An interesting article on Biden's predicament which suggests that OGH was, after all, quite right when he opined that Biden and Saunders are just too old to be President: https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/01/biden-1246920
Actually if Biden is out polls show most of his support transfers to Sanders making Sanders clear favourite for the Democratic nomination.
It would then be a Trump v Sanders general election, both candidates over 70
Those Biden videos have been on you tube for years - his age was never the issue but his hands on approach was more of a problem. If it was just the apparent inappropriateness with adult women it wouldn't be so bad.
Now we have Pelosi saying the allegations don't matter - presumably because its OK as Biden is a Democrat. She didn't of course give the same consideration to Judge Kavanaugh - and his alleged transgressions were never caught on video and placed on you tube.
I think it is clear that they are playing party political games with people's jobs and businesses.
Labour are playing a game. The game is Get The Tories Out. It may annoy people but that is essentially what they are there for.
Imagine if they were to pitch in heart and soul and break this impasse, and as a consequence the government struggles through and the Cons end up getting their act together and winning the next election, where would that leave us?
I know where it would leave me - absolutely spitting feathers.
Genuinely bizarre that anyone thinks there will be Euro elections. I cannot see any credible scenario under which they take place.
We extend article 50 next week following the EU summit, remain EU members and have no choice but to?
I can see the Tories and Labour may not want them - but that is another matter.
There is zero chance of Mrs May asking for any kind of extension that involves European elections. If the choice is those or No Deal she will take No Deal.
She has more than implied that the "grave alternative" is a very long extension and EU elections participation. It would be odd if she now came out and said it's No Deal instead.
From a negotiation perspective, by enforcing panic amongst moderate Labour MPs, the EU and Leo, it may be a sound move. But we are so close to it happening, I don't see how she can stand up later today and say that is what we are doing.
When does Cabinet finish? Are we expecting any sort of statement of intent from the PM after it?
An interesting article on Biden's predicament which suggests that OGH was, after all, quite right when he opined that Biden and Saunders are just too old to be President: https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/01/biden-1246920
Actually if Biden is out polls show most of his support transfers to Sanders making Sanders clear favourite for the Democratic nomination.
It would then be a Trump v Sanders general election, both candidates over 70
Those Biden videos have been on you tube for years - his age was never the issue but his hands on approach was more of a problem. If it was just the apparent inappropriateness with adult women it wouldn't be so bad.
Now we have Pelosi saying the allegations don't matter - presumably because its OK as Biden is a Democrat. She didn't of course give the same consideration to Judge Kavanaugh - and his alleged transgressions were never caught on video and placed on you tube.
Yes, the accusations from adults are gateway to what he will face accusation of with younger females
TIG may reach an agreement with the Lib Dems, but I guarantee you that individual Lib Dems will stand against them, probably under the Liberal Party badge. This time there will be no free ride for never has beens and never will be's. My personal target is the egregious Heidi Allen.
The Liberal Party is (or was last time I looked) anti EU.
They campaigned with NO2EU in the Euros so I think that's fair. And as for the rump SDP...
TIG may reach an agreement with the Lib Dems, but I guarantee you that individual Lib Dems will stand against them, probably under the Liberal Party badge. This time there will be no free ride for never has beens and never will be's. My personal target is the egregious Heidi Allen.
The Liberal Party is (or was last time I looked) anti EU.
But happy then to work against TIGgers
Unlikely lib dems would stand on an anti EU platform though
I repeat. LibDem Party members are not Liberal Party members. And vice versa. Two distints political organisations.
I know, I was referring to the claim individual lib dems would stand against tigs on a liberal badge/platform
Apologies if my misunderstanding caused offence. Personally, I would describe myself as a Liberal who thinks the EU, and our membership if it, is a Good Thing. From the Liberals website 'We believe that the ‘LibDems’ as a party traded any last vestige of liberal principle or belief for a few seats at the cabinet table. In so doing they paid a heavy electoral price in 2015 for being party to a cruel and uncaring government which sought to make the poorest and most vulnerable in society pay for the mistakes of bankers and financiers who appear to have come out of the financial crisis relatively unscathed.' And while I don't think the first sentence is fair, I am, as a one time LD voter, somewhat ashamed of the policies on, for example health and legal aid.
All right, whose bright idea was the meaningful vote anyway? Would be quite amusing if it is directly responsible for a no deal brexit.
One wonders what would have happened had the MV requirement not been forced on us, and the Govt just did a deal last November. Would the ERG/Remainer cohort have blocked the passage of the ratifying legislation, or would it have just resulted in a week or two of Tory infighting, before we moved on with our lives until 30th March when we could have then started the process of negotiating our future relationship?
Quite likely. And probably without any focus to concentrate opposition to leaving. So no marches and petitions to undermine the democratic legitimacy of the referendum.
And delivering it on time was the first test of whether or not Brexit was going to be a success. It could have been followed up by comparing the predictions made for no deal with the actual outcome of leaving with a deal to portray remainers as out of touch. There was always going to be a rejoin campaign but it could have been looking at a very bad starting point literally right now.
I think it is clear that they are playing party political games with people's jobs and businesses.
Labour are playing a game. The game is Get The Tories Out. It may annoy people but that is essentially what they are there for.
Imagine if they were to pitch in heart and soul and break this impasse, and as a consequence the government struggles through and the Cons end up getting their act together and winning the next election, where would that leave us?
I know where it would leave me - absolutely spitting feathers.
The astounding part about "party before country" is that almost everyone saying this is having a pop at the Tories. Labour are doing exactly the same as you acknowledge.
I'd echo Letwin's sentiment that this Bill is going to be hard work (though probably no more difficult than any other course of action beyond saying "no")
Getting a Commons majority for it; then a May proposal (as amended) which the Commons backs; then persuading the EU that it constitutes "a plan" by next Wed feels like a tall order given everyone's track record so far.
I guess we get Lab whipping for; Tories against (?) (for what it's worth nowadays). But I'd have thought there'll be a substantial Commons voice arguing this isn't great law/not prescriptive enough/doesn't move us on from indicative votes - ie it leaves it entirely undecided as to what the will of the Commons is apart from "not this".
It also has to go through the Lords where delaying actions could be used by Brexit supporting Lords to delay it.
TIG may reach an agreement with the Lib Dems, but I guarantee you that individual Lib Dems will stand against them, probably under the Liberal Party badge. This time there will be no free ride for never has beens and never will be's. My personal target is the egregious Heidi Allen.
