politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Nighthawks is now open

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Nighthawks is now open

To you lurkers, why not delurk. Lurking, is Another World to posting, I, Believe, your contributions will be enhance PB, Hopefully this will Galvanise you to delurk.

Read the full story here

Mick_Pork

FPT:Some basic points for those who still don't get it.

The less Lib Dem MPs there are the less chance there is of a hung parliament.

If Farage implodes in a Robert Kilroy-Silk like manner or if the lib dems ditch the toxic calamity Clegg then everything is up for grabs.


The two biggest and most meaningful events that have clearly shifted VI in this parliament are Calamity Clegg utterly tanking the lib dem brand in 2010 and Osbrowne's omnishambles.
The first saw labour shoot up in the polls with disaffected lib dems jumping on board labour and the second marked the real start of kippers rise in the polls with disaffected tories jumping on board the kippers.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/96/UK_opinion_polling_2010-2015.png

kle4

FPT
Mick_Pork said:

Some basic points for those who still don't get it.

The less Lib Dem MPs there are the less chance there is of a hung parliament.

If Farage implodes in a Robert Kilroy-Silk like manner or if the lib dems ditch the toxic calamity Clegg then everything is up for grabs.


The two biggest and most meaningful events that have clearly shifting VI in this parliament are Calamity Clegg utterly tanking the lib dem brand in 2010 and Osbrowne's omnishambles.
The first saw labour shoot up in the polls and the second marked the start of kippers rise in the polls.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/96/UK_opinion_polling_2010-2015.png

The utter consistency of the LD drop after 2010 (that it happened also immediately is proof that it had little to do with any actions they did - although that did reinforce it later that year - and more just the principle of coalition with the Tories, proving the party was very significantly made up of labour-lites) is another major indication that even if they do rebound quiet a bit in 2015 come crunch time at election day, as many suspect as do I to some degree, it is unlikely to be by enough, as there surely would have been at least some sustained recovered since hitting that polling floor almost 3 years ago.

Ditching Clegg is a necessity. Not because the rest are not almost all as culpable in making the coalition decision in the first place, it is not as though he did not get his party's backing, but it is the sort of superficial change that might be just enough to convince LD-Lab switchers in a Con-LD marginal to hold their noses and vote LD again.

Man, the Tories were really riding high up to 2012. Feels like a long time ago now.

old_labour

How MSPs voted on the same sex marriage bill.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-25018895

kle4

The Aussies still attacking Stuart Broad? What a bunch of whiners. You'd have thought that having an England like bad period for a few years would have made them more less prone ro self righteous behaviour. Usually having bad runs lead to at least some introspection and recognition of one's own failings and not hypocritically calling out people for a well established australian practice. Everyone knows Aussies were told for decades not to walk.

SouthCoastKevin

Looking forward to the Ashes starting tonight! Definitely some Aussie whining about Broad playing hard but fair earlier this year. I think I probably would walk in that situation (but then I'm self-deluded enough to believe I'd never dive or exaggerate if I were a pro footballer) but surely more or less all cricketers - not just Aussies - don't walk any more. It's just not the done thing is it?

OllyT

Mick_Pork said:

FPT:Some basic points for those who still don't get it.

The less Lib Dem MPs there are the less chance there is of a hung parliament.

If Farage implodes in a Robert Kilroy-Silk like manner or if the lib dems ditch the toxic calamity Clegg then everything is up for grabs.


The two biggest and most meaningful events that have clearly shifted VI in this parliament are Calamity Clegg utterly tanking the lib dem brand in 2010 and Osbrowne's omnishambles.
The first saw labour shoot up in the polls with disaffected lib dems jumping on board labour and the second marked the real start of kippers rise in the polls with disaffected tories jumping on board the kippers.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/96/UK_opinion_polling_2010-2015.png

I am beginning to see the extent of the Tory-UKIP split as the critical factor in 2015. The Left Lib Dems seem to be sticking with Labour so I reckon Labour is not going to go below 35%.

I have been expecting the Tories to claw back a good chunk of UKIP votes by 2015 by hammering the wasted vote/ letting in Labour line. However I am beginning to wonder how successful that line will be if UKIP tops the polls in the Euros in 2014. The press will be full of it if it happens and for lots of people who don't pay much attention to politics I think it is going to make it very difficult for the Tories to make the wasted vote argument a few months later.

kle4

Hmm, no.1 says "The strategy was flawed in three ways. Firstly, because saying “well your lot are awful too” is just the kind of old politics, we’re all as bad as each other nonsense that Miliband says he wants to put behind him."

Am I to believe that Labourlist actually believed that old chestnut then? Someone actually believed a politician wasn't just talking nonsense when they said that?

In fairness, and it is by no means an Ed M or Labour thing, I imagine the temptation to respond in kind is just too much for someone inclined to try and rise above it to handle, they will be accused of being weak, their base support wants to see those sorts of attacks. But if anyone actually believed a new leader seriously thought they were going to usher in a new era of politics and standard debating tactics, I question what other silly things they believed.

Pulpstar

SouthCoastKevin said:

Looking forward to the Ashes starting tonight! Definitely some Aussie whining about Broad playing hard but fair earlier this year. I think I probably would walk in that situation (but then I'm self-deluded enough to believe I'd never dive or exaggerate if I were a pro footballer) but surely more or less all cricketers - not just Aussies - don't walk any more. It's just not the done thing is it?

Snooker players still call fouls on themselves when they touch a ball.

Neil

Pulpstar said:

SouthCoastKevin said:

Looking forward to the Ashes starting tonight! Definitely some Aussie whining about Broad playing hard but fair earlier this year. I think I probably would walk in that situation (but then I'm self-deluded enough to believe I'd never dive or exaggerate if I were a pro footballer) but surely more or less all cricketers - not just Aussies - don't walk any more. It's just not the done thing is it?

