Jo Swinson has a first from the LSE, She has more ministerial experience than several on the Tory or Labour front benches and she is widely regarded as a great example of a working Mum. Oh and has also won multiple awards as a Parliamentarian.
She is also surrounded by some great advisers, including incidentally Ed Davey, and leads a party that is undergoing a huge increase in membership and support. She is a serious political leader- and there are none of those in the Cabinet (and not many in the shadow cabinet) right now.
So while you might *want* to believe this, the reality is that Swinson is set to be a very significant figure both during the General election campaign and in the next Parliament.
I lack the feeling of utter emptiness inside that would lead one to vote LibDem in the first place but I do like JS. She's the PJ Harvey of British politics.
A word of warning to anyone thinking of staking cash on next Con leader: it’s not that long ago since one of the top names on that list was Ruth Davidson.
I wonder what happened to her?
#RuthForFM
Ho ho.
She was favourite at one point.
I blame punters who have zero knowledge of Scottish politics, but stake hard cash based on the mad comments made on PB and similar sites, by folk who also have zero knowledge of Scottish politics.
There are only a handful of Unionists around here who have a good grasp of politics north of the border, and no, I’m not going to assist opponents of Scottish self-government by naming them
LibDems believe their "team" will soar during the election campaign. Labourites believe it will be a rerun of 2017. BJers think they'll suck the Brexit Party dry and land a 100 seat majority.
No-one knows.
But these 15-20 losses will likely be made up by gains from Labour. I'd expect 20-30 gains there, resulting in a small overall Conservative majority.
Go beyond the end of the year mind, and irrespective of Brexit, the UK and the world will likely have drifted into recession. That won't be a fun time, as the governing party, to ask for a mandate. And if it's in the context of "No Deal", it may be especially painful. (Not the recession, but the electoral response; the electorate rarely looks beyond the border.)
That all makes sense. However, I'd foresee some of the 21 running successfully as independent Conservatives - Rory Stewart, for example, resulting in further cuts to a slim majority.
And Kate Hoey will be out of a job, too.
But if you look at the Conservative defectors (of all shapes and sizes), I can see maybe three or four who MIGHT hold their seats:
- Rory Stewart, because my wife is as apolitical as they come, and she adores him. I suspect she's not alone - Heidi Allen, because it's a Remain seat, and she's relatively popular local MP - Sarah Wollaston, because the LDs will stand down, and the BXP will split the Leave vote
Who else?
Possible that the LDs may give them a free run. Even if they don't when you have a majority of c.10 even losing 3 is quite serious.
But it's still three at a stretch.
It's got to be a Remain seat. It's got to be a popular local MP. It's got to have a good sized LD (and possibly Lab) vote to squeeze.
So, if Heidi Allen takes 25% of the Conservative vote, 15% of the Labour vote, and all the LibDem vote she's re-elected. That sounds plausible, if hardly a massively odds on bet.
I can make a similar case for SarahW, and maybe Justine Greening and Stephen Hammond at a push. But realistically, it's four of the former Tory MPs. Maybe five in extremis.
Whats true today may not be true when the election takes place. Say the election is in February, the former tories have got together as One Nation Conservative party led by Rory Stewart, now have 40 MPs and got some councillors and local officials to defect as well. They are part of the remain alliance government who have now negotiated an agreement with the EU ready for a referendum. In parallel, Farage has joined the Conservative party and closed the Brexit party.
What then? No-one knows. Extremis is not as narrow as we are used to thinking.
Personally, I don't know whether the Opposition parties denying an election will be good or bad for them politically (and I do think the effects will not be uniform).
However I do think it is wrong - to legislate for the Prime Minister to do something he doesn't want to do but deny him the alternative to challenge their 'mandate' to do so with the electorate. And frankly I want this Parliament out before they do any more damage. They can't go a couple of days without screwing something up - and I don't trust them a jot not to do so again. I think it is perfectly plausible that we crash out on Oct 31st because they can't agree amongst themselves on how to stop it.
If there's one thing worse for the future of the country than a no deal crash out, it's a no deal crash out without the electorate having been given the opportunity to stop it.
...the week from hell. Everything is unravelling...clueless and powerless...Viscerally I expect we're going to see him leaching support.
...absolutely risible...They are ripping themselves apart...fury in the corridors...nutcases...
....... I suggest the chances of an outright Conservative win are vanishingly narrow.
Wow.
They sound like at least a 20-1 shot.
Despite your complete conviction in the VANISHINGLY NARROW chance of a Conservative majority I will give you the opportunity of putting your money where your mouth is.
Happy to have anything up to £10k on a Tory majority at 5-1...which is incredibly skinny odds going by your post.
Money to be held by trusted 3rd party.
And because Labour are in this state, somehow the Tories sitll lead the polls.
I hope you don't teach your students about probability.
I was once asked if I could teach A-level maths. I got my whiteboard pen out and proved 2+2 can equal 5 in the right circumstances.
Funnily enough, nobody's asked me since.
But on a serious point, no government in this state should have even a faint chance of re-election. Labour members, I hope you're happy with how electing a geriatric populist nutter with the integrity of Horatio Bottomley has turned out.
Just for a bit of fun:
a = b aa = ab aa-bb = ab - bb (a-b)(a+b) = b(a-b) a+b = b 2b = b 2 = 1
Is that what you did?
pure and utter bollox. If you have two apples and another two apples , you can never get 2 apples to equal one apple unless you eat one of them.
Of course it is bollox, but your reason is not correct. Each line of maths is correct, but in one of the lines of maths I did something, that although normally is ok, in this instant isn't for a very particular reason. I'm deliberately being vague and it is very trivial but an easy mistake to make.
Last 3 lines look wrong to me
The mistake is from line 4 to line 5. I have done something that is normally allowed, but for very specific reasons I can't do in this instant.
...the week from hell. Everything is unravelling...clueless and powerless...Viscerally I expect we're going to see him leaching support.
...absolutely risible...They are ripping themselves apart...fury in the corridors...nutcases...
....... I suggest the chances of an outright Conservative win are vanishingly narrow.
Wow.
rity at 5-1...which is incredibly skinny odds going by your post.
Money to be held by trusted 3rd party.
The Tories should be ten thousand to one.
We right now have a party led by a pair of inept posh boys - one in Parliament and one appointed because of being bezzy mates - running a third rate cabal of hopelessly incompetent members with an ideology seemingly determined to take us back to the 1950s, noted for their institutionalised racism, incapable of forming a coherent sentence, ruthlessly kicking all of their opponents out, rumoured to have links to Russia, constitutionally incapable of telling the truth, and putting forward a pack of populist lies based on their own drunken prejudices and outmoded principles in a blatant attempt to bribe the electorate into voting for them.
And because Labour are in this state, somehow the Tories sitll lead the polls.
I hope you don't teach your students about probability.
I
Just for a bit of fun:
a = b aa = ab aa-bb = ab - bb (a-b)(a+b) = b(a-b) a+b = b 2b = b 2 = 1
Is that what you did?
pure and utter bollox. If you have two apples and another two apples , you can never get 2 apples to equal one apple unless you eat one of them.
Of course it is bollox, but your reason is not correct. Each line of maths is correct, but in one of the lines of maths I did something, that although normally is ok, in this instant isn't for a very particular reason. I'm deliberately being vague and it is very trivial but an easy mistake to make.
Malcolm I think ydoethur may suggest the correct remark to the student in red ink is '2/10, needs to try harder' and not 'utter bollox'. I don't think I ever got that comment on my homework and I definitely submitted stuff that could have been described as such.
I would of course have been much more circumspect in an exam. I once had a mark deducted for not having a full stop after my name to prevent me getting 100/100. That was criminal.
The anti-Corbyn, centre-right vote is baked in for the Tories now, they just need to squeeze the BXP, or do some kind of deal. How can they not, given they are now the BXP?
OTOH you don't see CocaCola doing a deal with Pepsi
Quite. The Conservatives are not functionally the same as the Brexit Party, even if they're closer together than they used to be - and they'll be perfectly well aware that a lot of already wavering centrist voters will run away if Johnson enters into a pact with Farage.
And I'm absolutely sure that the former does not want the latter, and a small contingent of his troops, constantly breathing down his neck in the Commons. Any deal with the Brexit Party is bound to include the Tories letting them run unopposed in a selection of target seats (which is the only way the Brexit Party is going to get any MPs returned.)
And yet 2 dozen mps are effectively Brexit Party mps already, and Boris cannot win unless he can get BXP to stand down or convinces people he will do the same things as BXP so please forgive him for being weak and not preventing an extension.
Corbyn as Neville Chamberlain for 5 minutes (before the LDs VONC him too) to extend and betray Brexit and Labour Leave voters is I agree the most likely scenario now
Thanks to Boris's early Christmas present to the opposition the LDs (with Con+DUP) don't actually enough guys to bring down Corbyn even if they want to, although admittedly Corbyn would have a hard time rounding everybody else up except as part of a broader plan.
Did that Flanner chap ever get back to you about a gentleman's bet on LD gains in Scotland? Complete deefy slung to my generous offer.
If I had the faintest idea what "deefy slung" is meant to mean, had any view about "LD gains in Scotland", or ever read anything about "gentlemen's bets" I might reply.
Though, being no gentleman, I'm not making bets on something I have little interest in. I think we can all agree that the proportion of seats in Scotland voting for a Remain candidate in the next GE is unlikely to be significantly different from 2017.
Corbyn as Neville Chamberlain for 5 minutes (before the LDs VONC him too) to extend and betray Brexit and Labour Leave voters is I agree the most likely scenario now
Thanks to Boris's early Christmas present to the opposition the LDs (with Con+DUP) don't actually enough guys to bring down Corbyn even if they want to, although admittedly Corbyn would have a hard time rounding everybody else up except as part of a broader plan.
The Tory 21 rebels would vote down Corbyn immediately following extension too
A word of warning to anyone thinking of staking cash on next Con leader: it’s not that long ago since one of the top names on that list was Ruth Davidson.
I wonder what happened to her?
#RuthForFM
Ho ho.
She was favourite at one point.
I blame punters who have zero knowledge of Scottish politics, but stake hard cash based on the mad comments made on PB and similar sites, by folk who also have zero knowledge of Scottish politics.
There are only a handful of Unionists around here who have a good grasp of politics north of the border, and no, I’m not going to assist opponents of Scottish self-government by naming them
Am I one of them Stuart
Not sure “handful” and “grasped” and Scottish politics is something that you want to be associated with Big G
...the week from hell. Everything is unravelling...clueless and powerless...Viscerally I expect we're going to see him leaching support.
...absolutely risible...They are ripping themselves apart...fury in the corridors...nutcases...
....... I suggest the chances of an outright Conservative win are vanishingly narrow.
Wow.
They sound like at least a 20-1 shot.
Despite your complete conviction in the VANISHINGLY NARROW chance of a Conservative majority I will give you the opportunity of putting your money where your mouth is.
Happy to have anything up to £10k on a Tory majority at 5-1...which is incredibly skinny odds going by your post.
Money to be held by trusted 3rd party.
And because Labour are in this state, somehow the Tories sitll lead the polls.
I hope you don't teach your students about probability.
I was once asked if I could teach A-level maths. I got my whiteboard pen out and proved 2+2 can equal 5 in the right circumstances.
Funnily enough, nobody's asked me since.
