 out of 20 rats would leave the sinking ship if they can find a good excuse".
Why is the party that campaigned to leave the EU and won still collecting the highly lucrative MEP salaries/expenses?
I wonder what Dan Hannan will do in his post-MEP life.
@TheScreamingEagles Osborne would be an awful choice for leader. Very popular in the Westminster Village and among some socially liberal Tories, but I cannot see him appealing to the wider public. He would neither attract the WWC nor young voters/Londoners for the Tories.
I'm struggling to think of what May did that was right during the campaign.
I still think calling the election was the right decision, given the evidence available at the time. But almost everything went wrong after that.
It was probably inevitable that Corbyn would always have surged, but she could have held onto almost all the seats she lost, and gained a good dozen more, and got into the 360-365 seat bracket, just through competence and a slim, focussed, barnacle-free manifesto.
May handled the terrorist incidents wel,l as one would expect from an experienced previous Home Secretary.
I'm struggling to think of what May did that was right during the campaign.
I still think calling the election was the right decision, given the evidence available at the time. But almost everything went wrong after that.
It was probably inevitable that Corbyn would always have surged, but she could have held onto almost all the seats she lost, and gained a good dozen more, and got into the 360-365 seat bracket, just through competence and a slim, focussed, barnacle-free manifesto.
The YouGov model suggests that the real situation, at the point the election was called, was a Tory lead of around 4-6%, rising to 6-8% as soon as the announcement was made. I doubt the election would have been called at all, had ICM, ComRes et al been doing all those dodgy adjustments.
Nevertheless Mrs May was one of the first Tories to understand, in the aftermath of the Brexit vote, the widespread and deep dissatisfaction with the post-crash economic settlement, and she made all sorts of promises to those who were struggling, which she has yet to meet. It isn't too much to ask that she might have applied her mind to how that dissatisfaction might play out in the heat of an election campaign, nor that she might have considered actually coming up with and initiating some proposals to help the people she professed to care about, if she was going to trouble the electorate for their votes?
He should have stayed. He made an uncertain situation worse by quitting. If that makes me a terminally stupid bell end in your eyes, well...
As one of the "terminally stupid", I expected the Prime Minister of our country to speak the truth and make clear his intentions. His behaviour during the Referendum campaign was despicable, but I though he had standards....
From the party of Nick Clegg and abolishing tuition fees, I find that incredibly touching.
Just trying to clear up the mess that Labour left behind. After all, it was Labour who introduced tuition fees in the first place.
And it was you Tories who were hell bent on putting them up.
Still, blame the Lib Dems for everything. We are used to it.
Why can`t you Tories/ Labour even have the gets to stand up for your own policies?
We have the guts, that's why Dave's Tories marmalised the Lib Dems in 2015.
And on that bombshell, I have to go and write a best man's speech.
Fingers crossed. This will be a fantastic result if it happens.
The National Day of Catalonia is the day after Gibraltar National Day (10th/11th Sept) and we always swap representatives and delegates.
How will it be fantastic? The Catalan separatists are the SNP of Spain.
In any case, it's unconstitutional.
To be fair, Geoff lives in a place that has been under almost constant threat from Spain for decades. Even if that threat were not military it has still made life incredibly difficult for the people of Gibraltar. I don't think there would be many there who would be sorry to see Spain in a constitutional crisis.
Correct me if Im wrong, but isn't Catalunya the engine of Spain?
Comparisons with our valued Scottish neighbours might need a bit of correction given the current state of North Sea oil....
That completely takes the wind out of the sails of those who have been claiming UKIP is a nasty party.
The headline might as well have been "18 out of 20 rats would leave the sinking ship if they can find a good excuse".
Why is the party that campaigned to leave the EU and won still collecting the highly lucrative MEP salaries/expenses?
I wonder what Dan Hannan will do in his post-MEP life.
