We are in uncharted FTPA territory here, but following a successful VNOC, I would expect discussions to take place between the Palace , the Cabinet Secretary and party leaders so as to form a judgement as to who is most likely to command a majority in the new circumstances. Some might argue that in the aftermath of a VNOC , Corbyn as Opposition Leader would be called to the Palace to 'try' to form a Government that would win an Affirmative vote. I am not sure that would occur without soundings having already taken place.
Yes, it's difficult to envisage exactly how things play out following a successful VONC but that's a decent enough guess.
I think he's doing great. Glad he prompted them to applaud, Theresa bless her would have just stumbled on getting croakier and croakier and looking miserable when applause did not materialise.
I turned him off when he got to electric planes.
Not a great speech is it, (or perhaps it's the delivery?).
It does seem that there is already advanced engineering for electric planes and innovation in this area by the UK could result in huge economic benefits
Is there? Boris is a salesman who doesn't do detail and listens to people who tell him what he wants to here or excites him.
Looking at the comments on here I'm reminded of the Monorail episode of the Simpsons..
Check out Pipistrel Electric Airplane
That's not exactly a jet engine is it...
Let's do some maths shall we. A a single Boeing 777 engine needs to provide 110,000 horsepower at cruising altitude and speed. There are 2 so you need 220,000 horsepower.
Now 1 horsepower = 746 watts.
So you need a battery system that can provide at any one time 164Megawatts and a battery system that holds 164mw/hrs worth of power for every hour of flying time. For a transatlantic flight that's something like 1320mw/hrs of power required or 15,500 of the largest battery available in a Tesla model S.
As for weight - the 85KWH battery pack in a Tesla weighs 520kg. And you need 15,500 of them....
Note I haven't bothered working out how the plane handles the additional weight or the space required for the batteries. I'll leave those additional issues to the reader.
I think he's doing great. Glad he prompted them to applaud, Theresa bless her would have just stumbled on getting croakier and croakier and looking miserable when applause did not materialise.
There is a wonderful video of the Steve Jobs NeXT launch, where he's demonstrating how easy it was to develop apps for his new system. And he pauses, awaiting applause, and nothing comes.
And he turns to the audience and repeats the line, more slowly, assuming the problem is at their end, rather than his.
It was utterly cringeworthy. And it reminded me of Boris this time around.
You don't ask people to applaud. If you need that you have a warm-up person (before the cameras roll) telling you what to do and (if organised and really desperate) prompts out of sight...
Boris was both desperate and dis-organised in his first key speech..
He's got the same problem as the old music hall comedians had in the 1950's.
Before the rise of TV, they could do the same act, night after night, for years. The act never got corny, because it was a different audience every night. Then TV came along, and their material was used up every night. Boris's act looks amusing with a hint of statesmanlike the first time you see it. But now more people are watching more often. The act needs to be fresh every time, so it won't be as rehearsed, so it won't be as good.
We are in uncharted FTPA territory here, but following a successful VNOC, I would expect discussions to take place between the Palace , the Cabinet Secretary and party leaders so as to form a judgement as to who is most likely to command a majority in the new circumstances. Some might argue that in the aftermath of a VNOC , Corbyn as Opposition Leader would be called to the Palace to 'try' to form a Government that would win an Affirmative vote. I am not sure that would occur without soundings having already taken place.
Johnson says spending all this money is good idea because the things he is proposing are popular and widely believed to be needed.
I can see Labour using this argument for all their spending too.
He is right. The only problem is that it is his Party who have consistently argued, over 9 years in government, that they were utterly irresponsible and unaffordable. Will he get away with it? Maybe.
It was unaffordable when the deficit was 10% of GDP.
It is because of the actions taken over the last 9 years that we can start to think about affording things now.
What happens when the deficit starts to rise again? Is that good or bad? Either better rail links across the North, a solution to social care and 20 000 new police are good ideas or not.
If the deficit rises again that is bad, unless it is countercyclical which it isn't atm.
However as long as the deficit is down we can "share the proceeds of growth" between continuing to keep the deficit down, and new priorities whether that be increased expenditure or reduced taxation.
The last 9 years have brought the deficit down by 9% of GDP. If we continued the path of the last 9 years then we would be running a budget surplus in 9 years time of 8% of GDP . . . that's not necessary!
If you look at the recent EU election result for Brecon and Radnor and the overall trend for higher turnout amongst Remainers then Bozo becoming PM has two probable effects.
Although you’d expect a bounce and a shift from BP to the Tories , you’re also likely to see this help Remainer turnout because of his no deal stance .
If you add together the EU election results into Brexit plus no deal .
You get BP 30.7+ Tories 7.9+ UKIP 2.7 = 41.3
The second vote , Remain
Lib Dems 23.4 + PC 20.4+ Greens 6.9+Ch UK 1.8= 52.5
Confused but anti no deal Labour 6.1
When one looks at these figures , and even if you put in the proviso that this was an EU election with a degree of protest vote , if you add recent polling in Wales on Remain v Leave then it’s likely the seat has now moved into the Remain category.
And given everything is now seen through the lens of Brexit the Lib Dems should have a very good chance of taking this .
'A very good chance of taking this.....'
You do understatement very well! They're 25/1 on with Betfair.
Would you like to give us your views on Manchester City's chances of scraping into the top five next season?
Very funny ! We live in weird times , making concrete forecasts is risky . Remember we were told the BP was a shoe in for Peterborough .
We are in uncharted FTPA territory here, but following a successful VNOC, I would expect discussions to take place between the Palace , the Cabinet Secretary and party leaders so as to form a judgement as to who is most likely to command a majority in the new circumstances. Some might argue that in the aftermath of a VNOC , Corbyn as Opposition Leader would be called to the Palace to 'try' to form a Government that would win an Affirmative vote. I am not sure that would occur without soundings having already taken place.
There is no parliamentary arithmetic that makes it possible for Corbyn to win such a vote
Even assuming he could get all Labour MPs to support him (and that is a big assumption), he would need more that the SNP, PC, Green and LDs to fall in with his plans.
Why would Chuka do anything to put Corbyn into Downing Street?
Even then the numbers don't add up. Too many anti-Corbyn independents for it to be possible.
Boris is getting huge coverage and is sequestering some of Corbyn's policies
I share doubts about his likely success but he has changed our politics in just a few days
He makes Corbyn look tired and negative and his enthusiam will be popular
I understand why he is angering many , especially those who want to remain, but his approach to the EU should have been from day 1, and for the first time the EU are facing a real problem with their intransigence
Dominic Cummings wants a deal and according to reports wants the 'Spartans' sidelined, so I would caution everyone to be aware that Boris and Cummings will be working on engineering a deal and that it is not off the table no matter the language
Is there a realistic chance that PM BJ could stand in a different constituency at the next GE? In which case, where? On paper, his result in Uxbridge and South Ruislip last time was not very convincing, and Baxter has it down as a very narrow Con Hold, with Labour only requiring a further 1.9 point swing to take it.
Shadsy has a price up that he will stand in a different seat: 10/1. Tempting?
Result GE17: Con (BJ) 23,716 Lab 18,682 LD 1,835 UKIP 1,577 Grn 884
We are in uncharted FTPA territory here, but following a successful VNOC, I would expect discussions to take place between the Palace , the Cabinet Secretary and party leaders so as to form a judgement as to who is most likely to command a majority in the new circumstances. Some might argue that in the aftermath of a VNOC , Corbyn as Opposition Leader would be called to the Palace to 'try' to form a Government that would win an Affirmative vote. I am not sure that would occur without soundings having already taken place.
My point is very specific. The motion stipulated in the Act says "That this House has confidence in Her Majesty’s Government." There can be only one government at a time, and only one prime minister. Clearly the Act must be referring to the alternative government, and by the same token it must be referring to the alternate prime minister.
And really this has to be the case, because the Act is framed in such a way as to address only the question of fixed terms. It's not intended to change the way prime ministers are appointed. So what would happen is the normal process by which the Queen asks someone to form a government. Clearly that has to happen before the House can express confidence in that government. And there's no way Johnson could still be prime minister after the Queen asked someone else to form a government. The outgoing prime minister always resigns before the new one is asked to form a government.
We are in uncharted FTPA territory here, but following a successful VNOC, I would expect discussions to take place between the Palace , the Cabinet Secretary and party leaders so as to form a judgement as to who is most likely to command a majority in the new circumstances. Some might argue that in the aftermath of a VNOC , Corbyn as Opposition Leader would be called to the Palace to 'try' to form a Government that would win an Affirmative vote. I am not sure that would occur without soundings having already taken place.
Doesn't the FTPA come up for review next year?
Consultation was announced yesterday. You can send in your comments.
We are in uncharted FTPA territory here, but following a successful VNOC, I would expect discussions to take place between the Palace , the Cabinet Secretary and party leaders so as to form a judgement as to who is most likely to command a majority in the new circumstances. Some might argue that in the aftermath of a VNOC , Corbyn as Opposition Leader would be called to the Palace to 'try' to form a Government that would win an Affirmative vote. I am not sure that would occur without soundings having already taken place.
Yes, it's difficult to envisage exactly how things play out following a successful VONC but that's a decent enough guess.
No.
In that case the motion specified by the Act would have to say something like "That this House has confidence in the hypothetical government that the Queen has asked someone else to try to form." It doesn't say anything like that, for obvious reasons.
Is there a realistic chance that PM BJ could stand in a different constituency at the next GE? In which case, where? On paper, his result in Uxbridge and South Ruislip last time was not very convincing, and Baxter has it down as a very narrow Con Hold, with Labour only requiring a further 1.9 point swing to take it.
Shadsy has a price up that he will stand in a different seat: 10/1. Tempting?
Result GE17: Con (BJ) 23,716 Lab 18,682 LD 1,835 UKIP 1,577 Grn 884
Boris is getting huge coverage and is sequestering some of Corbyn's policies
I share doubts about his likely success but he has changed our politics in just a few days
He makes Corbyn look tired and negative and his enthusiam will be popular
I understand why he is angering many , especially those who want to remain, but his approach to the EU should have been from day 1, and for the first time the EU are facing a real problem with their intransigence
Dominic Cummings wants a deal and according to reports wants the 'Spartans' sidelined, so I would caution everyone to be aware that Boris and Cummings will be working on engineering a deal and that it is not off the table no matter the language
It's heartbreaking how quickly you've discarded May to become a Borisbot. Party before country.