The Liberal Party is (or was last time I looked) anti EU.
But happy then to work against TIGgers
Unlikely lib dems would stand on an anti EU platform though
I repeat. LibDem Party members are not Liberal Party members. And vice versa. Two distints political organisations.
I know, I was referring to the claim individual lib dems would stand against tigs on a liberal badge/platform
Apologies if my misunderstanding caused offence. Personally, I would describe myself as a Liberal who thinks the EU, and our membership if it, is a Good Thing. From the Liberals website 'We believe that the ‘LibDems’ as a party traded any last vestige of liberal principle or belief for a few seats at the cabinet table. In so doing they paid a heavy electoral price in 2015 for being party to a cruel and uncaring government which sought to make the poorest and most vulnerable in society pay for the mistakes of bankers and financiers who appear to have come out of the financial crisis relatively unscathed.' And while I don't think the first sentence is fair, I am, as a one time LD voter, somewhat ashamed of the policies on, for example health and legal aid.
TIG may reach an agreement with the Lib Dems, but I guarantee you that individual Lib Dems will stand against them, probably under the Liberal Party badge. This time there will be no free ride for never has beens and never will be's. My personal target is the egregious Heidi Allen.
The Liberal Party is (or was last time I looked) anti EU.
But happy then to work against TIGgers
Unlikely lib dems would stand on an anti EU platform though
I repeat. LibDem Party members are not Liberal Party members. And vice versa. Two distints political organisations.
I know, I was referring to the claim individual lib dems would stand against tigs on a liberal badge/platform
Apologies if my misunderstanding caused offence. Personally, I would describe myself as a Liberal who thinks the EU, and our membership if it, is a Good Thing. From the Liberals website 'We believe that the ‘LibDems’ as a party traded any last vestige of liberal principle or belief for a few seats at the cabinet table. In so doing they paid a heavy electoral price in 2015 for being party to a cruel and uncaring government which sought to make the poorest and most vulnerable in society pay for the mistakes of bankers and financiers who appear to have come out of the financial crisis relatively unscathed.' And while I don't think the first sentence is fair, I am, as a one time LD voter, somewhat ashamed of the policies on, for example health and legal aid.
Nice post. Judging from how the polls have changed over the years you can't be the only person thinking that.
Congrats on the op btw. Keep walking, stay positive and hope you still have the chance to enjoy some of the beautiful Essex countryside!
TIG may reach an agreement with the Lib Dems, but I guarantee you that individual Lib Dems will stand against them, probably under the Liberal Party badge. This time there will be no free ride for never has beens and never will be's. My personal target is the egregious Heidi Allen.
The Liberal Party is (or was last time I looked) anti EU.
They campaigned with NO2EU in the Euros so I think that's fair. And as for the rump SDP...
An interesting article on Biden's predicament which suggests that OGH was, after all, quite right when he opined that Biden and Saunders are just too old to be President: https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/01/biden-1246920
Actually if Biden is out polls show most of his support transfers to Sanders making Sanders clear favourite for the Democratic nomination.
It would then be a Trump v Sanders general election, both candidates over 70
Those Biden videos have been on you tube for years - his age was never the issue but his hands on approach was more of a problem. If it was just the apparent inappropriateness with adult women it wouldn't be so bad.
Now we have Pelosi saying the allegations don't matter - presumably because its OK as Biden is a Democrat. She didn't of course give the same consideration to Judge Kavanaugh - and his alleged transgressions were never caught on video and placed on you tube.
Yes, the accusations from adults are gateway to what he will face accusation of with younger females
And the fact that he felt able to do it all in a public place with the cameras rolling and photographers and family members present - and no one said anything.
An interesting article on Biden's predicament which suggests that OGH was, after all, quite right when he opined that Biden and Saunders are just too old to be President: https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/01/biden-1246920
Actually if Biden is out polls show most of his support transfers to Sanders making Sanders clear favourite for the Democratic nomination.
It would then be a Trump v Sanders general election, both candidates over 70
Those Biden videos have been on you tube for years - his age was never the issue but his hands on approach was more of a problem. If it was just the apparent inappropriateness with adult women it wouldn't be so bad.
Now we have Pelosi saying the allegations don't matter - presumably because its OK as Biden is a Democrat. She didn't of course give the same consideration to Judge Kavanaugh - and his alleged transgressions were never caught on video and placed on you tube.
Yes, the accusations from adults are gateway to what he will face accusation of with younger females
And the fact that he felt able to do it all in a public place with the cameras rolling and photographers and family members present - and no one said anything. It makes you wonder what he might be like in private?
Genuinely bizarre that anyone thinks there will be Euro elections. I cannot see any credible scenario under which they take place.
We extend article 50 next week following the EU summit, remain EU members and have no choice but to?
I can see the Tories and Labour may not want them - but that is another matter.
There is zero chance of Mrs May asking for any kind of extension that involves European elections. If the choice is those or No Deal she will take No Deal.
She has more than implied that the "grave alternative" is a very long extension and EU elections participation. It would be odd if she now came out and said it's No Deal instead.
From a negotiation perspective, by enforcing panic amongst moderate Labour MPs, the EU and Leo, it may be a sound move. But we are so close to it happening, I don't see how she can stand up later today and say that is what we are doing.
When does Cabinet finish? Are we expecting any sort of statement of intent from the PM after it?
Not much of a threat.
Labour don't fear EU elections or the chaos continuing under an extension.
The one-clause bill will be presented on Tuesday, requiring the prime minister to immediately come forward with a proposal for an extension to the article 50 period beyond 12 April for parliament to debate and vote on.
Gaming in that way would be obvious to fairly simple statistical analysis if widespread. On top of that we had a massive demonstration on the streets of London indicating that the sentiment behind the petition was a genuine and widespread one that should be taken seriously by professional politicians, psephologists and supporters of respecting people's democratic wishes.
Both true.
There's a vulnerability for people who wish to sign 2/3/4 times (easy enough given home/mobile IPs), and plenty will be doing this, but that's not going to be more than a million of the signatures at most.
The real weakness would be against botnets. Different IP every one, and if they could be bothered, get hold of lots of names/postcodes in roughly the correct leave/remain distribution. Not at all difficult, and basically no way to detect or defend against it.
It would have to be rather more sophisticated than the setup outlined in Guido's article though. You'd have to match every feature of the genuine data, so at a minimum you'd need 24 hours worth of data as a model. And you'd have to phase in the bottery smoothly to avoid jumps in the time series. And you'd have to monitor it to slow down in line with the actual voting. There is no way it is a 3 hour job for a hacker.