Snooker players still call fouls on themselves when they touch a ball.

All of them or just the ones who have bet against themselves?

Carola

Oh my sides:

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/nov/20/michael-gove-regulators-free-schools?CMP=twt_fd

AndyJS

"17. SeanT lifts the lid on why Right now the West is doomed – because we’re losing the Toilet Wars"

This reminds me of an interesting thing about China which is that it's okay for tourists to use toilets in places like hotels without having to avail themselves of any of the other facilities. You can just walk in, use the toilet, and walk out again, and they don't mind. I don't know if this also applies to other countries in the region like Thailand.

Mick_Pork

kle4 said:

The utter consistency of the LD drop after 2010 (that it happened also immediately is proof that it had little to do with any actions they did - although that did reinforce it later that year - and more just the principle of coalition with the Tories, proving the party was very significantly made up of labour-lites)

Clegg is as responsible for the coalition as Cammie is. They ARE the coalition. ALL the actions taken after the election are down to his final say so on the coalition negotiations and such things as the disasterous tuition fees debacle. The polling is also crystal clear on which lib dem the public thinks is most toxic and that would be Clegg.

kle4 said:

is another major indication that even if they do rebound quiet a bit in 2015 come crunch time at election day, as many suspect as do I to some degree, it is unlikely to be by enough, as there surely would have been at least some sustained recovered since hitting that polling floor almost 3 years ago.

Almost everyone expects them to go up a bit before the election just as everyone expects the kippers to fall a bit. The question is by how much and ditching Clegg is the only option the lib dems have left to possibly mitigate their loss of MPs.

I agree to some extent that all the talk about 2010 lib dems is mostly overblown spin by those who wish to paint the lib dems as more relevant than they actually are, but a new labour friendly leader with a honeymoon period could change VI quite a bit for the lib dems, even if only for a short time since the lib dem brand has been almost completely trashed by Clegg by now.


CONTINUED.. since the comments appear to be broken for some strange reason.

kle4

Pulpstar said:

SouthCoastKevin said:

Looking forward to the Ashes starting tonight! Definitely some Aussie whining about Broad playing hard but fair earlier this year. I think I probably would walk in that situation (but then I'm self-deluded enough to believe I'd never dive or exaggerate if I were a pro footballer) but surely more or less all cricketers - not just Aussies - don't walk any more. It's just not the done thing is it?

Snooker players still call fouls on themselves when they touch a ball.

Laudable of them, although a single foul in snooker is not normally as significant as losing a wicket in the course of a game. Even so, that was never the problem with the Aussies whining about Broad, which is clearly just a tactic and manufactured outrage, because as SouthCostKevin points out, almost all cricketers don't walk anymore, and in fact they often get roundly criticised if they do.

That match a few years ago when Ian Bell thought the ball was dead and then got run out before tea, but the opposition (I forget who) essentially withdrew their appeal over tea and biscuits and let him come back, shows a high level of gentlemanly sportmanship though, though that might have been taking it too far.

Mick_Pork

CONTINUED..

kle4 said:

Ditching Clegg is a necessity. Not because the rest are not almost all as culpable in making the coalition decision in the first place, it is not as though he did not get his party's backing, but it is the sort of superficial change that might be just enough to convince LD-Lab switchers in a Con-LD marginal to hold their noses and vote LD again.

Indeed. "Vote lib dem to stop the tories getting in" is laughable now, particularly with Clegg at the helm. It'll still be hard to push even without him as leader but not nearly as much.

kle4 said:

Man, the Tories were really riding high up to 2012. Feels like a long time ago now.

Before Osbrowne's omnishambles labour and the tories were still extremely close with one crossover and one other very near crossover and change of lead. That's far harder to achieve with the kippers as high in the polling as they are. (and this is the kippers LOW point right now between last May's elections and the EU elections to come this May.

R0berts

kle4

Bit lazy to say former Lib Dem voters were always just "Labour lite".

AlastairMeeks

The Lib Dems will not ditch Nick Clegg. Too many senior figures have invested too much in the coalition for it to happen.

He might walk voluntarily, but I don't see it, for myself.

kle4

AndyJS said:

"17. SeanT lifts the lid on why Right now the West is doomed – because we’re losing the Toilet Wars"

This reminds me of an interesting thing about China which is that it's okay for tourists to use toilets in places like hotels without having to avail themselves of any of the other facilities. You can just walk in, use the toilet, and walk out again, and they don't mind. I don't know if this also applies to other countries in the region like Thailand.

Good on China, clearly the most civilized nation on Earth. One of my pet peeves is having to fork out money to use the loo at train stations of all places; I'd rather you just charge me more on the bloody ticket than force me to dig around for 20p of change I might not have, for the privilege of not spilling my urine on the side of a moving train as an alternative.

SouthCoastKevin

Neil said:

Pulpstar said:

Snooker players still call fouls on themselves when they touch a ball.

All of them or just the ones who have bet against themselves?

That's true, Pulpstar. Golfers are also very honest, on the whole, aren't they? And I don't just mean the ones who have bet against themselves, heh heh.

CarlottaVance

What filthy right wing rag has mentioned Jack Dromey's entirely accidental (not to mention coincidental) gay porn tweet:

The Mirror:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/david-camerons-downing-street-twitter-2814113

SouthCoastKevin

antifrank said:

The Lib Dems will not ditch Nick Clegg. Too many senior figures have invested too much in the coalition for it to happen.

He might walk voluntarily, but I don't see it, for myself.

Mr Clegg is obviously not a snooker or golf player.

MaxPB

If Robert or Mike are out there could you please email me.

kle4

R0berts said:

kle4

Bit lazy to say former Lib Dem voters were always just "Labour lite".