But on a serious point, no government in this state should have even a faint chance of re-election. Labour members, I hope you're happy with how electing a geriatric populist nutter with the integrity of Horatio Bottomley has turned out.
Just for a bit of fun:
a = b aa = ab aa-bb = ab - bb (a-b)(a+b) = b(a-b) a+b = b 2b = b 2 = 1
Is that what you did?
pure and utter bollox. If you have two apples and another two apples , you can never get 2 apples to equal one apple unless you eat one of them.
Of course it is bollox, but your reason is not correct. Each line of maths is correct, but in one of the lines of maths I did something, that although normally is ok, in this instant isn't for a very particular reason. I'm deliberately being vague and it is very trivial but an easy mistake to make.
Last 3 lines look wrong to me
The mistake is from line 4 to line 5. I have done something that is normally allowed, but for very specific reasons I can't do in this instant.
How if a=b can a+b = b , that would mean b = 0 and also a therefore have to be zero. Or have I lost my marbles.
Personally, I don't know whether the Opposition parties denying an election will be good or bad for them politically (and I do think the effects will not be uniform).
However I do think it is wrong - to legislate for the Prime Minister to do something he doesn't want to do but deny him the alternative to challenge their 'mandate' to do so with the electorate. And frankly I want this Parliament out before they do any more damage. They can't go a couple of days without screwing something up - and I don't trust them a jot not to do so again. I think it is perfectly plausible that we crash out on Oct 31st because they can't agree amongst themselves on how to stop it.
If there's one thing worse for the future of the country than a no deal crash out, it's a no deal crash out without the electorate having been given the opportunity to stop it.
All very commendable and correct, but ignoring the problem that the PM cannot be trusted.
Personally, I don't know whether the Opposition parties denying an election will be good or bad for them politically (and I do think the effects will not be uniform).
However I do think it is wrong - to legislate for the Prime Minister to do something he doesn't want to do but deny him the alternative to challenge their 'mandate' to do so with the electorate. And frankly I want this Parliament out before they do any more damage. They can't go a couple of days without screwing something up - and I don't trust them a jot not to do so again. I think it is perfectly plausible that we crash out on Oct 31st because they can't agree amongst themselves on how to stop it.
If there's one thing worse for the future of the country than a no deal crash out, it's a no deal crash out without the electorate having been given the opportunity to stop it.
I agree crashing out on Oct 31 without the electorate being able to stop it is the worst outcome. If people elect a no deal government, however stupid that would be, we have to live with it.
But, as with much of this parliament, it is perverse. You are far more likely to get the no deal pre elections, by calling the election than by delaying it!! This is because the PM can change the date of the election regardless of what parliament and the PM is a known and proven liar who is desperate.
The rebel alliance now have control, because they have the numbers in the democratically elected HoC, claims it is undemocratic miss the point, whoever has most votes is in charge, not the PM and rightly so. The chance of no deal on Oct 31 is a mix of the EU side (low), an election being called on Monday (very low), the govt getting back the support of 20-25 MPs from the rebel alliance to deliver no deal (extremely low).
BoZo resigns, Corbyn takes over, tables WA4 and we leave on Oct 31st
Jezza is a Brexit hero and BoZo is a footnote
lol, but no, I think more like
BoZo resigns or they VONC him, Corbyn takes over (or Ken Clarke or Rory Stewart or whoever, with Corbyn having some kind of "be responsible for something important and ostentatiously don't break it" position), rejig the PD to be more Norway-ish, pass that with the existing WA it subject to a referendum.
Referendum in January, out or revoke by Jan 31st. Election after that or not, see how it goes.
I don't think it's possible to hold a referendum at such short notice but we need it just to get this mess out of the way.
That is an implausable time scale. If Corbyn or ANO took over mid October it would take all of the time under the extension to obtain a formal ageement with the EU, then the HOC needs legislation enabling the referendum, then the wording needs to be agreed, then the campaign.
Late Spring, early Summer is a minimum for the actual vote and would a cobbled together HOC hold together and what domestic policy agenda could be agreed
The HOC is bankrupt, Boris is hopeless, and we need an election
Boris is correct wanting it on the 15th October, the rest are just playing politics because labour and lots of independents fear for their seats
G, correct they should be having it as soon as possible. The cabal of cowardy custards after whining for ever about wanting an election should be getting on with it. SNP especially should be getting pelters.
Good morning Malc. Believe it is a nice day in Ayrshire today. Have a good weekend
Would it make sense for Boris to use the Benn Act as a reason for saying that his negotiation hands are tied, so the best he can do is bring back TMs deal to the Commons to test current opinion? It remains the only deal in town and he has promised not to ask for an extension.
The opposition are duty bound to keep Johnson in post for as long as possible giving him maximum exposure to the public. He has no majority let him stew in his own juice.
I have to say though Nichomar, I don't hink opposition parties refusing an election is a good look. The Liberal Democrats will probably be OK because their supporters care above all about stopping Brexit and an election will make that harder. The SNP will be OK because they have a headlock on Scotland and don't stand candidates outside it.
But Labour are going to face very awkward questions as to why they had a chance to turf out this shambles via an election and refused. And that's going to be their membership that get mad at them, not just their voters.
I’m not sure “Labour stopped us having an Election” is a great message in the middle of an election.....
Quite. The message of 'they didnt want one when we thought we'd win, they wanted it when they thought they would win' is not solid.
Would it make sense for Boris to use the Benn Act as a reason for saying that his negotiation hands are tied, so the best he can do is bring back TMs deal to the Commons to test current opinion? It remains the only deal in town and he has promised not to ask for an extension.
What happened to the Kinnock amendment, werent we supposed to get a vote on WA4 from that?
A word of warning to anyone thinking of staking cash on next Con leader: it’s not that long ago since one of the top names on that list was Ruth Davidson.
I wonder what happened to her?
#RuthForFM
Ho ho.
She was favourite at one point.
I blame punters who have zero knowledge of Scottish politics, but stake hard cash based on the mad comments made on PB and similar sites, by folk who also have zero knowledge of Scottish politics.
There are only a handful of Unionists around here who have a good grasp of politics north of the border, and no, I’m not going to assist opponents of Scottish self-government by naming them
Am I one of them Stuart
Not sure “handful” and “grasped” and Scottish politics is something that you want to be associated with Big G
And for those of you convinced of the Cummings strategy to sweep the Labour heartlands ... Deja Vu.
"Theresa May laid bare the Conservatives’ ambitions to capture some of Labour’s most historic seats in England in a speech on Thursday night, telling voters in Leeds to put aside their traditional allegiances and vote “in the national interest”.
In a sign of the Conservatives’ bullishness about their chances in Labour’s northern heartlands, May told voters in Harehills that it was the Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, on the ballot, not the traditional party."
Except Cummings did actually win those areas in the EU referendum and Boris is a Leaver while May was a Remainer.
Cummings and Boris are forcing clear blue water with Corbyn on Brexit while easing off on austerity and pushing tax cuts, May's campaign saw her largely agree with Corbyn on Brexit while pushing more austerity and the dementia tax
That strategy is dependent on Brexit being the only issue. It isn't, and the Bored of Brexit mob will vote on other issues, as they did in 2017. The BXP vote is not interchangeable with the Tory vote and never will be. Indeed a formal pact may well damage both parties more than they gain, something my party also should consider.
Wrong.
Until Brexit is delivered Brexit IS the main issue.
2017 was fought with both May and Corbyn promising to deliver Brexit so other issues came to the fore neither have done so Brexit dominates after May extended and most Brexit Party voters voted Tory in 2017. Boris will fight as the leader to deliver Brexit come what may.
Plus on other issues there will be no dementia tax gaffes from Boris anyway
Only in a referendum would Brexit be the only issue. Elsewhere there are other issues
1) due to budget issues schools are no longer open 5 full days a week and while money was given to schools it was then spent increasing teachers pay so that doesn’t work out
I’m sure there are a 600 more all local and all may do harm to the sitting government
Personally, I don't know whether the Opposition parties denying an election will be good or bad for them politically (and I do think the effects will not be uniform).
However I do think it is wrong - to legislate for the Prime Minister to do something he doesn't want to do but deny him the alternative to challenge their 'mandate' to do so with the electorate. And frankly I want this Parliament out before they do any more damage. They can't go a couple of days without screwing something up - and I don't trust them a jot not to do so again. I think it is perfectly plausible that we crash out on Oct 31st because they can't agree amongst themselves on how to stop it.
If there's one thing worse for the future of the country than a no deal crash out, it's a no deal crash out without the electorate having been given the opportunity to stop it.
I agree with all that.
Boris is saying I am going to break the law, here is the opportunity to VNOC me.
The MPs say "No, we have confidence in you ... You're going to Jail".
I think my sympathies are with Boris (& Boris is one of the most utterly dislikable politicians ever)
We need an election -- and I shall be cheering any MP who loses his/her seat, because the Parliament elected in 2017 has proved rotten to the very core.
On topic, JRM isn't bad value. I agree that he's out of touch, and I would add that he's rude, surly and thoroughly unbritish in his views, a tea partyer in a suit, the sort of person that a great many voters would sooner drive a stake through than vote for. But. But.
We are talking about a scenario where Tory voters, new arrivals to the baying mob school of politics, could frighten the remaining MPs into having him on the ballot. We've seen in recent years how social media campaigns can create a rolling rock effect that creates landslips in public opinion. The selectorate for a leadership ballot is small, relatively homogeneous and angry. They are utterly ripe for the picking. A Bannon- or Putin- driven campaign could easily convince them that anybody else would be a betrayal of the people, etc etc.
In fact, there were attempts to astroturf a "Moggmentum" social media campaign. The fact that it's already happened could be looked upon either as a failed attempt to elevate him and it turns out even Conservative members aren't /that/ crazy. Or it could be looked upon as the essential groundwork for a final push to get him into number 10.
I think the former explanation is likelier, but I'm going to put a small wager on Mogg. Here's why: we now live in an age of attention-driven politics, where lack of ethical standards, weirdness, outright lies and general bad behaviour are /beneficial/. Trump is the archetype, but frankly Boris, Corbyn and numerous other examples are evidence that people aren't put off just because others despise them. Mogg fits this pattern perfectly. He'll sell papers with his weirdness, so he will be written about. If left- and centre- talking heads are constantly talking about him in negative terms, the hard-right Conservative core will take this as their signal that he must be doing something right.
Now, thoughts please on how we fix this godawful clickbait politics once and for all?
Interesting header as ever Mr Herdson, but a gentle reminder that if the next polls follow the most recent Survation one of a declining Tory lead things might not be developing in Johnson’s favour....
But that poll has Swinon's LibDems taking a tumble. If that trend continues, we might yet head towards a repeat of the Tory/Labour clash of 2017....
I did try to warn them.
Ed Davey would be wiping the floor with The Clown.
This is no time for a shouty Vicky Pollard.
The sole time I have seen Jo Swinson was in clips from the HoC debate last week, and I thought she was pretty good.
Just a guess, but I suspect she'll improve over time, and that she'll do OK. Not super duper amazing, but OK.
Problem is they need to be doing better than “OK” to defeat Brexit.
I think it is hard to evaluate in Scotland, where the SNP juggernaut comes into play, but in Westminster polling in Scotland the SLibs are up. Whether it is enough and concentrated in the right places will be telling. If I were her, I would invite Davidson Jr over for a play date, with photographers...
