King Cole, it's only 35s, including a small number of demented steps. In short (text from video): 1 - Create a free, open, inclusive movement 2 - Let the people decide who will lead 3 - Give everyone a say over campaign priorities 4 - Make it easier for new members to get involved
It's essentially a plan to allow entryism to maximum extent. It's insane. It'd be dumb as a post even if there weren't the shrieking banshee of a warning from what's happened to Labour.
I would say Elon Musk is half hype and half genius in the execution of complex problems. Both are key to what he is. I don't think his strength lies in original ideas. That's part of his hype. SpaceX isn't delivering anything.beyond what ArianeSpace has been doing for a couple of decades with far less attention. SpaceX has shaken up the market thanks to efficient rocket production and deployment. Gigafactory is again about making more batteries cheaper. The enterprise Musk struggles with, Tesla, is the one where he has the most ideas. That's because car manufacturing is about marketing, business organisation and service, none of which are his strength.
That's not true re SpaceX. The Ariane rockets use a complex mix of fuels that cost many millions of dollars per flight. SpaceX uses JetA* - aka Kerosene - which is incredibly cheap.
* yes, yes I know it is technically purified JetA
My point is that SpaceX delivers the same satellites to the same orbits at the same reliability on the same contractual basis as Arianespace has been doing for twenty years. "We use cheaper fuel" isn't what motivates these people.
My point is that cheap fuel and reusable rockets has the potential to reduce the cost of launching satellites by an order of magnitude.
Only if the market also expands by an order of magnitude. So far that hasn't happened. In any case design trade offs are nuanced and can change as circumstances change. Solid fuel boosters are cheap and simple to implement and as the fuel has a higher density you can have smaller rockets for the same payload.
Is price elasticity greater than one? I don't know the answer to that, but I suspect the answer is yes
Having said SpaceX is hyped, I should acknowledge the achievements. Firstly that it is a startup, which is remarkable in itself. It has shaken up a complacent satellite launch market with prices that area maybe 20% or 30% cheaper. Incumbents will be threatened by that.
Satellite launches aren't that price sensitive. The biggest cost is the satellite itself, so SpaceX needs to meet the same low failure rate as Ariane, which it has almost done.
Another MP refusing to follow the instructions of his constituents (who voted to leave) but with a majority of less than 1000 I'm sure his constituents will get him out at the next available opportunity...
In fairness they are representatives, not delegates, but with a 635 majority and the entire household income (he hired his wife just before the ban) at the pleasure of his electorate he's being very "brave".....
Maybe he think's if he keeps us in the EU he'll be able to transfer his household income from the Westminster gravy train to the EU gravy train when he's inevitably booted out by his constituents?
I’m not a supporter of Bebb, or his party, but from what I’ve read he’s a man who is willing to do what he thinks is right.
I was just reading his Wiki entry and apparently he jumped from Plaid to Con not over policy but because he failed to be selected by Plaid for a winnable seat.
Last year he put his wife on the public payroll just before these practices were banned.
Sounds like he has a pattern of behaviour when it comes to disloyalty and self-interest.
This from the LibDems consultation document on these membership changes (my bold):
"Two main arguments are generally raised against the adoption of a registered supporter scheme with the right to vote in leadership elections.
The first argument is based on the Labour Party’s experience in 2015, when large-scale entryism by left-wingers after Ed Miliband’s creation of a £3 supporter scheme led to the election of Jeremy Corbyn. There are rumours that the leave.eu campaign is currently trying to encourage its supporters to sign up to the Conservative Party to influence its next leadership election, and many former members of UKIP have already defected to the Tories.
The Liberal Democrats are different. The Labour Party has always been vulnerable to entryism by left-wing extremists who would otherwise support fringe parties. The Conservative Party is a right-wing party attracting right- wingers. The Liberal Democrats are a centre-ground liberal party aiming to attract a larger number of centre-ground liberal voters into our fold. This target audience would outnumber any other group."
On topic, I think this does come from Pence's office, but not from Pence himself. He'll be sufficiently insulated from the decision to do it that he should be fine if anything comes out, but I suspect he knows whose pen was on it.
1. The text is very clearly in VP "house style". The evidence is convincing on this - so it's either from his office or, less likely, deliberately written that way as a diversion. That doesn't mean Pence personally wrote it - but it strongly points to an aide.
2. If you're in Trump's office, why write the article? You might want to manage the idiot, but you don't want to destabilise the Donald, because you're his appointee, and because you actually think the administration can achieve good things as long as the big man is kept away from anything important.
3. Team Pence's motives are different. He's a more than averagely powerful VP, but there's plenty of truth in John Garner's "worth as much as a pitcher of warm p***" comment. If Trump falls at some point, he's suddenly the man. Same with impeachment - all grist to the Democrat base's mill, but the outcome isn't a Democrat President, it's Pence.
4. Check the dates... if Pence succeeds after January, he could be President for ten years (a VP who succeeds before the halfway mark can only do one additional term). Additionally, Pence's Presidential ambitions take a hell of a knock if Trump loses in 2020 and, by late 2019/early 2020 it's increasingly probable he's the candidate. They also take a knock if Trump dumps him as VP in 2020, which is just the sort of thing he'd pull on a whim. So, while it's been in his interests to play ball until now, the next twelve months are a very good time for Pence to cause maximum trouble.
Clearly a boost for May that the Tories are back in front and bad for Corbyn that Labour have slipped behind.
Plenty of evidence the last Survation poll was an outlier in terms of both the LAB and LD numbers.
Is it three polls with the LDs in double figures - everyone will want to lead us and if Vince gets his way anyone will be able to. ?
Drop back in UKIP support suggesting the Chequers "blip" has eased for now but an indication it could return IF it is seen May is slipping back toward BINO.
The Moderates dropping back behind the Swedish Democrats leaving the Red-Green Parties on 39.9% ahead of the Borgerlig vloc of four parties on 38.5% with the Swedish Democrats on 19% so it's going to be very close.
I don’t think its appropriate to add LAB + LD as some kind of grouping.
I would argue, as a supporter, that the LDs have more in common with the Conservative Party than Corbyn’s Labour.
Anyway, time for me to be off for a bit. Will be interesting to see if any of the parties has come up with a new, even more stupid way to self-harm in the short time before I return.
Is this just starting to be a test too far for the Indian seamers? Seriously good yesterday but weary today and the runs have flowed. I would like to think the selectors who decided that Buttler wasn't good enough for test cricket have retired in ignominy but cricket never seems to work like that.
Personally I would play him at 3 in the winter tours, Root at 4, Stokes at 5, Ali at 6, Bairstow back to 7 where he actually scores runs and Curran at 8 with Woakes at 9. If we can find 2 openers that would be a seriously good batting line up.
Is this just starting to be a test too far for the Indian seamers? Seriously good yesterday but weary today and the runs have flowed. I would like to think the selectors who decided that Buttler wasn't good enough for test cricket have retired in ignominy but cricket never seems to work like that.
Personally I would play him at 3 in the winter tours, Root at 4, Stokes at 5, Ali at 6, Bairstow back to 7 where he actually scores runs and Curran at 8 with Woakes at 9. If we can find 2 openers that would be a seriously good batting line up.
