Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » What sort of fool would have predicted the politics of 2020 in

124

Comments

  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,496
    isam said:

    .

    Stocky said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Stocky said:

    Stocky said:

    kinabalu said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Labour leadership contest seems to have taken Xmas and NY off.

    Not Nandy. She's giving it some.
    She knows she has ground to make up. She ticks a few boxes: female, northern, but under the rules she will find it hard to get onto the ballot. She needs a union to come out for her. Unlikely.

    A lay at current prices.

    RLB strong favourite.

    Not strong favourite. Or shouldn’t be. The far left is clearly split on her candidacy, hence Clive Lewis and Ian Lavery talking about entering.

    Funny you should mention Ian Lavery - I had a few speculative quid on him at 130/1 yesterday with Ladbrokes.

    I do think though that it will be difficult for any candidate to beat RLB, who is the Corbyn anointed one.

    I am not so sure. She’ll probably have Momentum and Unite behind her, which will bring huge advantages, but my guess is that Starmer will run her close.

    Hope you're completely wrong, I have laid them both

    If Rayner runs she’ll win. If not, it will be close between RLB and Starmer. I can’t see anyone else having a sniff, especially given the nomination process.

    What % chance would you say it is that either Starmer or RLB wins?

    If Long Bailey is running it means Rayner won’t be. I’d give her a 55% chance in a straight fight v Starmer. I’d give Starmer a 15% chance at best v Rayner.

    Yes I don’t rate Starmers chances of winning this contest at all. A man is really going to struggle this time round.

    He’s possibly value for leader after next if RLB does an IDS.
    I am surprised a man would even stand in the Labour leader contest.
    Why? Because a man has no chance?
    Just because they see themselves as the party of equality etc, and they've never had a female leader. I would have thought a man who was thinking of running would make a high profile decision to stand aside to let a woman have a better chance
    Ladies first? Positively antideluvian. Should he hold the door open for her as well?
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,952

    isam said:

    .

    Stocky said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Stocky said:

    Stocky said:

    kinabalu said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Labour leadership contest seems to have taken Xmas and NY off.

    Not Nandy. She's giving it some.

    RLB strong favourite.

    Not strong favourite. Or shouldn’t be. The far left is clearly split on her candidacy, hence Clive Lewis and Ian Lavery talking about entering.

    Funny you should mention Ian Lavery - I had a few speculative quid on him at 130/1 yesterday with Ladbrokes.

    I do think though that it will be difficult for any candidate to beat RLB, who is the Corbyn anointed one.

    I am not so sure. She’ll probably have Momentum and Unite behind her, which will bring huge advantages, but my guess is that Starmer will run her close.

    Hope you're completely wrong, I have laid them both

    If Rayner runs she’ll win. If not, it will be close between RLB and Starmer. I can’t see anyone else having a sniff, especially given the nomination process.

    What % chance would you say it is that either Starmer or RLB wins?

    If Long Bailey is running it means Rayner won’t be. I’d give her a 55% chance in a straight fight v Starmer. I’d give Starmer a 15% chance at best v Rayner.

    Yes I don’t rate Starmers chances of winning this contest at all. A man is really going to struggle this time round.

    He’s possibly value for leader after next if RLB does an IDS.
    I am surprised a man would even stand in the Labour leader contest.
    Why? Because a man has no chance?
    Just because they see themselves as the party of equality etc, and they've never had a female leader. I would have thought a man who was thinking of running would make a high profile decision to stand aside to let a woman have a better chance
    Ladies first? Positively antideluvian. Should he hold the door open for her as well?
    I am not saying he should, just that I would have expected a progressive politician in this day and age would.

    Although though I must say there is a part of me that thinks he probably should as well.
  • Options
    numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 5,488
    edited December 2019

    Starmer has a hugely greater intellect in my opinion and will handle interviews far better than RLB (as we have seen in the past).
    If Labour is to have a good chance of being returned to power in 2024 (or possibly earlier), they need to choose Starmer, if not RLB will ensure another defeat ... the British electorate will not accept another left-wing Corbynite, simples really.

    She is continuity Corbyn but even worse, presentationally she is appalling. She has an unfortunate issue (in the same way Corbyn always looks grumpy and Priti Patel looks a tad too pleased with herself) of looking perpetually confused.

    (Note I am giving her the benefit of the doubt and saying she looks perpetually confused rather than actually being perpetually confused. Your mileage may vary).
  • Options
    ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578



    That Marxist interpretation just doesn’t square with reality though. If anything we have seen the growth of the ‘comfortable classes’, outside of maybe London. School teachers, nurses, fireman etc have a pretty fine standard of living.

    But, for example, in my town North Wales, they are shutting schools and small local hospitals. They have shut the magistrates court. The nearest fire station is 21 miles way, the nearest police station is 43 miles away (though over an hour by road).

    There are hollowed-out areas of the country where there are few jobs like teachers, nurses, firemen actually left. People with those jobs may have a "pretty fine standard of living" if they still existed.

    The town survives, barely. There has been no growth in "the comfortable classes".

    What utter drivel. I’m willing to guess that your area of north wales has more teachers and nurses than ever before and has more police and fireman than it did twenty years ago. The only reason they would shut a school would be a stagnant population or to reopen a new school.

    As a special request, can I please ask you to put yourself forward to write labour’s next election manifesto.
    Something that is not often realised - many of the mining and industrial towns expanded massively in the 1860-1900 period.

    Aberfan for example was a tiny village in 1866. A town of 5000 in 1966.
    My paternal ancestors came to The Valleys from all over SW Wales. All in one colliery town in 1911 and all colliers of some sort; scattered throughout Ceredigion, Pembrokeshire and Carmarthenshire, and all farmworkers 50 years earlier.
    Much of post-industrial Britain - Wales, Lancashire, the North East, Glasgow - is way overpopulated in relation to its climate. People went there for jobs, the jobs have gone, the drizzle remains.

    These places will slowly empty, like Detroit, and there is virtually nothing we can do about it.
  • Options
    TGOHF666TGOHF666 Posts: 2,052
    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.
  • Options
    StockyStocky Posts: 9,736
    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    In that case Starmer fails on both fronts: he is neither idologically pure nor electorally appealing.
  • Options
    ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578
    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    He also has the televisual charisma of a Victorian coffin lid. And he's an awful speaker.
  • Options

    Stocky said:

    Starmer has a hugely greater intellect in my opinion and will handle interviews far better than RLB (as we have seen in the past).
    If Labour is to have a good chance of being returned to power in 2024 (or possibly earlier), they need to choose Starmer, if not RLB will ensure another defeat ... the British electorate will not accept another left-wing Corbynite, simples really.

    Agreed - though you`re making the mistake of assuming that the primary motivation is electoral success over ideological purity.

    It’s worth remembering that Owen Smith challenged Corbyn directly and got over 35% of the vote. For reasons that eluded many of us Corbyn had a significant personal following and also enjoyed that level of loyalty all Labour leaders get from the membership. Neither of those factors will be in play this time. And Starmer is a much better candidate than Smith was. What he won’t have, though, is the organisational support Long Bailey will have: essentially, the access to the Unite and Momentum mailing lists.

    I think who UNISON nominate will be crucial. Dave Prentis is actually rational, and surely knows that RLB would be a disaster. If they nominate Starmer, that would be a big boost for his campaign.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,952
    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    Stocky said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    In that case Starmer fails on both fronts: he is neither idologically pure nor electorally appealing.
    Byronic said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    He also has the televisual charisma of a Victorian coffin lid. And he's an awful speaker.
    Have to say I am baffled as to why he is so short in the betting, and what appeal people think he has that will win back voters who like either Boris or Corbyn
  • Options
    Stocky said:

    Stocky said:

    Starmer has a hugely greater intellect in my opinion and will handle interviews far better than RLB (as we have seen in the past).
    If Labour is to have a good chance of being returned to power in 2024 (or possibly earlier), they need to choose Starmer, if not RLB will ensure another defeat ... the British electorate will not accept another left-wing Corbynite, simples really.

    Agreed - though you`re making the mistake of assuming that the primary motivation is electoral success over ideological purity.

    It’s worth remembering that Owen Smith challenged Corbyn directly and got over 35% of the vote. For reasons that eluded many of us Corbyn had a significant personal following and also enjoyed that level of loyalty all Labour leaders get from the membership. Neither of those factors will be in play this time. And Starmer is a much better candidate than Smith was. What he won’t have, though, is the organisational support Long Bailey will have: essentially, the access to the Unite and Momentum mailing lists.

    A couple of further points:

    1) Starmer may not be able to get on the ballet due the changes in the procedure
    2) Since Owen Smith there has been a lot of labour membership resignations. I am working on the assumption that these resignations are largely moderates, so therefore the remaining membership is more left wing than was previously the case.

    I`m happy to be corrected on the above two points.

    I’d be surprised if Starmer did not make it into the ballot. He’ll get the MP nominations and even if he doesn’t get union support, he would only need the backing of around 35 CLPs. As for the membership, many are rejoining in order to vote. However, there’s no doubt the left dominates - hence Starmer’s no going back pitch. The far-left, though, is just one, relatively small part of the party.

  • Options

    Stocky said:

    Starmer has a hugely greater intellect in my opinion and will handle interviews far better than RLB (as we have seen in the past).
    If Labour is to have a good chance of being returned to power in 2024 (or possibly earlier), they need to choose Starmer, if not RLB will ensure another defeat ... the British electorate will not accept another left-wing Corbynite, simples really.

    Agreed - though you`re making the mistake of assuming that the primary motivation is electoral success over ideological purity.

    It’s worth remembering that Owen Smith challenged Corbyn directly and got over 35% of the vote. For reasons that eluded many of us Corbyn had a significant personal following and also enjoyed that level of loyalty all Labour leaders get from the membership. Neither of those factors will be in play this time. And Starmer is a much better candidate than Smith was. What he won’t have, though, is the organisational support Long Bailey will have: essentially, the access to the Unite and Momentum mailing lists.

    I think who UNISON nominate will be crucial. Dave Prentis is actually rational, and surely knows that RLB would be a disaster. If they nominate Starmer, that would be a big boost for his campaign.

    I agree.

  • Options
    ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578
    edited December 2019
    isam said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    Stocky said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    In that case Starmer fails on both fronts: he is neither idologically pure nor electorally appealing.
    Byronic said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    He also has the televisual charisma of a Victorian coffin lid. And he's an awful speaker.
    Have to say I am baffled as to why he is so short in the betting, and what appeal people think he has that will win back voters who like either Boris or Corbyn
    I think the wish is father to the thought. Moderate Labourites are DESPERATE for a sane, consensual, centrist leader, who looks very roughly like the kind of Labour leader that did OK in the past (Blair, Brown, Smith, etc).