Just set it up to run add 10% to the last 3 hours rolling rate though
Im struggling to identify what ChangeUK want to change.
Theyre the more of the same party
I think it might be the political status quo? Maybe? You should be in favour as someone who often rails against the "establishment". Not sure whether they have quite the number of old- Etonians to claim to be as anti-Establishment as, say, the ERG or supporters of the Blond Philanderer.
these people are the establishment as far as I can see.
But its not about people its about the policies, from what I have seen to date they want to pick up from whgere we left off in 2016. Something I view as wishful thinking.
On Europe I will be intrigued to see what their view is -will they go the whole hog and stand on integration, the euro and Schengen or will they go for the same old half in half out shtick the UK has pursued for years ?
Well the ERG probably want to pick up where we left off in 1945, so I think I prefer the slightly more up to date approach of 2016.
Sorry to disagree old bean, but "the Establishment", if such a thing really exists, is very much about people. Boris Johnson is a classic example of an establishment figure doing contortions of mendacity to appeal to any group that might enable him to have his sweaty, podgy hands on the levers of power.
lol, you seem to think I support the ERG or Boris, I dont.
You seem to be rather like our current crop of MPs. Against lots of stuff, but not really in favour of anything that is actually on offer.
All right, whose bright idea was the meaningful vote anyway? Would be quite amusing if it is directly responsible for a no deal brexit.
One wonders what would have happened had the MV requirement not been forced on us, and the Govt just did a deal last November. Would the ERG/Remainer cohort have blocked the passage of the ratifying legislation, or would it have just resulted in a week or two of Tory infighting, before we moved on with our lives until 30th March when we could have then started the process of negotiating our future relationship?
Genuinely bizarre that anyone thinks there will be Euro elections. I cannot see any credible scenario under which they take place.
We extend article 50 next week following the EU summit, remain EU members and have no choice but to?
I can see the Tories and Labour may not want them - but that is another matter.
There is zero chance of Mrs May asking for any kind of extension that involves European elections. If the choice is those or No Deal she will take No Deal.
She has more than implied that the "grave alternative" is a very long extension and EU elections participation. It would be odd if she now came out and said it's No Deal instead.
From a negotiation perspective, by enforcing panic amongst moderate Labour MPs, the EU and Leo, it may be a sound move. But we are so close to it happening, I don't see how she can stand up later today and say that is what we are doing.
When does Cabinet finish? Are we expecting any sort of statement of intent from the PM after it?
Not much of a threat.
Labour don't fear EU elections or the chaos continuing under an extension.
I didn't word that well. I meant by announcing No Deal she would enforce panic amongst moderate Labour MPs, the EU and Leo.
The one-clause bill will be presented on Tuesday, requiring the prime minister to immediately come forward with a proposal for an extension to the article 50 period beyond 12 April for parliament to debate and vote on.
Im struggling to identify what ChangeUK want to change.
Theyre the more of the same party
Yes! They’re the party that seek to deny the biggest change in British political history in favour of maintaining the status quo... 1984-esque branding
Genuinely bizarre that anyone thinks there will be Euro elections. I cannot see any credible scenario under which they take place.
We extend article 50 next week following the EU summit, remain EU members and have no choice but to?
I can see the Tories and Labour may not want them - but that is another matter.
There is zero chance of Mrs May asking for any kind of extension that involves European elections. If the choice is those or No Deal she will take No Deal.
She has more than implied that the "grave alternative" is a very long extension and EU elections participation. It would be odd if she now came out and said it's No Deal instead.
From a negotiation perspective, by enforcing panic amongst moderate Labour MPs, the EU and Leo, it may be a sound move. But we are so close to it happening, I don't see how she can stand up later today and say that is what we are doing.
When does Cabinet finish? Are we expecting any sort of statement of intent from the PM after it?
She, like the other weaker members of the Tory Party are in hock to the UKIP entryists and swivel-eyed geriatric members of her local association. For that reason, sadly, I think she would choose the madness that is No-Deal. Fuck the country, our retired members come first.
Another longer term implication of recent events is that the total failure of Labour, the SNP, PC, the LDs and the Greens to work together to prevent a Tory No Deal Brexit demonstrates clearly that there is next to no chance of a progressive coalition - formal or otherwise - to keep the Tories out of power after the next election.
The 'Tory' No Deal Brexit - if it happens - will have been the choice of a progressive alliance of the SNP, Labour, LibDems. TIGgers and, err, the DUP and ERG. How about that for a broad-based coalition?
This Pelosi defence of Biden ought to be no surprise. We, in a global sense, need to move on from this generation and their bizarre attitudes to entitlement.
Gaming in that way would be obvious to fairly simple statistical analysis if widespread. On top of that we had a massive demonstration on the streets of London indicating that the sentiment behind the petition was a genuine and widespread one that should be taken seriously by professional politicians, psephologists and supporters of respecting people's democratic wishes.
Both true.
There's a vulnerability for people who wish to sign 2/3/4 times (easy enough given home/mobile IPs), and plenty will be doing this, but that's not going to be more than a million of the signatures at most.
The real weakness would be against botnets. Different IP every one, and if they could be bothered, get hold of lots of names/postcodes in roughly the correct leave/remain distribution. Not at all difficult, and basically no way to detect or defend against it.
It would have to be rather more sophisticated than the setup outlined in Guido's article though. You'd have to match every feature of the genuine data, so at a minimum you'd need 24 hours worth of data as a model. And you'd have to phase in the bottery smoothly to avoid jumps in the time series. And you'd have to monitor it to slow down in line with the actual voting. There is no way it is a 3 hour job for a hacker.
Just set it up to run add 10% to the last 3 hours rolling rate though
Which would stick out like a sore thumb. You'd have to phase it in. And out. So you'd end up with less than a 10% boost. Which frankly would make very little difference to the political impact.
Its like asking him to guarantee no one will die as a result of negligence in the NHS - or guarantee that no one will die if we remain in the EU (e.g. freedom of movement allowing a murderer to move here as has happened).
Gaming in that way would be obvious to fairly simple statistical analysis if widespread. On top of that we had a massive demonstration on the streets of London indicating that the sentiment behind the petition was a genuine and widespread one that should be taken seriously by professional politicians, psephologists and supporters of respecting people's democratic wishes.
Both true.
There's a vulnerability for people who wish to sign 2/3/4 times (easy enough given home/mobile IPs), and plenty will be doing this, but that's not going to be more than a million of the signatures at most.