I think he's doing great. Glad he prompted them to applaud, Theresa bless her would have just stumbled on getting croakier and croakier and looking miserable when applause did not materialise.
I turned him off when he got to electric planes.
Not a great speech is it, (or perhaps it's the delivery?).
It does seem that there is already advanced engineering for electric planes and innovation in this area by the UK could result in huge economic benefits
And Brexit makes it better how exactly?
We do not need to be in the EU to develop electric engineering
Boris is getting huge coverage and is sequestering some of Corbyn's policies
I share doubts about his likely success but he has changed our politics in just a few days
He makes Corbyn look tired and negative and his enthusiam will be popular
I understand why he is angering many , especially those who want to remain, but his approach to the EU should have been from day 1, and for the first time the EU are facing a real problem with their intransigence
Dominic Cummings wants a deal and according to reports wants the 'Spartans' sidelined, so I would caution everyone to be aware that Boris and Cummings will be working on engineering a deal and that it is not off the table no matter the language
Labour have some serious thinking to do this august. Do they really want an election this autumn. If not, because they now fear they will lose (and that means the end of the Dear Leader), will they in the end send their MPs through the division for Boris's WA?
NB: this assumes the EU play ball and at least give him some lipstick for the pig. Not a given.
Surprised you missed Summer 2016 Britain - The EU Referendum itself. The timing may not have been a shock but the result certainly was.
Clearly you weren't following the polling. My final prediction, on German TV at 2200 on June 22nd 2016 was that it was too close to call - which given the outcome was an pretty good prediction.
The idea that this wasn't forecast is a myth. Please stop repeating it.
I refuse to go count the total number of surveys showing a remain or leave lead over a X time period before the referendum again. I just won't do it.
(the answer is it was exactly 50/50)
Have a look at the 12 months before the referendum was called rather than the days before the vote was counted.
Like the 2017 General Election. The result is much less shocking by comparing to final polls but the appropriate comparison IMO is not to final polls but to the polls befors the election was called. Then it is truly shocking.
In 2013 when Cameron announced there would be a referendum the next 16 opinion polls has 15 leave leads and a draw.
Shocking that Leave won.
Indeed and had the polls continued like that through 2015 and early 2016 it would have been far less shocking that leave won. In fact, had the polls continued like that through 2015 I suspect that Cameron would have tried a bit harder in his renegotiation and not gone so quickly to a referendum (remember it was supposed to be by 2018).
However after a referendum was announced the polls swung heavily back to Remain. It looked like after all the huffing and puffing when it wasn't a serious option, that Britain wasn't seriously going to leave afterall.
Throughout 2015 and early 2016, Remain led by 8% on average, but there was huge variation in the polling.
What planet is Rees-Mogg on? Imperial Units as laid down by parliament in 1824 include the chain, furlong and the league as measures of distance, the perch and rood as measures of area and the peck and bushel as measures of volume. And then the apothecaries measures of minim, scruple and drachm.(separate Act of Parliament) A prize for anyone who can correctly identify all of those without looking them up.
Boris is getting huge coverage and is sequestering some of Corbyn's policies
I share doubts about his likely success but he has changed our politics in just a few days
He makes Corbyn look tired and negative and his enthusiam will be popular
I understand why he is angering many , especially those who want to remain, but his approach to the EU should have been from day 1, and for the first time the EU are facing a real problem with their intransigence
Dominic Cummings wants a deal and according to reports wants the 'Spartans' sidelined, so I would caution everyone to be aware that Boris and Cummings will be working on engineering a deal and that it is not off the table no matter the language
The central No Deal fact remains the same: it hurts us a whole lot more than them. What has changed is that the UK government doesn’t seem to care about that anymore. So a UK crash-out is now much more likely.
You are right on Corbyn. Johnson is conceding the Tories have got it badly wrong and that huge increases in public spending are necessary. For a half-way - even quarter-way - Labour leader this would be a gift.
Johnson’s entire strategy is predicated on Corbyn’s uselessness and the stupidity of Labour members.
We are in uncharted FTPA territory here, but following a successful VNOC, I would expect discussions to take place between the Palace , the Cabinet Secretary and party leaders so as to form a judgement as to who is most likely to command a majority in the new circumstances. Some might argue that in the aftermath of a VNOC , Corbyn as Opposition Leader would be called to the Palace to 'try' to form a Government that would win an Affirmative vote. I am not sure that would occur without soundings having already taken place.
There is no parliamentary arithmetic that makes it possible for Corbyn to win such a vote
Even assuming he could get all Labour MPs to support him (and that is a big assumption), he would need more that the SNP, PC, Green and LDs to fall in with his plans.
Why would Chuka do anything to put Corbyn into Downing Street?
Even then the numbers don't add up. Too many anti-Corbyn independents for it to be possible.
Absolutely right. A Starmer, or Clarke-led administration to Revoke and call a GE is conceivable, and might have the numbers, but we are a long, long way from what would be a constitutional crisis.
I think he's doing great. Glad he prompted them to applaud, Theresa bless her would have just stumbled on getting croakier and croakier and looking miserable when applause did not materialise.
I turned him off when he got to electric planes.
Not a great speech is it, (or perhaps it's the delivery?).
It does seem that there is already advanced engineering for electric planes and innovation in this area by the UK could result in huge economic benefits
Is there? Boris is a salesman who doesn't do detail and listens to people who tell him what he wants to here or excites him.
Looking at the comments on here I'm reminded of the Monorail episode of the Simpsons..
Check out Pipistrel Electric Airplane
That's not exactly a jet engine is it...
Let's do some maths shall we. A a single Boeing 777 engine needs to provide 110,000 horsepower at cruising altitude and speed. There are 2 so you need 220,000 horsepower.
Now 1 horsepower = 746 watts.
So you need a battery system that can provide at any one time 164Megawatts and a battery system that holds 164mw/hrs worth of power for every hour of flying time. For a transatlantic flight that's something like 1320mw/hrs of power required or 15,500 of the largest battery available in a Tesla model S.
As for weight - the 85KWH battery pack in a Tesla weighs 520kg. And you need 15,500 of them....
Note I haven't bothered working out how the plane handles the additional weight or the space required for the batteries. I'll leave those additional issues to the reader.
I do not think anyone is expecting a 747 or 380 electric aircraft soon but by 2050 or even earlier who knows, I would not rule anything out
Your numbers prove the lie , just over half of EU students out of total 41K is NOT overwhelmed
Is your inability to read why you didn't get in to Edinburgh Malk?
I had no need to worry about that Scott, I was DUX of the school and could do well without having to go to Uni, I preferred wine , women and song and still manage to make more than most of the ones who did go to Uni.
I wouldn't bet on it. They will always blame somebody else, and there will be plenty of English people willing to believe them, no doubt egged on by our wonderful free press.
You can look to any right-wing playbook for the list of potential enemies and traitors to blame. The 1930s are a good place to start.
The 1930's don't tell us much about modern politics.
We are in uncharted FTPA territory here, but following a successful VNOC, I would expect discussions to take place between the Palace , the Cabinet Secretary and party leaders so as to form a judgement as to who is most likely to command a majority in the new circumstances. Some might argue that in the aftermath of a VNOC , Corbyn as Opposition Leader would be called to the Palace to 'try' to form a Government that would win an Affirmative vote. I am not sure that would occur without soundings having already taken place.
Is there a realistic chance that PM BJ could stand in a different constituency at the next GE? In which case, where? On paper, his result in Uxbridge and South Ruislip last time was not very convincing, and Baxter has it down as a very narrow Con Hold, with Labour only requiring a further 1.9 point swing to take it.
Shadsy has a price up that he will stand in a different seat: 10/1. Tempting?
Result GE17: Con (BJ) 23,716 Lab 18,682 LD 1,835 UKIP 1,577 Grn 884
I'd expect Boris to hold Uxbridge quite comfortably. It's not typical of Greater London.
What if TBP stand, Sean - doesn't that hole him below the waterline?
No, because he'd get the big majority of the anti-EU vote. He's the incumbent, very high profile, popular with right wing voters, and TBP would be seen as splitters.
I think he's doing great. Glad he prompted them to applaud, Theresa bless her would have just stumbled on getting croakier and croakier and looking miserable when applause did not materialise.
I turned him off when he got to electric planes.
Not a great speech is it, (or perhaps it's the delivery?).
It does seem that there is already advanced engineering for electric planes and innovation in this area by the UK could result in huge economic benefits
Is there? Boris is a salesman who doesn't do detail and listens to people who tell him what he wants to here or excites him.
Looking at the comments on here I'm reminded of the Monorail episode of the Simpsons..
Check out Pipistrel Electric Airplane
That's not exactly a jet engine is it...
Let's do some maths shall we. A a single Boeing 777 engine needs to provide 110,000 horsepower at cruising altitude and speed. There are 2 so you need 220,000 horsepower.
Now 1 horsepower = 746 watts.
So you need a battery system that can provide at any one time 164Megawatts and a battery system that holds 164mw/hrs worth of power for every hour of flying time. For a transatlantic flight that's something like 1320mw/hrs of power required or 15,500 of the largest battery available in a Tesla model S.
As for weight - the 85KWH battery pack in a Tesla weighs 520kg. And you need 15,500 of them....
Note I haven't bothered working out how the plane handles the additional weight or the space required for the batteries. I'll leave those additional issues to the reader.