South of the border, obviously she is person non grata with die-hard Leavers, but she plays very well to Remainers, women, youngsters and those wanting a more cross party approach to politics. She also wins over Remainer Tories put off by Corbynite Labour.
She will be fine, and in a campaign will look like the fresh face.
I think you're right. Unlike Corbyn and Johnson she doesn't personally repel vast swathes of the population. She's really the only safe pair of hands. She's not Caroline Lucas but neither is she Vicky Pollard (who I've worked with and who IS Vicky Pollard!)
BoZo resigns, Corbyn takes over, tables WA4 and we leave on Oct 31st
Jezza is a Brexit hero and BoZo is a footnote
lol, but no, I think more like
BoZo resigns or they VONC him, Corbyn takes over (or Ken Clarke or Rory Stewart or whoever, with Corbyn having some kind of "be responsible for something important and ostentatiously don't break it" position), rejig the PD to be more Norway-ish, pass that with the existing WA it subject to a referendum.
Referendum in January, out or revoke by Jan 31st. Election after that or not, see how it goes.
I don't think it's possible to hold a referendum at such short notice but we need it just to get this mess out of the way.
That is an implausable time scale. If Corbyn or ANO took over mid October it would take all of the time under the extension to obtain a formal ageement with the EU, then the HOC needs legislation enabling the referendum, then the wording needs to be agreed, then the campaign.
Late Spring, early Summer is a minimum for the actual vote and would a cobbled together HOC hold together and what domestic policy agenda could be agreed
The HOC is bankrupt, Boris is hopeless, and we need an election
Boris is correct wanting it on the 15th October, the rest are just playing politics because labour and lots of independents fear for their seats
I think if it could be outside the PMs control the opposition would accept 15 October. Any reason why they should trust a lying, manipulative, reckless PM not to say yes erm yes yes we will accept 15 October and then flip to 15 November once only he has the power?
...the week from hell. Everything is unravelling...clueless and powerless...Viscerally I expect we're going to see him leaching support.
...absolutely risible...They are ripping themselves apart...fury in the corridors...nutcases...
....... I suggest the chances of an outright Conservative win are vanishingly narrow.
Wow.
They sound like at least a 20-1 shot.
Despite your complete conviction in the VANISHINGLY NARROW chance of a Conservative majority I will give you the opportunity of putting your money where your mouth is.
Happy to have anything up to £10k on a Tory majority at 5-1...which is incredibly skinny odds going by your post.
Money to be held by trusted 3rd party.
And because Labour are in this state, somehow the Tories sitll lead the polls.
I hope you don't teach your students about probability.
I was once asked if I could teach A-level maths. I got my whiteboard pen out and proved 2+2 can equal 5 in the right circumstances.
Funnily enough, nobody's asked me since.
But on a serious point, no government in this state should have even a faint chance of re-election. Labour members, I hope you're happy with how electing a geriatric populist nutter with the integrity of Horatio Bottomley has turned out.
Just for a bit of fun:
a = b aa = ab aa-bb = ab - bb (a-b)(a+b) = b(a-b) a+b = b 2b = b 2 = 1
Is that what you did?
pure and utter bollox. If you have two apples and another two apples , you can never get 2 apples to equal one apple unless you eat one of them.
Of course it is bollox, but your reason is not correct. Each line of maths is correct, but in one of the lines of maths I did something, that although normally is ok, in this instant isn't for a very particular reason. I'm deliberately being vague and it is very trivial but an easy mistake to make.
Last 3 lines look wrong to me
The mistake is from line 4 to line 5. I have done something that is normally allowed, but for very specific reasons I can't do in this instant.
a = b aa = ab aa-bb = ab - bb (a-b)(a+b) = b(a-b) a+b = b 2b = b 2 = 1
Would it make sense for Boris to use the Benn Act as a reason for saying that his negotiation hands are tied, so the best he can do is bring back TMs deal to the Commons to test current opinion? It remains the only deal in town and he has promised not to ask for an extension.
What happened to the Kinnock amendment, werent we supposed to get a vote on WA4 from that?
The lords accepted it as is so nothing can be done to change it
A word of warning to anyone thinking of staking cash on next Con leader: it’s not that long ago since one of the top names on that list was Ruth Davidson.
I wonder what happened to her?
#RuthForFM
Ho ho.
She was favourite at one point.
I blame punters who have zero knowledge of Scottish politics, but stake hard cash based on the mad comments made on PB and similar sites, by folk who also have zero knowledge of Scottish politics.
There are only a handful of Unionists around here who have a good grasp of politics north of the border, and no, I’m not going to assist opponents of Scottish self-government by naming them
Am I one of them Stuart
Not sure “handful” and “grasped” and Scottish politics is something that you want to be associated with Big G
The Prime Minister said he “will not” carry out Parliament’s instructions to seek an Article 50 extension if he fails to agree a new deal, adding he was only bound “in theory” by a law passed on Friday.
Mr Johnson also ruled out the option of resigning to avoid asking for an extension, saying he would be staying in office to deliver Brexit and defeat Jeremy Corbyn.
Hes desperate to look tough to the BXP voters. It's a crossed line I think, but we've seen that the Boris worshippers are practically tumescent are him proving what stone cold badass he is.
And for those of you convinced of the Cummings strategy to sweep the Labour heartlands ... Deja Vu.
"Theresa May laid bare the Conservatives’ ambitions to capture some of Labour’s most historic seats in England in a speech on Thursday night, telling voters in Leeds to put aside their traditional allegiances and vote “in the national interest”.
In a sign of the Conservatives’ bullishness about their chances in Labour’s northern heartlands, May told voters in Harehills that it was the Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, on the ballot, not the traditional party."
Except Cummings did actually win those areas in the EU referendum and Boris is a Leaver while May was a Remainer.
Cummings and Boris are forcing clear blue water with Corbyn on Brexit while easing off on austerity and pushing tax cuts, May's campaign saw her largely agree with Corbyn on Brexit while pushing more austerity and the dementia tax
That strategy is dependent on Brexit being the only issue. It isn't, and the Bored of Brexit mob will vote on other issues, as they did in 2017. The BXP vote is not interchangeable with the Tory vote and never will be. Indeed a formal pact may well damage both parties more than they gain, something my party also should consider.
Wrong.
Until Brexit is delivered Brexit IS the main issue.
2017 was fought with both May and Corbyn promising to deliver Brexit so other issues came to the fore neither have done so Brexit dominates after May extended and most Brexit Party voters voted Tory in 2017. Boris will fight as the leader to deliver Brexit come what may.
Plus on other issues there will be no dementia tax gaffes from Boris anyway
Only in a referendum would Brexit be the only issue. Elsewhere there are other issues
1) due to budget issues schools are no longer open 5 full days a week and while money was given to schools it was then spent increasing teachers pay so that doesn’t work out
I’m sure there are a 600 more all local and all may do harm to the sitting government
Education in Wales & Scotland is devolved.
In Wales, the sitting government is Labour/LibDem.
Personally, I don't know whether the Opposition parties denying an election will be good or bad for them politically (and I do think the effects will not be uniform).
However I do think it is wrong - to legislate for the Prime Minister to do something he doesn't want to do but deny him the alternative to challenge their 'mandate' to do so with the electorate. And frankly I want this Parliament out before they do any more damage. They can't go a couple of days without screwing something up - and I don't trust them a jot not to do so again. I think it is perfectly plausible that we crash out on Oct 31st because they can't agree amongst themselves on how to stop it.
If there's one thing worse for the future of the country than a no deal crash out, it's a no deal crash out without the electorate having been given the opportunity to stop it.
I agree with all that.
Boris is saying I am going to break the law, here is the opportunity to VNOC me.
The MPs say "No, we have confidence in you ... You're going to Jail".
I think my sympathies are with Boris (& Boris is one of the most utterly dislikable politicians ever)
We need an election -- and I shall be cheering any MP who loses his/her seat, because the Parliament elected in 2017 has proved rotten to the very core.
You can’t VONC him for something that he might do , the crime occurs when he does it not when he talks about doing it.
Oh and with Parliament prorogue no one can do anything for the next 6 weeks - until after the queens speech
...the week from hell. Everything is unravelling...clueless and powerless...Viscerally I expect we're going to see him leaching support.
...an outright Conservative win are vanishingly narrow.
be held by trusted 3rd party.
And because Labour are in this state, somehow the Tories sitll lead the polls.
I hope you don't teach your students about probability.
I was once asked if I could teach A-level maths. I got my whiteboard pen out and proved 2+2 can equal 5 in the right circumstances.
Funnily enough, nobody's asked me since.
But on a serious point, no government in this state should have even a faint chance of re-election. Labour members, I hope you're happy with how electing a geriatric populist nutter with the integrity of Horatio Bottomley has turned out.
Just for a bit of fun:
a = b aa = ab aa-bb = ab - bb (a-b)(a+b) = b(a-b) a+b = b 2b = b 2 = 1
Is that what you did?
pure and utter bollox. If you have two apples and another two apples , you can never get 2 apples to equal one apple unless you eat one of them.
Of course it is bollox, but your reason is not correct. Each line of maths is correct, but in one of the lines of maths I did something, that although normally is ok, in this instant isn't for a very particular reason. I'm deliberately being vague and it is very trivial but an easy mistake to make.
Last 3 lines look wrong to me
The mistake is from line 4 to line 5. I have done something that is normally allowed, but for very specific reasons I can't do in this instant.
How if a=b can a+b = b , that would mean b = 0 and also a therefore have to be zero. Or have I lost my marbles.
Your right it can't, but that is because the mistake was made in getting from the line above to this line. Each line of maths is correct but to get from line 4 to line 5 I have divided each side by (a-b) which is normally a valid thing to do to simplify the statement so it looks ok.
However we already know a = b so I am therefore dividing each side by zero. A big no no which enables me to prove anything I damn well like and a common mistake when dealing with variables. I can't tell you the number of times I managed to appear to prove the impossible!
You correctly identified the point it goes wrong by substituting numbers for the variables.
...the week from hell. Everything is unravelling...clueless and powerless...Viscerally I expect we're going to see him leaching support.
...absolutely risible...They are ripping themselves apart...fury in the corridors...nutcases...
....... I suggest the chances of an outright Conservative win are vanishingly narrow.
Wow.
They sound like at least a 20-1 shot.
Despite your complete conviction in the VANISHINGLY NARROW chance of a Conservative majority I will give you the opportunity of putting your money where your mouth is.
Happy to have anything up to £10k on a Tory majority at 5-1...which is incredibly skinny odds going by your post.
Money to be held by trusted 3rd party.
And because Labour are in this state, somehow the Tories sitll lead the polls.
I hope you don't teach your students about probability.
I was once asked if I could teach A-level maths. I got my whiteboard pen out and proved 2+2 can equal 5 in the right circumstances.
Funnily enough, nobody's asked me since.
But on a serious point, no government in this state should have even a faint chance of re-election. Labour members, I hope you're happy with how electing a geriatric populist nutter with the integrity of Horatio Bottomley has turned out.
Just for a bit of fun:
a = b aa = ab aa-bb = ab - bb (a-b)(a+b) = b(a-b) a+b = b 2b = b 2 = 1
Is that what you did?
pure and utter bollox. If you have two apples and another two apples , you can never get 2 apples to equal one apple unless you eat one of them.