The real weakness would be against botnets. Different IP every one, and if they could be bothered, get hold of lots of names/postcodes in roughly the correct leave/remain distribution. Not at all difficult, and basically no way to detect or defend against it.
It would have to be rather more sophisticated than the setup outlined in Guido's article though. You'd have to match every feature of the genuine data, so at a minimum you'd need 24 hours worth of data as a model. And you'd have to phase in the bottery smoothly to avoid jumps in the time series. And you'd have to monitor it to slow down in line with the actual voting. There is no way it is a 3 hour job for a hacker.
Just set it up to run add 10% to the last 3 hours rolling rate though
Which would stick out like a sore thumb. You'd have to phase it in. And out. So you'd end up with less than a 10% boost. Which frankly would make very little difference to the political impact.
Basically, why bother?
Not if you catch it as momentum builds
(I meant 10% of the increase not 10% of the total. I know that’s not what I wrote...)
Another longer term implication of recent events is that the total failure of Labour, the SNP, PC, the LDs and the Greens to work together to prevent a Tory No Deal Brexit demonstrates clearly that there is next to no chance of a progressive coalition - formal or otherwise - to keep the Tories out of power after the next election.
The 'Tory' No Deal Brexit - if it happens - will have been the choice of a progressive alliance of the SNP, Labour, LibDems. TIGgers and, err, the DUP and ERG. How about that for a broad-based coalition?
Nope, the final choice is the PM’s. She is the only one who can revoke. It’s her decision alone.
The astounding part about "party before country" is that almost everyone saying this is having a pop at the Tories. Labour are doing exactly the same as you acknowledge.
Well, yes, although on this thread everybody was popping off at Labour, hence me being moved to scribble a note on the matter.
Yeah - and the Cabinet Secretary saying that this will make the country less safe, at a time when there are loads of returning IS fighters. Oh and food prices will go up - so sucks to those JAMS she claimed to care about.
If May is really minded to do this then she is a danger to the country. If her MPs cannot understand that and/or won't take action to stop her, they deserve everything they will get.
Another longer term implication of recent events is that the total failure of Labour, the SNP, PC, the LDs and the Greens to work together to prevent a Tory No Deal Brexit demonstrates clearly that there is next to no chance of a progressive coalition - formal or otherwise - to keep the Tories out of power after the next election.
The 'Tory' No Deal Brexit - if it happens - will have been the choice of a progressive alliance of the SNP, Labour, LibDems. TIGgers and, err, the DUP and ERG. How about that for a broad-based coalition?
Nope, the final choice is the PM’s. She is the only one who can revoke. It’s her decision alone.
Which is why there will be a 12-18 month extension and elections.
Another longer term implication of recent events is that the total failure of Labour, the SNP, PC, the LDs and the Greens to work together to prevent a Tory No Deal Brexit demonstrates clearly that there is next to no chance of a progressive coalition - formal or otherwise - to keep the Tories out of power after the next election.
The 'Tory' No Deal Brexit - if it happens - will have been the choice of a progressive alliance of the SNP, Labour, LibDems. TIGgers and, err, the DUP and ERG. How about that for a broad-based coalition?
In your dreams Richard. The people advocating no deal will be held accountable.
Yeah - and the Cabinet Secretary saying that this will make the country less safe, at a time when there are loads of returning IS fighters. Oh and food prices will go up - so sucks to those JAMS she claimed to care about.
If May is really minded to do this then she is a danger to the country. If her MPs cannot understand that and/or won't take action to stop her, they deserve everything they will get.
May sometimes seems to be trying to punish people for their sins, whether it's the Leave campaigners for their undeliverable promises, or the country for voting for them.
I think it is clear that they are playing party political games with people's jobs and businesses.
Labour are playing a game. The game is Get The Tories Out. It may annoy people but that is essentially what they are there for.
Imagine if they were to pitch in heart and soul and break this impasse, and as a consequence the government struggles through and the Cons end up getting their act together and winning the next election, where would that leave us?
I know where it would leave me - absolutely spitting feathers.
The astounding part about "party before country" is that almost everyone saying this is having a pop at the Tories. Labour are doing exactly the same as you acknowledge.
The flip side of which is that it is at least arguable that the ERG diehards are the one bloc in the Commons not putting party before country, assuming you accept that they actually believe the nonsense they come out with. Conversely, there must be at least some part of the central bit of the Tory party who oppose No Deal despite suspecting that supporting it might be the best thing for their party in the short run.
Says the man who thought various options would pass easily last night....
Did he? Oh dear.
Well as somebody who thinks that No Deal and REF2 are vying for the wooden spoon as absolute worst outcome I hope that he is equally off the money here.
This Pelosi defence of Biden ought to be no surprise. We, in a global sense, need to move on from this generation and their bizarre attitudes to entitlement.
It was pretty much the same argument used by the defenders of Clinton. But it is not a generational thing. There is plenty of evidence around that younger men have a similar sense of entitlement when it comes to women. And as much evidence of politicians taking a "my party: right or wrong" approach to misbehaviour of any kind.
Another longer term implication of recent events is that the total failure of Labour, the SNP, PC, the LDs and the Greens to work together to prevent a Tory No Deal Brexit demonstrates clearly that there is next to no chance of a progressive coalition - formal or otherwise - to keep the Tories out of power after the next election.
The 'Tory' No Deal Brexit - if it happens - will have been the choice of a progressive alliance of the SNP, Labour, LibDems. TIGgers and, err, the DUP and ERG. How about that for a broad-based coalition?
Nah bollocks Richard. It will be laid fair and square at the foot of the Conservative Party. Labour "wouldn't have started from here" and the voting public will get that.
Plus would you personally be happy for the deal to go through and then Mark Francois take over?
Another longer term implication of recent events is that the total failure of Labour, the SNP, PC, the LDs and the Greens to work together to prevent a Tory No Deal Brexit demonstrates clearly that there is next to no chance of a progressive coalition - formal or otherwise - to keep the Tories out of power after the next election.
The 'Tory' No Deal Brexit - if it happens - will have been the choice of a progressive alliance of the SNP, Labour, LibDems. TIGgers and, err, the DUP and ERG. How about that for a broad-based coalition?
In your dreams Richard. The people advocating no deal will be held accountable.
In my nightmares. actually. But clearly the responsibility lies with those MPs who voted to trigger Article 50 and then refused to vote for the only available orderly implementation of their own decision. You had the list last Friday.