First time they’ve had to bowl over 100 overs in an innings this series. Which rather suggests we need a top three that can occupy the crease for more than a few overs on a consistent basis.
I’m not convinced Buttler is a test three... but there again who in England is ?
Arianespace haven’t been landing rockets back and reusing them, their launch prices are an order of magnitude more expensive. What SpaceX are doing is completely revolutionary.
To me, this picture defines the last decade of scientific advancement, we will have to tell our kids that they used to send rockets up to space and just throw them away afterwards.
"their (Arianespace) launch prices are an order of magnitude more expensive."
Citation required. As far as I've read, SpaceX are currently about half the price of Arianespace for commercial launches at best with a reused booster (like-for-like, which is a difficult comparison given the rockets' differing capabilities). Likewise, the opportunities for lowering costs further with the F9 are few, which is why they're trying to catch the $6mn a throw fairings. SpaceX also charge the government (e.g. NASA) much more, which is a massive subsidy to them. Some argue they're using that money to catch commercial launches.
There is also an issue that reusability only becomes worthwhile with a certain number of launches per year: Arianespace looked into this a decade or more ago (before SpaceX's success) and worked out around 40 launches a year was needed to make the development worthwhile - and they weren't going to get them. The figure will be less for SpaceX, but there will still be a breakeven point where you won't get the development or operational costs back.
Basically, Musk is gambling on there being more launches in the future to make reusability worthwhile. Without them, reusability is an expensive mistake.
IMO this is a big driver for his investing in their Starlink communications system, which will require many launches that the F9 can provide.
Is this just starting to be a test too far for the Indian seamers? Seriously good yesterday but weary today and the runs have flowed. I would like to think the selectors who decided that Buttler wasn't good enough for test cricket have retired in ignominy but cricket never seems to work like that.
Personally I would play him at 3 in the winter tours, Root at 4, Stokes at 5, Ali at 6, Bairstow back to 7 where he actually scores runs and Curran at 8 with Woakes at 9. If we can find 2 openers that would be a seriously good batting line up.
First time they’ve had to bowl over 100 overs in an innings this series. Which rather suggests we need a top three that can occupy the crease for more than a few overs on a consistent basis.
I’m not convinced Buttler is a test three... but there again who in England is ?
What he has shown this summer is that he is not just one of the finest strikers of the ball in cricket, he can also play the position. In fairness that might not always have been so but he is by far our best run scorer this summer despite having to look after the tail most of the time. I can't see a better option. Boycott was arguing for that on TMS last night as well. He also said Bairstow was playing much too high in the order.
On topic, I think this does come from Pence's office, but not from Pence himself. He'll be sufficiently insulated from the decision to do it that he should be fine if anything comes out, but I suspect he knows whose pen was on it.
1. The text is very clearly in VP "house style". The evidence is convincing on this - so it's either from his office or, less likely, deliberately written that way as a diversion. That doesn't mean Pence personally wrote it - but it strongly points to an aide.
2. If you're in Trump's office, why write the article? You might want to manage the idiot, but you don't want to destabilise the Donald, because you're his appointee, and because you actually think the administration can achieve good things as long as the big man is kept away from anything important.
3. Team Pence's motives are different. He's a more than averagely powerful VP, but there's plenty of truth in John Garner's "worth as much as a pitcher of warm p***" comment. If Trump falls at some point, he's suddenly the man. Same with impeachment - all grist to the Democrat base's mill, but the outcome isn't a Democrat President, it's Pence.
4. Check the dates... if Pence succeeds after January, he could be President for ten years (a VP who succeeds before the halfway mark can only do one additional term). Additionally, Pence's Presidential ambitions take a hell of a knock if Trump loses in 2020 and, by late 2019/early 2020 it's increasingly probable he's the candidate. They also take a knock if Trump dumps him as VP in 2020, which is just the sort of thing he'd pull on a whim. So, while it's been in his interests to play ball until now, the next twelve months are a very good time for Pence to cause maximum trouble.
If you want to play Byzantine White House politics, then making this OpEd look like it could have been from Pence is a great way to get Pence dropped from the ticket as VP in 2020.
So who might benefit from being looked at as the next VP pick?
This from the LibDems consultation document on these membership changes (my bold):
"Two main arguments are generally raised against the adoption of a registered supporter scheme with the right to vote in leadership elections.
The first argument is based on the Labour Party’s experience in 2015, when large-scale entryism by left-wingers after Ed Miliband’s creation of a £3 supporter scheme led to the election of Jeremy Corbyn. There are rumours that the leave.eu campaign is currently trying to encourage its supporters to sign up to the Conservative Party to influence its next leadership election, and many former members of UKIP have already defected to the Tories.
The Liberal Democrats are different. The Labour Party has always been vulnerable to entryism by left-wing extremists who would otherwise support fringe parties. The Conservative Party is a right-wing party attracting right- wingers. The Liberal Democrats are a centre-ground liberal party aiming to attract a larger number of centre-ground liberal voters into our fold. This target audience would outnumber any other group."
Vince hopes should be added at the end...
That’s laughably naive. The exercise is pretty much guaranteed to attract large numbers of people who at best don’t have similar views to the current membership, and at worst who may want to actively harm the party.
Another MP refusing to follow the instructions of his constituents (who voted to leave) but with a majority of less than 1000 I'm sure his constituents will get him out at the next available opportunity...
In fairness they are representatives, not delegates, but with a 635 majority and the entire household income (he hired his wife just before the ban) at the pleasure of his electorate he's being very "brave".....
Maybe he think's if he keeps us in the EU he'll be able to transfer his household income from the Westminster gravy train to the EU gravy train when he's inevitably booted out by his constituents?
I’m not a supporter of Bebb, or his party, but from what I’ve read he’s a man who is willing to do what he thinks is right.
I was just reading his Wiki entry and apparently he jumped from Plaid to Con not over policy but because he failed to be selected by Plaid for a winnable seat.
Last year he put his wife on the public payroll just before these practices were banned.
Sounds like he has a pattern of behaviour when it comes to disloyalty and self-interest.
Another MP refusing to follow the instructions of his constituents (who voted to leave) but with a majority of less than 1000 I'm sure his constituents will get him out at the next available opportunity...
In fairness they are representatives, not delegates, but with a 635 majority and the entire household income (he hired his wife just before the ban) at the pleasure of his electorate he's being very "brave".....
Maybe he think's if he keeps us in the EU he'll be able to transfer his household income from the Westminster gravy train to the EU gravy train when he's inevitably booted out by his constituents?
I’m not a supporter of Bebb, or his party, but from what I’ve read he’s a man who is willing to do what he thinks is right.
I was just reading his Wiki entry and apparently he jumped from Plaid to Con not over policy but because he failed to be selected by Plaid for a winnable seat.
Last year he put his wife on the public payroll just before these practices were banned.
Sounds like he has a pattern of behaviour when it comes to disloyalty and self-interest.
"he is a genius with more ideas springing into his head in a week than many people" He might be a genius, but again I am unsure the second part of the sentence holds water. He may claim it does, but I'm far from convinced.