@TheScreamingEagles Osborne would be an awful choice for leader. Very popular in the Westminster Village and among some socially liberal Tories, but I cannot see him appealing to the wider public. He would neither attract the WWC nor young voters/Londoners for the Tories.
There would also be an exodus of members.
Anyone who has ever canvassed for the Tories know how toxic he is on the doorstep.
If there are more debates then I'd assume that UKIP won't feature. The Greens should probably be eliminated on the grounds that they are only competitive in Brighton.
The SNP and Plaid have their own regional debates to take part in and don't really fit well in a UK wide debate. However, the SNP probably deserve a special dispensation this time by virtue of the number of seats that they hold. The DUP probably have a better claim to a place than Plaid, given that they are more likely to hold the balance of power. However, including them would create issues with Sinn Fein, the Ulster Unionists and the SDLP.
My instinct would be to go for Lib, Lab, Con & SNP next time. If the SNP get smashed at the election, then I'd take the opportunity to revert to the traditional big three for the election after that. The 2010 debates were much more focussed and engaging to watch than the 2015 and 2017 versions.
Why do thein Dems get a free pass? Sub 10%, 12 seats, competitive in a dozen more perhaps.
12 seats is more than the DUP have and they proved themselves relevant.
The DUP contested, what, 14 seats in one region? - and won 10.
The LibDems contested 600+ seats and won, what, 14?
They're just so irrelevant. They are to politics what Lola were to formula one.
I'm struggling to think of what May did that was right during the campaign.
I still think calling the election was the right decision, given the evidence available at the time. But almost everything went wrong after that.
It was probably inevitable that Corbyn would always have surged, but she could have held onto almost all the seats she lost, and gained a good dozen more, and got into the 360-365 seat bracket, just through competence and a slim, focussed, barnacle-free manifesto.
Given the evidence at the time - I could defend most of her decisions. Even social care makes some sense if you think you are 20pts up.
Edit: I think not costing proposals was a big error that was avoidable.
That completely takes the wind out of the sails of those who have been claiming UKIP is a nasty party.
The headline might as well have been "18 out of 20 rats would leave the sinking ship if they can find a good excuse".
Why is the party that campaigned to leave the EU and won still collecting the highly lucrative MEP salaries/expenses?
I wonder what Dan Hannan will do in his post-MEP life.
@TheScreamingEagles Osborne would be an awful choice for leader. Very popular in the Westminster Village and among some socially liberal Tories, but I cannot see him appealing to the wider public. He would neither attract the WWC nor young voters/Londoners for the Tories.
There would also be an exodus of members.
Anyone who has ever canvassed for the Tories know how toxic he is on the doorstep.
Yes, I never got the impression Osborne was particuarly popular with either the PCP or Conservative Members.
That completely takes the wind out of the sails of those who have been claiming UKIP is a nasty party.
The headline might as well have been "18 out of 20 rats would leave the sinking ship if they can find a good excuse".
Why is the party that campaigned to leave the EU and won still collecting the highly lucrative MEP salaries/expenses?
I wonder what Dan Hannan will do in his post-MEP life.
@TheScreamingEagles Osborne would be an awful choice for leader. Very popular in the Westminster Village and among some socially liberal Tories, but I cannot see him appealing to the wider public. He would neither attract the WWC nor young voters/Londoners for the Tories.
There would also be an exodus of members.
Anyone who has ever canvassed for the Tories know how toxic he is on the doorstep.
And you also said Mrs May was going to be so wildly popular with Tory members and the country, how'd that turn out?
That completely takes the wind out of the sails of those who have been claiming UKIP is a nasty party.
The headline might as well have been "18 out of 20 rats would leave the sinking ship if they can find a good excuse".
Why is the party that campaigned to leave the EU and won still collecting the highly lucrative MEP salaries/expenses?
I wonder what Dan Hannan will do in his post-MEP life.
@TheScreamingEagles Osborne would be an awful choice for leader. Very popular in the Westminster Village and among some socially liberal Tories, but I cannot see him appealing to the wider public. He would neither attract the WWC nor young voters/Londoners for the Tories.