    Starmer looks like them. Middle class middle aged man, not obviously stupid or a Marxist. Able to walk unaided. Has progressive politics of a modest sort.

    Labour's need is so great, Starmer will do.

    To be fair to them, I can see Starmer as a Michael Howard figure. Steadying the ship, slowly rebuilding the party, boring the nutters til they leave or go quiet. Then, after another defeat, Labour could find and elect their Cameron.

    However I also agree with the commenters that it is very likely to be a woman, this time.

  • Options
    Another factor that hasn’t been brought into play much is Starmer’s past role as the DPP. I suspect the newspapers would be able to dig some stuff up around historic decisions not to prosecute etc if they wanted - probably completely unfairly (it’s one of those thankless jobs where you’re damned either way).
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,952
    Byronic said:

    isam said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    Stocky said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    In that case Starmer fails on both fronts: he is neither idologically pure nor electorally appealing.
    Byronic said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    He also has the televisual charisma of a Victorian coffin lid. And he's an awful speaker.
    Have to say I am baffled as to why he is so short in the betting, and what appeal people think he has that will win back voters who like either Boris or Corbyn
    I think the wish is father to the thought. Moderate Labourites are DESPERATE for a sane, consensual, centrist leader, who looks very roughly like the kind of Labour leader that did OK in the past (Blair, Brown, Smith, etc).

    Starmer looks like them. Middle class middle aged man, not obviously stupid or a Marxist. Able to walk unaided. Has progressive politics of a modest sort.

    Labour's need is so great, Starmer will do.

    To be fair to them, I can see Starmer as a Michael Howard figure. Steadying the ship, slowly rebuilding the party, boring the nutters til they leave or go quiet. Then, after another defeat, Labour could find and elect their Cameron.

    However I also agree with the commenters that it is very likely to be a woman, this time.

    I agree almost word for word
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,952

    Another factor that hasn’t been brought into play much is Starmer’s past role as the DPP. I suspect the newspapers would be able to dig some stuff up around historic decisions not to prosecute etc if they wanted - probably completely unfairly (it’s one of those thankless jobs where you’re damned either way).

    John Worboys?
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,941
    edited December 2019
    isam said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    Stocky said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    In that case Starmer fails on both fronts: he is neither idologically pure nor electorally appealing.
    Byronic said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    He also has the televisual charisma of a Victorian coffin lid. And he's an awful speaker.
    Have to say I am baffled as to why he is so short in the betting, and what appeal people think he has that will win back voters who like either Boris or Corbyn

    One very under-rated quality Starmer may have is that he will not frighten potential Tory to LibDem switchers. Labour needs many more of these if the Tories are to be denied a majority next time. The Corbyn haters are a much bigger issue among the general electorate than the Corbyn liners. Johnson’s positive appeal will depend a great deal on events.

  • Options
    Byronic said:

    isam said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    Stocky said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    In that case Starmer fails on both fronts: he is neither idologically pure nor electorally appealing.
    Byronic said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    He also has the televisual charisma of a Victorian coffin lid. And he's an awful speaker.
    Have to say I am baffled as to why he is so short in the betting, and what appeal people think he has that will win back voters who like either Boris or Corbyn
    I think the wish is father to the thought. Moderate Labourites are DESPERATE for a sane, consensual, centrist leader, who looks very roughly like the kind of Labour leader that did OK in the past (Blair, Brown, Smith, etc).

    Starmer looks like them. Middle class middle aged man, not obviously stupid or a Marxist. Able to walk unaided. Has progressive politics of a modest sort.

    Labour's need is so great, Starmer will do.

    To be fair to them, I can see Starmer as a Michael Howard figure. Steadying the ship, slowly rebuilding the party, boring the nutters til they leave or go quiet. Then, after another defeat, Labour could find and elect their Cameron.

    However I also agree with the commenters that it is very likely to be a woman, this time.

    My preferred candidate is Lisa Nandy. I just can’t see her getting into the contest.

  • Options
    BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 7,997

    Starmer has a hugely greater intellect in my opinion and will handle interviews far better than RLB (as we have seen in the past).
    If Labour is to have a good chance of being returned to power in 2024 (or possibly earlier), they need to choose Starmer, if not RLB will ensure another defeat ... the British electorate will not accept another left-wing Corbynite, simples really.

    She is continuity Corbyn but even worse, presentationally she is appalling. She has an unfortunate issue (in the same way Corbyn always looks grumpy and Priti Patel looks a tad too pleased with herself) of looking perpetually confused.

    (Note I am giving her the benefit of the doubt and saying she looks perpetually confused rather than actually being perpetually confused. Your mileage may vary).
    I like Jess Phillip's look. She looks cheeky and confident and can show passion. She could be a match for Johnson. I can't think of any other contender who would be. The look matters.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,952
    edited December 2019
    Barnesian said:

    Starmer has a hugely greater intellect in my opinion and will handle interviews far better than RLB (as we have seen in the past).
    If Labour is to have a good chance of being returned to power in 2024 (or possibly earlier), they need to choose Starmer, if not RLB will ensure another defeat ... the British electorate will not accept another left-wing Corbynite, simples really.

    She is continuity Corbyn but even worse, presentationally she is appalling. She has an unfortunate issue (in the same way Corbyn always looks grumpy and Priti Patel looks a tad too pleased with herself) of looking perpetually confused.

    (Note I am giving her the benefit of the doubt and saying she looks perpetually confused rather than actually being perpetually confused. Your mileage may vary).
    I like Jess Phillip's look. She looks cheeky and confident and can show passion. She could be a match for Johnson. I can't think of any other contender who would be. The look matters.
    I cannot stand her, but I can see why moderate lefties love her, and agree she would give Boris a good fight. If they picked Starmer over her it would be an incredible error IMO
  • Options
    ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578

    Byronic said:

    isam said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    Stocky said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    In that case Starmer fails on both fronts: he is neither idologically pure nor electorally appealing.
    Byronic said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    He also has the televisual charisma of a Victorian coffin lid. And he's an awful speaker.
    Have to say I am baffled as to why he is so short in the betting, and what appeal people think he has that will win back voters who like either Boris or Corbyn
    I think the wish is father to the thought. Moderate Labourites are DESPERATE for a sane, consensual, centrist leader, who looks very roughly like the kind of Labour leader that did OK in the past (Blair, Brown, Smith, etc).

    Starmer looks like them. Middle class middle aged man, not obviously stupid or a Marxist. Able to walk unaided. Has progressive politics of a modest sort.

    Labour's need is so great, Starmer will do.

    To be fair to them, I can see Starmer as a Michael Howard figure. Steadying the ship, slowly rebuilding the party, boring the nutters til they leave or go quiet. Then, after another defeat, Labour could find and elect their Cameron.

    However I also agree with the commenters that it is very likely to be a woman, this time.

    My preferred candidate is Lisa Nandy. I just can’t see her getting into the contest.

    One thing Labour urgently need is a leader who might win back Scotland.

    Unless Scotland goes indy (which I very much doubt) then the SNP will eventually tumble; no party can defy gravity forever (and the SNP have done amazingly well to get this far).

    This descent might happen sooner than we all think. Sturgeon has been around a long time, there's a nasty rape trial coming up..... who knows. She could rule Scotland for another decade, or she could be gone by April, with her party facing decline.

    So Labour need to have a leader able to take advantage, because without Scotland they will find it hard to win, ever.

    I can't see Starmer being that leader. But who is? Nandy seems nice but ineffectual. But maybe niceness is a start.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,352
    edited December 2019

    Stocky said:


    A couple of further points:

    1) Starmer may not be able to get on the ballet due the changes in the procedure
    2) Since Owen Smith there has been a lot of labour membership resignations. I am working on the assumption that these resignations are largely moderates, so therefore the remaining membership is more left wing than was previously the case.

    I`m happy to be corrected on the above two points.

    I’d be surprised if Starmer did not make it into the ballot. He’ll get the MP nominations and even if he doesn’t get union support, he would only need the backing of around 35 CLPs. As for the membership, many are rejoining in order to vote. However, there’s no doubt the left dominates - hence Starmer’s no going back pitch. The far-left, though, is just one, relatively small part of the party.

    SO is right on all of that. Members are generally just taking a break at the moment. Most potential candidates have yet to declare, let alone set out policy proposals. Knee-jerk members who simply vote for the apparently most extreme candidate are as SO says a relatively small minority - the support for Corbyn was personal to a significant degree, attracting people like me who would never have voted for, say, Arthur Scargill.

    i'm probably a fairly typical leftish member: I'd like to see the general leftish principles pursued but with a leader who voters more readily see as PM. it's easy to see Starmer as a PM, though I'd like to hear more about which leftish policies he'd like to retain. I'm keeping an open mind.

    And although it'd be nice to have a woman leader, it's not a requirement.
  • Options



    That Marxist interpretation just doesn’t square with reality though. If anything we have seen the growth of the ‘comfortable classes’, outside of maybe London. School teachers, nurses, fireman etc have a pretty fine standard of living.

    But, for example, in my town North Wales, they are shutting schools and small local hospitals. They have shut the magistrates court. The nearest fire station is 21 miles way, the nearest police station is 43 miles away (though over an hour by road).

    There are hollowed-out areas of the country where there are few jobs like teachers, nurses, firemen actually left. People with those jobs may have a "pretty fine standard of living" if they still existed.

    The town survives, barely. There has been no growth in "the comfortable classes".

    What utter drivel. I’m willing to guess that your area of north wales has more teachers and nurses than ever before and has more police and fireman than it did twenty years ago. The only reason they would shut a school would be a stagnant population or to reopen a new school.

    As a special request, can I please ask you to put yourself forward to write labour’s next election manifesto.
    I have the unfortunate task of telling you that your post is "utter drivel". Firefighter numbers are down around 11000 in England and Wales since 2010. The Fire Service in general is on its arse, with the majority of Fire Services understaffed and in need of increased funding. The recent round of HMICFRS audits has been scathing.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,062

    When a second referendum comes, there will be a pretty straightforward menu, and separation will be the less appetising and considerably more expensive option. Many Scots are angry, but they're nobody's fool. It will fail narrowly again. And again.

    However, hanging together by a thread because the alternative is worse is not really a way forward for any country. It leaves deep resentments (as winning the last one did). We need to be brought together. That's a Britain wide project, not a Scottish project. For what it's worth, the Government seems to be stumbling in the right direction with aspects of its domestic agenda.

    You see something that I don't , there has been precious little sign of them looking to change their attitude on Scotland to date.
    WE will hear plenty of rhetoric but it will be the same old soft soap.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,504

    Another factor that hasn’t been brought into play much is Starmer’s past role as the DPP. I suspect the newspapers would be able to dig some stuff up around historic decisions not to prosecute etc if they wanted - probably completely unfairly (it’s one of those thankless jobs where you’re damned either way).