It does compared to myself, maybe I'm just short on original ideas
Where he does have skill is to take ideas and run with them - he has a filter where most of us are put off by people saying: "You can't do that." He's also excellent at assembling small teams focused on a small problem, whilst he appears less good at managing massive teams.
I think Musk does literally see himself as Tony Stark (and the filmmakers used him as a model for the character). Instead, he should model himself on Branson: a figurehead. with a canny idea for new markets and leave the real work to his underlings, e.g. Shotwell at SpaceX.
Oh God the last thing we need is another Branson ! Certainly he should leave all the management and board stuff to his underlings though !
But I'm just a pleb on t'Internet. I daresay he'll manage without my contributions.
Hah, mine to.
Branson is not a good man but a shark.
Other people comes to him with their ideas, he rents them his brand and then screws then on the equity. See the history of Virgin Atlantic as a good case study.
Early on in Betgenius/Genius Sports history we got involved in a negotiation with Virgin.
The offer seemed relatively good, until we discovered that a large part of what they would pay us would be in inventory in the Virgin Atlantic in-flight magazine. (Which they valued at an absurd rate.) We politely declined the offer.
Par for the course. He doesn’t like giving people his cash
"he is a genius with more ideas springing into his head in a week than many people" He might be a genius, but again I am unsure the second part of the sentence holds water. He may claim it does, but I'm far from convinced.
It does compared to myself, maybe I'm just short on original ideas
Where he does have skill is to take ideas and run with them - he has a filter where most of us are put off by people saying: "You can't do that." He's also excellent at assembling small teams focused on a small problem, whilst he appears less good at managing massive teams.
I think Musk does literally see himself as Tony Stark (and the filmmakers used him as a model for the character). Instead, he should model himself on Branson: a figurehead. with a canny idea for new markets and leave the real work to his underlings, e.g. Shotwell at SpaceX.
Oh God the last thing we need is another Branson ! Certainly he should leave all the management and board stuff to his underlings though !
But I'm just a pleb on t'Internet. I daresay he'll manage without my contributions.
Hah, mine to.
Branson is not a good man but a shark.
Other people comes to him with their ideas, he rents them his brand and then screws then on the equity. See the history of Virgin Atlantic as a good case study.
Early on in Betgenius/Genius Sports history we got involved in a negotiation with Virgin.
The offer seemed relatively good, until we discovered that a large part of what they would pay us would be in inventory in the Virgin Atlantic in-flight magazine. (Which they valued at an absurd rate.) We politely declined the offer.
Par for the course. He doesn’t like giving people his cash
Ross Brawn is pretty damning about Branson in Adam Parr's book.
On topic, I think this does come from Pence's office, but not from Pence himself. He'll be sufficiently insulated from the decision to do it that he should be fine if anything comes out, but I suspect he knows whose pen was on it.
1. The text is very clearly in VP "house style". The evidence is convincing on this - so it's either from his office or, less likely, deliberately written that way as a diversion. That doesn't mean Pence personally wrote it - but it strongly points to an aide.
2. If you're in Trump's office, why write the article? You might want to manage the idiot, but you don't want to destabilise the Donald, because you're his appointee, and because you actually think the administration can achieve good things as long as the big man is kept away from anything important.
3. Team Pence's motives are different. He's a more than averagely powerful VP, but there's plenty of truth in John Garner's "worth as much as a pitcher of warm p***" comment. If Trump falls at some point, he's suddenly the man. Same with impeachment - all grist to the Democrat base's mill, but the outcome isn't a Democrat President, it's Pence.
4. Check the dates... if Pence succeeds after January, he could be President for ten years (a VP who succeeds before the halfway mark can only do one additional term). Additionally, Pence's Presidential ambitions take a hell of a knock if Trump loses in 2020 and, by late 2019/early 2020 it's increasingly probable he's the candidate. They also take a knock if Trump dumps him as VP in 2020, which is just the sort of thing he'd pull on a whim. So, while it's been in his interests to play ball until now, the next twelve months are a very good time for Pence to cause maximum trouble.
If you want to play Byzantine White House politics, then making this OpEd look like it could have been from Pence is a great way to get Pence dropped from the ticket as VP in 2020.
So who might benefit from being looked at as the next VP pick?
I think that's a level of intrigue too far.
If Pence's team genuinely weren't involved then the mole hunt isn't actually going to jeopardise him too badly. It might undermine his standing to the extent Trump is suspicious, but it wouldn't get rid of him. Additionally, the most likely Pence replacements aren't actually in the administration - he'd almost certainly get a congressman or governor and there are dozens of people who might have an outside chance.
It's an intriguing thought, but Occam's razor applies - the simplest explanation is most probably right.
This from the LibDems consultation document on these membership changes (my bold):
"Two main arguments are generally raised against the adoption of a registered supporter scheme with the right to vote in leadership elections.
The first argument is based on the Labour Party’s experience in 2015, when large-scale entryism by left-wingers after Ed Miliband’s creation of a £3 supporter scheme led to the election of Jeremy Corbyn. There are rumours that the leave.eu campaign is currently trying to encourage its supporters to sign up to the Conservative Party to influence its next leadership election, and many former members of UKIP have already defected to the Tories.
The Liberal Democrats are different. The Labour Party has always been vulnerable to entryism by left-wing extremists who would otherwise support fringe parties. The Conservative Party is a right-wing party attracting right- wingers. The Liberal Democrats are a centre-ground liberal party aiming to attract a larger number of centre-ground liberal voters into our fold. This target audience would outnumber any other group."
Vince hopes should be added at the end...
That’s laughably naive. The exercise is pretty much guaranteed to attract large numbers of people who at best don’t have similar views to the current membership, and at worst who may want to actively harm the party.
Even if they have similar views, it can be a serious problem if they get (or have got) a lot of new members who either obsess over a single issue, or who have unrealistic concepts of campaigning.
Another MP refusing to follow the instructions of his constituents (who voted to leave) but with a majority of less than 1000 I'm sure his constituents will get him out at the next available opportunity...
In fairness they are representatives, not delegates, but with a 635 majority and the entire household income (he hired his wife just before the ban) at the pleasure of his electorate he's being very "brave".....
Maybe he think's if he keeps us in the EU he'll be able to transfer his household income from the Westminster gravy train to the EU gravy train when he's inevitably booted out by his constituents?
I’m not a supporter of Bebb, or his party, but from what I’ve read he’s a man who is willing to do what he thinks is right.
I was just reading his Wiki entry and apparently he jumped from Plaid to Con not over policy but because he failed to be selected by Plaid for a winnable seat.
Last year he put his wife on the public payroll just before these practices were banned.
Sounds like he has a pattern of behaviour when it comes to disloyalty and self-interest.
He also has a name that sounds like he should have a walk-on role in the Star Wars cantina.....
Traditional Welsh. See Wikipedia 'Guto'r Glyn (1435–1493), Welsh language poet'
I was aware Bebb was a Welsh surname. (It would have to be if he previously wanted to be a Plaid MP!)
Guto was new to me as a first name though. Thanks.
Don’t mention it. TBH, don’t think Leanne Wood’s name sounds particularly Welsh. Yet she leads Plaid Cymru.