There would also be an exodus of members.
Anyone who has ever canvassed for the Tories know how toxic he is on the doorstep.
And you also said Mrs May was going to be so wildly popular with Tory members and the country, how'd that turn out?
That completely takes the wind out of the sails of those who have been claiming UKIP is a nasty party.
The headline might as well have been "18 out of 20 rats would leave the sinking ship if they can find a good excuse".
Why is the party that campaigned to leave the EU and won still collecting the highly lucrative MEP salaries/expenses?
I wonder what Dan Hannan will do in his post-MEP life.
@TheScreamingEagles Osborne would be an awful choice for leader. Very popular in the Westminster Village and among some socially liberal Tories, but I cannot see him appealing to the wider public. He would neither attract the WWC nor young voters/Londoners for the Tories.
There would also be an exodus of members.
Anyone who has ever canvassed for the Tories know how toxic he is on the doorstep.
And you also said Mrs May was going to be so wildly popular with Tory members and the country, how'd that turn out?
The country likes a posh boy.
To be fair, she won a shed load more votes than Cammo....
That completely takes the wind out of the sails of those who have been claiming UKIP is a nasty party.
The headline might as well have been "18 out of 20 rats would leave the sinking ship if they can find a good excuse".
Why is the party that campaigned to leave the EU and won still collecting the highly lucrative MEP salaries/expenses?
I wonder what Dan Hannan will do in his post-MEP life.
@TheScreamingEagles Osborne would be an awful choice for leader. Very popular in the Westminster Village and among some socially liberal Tories, but I cannot see him appealing to the wider public. He would neither attract the WWC nor young voters/Londoners for the Tories.
There would also be an exodus of members.
Anyone who has ever canvassed for the Tories know how toxic he is on the doorstep.
And you also said Mrs May was going to be so wildly popular with Tory members and the country, how'd that turn out?
The country likes a posh boy.
That posh boy is not George Osborne though.
Exactly.
An old pal of mine on blind tastings always decrees the popular wine brands as bland but inoffensive.
Osborne's politics offended too many to ever be considered leadership material
That completely takes the wind out of the sails of those who have been claiming UKIP is a nasty party.
The headline might as well have been "18 out of 20 rats would leave the sinking ship if they can find a good excuse".
Why is the party that campaigned to leave the EU and won still collecting the highly lucrative MEP salaries/expenses?
I wonder what Dan Hannan will do in his post-MEP life.
@TheScreamingEagles Osborne would be an awful choice for leader. Very popular in the Westminster Village and among some socially liberal Tories, but I cannot see him appealing to the wider public. He would neither attract the WWC nor young voters/Londoners for the Tories.
There would also be an exodus of members.
Anyone who has ever canvassed for the Tories know how toxic he is on the doorstep.
And you also said Mrs May was going to be so wildly popular with Tory members and the country, how'd that turn out?
The country likes a posh boy.
To be fair, she won a shed load more votes than Cammo....
But lost Dave's majority to Corbyn, to JEREMY CORBYN, Mrs May failed to win a majority against the terrorist sympathising, economically illiterate, turn us into Venezuela, and make Diane Abbott Home Secretary Trot.
If you think that's a success then I can't help you.
A few days ago in bed a bottom burp of my husband's brought forth the unmistakable words "Pol Pot". The following morning I awoke to hear the news that the infamous leader of the Khmer Rouge had died. Last night my husband farted in the bath. It's not looking good for Edward Woodward.
Mr. Eagles, if you're saying that success or failure is graded according to opposition then you must accept Hannibal was a better leader than Caesar.
Caesar scraped a victory against an ageing Pompey who was predictable and bullied into a needless battle by the Senate. Hannibal roamed around Italy for a decade and faced far more formidable opponents in Quintus Fabius Maximus, Nero, Marcellus, and Scipio.