    One of the imports from American politics is attempts to fit the UK to American political narratives - I have heard a number of people describing the justice system as institutionally racist because of the profile of the prison population. I am quite sure that the Maomentum types would go down that route - see Kamela Harris etc...
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,062
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    malcolmg said:

    Jonathan said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    FF43 said:

    DavidL said:

    I have not been able to find any predictions back as far as 2010.

    [... Other interesting predictions, some of which I share ...]

    If there's another referendum, I am confident independence will win. There isn't
    I have always said that the SNP have gone e now is a vote for considerable hardship.
    They have proven they have no intention of improving Scotland's lot and only way we ever get better is to raise our own taxes and spend it on what we want , not what London wants.
    ...

    Why would it not do as well as similarly sized, located and resourced countries like Ireland, Norway and Denmark?
    SNIP
    You can only treat people like crap for so long , even the weakest will get a backbone at some point. Completely shutting Scotland out of Brexit etc and taking back the powers was the final insult, we are not dogs to be ordered about.
    Scotland voted YES.
    You are forgetting @Jonathan that ‘my’ side is the whole nation/people, the others are… not to be considered.
    Unionists are scared to ask the people, that is the issue, they prefer to deny democracy, not for themselves but for others.
    If you are so confident why not have the vote and kill it, methinks I know why.
    We had the vote in 2014, Scots voted No after separatists promised it was a once in a generation referendum.

    The Tories won a majority on a manifesto commitment to ban indyref2 for their full 5 year term and have made clear they will stick to that promise in Government no matter how many toys Sturgeon throws out of her pram
    They went backward, though, in both votes and seats in the part of the country most affected. IMHO it's asking for trouble to effectively give a V sign to the voters who didn't vote for you. Which ever way round you have the fingers.
    54% of Scots voted for Unionist parties and the Tories won a majority across the UK with a manifesto commmitment to no indyref2.

    Boris has a mandate to tell Nicola Sturgeon to sod off and he will
    Democracy in action Tory style , brown shirts and jackboots.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,062
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Floater said:

    malcolmg said:

    Jonathan said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    FF43 said:



    SNIP

    As a somewhat convicted unionist, I wonder if our energies are better spent trying to make a success of independence rather than arguing about process. Brexit is an example to avoid I think. Not only is it a bad idea from my point of view, but Leavers/Tories are going about it in the most cackhanded, divisive and destructive way possible. Can't we do better than that?

    I have always said that the SNP have gone about this the dence now is a vote for considerable hardship.
    David, how do you build anything when the vast majority of your budget is determined by and controlled by Westminster. The SNP have virtually what London wants.
    ...

    Why would it not do as well as similarly sized, located and resourced countries like Ireland, Norway and Denmark?
    I agree - Though there would be sacrifices,on the weaponisation of people's most negative instincts.
    You can only treat people like crap for so long , even the weakest will get a backbone at some point. Completely shutting Scotland out of Brexit etc and taking back the powers was the final insult, we are not dogs to be ordered about.
    Scotland voted YES.
    Based on it being only way to stay in the EU and on a shedload of promises, all BROKEN, usual lies and cheating the mugs get every time.
    So, you appear to be stating that if you leave the UK you leave the EU.

    You had better play nice with Spain then....
    Spain is not a problem. There is a constitutional way for Scotland to leave the UK. There is no constitutional way for Catalonia to leave Spain.
    Yes there is, by constitutional amendmemt just the Federal Spanish government is unlikely to agree that and simply arrested Catalan nationalists when they held an illegal referendum and declared UDI

    The Spanish government, like the UK government, doesn’t arrest anyone.

    The Spanish police and civil guard arrested Catalan nationalists on behalf of the Spanish government if they had not already fled into exile
    Tories would absolutely love to be able to arrest SNP members just like their fascist pals in Spain.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,062



    That Marxist interpretation just doesn’t square with reality though. If anything we have seen the growth of the ‘comfortable classes’, outside of maybe London. School teachers, nurses, fireman etc have a pretty fine standard of living.

    But, for example, in my town North Wales, they are shutting schools and small local hospitals. They have shut the magistrates court. The nearest fire station is 21 miles way, the nearest police station is 43 miles away (though over an hour by road).

    There are hollowed-out areas of the country where there are few jobs like teachers, nurses, firemen actually left. People with those jobs may have a "pretty fine standard of living" if they still existed.

    The town survives, barely. There has been no growth in "the comfortable classes".

    What utter drivel. I’m willing to guess that your area of north wales has more teachers and nurses than ever before and has more police and fireman than it did twenty years ago. The only reason they would shut a school would be a stagnant population or to reopen a new school.

    What utter drivel. North West Wales has not got a stagnant population.

    It is de-populating. As are some areas of Scotland and the North of England. It is actually very common. The NE states of the US (Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont) are depopulating.

    There are fewer people in North West Wales now. Therefore, it has fewer school teachers, police, firemen.
    How would a local know better than the PB frother experts
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,496
    malcolmg said:

    When a second referendum comes, there will be a pretty straightforward menu, and separation will be the less appetising and considerably more expensive option. Many Scots are angry, but they're nobody's fool. It will fail narrowly again. And again.

    However, hanging together by a thread because the alternative is worse is not really a way forward for any country. It leaves deep resentments (as winning the last one did). We need to be brought together. That's a Britain wide project, not a Scottish project. For what it's worth, the Government seems to be stumbling in the right direction with aspects of its domestic agenda.

    You see something that I don't , there has been precious little sign of them looking to change their attitude on Scotland to date.
    WE will hear plenty of rhetoric but it will be the same old soft soap.
    I don't think they've necessarily changed their attitude toward Scotland specifically, but this seems like a very important step: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/business-50925321

    The Tories are now a party of the regions. Even if you feel they are utterly amoral, their very parliamentary make up now forces them to develop areas beyond London.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,062



    That Marxist interpretation just doesn’t square with reality though. If anything we have seen the growth of the ‘comfortable classes’, outside of maybe London. School teachers, nurses, fireman etc have a pretty fine standard of living.

    But, for example, in my town North Wales, they are shutting schools and small local hospitals. They have shut the magistrates court. The nearest fire station is 21 miles way, the nearest police station is 43 miles away (though over an hour by road).

    There are hollowed-out areas of the country where there are few jobs like teachers, nurses, firemen actually left. People with those jobs may have a "pretty fine standard of living" if they still existed.

    The town survives, barely. There has been no growth in "the comfortable classes".

    What utter drivel. I’m willing to guess that your area of north wales has more teachers and nurses than ever before and has more police and fireman than it did twenty years ago. The only reason they would shut a school would be a stagnant population or to reopen a new school.

    As a special request, can I please ask you to put yourself forward to write labour’s next election manifesto.
    I have the unfortunate task of telling you that your post is "utter drivel". Firefighter numbers are down around 11000 in England and Wales since 2010. The Fire Service in general is on its arse, with the majority of Fire Services understaffed and in need of increased funding. The recent round of HMICFRS audits has been scathing.
    TWS , how can reality compare to a PB Frother expert opinion
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,504
    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Floater said:

    malcolmg said:

    Jonathan said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    FF43 said:



    SNIP

    As a somewhat convicted unionist, I wonder if our energies are better spent trying to make a success of independence rather than arguing about process. Brexit is an example to avoid I think. Not only is it a bad idea from my point of view, but Leavers/Tories are going about it in the most cackhanded, divisive and destructive way possible. Can't we do better than that?

    I have always said that the SNP have gone about this the dence now is a vote for considerable hardship.
    David, how do you build anything when the vast majority of your budget is determined by and controlled by Westminster. The SNP have virtually what London wants.
    ...

    Why would it not do as well as similarly sized, located and resourced countries like Ireland, Norway and Denmark?
    I agree - Though there would be sacrifices,on the weaponisation of people's most negative instincts.
    You can only treat people like crap for so long , even the weakest will get a backbone at some point. Completely shutting Scotland out of Brexit etc and taking back the powers was the final insult, we are not dogs to be ordered about.
    Scotland voted YES.
    Based on it being only way to stay in the EU and on a shedload of promises, all BROKEN, usual lies and cheating the mugs get every time.
    So, you appear to be stating that if you leave the UK you leave the EU.

    You had better play nice with Spain then....
    Spain is not a problem. There is a constitutional way for Scotland to leave the UK. There is no constitutional way for Catalonia to leave Spain.
    :

    The Spanish government, like the UK government, doesn’t arrest anyone.

    The Spanish police and civil guard arrested Catalan nationalists on behalf of the Spanish government if they had not already fled into exile
    Tories would absolutely love to be able to arrest SNP members just like their fascist pals in Spain.
    I have never met anyone who wants to arrest SNP members - consider some of the blossoms we have tolerated in politics in this country. The Chuckle Brothers for example....
  • Options
    YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172



    And although it'd be nice to have a woman leader, it's not a requirement.

    Well, following on from the last thread, the Tories might have Sunak as leader (or leader designate) by next election.

    Overall, it is inescapably true that women get a sh!tty deal in the higher echelons of the Labour Party. For example, at the last Welsh leadership election, the only female (Eluned Morgan) was easily the most impressive of the candidates. She trailed in a poor third. (I imagine the Tories and Plaid Cymru were delighted).

    Labour can't carry on being the standard bearer for gender equality (or racial equality) unless their own organisation promotes women (or minorities) to the top.
  • Options
    Byronic said:



    That Marxist interpretation just doesn’t square with reality though. If anything we have seen the growth of the ‘comfortable classes’, outside of maybe London. School teachers, nurses, fireman etc have a pretty fine standard of living.

    But, for example, in my town North Wales, they are shutting schools and small local hospitals. They have shut the magistrates court. The nearest fire station is 21 miles way, the nearest police station is 43 miles away (though over an hour by road).

    There are hollowed-out areas of the country where there are few jobs like teachers, nurses, firemen actually left. People with those jobs may have a "pretty fine standard of living" if they still existed.

    The town survives, barely. There has been no growth in "the comfortable classes".

    What utter drivel. I’m willing to guess that your area of north wales has more teachers and nurses than ever before and has more police and fireman than it did twenty years ago. The only reason they would shut a school would be a stagnant population or to reopen a new school.

    As a special request, can I please ask you to put yourself forward to write labour’s next election manifesto.
    Something that is not often realised - many of the mining and industrial towns expanded massively in the 1860-1900 period.

    Aberfan for example was a tiny village in 1866. A town of 5000 in 1966.
    My paternal ancestors came to The Valleys from all over SW Wales. All in one colliery town in 1911 and all colliers of some sort; scattered throughout Ceredigion, Pembrokeshire and Carmarthenshire, and all farmworkers 50 years earlier.
    Much of post-industrial Britain - Wales, Lancashire, the North East, Glasgow - is way overpopulated in relation to its climate. People went there for jobs, the jobs have gone, the drizzle remains.