But Leanne is a French name - and I believe there are plenty of links between Gaulish and Welsh...
The French supported the Owain Glyndwr rebellion for a while, and it’s arguable that the withdrawal of their support, as well as a change in English tactics which eventually caused its failure.
On topic, I think this does come from Pence's office, but not from Pence himself. He'll be sufficiently insulated from the decision to do it that he should be fine if anything comes out, but I suspect he knows whose pen was on it.
1. The text is very clearly in VP "house style". The evidence is convincing on this - so it's either from his office or, less likely, deliberately written that way as a diversion. That doesn't mean Pence personally wrote it - but it strongly points to an aide.
2. If you're in Trump's office, why write the article? You might want to manage the idiot, but you don't want to destabilise the Donald, because you're his appointee, and because you actually think the administration can achieve good things as long as the big man is kept away from anything important.
3. Team Pence's motives are different. He's a more than averagely powerful VP, but there's plenty of truth in John Garner's "worth as much as a pitcher of warm p***" comment. If Trump falls at some point, he's suddenly the man. Same with impeachment - all grist to the Democrat base's mill, but the outcome isn't a Democrat President, it's Pence.
4. Check the dates... if Pence succeeds after January, he could be President for ten years (a VP who succeeds before the halfway mark can only do one additional term). Additionally, Pence's Presidential ambitions take a hell of a knock if Trump loses in 2020 and, by late 2019/early 2020 it's increasingly probable he's the candidate. They also take a knock if Trump dumps him as VP in 2020, which is just the sort of thing he'd pull on a whim. So, while it's been in his interests to play ball until now, the next twelve months are a very good time for Pence to cause maximum trouble.
If you want to play Byzantine White House politics, then making this OpEd look like it could have been from Pence is a great way to get Pence dropped from the ticket as VP in 2020.
So who might benefit from being looked at as the next VP pick?
Is this just starting to be a test too far for the Indian seamers? Seriously good yesterday but weary today and the runs have flowed. I would like to think the selectors who decided that Buttler wasn't good enough for test cricket have retired in ignominy but cricket never seems to work like that.
Personally I would play him at 3 in the winter tours, Root at 4, Stokes at 5, Ali at 6, Bairstow back to 7 where he actually scores runs and Curran at 8 with Woakes at 9. If we can find 2 openers that would be a seriously good batting line up.
First time they’ve had to bowl over 100 overs in an innings this series. Which rather suggests we need a top three that can occupy the crease for more than a few overs on a consistent basis.
I’m not convinced Buttler is a test three... but there again who in England is ?
What he has shown this summer is that he is not just one of the finest strikers of the ball in cricket, he can also play the position. In fairness that might not always have been so but he is by far our best run scorer this summer despite having to look after the tail most of the time. I can't see a better option. Boycott was arguing for that on TMS last night as well. He also said Bairstow was playing much too high in the order.
I wasn’t saying it’s impossible, but without a solid opening pair it risks setting back his test career. I’d agree that Boycott is a good judge of the game, whatever his detractors might say.
"he is a genius with more ideas springing into his head in a week than many people" He might be a genius, but again I am unsure the second part of the sentence holds water. He may claim it does, but I'm far from convinced.
It does compared to myself, maybe I'm just short on original ideas
Where he does have skill is to take ideas and run with them - he has a filter where most of us are put off by people saying: "You can't do that." He's also excellent at assembling small teams focused on a small problem, whilst he appears less good at managing massive teams.
I think Musk does literally see himself as Tony Stark (and the filmmakers used him as a model for the character). Instead, he should model himself on Branson: a figurehead. with a canny idea for new markets and leave the real work to his underlings, e.g. Shotwell at SpaceX.
Oh God the last thing we need is another Branson ! Certainly he should leave all the management and board stuff to his underlings though !
But I'm just a pleb on t'Internet. I daresay he'll manage without my contributions.
Hah, mine to.
Branson is not a good man but a shark.
Other people comes to him with their ideas, he rents them his brand and then screws then on the equity. See the history of Virgin Atlantic as a good case study.
Early on in Betgenius/Genius Sports history we got involved in a negotiation with Virgin.
The offer seemed relatively good, until we discovered that a large part of what they would pay us would be in inventory in the Virgin Atlantic in-flight magazine. (Which they valued at an absurd rate.) We politely declined the offer.
Par for the course. He doesn’t like giving people his cash
I agree with you, Charles. Anyone shaking hands with Branson should count their fingers carefully before and after - and be prepared for the loss of a couple of digits.
Is this just starting to be a test too far for the Indian seamers? Seriously good yesterday but weary today and the runs have flowed. I would like to think the selectors who decided that Buttler wasn't good enough for test cricket have retired in ignominy but cricket never seems to work like that.
Personally I would play him at 3 in the winter tours, Root at 4, Stokes at 5, Ali at 6, Bairstow back to 7 where he actually scores runs and Curran at 8 with Woakes at 9. If we can find 2 openers that would be a seriously good batting line up.
First time they’ve had to bowl over 100 overs in an innings this series. Which rather suggests we need a top three that can occupy the crease for more than a few overs on a consistent basis.
I’m not convinced Buttler is a test three... but there again who in England is ?
What he has shown this summer is that he is not just one of the finest strikers of the ball in cricket, he can also play the position. In fairness that might not always have been so but he is by far our best run scorer this summer despite having to look after the tail most of the time. I can't see a better option. Boycott was arguing for that on TMS last night as well. He also said Bairstow was playing much too high in the order.
This is a magnificent innings from Buttler, though. (And I think Rashid deserves some credit for helping frustrate India last night.)
Is this just starting to be a test too far for the Indian seamers? Seriously good yesterday but weary today and the runs have flowed. I would like to think the selectors who decided that Buttler wasn't good enough for test cricket have retired in ignominy but cricket never seems to work like that.
Personally I would play him at 3 in the winter tours, Root at 4, Stokes at 5, Ali at 6, Bairstow back to 7 where he actually scores runs and Curran at 8 with Woakes at 9. If we can find 2 openers that would be a seriously good batting line up.
First time they’ve had to bowl over 100 overs in an innings this series. Which rather suggests we need a top three that can occupy the crease for more than a few overs on a consistent basis.
I’m not convinced Buttler is a test three... but there again who in England is ?
What he has shown this summer is that he is not just one of the finest strikers of the ball in cricket, he can also play the position. In fairness that might not always have been so but he is by far our best run scorer this summer despite having to look after the tail most of the time. I can't see a better option. Boycott was arguing for that on TMS last night as well. He also said Bairstow was playing much too high in the order.
This is a magnificent innings from Buttler, though. (And I think Rashid deserves some credit for helping frustrate India last night.)
Brilliant. Those 6s were something else. I think England are in a very good position now so long as Broad and Anderson pitch it up. Broad in particular can be lethal when the ball is swinging like this.
Is this just starting to be a test too far for the Indian seamers? Seriously good yesterday but weary today and the runs have flowed. I would like to think the selectors who decided that Buttler wasn't good enough for test cricket have retired in ignominy but cricket never seems to work like that.