It is a bit lazy of me, true. But to clarify, that such a significant numbe of former LD voters jumped ship immediately upon there being a coalition, before any assessment of whether it could possibly be worth the trade offs in policy and what could be achieved for some compromsing would be could take place, demonstrates to me that that significant portions overwhelming feeling was that nothing could ever be worth the price of temporarily allying with the conservatives.

Have they been proved right it was not worth it? Sure. But their instinctive and immediate move showed that they were much more anti-Tory than they were pro LD, because if they were were the latter more than the former, they would have stuck around at least awhile. The histrionic talk of betrayal and so on which sprung up immediately was, to my mind, more lazy and tribal behaviour than what I will admit was my own lazily inelegant summary of that movement immediately after the election.

Years on from then, and it still seems as though a significant portion of LDs wanted them to be Labour-lite and still do, despite protestations from the leadership for years that they are neither left nor right/a middle ground/soundbite of choice. They aren't interested in any accomodation with the Tories even under extreme and highly specific circumstances.

Those that might like such an accomodation (and be tempted by NIck Boles' idea of national liberals), or are willing to stomach it for a few gains, are the only ones left.

It's fine if the left of the party was opposed to any sort of agreement, but the immediacy of the action prior to any consequences which showed any gains would not offset the losses, shows it for lazy tribal behaviour.

Mick_Pork

antifrank said:

The Lib Dems will not ditch Nick Clegg. Too many senior figures have invested too much in the coalition for it to happen.

He might walk voluntarily, but I don't see it, for myself.

The big forces that will see him under extreme pressure are the sheer number of Lib Dem MPs who are now staring defeat in the face. (MPs tend to be keen on any option which might see them keep their seats even if it's not guaranteed) The other factor is the year on year hemorrhaging of the lib dem base and activists which will take many, many years to build back up.

AlastairMeeks

Mick_Pork said:

antifrank said:

The Lib Dems will not ditch Nick Clegg. Too many senior figures have invested too much in the coalition for it to happen.

He might walk voluntarily, but I don't see it, for myself.

The big forces that will see him under extreme pressure are the sheer number of Lib Dem MPs who are now staring defeat in the face. (MPs tend to be keen on any option which might see them keep their seats even if it's not guaranteed) The other factor is the year on year hemorrhaging of the lib dem base and activists which will take many, many years to build back up.

He looks likely to outlast Alex Salmond as party leader.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. kle4, I quite agree.

Scott_P

Non-story nobody cares about...

@benedictbrogan: Labour's 'cover up' over Co-op bank chief. Tonight's @Telegraph front page http://t.co/YB6VS0jf0h

JosiasJessop

kle4 said:

AndyJS said:

"17. SeanT lifts the lid on why Right now the West is doomed – because we’re losing the Toilet Wars"

This reminds me of an interesting thing about China which is that it's okay for tourists to use toilets in places like hotels without having to avail themselves of any of the other facilities. You can just walk in, use the toilet, and walk out again, and they don't mind. I don't know if this also applies to other countries in the region like Thailand.

Good on China, clearly the most civilized nation on Earth. One of my pet peeves is having to fork out money to use the loo at train stations of all places; I'd rather you just charge me more on the bloody ticket than force me to dig around for 20p of change I might not have, for the privilege of not spilling my urine on the side of a moving train as an alternative.

There's nowt wrong wi' a shovel and some leaves. (*)

Although preferably not on the municipal golf course.

(*) I actually tried this once. I was going through my experimental camping phase and was trying to live as much as possible off the land. My snares caught nothing but air, and I cut myself making them. I nearly poisoned myself on some mushrooms, and whilst dealing with the results of that problem, leaves proved to be less robust than newspaper, and more smeary than 1980s-vintage BR toilet roll...

Mick_Pork

antifrank said:

Mick_Pork said:

antifrank said:

The Lib Dems will not ditch Nick Clegg. Too many senior figures have invested too much in the coalition for it to happen.

He might walk voluntarily, but I don't see it, for myself.

The big forces that will see him under extreme pressure are the sheer number of Lib Dem MPs who are now staring defeat in the face. (MPs tend to be keen on any option which might see them keep their seats even if it's not guaranteed) The other factor is the year on year hemorrhaging of the lib dem base and activists which will take many, many years to build back up.

He looks likely to outlast Alex Salmond as party leader.

That'll be why that recent yougov showed the lib dems even more toxic than the tories.

*chortle*

kle4

antifrank said:

The Lib Dems will not ditch Nick Clegg. Too many senior figures have invested too much in the coalition for it to happen.

He might walk voluntarily, but I don't see it, for myself.

Whenever I claim he will be ditched prior to the election, I personally include walking 'voluntarily' within that statement. The coalition is invested in by the senior figures and they need to talk it up as pretty much a success (if one which would have been much better if the LDs had more power arising from more seats within it), but that does not preclude a cosmetic change of leadership to, if only potentially, give some of those disaffected by Clegg personally (him being the face of the coalition, even if the leadership is all in on it for the most part) justification to back them.

It isn't likely to harm their chances for him to be gone, and it has potential for improving their chances, so he will be made to see the reason for going even if he might claim he wants to stick around until the election itself, and will stand down for the good of the party rather than be officially ousted I think.

fitalass

FPT. @Fenster I totally disagree with you over Falkirk, Unite, Flowers and the Co-op. All of these issues are now combining to highlight that the Labour party has learnt nothing from their previous mistakes in Government and as the sleazy party. And more importantly, it also shows that neither Ed Miliband or Ed Balls have displayed particularly sound judgement over these issues. Its now painting a picture of Labour as a dysfunctional and corner cutting political party. And one who has far too often allowed their own prejudice and arrogance to let them think that 'ethical' rules only apply to their political opponents, as if they have some morale high ground get out clause.

Mick_Pork

NannyCam's John Major like "Back to Basics" campaign is well underway.