Boris is getting huge coverage and is sequestering some of Corbyn's policies
I share doubts about his likely success but he has changed our politics in just a few days
He makes Corbyn look tired and negative and his enthusiam will be popular
I understand why he is angering many , especially those who want to remain, but his approach to the EU should have been from day 1, and for the first time the EU are facing a real problem with their intransigence
Dominic Cummings wants a deal and according to reports wants the 'Spartans' sidelined, so I would caution everyone to be aware that Boris and Cummings will be working on engineering a deal and that it is not off the table no matter the language
Don't think many are "angered" by Boris. Mild bemusement, maybe, that a few jokes, speaking loudly, and a threat that we really, really mean to commit an act of self-harm, is seen to be a sure fire way to dislodge Brusssels from its consistently held position.
We are in uncharted FTPA territory here, but following a successful VNOC, I would expect discussions to take place between the Palace , the Cabinet Secretary and party leaders so as to form a judgement as to who is most likely to command a majority in the new circumstances. Some might argue that in the aftermath of a VNOC , Corbyn as Opposition Leader would be called to the Palace to 'try' to form a Government that would win an Affirmative vote. I am not sure that would occur without soundings having already taken place.
There is no parliamentary arithmetic that makes it possible for Corbyn to win such a vote
Even assuming he could get all Labour MPs to support him (and that is a big assumption), he would need more that the SNP, PC, Green and LDs to fall in with his plans.
Why would Chuka do anything to put Corbyn into Downing Street?
Even then the numbers don't add up. Too many anti-Corbyn independents for it to be possible.
For the specific purpose of avoiding a No Deal Brexit, I think Corbyn would obtain the support of those people. The uncertainty relates to what the alienated Tory Remainers would do when faced with such a last resort option!
Is there a realistic chance that PM BJ could stand in a different constituency at the next GE? In which case, where? On paper, his result in Uxbridge and South Ruislip last time was not very convincing, and Baxter has it down as a very narrow Con Hold, with Labour only requiring a further 1.9 point swing to take it.
Shadsy has a price up that he will stand in a different seat: 10/1. Tempting?
Result GE17: Con (BJ) 23,716 Lab 18,682 LD 1,835 UKIP 1,577 Grn 884
I'd expect Boris to hold Uxbridge quite comfortably. It's not typical of Greater London.
What if TBP stand, Sean - doesn't that hole him below the waterline?
No, because he'd get the big majority of the anti-EU vote. He's the incumbent, very high profile, popular with right wing voters, and TBP would be seen as splitters.
You don't think there's any risk he'll ever be seen as May 2.0?
Boris is getting huge coverage and is sequestering some of Corbyn's policies
I share doubts about his likely success but he has changed our politics in just a few days
He makes Corbyn look tired and negative and his enthusiam will be popular
I understand why he is angering many , especially those who want to remain, but his approach to the EU should have been from day 1, and for the first time the EU are facing a real problem with their intransigence
Dominic Cummings wants a deal and according to reports wants the 'Spartans' sidelined, so I would caution everyone to be aware that Boris and Cummings will be working on engineering a deal and that it is not off the table no matter the language
It's heartbreaking how quickly you've discarded May to become a Borisbot. Party before country.
It is , and backing Corbyn policies now because Boris has said so. Previously he discarded them, as the magic money tree.
We are in uncharted FTPA territory here, but following a successful VNOC, I would expect discussions to take place between the Palace , the Cabinet Secretary and party leaders so as to form a judgement as to who is most likely to command a majority in the new circumstances. Some might argue that in the aftermath of a VNOC , Corbyn as Opposition Leader would be called to the Palace to 'try' to form a Government that would win an Affirmative vote. I am not sure that would occur without soundings having already taken place.
There is no parliamentary arithmetic that makes it possible for Corbyn to win such a vote
Even assuming he could get all Labour MPs to support him (and that is a big assumption), he would need more that the SNP, PC, Green and LDs to fall in with his plans.
Why would Chuka do anything to put Corbyn into Downing Street?
Even then the numbers don't add up. Too many anti-Corbyn independents for it to be possible.
For the specific purpose of avoiding a No Deal Brexit, I think Corbyn would obtain the support of those people. The uncertainty relates to what the alienated Tory Remainers would do when faced with such a last resort option!
Corbyn cannot be sure all his mps would support him
Let's do some maths shall we. A a single Boeing 777 engine needs to provide 110,000 horsepower at cruising altitude and speed. There are 2 so you need 220,000 horsepower.
Now 1 horsepower = 746 watts.
So you need a battery system that can provide at any one time 164Megawatts and a battery system that holds 164mw/hrs worth of power for every hour of flying time. For a transatlantic flight that's something like 1320mw/hrs of power required or 15,500 of the largest battery available in a Tesla model S.
As for weight - the 85KWH battery pack in a Tesla weighs 520kg. And you need 15,500 of them....
Note I haven't bothered working out how the plane handles the additional weight or the space required for the batteries. I'll leave those additional issues to the reader.
The weight is the killer. Even if you could develop a battery with similar energy density to aviation fuel, and even if you had a super efficient motor, you still have to carry that full weight of batteries from take-off to landing. This is not an easy to solve problem.
Is there a realistic chance that PM BJ could stand in a different constituency at the next GE? In which case, where? On paper, his result in Uxbridge and South Ruislip last time was not very convincing, and Baxter has it down as a very narrow Con Hold, with Labour only requiring a further 1.9 point swing to take it.
Shadsy has a price up that he will stand in a different seat: 10/1. Tempting?
Result GE17: Con (BJ) 23,716 Lab 18,682 LD 1,835 UKIP 1,577 Grn 884
I'd expect Boris to hold Uxbridge quite comfortably. It's not typical of Greater London.
What if TBP stand, Sean - doesn't that hole him below the waterline?
No, because he'd get the big majority of the anti-EU vote. He's the incumbent, very high profile, popular with right wing voters, and TBP would be seen as splitters.
You don't think there's any risk he'll ever be seen as May 2.0?
We are in uncharted FTPA territory here, but following a successful VNOC, I would expect discussions to take place between the Palace , the Cabinet Secretary and party leaders so as to form a judgement as to who is most likely to command a majority in the new circumstances. Some might argue that in the aftermath of a VNOC , Corbyn as Opposition Leader would be called to the Palace to 'try' to form a Government that would win an Affirmative vote. I am not sure that would occur without soundings having already taken place.
Yes, it's difficult to envisage exactly how things play out following a successful VONC but that's a decent enough guess.
No.
In that case the motion specified by the Act would have to say something like "That this House has confidence in the hypothetical government that the Queen has asked someone else to try to form." It doesn't say anything like that, for obvious reasons.
But it is not clear that in the aftermath of a successful VNOC that we would get to the point of an Affirmative Vote being held in another Government - if there is no evidence that anybody else is likely to command a majority. Under those circumstances, it seems likely that Boris would remain PM in a caretaker capacity. I may be wrong - and -in a way- I hope I am!
"Prime Minister Boris Johnson will pledge to fund a new high-speed rail route between Leeds and Manchester." says an article on the BBC news website. What a complete fib. Boris won't fund it, we poor taxpayers will, and the same goes for all the other grandiose giveaways he is busy telling us about.
We are in uncharted FTPA territory here, but following a successful VNOC, I would expect discussions to take place between the Palace , the Cabinet Secretary and party leaders so as to form a judgement as to who is most likely to command a majority in the new circumstances. Some might argue that in the aftermath of a VNOC , Corbyn as Opposition Leader would be called to the Palace to 'try' to form a Government that would win an Affirmative vote. I am not sure that would occur without soundings having already taken place.
There is no parliamentary arithmetic that makes it possible for Corbyn to win such a vote
Even assuming he could get all Labour MPs to support him (and that is a big assumption), he would need more that the SNP, PC, Green and LDs to fall in with his plans.
Why would Chuka do anything to put Corbyn into Downing Street?
Even then the numbers don't add up. Too many anti-Corbyn independents for it to be possible.
For the specific purpose of avoiding a No Deal Brexit, I think Corbyn would obtain the support of those people. The uncertainty relates to what the alienated Tory Remainers would do when faced with such a last resort option!
Corbyn cannot be sure all his mps would support him
They would under those circumstances - or be faced with immediate expulsion.
Boris is getting huge coverage and is sequestering some of Corbyn's policies
I share doubts about his likely success but he has changed our politics in just a few days
He makes Corbyn look tired and negative and his enthusiam will be popular
I understand why he is angering many , especially those who want to remain, but his approach to the EU should have been from day 1, and for the first time the EU are facing a real problem with their intransigence
Dominic Cummings wants a deal and according to reports wants the 'Spartans' sidelined, so I would caution everyone to be aware that Boris and Cummings will be working on engineering a deal and that it is not off the table no matter the language
It's heartbreaking how quickly you've discarded May to become a Borisbot. Party before country.
It is , and backing Corbyn policies now because Boris has said so. Previously he discarded them, as the magic money tree.
Excuse me.
I have not changed my view that I want a deal and no deal sees me resign from the party
However, I do like the domestic policies being put forward
And as far as party before country goes, a deal is the correct thing to do for democracy
Post a deal, it is an honest position to campaign to re-join
I would add that above even Brexit, my desire to see Corbyn and his associates defeated is number one
Let's do some maths shall we. A a single Boeing 777 engine needs to provide 110,000 horsepower at cruising altitude and speed. There are 2 so you need 220,000 horsepower.
Now 1 horsepower = 746 watts.
So you need a battery system that can provide at any one time 164Megawatts and a battery system that holds 164mw/hrs worth of power for every hour of flying time. For a transatlantic flight that's something like 1320mw/hrs of power required or 15,500 of the largest battery available in a Tesla model S.
As for weight - the 85KWH battery pack in a Tesla weighs 520kg. And you need 15,500 of them....
Note I haven't bothered working out how the plane handles the additional weight or the space required for the batteries. I'll leave those additional issues to the reader.
The weight is the killer. Even if you could develop a battery with similar energy density to aviation fuel, and even if you had a super efficient motor, you still have to carry that full weight of batteries from take-off to landing. This is not an easy to solve problem.
just make it like Saturn V , have the batteries jettison by parachute after takeoff , have a fleet of lorries going around picking them up.
On topic, July 1914 was quite eventful on three fronts: a huge financial crash, looming civil war in Ireland and some confused goings-on in the Balkans.
Just dropping in.