Personally I would play him at 3 in the winter tours, Root at 4, Stokes at 5, Ali at 6, Bairstow back to 7 where he actually scores runs and Curran at 8 with Woakes at 9. If we can find 2 openers that would be a seriously good batting line up.
First time they’ve had to bowl over 100 overs in an innings this series. Which rather suggests we need a top three that can occupy the crease for more than a few overs on a consistent basis.
I’m not convinced Buttler is a test three... but there again who in England is ?
What he has shown this summer is that he is not just one of the finest strikers of the ball in cricket, he can also play the position. In fairness that might not always have been so but he is by far our best run scorer this summer despite having to look after the tail most of the time. I can't see a better option. Boycott was arguing for that on TMS last night as well. He also said Bairstow was playing much too high in the order.
This is a magnificent innings from Buttler, though.
Re: Guto Bebb & Conviction Politicians & the People's Vote
Those suggesting Guto Bebb will be kicked out by his constituents need to remember that on the new boundaries, he won’t even have a seat.
Existing Aberconwy is either transferred into new Gwynedd (Plaid Cymru stronghold) or new Conwy & Colwyn (Tory seat but predominantly existing Clwyd West).
My guess is that if the boundary changes go through, Guto Bebb may leave the Tories and either sit as an independent or even defect back to Plaid Cymru. He has looked increasingly disenchanted.
There are 40 Welsh MPs that are going to be cut back to 29.
Quite a number of them will become “Conviction Politicians” once it is clear that they are in the trash can.
Re: Guto Bebb & Conviction Politicians & the People's Vote
Those suggesting Guto Bebb will be kicked out by his constituents need to remember that on the new boundaries, he won’t even have a seat.
Existing Aberconwy is either transferred into new Gwynedd (Plaid Cymru stronghold) or new Conwy & Colwyn (Tory seat but predominantly existing Clwyd West).
My guess is that if the boundary changes go through, Guto Bebb may leave the Tories and either sit as an independent or even defect back to Plaid Cymru. He has looked increasingly disenchanted.
There are 40 Welsh MPs that are going to be cut back to 29.
Quite a number of them will become “Conviction Politicians” once it is clear that they are in the trash can.
Assuming of course that the Tories can get their gerrymander through the Commons.
Is this just starting to be a test too far for the Indian seamers? Seriously good yesterday but weary today and the runs have flowed. I would like to think the selectors who decided that Buttler wasn't good enough for test cricket have retired in ignominy but cricket never seems to work like that.
Personally I would play him at 3 in the winter tours, Root at 4, Stokes at 5, Ali at 6, Bairstow back to 7 where he actually scores runs and Curran at 8 with Woakes at 9. If we can find 2 openers that would be a seriously good batting line up.
First time they’ve had to bowl over 100 overs in an innings this series. Which rather suggests we need a top three that can occupy the crease for more than a few overs on a consistent basis.
I’m not convinced Buttler is a test three... but there again who in England is ?
What he has shown this summer is that he is not just one of the finest strikers of the ball in cricket, he can also play the position. In fairness that might not always have been so but he is by far our best run scorer this summer despite having to look after the tail most of the time. I can't see a better option. Boycott was arguing for that on TMS last night as well. He also said Bairstow was playing much too high in the order.
This is a magnificent innings from Buttler, though.
Was!
Yes, I acknowledge, yet again, that I should have resisted making a comment. Apologies, Jos.
Re: Guto Bebb & Conviction Politicians & the People's Vote
Those suggesting Guto Bebb will be kicked out by his constituents need to remember that on the new boundaries, he won’t even have a seat.
Existing Aberconwy is either transferred into new Gwynedd (Plaid Cymru stronghold) or new Conwy & Colwyn (Tory seat but predominantly existing Clwyd West).
My guess is that if the boundary changes go through, Guto Bebb may leave the Tories and either sit as an independent or even defect back to Plaid Cymru. He has looked increasingly disenchanted.
There are 40 Welsh MPs that are going to be cut back to 29.
Quite a number of them will become “Conviction Politicians” once it is clear that they are in the trash can.
Assuming of course that the Tories can get their gerrymander through the Commons.
I think to suggest the Welsh seats are being gerrymandered by the Tories is wrong.
Remember, after the introduction of devolution, the Scottish Westminster seats were revised, but the Welsh seats weren’t. That was the gerrymander.
Just 10,000 votes will get you elected as an MP in some of the tiny Welsh seats. In East Anglian constituencies, 10,000 votes may not be enough to get you into 3rd place.
I agree though that Conviction Politicians need to wait to see whether the new boundaries pass.
On topic, I think this does come from Pence's office, but not from Pence himself. He'll be sufficiently insulated from the decision to do it that he should be fine if anything comes out, but I suspect he knows whose pen was on it.
1. The text is very clearly in VP "house style". The evidence is convincing on this - so it's either from his office or, less likely, deliberately written that way as a diversion. That doesn't mean Pence personally wrote it - but it strongly points to an aide.
2. If you're in Trump's office, why write the article? You might want to manage the idiot, but you don't want to destabilise the Donald, because you're his appointee, and because you actually think the administration can achieve good things as long as the big man is kept away from anything important.
3. Team Pence's motives are different. He's a more than averagely powerful VP, but there's plenty of truth in John Garner's "worth as much as a pitcher of warm p***" comment. If Trump falls at some point, he's suddenly the man. Same with impeachment - all grist to the Democrat base's mill, but the outcome isn't a Democrat President, it's Pence.
4. Check the dates... if Pence succeeds after January, he could be President for ten years (a VP who succeeds before the halfway mark can only do one additional term). Additionally, Pence's Presidential ambitions take a hell of a knock if Trump loses in 2020 and, by late 2019/early 2020 it's increasingly probable he's the candidate. They also take a knock if Trump dumps him as VP in 2020, which is just the sort of thing he'd pull on a whim. So, while it's been in his interests to play ball until now, the next twelve months are a very good time for Pence to cause maximum trouble.
If you want to play Byzantine White House politics, then making this OpEd look like it could have been from Pence is a great way to get Pence dropped from the ticket as VP in 2020.
So who might benefit from being looked at as the next VP pick?
Jared?
Lol. Candidates get a lot of latitude in their VP picks but they do still have to be ratified by the Convention.
Is this just starting to be a test too far for the Indian seamers? Seriously good yesterday but weary today and the runs have flowed. I would like to think the selectors who decided that Buttler wasn't good enough for test cricket have retired in ignominy but cricket never seems to work like that.
Personally I would play him at 3 in the winter tours, Root at 4, Stokes at 5, Ali at 6, Bairstow back to 7 where he actually scores runs and Curran at 8 with Woakes at 9. If we can find 2 openers that would be a seriously good batting line up.
First time they’ve had to bowl over 100 overs in an innings this series. Which rather suggests we need a top three that can occupy the crease for more than a few overs on a consistent basis.
I’m not convinced Buttler is a test three... but there again who in England is ?
England batted 100+ overs in the last innings of the 3rd test too (104.5 overs to make 317, chasing 521).