I'm struggling to think of what May did that was right during the campaign.
I still think calling the election was the right decision, given the evidence available at the time. But almost everything went wrong after that.
It was probably inevitable that Corbyn would always have surged, but she could have held onto almost all the seats she lost, and gained a good dozen more, and got into the 360-365 seat bracket, just through competence and a slim, focussed, barnacle-free manifesto.
If she'd called it pre-A50, there's a very good chance she'd have won a landslide IMO.
LD's on 20-30%, Corbyn's Lab on 20-30%
Con on 40-60%
450+ seats.
Brexit still needed to be uncertain for the campaign that she ran, to resonate. The manifesto should have been the A50 letter, which she was asking the British electorate to sign.
Mr. Eagles, if you're saying that success or failure is graded according to opposition then you must accept Hannibal was a better leader than Caesar.
Caesar scraped a victory against an ageing Pompey who was predictable and bullied into a needless battle by the Senate. Hannibal roamed around Italy for a decade and faced far more formidable opponents in Quintus Fabius Maximus, Nero, Marcellus, and Scipio.
Caesar became the byword for Kings.
What did Hannibal become the byword for?
Caesar is the most famous Caesar, whereas Hannibal Barca is probably the third most famous Hannibal, after Hannibal Lecter and John 'Hannibal' Smith from The A-Team.
That completely takes the wind out of the sails of those who have been claiming UKIP is a nasty party.
The headline might as well have been "18 out of 20 rats would leave the sinking ship if they can find a good excuse".
Why is the party that campaigned to leave the EU and won still collecting the highly lucrative MEP salaries/expenses?
I wonder what Dan Hannan will do in his post-MEP life.
@TheScreamingEagles Osborne would be an awful choice for leader. Very popular in the Westminster Village and among some socially liberal Tories, but I cannot see him appealing to the wider public. He would neither attract the WWC nor young voters/Londoners for the Tories.
There would also be an exodus of members.
Anyone who has ever canvassed for the Tories know how toxic he is on the doorstep.
And you also said Mrs May was going to be so wildly popular with Tory members and the country, how'd that turn out?
The country likes a posh boy.
To be fair, she won a shed load more votes than Cammo....
But lost Dave's majority to Corbyn, to JEREMY CORBYN, Mrs May failed to win a majority against the terrorist sympathising, economically illiterate, turn us into Venezuela, and make Diane Abbott Home Secretary Trot.
If you think that's a success then I can't help you.
The thing is that young voters, regrettably, just don't care about the opposition because attention focuses on the party that has been in charge for seven years. David Cameron, conversely, failed to get a majority after ten years of New Labour, during a financial crisis, and against a man who called a nice old lady "bigoted" in the middle of the campaign.
That completely takes the wind out of the sails of those who have been claiming UKIP is a nasty party.
The headline might as well have been "18 out of 20 rats would leave the sinking ship if they can find a good excuse".
Why is the party that campaigned to leave the EU and won still collecting the highly lucrative MEP salaries/expenses?
I wonder what Dan Hannan will do in his post-MEP life.
@TheScreamingEagles Osborne would be an awful choice for leader. Very popular in the Westminster Village and among some socially liberal Tories, but I cannot see him appealing to the wider public. He would neither attract the WWC nor young voters/Londoners for the Tories.
There would also be an exodus of members.
Anyone who has ever canvassed for the Tories know how toxic he is on the doorstep.
And you also said Mrs May was going to be so wildly popular with Tory members and the country, how'd that turn out?
The country likes a posh boy.
To be fair, she won a shed load more votes than Cammo....
But lost Dave's majority to Corbyn, to JEREMY CORBYN, Mrs May failed to win a majority against the terrorist sympathising, economically illiterate, turn us into Venezuela, and make Diane Abbott Home Secretary Trot.
If you think that's a success then I can't help you.