Telegraph News ‏@TelegraphNews 8h

David Cameron has said that Labour "knew" about the past of Paul Flowers, the disgraced Co-op bank chief http://fw.to/MOeH3Bi

LOL

AlastairMeeks

Mick_Pork said:

antifrank said:

Mick_Pork said:

antifrank said:

The Lib Dems will not ditch Nick Clegg. Too many senior figures have invested too much in the coalition for it to happen.

He might walk voluntarily, but I don't see it, for myself.

The big forces that will see him under extreme pressure are the sheer number of Lib Dem MPs who are now staring defeat in the face. (MPs tend to be keen on any option which might see them keep their seats even if it's not guaranteed) The other factor is the year on year hemorrhaging of the lib dem base and activists which will take many, many years to build back up.

He looks likely to outlast Alex Salmond as party leader.

That'll be why that recent yougov showed the lib dems even more toxic than the tories.

*chortle*

I'm happy to take a bet on the notion.

Mick_Pork

antifrank said:

Mick_Pork said:

antifrank said:

Mick_Pork said:

antifrank said:

The Lib Dems will not ditch Nick Clegg. Too many senior figures have invested too much in the coalition for it to happen.

He might walk voluntarily, but I don't see it, for myself.

The big forces that will see him under extreme pressure are the sheer number of Lib Dem MPs who are now staring defeat in the face. (MPs tend to be keen on any option which might see them keep their seats even if it's not guaranteed) The other factor is the year on year hemorrhaging of the lib dem base and activists which will take many, many years to build back up.

He looks likely to outlast Alex Salmond as party leader.

That'll be why that recent yougov showed the lib dems even more toxic than the tories.

*chortle*

I'm happy to take a bet on the notion.

Other SNP posters may be pleased to hear it since I never have and never will take bets on this site, for reasons which we can't of course go into.

fitalass

Twitter
Benedict Brogan ‏@benedictbrogan 5m
Labour's 'cover up' over Co-op bank chief. Tonight's @Telegraph front page pic.twitter.com/YB6VS0jf0h

Mick_Pork

kle4 said:

antifrank said:

The Lib Dems will not ditch Nick Clegg. Too many senior figures have invested too much in the coalition for it to happen.

He might walk voluntarily, but I don't see it, for myself.

Whenever I claim he will be ditched prior to the election, I personally include walking 'voluntarily' within that statement.

Of course. It's mere semantics since every leader under pressure ends up doing so.
As calamity Clegg knows full well since he was one of the main lib dems briefing against Ming Campbell shortly before he went 'voluntarily'.

Stark_Dawning

Scott_P said:

Non-story nobody cares about...

@benedictbrogan: Labour's 'cover up' over Co-op bank chief. Tonight's @Telegraph front page http://t.co/YB6VS0jf0h

This is becoming utterly toxic for Labour; Ed needs to grab back the initiative over banking sleaze, and fast. Something along the lines of his fuel-price gimmick? Perhaps he could promise a law forcing banks to guarantee everyone an overdraft of a thousand quid? Cost of living: tick. Revenge on evil bankers: tick. It's mad but it just might work...

AlastairMeeks

I throw it open to any reputable poster then: I back Nick Clegg to be party leader on the day Alex Salmond steps down as party leader. Happy to bet to substantial stakes at evens.

kle4

Mick_Pork said:

kle4 said:

antifrank said:

The Lib Dems will not ditch Nick Clegg. Too many senior figures have invested too much in the coalition for it to happen.

He might walk voluntarily, but I don't see it, for myself.

Whenever I claim he will be ditched prior to the election, I personally include walking 'voluntarily' within that statement.

Of course. It's mere semantics since every leader under pressure ends up doing so.

Except Julia Gillard.

Mick_Pork

antifrank said:

I throw it open to any reputable poster then: I back Nick Clegg to be party leader on the day Alex Salmond steps down as party leader. Happy to bet to substantial stakes at evens.

I certainly won't put them on the spot but I know of several SNP posters who have ended up taking such bets. Even against the less reputable posters on here.

jayfdee

I do not bank with the Co-Op,and never have,but if I did ,I would be now running for the hills,I hope all the current bad publicity does not result in a run.
I hope Flowers can withstand the intense pressure that is heading his way,this could also go badly wrong.
On the Co-Op,Jayfdee junior was design manager for BAM,the main contractor for the new head office in Manchester,the build has won numerous awards,and is possibly the most environmentally friendly new build in the world. He had the pleasure of showing the Queen around part of the build,at its official opening last week.

tpfkar

Hope the Dirty Dicks squad have had a good time.

Nick Clegg is completely safe as LD leader. For the past two conferences, journalists have gone fishing for leadership speculation and come away empty-handed. There is just no internal opposition looking to do anything before 2015. It's true some accept this with resignation rather than enthusiasm but that's how it is. My own view is that changing leader before 2015 would be suicide as we'd lose everyone who respected us for staying the course, whilethe detectors would almost all stick with Labour. Clegg could walk of course, but I've seen no signs that he's even considering this.

fitalass

The Ed Miliband and Ed Balls Banking Levy, the gift that seems to keep giving.

Stark_Dawning said:

Scott_P said:

Non-story nobody cares about...

@benedictbrogan: Labour's 'cover up' over Co-op bank chief. Tonight's @Telegraph front page http://t.co/YB6VS0jf0h

This is becoming utterly toxic for Labour; Ed needs to grab back the initiative over banking sleaze, and fast. Something along the lines of his fuel-price gimmick? Perhaps he could promise a law forcing banks to guarantee everyone an overdraft of a thousand quid? Cost of living: tick. Revenge on evil bankers: tick. It's mad but it just might work...

kle4

antifrank said:

I throw it open to any reputable poster then: I back Nick Clegg to be party leader on the day Alex Salmond steps down as party leader. Happy to bet to substantial stakes at evens.