Re: Guto Bebb & Conviction Politicians & the People's Vote
Those suggesting Guto Bebb will be kicked out by his constituents need to remember that on the new boundaries, he won’t even have a seat.
Existing Aberconwy is either transferred into new Gwynedd (Plaid Cymru stronghold) or new Conwy & Colwyn (Tory seat but predominantly existing Clwyd West).
My guess is that if the boundary changes go through, Guto Bebb may leave the Tories and either sit as an independent or even defect back to Plaid Cymru. He has looked increasingly disenchanted.
There are 40 Welsh MPs that are going to be cut back to 29.
Quite a number of them will become “Conviction Politicians” once it is clear that they are in the trash can.
Assuming of course that the Tories can get their gerrymander through the Commons.
Explain how the product of independent quangoes, making (nearly) all constituencies so that they have more-or-less the same electorate is a 'gerrymander'?
A good Politico essay on the 25th Amendment: https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/09/08/trump-25th-amendment-constitutional-crisis-219739 During hearings in 1964 and 1965, members of Congress debated what constituted “inability” in Sections 3 and 4. Some, such as Representative Richard Poff of Virginia, suggested that Section 4 should be used when the president was simply “unable or unwilling to make any rational decision.” But the burden of the congressional commentary was to conclude, as Feerick wrote, that “unpopularity, incompetence, impeachable conduct, poor judgment, and laziness [did] not constitute an ‘inability’ within the meanings of the amendment.”
Re: Guto Bebb & Conviction Politicians & the People's Vote
Those suggesting Guto Bebb will be kicked out by his constituents need to remember that on the new boundaries, he won’t even have a seat.
Existing Aberconwy is either transferred into new Gwynedd (Plaid Cymru stronghold) or new Conwy & Colwyn (Tory seat but predominantly existing Clwyd West).
My guess is that if the boundary changes go through, Guto Bebb may leave the Tories and either sit as an independent or even defect back to Plaid Cymru. He has looked increasingly disenchanted.
There are 40 Welsh MPs that are going to be cut back to 29.
Quite a number of them will become “Conviction Politicians” once it is clear that they are in the trash can.
Assuming of course that the Tories can get their gerrymander through the Commons.
Yawn - don't write garbage about words you don't understand.
Is this just starting to be a test too far for the Indian seamers? Seriously good yesterday but weary today and the runs have flowed. I would like to think the selectors who decided that Buttler wasn't good enough for test cricket have retired in ignominy but cricket never seems to work like that.
Personally I would play him at 3 in the winter tours, Root at 4, Stokes at 5, Ali at 6, Bairstow back to 7 where he actually scores runs and Curran at 8 with Woakes at 9. If we can find 2 openers that would be a seriously good batting line up.
First time they’ve had to bowl over 100 overs in an innings this series. Which rather suggests we need a top three that can occupy the crease for more than a few overs on a consistent basis.
I’m not convinced Buttler is a test three... but there again who in England is ?
England batted 100+ overs in the last innings of the 3rd test too (104.5 overs to make 317, chasing 521).
I don’t think its appropriate to add LAB + LD as some kind of grouping.
I would argue, as a supporter, that the LDs have more in common with the Conservative Party than Corbyn’s Labour.
Don't tell HYUFD that, he seems convinced the LDs will back a minority Corbyn Government.
Seriously, yes, of course, the LDs can have no truck with the Corbyn Labour Party and its economic policies let alone its stance in other areas. The problem is the experience of Coalition with Cameron makes us wary at the very least of any deal with the Conservatives.
As we creep into double figures and hopefully move higher in the months to come, the party needs to start thinking the unthinkable - yes, we can adopt a form of equidistance but come the next election and the thought of winning 20-25 seats and possibly holding the balance again comes to the fore.
If we do a deal with the Conservatives, we have, to pardon my language, nail their gonads to the floor as the price of our support which means STV for all local elections at the very least without a referendum. The problem in 2010 was our excitement at getting our feet on the Ministerial carpet was compounded by the siren calls of the Civil Service claiming the country needed a Government and a deal needed to be done neither of which were true.
I don’t think its appropriate to add LAB + LD as some kind of grouping.
I would argue, as a supporter, that the LDs have more in common with the Conservative Party than Corbyn’s Labour.
Don't tell HYUFD that, he seems convinced the LDs will back a minority Corbyn Government.
Seriously, yes, of course, the LDs can have no truck with the Corbyn Labour Party and its economic policies let alone its stance in other areas. The problem is the experience of Coalition with Cameron makes us wary at the very least of any deal with the Conservatives.
As we creep into double figures and hopefully move higher in the months to come, the party needs to start thinking the unthinkable - yes, we can adopt a form of equidistance but come the next election and the thought of winning 20-25 seats and possibly holding the balance again comes to the fore.
If we do a deal with the Conservatives, we have, to pardon my language, nail their gonads to the floor as the price of our support which means STV for all local elections at the very least without a referendum. The problem in 2010 was our excitement at getting our feet on the Ministerial carpet was compounded by the siren calls of the Civil Service claiming the country needed a Government and a deal needed to be done neither of which were true.
I was having a similar discussion on twitter the other day. If, after the next election, Lab+SNP+PC+Grn=315 and Con+DUP=310 then whatever the Lib Dems choose to do becomes decisive. They don't have to go into coalition with either party, or even actively support either party; a mere abstention determines who gains and who loses office.
But as always, in negotiations you need leverage - which means that the Lib Dems really ought to be willing to contemplate backing either side into office, or, if that is unacceptable, to be willing to go into coalition. Anything else means they'd become patsies.
I don’t think its appropriate to add LAB + LD as some kind of grouping.
I would argue, as a supporter, that the LDs have more in common with the Conservative Party than Corbyn’s Labour.
Don't tell HYUFD that, he seems convinced the LDs will back a minority Corbyn Government.
Seriously, yes, of course, the LDs can have no truck with the Corbyn Labour Party and its economic policies let alone its stance in other areas. The problem is the experience of Coalition with Cameron makes us wary at the very least of any deal with the Conservatives.
As we creep into double figures and hopefully move higher in the months to come, the party needs to start thinking the unthinkable - yes, we can adopt a form of equidistance but come the next election and the thought of winning 20-25 seats and possibly holding the balance again comes to the fore.
If we do a deal with the Conservatives, we have, to pardon my language, nail their gonads to the floor as the price of our support which means STV for all local elections at the very least without a referendum. The problem in 2010 was our excitement at getting our feet on the Ministerial carpet was compounded by the siren calls of the Civil Service claiming the country needed a Government and a deal needed to be done neither of which were true.
Seriously disagree with the last point. In 2010 we were in a highly dangerous situation and anything other than a government that looked stable and in which the markets had confidence could have led to very serious disruption. The coalition government met those criteria and did a great deal of good besides.
Seriously disagree with the last point. In 2010 we were in a highly dangerous situation and anything other than a government that looked stable and in which the markets had confidence could have led to very serious disruption. The coalition government met those criteria and did a great deal of good besides.
Inasmuch as there was a degree of panic compounded by events in Greece on the Friday and Saturday, the EU (remember them agreed a bailout for Greece on the Sunday night (Alastair Darling was involved) and the markets surged on Monday morning taking the pressure off.