Flip it on it's head and you wonder why Cameron couldn't get as many votes in 2015 as Jeremy Corbyn in the 2017.
I think history will prove us both right about the negatives and both wrong about the positives; neither Cameron nor May were/are popular, and neither a wonderful tactician....
Comments
What criteria would you draw up for a formula to determine inclusion in a major debate?
The options below all seem prefabricated to artificially accommodate the Greens (1 seat) or the LibDems ("3 main parties" lololol).
So would allow the Tories, Lab, Lib Dems, and the SNP to appear.
Four seems a reasonable number.
The system used in the US is bipartisan but it's far easier there for the Republicans and Democrats to stitch it up between them, given how much smaller the third-parties are over there. Britain's strong regional parties and larger third parties make life much harder. So if the parties and broadcasters can't agree some kind of permanent commission then they'll have to continue to wing it each time.
Also, the SNP wouldn't do a deal with the Conservatives.
And the closest we have to a minor party in coalition is the DUP.
We need a set formula, not broadcasters making it up as they go.
What we really need is what those bloody colonials have, a Commission on Presidential Debates.
Only the terminally stupid expected to Cameron to continue if he lost the referendum.
He only said what he said before the vote about not resigning because people would have framed it as 'Vote Leave and get rid of Dave'
If he had continued, bell end Leavers (of which you are not) would have made his job impossible. They would have been banging on 'Dave couldn't get a good renegotiation, how will he get a good Brexit deal?'
Or how about broadcasters putting the leaders on the spot - giving them tough questions to answer. But not Theresa cos she was frit.
Do you really believe broadcasters should be able to dictate the course of a campaign?
They exist to report on events and provide news, not to determine the course of events and create the news.
The debates should just be Tory vs Labour. The others can have their own programme but its crazy to say that the LDs get equal billing with parties that get 20 times their seat numbers
I'll pony up the £163k to get enough candidates up. Then I'll get my hour of fame on stage ... live on national tv.
You lot can all bet on how many minutes in to the debate that I will declare my really quite unhealthy obsession with Sophy Ridge, get my cock out on stage and start swinging it around. It'll be worth every penny.
Let's just hope that she's actually moderating that debate. Otherwise it'll be odd.
(1) May ducked out of one, because she was frit
(2) May told a woman who hadn't had a pay rise for years that there was no "magic money tree"
(3) Corbyn was much better than expected
(4) Paxman was a dick
From that I conclude (a) they're important, (b) most people pay little attention to politics until the final weeks of an election campaign, and, (c) being shit at debates or trying to avoid them will no longer wash.
Ergo, if you're a PM or candidate to be one, get better at doing debates.
When was the last LibDem MP from NI?
On that basis only one of them is truly a UK-wide party and it isn't the dead parrots.
https://twitter.com/CatalansForYes/status/881535766287065090
I trust u will be charging them 5% commission?
Pre Farage Leadership- 3%
Farage - Win Euros, 13%, force referendum, win referendum
Post Farage - 2%
A reduction to the 3 way at most is needed.
It would have been annoying if she'd been the one to ruin my point as I helped with the TUV campaign that year and my guy got more votes than Peter Robinson lost by.
His behaviour during the Referendum campaign was despicable, but I though he had standards....
The National Day of Catalonia is the day after Gibraltar National Day (10th/11th Sept) and we always swap representatives and delegates.
In any case, it's unconstitutional.
I still think calling the election was the right decision, given the evidence available at the time. But almost everything went wrong after that.
It was probably inevitable that Corbyn would always have surged, but she could have held onto almost all the seats she lost, and gained a good dozen more, and got into the 360-365 seat bracket, just through competence and a slim, focussed, barnacle-free manifesto.
https://myaccount.betfair.com/activity/premium-charges
Mr. F, impossible. The EU guarantees peace in Europe.
Ahem.
It'd be the beginning of the end of Spain as a nation (woohoo!) and the lighting of a big signal bonfire for independence movements all over the place.
