Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Tories needs to resolve divisions soon because divided par
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Tories needs to resolve divisions soon because divided parties struggle at election time
One of the things that we know from previous elections is that parties that are seen to be divided can get punished by the voters. That was John Major’s fate at GE1997 after five difficult years of one split after another.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
For betting purposes i'll treat as 99% fiction, tho
Interesting divide on males and females. Women are more likely to say don't know than men; probably more honest.
United - 28% (+15% since May)
Divided - 47% (-18% since May)
http://tinyurl.com/JustAPoundShopGordonBrown
The Corbyn critics shut up during the election campaign and gave the appearance of a united party. It wasn't united but the critics wanted Corbyn to own the blame rather than it be assigned to their undermining him. Obviously, that's not quite how it turned out.
And no, Labour isn't a united party by any means, both in terms of Corbyn's position and in terms of setting policy at a Shadow Cabinet level. But Labour's not in government and for those not paying close attention, it looks (and is) a good deal more united than it was this time last year.
This may be overblown. It's true the blues aren't united, but either May stays and they have to unite ahead of election, or she goes and her successor gets some time.
I suspect she'll go of her own accord.
However, of the two, the Brexit issue is the more important. The leadership question exists only in the background; Brexit is a daily challenge and one which can play out in any number of areas.
How would they get ready though?
The next leader will be PM - you'd think then it would be someone in a top job already.
Had it been 60/40 Remain, a minor split *might* have occurred, though worth recalling the purple tide was receding even then.
Perhaps Cameron's real misjudgement was seeing UKIP as a threat to the blues rather than a threat to the reds. But it's easy to consider things in hindsight.
I'm also amused by the idea that Cameron's attitude was 'contemptuous'.
"The latest turbo hybrid F1 engines represent a revolutionary advance in technology but they are far from universally popular. Their detractors shrug off the 1,000bhp they produce, the fact they use 35% less fuel to do a grand prix, that they have increased thermal efficiency from 29% to a remarkable 50% in just four years, and focus instead on their muted sound and their high cost."
Talking about fuel and thermal efficiency in F1 is a bit like saying you visit a particular brothel because you like chatting to the receptionist. That said, he's right that many dislike the new engines because of the lower noise (never bothered me), and that's a bit daft too.
Mind you, the next line describes returning to old-fashioned engines as a delusional fantasy, so that does rather nail the colours to the mast.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/motorsport/40735193
https://www.macrumors.com/2017/07/26/foxconn-tv-display-factory-wisconsin/
The most obvious and immediate threat to the party was from the bastards. Remember that conference when Farage went somewhere down south and the rumours were a third Conservative MP was shifting over? (*) The pat could not stand much more of that.
Cameron should be congratulated by Conservatives for holding the referendum. Some of us may have voted remain, some of us may dislike the result, some of us may wish it never happened, but at least he gave us a vote.
(*) It'd be great to learn the true story behind that.
In other news, a Wisconsin university has just got $506 million from Apple in a patent suit. Another sign of the patent madness overtaking America.
http://fortune.com/2017/07/26/apple-wisconsin-patent-lawsuit/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/horse-racing/40740691
(From New York Times article: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/26/business/foxconn-factory-wisconsin-jobs.html)
WTF??????
"some bookmakers have said they will pay out on the horses finishing first and second."
This bit ^ indicates it was more likely to be a cockup, not conspiracy.
"Cameron should be congratulated by Conservatives for holding the referendum. Some of us may have voted remain, some of us may dislike the result, some of us may wish it never happened, but at least he gave us a vote"
I don't believe many people will think that in five years time! Even those who wanted the referendum and voted leave.
Rather odd thing to happen. The closest F1 equivalent was, I think, a season or two ago when Williams (if memory serves) somehow managed to put on three soft and one medium tyre on Bottas' car.
People had been working on transmitting films for years; Logie-Baird's was not the system that progressed technologically, even if it was the first to transmit. If you were to look back through 'modern' TV's evolutionary tree, it would start in the US.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television#History
Which just about sums up the Tories these days!
Vince Cable
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jul/27/brexit-corbyn-hard-right-progressive-labour-europe
But no, for all that Brexit is important and though it might lead to defections in all directions of voters and, to a lesser extent, politicians, the party structure will probably survive the next decade more-or-less unchanged.
Besides, surely it's more like visiting a particular establishment because the service providers are vegetarian, or some such?
There's a scene with a brothel receptionist in the second story in this book (by me):
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Adventures-Edric-Hero-Hornska-Book-ebook/dp/B01DOSP9ZK/
Quite a nice scene, (says he who wrote it).
So I'm told.
In fact none of the apparent sticking points matter as far as the deal is concerned. The money is a haggle and manageable. We will want immigration from the EU, it's reciprocal for our citizens to the EU and in any case we have managed perfectly all right for the past 40 years. As there needs to be supranational oversight of the arrangements, the ECJ is as good a way to do it as any and, again, we have managed fine.
These are simply sticking points in terms of domestic politics and the way Brexit was sold to the British population. If we don't get control over our EU immigration, can't reject foreign courts and have to pay as much as before, but get less trade, prosperity, tax revenue for public services, influence and jobs and have to go through massive disruption on the way, then what's the point of Brexit? It's not a question the EU needs to answer. It's a question half the country has been asking for a year without a good answer from the promoters of Brexit.
What matters in terms of the deal is the stuff that isn't being discussed: what to do about nuclear waste, product certification, tariffs on automotive components, chlorinated chicken, financial regulation, aviation certification, fishing rights etc etc etc.