Of course it is bollox, but your reason is not correct. Each line of maths is correct, but in one of the lines of maths I did something, that although normally is ok, in this instant isn't for a very particular reason. I'm deliberately being vague and it is very trivial but an easy mistake to make.
Last 3 lines look wrong to me
The mistake is from line 4 to line 5. I have done something that is normally allowed, but for very specific reasons I can't do in this instant.
Is it that:
If A = B [line 1] Then (A-B) = 0
So you can't divide by (A-B) because you're not allowed to divide by 0?
The Prime Minister said he “will not” carry out Parliament’s instructions to seek an Article 50 extension if he fails to agree a new deal, adding he was only bound “in theory” by a law passed on Friday.
Mr Johnson also ruled out the option of resigning to avoid asking for an extension, saying he would be staying in office to deliver Brexit and defeat Jeremy Corbyn.
Hes desperate to look tough to the BXP voters. It's a crossed line I think, but we've seen that the Boris worshippers are practically tumescent are him proving what stone cold badass he is.
Perhaps he could use his time in prison to write a book about his struggle?
...the week from hell. Everything is unravelling...clueless and powerless...Viscerally I expect we're going to see him leaching support.
...absolutely risible...They are ripping themselves apart...fury in the corridors...nutcases...
....... I suggest the chances of an outright Conservative win are vanishingly narrow.
Wow.
They sound like at least a 20-1 shot.
Despite your complete conviction in the VANISHINGLY NARROW chance of a Conservative majority I will give you the opportunity of putting your money where your mouth is.
Happy to have anything up to £10k on a Tory majority at 5-1...which is incredibly skinny odds going by your post.
Money to be held by trusted 3rd party.
And because Labour are in this state, somehow the Tories sitll lead the polls.
I hope you don't teach your students about probability.
I was once asked if I could teach A-level maths. I got my whiteboard pen out and proved 2+2 can equal 5 in the right circumstances.
Funnily enough, nobody's asked me since.
But on a serious point, no government in this state should have even a faint chance of re-election. Labour members, I hope you're happy with how electing a geriatric populist nutter with the integrity of Horatio Bottomley has turned out.
Just for a bit of fun:
a = b aa = ab aa-bb = ab - bb (a-b)(a+b) = b(a-b) a+b = b 2b = b 2 = 1
Is that what you did?
pure and utter bollox. If you have two apples and another two apples , you can never get 2 apples to equal one apple unless you eat one of them.
Of course it is bollox, but your reason is not correct. Each line of maths is correct, but in one of the lines of maths I did something, that although normally is ok, in this instant isn't for a very particular reason. I'm deliberately being vague and it is very trivial but an easy mistake to make.
Last 3 lines look wrong to me
The mistake is from line 4 to line 5. I have done something that is normally allowed, but for very specific reasons I can't do in this instant.
How if a=b can a+b = b , that would mean b = 0 and also a therefore have to be zero. Or have I lost my marbles.
The 'trick' is that a-b = 0. You cannot go from line 4 to 5 by removing the (a-b).
Personally, I don't know whether the Opposition parties denying an election will be good or bad for them politically (and I do think the effects will not be uniform).
However I do think it is wrong - to legislate for the Prime Minister to do something he doesn't want to do but deny him the alternative to challenge their 'mandate' to do so with the electorate. And frankly I want this Parliament out before they do any more damage. They can't go a couple of days without screwing something up - and I don't trust them a jot not to do so again. I think it is perfectly plausible that we crash out on Oct 31st because they can't agree amongst themselves on how to stop it.
If there's one thing worse for the future of the country than a no deal crash out, it's a no deal crash out without the electorate having been given the opportunity to stop it.
All very commendable and correct, but ignoring the problem that the PM cannot be trusted.
Which bit means trust is a problem - I really don't believe the line that he might promise (on oath if necessary) to have an election on Oct 15th and then call it in November. Not least because I think the circumstances of an election are better for him under the former against the latter.
And I actually hold out hope that given a majority in an election the fact he cannot be trusted would actually be a good thing in the event he secures a majority.
...the week from hell. Everything is unravelling...clueless and powerless...Viscerally I expect we're going to see him leaching support.
...absolutely risible...They are ripping themselves apart...fury in the corridors...nutcases...
....... I suggest the chances of an outright Conservative win are vanishingly narrow.
Wow.
They sound like at least a 20-1 shot.
Despite your complete conviction in the VANISHINGLY NARROW chance of a Conservative majority I will give you the opportunity of putting your money where your mouth is.
Happy to have anything up to £10k on a Tory majority at 5-1...which is incredibly skinny odds going by your post.
Money to be held by trusted 3rd party.
And because Labour are in this state, somehow the Tories sitll lead the polls.
I hope you don't teach your students about probability.
I was once asked if I could teach A-level maths. I got my whiteboard pen out and proved 2+2 can equal 5 in the right circumstances.
Funnily enough, nobody's asked me since.
But on a serious point, no government in this state should have even a faint chance of re-election. Labour members, I hope you're happy with how electing a geriatric populist nutter with the integrity of Horatio Bottomley has turned out.
Just for a bit of fun:
a = b aa = ab aa-bb = ab - bb (a-b)(a+b) = b(a-b) a+b = b 2b = b 2 = 1
Is that what you did?
pure and utter bollox. If you have two apples and another two apples , you can never get 2 apples to equal one apple unless you eat one of them.
Of course it is bollox, but your reason is not correct. Each line of maths is correct, but in one of the lines of maths I did something, that although normally is ok, in this instant isn't for a very particular reason. I'm deliberately being vague and it is very trivial but an easy mistake to make.
Last 3 lines look wrong to me
The mistake is from line 4 to line 5. I have done something that is normally allowed, but for very specific reasons I can't do in this instant.
a = b aa = ab aa-bb = ab - bb (a-b)(a+b) = b(a-b) a+b = b 2b = b 2 = 1
Absurd, hence a cannot equal b
As I have defined a = b that is not the explanation. See explanation of error in other post.
Personally, I don't know whether the Opposition parties denying an election will be good or bad for them politically (and I do think the effects will not be uniform).
However I do think it is wrong - to legislate for the Prime Minister to do something he doesn't want to do but deny him the alternative to challenge their 'mandate' to do so with the electorate. And frankly I want this Parliament out before they do any more damage. They can't go a couple of days without screwing something up - and I don't trust them a jot not to do so again. I think it is perfectly plausible that we crash out on Oct 31st because they can't agree amongst themselves on how to stop it.
If there's one thing worse for the future of the country than a no deal crash out, it's a no deal crash out without the electorate having been given the opportunity to stop it.
I agree with all that.
Boris is saying I am going to break the law, here is the opportunity to VNOC me.
The MPs say "No, we have confidence in you ... You're going to Jail".
I think my sympathies are with Boris (& Boris is one of the most utterly dislikable politicians ever)
We need an election -- and I shall be cheering any MP who loses his/her seat, because the Parliament elected in 2017 has proved rotten to the very core.
You can’t VONC him for something that he might do , the crime occurs when he does it not when he talks about doing it.
Oh and with Parliament prorogue no one can do anything for the next 6 weeks - until after the queens speech
I am pointing out that this is a battle for public opinion, it is not one in which legalistic arguments will have much force in the end.
You can put Boris in jail if you want, but it will backfire, in my judgment.
It will probably guarantee No Deal. It is hard to think of much that will evoke sympathy for Boris, but this will.
Would it make sense for Boris to use the Benn Act as a reason for saying that his negotiation hands are tied, so the best he can do is bring back TMs deal to the Commons to test current opinion? It remains the only deal in town and he has promised not to ask for an extension.
He has no wish to do so. If he meant what he said about do or die hed consider it, but hes trashed it completely. He does not want to be out do or die, he only wants out in specific ways, notwithstanding he voted for the damn thing.
It's the same as all those phones willing to do anything to stop no deal except vote for a deal. They are willing to do anything so long as it leads to remain.
Personally, I don't know whether the Opposition parties denying an election will be good or bad for them politically (and I do think the effects will not be uniform).
However I do think it is wrong - to legislate for the Prime Minister to do something he doesn't want to do but deny him the alternative to challenge their 'mandate' to do so with the electorate. And frankly I want this Parliament out before they do any more damage. They can't go a couple of days without screwing something up - and I don't trust them a jot not to do so again. I think it is perfectly plausible that we crash out on Oct 31st because they can't agree amongst themselves on how to stop it.
If there's one thing worse for the future of the country than a no deal crash out, it's a no deal crash out without the electorate having been given the opportunity to stop it.
I agree with all that.
Boris is saying I am going to break the law, here is the opportunity to VNOC me.
The MPs say "No, we have confidence in you ... You're going to Jail".
I think my sympathies are with Boris (& Boris is one of the most utterly dislikable politicians ever)
We need an election -- and I shall be cheering any MP who loses his/her seat, because the Parliament elected in 2017 has proved rotten to the very core.
You can’t VONC him for something that he might do , the crime occurs when he does it not when he talks about doing it.
Oh and with Parliament prorogue no one can do anything for the next 6 weeks - until after the queens speech
Surely you dont need a reason to vonc, they can do it based on what he says he might do.
Listening to Rachel Sylvester on Radio 4 Johnson is finished. The game's over. If she's correct wouldn't this be the moment for him to declare war on someone?
Politicians deciding which laws they should and should not obey takes us to Catalonia. It does not end well. That the Tories are seriously contemplating this is genuinely astonishing.
...the week from hell. Everything is unravelling...clueless and powerless...Viscerally I expect we're going to see him leaching support.
...absolutely risible...They are ripping themselves apart...fury in the corridors...nutcases...
....... I suggest the chances of an outright Conservative win are vanishingly narrow.
Wow.
up to £10k on a Tory majority at 5-1...which is incredibly skinny odds going by your post.
Money to be held by trusted 3rd party.
And because Labour are in this state, somehow the Tories sitll lead the polls.
I hope you don't teach your students about probability.
I was once asked if I could teach A-level maths. I got my whiteboard pen out and proved 2+2 can equal 5 in the right circumstances.
Funnily enough, nobody's asked me since.
But on a serious point, no government in this state should have even a faint chance of re-election. Labour members, I hope you're happy with how electing a geriatric populist nutter with the integrity of Horatio Bottomley has turned out.
Just for a bit of fun:
a = b aa = ab aa-bb = ab - bb (a-b)(a+b) = b(a-b) a+b = b 2b = b 2 = 1
Is that what you did?
pure and utter bollox. If you have two apples and another two apples , you can never get 2 apples to equal one apple unless you eat one of them.
Of course it is bollox, but your reason is not correct. Each line of maths is correct, but in one of the lines of maths I did something, that although normally is ok, in this instant isn't for a very particular reason. I'm deliberately being vague and it is very trivial but an easy mistake to make.
Last 3 lines look wrong to me
The mistake is from line 4 to line 5. I have done something that is normally allowed, but for very specific reasons I can't do in this instant.
Is it that:
If A = B [line 1] Then (A-B) = 0
So you can't divide by (A-B) because you're not allowed to divide by 0?
Spot on.
I've been quite surprised by this. I nearly didn't post it in response to ydoethur's post as I thought it a really old party trick, but apparently not.