I thought about 1914 but rejected it on the grounds that it was a bit obvious. Also, I was thinking about Poland and Eastern Europe yesterday for reasons which don't need airing here. I still think the events of the summers of 1980 and 1989 (and the autumn in the latter case) to be some of the most momentous and hopeful of my life. Watching history being made in front of one's eyes was unbelievable.
Let's do some maths shall we. A a single Boeing 777 engine needs to provide 110,000 horsepower at cruising altitude and speed. There are 2 so you need 220,000 horsepower.
Now 1 horsepower = 746 watts.
So you need a battery system that can provide at any one time 164Megawatts and a battery system that holds 164mw/hrs worth of power for every hour of flying time. For a transatlantic flight that's something like 1320mw/hrs of power required or 15,500 of the largest battery available in a Tesla model S.
As for weight - the 85KWH battery pack in a Tesla weighs 520kg. And you need 15,500 of them....
Note I haven't bothered working out how the plane handles the additional weight or the space required for the batteries. I'll leave those additional issues to the reader.
That's with today's technology. Nobody is saying that we will be building jet engines using today's technology! You couldn't build a Tesla with the technology of 20 years ago either. Technology is continuously evolving, a couple of years ago the furthest you could go in a car with was about 60 miles now you can get cars with a range of about 330 miles, which matches my petrol car's range on a full tank of fuel.
Battery packs have been getting progressively better every year and there is a lot of work being done to develop the next step change generation of batteries (moving away from Lithium).
Similarly regarding horsepower efficiency is continuously improving.
Finally jet fuel doesn't exactly weigh nothing. I've been trying to estimate how much fuel a jet carries by weight, as far as I can tell a US gallon of fuel weighs 3kg and a 777 carries 47,890 US gallons of fuel. So that is 143,670 kg of fuel being carried.
So yes 520kg is a lot, but already you could carry 276 of them without changing the weight. Now that doesn't match your 15,500 but it is far from unbelievable that technological improvements not just can but will bridge that gap.
Finally of course before we get fully electronic planes we are likely, like with cars, to see hybrid planes first - which can burn fuel for the far more demanding acceleration and take off but where electricity can be an alternative for fuel for some or all of the cruising.
Let's do some maths shall we. A a single Boeing 777 engine needs to provide 110,000 horsepower at cruising altitude and speed. There are 2 so you need 220,000 horsepower.
Now 1 horsepower = 746 watts.
So you need a battery system that can provide at any one time 164Megawatts and a battery system that holds 164mw/hrs worth of power for every hour of flying time. For a transatlantic flight that's something like 1320mw/hrs of power required or 15,500 of the largest battery available in a Tesla model S.
As for weight - the 85KWH battery pack in a Tesla weighs 520kg. And you need 15,500 of them....
Note I haven't bothered working out how the plane handles the additional weight or the space required for the batteries. I'll leave those additional issues to the reader.
The weight is the killer. Even if you could develop a battery with similar energy density to aviation fuel, and even if you had a super efficient motor, you still have to carry that full weight of batteries from take-off to landing. This is not an easy to solve problem.
just make it like Saturn V , have the batteries jettison by parachute after takeoff , have a fleet of lorries going around picking them up.
"Prime Minister Boris Johnson will pledge to fund a new high-speed rail route between Leeds and Manchester." says an article on the BBC news website. What a complete fib. Boris won't fund it, we poor taxpayers will, and the same goes for all the other grandiose giveaways he is busy telling us about.
It is desperately needed. Has been for decades. Would be a pittance compared to London infrastructure spending. Wait. Was that my brew I drank? Or did someone spike it with Boris kool aid?
Johnson's promise to recruit 20,000 new police men and women that he voted to abolish is an absolute bobby dazzler: an admission that he was totally and utterly wrong. And he has also admitted that the Tories have been wrong not to invest heavily in infrastructure.
Labour should be doing high fives and dancing with joy - it is a political gift beyond precedent. Instead, they are attacking the LibDems.
If Mr Mark is around, I did suggest to you a couple of hours ago that you ought not to be impatient. Another MP has now come over to the Lib Dems. I have a feeling that Heidi Allen will not be the last.
Boris is getting huge coverage and is sequestering some of Corbyn's policies
I share doubts about his likely success but he has changed our politics in just a few days
He makes Corbyn look tired and negative and his enthusiam will be popular
I understand why he is angering many , especially those who want to remain, but his approach to the EU should have been from day 1, and for the first time the EU are facing a real problem with their intransigence
Dominic Cummings wants a deal and according to reports wants the 'Spartans' sidelined, so I would caution everyone to be aware that Boris and Cummings will be working on engineering a deal and that it is not off the table no matter the language
It's heartbreaking how quickly you've discarded May to become a Borisbot. Party before country.
It is , and backing Corbyn policies now because Boris has said so. Previously he discarded them, as the magic money tree.
Excuse me.
I have not changed my view that I want a deal and no deal sees me resign from the party
However, I do like the domestic policies being put forward
And as far as party before country goes, a deal is the correct thing to do for democracy
Post a deal, it is an honest position to campaign to re-join
I would add that above even Brexit, my desire to see Corbyn and his associates defeated is number one
I would prefer if Boris would cut some spending pledges like Hs2 and Heathrow 3. However I say again when Labour announce spending commitments , the first question, is where is the money coming from. The same should apply to your support for Boris.
Johnson's promise to recruit 20,000 new police men and women that he voted to abolish is an absolute bobby dazzler: an admission that he was totally and utterly wrong. And he has also admitted that the Tories have been wrong not to invest heavily in infrastructure.
Labour should be doing high fives and dancing with joy - it is a political gift beyond precedent. Instead, they are attacking the LibDems.
Surely you've not drank Corbynistas Kool-Aid? Surely you didn't think austerity could be avoided when we were running a £150 billion deficit?
In an ideal world nobody would want police numbers cutting or infrastructure projects put on hold but as a country we literally couldn't afford that expenditure when the deficit was 10% of GDP. It is only because of the actions of the last nine years that now we can start to expand projects and start rebuilding what has been cut because now it can be afforded once more. But if the economy is trashed then it will be unavoidable once more which is why we need to avoid Corbynistas extravagence.
Boris is getting huge coverage and is sequestering some of Corbyn's policies
I share doubts about his likely success but he has changed our politics in just a few days
He makes Corbyn look tired and negative and his enthusiam will be popular
I understand why he is angering many , especially those who want to remain, but his approach to the EU should have been from day 1, and for the first time the EU are facing a real problem with their intransigence
Dominic Cummings wants a deal and according to reports wants the 'Spartans' sidelined, so I would caution everyone to be aware that Boris and Cummings will be working on engineering a deal and that it is not off the table no matter the language
The central No Deal fact remains the same: it hurts us a whole lot more than them. What has changed is that the UK government doesn’t seem to care about that anymore. So a UK crash-out is now much more likely.
You are right on Corbyn. Johnson is conceding the Tories have got it badly wrong and that huge increases in public spending are necessary. For a half-way - even quarter-way - Labour leader this would be a gift.
Johnson’s entire strategy is predicated on Corbyn’s uselessness and the stupidity of Labour members.
It is not just Corbyn's policies Boris is nicking. Boris seeks to nullify Labour's core election tactic that we saw in 2017 and at Peterborough, which is to campaign on things that matter to voters rather than Brexit.
Boris is setting up the Tories' next campaign as pro cake and pro eating, pro-Brexit and pro-social and economic investment.
Johnson's promise to recruit 20,000 new police men and women that he voted to abolish is an absolute bobby dazzler: an admission that he was totally and utterly wrong. And he has also admitted that the Tories have been wrong not to invest heavily in infrastructure.
Labour should be doing high fives and dancing with joy - it is a political gift beyond precedent. Instead, they are attacking the LibDems.
No doubt McDonnell is watching the Boris spending plans with interest.
Boris is getting huge coverage and is sequestering some of Corbyn's policies
I share doubts about his likely success but he has changed our politics in just a few days
He makes Corbyn look tired and negative and his enthusiam will be popular
I understand why he is angering many , especially those who want to remain, but his approach to the EU should have been from day 1, and for the first time the EU are facing a real problem with their intransigence
Dominic Cummings wants a deal and according to reports wants the 'Spartans' sidelined, so I would caution everyone to be aware that Boris and Cummings will be working on engineering a deal and that it is not off the table no matter the language
It's heartbreaking how quickly you've discarded May to become a Borisbot. Party before country.
It is , and backing Corbyn policies now because Boris has said so. Previously he discarded them, as the magic money tree.
Excuse me.
I have not changed my view that I want a deal and no deal sees me resign from the party
However, I do like the domestic policies being put forward
And as far as party before country goes, a deal is the correct thing to do for democracy
Post a deal, it is an honest position to campaign to re-join
I would add that above even Brexit, my desire to see Corbyn and his associates defeated is number one
I would prefer if Boris would cut some spending pledges like Hs2 and Heathrow 3. However I say again when Labour announce spending commitments , the first question, is where is the money coming from. The same should apply to your support for Boris.
The spending is coming from having managed the economy well and brought the deficit down, debt falling and the economy still growing.
Let's do some maths shall we. A a single Boeing 777 engine needs to provide 110,000 horsepower at cruising altitude and speed. There are 2 so you need 220,000 horsepower.
Now 1 horsepower = 746 watts.
So you need a battery system that can provide at any one time 164Megawatts and a battery system that holds 164mw/hrs worth of power for every hour of flying time. For a transatlantic flight that's something like 1320mw/hrs of power required or 15,500 of the largest battery available in a Tesla model S.
As for weight - the 85KWH battery pack in a Tesla weighs 520kg. And you need 15,500 of them....
Note I haven't bothered working out how the plane handles the additional weight or the space required for the batteries. I'll leave those additional issues to the reader.
The weight is the killer. Even if you could develop a battery with similar energy density to aviation fuel, and even if you had a super efficient motor, you still have to carry that full weight of batteries from take-off to landing. This is not an easy to solve problem.
just make it like Saturn V , have the batteries jettison by parachute after takeoff , have a fleet of lorries going around picking them up.