I'm tempted, but I fear him stepping down shortly after succeeding with the independence referendum as a 'job accomplished, younger generation needed to build the framework of a new scotland' sort of deal, and I don't think Clegg will go until late 2014/early 2015 so Salmond might just pip him to the post.

Mick_Pork

tpfkar said:

Hope the Dirty Dicks squad have had a good time.

Nick Clegg is completely safe as LD leader. For the past two conferences, journalists have gone fishing for leadership speculation and come away empty-handed.

Yes because any Lib Dem leadership hopeful would just LOVE to be the coalition shit magnet for as long as possible before 2015 and avoid any election campaign honeymoon period while they do so.

SouthCoastKevin

jayfdee said:

I do not bank with the Co-Op,and never have,but if I did ,I would be now running for the hills,I hope all the current bad publicity does not result in a run.
I hope Flowers can withstand the intense pressure that is heading his way,this could also go badly wrong.

I do bank with the Co-op. I may well be contributing to any run on the bank over the next few days. But, yes, good point about Paul Flowers himself and how he deals with all this. Best wishes to him...

kle4

tpfkar said:

Hope the Dirty Dicks squad have had a good time.

Nick Clegg is completely safe as LD leader. For the past two conferences, journalists have gone fishing for leadership speculation and come away empty-handed. There is just no internal opposition looking to do anything before 2015.

I accept that point - I just think that things are quiet because the party recognises there is little benefit in switching leader so far from the GE, giving time for that leader to be equally tainted by Coalition politics, so everyone accepts there will be no moves for some while. 6-8 months from the GE though, with coalition winding down? Maybe that's a more apposite time.

I should clarify that I actually feel Clegg gets more bad press than he deserves, I like him as a leader, I just think factors have combined to make him an unvaoidable drag on his party no matter what he does.

AndyJS

kle4 said:

AndyJS said:

"17. SeanT lifts the lid on why Right now the West is doomed – because we’re losing the Toilet Wars"

This reminds me of an interesting thing about China which is that it's okay for tourists to use toilets in places like hotels without having to avail themselves of any of the other facilities. You can just walk in, use the toilet, and walk out again, and they don't mind. I don't know if this also applies to other countries in the region like Thailand.

Good on China, clearly the most civilized nation on Earth. One of my pet peeves is having to fork out money to use the loo at train stations of all places; I'd rather you just charge me more on the bloody ticket than force me to dig around for 20p of change I might not have, for the privilege of not spilling my urine on the side of a moving train as an alternative.

Actually you could say this is testament to the superior business sense of the Chinese, because the fact is if 30 foreign tourists come into hotel to use the toilets there's a fairly good chance that one or two of them might buy a drink or some souvenirs, and if they don't you haven't lost anything.

Mick_Pork

kle4 said:

antifrank said:

I throw it open to any reputable poster then: I back Nick Clegg to be party leader on the day Alex Salmond steps down as party leader. Happy to bet to substantial stakes at evens.

I'm tempted, but I fear him stepping down shortly after succeeding with the independence referendum as a 'job accomplished, younger generation needed to build the framework of a new scotland' sort of deal, and I don't think Clegg will go until late 2014/early 2015 so Salmond might just pip him to the post.

There's the independence negotiations and also the next scottish elections to prepare for in either scenario. We could also point out the leadership ratings of Salmond compared to the likes of Clegg but we know those don't matter to those lib dem spinners in Clegg's amusing ostrich faction.

MikeK

kle4 said:

AndyJS said:

"17. SeanT lifts the lid on why Right now the West is doomed – because we’re losing the Toilet Wars"

This reminds me of an interesting thing about China which is that it's okay for tourists to use toilets in places like hotels without having to avail themselves of any of the other facilities. You can just walk in, use the toilet, and walk out again, and they don't mind. I don't know if this also applies to other countries in the region like Thailand.

Good on China, clearly the most civilized nation on Earth. One of my pet peeves is having to fork out money to use the loo at train stations of all places; I'd rather you just charge me more on the bloody ticket than force me to dig around for 20p of change I might not have, for the privilege of not spilling my urine on the side of a moving train as an alternative.

Just back home from Dirty dicks: tonight a comparatively small gathering, though SeanT's free drinks was a nice touch.

However regarding the toilet wars: I often walk in to the swankiest London hotels for a pee or heavier duty. No one asks me what I'm doing in the hotel, nor should they. The 5 star hotels are the best places to relieve yourself. Never decide to pee in a 3 star or lower hotel; they will always want to know what your doing in their illustrious building.

R0berts

antifrank said:

I throw it open to any reputable poster then: I back Nick Clegg to be party leader on the day Alex Salmond steps down as party leader. Happy to bet to substantial stakes at evens.

Hmn. Don't know if I'm "reputable", and certainly don't have "substantial stakes" to chuck around.

But if Salmond.... referendum aftermath win or lose..... *strokes chin*... I think you have the better value, but I'll go for a small charity bet at evens?

Sorry if that doesn't float your boat, you might get a better offer!

Scott_P

Non-story...

Paul Flowers was allowed to remain as chairman of governors of a primary school for two years after he resigned from a council for secretly using pornography on a local authority-provided computer.

He pretended that his reason for quitting and forcing a by-election was the burden of his work as chairman of the Co-operative Bank.

Labour has been accused of keeping the scandal secret. A senior member of Bradford council, with the powerful culture portfolio, Mr Flowers often boasted about his access to Downing Street when Labour was in power.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/business/industries/banking/article3927442.ece

Mick_Pork

kle4 said:

Mick_Pork said:

kle4 said:

antifrank said:

The Lib Dems will not ditch Nick Clegg. Too many senior figures have invested too much in the coalition for it to happen.

He might walk voluntarily, but I don't see it, for myself.

Whenever I claim he will be ditched prior to the election, I personally include walking 'voluntarily' within that statement.