It is such a common mistake that everyone doing maths makes so many times in their life. The number of times I have proved the impossible. It is so frustrating and it is the first thing you go back and check to see if that is what you have done.
...the week from hell. Everything is unravelling...clueless and powerless...Viscerally I expect we're going to see him leaching support.
...absolutely risible...They are ripping themselves apart...fury in the corridors...nutcases...
....... I suggest the chances of an outright Conservative win are vanishingly narrow.
Wow.
They sound like at least a 20-1 shot.
And because Labour are in this state, somehow the Tories sitll lead the polls.
I hope you don't teach your students about probability.
I was once asked if I could teach A-level maths. I got my whiteboard pen out and proved 2+2 can equal 5 in the right circumstances.
Funnily enough, nobody's asked me since.
But on a serious point, no government in this state should have even a faint chance of re-election. Labour members, I hope you're happy with how electing a geriatric populist nutter with the integrity of Horatio Bottomley has turned out.
Just for a bit of fun:
a = b aa = ab aa-bb = ab - bb (a-b)(a+b) = b(a-b) a+b = b 2b = b 2 = 1
Is that what you did?
pure and utter bollox. If you have two apples and another two apples , you can never get 2 apples to equal one apple unless you eat one of them.
Of course it is bollox, but your reason is not correct. Each line of maths is correct, but in one of the lines of maths I did something, that although normally is ok, in this instant isn't for a very particular reason. I'm deliberately being vague and it is very trivial but an easy mistake to make.
Last 3 lines look wrong to me
The mistake is from line 4 to line 5. I have done something that is normally allowed, but for very specific reasons I can't do in this instant.
a = b aa = ab aa-bb = ab - bb (a-b)(a+b) = b(a-b) a+b = b 2b = b 2 = 1
Absurd, hence a cannot equal b
As I have defined a = b that is not the explanation. See explanation of error in other post.
I know perfectly well the reason for the error. I was making a (maths) joke!
The point being that if you prove (without error) something absurd, then the conclusion isn't that the absurd thing is correct but rather that the initial assumption must be flawed...
You were 'trying' to show that 2=1. It would work equally well if you were trying to prove that a cannot equal b.
A word of warning to anyone thinking of staking cash on next Con leader: it’s not that long ago since one of the top names on that list was Ruth Davidson.
I wonder what happened to her?
#RuthForFM
Ho ho.
She was favourite at one point.
I blame punters who have zero knowledge of Scottish politics, but stake hard cash based on the mad comments made on PB and similar sites, by folk who also have zero knowledge of Scottish politics.
There are only a handful of Unionists around here who have a good grasp of politics north of the border, and no, I’m not going to assist opponents of Scottish self-government by naming them
Am I one of them Stuart
Not sure “handful” and “grasped” and Scottish politics is something that you want to be associated with Big G
That is an implausable time scale. If Corbyn or ANO took over mid October it would take all of the time under the extension to obtain a formal ageement with the EU, then the HOC needs legislation enabling the referendum, then the wording needs to be agreed, then the campaign.
Late Spring, early Summer is a minimum for the actual vote and would a cobbled together HOC hold together and what domestic policy agenda could be agreed
They can get working on the referendum wording immediately, in parallel with any discussions with the EU. The Political Declaration is mostly there for domestic British political purposes; What the EU are really bothered about is the WA, which is already consistent with Norway, and all the detailed discussion about what happens afterwards is done during the transition period. So if the UK parliament agrees on what it agrees on, and the EU is happy with the general direction, you could literally do it in a day.
So parliament can pass the WA+referendum bill by the end of October, tell the Electoral Commission to get all its preparations done in November (change legislation for this if necessary), campaigns formally agreed in December, campaign starts right after the New Year, vote late Jan, out (or revoke) end Jan.
I think it's actually easier if you do it fast, because as you say if you allow it to stretch out you start arguing about the domestic agenda.
BoZo resigns, Corbyn takes over, tables WA4 and we leave on Oct 31st
Jezza is a Brexit hero and BoZo is a footnote
lol, but no, I think more like
BoZo resigns or they VONC him, Corbyn takes over (or Ken Clarke or Rory Stewart or whoever, with Corbyn having some kind of "be responsible for something important and ostentatiously don't break it" position), rejig the PD to be more Norway-ish, pass that with the existing WA it subject to a referendum.
Referendum in January, out or revoke by Jan 31st. Election after that or not, see how it goes.
I don't think it's possible to hold a referendum at such short notice but we need it just to get this mess out of the way.
That is an implausable time scale. If Corbyn or ANO took over mid October it would take all of the time under the extension to obtain a formal ageement with the EU, then the HOC needs legislation enabling the referendum, then the wording needs to be agreed, then the campaign.
Late Spring, early Summer is a minimum for the actual vote and would a cobbled together HOC hold together and what domestic policy agenda could be agreed
The HOC is bankrupt, Boris is hopeless, and we need an election
Boris is correct wanting it on the 15th October, the rest are just playing politics because labour and lots of independents fear for their seats
G, correct they should be having it as soon as possible. The cabal of cowardy custards after whining for ever about wanting an election should be getting on with it. SNP especially should be getting pelters.
Good morning Malc. Believe it is a nice day in Ayrshire today. Have a good weekend
G, it is indeed, first sunshine in a while, I will be out getting some vitamn D later. Best wishes to your good self.
Politicians deciding which laws they should and should not obey takes us to Catalonia. It does not end well. That the Tories are seriously contemplating this is genuinely astonishing.
There can be no finer example of how Brexit purity is now the only thing that matters. Not delivering Brexit by any means, since he has ruled out plenty of Brexit options, so they cannot claim to be willing to do anything to Brexit.
But the law and order party no longer minds if the law is followed, they no longer care if the uk breaks apart. That might have been surprising once.
Personally, I don't know whether the Opposition parties denying an election will be good or bad for them politically (and I do think the effects will not be uniform).
However I do think it is wrong - to legislate for the Prime Minister to do something he doesn't want to do but deny him the alternative to challenge their 'mandate' to do so with the electorate. And frankly I want this Parliament out before they do any more damage. They can't go a couple of days without screwing something up - and I don't trust them a jot not to do so again. I think it is perfectly plausible that we crash out on Oct 31st because they can't agree amongst themselves on how to stop it.
If there's one thing worse for the future of the country than a no deal crash out, it's a no deal crash out without the electorate having been given the opportunity to stop it.
I agree with all that.
Boris is saying I am going to break the law, here is the opportunity to VNOC me.
The MPs say "No, we have confidence in you ... You're going to Jail".
I think my sympathies are with Boris (& Boris is one of the most utterly dislikable politicians ever)
We need an election -- and I shall be cheering any MP who loses his/her seat, because the Parliament elected in 2017 has proved rotten to the very core.
Worse than the bunch who chsselled their expenses? I think this is one of the most honourable set of MPs we've had. They have fought for the rights of parliament against a sleazy and duplicious executive. How can you sympathise with 'One of the most dislikable politicians ever'?
Would it make sense for Boris to use the Benn Act as a reason for saying that his negotiation hands are tied, so the best he can do is bring back TMs deal to the Commons to test current opinion? It remains the only deal in town and he has promised not to ask for an extension.
It is on a plate for him with a cross party alliance including Stephen Kinnock and Rory Stewart bringing it to the HOC as they have already said, and it is required under the terms of the no deal act
As we all know Boris is not to be trusted so how about this for an idea. He returns from the EU Council meeting with a superficial change to the PD, the WDA as modified including labour's recommendations agreed with TM, is presented on the 19th October and the HOC votes it through, we leave on the 31st March and we have a transition period that will see stock markets soar, business cheer, and the Country sigh a huge sigh of relief
Job done, ERG done (Cummings does not like the ERG), Remainers done, the referendum fulfilled, and Boris has achieved his objective
It may be fanciful but it is not impossible by any means
And the real hero in this would be TM who laid all the groundwork
Would it make sense for Boris to use the Benn Act as a reason for saying that his negotiation hands are tied, so the best he can do is bring back TMs deal to the Commons to test current opinion? It remains the only deal in town and he has promised not to ask for an extension.
He has no wish to do so. If he meant what he said about do or die hed consider it, but hes trashed it completely. He does not want to be out do or die, he only wants out in specific ways, notwithstanding he voted for the damn thing.
It's the same as all those phones willing to do anything to stop no deal except vote for a deal. They are willing to do anything so long as it leads to remain.
Didn't I read somewhere that he is required to bring May's deal back to the Commons under the Kinnock amendment?
Agree with the header and I am strongly attracted to Michael Gove. He appears to me to be the person who best combines Leave credentials with competence.
2 routes -
(1) As described by David. Johnson wins an election, does Brexit, but it soon becomes clear that he cannot run a chip shop. Gove takes over.
(2) Election does not come, Johnson gets trapped powerless in Downing St and implodes. Gove takes over.
If not Gove, Penny Mordaunt.
I like her too - for similar reasons - and she is my 2nd choice.
...the week from hell. Everything is unravelling...clueless and powerless...Viscerally I expect we're going to see him leaching support.
...absolutely risible...They are ripping themselves apart...fury in the corridors...nutcases...
....... I suggest the chances of an outright Conservative win are vanishingly narrow.
Wow.
They sound like at least a 20-1 shot.
And because Labour are in this state, somehow the Tories sitll lead the polls.
I hope you don't teach your students about probability.
I was once asked if I could teach A-level maths. I got my whiteboard pen out and proved 2+2 can equal 5 in the right circumstances.
Just for a bit of fun:
a = b aa = ab aa-bb = ab - bb (a-b)(a+b) = b(a-b) a+b = b 2b = b 2 = 1
Is that what you did?
pure and utter bollox. If you have two apples and another two apples , you can never get 2 apples to equal one apple unless you eat one of them.
Of course it is bollox, but your reason is not correct. Each line of maths is correct, but in one of the lines of maths I did something, that although normally is ok, in this instant isn't for a very particular reason. I'm deliberately being vague and it is very trivial but an easy mistake to make.
Last 3 lines look wrong to me
The mistake is from line 4 to line 5. I have done something that is normally allowed, but for very specific reasons I can't do in this instant.
a = b aa = ab aa-bb = ab - bb (a-b)(a+b) = b(a-b) a+b = b 2b = b 2 = 1
Absurd, hence a cannot equal b
As I have defined a = b that is not the explanation. See explanation of error in other post.
I know perfectly well the reason for the error. I was making a (maths) joke!
The point being that if you prove (without error) something absurd, then the conclusion isn't that the absurd thing is correct but rather that the initial assumption must be flawed...
You were 'trying' to show that 2=1. It would work equally well if you were trying to prove that a cannot equal b.
Reductio ad absurdum.
Hope you boys don't tell maths jokes at parties or try them as chat up lines.
...the week from hell. Everything is unravelling...clueless and powerless...Viscerally I expect we're going to see him leaching support.
...an outright Conservative win are vanishingly narrow.
be held by trusted 3rd party.
And because Labour are in this state, somehow the Tories sitll lead the polls.
I hope you don't teach your students about probability.
I
Just for a bit of fun:
a = b aa = ab aa-bb = ab - bb (a-b)(a+b) = b(a-b) a+b = b 2b = b 2 = 1
Is that what you did?
pure and utter bollox. If you have two apples and another two apples , you can never get 2 apples to equal one apple unless you eat one of them.