The big difference is that with a rocket the fuel is the vast majority of the mass, about 20:1 with Saturn V. It's really, really hard to beat burning fuel.
Johnson's promise to recruit 20,000 new police men and women that he voted to abolish is an absolute bobby dazzler: an admission that he was totally and utterly wrong. And he has also admitted that the Tories have been wrong not to invest heavily in infrastructure.
Labour should be doing high fives and dancing with joy - it is a political gift beyond precedent. Instead, they are attacking the LibDems.
Surely you've not drank Corbynistas Kool-Aid? Surely you didn't think austerity could be avoided when we were running a £150 billion deficit?
In an ideal world nobody would want police numbers cutting or infrastructure projects put on hold but as a country we literally couldn't afford that expenditure when the deficit was 10% of GDP. It is only because of the actions of the last nine years that now we can start to expand projects and start rebuilding what has been cut because now it can be afforded once more. But if the economy is trashed then it will be unavoidable once more which is why we need to avoid Corbynistas extravagence.
How many lives were lost and ruined as a result of those 20,000 police cuts that Johnson now admits were wrong? Did you hear what Johnson said today about the economic benefits of infrastructure spending?
Boris is getting huge coverage and is sequestering some of Corbyn's policies
I share doubts about his likely success but he has changed our politics in just a few days
He makes Corbyn look tired and negative and his enthusiam will be popular
I understand why he is angering many , especially those who want to remain, but his approach to the EU should have been from day 1, and for the first time the EU are facing a real problem with their intransigence
Dominic Cummings wants a deal and according to reports wants the 'Spartans' sidelined, so I would caution everyone to be aware that Boris and Cummings will be working on engineering a deal and that it is not off the table no matter the language
The central No Deal fact remains the same: it hurts us a whole lot more than them. What has changed is that the UK government doesn’t seem to care about that anymore. So a UK crash-out is now much more likely.
You are right on Corbyn. Johnson is conceding the Tories have got it badly wrong and that huge increases in public spending are necessary. For a half-way - even quarter-way - Labour leader this would be a gift.
Johnson’s entire strategy is predicated on Corbyn’s uselessness and the stupidity of Labour members.
It is not just Corbyn's policies Boris is nicking. Boris seeks to nullify Labour's core election tactic that we saw in 2017 and at Peterborough, which is to campaign on things that matter to voters rather than Brexit.
Boris is setting up the Tories' next campaign as pro cake and pro eating, pro-Brexit and pro-social and economic investment.
Yep - that's why I expect him to be the last Tory PM of my lifetime. He is going to disappoint so many people.
Boris is getting huge coverage and is sequestering some of Corbyn's policies
I share doubts about his likely success but he has changed our politics in just a few days
He makes Corbyn look tired and negative and his enthusiam will be popular
I understand why he is angering many , especially those who want to remain, but his approach to the EU should have been from day 1, and for the first time the EU are facing a real problem with their intransigence
Dominic Cummings wants a deal and according to reports wants the 'Spartans' sidelined, so I would caution everyone to be aware that Boris and Cummings will be working on engineering a deal and that it is not off the table no matter the language
It's heartbreaking how quickly you've discarded May to become a Borisbot. Party before country.
It is , and backing Corbyn policies now because Boris has said so. Previously he discarded them, as the magic money tree.
Excuse me.
I have not changed my view that I want a deal and no deal sees me resign from the party
However, I do like the domestic policies being put forward
And as far as party before country goes, a deal is the correct thing to do for democracy
Post a deal, it is an honest position to campaign to re-join
I would add that above even Brexit, my desire to see Corbyn and his associates defeated is number one
I would prefer if Boris would cut some spending pledges like Hs2 and Heathrow 3. However I say again when Labour announce spending commitments , the first question, is where is the money coming from. The same should apply to your support for Boris.
The spending is coming from having managed the economy well and brought the deficit down, debt falling and the economy still growing.
Johnson's promise to recruit 20,000 new police men and women that he voted to abolish is an absolute bobby dazzler: an admission that he was totally and utterly wrong. And he has also admitted that the Tories have been wrong not to invest heavily in infrastructure.
Labour should be doing high fives and dancing with joy - it is a political gift beyond precedent. Instead, they are attacking the LibDems.
Surely you've not drank Corbynistas Kool-Aid? Surely you didn't think austerity could be avoided when we were running a £150 billion deficit?
In an ideal world nobody would want police numbers cutting or infrastructure projects put on hold but as a country we literally couldn't afford that expenditure when the deficit was 10% of GDP. It is only because of the actions of the last nine years that now we can start to expand projects and start rebuilding what has been cut because now it can be afforded once more. But if the economy is trashed then it will be unavoidable once more which is why we need to avoid Corbynistas extravagence.
You are happy to trash the economy to secure Brexit. As are Boris Johnson and the Tories.
If Mr Mark is around, I did suggest to you a couple of hours ago that you ought not to be impatient. Another MP has now come over to the Lib Dems. I have a feeling that Heidi Allen will not be the last.
I think she has not actually joined, she is just out campaigning with them.
Johnson's promise to recruit 20,000 new police men and women that he voted to abolish is an absolute bobby dazzler: an admission that he was totally and utterly wrong. And he has also admitted that the Tories have been wrong not to invest heavily in infrastructure.
Labour should be doing high fives and dancing with joy - it is a political gift beyond precedent. Instead, they are attacking the LibDems.
Surely you've not drank Corbynistas Kool-Aid? Surely you didn't think austerity could be avoided when we were running a £150 billion deficit?
In an ideal world nobody would want police numbers cutting or infrastructure projects put on hold but as a country we literally couldn't afford that expenditure when the deficit was 10% of GDP. It is only because of the actions of the last nine years that now we can start to expand projects and start rebuilding what has been cut because now it can be afforded once more. But if the economy is trashed then it will be unavoidable once more which is why we need to avoid Corbynistas extravagence.
How many lives were lost and ruined as a result of those 20,000 police cuts that Johnson now admits were wrong? Did you hear what Johnson said today about the economic benefits of infrastructure spending?
There are also benefits for not being bankrupt. There are also benefits for not running up debt at such a margin that interest payments alone dwarf almost all governmental departments now.
At 10% deficit these payments could not be afforded and if we had tried to afford them then, maintained such a mammoth deficit, paid higher interest on our debt as we didn't look creditworthy then ultimately far more serious austerity would have been unavoidable.
There was simply no choice but to cut years ago. If we hadn't what level of interest do you think we'd be paying now? However because of bringing debt and deficit down [yes both are going down now not just one] we can now actually afford these choices. Which we couldn't previously.
Boris is getting huge coverage and is sequestering some of Corbyn's policies
I share doubts about his likely success but he has changed our politics in just a few days
He makes Corbyn look tired and negative and his enthusiam will be popular
I understand why he is angering many , especially those who want to remain, but his approach to the EU should have been from day 1, and for the first time the EU are facing a real problem with their intransigence
Dominic Cummings wants a deal and according to reports wants the 'Spartans' sidelined, so I would caution everyone to be aware that Boris and Cummings will be working on engineering a deal and that it is not off the table no matter the language
It's heartbreaking how quickly you've discarded May to become a Borisbot. Party before country.
It is , and backing Corbyn policies now because Boris has said so. Previously he discarded them, as the magic money tree.
Excuse me.
I have not changed my view that I want a deal and no deal sees me resign from the party
However, I do like the domestic policies being put forward
And as far as party before country goes, a deal is the correct thing to do for democracy
Post a deal, it is an honest position to campaign to re-join
I would add that above even Brexit, my desire to see Corbyn and his associates defeated is number one
I would prefer if Boris would cut some spending pledges like Hs2 and Heathrow 3. However I say again when Labour announce spending commitments , the first question, is where is the money coming from. The same should apply to your support for Boris.
The spending is coming from having managed the economy well and brought the deficit down, debt falling and the economy still growing.
I doubt that Hammond and Osborne will agree.
I don't. They each had their own pet expenditure projects through the years they could afford while bringing the deficit down. I think they would both agree with the importance of what has been done to bring it down.
Boris is getting huge coverage and is sequestering some of Corbyn's policies
I share doubts about his likely success but he has changed our politics in just a few days
He makes Corbyn look tired and negative and his enthusiam will be popular
I understand why he is angering many , especially those who want to remain, but his approach to the EU should have been from day 1, and for the first time the EU are facing a real problem with their intransigence
Dominic Cummings wants a deal and according to reports wants the 'Spartans' sidelined, so I would caution everyone to be aware that Boris and Cummings will be working on engineering a deal and that it is not off the table no matter the language
It's heartbreaking how quickly you've discarded May to become a Borisbot. Party before country.
It is , and backing Corbyn policies now because Boris has said so. Previously he discarded them, as the magic money tree.
Excuse me.
I have not changed my view that I want a deal and no deal sees me resign from the party
However, I do like the domestic policies being put forward
And as far as party before country goes, a deal is the correct thing to do for democracy
Post a deal, it is an honest position to campaign to re-join
I would add that above even Brexit, my desire to see Corbyn and his associates defeated is number one
I would prefer if Boris would cut some spending pledges like Hs2 and Heathrow 3. However I say again when Labour announce spending commitments , the first question, is where is the money coming from. The same should apply to your support for Boris.
The spending is coming from having managed the economy well and brought the deficit down, debt falling and the economy still growing.
Johnson's promise to recruit 20,000 new police men and women that he voted to abolish is an absolute bobby dazzler: an admission that he was totally and utterly wrong. And he has also admitted that the Tories have been wrong not to invest heavily in infrastructure.
Labour should be doing high fives and dancing with joy - it is a political gift beyond precedent. Instead, they are attacking the LibDems.
Surely you've not drank Corbynistas Kool-Aid? Surely you didn't think austerity could be avoided when we were running a £150 billion deficit?
In an ideal world nobody would want police numbers cutting or infrastructure projects put on hold but as a country we literally couldn't afford that expenditure when the deficit was 10% of GDP. It is only because of the actions of the last nine years that now we can start to expand projects and start rebuilding what has been cut because now it can be afforded once more. But if the economy is trashed then it will be unavoidable once more which is why we need to avoid Corbynistas extravagence.