    These places will slowly empty, like Detroit, and there is virtually nothing we can do about it.
    The population of Glasgow has been slowly rising (coincidentally since 2007).
  • Options
    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Floater said:

    malcolmg said:

    Jonathan said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    FF43 said:



    SNIP

    As a somewhat convicted unionist, I wonder if our energies are better spent trying to make a success of independence rather than arguing about process. Brexit is an example to avoid I think. Not only is it a bad idea from my point of view, but Leavers/Tories are going about it in the most cackhanded, divisive and destructive way possible. Can't we do better than that?

    I have always said that the SNP have gone about this the dence now is a vote for considerable hardship.
    David, how do you build anything when the vast majority of your budget is determined by and controlled by Westminster. The SNP have virtually what London wants.
    ...

    Why would it not do as well as similarly sized, located and resourced countries like Ireland, Norway and Denmark?
    I agree - Though there would be sacrifices,on the weaponisation of people's most negative instincts.
    You can only treat people like crap for so long , even the weakest will get a backbone at some point. Completely shutting Scotland out of Brexit etc and taking back the powers was the final insult, we are not dogs to be ordered about.
    Scotland voted YES.
    Based on it being only way to stay in the EU and on a shedload of promises, all BROKEN, usual lies and cheating the mugs get every time.
    So, you appear to be stating that if you leave the UK you leave the EU.

    You had better play nice with Spain then....
    Spain is not a problem. There is a constitutional way for Scotland to leave the UK. There is no constitutional way for Catalonia to leave Spain.
    Yes there is, by constitutional amendmemt just the Federal Spanish government is unlikely to agree that and simply arrested Catalan nationalists when they held an illegal referendum and declared UDI

    The Spanish government, like the UK government, doesn’t arrest anyone.

    The Spanish police and civil guard arrested Catalan nationalists on behalf of the Spanish government if they had not already fled into exile
    Tories would absolutely love to be able to arrest SNP members just like their fascist pals in Spain.
    Are you on the fortified wine again ?
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,062

    malcolmg said:

    When a second referendum comes, there will be a pretty straightforward menu, and separation will be the less appetising and considerably more expensive option. Many Scots are angry, but they're nobody's fool. It will fail narrowly again. And again.

    However, hanging together by a thread because the alternative is worse is not really a way forward for any country. It leaves deep resentments (as winning the last one did). We need to be brought together. That's a Britain wide project, not a Scottish project. For what it's worth, the Government seems to be stumbling in the right direction with aspects of its domestic agenda.

    You see something that I don't , there has been precious little sign of them looking to change their attitude on Scotland to date.
    WE will hear plenty of rhetoric but it will be the same old soft soap.
    I don't think they've necessarily changed their attitude toward Scotland specifically, but this seems like a very important step: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/business-50925321

    The Tories are now a party of the regions. Even if you feel they are utterly amoral, their very parliamentary make up now forces them to develop areas beyond London.
    They got gubbed in Scotland, no incentive to do anything even if they wanted to. I will not hold my breath waiting on them building any decent infrastructure.
  • Options

    Another factor that hasn’t been brought into play much is Starmer’s past role as the DPP. I suspect the newspapers would be able to dig some stuff up around historic decisions not to prosecute etc if they wanted - probably completely unfairly (it’s one of those thankless jobs where you’re damned either way).

    One of the imports from American politics is attempts to fit the UK to American political narratives - I have heard a number of people describing the justice system as institutionally racist because of the profile of the prison population. I am quite sure that the Maomentum types would go down that route - see Kamela Harris etc...
    I can’t wait. Workington man generally doesn’t even see the intense culture wars around transgender and pronouns etc. Wait until the full horror of this sick identity based woke nonsense starts to cut through. At the moment he’s just wondering why every family on tv is either mixed race or black with a gay son.
  • Options
    Byronic said:

    Byronic said:

    isam said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    Stocky said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    In that case Starmer fails on both fronts: he is neither idologically pure nor electorally appealing.
    Byronic said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    He also has the televisual charisma of a Victorian coffin lid. And he's an awful speaker.
    Have to say I am baffled as to why he is so short in the betting, and what appeal people think he has that will win back voters who like either Boris or Corbyn
    I think the wish is father to the thought. Moderate Labourites are DESPERATE for a sane, consensual, centrist leader, who looks very roughly like the kind of Labour leader that did OK in the past (Blair, Brown, Smith, etc).

    Starmer looks like them. Middle class middle aged man, not obviously stupid or a Marxist. Able to walk unaided. Has progressive politics of a modest sort.

    Labour's need is so great, Starmer will do.

    To beCameron.

    However I also agree with the commenters that it is very likely to be a woman, this time.

    My preferred candidate is Lisa Nandy. I just can’t see her getting into the contest.

    One thing Labour urgently need is a leader who might win back Scotland.

    Unless Scotland goes indy (which I very much doubt) then the SNP will eventually tumble; no party can defy gravity forever (and the SNP have done amazingly well to get this far).

    This descent might happen sooner than we all think. Sturgeon has been around a long time, there's a nasty rape trial coming up..... who knows. She could rule Scotland for another decade, or she could be gone by April, with her party facing decline.

    So Labour need to have a leader able to take advantage, because without Scotland they will find it hard to win, ever.

    I can't see Starmer being that leader. But who is? Nandy seems nice but ineffectual. But maybe niceness is a start.

    Scotland is gone. That’s why it’s so important the next Labour leader does not frighten potential LibDem voters in England (and Wales). Labour is not going to win a majority, but could be the biggest part of an alliance - formal or informal - that deprives the Tories of a majority.

  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,504



    That Marxist interpretation just doesn’t square with reality though. If anything we have seen the growth of the ‘comfortable classes’, outside of maybe London. School teachers, nurses, fireman etc have a pretty fine standard of living.

    But, for example, in my town North Wales, they are shutting schools and small local hospitals. They have shut the magistrates court. The nearest fire station is 21 miles way, the nearest police station is 43 miles away (though over an hour by road).

    There are hollowed-out areas of the country where there are few jobs like teachers, nurses, firemen actually left. People with those jobs may have a "pretty fine standard of living" if they still existed.

    The town survives, barely. There has been no growth in "the comfortable classes".

    What utter drivel. I’m willing to guess that your area of north wales has more teachers and nurses than ever before and has more police and fireman than it did twenty years ago. The only reason they would shut a school would be a stagnant population or to reopen a new school.

    As a special request, can I please ask you to put yourself forward to write labour’s next election manifesto.
    I have the unfortunate task of telling you that your post is "utter drivel". Firefighter numbers are down around 11000 in England and Wales since 2010. The Fire Service in general is on its arse, with the majority of Fire Services understaffed and in need of increased funding. The recent round of HMICFRS audits has been scathing.
    https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fires_in_the_UK.png

    As ever, hard numbers are interesting. The reason for the drop in fires is apparently due to

    1) Working out of the system of beds and sofas that don't meet the newer standards for fire safety.
    2) The spread of modern circuit breaker boxes.
    3) The reduction in smoking acceptability - even those who still smoke are much more likely to go outside now.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,062

    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Floater said:

    malcolmg said:

    Jonathan said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    FF43 said:



    SNIP

    As a somewhat convicted unionist, I wonder if our energies are better spent trying to make a success of independence rather than arguing about process. Brexit is an example to avoid I think. Not only is it a bad idea from my point of view, but Leavers/Tories are going about it in the most cackhanded, divisive and destructive way possible. Can't we do better than that?

    I have always said that the SNP have gone about this the dence now is a vote for considerable hardship.
    David, how do you build anything when the vast majority of your budget is determined by and controlled by Westminster. The SNP have virtually what London wants.
    ...

    Why would it not do as well as similarly sized, located and resourced countries like Ireland, Norway and Denmark?
    I agree - Though there would be sacrifices,on the weaponisation of people's most negative instincts.
    SNIP
    Scotland voted YES.
    Based on it being only way to stay in the EU and on a shedload of promises, all BROKEN, usual lies and cheating the mugs get every time.
    So, you appear to be stating that if you leave the UK you leave the EU.

    You had better play nice with Spain then....
    Spain is not a problem. There is a constitutional way for Scotland to leave the UK. There is no constitutional way for Catalonia to leave Spain.
    Yes there is, by constitutional amendmemt just the Federal Spanish government is unlikely to agree that and simply arrested Catalan nationalists when they held an illegal referendum and declared UDI

    The Spanish government, like the UK government, doesn’t arrest anyone.

    The Spanish police and civil guard arrested Catalan nationalists on behalf of the Spanish government if they had not already fled into exile
    Tories would absolutely love to be able to arrest SNP members just like their fascist pals in Spain.
    Are you on the fortified wine again ?
    F off you moron, if you are unable to post something intelligent beggar off. Don't class other people like yourself.
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,496
    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    When a second referendum comes, there will be a pretty straightforward menu, and separation will be the less appetising and considerably more expensive option. Many Scots are angry, but they're nobody's fool. It will fail narrowly again. And again.

    However, hanging together by a thread because the alternative is worse is not really a way forward for any country. It leaves deep resentments (as winning the last one did). We need to be brought together. That's a Britain wide project, not a Scottish project. For what it's worth, the Government seems to be stumbling in the right direction with aspects of its domestic agenda.

    You see something that I don't , there has been precious little sign of them looking to change their attitude on Scotland to date.
    WE will hear plenty of rhetoric but it will be the same old soft soap.
    I don't think they've necessarily changed their attitude toward Scotland specifically, but this seems like a very important step: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/business-50925321

    The Tories are now a party of the regions. Even if you feel they are utterly amoral, their very parliamentary make up now forces them to develop areas beyond London.
    They got gubbed in Scotland, no incentive to do anything even if they wanted to. I will not hold my breath waiting on them building any decent infrastructure.
    Scotland has many marginal seats and Labour is nowhere. All to play for.

    But I agree, we'll soon see if it's all hot air or not.
  • Options
    ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578

    Byronic said:



    That Marxist interpretation just doesn’t square with reality though. If anything we have seen the growth of the ‘comfortable classes’, outside of maybe London. School teachers, nurses, fireman etc have a pretty fine standard of living.

    But, for example, in my town North Wales, they are shutting schools and small local hospitals. They have shut the magistrates court. The nearest fire station is 21 miles way, the nearest police station is 43 miles away (though over an hour by road).

    There are hollowed-out areas of the country where there are few jobs like teachers, nurses, firemen actually left. People with those jobs may have a "pretty fine standard of living" if they still existed.

    The town survives, barely. There has been no growth in "the comfortable classes".