Of course. It's mere semantics since every leader under pressure ends up doing so.

Except Julia Gillard.

Fair enough, almost every leader.

BTW infamous SLAB spinner and attack dog John "no-brainer" McTernan was one of the most hilariously incompetent factors in Gillard's disasterous leadership 'fightback'.

AlastairMeeks

R0berts said:

antifrank said:

I throw it open to any reputable poster then: I back Nick Clegg to be party leader on the day Alex Salmond steps down as party leader. Happy to bet to substantial stakes at evens.

Hmn. Don't know if I'm "reputable", and certainly don't have "substantial stakes" to chuck around.

But if Salmond.... referendum aftermath win or lose..... *strokes chin*... I think you have the better value, but I'll go for a small charity bet at evens?

Sorry if that doesn't float your boat, you might get a better offer!

For charity bets I don't discriminate. Name your stake and charity. I'll name the National Autistic Society.

Mick_Pork

No surprise after Clegg's bedroom tax debacle.

TheIndyPolitics ‏@IndyPolitics 1h

Exclusive: Nick Clegg' plans to raise personal tax allowance 'will help better-off more than low-paid' http://ind.pn/1dictbD

R0berts

antifrank said:

R0berts said:

antifrank said:

I throw it open to any reputable poster then: I back Nick Clegg to be party leader on the day Alex Salmond steps down as party leader. Happy to bet to substantial stakes at evens.

Hmn. Don't know if I'm "reputable", and certainly don't have "substantial stakes" to chuck around.

But if Salmond.... referendum aftermath win or lose..... *strokes chin*... I think you have the better value, but I'll go for a small charity bet at evens?

Sorry if that doesn't float your boat, you might get a better offer!

For charity bets I don't discriminate. Name your stake and charity. I'll name the National Autistic Society.

Cool. Twenty quid for Shelter ok with you?

AndyJS

Most British hoteliers seem to regard every non-patron as a potential lunatic who might turn their precious toilets into a pigsty when the reality is they're more likely to spend some money in the hotel than cause any trouble.

AlastairMeeks

R0berts said:

antifrank said:

R0berts said:

antifrank said:

I throw it open to any reputable poster then: I back Nick Clegg to be party leader on the day Alex Salmond steps down as party leader. Happy to bet to substantial stakes at evens.

Hmn. Don't know if I'm "reputable", and certainly don't have "substantial stakes" to chuck around.

But if Salmond.... referendum aftermath win or lose..... *strokes chin*... I think you have the better value, but I'll go for a small charity bet at evens?

Sorry if that doesn't float your boat, you might get a better offer!

For charity bets I don't discriminate. Name your stake and charity. I'll name the National Autistic Society.

Cool. Twenty quid for Shelter ok with you?

That's a deal.

AndyJS

Someone needs to invent a word to describe the process whereby someone wants to use the toilets in a pub so you have to buy a drink in order to be able to use them, causing you to need the toilet again a short time later. Maybe it's already appeared in the Meaning of Liff.

Neil

tim said:

What's the betting there was no poll?

You would expect Dan to protect his sources. Whether they were Tory insiders or the voices in his head.

R0berts

antifrank said:

R0berts said:

antifrank said:

R0berts said:

antifrank said:

I throw it open to any reputable poster then: I back Nick Clegg to be party leader on the day Alex Salmond steps down as party leader. Happy to bet to substantial stakes at evens.

Hmn. Don't know if I'm "reputable", and certainly don't have "substantial stakes" to chuck around.

But if Salmond.... referendum aftermath win or lose..... *strokes chin*... I think you have the better value, but I'll go for a small charity bet at evens?

Sorry if that doesn't float your boat, you might get a better offer!

For charity bets I don't discriminate. Name your stake and charity. I'll name the National Autistic Society.

Cool. Twenty quid for Shelter ok with you?

That's a deal.

Ace! I reckon PB could do with more small charity bets. Could bring a lot of these to-and-fro arguments back to serious ish political considerations and betting. And boost a lot of good causes, PB funding itself if necessary.

As for the politics - I think Clegg's fate will be decided by events completely out of his control, Salmond's fate will be decided by Salmond himself whatever happens. Hey ho. Come on Alex!

R0berts

Neil said:

tim said:

What's the betting there was no poll?

You would expect Dan to protect his sources. Whether they were Tory insiders or the voices in his head.

Or JackW?

Sorry, I couldn't resist...

Mick_Pork

tim said:

@georgeeaton: I've written to the British Polling Council asking if Tories are now required to publish private polling under disclosure rules.

What's the betting there was no poll?

The PB tories not in full flow then?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NwW3ytid4DA

*chortle*

Neil

tim said:

Neil said:

tim said:

What's the betting there was no poll?

You would expect Dan to protect his sources. Whether they were Tory insiders or the voices in his head.

Isn't it more likely to come down to how much the Tories want to protect Dan?

You are such a cynic, tim. It's time for them to formalise their relationship anyway. "Dan is the Blairite chick in the Cameroon nest. Watch Dan swallow this worm hook, line and sinker."

Scott_P

The more information that emerges about the unsuitability of Mr Flowers to run a major bank, the more pertinent the questions about who knew of his shortcomings and why nothing was done to protect the institution and its customers.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/10462821/Miliband-cant-duck-questions-on-the-Co-op.html

CarlottaVance

tim said:

Oops


Tomorrow's @FT front page: Osborne leaned on EU to ease rules for Co-op http://t.co/bQeBckkHHC

Owen Jones on BBC News 24 just tried to spin this as "Tories in it too" - until the other reviewer pointed out that the body of the story simply pointed out that Osborne argued that the relaxed capital requirements for mutuals in the EU should apply to the COOP too.....Owen Jones not having much fun....