Says the man who thought various options would pass easily last night....
Did he? Oh dear.
Well as somebody who thinks that No Deal and REF2 are vying for the wooden spoon as absolute worst outcome I hope that he is equally off the money here.
Well he was saying other people said they would pass by 50 etc. Peston has been consistently off the money since Labour have left power and his mates like Ed Balls are now busy doing dancing shows.
Another longer term implication of recent events is that the total failure of Labour, the SNP, PC, the LDs and the Greens to work together to prevent a Tory No Deal Brexit demonstrates clearly that there is next to no chance of a progressive coalition - formal or otherwise - to keep the Tories out of power after the next election.
The 'Tory' No Deal Brexit - if it happens - will have been the choice of a progressive alliance of the SNP, Labour, LibDems. TIGgers and, err, the DUP and ERG. How about that for a broad-based coalition?
In your dreams Richard. The people advocating no deal will be held accountable.
As a pragmatic, centrist, floating voter I would hold all of them accountable. For the pro-referendum grouping of LibDems and TIGgers to risk no deal brexit for a shot at remain is too high risk for not much reward. It is not grown up politics and does not suggest they would work well in coalitions, which is what is needed in a divided country.
Yeah - and the Cabinet Secretary saying that this will make the country less safe, at a time when there are loads of returning IS fighters. Oh and food prices will go up - so sucks to those JAMS she claimed to care about.
If May is really minded to do this then she is a danger to the country. If her MPs cannot understand that and/or won't take action to stop her, they deserve everything they will get.
Yes - our mass orchestrated outrage over a rather stupid 19 year old girl with a child who wants to come home compared to little or no outrage at letting several hundred young male ISIS fighters back in to no doubt to live a life on welfare giving them plenty of time for other 'activities'. Very easy to ban a teenage girl - and let the male soldiers back in their hundreds!
Bizarre to be concerned about 'national security' therefore - one can't help being a little cynical.
Im struggling to identify what ChangeUK want to change.
Theyre the more of the same party
I think it might be the political status quo? Maybe? You should be in favour as someone who often rails against the "establishment". Not sure whether they have quite the number of old- Etonians to claim to be as anti-Establishment as, say, the ERG or supporters of the Blond Philanderer.
these people are the establishment as far as I can see.
But its not about people its about the policies, from what I have seen to date they want to pick up from whgere we left off in 2016. Something I view as wishful thinking.
On Europe I will be intrigued to see what their view is -will they go the whole hog and stand on integration, the euro and Schengen or will they go for the same old half in half out shtick the UK has pursued for years ?
Well the ERG probably want to pick up where we left off in 1945, so I think I prefer the slightly more up to date approach of 2016.
Sorry to disagree old bean, but "the Establishment", if such a thing really exists, is very much about people. Boris Johnson is a classic example of an establishment figure doing contortions of mendacity to appeal to any group that might enable him to have his sweaty, podgy hands on the levers of power.
lol, you seem to think I support the ERG or Boris, I dont.
You seem to be rather like our current crop of MPs. Against lots of stuff, but not really in favour of anything that is actually on offer.
I think it is clear that they are playing party political games with people's jobs and businesses.
Labour are playing a game. The game is Get The Tories Out. It may annoy people but that is essentially what they are there for.
Imagine if they were to pitch in heart and soul and break this impasse, and as a consequence the government struggles through and the Cons end up getting their act together and winning the next election, where would that leave us?
I know where it would leave me - absolutely spitting feathers.
That's fair enough.
As an aside, I'd say that almost everyone who wants compromise wants compromise from thee, not from me.
Nah bollocks Richard. It will be laid fair and square at the foot of the Conservative Party. Labour "wouldn't have started from here" and the voting public will get that.
Ah, that's a different question. Yes, I agree that the Conservatives will be blamed by the voters, and that Labour - for all their cynicism and the fact that they are responsible as much as the ERGers - won't get much of the blame.
Nah bollocks Richard. It will be laid fair and square at the foot of the Conservative Party. Labour "wouldn't have started from here" and the voting public will get that.
Ah, that's a different question. Yes, I agree that the Conservatives will be blamed by the voters, and that Labour - for all their cynicism and the fact that they are responsible as much as the ERGers - won't get much of the blame.
Another longer term implication of recent events is that the total failure of Labour, the SNP, PC, the LDs and the Greens to work together to prevent a Tory No Deal Brexit demonstrates clearly that there is next to no chance of a progressive coalition - formal or otherwise - to keep the Tories out of power after the next election.
The 'Tory' No Deal Brexit - if it happens - will have been the choice of a progressive alliance of the SNP, Labour, LibDems. TIGgers and, err, the DUP and ERG. How about that for a broad-based coalition?
In your dreams Richard. The people advocating no deal will be held accountable.
In my nightmares. actually. But clearly the responsibility lies with those MPs who voted to trigger Article 50 and then refused to vote for the only available orderly implementation of their own decision. You had the list last Friday.
Nope. People who wanted No Deal would be responsible for No Deal.
The fact that the deal was incompetent, inadequate and unpopular does indeed lie with May, but she is not responsible for No Deal. That's with the Ultras and them alone.
Obviously No Deal will be a great success and David Davis will be on the £500 note (worth 12p in today's money).
This Pelosi defence of Biden ought to be no surprise. We, in a global sense, need to move on from this generation and their bizarre attitudes to entitlement.
It was pretty much the same argument used by the defenders of Clinton. But it is not a generational thing. There is plenty of evidence around that younger men have a similar sense of entitlement when it comes to women. And as much evidence of politicians taking a "my party: right or wrong" approach to misbehaviour of any kind.
Yes, I agree there are young men with a similar sense. The evidence is all around. The difference is that those who aspire to lead from younger generations generally don't treat it as a peccadillo to be indulged. This is the point that needs to change. The outright enabling from those in power needs to stop.
Yeah - and the Cabinet Secretary saying that this will make the country less safe, at a time when there are loads of returning IS fighters. Oh and food prices will go up - so sucks to those JAMS she claimed to care about.
If May is really minded to do this then she is a danger to the country. If her MPs cannot understand that and/or won't take action to stop her, they deserve everything they will get.
Yes - our mass orchestrated outrage over a rather stupid 19 year old girl with a child who wants to come home compared to little or no outrage at letting several hundred young male ISIS fighters back in to no doubt to live a life on welfare giving them plenty of time for other 'activities'. Very easy to ban a teenage girl - and let the male soldiers back in their hundreds!