Saying we have 'done fine' in regard to immigration, the ECJ oversight and how much we pay is arrogance in the extreme. Whilst I personally might be in favour of open borders, that is because I am in a privileged position whereby I am unaffected by it. That does not mean that for many people 'we have managed perfectly all right for the past 40 years'. We certainly haven't done alright as far as the ECJ is concerned, nor regarding the amount of money we have thrown away on Europhiles' vast vanity project.
And actually half the country has not been asking that question at all. Fanatics like you might have been but the majority of the country has just been getting on with things and has expected the Government and politicians on all sides to do the same.
An "overturn the first referendum" referendum is impossible, as it would require the Article 50 negotiations to yield two deals for the British people to choose between. That ain't gonna happen.
A Noel Edmonds referendum, on the other hand, is technically possible but would be dumb beyond belief (cf the Greek experience) and so the chances of Parliament actually requesting one are (to say the least) remote - they will take the Deal or No Deal decision themselves.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/40744668
Also, Bottas is 9.4 on Betfair for the win. Hmm.
Nobody in the UK has a solution for how to leave the EU without undermining it and without diminishing ourselves. We could do one or the other but there isn't a majority in favour of becoming a supplicant and neither is there a majority in favour of becoming a geopolitical ally of Putin against the EU. Ultimately this conflict can only be resolved by getting a new pro-EU mandate and abandoning 20 years of drift, or by entering a long-term cycle of self-inflicted decline.
Your fanatical belief in the EU blinds you both to its faults and to the alternatives. It is no wonder so many of us consider you an object of derision these days.
https://twitter.com/bbcpolitics/status/890619382606450689
As much as every parent loves their kids, I'm sure at the same time most would think it a bad thing to have 20 or 30 of them.
I am in a rare and fortunate position of knowing from long before the vote that my first, pure, preferences would never be achieved as I hold a very minority view. So for me compromise has already happened. I know there are plenty of people on the Remain side who are in a similar position for a slightly different reason.
The fools are those on either side who think all their dreams will come true and the outcome of this process will be exactly as they hoped - yes I am looking at you Williamglenn.
https://youtu.be/QYouL4GBu5c?t=5m55s
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jul/27/met-says-grenfell-council-may-have-committed-corporate-manslaughter
Mr Dancer, if the guy with the joint fastest car is 9.4 that's massive value.
England's cricketers saved by the rain at the Oval, maybe this is the rare Test where one backs the draw?
Good luck to Ms @Cyclefree on her new endeavour, working for yourself is so much better than a dreary day job chasing dodgy bankers.
http://theriveroflife.com/
Whatever Brexit might bring initially the real game is about the long term. The UK can negotiate progressively better deals, and although its pretty important that a good deal is struck at the first asking it's not vital.
The worst thing that Labour have going for them is that they choose to be on the wrong side of arguments.
The world is becoming an increasingly liberal place, intolerant of petty nationalisms, though they do tend to lash out in their death throes. It is going to be an increasingly mobile world, and future generations will blame the Brexiteers for putting us out in the cold politically.
Imagine the UK news coverage from an EU summit 20 years from now where an event of world significance was being decided. Everything will be tinged with a sense of loss, of what could have been had we not walked out and given up our seat at the table.
Imagine the EU news coverage from the UK parliament 20 years from now where an event of world significance had been led by the UK. Everything will be tinged with a sense of failure, of what could have been had they not treated us so badly.
Invited to deliver the normal platitudes at the national jamboree, he ruined the Scout Spirit by making sarcastic comments about Hilary Clinton, Barack Obama and the Fake News Media. The Chief Scout is not pleased and issued a strongly worded statement condemning Donald Trump, including:
We have steadfastly remained non-partisan and refused to comment on political matters. We sincerely regret that politics were inserted into the Scouting program.
While we live in a challenging time in a country divided along political lines, the focus of Scouting remains the same today as every day.
Trustworthiness, loyalty, kindness and bravery are just a few of the admirable traits Scouts aspire to develop [...]
Few will argue the importance of teaching values and responsibility to our youth — not only right from wrong, but specific positive values such as fairness, courage, honor and respect for others. [...]
In a time when differences seem to separate our country, we hope the true spirit of Scouting will empower our next generation of leaders to bring people together to do good in the world.
It's clear he thinks Donald Trump has none of the values of trustworthiness, loyalty, kindness, bravery, responsibility, knowing right from wrong, fairness, courage, honor and respect for others. It's quite a list. The grown ups were the ones in the audience, many of whom would a better job than the incumbent.
I jest. But historically there were significant arguments within some of the Canadian colonies -
generally during times of economic hardship - as to whether a merger with their U.S. markets would be the way forward. Every time the USA narrowly elects a president whom the Canadians take a disdain for (and that's regularly enough) I wonder how the Candians live with the guilt - that the USA inflicts such personages upon the world stage is basically their fault (or at least, sine qua non causal responsibility).
https://twitter.com/emporersnewc/status/890649761761468416
Our choices in this world are not what you think they are, and this delusion lies at the heart of so many of the problems we've had in accepting our membership of the EU.
Pretty much ditto for the proposals (raised at an official level both during the early stages of WW2 and then again post-Suez) for a merger of Britain and France.
He's like a political Shia LaBeouf.
https://fullfact.org/europe/uk-eu-trade/
A mere trifle?
One of the worst exploiters of the millenium bug in the telecoms world was Nortel which eventually went belly up having feasted on the sudden increase in spending and could not survive the inevitable trough.
And if it doesn't work out, well, at least I'll have tried. It's always the things one doesn't do that one regrets. In my experience, anyway.
Thank you to all for your good wishes.
(If a refreshingly sane voice appears on your screens talking sense about stuff - a sort of anti-Shami - well, that will be me!
(Which is probably good news for the world.)
It struck me as one of those proposals that would never quite happen. Too complicated, too many vested interests against etc.