Of course it is bollox, but your reason is not correct. Each line of maths is correct, but in one of the lines of maths I did something, that although normally is ok, in this instant isn't for a very particular reason. I'm deliberately being vague and it is very trivial but an easy mistake to make.
Last 3 lines look wrong to me
The mistake is from line 4 to line 5. I have done something that is normally allowed, but for very specific reasons I can't do in this instant.
How if a=b can a+b = b , that would mean b = 0 and also a therefore have to be zero. Or have I lost my marbles.
Your right it can't, but that is because the mistake was made in getting from the line above to this line. Each line of maths is correct but to get from line 4 to line 5 I have divided each side by (a-b) which is normally a valid thing to do to simplify the statement so it looks ok.
However we already know a = b so I am therefore dividing each side by zero. A big no no which enables me to prove anything I damn well like and a common mistake when dealing with variables. I can't tell you the number of times I managed to appear to prove the impossible!
You correctly identified the point it goes wrong by substituting numbers for the variables.
Would it make sense for Boris to use the Benn Act as a reason for saying that his negotiation hands are tied, so the best he can do is bring back TMs deal to the Commons to test current opinion? It remains the only deal in town and he has promised not to ask for an extension.
It is on a plate for him with a cross party alliance including Stephen Kinnock and Rory Stewart bringing it to the HOC as they have already said, and it is required under the terms of the no deal act
As we all know Boris is not to be trusted so how about this for an idea. He returns from the EU Council meeting with a superficial change to the PD, the WDA as modified including labour's recommendations agreed with TM, is presented on the 19th October and the HOC votes it through, we leave on the 31st March and we have a transition period that will see stock markets soar, business cheer, and the Country sigh a huge sigh of relief
Job done, ERG done (Cummings does not like the ERG), Remainers done, the referendum fulfilled, and Boris has achieved his objective
It may be fanciful but it is not impossible by any means
And the real hero in this would be TM who laid all the groundwork
It is as close to impossible as you can get. You dont float the idea of simply ignoring the law and see your supporters eagerly hope you can lead them as a martyr from prison if you're contemplating a tiny tweak bait and switch.
The main problem is that will see the tory vote plunge as BXP cry betrayal, and now all parties are on record as wanting an election, which he would then lose.
No deal even if it means ignoring another law is risky but still might give him victory. That's all that matters.
Personally, I don't know whether the Opposition parties denying an election will be good or bad for them politically (and I do think the effects will not be uniform).
However I do think it is wrong - to legislate for the Prime Minister to do something he doesn't want to do but deny him the alternative to challenge their 'mandate' to do so with the electorate. And frankly I want this Parliament out before they do any more damage. They can't go a couple of days without screwing something up - and I don't trust them a jot not to do so again. I think it is perfectly plausible that we crash out on Oct 31st because they can't agree amongst themselves on how to stop it.
If there's one thing worse for the future of the country than a no deal crash out, it's a no deal crash out without the electorate having been given the opportunity to stop it.
I agree with all that.
Boris is saying I am going to break the law, here is the opportunity to VNOC me.
The MPs say "No, we have confidence in you ... You're going to Jail".
I think my sympathies are with Boris (& Boris is one of the most utterly dislikable politicians ever)
We need an election -- and I shall be cheering any MP who loses his/her seat, because the Parliament elected in 2017 has proved rotten to the very core.
Worse than the bunch who chsselled their expenses? I think this is one of the most honourable set of MPs we've had. They have fought for the rights of parliament against a sleazy and duplicious executive. How can you sympathise with 'One of the most dislikable politicians ever'?
I think the happy resolution of this can only end up via the passing of the WA.
This Parliament has voted against the WA three times -- many for crass party political reasons or because they want a solution at the extremes instead of in the middle.
I don't see No Deal Brexit or Revoke as being stable resolutions in the long run.
BoZo resigns, Corbyn takes over, tables WA4 and we leave on Oct 31st
Jezza is a Brexit hero and BoZo is a footnote
lol, but no, I think more like
BoZo resigns or they VONC him, Corbyn takes over (or Ken Clarke or Rory Stewart or whoever, with Corbyn having some kind of "be responsible for something important and ostentatiously don't break it" position), rejig the PD to be more Norway-ish, pass that with the existing WA it subject to a referendum.
Referendum in January, out or revoke by Jan 31st. Election after that or not, see how it goes.
I don't think it's possible to hold a referendum at such short notice but we need it just to get this mess out of the way.
That is an implausable time scale. If Corbyn or ANO took over mid October it would take all of the time under the extension to obtain a formal ageement with the EU, then the HOC needs legislation enabling the referendum, then the wording needs to be agreed, then the campaign.
Late Spring, early Summer is a minimum for the actual vote and would a cobbled together HOC hold together and what domestic policy agenda could be agreed
The HOC is bankrupt, Boris is hopeless, and we need an election
Boris is correct wanting it on the 15th October, the rest are just playing politics because labour and lots of independents fear for their seats
I think if it could be outside the PMs control the opposition would accept 15 October. Any reason why they should trust a lying, manipulative, reckless PM not to say yes erm yes yes we will accept 15 October and then flip to 15 November once only he has the power?
Nothing, but if he states it at the dispatch box, the proclamation then goes on the Palace gates and cannot be changed. So he would have to change it within an hour or so as he is on the way to the Palace
The rebel alliance is using it as labour and all the independents are running scared for their own jobs and that sums up this bankrupt HOC
Agree with the header and I am strongly attracted to Michael Gove. He appears to me to be the person who best combines Leave credentials with competence.
2 routes -
(1) As described by David. Johnson wins an election, does Brexit, but it soon becomes clear that he cannot run a chip shop. Gove takes over.
(2) Election does not come, Johnson gets trapped powerless in Downing St and implodes. Gove takes over.
If not Gove, Penny Mordaunt.
I like her too - for similar reasons - and she is my 2nd choice.
Specsavers for you , not even an alien could be attracted to Gove.
Would it make sense for Boris to use the Benn Act as a reason for saying that his negotiation hands are tied, so the best he can do is bring back TMs deal to the Commons to test current opinion? It remains the only deal in town and he has promised not to ask for an extension.
He has no wish to do so. If he meant what he said about do or die hed consider it, but hes trashed it completely. He does not want to be out do or die, he only wants out in specific ways, notwithstanding he voted for the damn thing.
It's the same as all those phones willing to do anything to stop no deal except vote for a deal. They are willing to do anything so long as it leads to remain.
Didn't I read somewhere that he is required to bring May's deal back to the Commons under the Kinnock amendment?
I confess the actual effect of that amendment escapes me right now, but he would still whip against since if he was willing to leave under those circumstances hed have left himself wiggle room to bring it back himself .
...the week from hell. Everything is unravelling...clueless and powerless...Viscerally I expect we're going to see him leaching support.
...absolutely risible...They are ripping themselves apart...fury in the corridors...nutcases...
....... I suggest the chances of an outright Conservative win are vanishingly narrow.
Wow.
They sound like at least a 20-1 shot.
Despite your complete conviction in the VANISHINGLY NARROW chance of a Conservative majority I will give you the opportunity of putting your money where your mouth is.
Happy to have anything up to £10k on a Tory majority at 5-1...which is incredibly skinny odds going by your post.
Money to be held by trusted 3rd party.
And because Labour are in this state, somehow the Tories sitll lead the polls.
I hope you don't teach your students about probability.
I was once asked if I could teach A-level maths. I got my whiteboard pen out and proved 2+2 can equal 5 in the right circumstances.
Funnily enough, nobody's asked me since.
But on a serious point, no government in this state should have even a faint chance of re-election. Labour members, I hope you're happy with how electing a geriatric populist nutter with the integrity of Horatio Bottomley has turned out.
Just for a bit of fun:
a = b aa = ab aa-bb = ab - bb (a-b)(a+b) = b(a-b) a+b = b 2b = b 2 = 1
Is that what you did?
pure and utter bollox. If you have two apples and another two apples , you can never get 2 apples to equal one apple unless you eat one of them.
Of course it is bollox, but your reason is not correct. Each line of maths is correct, but in one of the lines of maths I did something, that although normally is ok, in this instant isn't for a very particular reason. I'm deliberately being vague and it is very trivial but an easy mistake to make.
Last 3 lines look wrong to me
The mistake is from line 4 to line 5. I have done something that is normally allowed, but for very specific reasons I can't do in this instant.
Is it that:
If A = B [line 1] Then (A-B) = 0
So you can't divide by (A-B) because you're not allowed to divide by 0?
More worrying than what the Sun and the Telegraph and the FT are writing is what Ministers are saying to journalists. Everyone of them has a story along the lines that Johnson's losing it/is badly advised etc and we all know what happens to a PM when this happens.
Personally, I don't know whether the Opposition parties denying an election will be good or bad for them politically (and I do think the effects will not be uniform).
However I do think it is wrong - to legislate for the Prime Minister to do something he doesn't want to do but deny him the alternative to challenge their 'mandate' to do so with the electorate. And frankly I want this Parliament out before they do any more damage. They can't go a couple of days without screwing something up - and I don't trust them a jot not to do so again. I think it is perfectly plausible that we crash out on Oct 31st because they can't agree amongst themselves on how to stop it.
If there's one thing worse for the future of the country than a no deal crash out, it's a no deal crash out without the electorate having been given the opportunity to stop it.
I agree with all that.
Boris is saying I am going to break the law, here is the opportunity to VNOC me.
The MPs say "No, we have confidence in you ... You're going to Jail".
I think my sympathies are with Boris (& Boris is one of the most utterly dislikable politicians ever)
We need an election -- and I shall be cheering any MP who loses his/her seat, because the Parliament elected in 2017 has proved rotten to the very core.
Worse than the bunch who chsselled their expenses? I think this is one of the most honourable set of MPs we've had. They have fought for the rights of parliament against a sleazy and duplicious executive. How can you sympathise with 'One of the most dislikable politicians ever'?
Roger , they are a bunch of dithering duffers who are either stupid or just scared to make a decision one way or the other.
Do it! As noted last night he thinks he'll win a GE if we are out, so the DUP pulling support is surely not a threat to him.
has anyone noticed that when you about 40 down on the reliable numbers, the 10 votes of the worlds' most duplicitous party (DUP, in a close contest with Sinn Fein) are not worth having, especially as they never had them when they were actually needed.
Personally, I don't know whether the Opposition parties denying an election will be good or bad for them politically (and I do think the effects will not be uniform).
However I do think it is wrong - to legislate for the Prime Minister to do something he doesn't want to do but deny him the alternative to challenge their 'mandate' to do so with the electorate. And frankly I want this Parliament out before they do any more damage. They can't go a couple of days without screwing something up - and I don't trust them a jot not to do so again. I think it is perfectly plausible that we crash out on Oct 31st because they can't agree amongst themselves on how to stop it.
If there's one thing worse for the future of the country than a no deal crash out, it's a no deal crash out without the electorate having been given the opportunity to stop it.
I agree with all that.
Boris is saying I am going to break the law, here is the opportunity to VNOC me.
The MPs say "No, we have confidence in you ... You're going to Jail".
I think my sympathies are with Boris (& Boris is one of the most utterly dislikable politicians ever)
We need an election -- and I shall be cheering any MP who loses his/her seat, because the Parliament elected in 2017 has proved rotten to the very core.