Neil

CarlottaVance said:

until the other reviewer pointed out that the body of the story simply pointed out that Osborne argued that the relaxed capital requirements for mutuals in the EU should apply to the COOP too

Yes, that's rather the point.

Lucian_Fletcher

Woo. Ashes Pt2. Hope all are well. Warner top Aussie bat looks bet of the day to me. A century and 2 fifties in his last 2 FC matches. He's been biffing it around a lot in one-day stuff too but I don't hold as much store by that.

Mick_Pork

Back to Basics for NannyCam.

Mehdi Hasan ‏@mehdirhasan 7h

Cameron, who appointed Stephen Green of HSBC, to be his trade minister, attacks Labour over Co-op/Rev Flowers (!) http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/07/18/stephen-green-minister-hsbc-money-laundering_n_1681794.html …

R0berts

Scott_P said:

The more information that emerges about the unsuitability of Mr Flowers to run a major bank, the more pertinent the questions about who knew of his shortcomings and why nothing was done to protect the institution and its customers.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/10462821/Miliband-cant-duck-questions-on-the-Co-op.html

Who?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vy1ueZf1WMQ

Mick_Pork

tim said:

Bye bye poor huskies, bye bye tiny windmill,bye bye fake Dave.
Hello fake fake Dave

@hendopolis: THE SUN: Get rid of the green crap #tomorrowspaperstoday #BBCPapers http://t.co/rZQSAry2JZ

(by "get rid" of course he means move)

Can't work out why people think he has no beliefs

It's a complete mystery.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfM25e0eiaU

Pulpstar

Lucian_Fletcher said:

Woo. Ashes Pt2. Hope all are well. Warner top Aussie bat looks bet of the day to me. A century and 2 fifties in his last 2 FC matches. He's been biffing it around a lot in one-day stuff too but I don't hold as much store by that.

Hello Mr Fletcher ! Was wondering where you'd been the other day - good to see you back

foxinsoxuk

For all its faults HSBC was the most financially sensible and most solvent of the British High St banks, and is still solvent. The Co-op bank is at serious risk of going out of business.

In part this may be because politics counted more than competence at the Co-op.

Mick_Pork said:

Back to Basics for NannyCam.

Mehdi Hasan ‏@mehdirhasan 7h

Cameron, who appointed Stephen Green of HSBC, to be his trade minister, attacks Labour over Co-op/Rev Flowers (!) http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/07/18/stephen-green-minister-hsbc-money-laundering_n_1681794.html …

R0berts

Can anyone think of a better job than working on TMS?

CarlottaVance

Peter Oborne:

It’s no coincidence the MPs found guilty of fiddling are all Labour
The party may take the moral high ground, but lying and cheating are deep in its DNA

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/10462871/Its-no-coincidence-the-MPs-found-guilty-of-fiddling-are-all-Labour.html

Omnium

Clegg is the main asset the LDs have. It's rather bewildering that they haven't used the platform of government to build their base, but it's obvious that they have real and established credibility as a party of coalition government now.

I can't imagine I'll vote LD, but they are much better placed for the long term than they were five years ago.

SouthCoastKevin

AndyJS said:

Someone needs to invent a word to describe the process whereby someone wants to use the toilets in a pub so you have to buy a drink in order to be able to use them, causing you to need the toilet again a short time later. Maybe it's already appeared in the Meaning of Liff.

Ah, I love the Meaning of Liff! There was a sequel 'After Liff' published this year which I got as a most welcome present. For your amusement I present:

'Arbuckle Junction' - That point in the task where you realise it's going to be a lot harder than you thought.

dr_spyn

This is one for the list - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-25013022

Shrine for Tendulkar.

TheSheikofShake

Labour taking sizeable donations from reckless (business wrecking) bankers is the issue with Flowers.

A large part of their strategy has been built on banker bashing.

Mick_Pork

foxinsoxuk said:

The Co-op bank is at serious risk of going out of business.

This is anything but a dry business story as the tabloid's delight clearly shows.
Nor are the faults of HSBC highlighted small. They are extraordinarily serious.

Though if Cameron really wants to posture on the morality and the private lives of those close to a party and it's leadership then that is entirely his choice.

Lucian_Fletcher

Pulpstar said:

Lucian_Fletcher said:

Woo. Ashes Pt2. Hope all are well. Warner top Aussie bat looks bet of the day to me. A century and 2 fifties in his last 2 FC matches. He's been biffing it around a lot in one-day stuff too but I don't hold as much store by that.

Hello Mr Fletcher ! Was wondering where you'd been the other day - good to see you back

Promotion at work and a pregnant wife means I'm almost always chasing my tail at the moment. But buzzing about the cricket.

Lucian_Fletcher

R0berts said:

Can anyone think of a better job than working on TMS?

No. Absolutely no job would be better. One of my college friends works on cricket at the BBC. I am far more jealous of him than any of our better-paid contemporaries.

R0berts

Omnium said:

Clegg is the main asset the LDs have. It's rather bewildering that they haven't used the platform of government to build their base, but it's obvious that they have real and established credibility as a party of coalition government now.

I can't imagine I'll vote LD, but they are much better placed for the long term than they were five years ago.

Nonsense. Clegg is a national joke, their base is gone, their latent likeability is shot.

I feel sorry for them, they were totally unprepared for the sheer ruthlesness and nastiness of the Tory machine, but what's done is done. They have a massive job on their hands post 2015, whatever happens.

And I quite like Nick Clegg, feel sorry for him. He hasn't been helped by those that have been completely assimilated by The Tory, we all know who they are.

SouthCoastKevin

Mick_Pork said:

Though if Cameron really wants to posture on the morality and the private lives of those close to a party and it's leadership then that is entirely his choice.

Huh? This isn't remotely what the Flowers / Co-operative Bank issue is about. It's not about morality and private lives; it's about the appointment process that led to Flowers becoming chair of the Co-op Bank, and whether / how Labour were involved in his getting to that position.