Bizarre to be concerned about 'national security' therefore - one can't help being a little cynical.
I was thinking more of the fact that co-operation with EU security services and access to information will be curtailed. Given that returning terrorists will likely be travelling through Continental Europe to get here that does raise security concerns. I find it extraordinary that a former Home Secretary would disregard such concerns.
Security is the single most important role of any government. To embark on a course of action that risks that is a complete abdication of responsibility by the government. It is only arising because May is weak, has boxed herself into a corner, refuses to compromise and listens to no-one. She is simply not fit to be PM and it is a failing of our system that there seem to be no effective restraints on her power to make a mess of things in a way that places us at risk. We may as well have a mad King in charge, frankly.
Nope, the final choice is the PM’s. She is the only one who can revoke. It’s her decision alone.
If parliament were to vote with a clear majority in favour of revocation, you'd have a point. Without such a vote, the legal position is unclear and it's not realistic politically.
I have to say I find this rather concerning. I am no fan of his, but as far as I know he has done nothing wrong on the platform, so surely should be treated equally until he does do something wrong.
Where do we stop? We say Alex Jones should go because he was pushing dangerous conspiracy theories, now Tommy Robinson, where does it stop? Carl Benjamin, again not a fan, but is getting restricted on various platforms (twitter I can understand the ban), but again his content isn't my cup of tea but doesn't seem crazy extremist.
It also plays into their narrative of the establishment trying to censor them etc etc etc. I much prefer, like say Nick Griffin, call him out on things, engage and then the public see them for what they are (if they are what we think they are). The best take down of Griffin was Iain Dale, who basically got past the usual your a racist / Griffin's careful defence, onto policy and it was a shit show super quickly as he had no clear policies that stood up to any prodding.
This Pelosi defence of Biden ought to be no surprise. We, in a global sense, need to move on from this generation and their bizarre attitudes to entitlement.
It was pretty much the same argument used by the defenders of Clinton. But it is not a generational thing. There is plenty of evidence around that younger men have a similar sense of entitlement when it comes to women. And as much evidence of politicians taking a "my party: right or wrong" approach to misbehaviour of any kind.
Yes, I agree there are young men with a similar sense. The evidence is all around. The difference is that those who aspire to lead from younger generations generally don't treat it as a peccadillo to be indulged. This is the point that needs to change. The outright enabling from those in power needs to stop.
Boris. Apparently popular with Tories and some from the younger generation on here. His peccadillos are very much indulged.
Nah bollocks Richard. It will be laid fair and square at the foot of the Conservative Party. Labour "wouldn't have started from here" and the voting public will get that.
Ah, that's a different question. Yes, I agree that the Conservatives will be blamed by the voters, and that Labour - for all their cynicism and the fact that they are responsible as much as the ERGers - won't get much of the blame.
Plus would you personally be happy for the deal to go through and then Mark Francois take over?
LOL!
I think that should not be assumed. To some extent it will depend on the last minute theatrics, who takes over as Tory leader and so on.
That is the point. Some people (me sir, me sir) might think it would be the most extraordinary and extraodinarily bad thing if Francois were to become PM but it is certainly possible and what further cover does Lab need than pointing this out for opposing every damn thing the govt proposes.
Curse of new thread. Am beginning to think passing TMs Deal may turn out to be the worst possible result for the government. All other scenarios, and blame can be deflected. Especially, as the government may well fall, leaving another to deal with the fall out. In that one, you still have a fractured, resentful Party, still in power, with no one else to shoulder the responsibility. And no solution to the fundamental problem...we don't know what future relationship we want.
Seems to me that the government will fall in any case. Either May will put her deal again and lose again or, more likely, she will be forced to ask for a long extension for either a referendum or a general election. And that will be her last act as PM.
Seems about right. Logical or not parliament will not approve her deal (and it is seen that way so it is about her, despite Becketts insults) and every other option (and even that one probably) cause a split and a collapse.
Im struggling to identify what ChangeUK want to change.
Theyre the more of the same party
Yes! They’re the party that seek to deny the biggest change in British political history in favour of maintaining the status quo... 1984-esque branding
Nope, the final choice is the PM’s. She is the only one who can revoke. It’s her decision alone.
If parliament were to vote with a clear majority in favour of revocation, you'd have a point. Without such a vote, the legal position is unclear and it's not realistic politically.
It's another example of the unreality of the situation, that there are people who seem to think it feasible that May will break totally with her party and lead about 30 of her MPs into alliance with Labour, in order to revoke Brexit or hold a second referendum.
Quite. The Cherry motion yesterday was the one. That had teeth. Revoke if we get within 48 hours of No Deal. Pity it came from the SNP. That ruled it out.
Nope, the final choice is the PM’s. She is the only one who can revoke. It’s her decision alone.
If parliament were to vote with a clear majority in favour of revocation, you'd have a point. Without such a vote, the legal position is unclear and it's not realistic politically.
It's another example of the unreality of the situation, that there are people who seem to think it feasible that May will break totally with her party and lead about 30 of her MPs into alliance with Labour, in order to revoke Brexit or hold a second referendum.
An alliance to do something which the Labour leadership doesn't even want!
I have to say I find this rather concerning. I am no fan of his, but as far as I know he has done nothing wrong on the platform, so surely should be treated equally until he does do something wrong.
Where do we stop? We say Alex Jones should go because he was pushing dangerous conspiracy theories, now Tommy Robinson, where does it stop? Carl Benjamin, again not a fan, but is getting restricted on various platforms (twitter I can understand the ban), but again his content isn't my cup of tea but doesn't seem crazy extremist.
I thought Jones was booted because he told libelous lies about the Sandy Hook parents?
Do you think private companies should have rules imposed on them about who they offer their services to?
That is the point. Some people (me sir, me sir) might think it would be the most extraordinary and extraodinarily bad thing if Francois were to become PM but it is certainly possible and what further cover does Lab need than pointing this out for opposing every damn thing the govt proposes.
Francois as Tory leader. That will make Marxists of us all.
Nope, the final choice is the PM’s. She is the only one who can revoke. It’s her decision alone.
If parliament were to vote with a clear majority in favour of revocation, you'd have a point. Without such a vote, the legal position is unclear and it's not realistic politically.
If the EU genuinely does refuse a proper extension, do you not think it's quite likely that a majority of the Commons WILL vote to revoke A50?
I think it is clear that they are playing party political games with people's jobs and businesses.
Labour are playing a game. The game is Get The Tories Out. It may annoy people but that is essentially what they are there for.