Worse than the bunch who chsselled their expenses? I think this is one of the most honourable set of MPs we've had. They have fought for the rights of parliament against a sleazy and duplicious executive. How can you sympathise with 'One of the most dislikable politicians ever'?
Roger , they are a bunch of dithering duffers who are either stupid or just scared to make a decision one way or the other.
...the week from hell. Everything is unravelling...clueless and powerless...Viscerally I expect we're going to see him leaching support.
...absolutely risible...They are ripping themselves apart...fury in the corridors...nutcases...
....... I suggest the chances of an outright Conservative win are vanishingly narrow.
Wow.
They sound like at least a 20-1 shot.
Despite your complete conviction in the VANISHINGLY NARROW chance of a Conservative majority I will give you the opportunity of putting your money where your mouth is.
Happy to have anything up to £10k on a Tory majority at 5-1...which is incredibly skinny odds going by your post.
Money to be held by trusted 3rd party.
And because Labour are in this state, somehow the Tories sitll lead the polls.
I hope you don't teach your students about probability.
I was once asked if I could teach A-level maths. I got my whiteboard pen out and proved 2+2 can equal 5 in the right circumstances.
Funnily enough, nobody's asked me since.
But on a serious point, no government in this state should have even a faint chance of re-election. Labour members, I hope you're happy with how electing a geriatric populist nutter with the integrity of Horatio Bottomley has turned out.
Just for a bit of fun:
a = b aa = ab aa-bb = ab - bb (a-b)(a+b) = b(a-b) a+b = b 2b = b 2 = 1
Is that what you did?
pure and utter bollox. If you have two apples and another two apples , you can never get 2 apples to equal one apple unless you eat one of them.
Of course it is bollox, but your reason is not correct. Each line of maths is correct, but in one of the lines of maths I did something, that although normally is ok, in this instant isn't for a very particular reason. I'm deliberately being vague and it is very trivial but an easy mistake to make.
Last 3 lines look wrong to me
The mistake is from line 4 to line 5. I have done something that is normally allowed, but for very specific reasons I can't do in this instant.
Supercomputers don't like dividing by zero, and neither should you.
More worrying than what the Sun and the Telegraph and the FT are writing is what Ministers are saying to journalists. Everyone of them has a story along the lines that Johnson's losing it and we all know what happens to a PM when this happens.
Unless this genuinely is all part of the plan and we end up looking very silly, I'm curious what BoJo expected once he became PM. He has a famously high opinion of his own intellect, so no matter how bad May was did he really think it would be so easy?
More worrying than what the Sun and the Telegraph and the FT are writing is what Ministers are saying to journalists. Everyone of them has a story along the lines that Johnson's losing it/is badly advised etc and we all know what happens to a PM when this happens.
Maybe. or it may reveal that they are not telling the press.
Personally, I don't know whether the Opposition parties denying an election will be good or bad for them politically (and I do think the effects will not be uniform).
However I do think it is wrong - to legislate for the Prime Minister to do something he doesn't want to do but deny him the alternative to challenge their 'mandate' to do so with the electorate. And frankly I want this Parliament out before they do any more damage. They can't go a couple of days without screwing something up - and I don't trust them a jot not to do so again. I think it is perfectly plausible that we crash out on Oct 31st because they can't agree amongst themselves on how to stop it.
If there's one thing worse for the future of the country than a no deal crash out, it's a no deal crash out without the electorate having been given the opportunity to stop it.
I agree with all that.
Boris is saying I am going to break the law, here is the opportunity to VNOC me.
The MPs say "No, we have confidence in you ... You're going to Jail".
I think my sympathies are with Boris (& Boris is one of the most utterly dislikable politicians ever)
We need an election -- and I shall be cheering any MP who loses his/her seat, because the Parliament elected in 2017 has proved rotten to the very core.
Worse than the bunch who chsselled their expenses? I think this is one of the most honourable set of MPs we've had. They have fought for the rights of parliament against a sleazy and duplicious executive. How can you sympathise with 'One of the most dislikable politicians ever'?
I struggle to understand why people call the MPs who voted to stop no deal as doing it ‘for their own interest’ it is possible the genuinely believe they have a responsibility to stop what they consider will be a disaster from happening. To kick out Hammond and co who voted for the WA whilst leaving the ERG Spartans in place is a strange optic if you care to look closely. I’m afraid a lot of the public think the ones kicked out were the ones stopping it all along and are not interested in any analysis or debate because ‘all MPs are as bad as each other’
In his piece David Herdson underplays the impact of The Brexit Party.
I know many people who, unlike me, voted for Brexit and they all, without exception, will vote for The Brexit Party rather than the Tories. Farage is their god.
I cannot understand how the Tories can be best priced 1/2 to win most seats at next GE (let alone a majority).
Surely the 3/1 on Labour in the same market is value??
To secure Brexit, the Tories will now happily contemplate: * The end of the UK * Closing down Parliament * Breaking the law * Causing sustained damage to the economy This is astonishing. It is complete madness. And it is just plain wrong. These people are deranged.
In his piece David Herdson underplays the impact of The Brexit Party.
I know many people who, unlike me, voted for Brexit and they all, without exception, will vote for The Brexit Party rather than the Tories. Farage is their god.
I cannot understand how the Tories can be best priced 1/2 to win most seats at next GE (let alone a majority).
Surely the 3/1 on Labour in the same market is value??
On the off chance BXP stood down, at least in some areas, who would then vote for?
I dont think they will, but I am curious given the tory strategy relies on it.
Personally, I don't know whether the Opposition parties denying an election will be good or bad for them politically (and I do think the effects will not be uniform).
However I do think it is wrong - to legislate for the Prime Minister to do something he doesn't want to do but deny him the alternative to challenge their 'mandate' to do so with the electorate. And frankly I want this Parliament out before they do any more damage. They can't go a couple of days without screwing something up - and I don't trust them a jot not to do so again. I think it is perfectly plausible that we crash out on Oct 31st because they can't agree amongst themselves on how to stop it.
If there's one thing worse for the future of the country than a no deal crash out, it's a no deal crash out without the electorate having been given the opportunity to stop it.
I agree with all that.
Boris is saying I am going to break the law, here is the opportunity to VNOC me.
The MPs say "No, we have confidence in you ... You're going to Jail".
I think my sympathies are with Boris (& Boris is one of the most utterly dislikable politicians ever)
We need an election -- and I shall be cheering any MP who loses his/her seat, because the Parliament elected in 2017 has proved rotten to the very core.
Worse than the bunch who chsselled their expenses? I think this is one of the most honourable set of MPs we've had. They have fought for the rights of parliament against a sleazy and duplicious executive. How can you sympathise with 'One of the most dislikable politicians ever'?
Roger , they are a bunch of dithering duffers who are either stupid or just scared to make a decision one way or the other.
I enjoy watching five opposition parties taking chunks out of this sleazy government. So should you. Your man Blackford is the best of the bunch. If he was leading the Labour Party Johnson would be toast by now
...the week from hell. Everything is unravelling...clueless and powerless...Viscerally I expect we're going to see him leaching support.
...an outright Conservative win are vanishingly narrow.
be held by trusted 3rd party.
And because Labour are in this state, somehow the Tories sitll lead the polls.
I hope you don't teach your students about probability.
I
Just for a bit of fun:
a = b aa = ab aa-bb = ab - bb (a-b)(a+b) = b(a-b) a+b = b 2b = b 2 = 1
Is that what you did?
pure and utter bollox. If you have two apples and another two apples , you can never get 2 apples to equal one apple unless you eat one of them.
Of course it is bollox, but your reason is not correct. Each line of maths is correct, but in one of the lines of maths I did something, that although normally is ok, in this instant isn't for a very particular reason. I'm deliberately being vague and it is very trivial but an easy mistake to make.
Last 3 lines look wrong to me
The mistake is from line 4 to line 5. I have done something that is normally allowed, but for very specific reasons I can't do in this instant.
How if a=b can a+b = b , that would mean b = 0 and also a therefore have to be zero. Or have I lost my marbles.
Your right it can't, but that is because the mistake was made in getting from the line above to this line. Each line of maths is correct but to get from line 4 to line 5 I have divided each side by (a-b) which is normally a valid thing to do to simplify the statement so it looks ok.
However we already know a = b so I am therefore dividing each side by zero. A big no no which enables me to prove anything I damn well like and a common mistake when dealing with variables. I can't tell you the number of times I managed to appear to prove the impossible!
You correctly identified the point it goes wrong by substituting numbers for the variables.
Personally, I don't know whether the Opposition parties denying an election will be good or bad for them politically (and I do think the effects will not be uniform).
However I do think it is wrong - to legislate for the Prime Minister to do something he doesn't want to do but deny him the alternative to challenge their 'mandate' to do so with the electorate. And frankly I want this Parliament out before they do any more damage. They can't go a couple of days without screwing something up - and I don't trust them a jot not to do so again. I think it is perfectly plausible that we crash out on Oct 31st because they can't agree amongst themselves on how to stop it.
If there's one thing worse for the future of the country than a no deal crash out, it's a no deal crash out without the electorate having been given the opportunity to stop it.
I agree with all that.
Boris is saying I am going to break the law, here is the opportunity to VNOC me.
The MPs say "No, we have confidence in you ... You're going to Jail".
I think my sympathies are with Boris (& Boris is one of the most utterly dislikable politicians ever)
We need an election -- and I shall be cheering any MP who loses his/her seat, because the Parliament elected in 2017 has proved rotten to the very core.
Worse than the bunch who chsselled their expenses? I think this is one of the most honourable set of MPs we've had. They have fought for the rights of parliament against a sleazy and duplicious executive. How can you sympathise with 'One of the most dislikable politicians ever'?
Roger , they are a bunch of dithering duffers who are either stupid or just scared to make a decision one way or the other.
You mean like Nicola and SINDYREF2?
I included all in my "they" and have already stated the SNP are as crap as the rest, they should be pushing 15th Oct election rather than joining the cowards cabal. I have also said Nicola is running scared and will be out if she does not have referendum by next year. I am not some party groupie.
And for those of you convinced of the Cummings strategy to sweep the Labour heartlands ... Deja Vu.
"Theresa May laid bare the Conservatives’ ambitions to capture some of Labour’s most historic seats in England in a speech on Thursday night, telling voters in Leeds to put aside their traditional allegiances and vote “in the national interest”.
In a sign of the Conservatives’ bullishness about their chances in Labour’s northern heartlands, May told voters in Harehills that it was the Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, on the ballot, not the traditional party."
Except Cummings did actually win those areas in the EU referendum and Boris is a Leaver while May was a Remainer.
Cummings and Boris are forcing clear blue water with Corbyn on Brexit while easing off on austerity and pushing tax cuts, May's campaign saw her largely agree with Corbyn on Brexit while pushing more austerity and the dementia tax
That strategy is dependent on Brexit being the only issue. It isn't, and the Bored of Brexit mob will vote on other issues, as they did in 2017. The BXP vote is not interchangeable with the Tory vote and never will be. Indeed a formal pact may well damage both parties more than they gain, something my party also should consider.
Wrong.
Until Brexit is delivered Brexit IS the main issue.
2017 was fought with both May and Corbyn promising to deliver Brexit so other issues came to the fore neither have done so Brexit dominates after May extended and most Brexit Party voters voted Tory in 2017. Boris will fight as the leader to deliver Brexit come what may.