Brown then resigned which seemed to force everyone's hand as apparently we can't cope for five minutes without a Prime Minister so the Coalition deal had to be done by Tuesday lunchtime.
I was having a similar discussion on twitter the other day. If, after the next election, Lab+SNP+PC+Grn=315 and Con+DUP=310 then whatever the Lib Dems choose to do becomes decisive. They don't have to go into coalition with either party, or even actively support either party; a mere abstention determines who gains and who loses office.
But as always, in negotiations you need leverage - which means that the Lib Dems really ought to be willing to contemplate backing either side into office, or, if that is unacceptable, to be willing to go into coalition. Anything else means they'd become patsies.
Not quite. All this pre-supposes unified voting blocks on either side. Back in March 1974, the Conservatives and Liberals had the votes to overturn Wilson's Queen's Speech but the Conservatives chose to abstain.
As the last 75 years has shown, having a nuclear option doesn't imply a willingness to use a nuclear option but the other guy can never be certain so as a deterrent it works.
I think there are many LDs who would be unable to work with the DUP to be blunt. Any deal with the Conservatives therefore starts with the Conservatives dumping the DUP.
Seriously disagree with the last point. In 2010 we were in a highly dangerous situation and anything other than a government that looked stable and in which the markets had confidence could have led to very serious disruption. The coalition government met those criteria and did a great deal of good besides.
Inasmuch as there was a degree of panic compounded by events in Greece on the Friday and Saturday, the EU (remember them agreed a bailout for Greece on the Sunday night (Alastair Darling was involved) and the markets surged on Monday morning taking the pressure off.
Brown then resigned which seemed to force everyone's hand as apparently we can't cope for five minutes without a Prime Minister so the Coalition deal had to be done by Tuesday lunchtime.
I think you are underestimating what might be called the strategic position rather than the tactical. We had a £150bn deficit, we had a Banking sector that was verging on the insolvent, we had major liquidity problems and we had no majority government.
“It’s very easy for people in the affluent South to be Remainers. It’s a purely selfish vote, no matter how much they talk about brotherhood of man and internationalism. It’s purely because their lives are going just fine for them. I reverted to my old self which was a very poor working class girl from the West Country, where my people have been treated like dumb pawns in the European game for many generations. I reverted to my class type and voted for Brexit as a protest, because their vote is all they have and Brexiteers are the true democrats. Their vote is all they have and they used it.”
The old gifts never die. Julie can still use language like a rapier, when the mood takes her.
You could hardly find a better skewering of the monied Toppings and Meeks and WilliamGlenns.
And the desolation of “Their vote is all they have and they used it” still tugs the heart.
Re: Guto Bebb & Conviction Politicians & the People's Vote
Those suggesting Guto Bebb will be kicked out by his constituents need to remember that on the new boundaries, he won’t even have a seat.
Existing Aberconwy is either transferred into new Gwynedd (Plaid Cymru stronghold) or new Conwy & Colwyn (Tory seat but predominantly existing Clwyd West).
My guess is that if the boundary changes go through, Guto Bebb may leave the Tories and either sit as an independent or even defect back to Plaid Cymru. He has looked increasingly disenchanted.
There are 40 Welsh MPs that are going to be cut back to 29.
Quite a number of them will become “Conviction Politicians” once it is clear that they are in the trash can.
Assuming of course that the Tories can get their gerrymander through the Commons.
Explain how the product of independent quangoes, making (nearly) all constituencies so that they have more-or-less the same electorate is a 'gerrymander'?
William, the campaigns are over. There is no Remain campaign.
As Julie put it rather well it's the Violet Elizabeth Bott campaign now from the self entitled who are used to getting their own way and for once on 23 June 2016 didn't.
I will squeam, and I'll squeam and I'll squeam until I get a 'people's vote' and I will keep squeaming until the people vote the right way.
Clearly a boost for May that the Tories are back in front and bad for Corbyn that Labour have slipped behind.
Plenty of evidence the last Survation poll was an outlier in terms of both the LAB and LD numbers.
Is it three polls with the LDs in double figures - everyone will want to lead us and if Vince gets his way anyone will be able to. ?
Drop back in UKIP support suggesting the Chequers "blip" has eased for now but an indication it could return IF it is seen May is slipping back toward BINO.
The Moderates dropping back behind the Swedish Democrats leaving the Red-Green Parties on 39.9% ahead of the Borgerlig vloc of four parties on 38.5% with the Swedish Democrats on 19% so it's going to be very close.
I don’t think its appropriate to add LAB + LD as some kind of grouping.
I would argue, as a supporter, that the LDs have more in common with the Conservative Party than Corbyn’s Labour.
That might be true if it wasn't for Brexit. It is extremely unlikely that LibDems would support a Tory government for that reason.
The Dublin Convention will truly destroy the EU, not Brexit.
I have long argued that the Convention is insane -- it places almost the entire burden of dealing with migration largely on Italy, Greece and Spain (instead of it being a shared responsibility of all the member states).
I now read that the President of the Rich, the Mighty Jupiter, has pondered the matter.
"French President Emmanuel Macron, speaking in a news conference following Thursday's meeting in Luxembourg, said the EU's main point-of-entry countries for migrants, like Spain, Italy and Greece, have a responsibility and cannot avoid it."
Comments
1 - Create a free, open, inclusive movement
2 - Let the people decide who will lead
3 - Give everyone a say over campaign priorities
4 - Make it easier for new members to get involved
It's essentially a plan to allow entryism to maximum extent. It's insane. It'd be dumb as a post even if there weren't the shrieking banshee of a warning from what's happened to Labour.
Satellite launches aren't that price sensitive. The biggest cost is the satellite itself, so SpaceX needs to meet the same low failure rate as Ariane, which it has almost done.
"Two main arguments are generally raised against the adoption of a registered supporter scheme with the right to vote in leadership elections.
The first argument is based on the Labour Party’s experience in 2015, when large-scale entryism by left-wingers after Ed Miliband’s creation of a £3 supporter scheme led to the election of Jeremy Corbyn. There are rumours that the leave.eu campaign is currently trying to encourage its supporters to sign up to the Conservative Party to influence its next leadership election, and many former members of UKIP have already defected to the Tories.
The Liberal Democrats are different. The Labour Party has always been vulnerable to entryism by left-wing extremists who would otherwise support fringe parties. The Conservative Party is a right-wing party attracting right- wingers. The Liberal Democrats are a centre-ground liberal party aiming to attract a larger number of centre-ground liberal voters into our fold. This target audience would outnumber any other group."
Vince hopes should be added at the end...
1. The text is very clearly in VP "house style". The evidence is convincing on this - so it's either from his office or, less likely, deliberately written that way as a diversion. That doesn't mean Pence personally wrote it - but it strongly points to an aide.
2. If you're in Trump's office, why write the article? You might want to manage the idiot, but you don't want to destabilise the Donald, because you're his appointee, and because you actually think the administration can achieve good things as long as the big man is kept away from anything important.