You are happy to trash the economy to secure Brexit. As are Boris Johnson and the Tories.
No, I don't believe Brexit will trash the economy, I believe being a free nation like Canada, Australia etc all of which have a better GDP/capita than we do will improve our economy like it has improved theirs.
Boris is getting huge coverage and is sequestering some of Corbyn's policies
I share doubts about his likely success but he has changed our politics in just a few days
He makes Corbyn look tired and negative and his enthusiam will be popular
I understand why he is angering many , especially those who want to remain, but his approach to the EU should have been from day 1, and for the first time the EU are facing a real problem with their intransigence
Dominic Cummings wants a deal and according to reports wants the 'Spartans' sidelined, so I would caution everyone to be aware that Boris and Cummings will be working on engineering a deal and that it is not off the table no matter the language
It's heartbreaking how quickly you've discarded May to become a Borisbot. Party before country.
It is , and backing Corbyn policies now because Boris has said so. Previously he discarded them, as the magic money tree.
Excuse me.
I have not changed my view that I want a deal and no deal sees me resign from the party
However, I do like the domestic policies being put forward
And as far as party before country goes, a deal is the correct thing to do for democracy
Post a deal, it is an honest position to campaign to re-join
I would add that above even Brexit, my desire to see Corbyn and his associates defeated is number one
I would prefer if Boris would cut some spending pledges like Hs2 and Heathrow 3. However I say again when Labour announce spending commitments , the first question, is where is the money coming from. The same should apply to your support for Boris.
The spending is coming from having managed the economy well and brought the deficit down, debt falling and the economy still growing.
still borrowing shedloads
1.2% of GDP, below growth which is why Debt:GDP is falling.
We shouldn't Brown-style turn on the spending taps but a few targetted projects are affordable.
Johnson's promise to recruit 20,000 new police men and women that he voted to abolish is an absolute bobby dazzler: an admission that he was totally and utterly wrong. And he has also admitted that the Tories have been wrong not to invest heavily in infrastructure.
Labour should be doing high fives and dancing with joy - it is a political gift beyond precedent. Instead, they are attacking the LibDems.
Surely you've not drank Corbynistas Kool-Aid? Surely you didn't think austerity could be avoided when we were running a £150 billion deficit?
In an ideal world nobody would want police numbers cutting or infrastructure projects put on hold but as a country we literally couldn't afford that expenditure when the deficit was 10% of GDP. It is only because of the actions of the last nine years that now we can start to expand projects and start rebuilding what has been cut because now it can be afforded once more. But if the economy is trashed then it will be unavoidable once more which is why we need to avoid Corbynistas extravagence.
How many lives were lost and ruined as a result of those 20,000 police cuts that Johnson now admits were wrong? Did you hear what Johnson said today about the economic benefits of infrastructure spending?
There are also benefits for not being bankrupt. There are also benefits for not running up debt at such a margin that interest payments alone dwarf almost all governmental departments now.
At 10% deficit these payments could not be afforded and if we had tried to afford them then, maintained such a mammoth deficit, paid higher interest on our debt as we didn't look creditworthy then ultimately far more serious austerity would have been unavoidable.
There was simply no choice but to cut years ago. If we hadn't what level of interest do you think we'd be paying now? However because of bringing debt and deficit down [yes both are going down now not just one] we can now actually afford these choices. Which we couldn't previously.
There were plenty of choices. Paying down the deficit did not have to take place over such a short time-frame, for example. A clear direction of travel would have been sufficient. Lives were lost and ruined because of police cuts that Johnson voted for and that you clearly supported.
It is normally a small circular pie filled with mutton , though you get good steak ones nowadays. Mandatory at football, pie and a bovril at half time. Delicious fast food if you get a good on and should never contain bollox. http://www.glasgowguide.co.uk/scottish_recipes_Scotch_Pie.htm
I was surprised to encounter some BXP activits while out for a wonder. Have picked up a copy of 'The Brexiteer' , the newspaper of the Brexit Party, chich declares it to be 'free for democrats'. I'm sure it is going to be a riveting read.
Johnson's promise to recruit 20,000 new police men and women that he voted to abolish is an absolute bobby dazzler: an admission that he was totally and utterly wrong. And he has also admitted that the Tories have been wrong not to invest heavily in infrastructure.
Labour should be doing high fives and dancing with joy - it is a political gift beyond precedent. Instead, they are attacking the LibDems.
Surely you've not drank Corbynistas Kool-Aid? Surely you didn't think austerity could be avoided when we were running a £150 billion deficit?
In an ideal world nobody would want police numbers cutting or infrastructure projects put on hold but as a country we literally couldn't afford that expenditure when the deficit was 10% of GDP. It is only because of the actions of the last nine years that now we can start to expand projects and start rebuilding what has been cut because now it can be afforded once more. But if the economy is trashed then it will be unavoidable once more which is why we need to avoid Corbynistas extravagence.
How many lives were lost and ruined as a result of those 20,000 police cuts that Johnson now admits were wrong? Did you hear what Johnson said today about the economic benefits of infrastructure spending?
There are also benefits for not being bankrupt. There are also benefits for not running up debt at such a margin that interest payments alone dwarf almost all governmental departments now.
At 10% deficit these payments could not be afforded and if we had tried to afford them then, maintained such a mammoth deficit, paid higher interest on our debt as we didn't look creditworthy then ultimately far more serious austerity would have been unavoidable.
There was simply no choice but to cut years ago. If we hadn't what level of interest do you think we'd be paying now? However because of bringing debt and deficit down [yes both are going down now not just one] we can now actually afford these choices. Which we couldn't previously.
If interest rates were related at all closely to the size of the PSBR or the National Debt, they would be higher today than in the 1980s and 1990s. That is very far from being the case.
Johnson's promise to recruit 20,000 new police men and women that he voted to abolish is an absolute bobby dazzler: an admission that he was totally and utterly wrong. And he has also admitted that the Tories have been wrong not to invest heavily in infrastructure.
Labour should be doing high fives and dancing with joy - it is a political gift beyond precedent. Instead, they are attacking the LibDems.
Surely you've not drank Corbynistas Kool-Aid? Surely you didn't think austerity could be avoided when we were running a £150 billion deficit?
In an ideal world nobody would want police numbers cutting or infrastructure projects put on hold but as a country we literally couldn't afford that expenditure when the deficit was 10% of GDP. It is only because of the actions of the last nine years that now we can start to expand projects and start rebuilding what has been cut because now it can be afforded once more. But if the economy is trashed then it will be unavoidable once more which is why we need to avoid Corbynistas extravagence.
You are happy to trash the economy to secure Brexit. As are Boris Johnson and the Tories.
No, I don't believe Brexit will trash the economy, I believe being a free nation like Canada, Australia etc all of which have a better GDP/capita than we do will improve our economy like it has improved theirs.
Having almost unlimited raw materials to supply the world's most populous nation going through an unprecedented economic explosion may have helped a bit.
Johnson's promise to recruit 20,000 new police men and women that he voted to abolish is an absolute bobby dazzler: an admission that he was totally and utterly wrong. And he has also admitted that the Tories have been wrong not to invest heavily in infrastructure.
Labour should be doing high fives and dancing with joy - it is a political gift beyond precedent. Instead, they are attacking the LibDems.
Surely you've not drank Corbynistas Kool-Aid? Surely you didn't think austerity could be avoided when we were running a £150 billion deficit?
In an ideal world nobody would want police numbers cutting or infrastructure projects put on hold but as a country we literally couldn't afford that expenditure when the deficit was 10% of GDP. It is only because of the actions of the last nine years that now we can start to expand projects and start rebuilding what has been cut because now it can be afforded once more. But if the economy is trashed then it will be unavoidable once more which is why we need to avoid Corbynistas extravagence.
You are happy to trash the economy to secure Brexit. As are Boris Johnson and the Tories.
No, I don't believe Brexit will trash the economy, I believe being a free nation like Canada, Australia etc all of which have a better GDP/capita than we do will improve our economy like it has improved theirs.
We are a free nation. Saying otherwise entirely demeans the experiences of those living in countries that are not free. A number of EU countries have better GDP/capita than we do - even ones that do not have the natural resources that Canada and Australia have.
So here's a question - if it does turn out that Brexit leads to serious economic downturn, will you admit you were wrong to back it?
Boris is getting huge coverage and is sequestering some of Corbyn's policies
I share doubts about his likely success but he has changed our politics in just a few days
He makes Corbyn look tired and negative and his enthusiam will be popular
I understand why he is angering many , especially those who want to remain, but his approach to the EU should have been from day 1, and for the first time the EU are facing a real problem with their intransigence
Dominic Cummings wants a deal and according to reports wants the 'Spartans' sidelined, so I would caution everyone to be aware that Boris and Cummings will be working on engineering a deal and that it is not off the table no matter the language
It's heartbreaking how quickly you've discarded May to become a Borisbot. Party before country.
It is , and backing Corbyn policies now because Boris has said so. Previously he discarded them, as the magic money tree.
Excuse me.
I have not changed my view that I want a deal and no deal sees me resign from the party
However, I do like the domestic policies being put forward
And as far as party before country goes, a deal is the correct thing to do for democracy
Post a deal, it is an honest position to campaign to re-join
I would add that above even Brexit, my desire to see Corbyn and his associates defeated is number one
I would prefer if Boris would cut some spending pledges like Hs2 and Heathrow 3. However I say again when Labour announce spending commitments , the first question, is where is the money coming from. The same should apply to your support for Boris.
The spending is coming from having managed the economy well and brought the deficit down, debt falling and the economy still growing.
still borrowing shedloads
I was about to say a work in progress, but I think we all know it is never going to be eliminated, given direction of travel to splurge again.
Why a secret ballot? Why should I not know if my MP supports my PM?
Indeed. Someone suggested months back a secret ballot on Brexit issues to break deadlock because of all the pressure MPs were under, and not to be too mean, but they need to toughen up. Accountability isn't easy, and they face plenty of crap, but there's nothing reasonable in expecting to know how they vote.