Plus on other issues there will be no dementia tax gaffes from Boris anyway
Only in a referendum would Brexit be the only issue. Elsewhere there are other issues
1) due to budget issues schools are no longer open 5 full days a week and while money was given to schools it was then spent increasing teachers pay so that doesn’t work out
I’m sure there are a 600 more all local and all may do harm to the sitting government
Education in Wales & Scotland is devolved.
In Wales, the sitting government is Labour/LibDem.
It is remarkable how few posters, particularly labour ones, do not realise how devolved the powers are to Scotland and Wales. None of their NHS or Education policies would apply along with most of the rest of their manifesto
The opposition are duty bound to keep Johnson in post for as long as possible giving him maximum exposure to the public. He has no majority let him stew in his own juice.
I have to say though Nichomar, I don't hink opposition parties refusing an election is a good look. The Liberal Democrats will probably be OK because their supporters care above all about stopping Brexit and an election will make that harder. The SNP will be OK because they have a headlock on Scotland and don't stand candidates outside it.
But Labour are going to face very awkward questions as to why they had a chance to turf out this shambles via an election and refused. And that's going to be their membership that get mad at them, not just their voters.
I’m not sure “Labour stopped us having an Election” is a great message in the middle of an election.....
Post of the day.
Others have tried to encapsulate this in few words.
The Tory 21 rebels would vote down Corbyn immediately following extension too
That remains to be seen. They'd certainly have voted him down if they'd still been Tories, but...
They still are 'tories' just like myself.
I resigned when Boris sacked them but neither I nor any of them would be a party to putting Corbyn anywhere near No 10
If they believe no deal must be stopped and that becomes the only way to do so then they should. Otherwise their noble stand against no deal is not so noble after all.
If they'd rather no deal than have Corbyn then they might as well have not rebelled.
Parliament is self-governing. If the PM refuses to obey then they can VONC him and choose a new PM.
They will do if necessary, they will do whatever is necessary to stop no deal within this parliament, it will not happen.
But, I think every previous PM of my lifetime and probably beyond would have resigned when they have lost the support of the Commons to an extent where their only option is to clearly break the law. Why does this elitist, selfish, entitled PM not do likewise?
Would it make sense for Boris to use the Benn Act as a reason for saying that his negotiation hands are tied, so the best he can do is bring back TMs deal to the Commons to test current opinion? It remains the only deal in town and he has promised not to ask for an extension.
What happened to the Kinnock amendment, werent we supposed to get a vote on WA4 from that?
The lords accepted it as is so nothing can be done to change it
That is wrong.
The act includes the 'Kinnock' amendment and is conditional that it is presented to the HOC. The 'Kinnock' amendment includes TM WDA amended to include some of labour's request which TM agreed
I'm less bothered by the delaying of the election than I am by the opposition allowing the prorogation to happen. This is now totally unnecessary and will be followed by an unnecessary Queen's Speech.
Comments
What then? No-one knows. Extremis is not as narrow as we are used to thinking.
However I do think it is wrong - to legislate for the Prime Minister to do something he doesn't want to do but deny him the alternative to challenge their 'mandate' to do so with the electorate. And frankly I want this Parliament out before they do any more damage. They can't go a couple of days without screwing something up - and I don't trust them a jot not to do so again. I think it is perfectly plausible that we crash out on Oct 31st because they can't agree amongst themselves on how to stop it.
If there's one thing worse for the future of the country than a no deal crash out, it's a no deal crash out without the electorate having been given the opportunity to stop it.
I once had a mark deducted for not having a full stop after my name to prevent me getting 100/100. That was criminal.
https://twitter.com/daily_record/status/1088692901754867712?s=21
But, as with much of this parliament, it is perverse. You are far more likely to get the no deal pre elections, by calling the election than by delaying it!! This is because the PM can change the date of the election regardless of what parliament and the PM is a known and proven liar who is desperate.
The rebel alliance now have control, because they have the numbers in the democratically elected HoC, claims it is undemocratic miss the point, whoever has most votes is in charge, not the PM and rightly so. The chance of no deal on Oct 31 is a mix of the EU side (low), an election being called on Monday (very low), the govt getting back the support of 20-25 MPs from the rebel alliance to deliver no deal (extremely low).
1) due to budget issues schools are no longer open 5 full days a week and while money was given to schools it was then spent increasing teachers pay so that doesn’t work out
I’m sure there are a 600 more all local and all may do harm to the sitting government
Boris is saying I am going to break the law, here is the opportunity to VNOC me.
The MPs say "No, we have confidence in you ... You're going to Jail".
I think my sympathies are with Boris (& Boris is one of the most utterly dislikable politicians ever)
We need an election -- and I shall be cheering any MP who loses his/her seat, because the Parliament elected in 2017 has proved rotten to the very core.
I agree that he's out of touch, and I would add that he's rude, surly and thoroughly unbritish in his views, a tea partyer in a suit, the sort of person that a great many voters would sooner drive a stake through than vote for. But. But.
We are talking about a scenario where Tory voters, new arrivals to the baying mob school of politics, could frighten the remaining MPs into having him on the ballot. We've seen in recent years how social media campaigns can create a rolling rock effect that creates landslips in public opinion. The selectorate for a leadership ballot is small, relatively homogeneous and angry. They are utterly ripe for the picking. A Bannon- or Putin- driven campaign could easily convince them that anybody else would be a betrayal of the people, etc etc.
In fact, there were attempts to astroturf a "Moggmentum" social media campaign. The fact that it's already happened could be looked upon either as a failed attempt to elevate him and it turns out even Conservative members aren't /that/ crazy. Or it could be looked upon as the essential groundwork for a final push to get him into number 10.
I think the former explanation is likelier, but I'm going to put a small wager on Mogg. Here's why: we now live in an age of attention-driven politics, where lack of ethical standards, weirdness, outright lies and general bad behaviour are /beneficial/. Trump is the archetype, but frankly Boris, Corbyn and numerous other examples are evidence that people aren't put off just because others despise them. Mogg fits this pattern perfectly. He'll sell papers with his weirdness, so he will be written about. If left- and centre- talking heads are constantly talking about him in negative terms, the hard-right Conservative core will take this as their signal that he must be doing something right.
Now, thoughts please on how we fix this godawful clickbait politics once and for all?
aa = ab
aa-bb = ab - bb
(a-b)(a+b) = b(a-b)
a+b = b
2b = b
2 = 1
Absurd, hence a cannot equal b
In Wales, the sitting government is Labour/LibDem.
Oh and with Parliament prorogue no one can do anything for the next 6 weeks - until after the queens speech
However we already know a = b so I am therefore dividing each side by zero. A big no no which enables me to prove anything I damn well like and a common mistake when dealing with variables. I can't tell you the number of times I managed to appear to prove the impossible!
You correctly identified the point it goes wrong by substituting numbers for the variables.
If A = B [line 1]
Then (A-B) = 0
So you can't divide by (A-B) because you're not allowed to divide by 0?
And I actually hold out hope that given a majority in an election the fact he cannot be trusted would actually be a good thing in the event he secures a majority.
You can put Boris in jail if you want, but it will backfire, in my judgment.
It will probably guarantee No Deal. It is hard to think of much that will evoke sympathy for Boris, but this will.
It's the same as all those phones willing to do anything to stop no deal except vote for a deal. They are willing to do anything so long as it leads to remain.
I've been quite surprised by this. I nearly didn't post it in response to ydoethur's post as I thought it a really old party trick, but apparently not.
It is such a common mistake that everyone doing maths makes so many times in their life. The number of times I have proved the impossible. It is so frustrating and it is the first thing you go back and check to see if that is what you have done.
The point being that if you prove (without error) something absurd, then the conclusion isn't that the absurd thing is correct but rather that the initial assumption must be flawed...
You were 'trying' to show that 2=1. It would work equally well if you were trying to prove that a cannot equal b.
Reductio ad absurdum.
So parliament can pass the WA+referendum bill by the end of October, tell the Electoral Commission to get all its preparations done in November (change legislation for this if necessary), campaigns formally agreed in December, campaign starts right after the New Year, vote late Jan, out (or revoke) end Jan.
I think it's actually easier if you do it fast, because as you say if you allow it to stretch out you start arguing about the domestic agenda.
But the law and order party no longer minds if the law is followed, they no longer care if the uk breaks apart. That might have been surprising once.
As we all know Boris is not to be trusted so how about this for an idea. He returns from the EU Council meeting with a superficial change to the PD, the WDA as modified including labour's recommendations agreed with TM, is presented on the 19th October and the HOC votes it through, we leave on the 31st March and we have a transition period that will see stock markets soar, business cheer, and the Country sigh a huge sigh of relief
Job done, ERG done (Cummings does not like the ERG), Remainers done, the referendum fulfilled, and Boris has achieved his objective
It may be fanciful but it is not impossible by any means
And the real hero in this would be TM who laid all the groundwork
2 routes -
(1) As described by David. Johnson wins an election, does Brexit, but it soon becomes clear that he cannot run a chip shop. Gove takes over.
(2) Election does not come, Johnson gets trapped powerless in Downing St and implodes. Gove takes over.
If not Gove, Penny Mordaunt.
I like her too - for similar reasons - and she is my 2nd choice.
https://twitter.com/ProfTomkins/status/1170241660489490432?s=20
The main problem is that will see the tory vote plunge as BXP cry betrayal, and now all parties are on record as wanting an election, which he would then lose.
No deal even if it means ignoring another law is risky but still might give him victory. That's all that matters.
Britain Elects
@britainelects
Westminster voting intention:
CON: 29% (-2)
LAB: 24% (-)
LDEM: 18% (-3)
BREX: 17% (+3)
GRN: 3% (-)
via
@Survation
, fw TBC
Chgs. w/ Aug
This Parliament has voted against the WA three times -- many for crass party political reasons or because they want a solution at the extremes instead of in the middle.
I don't see No Deal Brexit or Revoke as being stable resolutions in the long run.
The rebel alliance is using it as labour and all the independents are running scared for their own jobs and that sums up this bankrupt HOC
I know many people who, unlike me, voted for Brexit and they all, without exception, will vote for The Brexit Party rather than the Tories. Farage is their god.
I cannot understand how the Tories can be best priced 1/2 to win most seats at next GE (let alone a majority).
Surely the 3/1 on Labour in the same market is value??
I resigned when Boris sacked them but neither I nor any of them would be a party to putting Corbyn anywhere near No 10
* The end of the UK
* Closing down Parliament
* Breaking the law
* Causing sustained damage to the economy
This is astonishing. It is complete madness. And it is just plain wrong. These people are deranged.
I dont think they will, but I am curious given the tory strategy relies on it.
I am not some party groupie.
Others have tried to encapsulate this in few words.
You got it into one sentence.
Bravo 👏
The Dinner Party from Hell
If they'd rather no deal than have Corbyn then they might as well have not rebelled.
But, I think every previous PM of my lifetime and probably beyond would have resigned when they have lost the support of the Commons to an extent where their only option is to clearly break the law. Why does this elitist, selfish, entitled PM not do likewise?
The act includes the 'Kinnock' amendment and is conditional that it is presented to the HOC. The 'Kinnock' amendment includes TM WDA amended to include some of labour's request which TM agreed
https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/1170267569925832704?s=20