    What utter drivel. I’m willing to guess that your area of north wales has more teachers and nurses than ever before and has more police and fireman than it did twenty years ago. The only reason they would shut a school would be a stagnant population or to reopen a new school.

    As a special request, can I please ask you to put yourself forward to write labour’s next election manifesto.
    Something that is not often realised - many of the mining and industrial towns expanded massively in the 1860-1900 period.

    Aberfan for example was a tiny village in 1866. A town of 5000 in 1966.
    My paternal ancestors came to The Valleys from all over SW Wales. All in one colliery town in 1911 and all colliers of some sort; scattered throughout Ceredigion, Pembrokeshire and Carmarthenshire, and all farmworkers 50 years earlier.
    Much of post-industrial Britain - Wales, Lancashire, the North East, Glasgow - is way overpopulated in relation to its climate. People went there for jobs, the jobs have gone, the drizzle remains.

    These places will slowly empty, like Detroit, and there is virtually nothing we can do about it.
    The population of Glasgow has been slowly rising (coincidentally since 2007).
    The population of Dublin increased markedly during the Irish Famine, because of all the starvelings who gathered there, waiting to take ship for the New World.

    Similarly, metropolitan Glasgow can expect a very temporary surge in population, as most of Scotland clusters by its taxi ranks and bus stations, eager to escape south for sunny southern England, basking under perpetual Tory rule.

    By 2035 Glasgow will be reduced to a small kiosk selling deep fried Snickers to retching Chinese tourists. You read it here first.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,062

    Byronic said:



    That Marxist interpretation just doesn’t square with reality though. If anything we have seen the growth of the ‘comfortable classes’, outside of maybe London. School teachers, nurses, fireman etc have a pretty fine standard of living.

    But, for example, in my town North Wales, they are shutting schools and small local hospitals. They have shut the magistrates court. The nearest fire station is 21 miles way, the nearest police station is 43 miles away (though over an hour by road).

    There are hollowed-out areas of the country where there are few jobs like teachers, nurses, firemen actually left. People with those jobs may have a "pretty fine standard of living" if they still existed.

    The town survives, barely. There has been no growth in "the comfortable classes".

    What utter drivel. I’m willing to guess that your area of north wales has more teachers and nurses than ever before and has more police and fireman than it did twenty years ago. The only reason they would shut a school would be a stagnant population or to reopen a new school.

    As a special request, can I please ask you to put yourself forward to write labour’s next election manifesto.
    Something that is not often realised - many of the mining and industrial towns expanded massively in the 1860-1900 period.

    Aberfan for example was a tiny village in 1866. A town of 5000 in 1966.
    My paternal ancestors came to The Valleys from all over SW Wales. All in one colliery town in 1911 and all colliers of some sort; scattered throughout Ceredigion, Pembrokeshire and Carmarthenshire, and all farmworkers 50 years earlier.
    Much of post-industrial Britain - Wales, Lancashire, the North East, Glasgow - is way overpopulated in relation to its climate. People went there for jobs, the jobs have gone, the drizzle remains.

    These places will slowly empty, like Detroit, and there is virtually nothing we can do about it.
    The population of Glasgow has been slowly rising (coincidentally since 2007).
    You could not make it up, deluded does not begin to come near. Another M25 expert talks out his erchie.
  • Options
    twistedfirestopper3twistedfirestopper3 Posts: 2,086
    edited December 2019

    Another factor that hasn’t been brought into play much is Starmer’s past role as the DPP. I suspect the newspapers would be able to dig some stuff up around historic decisions not to prosecute etc if they wanted - probably completely unfairly (it’s one of those thankless jobs where you’re damned either way).

    One of the imports from American politics is attempts to fit the UK to American political narratives - I have heard a number of people describing the justice system as institutionally racist because of the profile of the prison population. I am quite sure that the Maomentum types would go down that route - see Kamela Harris etc...
    I can’t wait. Workington man generally doesn’t even see the intense culture wars around transgender and pronouns etc. Wait until the full horror of this sick identity based woke nonsense starts to cut through. At the moment he’s just wondering why every family on tv is either mixed race or black with a gay son.
    Shit the bed, if that's the North, it needs napalming.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,728

    isam said:

    .

    Stocky said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Stocky said:

    Stocky said:

    kinabalu said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Labour leadership contest seems to have taken Xmas and NY off.

    Not Nandy. She's giving it some.
    She knows she has ground to make up. She ticks a few boxes: female, northern, but under the rules she will find it hard to get onto the ballot. She needs a union to come out for her. Unlikely.

    A lay at current prices.

    RLB strong favourite.

    Not strong favourite. Or shouldn’t be. The far left is clearly split on her candidacy, hence Clive Lewis and Ian Lavery talking about entering.

    Funny you should mention Ian Lavery - I had a few speculative quid on him at 130/1 yesterday with Ladbrokes.

    I do think though that it will be difficult for any candidate to beat RLB, who is the Corbyn anointed one.

    I am not so sure. She’ll probably have Momentum and Unite behind her, which will bring huge advantages, but my guess is that Starmer will run her close.

    Hope you're completely wrong, I have laid them both

    If Rayner runs she’ll win. If not, it will be close between RLB and Starmer. I can’t see anyone else having a sniff, especially given the nomination process.

    What % chance would you say it is that either Starmer or RLB wins?

    If Long Bailey is running it means Rayner won’t be. I’d give her a 55% chance in a straight fight v Starmer. I’d give Starmer a 15% chance at best v Rayner.

    Yes I don’t rate Starmers chances of winning this contest at all. A man is really going to struggle this time round.

    He’s possibly value for leader after next if RLB does an IDS.
    I am surprised a man would even stand in the Labour leader contest.
    Why? Because a man has no chance?
    Just because they see themselves as the party of equality etc, and they've never had a female leader. I would have thought a man who was thinking of running would make a high profile decision to stand aside to let a woman have a better chance
    Ladies first? Positively antideluvian. Should he hold the door open for her as well?
    Ladies 20th actually, given there have been 19 male leaders of the Labour Party already.
  • Options
    ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578
    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Floater said:

    malcolmg said:

    Jonathan said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    FF43 said:



    SNIP

    As a somo better than that?

    I have always said that the SNP have gone about this the dence now is a vote for considerable hardship.
    David, how do you build anything when the vast majority of your budget is determined by and controlled by Westminster. The SNP have virtually what London wants.
    ...

    Why would it not do as well as similarly sized, located and resourced countries like Ireland, Norway and Denmark?
    I agree - Though there would be sacrifices,on the weaponisation of people's most negative instincts.
    SNIP
    Scotland voted YES.
    Based on it being only way to stay in the EU and on a shedload of promises, all BROKEN, usual lies and cheating the mugs get every time.
    So, you appear to be stating that if you leave the UK you leave the EU.

    You had better play nice with Spain then....
    Spain is not a problem. There is a constitutional way for Scotland to leave the UK. There is no constitutional way for Catalonia to leave Spain.
    Yes there is, by constitutional amendmemt just the Federal Spanish government is unlikely to agree that and simply arrested Catalan nationalists when they held an illegal referendum and declared UDI

    The Spanish government, like the UK government, doesn’t arrest anyone.

    The Spanish police and civil guard arrested Catalan nationalists on behalf of the Spanish government if they had not already fled into exile
    Tories would absolutely love to be able to arrest SNP members just like their fascist pals in Spain.
    Are you on the fortified wine again ?
    F off you moron, if you are unable to post something intelligent beggar off. Don't class other people like yourself.
    You seem to be in an unusually benign mood this afternoon, malcy. What's got you so cheerful?
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,062

    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Floater said:

    malcolmg said:

    Jonathan said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    FF43 said:



    SNIP

    As a somewhat convicted unionist, I wonder if our energies are better spent trying to make a success of independence rather than arguing about process. Brexit is an example to avoid I think. Not only is it a bad idea from my point of view, but Leavers/Tories are going about it in the most cackhanded, divisive and destructive way possible. Can't we do better than that?

    I have always said that the SNP have gone about this the dence now is a vote for considerable hardship.
    David, how do you build anything when the vast majority of your budget is determined by and controlled by Westminster. The SNP have virtually what London wants.
    ...

    Why would it not do as well as similarly sized, located and resourced countries like Ireland, Norway and Denmark?
    I agree - Though there would be sacrifices,on the weaponisation of people's most negative instincts.
    You can only treat people like crap for so long , even the weakest will get a backbone at some point. Completely shutting Scotland out of Brexit etc and taking back the powers was the final insult, we are not dogs to be ordered about.
    Scotland voted YES.
    Based on it being only way to stay in the EU and on a shedload of promises, all BROKEN, usual lies and cheating the mugs get every time.
    So, you appear to be stating that if you leave the UK you leave the EU.

    You had better play nice with Spain then....
    Spain is not a problem. There is a constitutional way for Scotland to leave the UK. There is no constitutional way for Catalonia to leave Spain.
    :

    The Spanish government, like the UK government, doesn’t arrest anyone.

    The Spanish police and civil guard arrested Catalan nationalists on behalf of the Spanish government if they had not already fled into exile
    Tories would absolutely love to be able to arrest SNP members just like their fascist pals in Spain.
    I have never met anyone who wants to arrest SNP members - consider some of the blossoms we have tolerated in politics in this country. The Chuckle Brothers for example....
    Anybody that thinks what is happening in Spain re politics is fine and dandy is a fascist for sure.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,062

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    When a second referendum comes, there will be a pretty straightforward menu, and separation will be the less appetising and considerably more expensive option. Many Scots are angry, but they're nobody's fool. It will fail narrowly again. And again.

    However, hanging together by a thread because the alternative is worse is not really a way forward for any country. It leaves deep resentments (as winning the last one did). We need to be brought together. That's a Britain wide project, not a Scottish project. For what it's worth, the Government seems to be stumbling in the right direction with aspects of its domestic agenda.

    You see something that I don't , there has been precious little sign of them looking to change their attitude on Scotland to date.
    WE will hear plenty of rhetoric but it will be the same old soft soap.
    I don't think they've necessarily changed their attitude toward Scotland specifically, but this seems like a very important step: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/business-50925321

    The Tories are now a party of the regions. Even if you feel they are utterly amoral, their very parliamentary make up now forces them to develop areas beyond London.
    They got gubbed in Scotland, no incentive to do anything even if they wanted to. I will not hold my breath waiting on them building any decent infrastructure.
    Scotland has many marginal seats and Labour is nowhere. All to play for.