Imagine if they were to pitch in heart and soul and break this impasse, and as a consequence the government struggles through and the Cons end up getting their act together and winning the next election, where would that leave us?
I know where it would leave me - absolutely spitting feathers.
That's fair enough.
As an aside, I'd say that almost everyone who wants compromise wants compromise from thee, not from me.
I’d say in this the language of political discourse is part of the blame - the labour side being the best to deploy language.
Things like bedroom tax, and cliff edge Brexit don’t allow opponents to appreciate the benefits in their opponents schemes.
The Tory headbangers and unfortunately most of Labour would be hard pressed to name an opposition policy that they thought was a good idea, name a good person from the opposition politicians, or name an opposition politician that they are friends with. I note with this that Tom Watson today talked about working together with pro EU Tories - this is good news in fact and framing of the debate
Nope, the final choice is the PM’s. She is the only one who can revoke. It’s her decision alone.
If parliament were to vote with a clear majority in favour of revocation, you'd have a point. Without such a vote, the legal position is unclear and it's not realistic politically.
Yep, it's not realistic politically. It would destroy the Conservative party. But if we get to No Deal it will be because Mrs May's government has rejected the chance to revoke.
Nope, the final choice is the PM’s. She is the only one who can revoke. It’s her decision alone.
If parliament were to vote with a clear majority in favour of revocation, you'd have a point. Without such a vote, the legal position is unclear and it's not realistic politically.
If the EU genuinely does refuse a proper extension, do you not think it's quite likely that a majority of the Commons WILL vote to revoke A50?
Nope, the final choice is the PM’s. She is the only one who can revoke. It’s her decision alone.
If parliament were to vote with a clear majority in favour of revocation, you'd have a point. Without such a vote, the legal position is unclear and it's not realistic politically.
If the EU genuinely does refuse a proper extension, do you not think it's quite likely that a majority of the Commons WILL vote to revoke A50?
This Pelosi defence of Biden ought to be no surprise. We, in a global sense, need to move on from this generation and their bizarre attitudes to entitlement.
It was pretty much the same argument used by the defenders of Clinton. But it is not a generational thing. There is plenty of evidence around that younger men have a similar sense of entitlement when it comes to women. And as much evidence of politicians taking a "my party: right or wrong" approach to misbehaviour of any kind.
Yes, I agree there are young men with a similar sense. The evidence is all around. The difference is that those who aspire to lead from younger generations generally don't treat it as a peccadillo to be indulged. This is the point that needs to change. The outright enabling from those in power needs to stop.
Boris. Apparently popular with Tories and some from the younger generation on here. His peccadillos are very much indulged.
I think the difference is whether it involves consenting participants.
Boris may be a rogue and you can judge him morally but that is a whole different matter.
To give the British Parliament time to think of a reason for the next extension
Agreed.
I could easily see a hilarious position whereby the UK is constantly in 'Article 50' mode. Extend, extend, extend but never leave (or revoke). Bit like how Income Tax is a temporary measure to fund the Napoleonic wars.
If we are to extend again (and for a final time) I see only THREE reasons why:
1. For a Referendum; 2. For a General Election 3. Because the government want to scrap the Deal currently negotiated and try again.
I see no reason for any other extension. And I doubt the EU would entertain (3) anyway, so unless its (1) or (2), I just wouldn't bother.
To give the British Parliament time to think of a reason for the next extension
All seems like a lot of desperate displacement activity and probably bad law. I seem to recall people saying it was wrong of May to ram something through, but it's ok to rush through actual legislation super quick rather than agree something that provides a reason for an extension?
Is Tiger Roll as good as all that ? Perhaps a straight lay on the Betfair exchanges is 'the bet'...
There'll be no change in the torrent of "virtual" racing. That's been there all the time - no one bets on it as far as I can see. It creates an illusion of activity to lure in the stupid and the gullible (like me I imagine). There's morning dog racing from the real world starting as early as 8.12 for those who like their greyhounds Irish and their breakfast English.
The view from the bookies is the shops have to be "busy" with a betting opportunity every minute or two. If today is anything to go by, that's coming to an end. Like other aspects of the High Street, retail bookmaking is going to lose out to the online world - most of those in the East Ham shops were old, white and male (me included). The FOBT players (who were only one of the three) have gone.
As for TIGER ROLL, he might well win and the handicapper has given him a right chance but 7/2!! He could be carried out or brought down at the first or indeed any of the other 30 obstacles. It's a price only for the mugs as is RATHVINDEN at 8s. I was told by Grandpa Stodge every horse should be 10/1 just to get round but that was a different race. It's still a spectacle but it's lost something and is really Britain's attempt at emulating the Melbourne Cup these days.
Nope, the final choice is the PM’s. She is the only one who can revoke. It’s her decision alone.
If parliament were to vote with a clear majority in favour of revocation, you'd have a point. Without such a vote, the legal position is unclear and it's not realistic politically.
If the EU genuinely does refuse a proper extension, do you not think it's quite likely that a majority of the Commons WILL vote to revoke A50?
I think it would be very close.
Close-ish, but I'd be surprised if there would be many Labour rebels in that circumstance - I'm not even sure Caroline Flint would rebel.
So it would basically come down to whether a Tory rebellion could be kept down to less than 20....seems unlikely to me, but who knows.
I could easily see a hilarious position whereby the UK is constantly in 'Article 50' mode. Extend, extend, extend but never leave (or revoke). Bit like how Income Tax is a temporary measure to fund the Napoleonic wars.
If we are to extend again (and for a final time) I see only THREE reasons why:
1. For a Referendum; 2. For a General Election 3. Because the government want to scrap the Deal currently negotiated and try again.
I see no reason for any other extension. And I doubt the EU would entertain (3) anyway, so unless its (1) or (2), I just wouldn't bother.
Or at a push, a Referendum AND a General Election (either order).
To give the British Parliament time to think of a reason for the next extension
Agreed.
I could easily see a hilarious position whereby the UK is constantly in 'Article 50' mode. Extend, extend, extend but never leave (or revoke). Bit like how Income Tax is a temporary measure to fund the Napoleonic wars.
The annual Meaningful Vote could replace the Outlawries Bill as part of the arcana surrounding the State Opening of Parliament.
Comments
Now we have Pelosi saying the allegations don't matter - presumably because its OK as Biden is a Democrat. She didn't of course give the same consideration to Judge Kavanaugh - and his alleged transgressions were never caught on video and placed on you tube.