Omnium

It's hard to see Flowers as having any relevance to Labour. Who cares frankly. It's much more damaging to his church I guess, but no one really pays attention to such things. If we did though we'd find a strand of thought/policy that had some kinship to claiming infallibility and yet is endlessly mired in the entrails of the most fallible of man's deeds. A thousand years (say) to move from 'impossibility' to 'improbability' is perhaps a while though.

Scott_P

Omnium said:

It's hard to see Flowers as having any relevance to Labour.

That's a keeper...

Neil

Omnium said:

It's hard to see Flowers as having any relevance to Labour.

Hang around here for a few more days if you want to see dozens of posters desperately try to make a connection.

Mick_Pork

SouthCoastKevin said:

Mick_Pork said:

Though if Cameron really wants to posture on the morality and the private lives of those close to a party and it's leadership then that is entirely his choice.

Huh? This isn't remotely what the Flowers / Co-operative Bank issue is about. It's not about morality and private lives; it's about the appointment process that led to Flowers becoming chair of the Co-op Bank, and whether / how Labour were involved in his getting to that position.

You'll have to spin a great deal harder than that. None of the process or labour involvement is relevant without Flowers himself and his behaviour being the story as he quite obviously is.

CarlottaVance

Omnium said:

It's hard to see Flowers as having any relevance to Labour. .

I suggest you avert your gaze from the newspapers for the next few days at least....

SouthCoastKevin

Cool, have it your way, Mick_Pork. Maybe I should have said 'If Cameron is posturing about anything then it's the appointment process...'. IMO the jury's very much out on how much impact all this will have on Labour, but I think it's you who was doing a spot of spinning with your comment about Cameron's posturing.

Scott_P

Neil said:

Hang around here for a few more days if you want to see dozens of posters desperately try to make a connection.

Labour councillor not connected to Labour Party.

Unspoofable...

Omnium

@Neil, @Scott_P

There's a connection, and there are certainly questions that Labour may be asked and will need to answer, but one man's fallibility (no not Ed!) doesn't count.

edit: perhaps a revision is in order along the lines of "one man's fallibility when not in high political office".

foxinsoxuk

I thought the rule was that financial scandals were the end of Labour politicians, while sex scandals were the end of Conservative politicians.

The Rev Flowers seems to want to cover all bases. Is he a Blairite like tim?

Any news yet on why he left Rochdale?

CarlottaVance said:

Omnium said:

It's hard to see Flowers as having any relevance to Labour. .

I suggest you avert your gaze from the newspapers for the next few days at least....

Neil

Scott_P said:

Neil said:

Hang around here for a few more days if you want to see dozens of posters desperately try to make a connection.

Labour councillor not connected to Labour Party.

Unspoofable...

Oh, he was a Labour councillor. Oh, well, sack the lot of them then. Thanks for the update.

CarlottaVance

foxinsoxuk said:

I thought the rule was that financial scandals were the end of Labour politicians, while sex scandals were the end of Conservative politicians.

The Rev Flowers seems to want to cover all bases. Is he a Blairite like tim?

Any news yet on why he left Rochdale?

CarlottaVance said:

Omnium said:

It's hard to see Flowers as having any relevance to Labour. .

I suggest you avert your gaze from the newspapers for the next few days at least....

So far the unspecific :

Flowers left Rochdale under a cloud when very serious accusations were levelled at him by local Conservative activists

http://www.rochdaleonline.co.uk/news-features/2/news-headlines/83797/coop-bank-to-face-independent-inquiry-over-flowers

Mick_Pork

Think what you like SouthCoastKevin as it's crystal clear who was doing the posturing at PMQ's over Flowers.

PMQs: Cameron on Paul Flowers and Co-Op Bank inquiry

9 hours ago

The prime minister said the chancellor is talking to regulators looking at the best way to hold an inquiry into the Co-Op Bank after Paul Flowers stood down when drug and porn claims emerged.

He said the "first priority is to safeguarded this bank" without using taxpayers' money, and anyone with information should "stand up and provide it to the authorities".

Mr Cameron was responding to Tory MP Steve Brine who asked about the "nightmare" at the bank, and spoke of his "disbelief" that Mr Flowers had become chairman.

Is there some part of "drug and porn claims", "nightmare" or "disbelief" that eludes you?

The only reason there is any story whatsoever is because of what Flowers has been exposed to have done in his private life. So if Cammie wants to make this all about Flowers and his links to labour and it's leadership then he'd best be prepared for the consequences.

TheSheikofShake

Balls pockets £50k and Labour pocket X million while this bank is going bust........

Answers aren't required - just the repetition of those basics when they are doing their usual holier-than-thou charade.

fitalass

Welcome back Lucien, great to see you posting again. Congratulations to you both on the wonderful baby news, and the promotion too.

Lucian_Fletcher said:

Pulpstar said:

Lucian_Fletcher said:

Woo. Ashes Pt2. Hope all are well. Warner top Aussie bat looks bet of the day to me. A century and 2 fifties in his last 2 FC matches. He's been biffing it around a lot in one-day stuff too but I don't hold as much store by that.

Hello Mr Fletcher ! Was wondering where you'd been the other day - good to see you back

Promotion at work and a pregnant wife means I'm almost always chasing my tail at the moment. But buzzing about the cricket.

Lucian_Fletcher

Big first session. England want a couple of wickets.

Lucian_Fletcher

Thanks Fitalass. Though I prob won't be back as much as I was. Not until I'm betting regularly again, anyway. That will be for Cheltenham.

foxinsoxuk

I ran across this headline today in the Leicester Mercury, of heartless politicians throwing a widow and her children out of their home, though fortunately the courts have intervened.

http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/sdsds/story-20100231-detail/story.html

Who needs the spare room subsidy?