    But I agree, we'll soon see if it's all hot air or not.
    Yes only time will tell, there have been many false dawns.
  • Options
    ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578

    Byronic said:

    Byronic said:

    isam said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    Stocky said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    In that case Starmer fails on both fronts: he is neither idologically pure nor electorally appealing.
    Byronic said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    He also has the televisual charisma of a Victorian coffin lid. And he's an awful speaker.
    Have to say I am baffled as to why he is so short in the betting, and what appeal people think he has that will win back voters who like either Boris or Corbyn
    I think the wish is father to the thought. Moderate Labourites are DESPERATE for a sane, consensual, centrist leader, who looks very roughly like the kind of Labour leader that did OK in the past (Blair, Brown, Smith, etc).

    Starmer looks like them. Middle class middle aged man, not obviously stupid or a Marxist. Able to walk unaided. Has progressive politics of a modest sort.

    Labour's need is so great, Starmer will do.

    To beCameron.

    However I also agree with the commenters that it is very likely to be a woman, this time.

    My preferred candidate is Lisa Nandy. I just can’t see her getting into the contest.

    One thiness is a start.

    Scotland is gone. That’s why it’s so important the next Labour leader does not frighten potential LibDem voters in England (and Wales). Labour is not going to win a majority, but could be the biggest part of an alliance - formal or informal - that deprives the Tories of a majority.

    I don't understand this defeatism. Scotland is not going to become a Tory country any day soon, if ever. The SNP cannot rule eternally (especially if they either lose a referendum, or they implode in the absence of one).

    Labour need to be ready to seize the moment. Just giving up on the country is mad,

    The rot of fatalism is deep in Labour's psyche.
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,027
    Byronic said:



    That Marxist interpretation just doesn’t square with reality though. If anything we have seen the growth of the ‘comfortable classes’, outside of maybe London. School teachers, nurses, fireman etc have a pretty fine standard of living.

    But, for example, in my town North Wales, they are shutting schools and small local hospitals. They have shut the magistrates court. The nearest fire station is 21 miles way, the nearest police station is 43 miles away (though over an hour by road).

    There are hollowed-out areas of the country where there are few jobs like teachers, nurses, firemen actually left. People with those jobs may have a "pretty fine standard of living" if they still existed.

    The town survives, barely. There has been no growth in "the comfortable classes".

    What utter drivel. I’m willing to guess that your area of north wales has more teachers and nurses than ever before and has more police and fireman than it did twenty years ago. The only reason they would shut a school would be a stagnant population or to reopen a new school.

    As a special request, can I please ask you to put yourself forward to write labour’s next election manifesto.
    Something that is not often realised - many of the mining and industrial towns expanded massively in the 1860-1900 period.

    Aberfan for example was a tiny village in 1866. A town of 5000 in 1966.
    My paternal ancestors came to The Valleys from all over SW Wales. All in one colliery town in 1911 and all colliers of some sort; scattered throughout Ceredigion, Pembrokeshire and Carmarthenshire, and all farmworkers 50 years earlier.
    Much of post-industrial Britain - Wales, Lancashire, the North East, Glasgow - is way overpopulated in relation to its climate. People went there for jobs, the jobs have gone, the drizzle remains.

    These places will slowly empty, like Detroit, and there is virtually nothing we can do about it.
    None of the cousins, second cousins etc that I know about now live in SE Wales. We’re scattered throughout the world.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,093
    Byronic said:

    Byronic said:

    isam said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    Stocky said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    In that case Starmer fails on both fronts: he is neither idologically pure nor electorally appealing.
    Byronic said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    He also has the televisual charisma of a Victorian coffin lid. And he's an awful speaker.
    Have to say I am baffled as to why he is so short in the betting, and what appeal people think he has that will win back voters who like either Boris or Corbyn
    I think the wish is father to the thought. Moderate Labourites are DESPERATE for a sane, consensual, centrist leader, who looks very roughly hat it is very likely to be a woman, this time.

    My preferred candidate is Lisa Nandy. I just can’t see her getting into the contest.

    One thing Labour urgently need is a leader who might win back Scotland.

    Unless Scotland goes indy (which I very much doubt) then the SNP will eventually tumble; no party can defy gravity forever (and the SNP have done amazingly well to get this far).

    This descent might happen sooner than we all think. Sturgeon has been around a long time, there's a nasty rape trial coming up..... who knows. She could rule Scotland for another decade, or she could be gone by April, with her party facing decline.

    So Labour need to have a leader able to take advantage, because without Scotland they will find it hard to win, ever.

    I can't see Starmer being that leader. But who is? Nandy seems nice but ineffectual. But maybe niceness is a start.
    I can't see Labour beating back the SNP in Glasgow and the more ex industrial parts of the central belt anytime soon, Glasgow remember even voted for independence in 2014.

    The Scottish Tories have done well but probably have a ceiling of about 30% concentrated mainly in rural Scotland, in fact the Scottish LDs may be best placed to challenge the SNP being pro Union and pro close ties to the EU, a ticket that could win back Edinburgh, Aberdeen and much of Scottish suburbia from the SNP
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,062
    Byronic said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Floater said:

    malcolmg said:

    Jonathan said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    FF43 said:



    SNIP

    As a somo better than that?

    I have always said that the SNP have gone about this the dence now is a vote for considerable hardship.
    David, how do you build anything when the vast majority of your budget is determined by and controlled by Westminster. The SNP have virtually what London wants.
    ...

    Why would it not do as well as similarly sized, located and resourced countries like Ireland, Norway and Denmark?
    I agree - Though there would be sacrifices,on the weaponisation of people's most negative instincts.
    SNIP
    Scotland voted YES.
    Based on it being only way to stay in the EU and on a shedload of promises, all BROKEN, usual lies and cheating the mugs get every time.
    So, you appear to be stating that if you leave the UK you leave the EU.

    You had better play nice with Spain then....
    Spain is not a problem. There is a constitutional way for Scotland to leave the UK. There is no constitutional way for Catalonia to leave Spain.
    Yes there is, by constitutional amendmemt just the Federal Spanish government is unlikely to agree that and simply arrested Catalan nationalists when they held an illegal referendum and declared UDI

    The Spanish government, like the UK government, doesn’t arrest anyone.

    The Spanish police and civil guard arrested Catalan nationalists on behalf of the Spanish government if they had not already fled into exile
    Tories would absolutely love to be able to arrest SNP members just like their fascist pals in Spain.
    Are you on the fortified wine again ?
    F off you moron, if you are unable to post something intelligent beggar off. Don't class other people like yourself.
    You seem to be in an unusually benign mood this afternoon, malcy. What's got you so cheerful?
    I am still ill, that is over 7 days now, my wife has been laid up for 4 days, I have almost coughed my brains out, next to no sleep , had 1 meal in that time and not had a drink for 8 days either. Therefore I am a bit grumpy to put it mildly. We shall improve , hopefully.
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,496


    Ladies 20th actually, given there have been 19 male leaders of the Labour Party already.

    I agree it's about time. But it should (and I think will?) happen without male candidates patronisingly stepping aside.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,728

    Another factor that hasn’t been brought into play much is Starmer’s past role as the DPP. I suspect the newspapers would be able to dig some stuff up around historic decisions not to prosecute etc if they wanted - probably completely unfairly (it’s one of those thankless jobs where you’re damned either way).

    One of the imports from American politics is attempts to fit the UK to American political narratives - I have heard a number of people describing the justice system as institutionally racist because of the profile of the prison population. I am quite sure that the Maomentum types would go down that route - see Kamela Harris etc...
    I can’t wait. Workington man generally doesn’t even see the intense culture wars around transgender and pronouns etc. Wait until the full horror of this sick identity based woke nonsense starts to cut through. At the moment he’s just wondering why every family on tv is either mixed race or black with a gay son.
    I can’t speak for Workington man, never having been there, but most of the north is very cosmopolitan, diverse and inclusive these days in my experience.
  • Options



    That Marxist interpretation just doesn’t square with reality though. If anything we have seen the growth of the ‘comfortable classes’, outside of maybe London. School teachers, nurses, fireman etc have a pretty fine standard of living.

    But, for example, in my town North Wales, they are shutting schools and small local hospitals. They have shut the magistrates court. The nearest fire station is 21 miles way, the nearest police station is 43 miles away (though over an hour by road).

    There are hollowed-out areas of the country where there are few jobs like teachers, nurses, firemen actually left. People with those jobs may have a "pretty fine standard of living" if they still existed.

    The town survives, barely. There has been no growth in "the comfortable classes".

    What utter drivel. I’m willing to guess that your area of north wales has more teachers and nurses than ever before and has more police and fireman than it did twenty years ago. The only reason they would shut a school would be a stagnant population or to reopen a new school.

    As a special request, can I please ask you to put yourself forward to write labour’s next election manifesto.
    I have the unfortunate task of telling you that your post is "utter drivel". Firefighter numbers are down around 11000 in England and Wales since 2010. The Fire Service in general is on its arse, with the majority of Fire Services understaffed and in need of increased funding. The recent round of HMICFRS audits has been scathing.
    https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fires_in_the_UK.png

    As ever, hard numbers are interesting. The reason for the drop in fires is apparently due to

    1) Working out of the system of beds and sofas that don't meet the newer standards for fire safety.
    2) The spread of modern circuit breaker boxes.
    3) The reduction in smoking acceptability - even those who still smoke are much more likely to go outside now.
    I don't deny it. Cars are safer, modern buildings are in general less likely to catch fire and we fit smoke detectors like there's no tomorrow, but less firefighters mean a slower, lighter weight of attack which results in unnecessary loss of life and property. Then you have the flooding (not in our role map and we don't get funded for it) which is only going to get worse. We have had a few close shaves due to cuts, and one day we'll get bit on the arse.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,610
    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    malcolmg said:

    Jonathan said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    FF43 said:

    DavidL said:

    I have not been able to find any predictions back as far as 2010.

    [... Other interesting predictions, some of which I share ...]

    If there's another referendum, I am confident independence will win. There isn't
    I have always said that the SNP have gone e now is a vote for considerable hardship.
    They have proven they have no intention of improving Scotland's lot and only way we ever get better is to raise our own taxes and spend it on what we want , not what London wants.
    ...

    Why would it not do as well as similarly sized, located and resourced countries like Ireland, Norway and Denmark?
    SNIP
    You can only treat people like crap for so long , even the weakest will get a backbone at some point. Completely shutting Scotland out of Brexit etc and taking back the powers was the final insult, we are not dogs to be ordered about.
    Scotland voted YES.
    You are forgetting @Jonathan that ‘my’ side is the whole nation/people, the others are… not to be considered.
    Unionists are scared to ask the people, that is the issue, they prefer to deny democracy, not for themselves but for others.
    If you are so confident why not have the vote and kill it, methinks I know why.
    We had the vote in 2014, Scots voted No after separatists promised it was a once in a generation referendum.