'Scottish Labour members call for Corbyn to go'
http://tinyurl.com/y8l3okul
Mind you, haven't heard a mouse fart of dissent from anyone in SLab since 08/06/17.
He obviously looks crap and out of his depth. But in all honesty just where is his leverage. Since the Gov't has a deal with the DUP now, he carries about as much weight as a sackful of rocking horse manure.
Red Bull, all else being equal, will lose out. The circuit, as far as I remember, is all about straight line speed. So, if the top two teams suffer misfortune or incompetence, it won't be Red Bull but the Pink Panthers or Williams who benefit. [Unless it's wet, then back Verstappen].
Red Bulls are in the 20s. I'd have them in the 50s and Perez around 67, or something like that. Also because the Red Bulls are fundamentally less reliable than the Force Indias.
Anyway, odds against, but this sort of thing only needs to come off once every few years to be very green overall.
But the sight of blood and the optics of repression of a democratic vote by force will sow seeds.
The public here would support the MLAs and their staff having their salaries binned. The phone ins are almost unanimous. Nobody is impressed.
http://news.sky.com/story/hinkley-point-c-nuclear-plant-hit-by-cost-over-run-and-delay-edf-10934943
And it was you Tories who were hell bent on putting them up.
Still, blame the Lib Dems for everything. We are used to it.
Why can`t you Tories/ Labour even have the gets to stand up for your own policies?
@TheScreamingEagles Osborne would be an awful choice for leader. Very popular in the Westminster Village and among some socially liberal Tories, but I cannot see him appealing to the wider public. He would neither attract the WWC nor young voters/Londoners for the Tories.
Nevertheless Mrs May was one of the first Tories to understand, in the aftermath of the Brexit vote, the widespread and deep dissatisfaction with the post-crash economic settlement, and she made all sorts of promises to those who were struggling, which she has yet to meet. It isn't too much to ask that she might have applied her mind to how that dissatisfaction might play out in the heat of an election campaign, nor that she might have considered actually coming up with and initiating some proposals to help the people she professed to care about, if she was going to trouble the electorate for their votes?
And on that bombshell, I have to go and write a best man's speech.
Comparisons with our valued Scottish neighbours might need a bit of correction given the current state of North Sea oil....
Anyone who has ever canvassed for the Tories know how toxic he is on the doorstep.
The LibDems contested 600+ seats and won, what, 14?
They're just so irrelevant. They are to politics what Lola were to formula one.
Even social care makes some sense if you think you are 20pts up.
Edit: I think not costing proposals was a big error that was avoidable.
The country likes a posh boy.
An old pal of mine on blind tastings always decrees the popular wine brands as bland but inoffensive.
Osborne's politics offended too many to ever be considered leadership material
If you think that's a success then I can't help you.
A few days ago in bed a bottom burp of my husband's brought forth the unmistakable words "Pol Pot". The following morning I awoke to hear the news that the infamous leader of the Khmer Rouge had died. Last night my husband farted in the bath. It's not looking good for Edward Woodward.
Caesar scraped a victory against an ageing Pompey who was predictable and bullied into a needless battle by the Senate. Hannibal roamed around Italy for a decade and faced far more formidable opponents in Quintus Fabius Maximus, Nero, Marcellus, and Scipio.
LD's on 20-30%, Corbyn's Lab on 20-30%
Con on 40-60%
450+ seats.
Brexit still needed to be uncertain for the campaign that she ran, to resonate. The manifesto should have been the A50 letter, which she was asking the British electorate to sign.
What did Hannibal become the byword for?
Caesar is the most famous Caesar, whereas Hannibal Barca is probably the third most famous Hannibal, after Hannibal Lecter and John 'Hannibal' Smith from The A-Team.
Julius Caesar enjoyed supreme authority for less time than Theresa May.
I think history will prove us both right about the negatives and both wrong about the positives; neither Cameron nor May were/are popular, and neither a wonderful tactician....