Imagine if they were to pitch in heart and soul and break this impasse, and as a consequence the government struggles through and the Cons end up getting their act together and winning the next election, where would that leave us?
I know where it would leave me - absolutely spitting feathers.
From a negotiation perspective, by enforcing panic amongst moderate Labour MPs, the EU and Leo, it may be a sound move. But we are so close to it happening, I don't see how she can stand up later today and say that is what we are doing.
When does Cabinet finish? Are we expecting any sort of statement of intent from the PM after it?
From the Liberals website 'We believe that the ‘LibDems’ as a party traded any last vestige of liberal principle or belief for a few seats at the cabinet table. In so doing they paid a heavy electoral price in 2015 for being party to a cruel and uncaring government which sought to make the poorest and most vulnerable in society pay for the mistakes of bankers and financiers who appear to have come out of the financial crisis relatively unscathed.'
And while I don't think the first sentence is fair, I am, as a one time LD voter, somewhat ashamed of the policies on, for example health and legal aid.
And delivering it on time was the first test of whether or not Brexit was going to be a success. It could have been followed up by comparing the predictions made for no deal with the actual outcome of leaving with a deal to portray remainers as out of touch. There was always going to be a rejoin campaign but it could have been looking at a very bad starting point literally right now.
But that isn't how it has turned out.
Congrats on the op btw. Keep walking, stay positive and hope you still have the chance to enjoy some of the beautiful Essex countryside!
Best wishes for your wife as well.
Was happy to lay at 1.3 on Betfair.
Labour don't fear EU elections or the chaos continuing under an extension.
Pesto now postulating that the choice has boiled down to No Deal or Referendum.
Basically, why bother?
It’s very likely it will but not 100%
(I meant 10% of the increase not 10% of the total. I know that’s not what I wrote...)
If May is really minded to do this then she is a danger to the country. If her MPs cannot understand that and/or won't take action to stop her, they deserve everything they will get.
It's a no brainer.
And will be held accountable . The no deal sheep following the nonsense spouted by the ERG will soon turn on them when the country implodes .
Well as somebody who thinks that No Deal and REF2 are vying for the wooden spoon as absolute worst outcome I hope that he is equally off the money here.
It was pretty much the same argument used by the defenders of Clinton. But it is not a generational thing. There is plenty of evidence around that younger men have a similar sense of entitlement when it comes to women. And as much evidence of politicians taking a "my party: right or wrong" approach to misbehaviour of any kind.
Plus would you personally be happy for the deal to go through and then Mark Francois take over?
Bizarre to be concerned about 'national security' therefore - one can't help being a little cynical.
As an aside, I'd say that almost everyone who wants compromise wants compromise from thee, not from me.
https://twitter.com/bbcessex/status/1113060047041355776?s=21
The fact that the deal was incompetent, inadequate and unpopular does indeed lie with May, but she is not responsible for No Deal. That's with the Ultras and them alone.
Obviously No Deal will be a great success and David Davis will be on the £500 note (worth 12p in today's money).
This is the point that needs to change. The outright enabling from those in power needs to stop.
Security is the single most important role of any government. To embark on a course of action that risks that is a complete abdication of responsibility by the government. It is only arising because May is weak, has boxed herself into a corner, refuses to compromise and listens to no-one. She is simply not fit to be PM and it is a failing of our system that there seem to be no effective restraints on her power to make a mess of things in a way that places us at risk. We may as well have a mad King in charge, frankly.
Presumably they had a ferry across to Mersea before they built the causeway?
Clips uploaded by Mr Robinson have been removed from search results and he is blocked from streaming live events via the site.
Messages warning that his videos may not be appropriate for all viewers will also play before clips.
YouTube had already, in January, decided to suspend adverts on Mr Robinson's channel.
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-47786252
I have to say I find this rather concerning. I am no fan of his, but as far as I know he has done nothing wrong on the platform, so surely should be treated equally until he does do something wrong.
Where do we stop? We say Alex Jones should go because he was pushing dangerous conspiracy theories, now Tommy Robinson, where does it stop? Carl Benjamin, again not a fan, but is getting restricted on various platforms (twitter I can understand the ban), but again his content isn't my cup of tea but doesn't seem crazy extremist.
It also plays into their narrative of the establishment trying to censor them etc etc etc. I much prefer, like say Nick Griffin, call him out on things, engage and then the public see them for what they are (if they are what we think they are). The best take down of Griffin was Iain Dale, who basically got past the usual your a racist / Griffin's careful defence, onto policy and it was a shit show super quickly as he had no clear policies that stood up to any prodding.
Has the Commons decided what it doesn't approve of today?
Do you think private companies should have rules imposed on them about who they offer their services to?
Things like bedroom tax, and cliff edge Brexit don’t allow opponents to appreciate the benefits in their opponents schemes.
The Tory headbangers and unfortunately most of Labour would be hard pressed to name an opposition policy that they thought was a good idea, name a good person from the opposition politicians, or name an opposition politician that they are friends with. I note with this that Tom Watson today talked about working together with pro EU Tories - this is good news in fact and framing of the debate
Boris may be a rogue and you can judge him morally but that is a whole different matter.
I could easily see a hilarious position whereby the UK is constantly in 'Article 50' mode. Extend, extend, extend but never leave (or revoke). Bit like how Income Tax is a temporary measure to fund the Napoleonic wars.
If we are to extend again (and for a final time) I see only THREE reasons why:
1. For a Referendum;
2. For a General Election
3. Because the government want to scrap the Deal currently negotiated and try again.
I see no reason for any other extension. And I doubt the EU would entertain (3) anyway, so unless its (1) or (2), I just wouldn't bother.
Who the hell wants another year of this shitshow?
The view from the bookies is the shops have to be "busy" with a betting opportunity every minute or two. If today is anything to go by, that's coming to an end. Like other aspects of the High Street, retail bookmaking is going to lose out to the online world - most of those in the East Ham shops were old, white and male (me included). The FOBT players (who were only one of the three) have gone.
As for TIGER ROLL, he might well win and the handicapper has given him a right chance but 7/2!! He could be carried out or brought down at the first or indeed any of the other 30 obstacles. It's a price only for the mugs as is RATHVINDEN at 8s. I was told by Grandpa Stodge every horse should be 10/1 just to get round but that was a different race. It's still a spectacle but it's lost something and is really Britain's attempt at emulating the Melbourne Cup these days.
So it would basically come down to whether a Tory rebellion could be kept down to less than 20....seems unlikely to me, but who knows.