    The Tories won a majority on a manifesto commitment to ban indyref2 for their full 5 year term and have made clear they will stick to that promise in Government no matter how many toys Sturgeon throws out of her pram
    They went backward, though, in both votes and seats in the part of the country most affected. IMHO it's asking for trouble to effectively give a V sign to the voters who didn't vote for you. Which ever way round you have the fingers.
    54% of Scots voted for Unionist parties and the Tories won a majority across the UK with a manifesto commmitment to no indyref2.

    Boris has a mandate to tell Nicola Sturgeon to sod off and he will
    Democracy in action Tory style , brown shirts and jackboots.
    Tbf, you lot voted for the Tory jackboot in 2014, can't blame us for that.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,728


    Ladies 20th actually, given there have been 19 male leaders of the Labour Party already.

    I agree it's about time. But it should (and I think will?) happen without male candidates patronisingly stepping aside.
    Bloody hell that’s twice we’ve agreed - you’re obviously a reformed character!
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,504
    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Floater said:

    malcolmg said:

    Jonathan said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    FF43 said:



    :

    I have always said that the SNP have gone about this the dence now is a vote for considerable hardship.
    David, how do you build anything when the vast majority of your budget is determined by and controlled by Westminster. The SNP have virtually what London wants.
    ...

    Why would it not do as well as similarly sized, located and resourced countries like Ireland, Norway and Denmark?
    I agree - Though there would be sacrifices,on the weaponisation of people's most negative instincts.
    You can only treat people like crap for so long , even the weakest will get a backbone at some point. Completely shutting Scotland out of Brexit etc and taking back the powers was the final insult, we are not dogs to be ordered about.
    Scotland voted YES.
    Based on it being only way to stay in the EU and on a shedload of promises, all BROKEN, usual lies and cheating the mugs get every time.
    So, you appear to be stating that if you leave the UK you leave the EU.

    You had better play nice with Spain then....
    :
    :

    The Spanish government, like the UK government, doesn’t arrest anyone.

    The Spanish police and civil guard arrested Catalan nationalists on behalf of the Spanish government if they had not already fled into exile
    Tories would absolutely love to be able to arrest SNP members just like their fascist pals in Spain.
    I have never met anyone who wants to arrest SNP members - consider some of the blossoms we have tolerated in politics in this country. The Chuckle Brothers for example....
    Anybody that thinks what is happening in Spain re politics is fine and dandy is a fascist for sure.
    Most people are un-aware of what is happening in Spain. Those that are, are somewhere between WTF and disbelief.

    To most people in the UK, Spain is a nice sunny place where they go on holiday. The locals are pleasant, and they have happy memories of the place. The idea that the police and the government are arresting people for holding a vote doesn't compute with what they know.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,093
    Byronic said:

    isam said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    Stocky said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    In that case Starmer fails on both fronts: he is neither idologically pure nor electorally appealing.
    Byronic said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    He also has the televisual charisma of a Victorian coffin lid. And he's an awful speaker.
    Have to say I am baffled as to why he is so short in the betting, and what appeal people think he has that will win back voters who like either Boris or Corbyn
    I think the wish is father to the thought. Moderate Labourites are DESPERATE for a sane, consensual, centrist leader, who looks very roughly like the kind of Labour leader that did OK in the past (Blair, Brown, Smith, etc).

    Starmer looks like them. Middle class middle aged man, not obviously stupid or a Marxist. Able to walk unaided. Has progressive politics of a modest sort.

    Labour's need is so great, Starmer will do.

    To be fair to them, I can see Starmer as a Michael Howard figure. Steadying the ship, slowly rebuilding the party, boring the nutters til they leave or go quiet. Then, after another defeat, Labour could find and elect their Cameron.

    However I also agree with the commenters that it is very likely to be a woman, this time.

    Yes, remember after the Tories pass the boundary changes they will have a majority of 102 ie identical to Thatcher's 1987 win and the biggest majority for any Government since the Blair government of 2001 to 2005.

    Labour are now thus really looking for a Kinnock or Howard figure before they get to a Blair or Cameron
  • Options
    ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578
    malcolmg said:

    Byronic said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Floater said:

    malcolmg said:

    Jonathan said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    FF43 said:



    SNIP

    As a somo better than that?

    I have always said that the SNP have gone about this the dence now is a vote for considerable hardship.
    Davidster. The SNP have virtually what London wants.
    ...

    Why would it not do as well as similarly sized, located and resourced countries like Ireland, Norway and Denmark?
    I agree - Though there would be sacrifices,on the weaponisation of people's most negative instincts.
    SNIP
    Scotland voted YES.
    Based on it being only way to stay in the EU and on a shedload of promises, all BROKEN, usual lies and cheating the mugs get every time.
    So, you appear to be stating that if you leave the UK you leave the EU.

    You had better play nice with Spain then....
    Spain is not a problem. There is a constitutional way for Scotland to leave the UK. There is no constitutional way for Catalonia to leave Spain.
    Yes td UDI

    The Spanish government, like the UK government, doesn’t arrest anyone.

    The Spanish police and civil guard arrested Catalan nationalists on behalf of the Spanish government if they had not already fled into exile
    Tories would absolutely love to be able to arrest SNP members just like their fascist pals in Spain.
    Are you on the fortified wine again ?
    F off you moron, if you are unable to post something intelligent beggar off. Don't class other people like yourself.
    You seem to be in an unusually benign mood this afternoon, malcy. What's got you so cheerful?
    I am still ill, that is over 7 days now, my wife has been laid up for 4 days, I have almost coughed my brains out, next to no sleep , had 1 meal in that time and not had a drink for 8 days either. Therefore I am a bit grumpy to put it mildly. We shall improve , hopefully.
    Ah, mate. that's not nice

    At least you will be glamorously thin at the end.

  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,027



    That Marxist interpretation just doesn’t square with reality though. If anything we have seen the growth of the ‘comfortable classes’, outside of maybe London. School teachers, nurses, fireman etc have a pretty fine standard of living.

    But, for example, in my town North Wales, they are shutting schools and small local hospitals. They have shut the magistrates court. The nearest fire station is 21 miles way, the nearest police station is 43 miles away (though over an

    The town survives, barely. There has been no growth in "the comfortable classes".

    What utter drivel. I’m willing to guess that your area of north wales has more teachers and nurses than ever before and has more police and fireman than it did twenty years ago. The only reason they would shut a school would be a stagnant population or to reopen a new school.

    As a special request, can I please ask you to put yourself forward to write labour’s next election manifesto.
    I have the unfortunate task of telling you that your post is "utter drivel". Firefighter numbers are down around 11000 in England and Wales since 2010. The Fire Service in general is on its arse, with the majority of Fire Services understaffed and in need of increased funding. The recent round of HMICFRS audits has been scathing.
    https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fires_in_the_UK.png

    As ever, hard numbers are interesting. The reason for the drop in fires is apparently due to

    1) Working out of the system of beds and sofas that don't meet the newer standards for fire safety.
    2) The spread of modern circuit breaker boxes.
    3) The reduction in smoking acceptability - even those who still smoke are much more likely to go outside now.
    The Essex Fire & Rescue has done a lot of work on prevention. Always better than cure.
  • Options
    YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    Barnesian said:

    Starmer has a hugely greater intellect in my opinion and will handle interviews far better than RLB (as we have seen in the past).
    If Labour is to have a good chance of being returned to power in 2024 (or possibly earlier), they need to choose Starmer, if not RLB will ensure another defeat ... the British electorate will not accept another left-wing Corbynite, simples really.

    She is continuity Corbyn but even worse, presentationally she is appalling. She has an unfortunate issue (in the same way Corbyn always looks grumpy and Priti Patel looks a tad too pleased with herself) of looking perpetually confused.

    (Note I am giving her the benefit of the doubt and saying she looks perpetually confused rather than actually being perpetually confused. Your mileage may vary).
    I like Jess Phillip's look. She looks cheeky and confident and can show passion. She could be a match for Johnson. I can't think of any other contender who would be. The look matters.
    She is God-awful. She is the worst kind of politician, self promoting and unprincipled.

    She could be a Tony Blair for our times, but I think the temper of the times is not amenable to the charms of another Blair. A New Tony Blair could not do now what Blair did then. The past is another country.

    If Labour want a verbal match for Johnson, then Angela Rayner is best. If they want a thoughtful resetting of the party, then Lisa Nandy is best.

    If they want a full-scale civil war, then Jess Phillips is best. And if they want a woodentop, then Keir Starmer is best.
  • Options
    NorthernPowerhouseNorthernPowerhouse Posts: 557
    edited December 2019



    That Marxist interpretation just doesn’t square with reality though. If anything we have seen the growth of the ‘comfortable classes’, outside of maybe London. School teachers, nurses, fireman etc have a pretty fine standard of living.

    But, for example, in my town North Wales, they are shutting schools and small local hospitals. They have shut the magistrates court. The nearest fire station is 21 miles way, the nearest police station is 43 miles away (though over an hour by road).

    There are hollowed-out areas of the country where there are few jobs like teachers, nurses, firemen actually left. People with those jobs may have a "pretty fine standard of living" if they still existed.

    The town survives, barely. There has been no growth in "the comfortable classes".

    What utter drivel. I’m willing to guess that your area of north wales has more teachers and nurses than ever before and has more police and fireman than it did twenty years ago. The only reason they would shut a school would be a stagnant population or to reopen a new school.

    As a special request, can I please ask you to put yourself forward to write labour’s next election manifesto.
    I have the unfortunate task of telling you that your post is "utter drivel". Firefighter numbers are down around 11000 in England and Wales since 2010. The Fire Service in general is on its arse, with the majority of Fire Services understaffed and in need of increased funding. The recent round of HMICFRS audits has been scathing.
    Increased increased increased funding blah blah blah. The fire service have very little to do now other than twiddle thumbs. And I made the point that numbers are akin to twenty years ago not ten. Through technology and regulation fires are extraordinarily rare and crews are left with very little to do. But what do I know... I was only a company director of a regional fire control centre.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,062
    Byronic said:

    malcolmg said:

    Byronic said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Floater said:

    malcolmg said:

    Jonathan said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    FF43 said:



    SNIP

    As a somo better than that?

    Davidster. The SNP have virtually what London wants.
    ...

    I agree - Though there would be sacrifices,on the weaponisation of people's most negative instincts.
    SNIP
    Scotland voted YES.
    Based on it being only way to stay in the EU and on a shedload of promises, all BROKEN, usual lies and cheating the mugs get every time.
    So, you appear to be stating that if you leave the UK you leave the EU.

    You had better play nice with Spain then....
    Spain is not a problem. There is a constitutional way for Scotland to leave the UK. There is no constitutional way for Catalonia to leave Spain.
    Yes td UDI

    The Spanish government, like the UK government, doesn’t arrest anyone.