Johnson's promise to recruit 20,000 new police men and women that he voted to abolish is an absolute bobby dazzler: an admission that he was totally and utterly wrong. And he has also admitted that the Tories have been wrong not to invest heavily in infrastructure.
Labour should be doing high fives and dancing with joy - it is a political gift beyond precedent. Instead, they are attacking the LibDems.
Boris is getting huge coverage and is sequestering some of Corbyn's policies
I share doubts about his likely success but he has changed our politics in just a few days
He makes Corbyn look tired and negative and his enthusiam will be popular
I understand why he is angering many , especially those who want to remain, but his approach to the EU should have been from day 1, and for the first time the EU are facing a real problem with their intransigence
Dominic Cummings wants a deal and according to reports wants the 'Spartans' sidelined, so I would caution everyone to be aware that Boris and Cummings will be working on engineering a deal and that it is not off the table no matter the language
It's heartbreaking how quickly you've discarded May to become a Borisbot. Party before country.
It is , and backing Corbyn policies now because Boris has said so. Previously he discarded them, as the magic money tree.
Excuse me.
I have not changed my view that I want a deal and no deal sees me resign from the party
However, I do like the domestic policies being put forward
And as far as party before country goes, a deal is the correct thing to do for democracy
Post a deal, it is an honest position to campaign to re-join
I would add that above even Brexit, my desire to see Corbyn and his associates defeated is number one
I would prefer if Boris would cut some spending pledges like Hs2 and Heathrow 3. However I say again when Labour announce spending commitments , the first question, is where is the money coming from. The same should apply to your support for Boris.
The spending is coming from having managed the economy well and brought the deficit down, debt falling and the economy still growing.
still borrowing shedloads
1.2% of GDP, below growth which is why Debt:GDP is falling.
We shouldn't Brown-style turn on the spending taps but a few targetted projects are affordable.
hard not to be sceptical given their previous, crossrail , HS2 planning etc and it will end up mainly in London for sure once Boris has convinced eth sheeple he will look after them
It is normally a small circular pie filled with mutton , though you get good steak ones nowadays. Mandatory at football, pie and a bovril at half time. Delicious fast food if you get a good on and should never contain bollox. http://www.glasgowguide.co.uk/scottish_recipes_Scotch_Pie.htm
JackW's Scotch pies may contain a certain amount of Bollocks to Brexit T-shirts, in the mincing process. Within legal limits.....
Johnson's promise to recruit 20,000 new police men and women that he voted to abolish is an absolute bobby dazzler: an admission that he was totally and utterly wrong. And he has also admitted that the Tories have been wrong not to invest heavily in infrastructure.
Labour should be doing high fives and dancing with joy - it is a political gift beyond precedent. Instead, they are attacking the LibDems.
We are in uncharted FTPA territory here, but following a successful VNOC, I would expect discussions to take place between the Palace , the Cabinet Secretary and party leaders so as to form a judgement as to who is most likely to command a majority in the new circumstances. Some might argue that in the aftermath of a VNOC , Corbyn as Opposition Leader would be called to the Palace to 'try' to form a Government that would win an Affirmative vote. I am not sure that would occur without soundings having already taken place.
Yes, it's difficult to envisage exactly how things play out following a successful VONC but that's a decent enough guess.
No.
In that case the motion specified by the Act would have to say something like "That this House has confidence in the hypothetical government that the Queen has asked someone else to try to form." It doesn't say anything like that, for obvious reasons.
But it is not clear that in the aftermath of a successful VNOC that we would get to the point of an Affirmative Vote being held in another Government - if there is no evidence that anybody else is likely to command a majority. Under those circumstances, it seems likely that Boris would remain PM in a caretaker capacity. I may be wrong - and -in a way- I hope I am!
Oh, certainly if no one else is asked to form a government, Johnson will remain PM. How could it be otherwise?
(Edit: But it is being asked to form a government that's the criterion, not the vote in the Commons. The Commons doesn't have a direct role in appointing a prime minister. That happens when the Queen asks someone to form a government, and the FTPA hasn't changed that.)
Johnson's promise to recruit 20,000 new police men and women that he voted to abolish is an absolute bobby dazzler: an admission that he was totally and utterly wrong. And he has also admitted that the Tories have been wrong not to invest heavily in infrastructure.
Labour should be doing high fives and dancing with joy - it is a political gift beyond precedent. Instead, they are attacking the LibDems.
Let's do some maths shall we. A a single Boeing 777 engine needs to provide 110,000 horsepower at cruising altitude and speed. There are 2 so you need 220,000 horsepower.
Now 1 horsepower = 746 watts.
So you need a battery system that can provide at any one time 164Megawatts and a battery system that holds 164mw/hrs worth of power for every hour of flying time. For a transatlantic flight that's something like 1320mw/hrs of power required or 15,500 of the largest battery available in a Tesla model S.
As for weight - the 85KWH battery pack in a Tesla weighs 520kg. And you need 15,500 of them....
Note I haven't bothered working out how the plane handles the additional weight or the space required for the batteries. I'll leave those additional issues to the reader.
That's with today's technology. Nobody is saying that we will be building jet engines using today's technology! You couldn't build a Tesla with the technology of 20 years ago either. Technology is continuously evolving, a couple of years ago the furthest you could go in a car with was about 60 miles now you can get cars with a range of about 330 miles, which matches my petrol car's range on a full tank of fuel.
Battery packs have been getting progressively better every year and there is a lot of work being done to develop the next step change generation of batteries (moving away from Lithium).
Similarly regarding horsepower efficiency is continuously improving.
Finally jet fuel doesn't exactly weigh nothing. I've been trying to estimate how much fuel a jet carries by weight, as far as I can tell a US gallon of fuel weighs 3kg and a 777 carries 47,890 US gallons of fuel. So that is 143,670 kg of fuel being carried.
So yes 520kg is a lot, but already you could carry 276 of them without changing the weight. Now that doesn't match your 15,500 but it is far from unbelievable that technological improvements not just can but will bridge that gap.
Finally of course before we get fully electronic planes we are likely, like with cars, to see hybrid planes first - which can burn fuel for the far more demanding acceleration and take off but where electricity can be an alternative for fuel for some or all of the cruising.
I'm guessing here, but a hydrogen fuel cell might be a more efficient store of energy then a battery by weight. Engineering problems can often be solved if the incentives to do so are created. Political problems though...
We are in uncharted FTPA territory here, but following a successful VNOC, I would expect discussions to take place between the Palace , the Cabinet Secretary and party leaders so as to form a judgement as to who is most likely to command a majority in the new circumstances. Some might argue that in the aftermath of a VNOC , Corbyn as Opposition Leader would be called to the Palace to 'try' to form a Government that would win an Affirmative vote. I am not sure that would occur without soundings having already taken place.
Yes, it's difficult to envisage exactly how things play out following a successful VONC but that's a decent enough guess.
No.
In that case the motion specified by the Act would have to say something like "That this House has confidence in the hypothetical government that the Queen has asked someone else to try to form." It doesn't say anything like that, for obvious reasons.
But it is not clear that in the aftermath of a successful VNOC that we would get to the point of an Affirmative Vote being held in another Government - if there is no evidence that anybody else is likely to command a majority. Under those circumstances, it seems likely that Boris would remain PM in a caretaker capacity. I may be wrong - and -in a way- I hope I am!
Oh, certainly if no one else is asked to form a government, Johnson will remain PM. How could it be otherwise?
Indeed - and my point really is that those who pass a VNOC need to have the clear intent of installing a new PM . Failing that ,No Deal Brexit on 31st October will happen regardless.
It is normally a small circular pie filled with mutton , though you get good steak ones nowadays. Mandatory at football, pie and a bovril at half time. Delicious fast food if you get a good on and should never contain bollox. http://www.glasgowguide.co.uk/scottish_recipes_Scotch_Pie.htm
The ones on sale when I was growing up always said "minimum 16% meat content," which I never found very reassuring. It wouldn't have surprised me if some of the remaining 84% was testicular in origin. In Dundee they were said to request "a peh an a bridie an an ingin in an a"* although I never heard anyone say that, obviously. *"a pie and a bridie** and an onion one as well" **a different type of meat and pastry based foodstuff.
We are in uncharted FTPA territory here, but following a successful VNOC, I would expect discussions to take place between the Palace , the Cabinet Secretary and party leaders so as to form a judgement as to who is most likely to command a majority in the new circumstances. Some might argue that in the aftermath of a VNOC , Corbyn as Opposition Leader would be called to the Palace to 'try' to form a Government that would win an Affirmative vote. I am not sure that would occur without soundings having already taken place.
Yes, it's difficult to envisage exactly how things play out following a successful VONC but that's a decent enough guess.
No.
In that case the motion specified by the Act would have to say something like "That this House has confidence in the hypothetical government that the Queen has asked someone else to try to form." It doesn't say anything like that, for obvious reasons.
But it is not clear that in the aftermath of a successful VNOC that we would get to the point of an Affirmative Vote being held in another Government - if there is no evidence that anybody else is likely to command a majority. Under those circumstances, it seems likely that Boris would remain PM in a caretaker capacity. I may be wrong - and -in a way- I hope I am!
Oh, certainly if no one else is asked to form a government, Johnson will remain PM. How could it be otherwise?
Indeed - and my point really is that those who pass a VNOC need to have the clear intent of installing a new PM . Failing that ,No Deal Brexit on 31st October will happen regardless.
Yes, I agree with that - though again with the quibble that the PM changes when the Queen asks, not when (and if) the Commons confirms.
Boris is getting huge coverage and is sequestering some of Corbyn's policies
I share doubts about his likely success but he has changed our politics in just a few days
He makes Corbyn look tired and negative and his enthusiam will be popular
I understand why he is angering many , especially those who want to remain, but his approach to the EU should have been from day 1, and for the first time the EU are facing a real problem with their intransigence
Dominic Cummings wants a deal and according to reports wants the 'Spartans' sidelined, so I would caution everyone to be aware that Boris and Cummings will be working on engineering a deal and that it is not off the table no matter the language
The central No Deal fact remains the same: it hurts us a whole lot more than them. What has changed is that the UK government doesn’t seem to care about that anymore. So a UK crash-out is now much more likely.