3. Team Pence's motives are different. He's a more than averagely powerful VP, but there's plenty of truth in John Garner's "worth as much as a pitcher of warm p***" comment. If Trump falls at some point, he's suddenly the man. Same with impeachment - all grist to the Democrat base's mill, but the outcome isn't a Democrat President, it's Pence.
4. Check the dates... if Pence succeeds after January, he could be President for ten years (a VP who succeeds before the halfway mark can only do one additional term). Additionally, Pence's Presidential ambitions take a hell of a knock if Trump loses in 2020 and, by late 2019/early 2020 it's increasingly probable he's the candidate. They also take a knock if Trump dumps him as VP in 2020, which is just the sort of thing he'd pull on a whim. So, while it's been in his interests to play ball until now, the next twelve months are a very good time for Pence to cause maximum trouble.
I would argue, as a supporter, that the LDs have more in common with the Conservative Party than Corbyn’s Labour.
Personally I would play him at 3 in the winter tours, Root at 4, Stokes at 5, Ali at 6, Bairstow back to 7 where he actually scores runs and Curran at 8 with Woakes at 9. If we can find 2 openers that would be a seriously good batting line up.
I’m not convinced Buttler is a test three... but there again who in England is ?
Citation required. As far as I've read, SpaceX are currently about half the price of Arianespace for commercial launches at best with a reused booster (like-for-like, which is a difficult comparison given the rockets' differing capabilities). Likewise, the opportunities for lowering costs further with the F9 are few, which is why they're trying to catch the $6mn a throw fairings. SpaceX also charge the government (e.g. NASA) much more, which is a massive subsidy to them. Some argue they're using that money to catch commercial launches.
There is also an issue that reusability only becomes worthwhile with a certain number of launches per year: Arianespace looked into this a decade or more ago (before SpaceX's success) and worked out around 40 launches a year was needed to make the development worthwhile - and they weren't going to get them. The figure will be less for SpaceX, but there will still be a breakeven point where you won't get the development or operational costs back.
Basically, Musk is gambling on there being more launches in the future to make reusability worthwhile. Without them, reusability is an expensive mistake.
IMO this is a big driver for his investing in their Starlink communications system, which will require many launches that the F9 can provide.
So who might benefit from being looked at as the next VP pick?
There is a feud between Bebb and neighbouring MP and AM which could lead to more losses than expected for the Tories in North Wales.
https://tinyurl.com/yavnmo9k
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4328733.stm
If Pence's team genuinely weren't involved then the mole hunt isn't actually going to jeopardise him too badly. It might undermine his standing to the extent Trump is suspicious, but it wouldn't get rid of him. Additionally, the most likely Pence replacements aren't actually in the administration - he'd almost certainly get a congressman or governor and there are dozens of people who might have an outside chance.
It's an intriguing thought, but Occam's razor applies - the simplest explanation is most probably right.
I’d agree that Boycott is a good judge of the game, whatever his detractors might say.
(And I think Rashid deserves some credit for helping frustrate India last night.)
Those suggesting Guto Bebb will be kicked out by his constituents need to remember that on the new boundaries, he won’t even have a seat.
Existing Aberconwy is either transferred into new Gwynedd (Plaid Cymru stronghold) or new Conwy & Colwyn (Tory seat but predominantly existing Clwyd West).
My guess is that if the boundary changes go through, Guto Bebb may leave the Tories and either sit as an independent or even defect back to Plaid Cymru. He has looked increasingly disenchanted.
There are 40 Welsh MPs that are going to be cut back to 29.
Quite a number of them will become “Conviction Politicians” once it is clear that they are in the trash can.
Apologies, Jos.
Remember, after the introduction of devolution, the Scottish Westminster seats were revised, but the Welsh seats weren’t. That was the gerrymander.
Just 10,000 votes will get you elected as an MP in some of the tiny Welsh seats. In East Anglian constituencies, 10,000 votes may not be enough to get you into 3rd place.
I agree though that Conviction Politicians need to wait to see whether the new boundaries pass.
http://dearcoquette.com/on-the-resistance-inside-the-trump-administration/
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/09/08/trump-25th-amendment-constitutional-crisis-219739
During hearings in 1964 and 1965, members of Congress debated what constituted “inability” in Sections 3 and 4. Some, such as Representative Richard Poff of Virginia, suggested that Section 4 should be used when the president was simply “unable or unwilling to make any rational decision.” But the burden of the congressional commentary was to conclude, as Feerick wrote, that “unpopularity, incompetence, impeachable conduct, poor judgment, and laziness [did] not constitute an ‘inability’ within the meanings of the amendment.”
Seriously, yes, of course, the LDs can have no truck with the Corbyn Labour Party and its economic policies let alone its stance in other areas. The problem is the experience of Coalition with Cameron makes us wary at the very least of any deal with the Conservatives.
As we creep into double figures and hopefully move higher in the months to come, the party needs to start thinking the unthinkable - yes, we can adopt a form of equidistance but come the next election and the thought of winning 20-25 seats and possibly holding the balance again comes to the fore.
If we do a deal with the Conservatives, we have, to pardon my language, nail their gonads to the floor as the price of our support which means STV for all local elections at the very least without a referendum. The problem in 2010 was our excitement at getting our feet on the Ministerial carpet was compounded by the siren calls of the Civil Service claiming the country needed a Government and a deal needed to be done neither of which were true.
Well, it's been a couple of hours. Has any of the parties managed to outdo the Lib Dems' latest demented plan to immolate itself?
But as always, in negotiations you need leverage - which means that the Lib Dems really ought to be willing to contemplate backing either side into office, or, if that is unacceptable, to be willing to go into coalition. Anything else means they'd become patsies.
https://twitter.com/BBCNewsnight/status/1038185017103400960
Brown then resigned which seemed to force everyone's hand as apparently we can't cope for five minutes without a Prime Minister so the Coalition deal had to be done by Tuesday lunchtime.
As the last 75 years has shown, having a nuclear option doesn't imply a willingness to use a nuclear option but the other guy can never be certain so as a deterrent it works.
I think there are many LDs who would be unable to work with the DUP to be blunt. Any deal with the Conservatives therefore starts with the Conservatives dumping the DUP.
The old gifts never die. Julie can still use language like a rapier, when the mood takes her.
You could hardly find a better skewering of the monied Toppings and Meeks and WilliamGlenns.
And the desolation of “Their vote is all they have and they used it” still tugs the heart.
As Julie put it rather well it's the Violet Elizabeth Bott campaign now from the self entitled who are used to getting their own way and for once on 23 June 2016 didn't.
I will squeam, and I'll squeam and I'll squeam until I get a 'people's vote' and I will keep squeaming until the people vote the right way.
This thread is now OLD
I have long argued that the Convention is insane -- it places almost the entire burden of dealing with migration largely on Italy, Greece and Spain (instead of it being a shared responsibility of all the member states).
I now read that the President of the Rich, the Mighty Jupiter, has pondered the matter.
"French President Emmanuel Macron, speaking in a news conference following Thursday's meeting in Luxembourg, said the EU's main point-of-entry countries for migrants, like Spain, Italy and Greece, have a responsibility and cannot avoid it."
This is the Great Reforming Hope of the EU.
The EU truly cannot save itself.