You are right on Corbyn. Johnson is conceding the Tories have got it badly wrong and that huge increases in public spending are necessary. For a half-way - even quarter-way - Labour leader this would be a gift.
Johnson’s entire strategy is predicated on Corbyn’s uselessness and the stupidity of Labour members.
I'm not sure about that - Boris is hoping that Labour supporters don't end up voting for Labour and instead either vote for a Brexit candidate or don't vote.
Johnson's promise to recruit 20,000 new police men and women that he voted to abolish is an absolute bobby dazzler: an admission that he was totally and utterly wrong. And he has also admitted that the Tories have been wrong not to invest heavily in infrastructure.
Labour should be doing high fives and dancing with joy - it is a political gift beyond precedent. Instead, they are attacking the LibDems.
Surely you've not drank Corbynistas Kool-Aid? Surely you didn't think austerity could be avoided when we were running a £150 billion deficit?
In an ideal world nobody would want police numbers cutting or infrastructure projects put on hold but as a country we literally couldn't afford that expenditure when the deficit was 10% of GDP. It is only because of the actions of the last nine years that now we can start to expand projects and start rebuilding what has been cut because now it can be afforded once more. But if the economy is trashed then it will be unavoidable once more which is why we need to avoid Corbynistas extravagence.
How many lives were lost and ruined as a result of those 20,000 police cuts that Johnson now admits were wrong? Did you hear what Johnson said today about the economic benefits of infrastructure spending?
I don't think rates of homicides have changed by very much since 2010.
Comments
Let's do some maths shall we. A a single Boeing 777 engine needs to provide 110,000 horsepower at cruising altitude and speed. There are 2 so you need 220,000 horsepower.
Now 1 horsepower = 746 watts.
So you need a battery system that can provide at any one time 164Megawatts and a battery system that holds 164mw/hrs worth of power for every hour of flying time. For a transatlantic flight that's something like 1320mw/hrs of power required or 15,500 of the largest battery available in a Tesla model S.
As for weight - the 85KWH battery pack in a Tesla weighs 520kg. And you need 15,500 of them....
Note I haven't bothered working out how the plane handles the additional weight or the space required for the batteries. I'll leave those additional issues to the reader.
Before the rise of TV, they could do the same act, night after night, for years. The act never got corny, because it was a different audience every night. Then TV came along, and their material was used up every night.
Boris's act looks amusing with a hint of statesmanlike the first time you see it. But now more people are watching more often. The act needs to be fresh every time, so it won't be as rehearsed, so it won't be as good.
However as long as the deficit is down we can "share the proceeds of growth" between continuing to keep the deficit down, and new priorities whether that be increased expenditure or reduced taxation.
The last 9 years have brought the deficit down by 9% of GDP. If we continued the path of the last 9 years then we would be running a budget surplus in 9 years time of 8% of GDP . . . that's not necessary!
Even assuming he could get all Labour MPs to support him (and that is a big assumption), he would need more that the SNP, PC, Green and LDs to fall in with his plans.
Why would Chuka do anything to put Corbyn into Downing Street?
Even then the numbers don't add up. Too many anti-Corbyn independents for it to be possible.
I share doubts about his likely success but he has changed our politics in just a few days
He makes Corbyn look tired and negative and his enthusiam will be popular
I understand why he is angering many , especially those who want to remain, but his approach to the EU should have been from day 1, and for the first time the EU are facing a real problem with their intransigence
Dominic Cummings wants a deal and according to reports wants the 'Spartans' sidelined, so I would caution everyone to be aware that Boris and Cummings will be working on engineering a deal and that it is not off the table no matter the language
And really this has to be the case, because the Act is framed in such a way as to address only the question of fixed terms. It's not intended to change the way prime ministers are appointed. So what would happen is the normal process by which the Queen asks someone to form a government. Clearly that has to happen before the House can express confidence in that government. And there's no way Johnson could still be prime minister after the Queen asked someone else to form a government. The outgoing prime minister always resigns before the new one is asked to form a government.
In that case the motion specified by the Act would have to say something like "That this House has confidence in the hypothetical government that the Queen has asked someone else to try to form." It doesn't say anything like that, for obvious reasons.
NB: this assumes the EU play ball and at least give him some lipstick for the pig. Not a given.
I'd be quite happy with that.
You are right on Corbyn. Johnson is conceding the Tories have got it badly wrong and that huge increases in public spending are necessary. For a half-way - even quarter-way - Labour leader this would be a gift.
Johnson’s entire strategy is predicated on Corbyn’s uselessness and the stupidity of Labour members.
*sighs*
Previously he discarded them, as the magic money tree.
What a complete fib. Boris won't fund it, we poor taxpayers will, and the same goes for all the other grandiose giveaways he is busy telling us about.
Friday, July 26
Race/Topic (Click to Sort) Poll Results Spread
2020 Democratic Presidential Nomination
FOX News
Biden 33, Sanders 15, Warren 12, Harris 10, Buttigieg 5, O'Rourke 2, Yang 3, Booker 2, Klobuchar 3, Castro 1, Gabbard 0, Steyer 1
Biden +18
General Election: Trump vs. Biden
FOX News
Biden 49, Trump 39
Biden +10
General Election: Trump vs. Sanders
FOX News
Sanders 46, Trump 40
Sanders +6
General Election: Trump vs. Warren
FOX News
Warren 41, Trump 42
Trump +1
General Election: Trump vs. Harris
FOX News
Harris 40, Trump 41
Trump +
I have not changed my view that I want a deal and no deal sees me resign from the party
However, I do like the domestic policies being put forward
And as far as party before country goes, a deal is the correct thing to do for democracy
Post a deal, it is an honest position to campaign to re-join
I would add that above even Brexit, my desire to see Corbyn and his associates defeated is number one
I thought about 1914 but rejected it on the grounds that it was a bit obvious. Also, I was thinking about Poland and Eastern Europe yesterday for reasons which don't need airing here. I still think the events of the summers of 1980 and 1989 (and the autumn in the latter case) to be some of the most momentous and hopeful of my life. Watching history being made in front of one's eyes was unbelievable.
Battery packs have been getting progressively better every year and there is a lot of work being done to develop the next step change generation of batteries (moving away from Lithium).
Similarly regarding horsepower efficiency is continuously improving.
Finally jet fuel doesn't exactly weigh nothing. I've been trying to estimate how much fuel a jet carries by weight, as far as I can tell a US gallon of fuel weighs 3kg and a 777 carries 47,890 US gallons of fuel. So that is 143,670 kg of fuel being carried.
So yes 520kg is a lot, but already you could carry 276 of them without changing the weight. Now that doesn't match your 15,500 but it is far from unbelievable that technological improvements not just can but will bridge that gap.
Finally of course before we get fully electronic planes we are likely, like with cars, to see hybrid planes first - which can burn fuel for the far more demanding acceleration and take off but where electricity can be an alternative for fuel for some or all of the cruising.
Wait. Was that my brew I drank? Or did someone spike it with Boris kool aid?
Labour should be doing high fives and dancing with joy - it is a political gift beyond precedent. Instead, they are attacking the LibDems.
https://enormo-haddock.blogspot.com/2019/07/germany-pre-qualifying-2019.html
However I say again when Labour announce spending commitments , the first question, is where is the money coming from.
The same should apply to your support for Boris.
In an ideal world nobody would want police numbers cutting or infrastructure projects put on hold but as a country we literally couldn't afford that expenditure when the deficit was 10% of GDP. It is only because of the actions of the last nine years that now we can start to expand projects and start rebuilding what has been cut because now it can be afforded once more. But if the economy is trashed then it will be unavoidable once more which is why we need to avoid Corbynistas extravagence.
Boris is setting up the Tories' next campaign as pro cake and pro eating, pro-Brexit and pro-social and economic investment.
https://twitter.com/Andrew_Adonis/status/1155081670837579776
At 10% deficit these payments could not be afforded and if we had tried to afford them then, maintained such a mammoth deficit, paid higher interest on our debt as we didn't look creditworthy then ultimately far more serious austerity would have been unavoidable.
There was simply no choice but to cut years ago. If we hadn't what level of interest do you think we'd be paying now? However because of bringing debt and deficit down [yes both are going down now not just one] we can now actually afford these choices. Which we couldn't previously.
We shouldn't Brown-style turn on the spending taps but a few targetted projects are affordable.
http://www.glasgowguide.co.uk/scottish_recipes_Scotch_Pie.htm
So here's a question - if it does turn out that Brexit leads to serious economic downturn, will you admit you were wrong to back it?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7291993/Female-employee-20-hounded-shamed-MP-Jared-OMara-exposes-crude-texts.html
1997 69.6
1998 67.7
1999 65.8
2000 61.8
2001 66.1
2002 74.8
2003 70.5
2004 61.5
2005 59.0
2006 54.4
2007 53.7
2008 59.6
2009 68.3
2010 87.0
2011 94.3
2012 84.3
2013 86.2
2014 84.4
2015 103.5
2016 100.0
2017 105.5
2018 111.2
2019q1 122.2
Page 1a, column F on the spreadsheet here:
https://www.ons.gov.uk/businessindustryandtrade/constructionindustry/datasets/outputintheconstructionindustry
Looks like heavy investment in new infrastructure to me.
And as with other things it shows Gordon Brown's claims about 'Labour investment' to be a lie.
(Edit: But it is being asked to form a government that's the criterion, not the vote in the Commons. The Commons doesn't have a direct role in appointing a prime minister. That happens when the Queen asks someone to form a government, and the FTPA hasn't changed that.)
Though it is certainly possible that more should have been spent and/or spent on different things.
In Dundee they were said to request "a peh an a bridie an an ingin in an a"* although I never heard anyone say that, obviously.
*"a pie and a bridie** and an onion one as well"
**a different type of meat and pastry based foodstuff.
I suspect that isn't going to be the case...