    The Spanish police and civil guard arrested Catalan nationalists on behalf of the Spanish government if they had not already fled into exile
    Tories would absolutely love to be able to arrest SNP members just like their fascist pals in Spain.
    Are you on the fortified wine again ?
    F off you moron, if you are unable to post something intelligent beggar off. Don't class other people like yourself.
    You seem to be in an unusually benign mood this afternoon, malcy. What's got you so cheerful?
    I am still ill, that is over 7 days now, my wife has been laid up for 4 days, I have almost coughed my brains out, next to no sleep , had 1 meal in that time and not had a drink for 8 days either. Therefore I am a bit grumpy to put it mildly. We shall improve , hopefully.
    Ah, mate. that's not nice

    At least you will be glamorously thin at the end.

    The only silver lining for sure, I am down to a mountain already. At least my face is healing up, though my black eye is still a cracker , it is at least open now.
  • Options



    That Marxist interpretation just doesn’t square with reality though. If anything we have seen the growth of the ‘comfortable classes’, outside of maybe London. School teachers, nurses, fireman etc have a pretty fine standard of living.

    But, for example, in my town North Wales, they are shutting schools and small local hospitals. They have shut the magistrates court. The nearest fire station is 21 miles way, the nearest police station is 43 miles away (though over an hour by road).

    There are hollowed-out areas of the country where there are few jobs like teachers, nurses, firemen actually left. People with those jobs may have a "pretty fine standard of living" if they still existed.

    The town survives, barely. There has been no growth in "the comfortable classes".

    What utter drivel. I’m willing to guess that your area of north wales has more teachers and nurses than ever before and has more police and fireman than it did twenty years ago. The only reason they would shut a school would be a stagnant population or to reopen a new school.

    As a special request, can I please ask you to put yourself forward to write labour’s next election manifesto.
    I have the unfortunate task of telling you that your post is "utter drivel". Firefighter numbers are down around 11000 in England and Wales since 2010. The Fire Service in general is on its arse, with the majority of Fire Services understaffed and in need of increased funding. The recent round of HMICFRS audits has been scathing.
    Increased increased increased funding blah blah blah. The fire service have very little to do now other than twiddle thumbs. And I made the point that numbers are akin to twenty years ago not ten. Through technology and regulation fires are extraordinarily rare and it was
    You genuinely have no idea what you are talking about. I can't help you.
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,027
    Byronic said:

    malcolmg said:

    Byronic said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Floater said:

    malcolmg said:

    Jonathan said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    FF43 said:



    SNIP

    As a somo better than that?

    I have always said that the SNP have gone about this the dence now is a vote for considerable hardship.
    Davidster. The SNP have virtually what London wants.
    ...

    Why would it not do as well as similarly sized, located and resourced countries like Ireland, Norway and Denmark?
    I agree - Though there would be sacrifices,on the weaponisation of people's most negative instincts.
    SNIP
    Scotland voted YES.
    Based on it being only way to stay in the EU and on a shedload of promises, all BROKEN, usual lies and cheating the mugs get every time.
    So, you appear to be stating that if you leave the UK you leave the EU.

    You had better play nice with Spain then....
    Spain is not a problem. There is a constitutional way for Scotland to leave the UK. There is no constitutional way for Catalonia to leave Spain.
    Yes td UDI

    The Spanish government, like the UK government, doesn’t arrest anyone.

    The Spanish police and civil guard arrested Catalan nationalists on behalf of the Spanish government if they had not already fled into exile
    Tories would absolutely love to be able to arrest SNP members just like their fascist pals in Spain.
    Are you on the fortified wine again ?
    F off you moron, if you are unable to post something intelligent beggar off. Don't class other people like yourself.
    You seem to be in an unusually benign mood this afternoon, malcy. What's got you so cheerful?
    I am still ill, that is over 7 days now, my wife has been laid up for 4 days, I have almost coughed my brains out, next to no sleep , had 1 meal in that time and not had a drink for 8 days either. Therefore I am a bit grumpy to put it mildly. We shall improve , hopefully.
    Ah, mate. that's not nice

    At least you will be glamorously thin at the end.

    Wish you well, especially with Hogmanay approaching.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,728
    HYUFD said:

    Byronic said:

    isam said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    Stocky said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    In that case Starmer fails on both fronts: he is neither idologically pure nor electorally appealing.
    Byronic said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    He also has the televisual charisma of a Victorian coffin lid. And he's an awful speaker.
    Have to say I am baffled as to why he is so short in the betting, and what appeal people think he has that will win back voters who like either Boris or Corbyn
    I think the wish is father to the thought. Moderate Labourites are DESPERATE for a sane, consensual, centrist leader, who looks very roughly like the kind of Labour leader that did OK in the past (Blair, Brown, Smith, etc).

    Starmer looks like them. Middle class middle aged man, not obviously stupid or a Marxist. Able to walk unaided. Has progressive politics of a modest sort.

    Labour's need is so great, Starmer will do.

    To be fair to them, I can see Starmer as a Michael Howard figure. Steadying the ship, slowly rebuilding the party, boring the nutters til they leave or go quiet. Then, after another defeat, Labour could find and elect their Cameron.

    However I also agree with the commenters that it is very likely to be a woman, this time.

    Yes, remember after the Tories pass the boundary changes they will have a majority of 102 ie identical to Thatcher's 1987 win and the biggest majority for any Government since the Blair government of 2001 to 2005.

    Labour are now thus really looking for a Kinnock or Howard figure before they get to a Blair or Cameron
    They won’t have a majority of 102 unless they win it in a future election.
  • Options
    Finally, a modicum of realism from PB Tories accepting that the SCons haven't a scooby of managing anything important in Scotland. Pinning their Unionist hopes on SLab and the SLDs is pretty hilarious though.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,504



    That Marxist interpretation just doesn’t square with reality though. If anything we have seen the growth of the ‘comfortable classes’, outside of maybe London. School teachers, nurses, fireman etc have a pretty fine standard of living.

    :

    What utter drivel. I’m willing to guess that your area of north wales has more teachers and nurses than ever before and has more police and fireman than it did twenty years ago. The only reason they would shut a school would be a stagnant population or to reopen a new school.

    As a special request, can I please ask you to put yourself forward to write labour’s next election manifesto.
    I have the unfortunate task of telling you that your post is "utter drivel". Firefighter numbers are down around 11000 in England and Wales since 2010. The Fire Service in general is on its arse, with the majority of Fire Services understaffed and in need of increased funding. The recent round of HMICFRS audits has been scathing.
    https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fires_in_the_UK.png

    As ever, hard numbers are interesting. The reason for the drop in fires is apparently due to

    1) Working out of the system of beds and sofas that don't meet the newer standards for fire safety.
    2) The spread of modern circuit breaker boxes.
    3) The reduction in smoking acceptability - even those who still smoke are much more likely to go outside now.
    I don't deny it. Cars are safer, modern buildings are in general less likely to catch fire and we fit smoke detectors like there's no tomorrow, but less firefighters mean a slower, lighter weight of attack which results in unnecessary loss of life and property. Then you have the flooding (not in our role map and we don't get funded for it) which is only going to get worse. We have had a few close shaves due to cuts, and one day we'll get bit on the arse.
    The biggest issue with flooding is that from 1997 onwards there were massive pull back from actually managing waterways properly. Justified in the name of environmentalism. Some of this has been reversed as of late, but the bizarre belief that abandoning drainage is "good" is ingrained in some part of the system.

    The funding that remained was diverted into building "proper" offices etc, rather than spending money on that nasty muddy stuff.

    An exception has been the work done on canals.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,728

    Barnesian said:

    Starmer has a hugely greater intellect in my opinion and will handle interviews far better than RLB (as we have seen in the past).
    If Labour is to have a good chance of being returned to power in 2024 (or possibly earlier), they need to choose Starmer, if not RLB will ensure another defeat ... the British electorate will not accept another left-wing Corbynite, simples really.

    She is continuity Corbyn but even worse, presentationally she is appalling. She has an unfortunate issue (in the same way Corbyn always looks grumpy and Priti Patel looks a tad too pleased with herself) of looking perpetually confused.

    (Note I am giving her the benefit of the doubt and saying she looks perpetually confused rather than actually being perpetually confused. Your mileage may vary).
    I like Jess Phillip's look. She looks cheeky and confident and can show passion. She could be a match for Johnson. I can't think of any other contender who would be. The look matters.
    She is God-awful. She is the worst kind of politician, self promoting and unprincipled.

    She could be a Tony Blair for our times, but I think the temper of the times is not amenable to the charms of another Blair. A New Tony Blair could not do now what Blair did then. The past is another country.

    If Labour want a verbal match for Johnson, then Angela Rayner is best. If they want a thoughtful resetting of the party, then Lisa Nandy is best.

    If they want a full-scale civil war, then Jess Phillips is best. And if they want a woodentop, then Keir Starmer is best.
    Ha! “She is the worst kind of politician, self promoting and unprincipled.”

    Unlike Boris, eh?
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,062

    Byronic said:

    malcolmg said:

    Byronic said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Floater said:

    malcolmg said:

    Jonathan said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    FF43 said:



    SNIP

    As a somo better than that?

    Davidster. The SNP have virtually what London wants.
    ...

    Why would it not do as well as similarly sized, located and resourced countries like Ireland, Norway and Denmark?
    I agree - Though there would be sacrifices,on the weaponisation of people's most negative instincts.
    SNIP
    Scotland voted YES.
    Based on it being only way to stay in the EU and on a shedload of promises, all BROKEN, usual lies and cheating the mugs get every time.
    So, you appear to be stating that if you leave the UK you leave the EU.

    You had better play nice with Spain then....
    Spain is not a problem. There is a constitutional way for Scotland to leave the UK. There is no constitutional way for Catalonia to leave Spain.
    Yes td UDI

    The Spanish government, like the UK government, doesn’t arrest anyone.

    The Spanish police and civil guard arrested Catalan nationalists on behalf of the Spanish government if they had not already fled into exile
    Tories would absolutely love to be able to arrest SNP members just like their fascist pals in Spain.
    Are you on the fortified wine again ?
    F off you moron, if you are unable to post something intelligent beggar off. Don't class other people like yourself.
    You seem to be in an unusually benign mood this afternoon, malcy. What's got you so cheerful?
    I am still ill, that is over 7 days now, my wife has been laid up for 4 days, I have almost coughed my brains out, next to no sleep , had 1 meal in that time and not had a drink for 8 days either. Therefore I am a bit grumpy to put it mildly. We shall improve , hopefully.
    Ah, mate. that's not nice

    At least you will be glamorously thin at the end.

    Wish you well, especially with Hogmanay approaching.
    Thanks OKC, it will be a quiet one this year for sure
  • Options

    Barnesian said:

    Starmer has a hugely greater intellect in my opinion and will handle interviews far better than RLB (as we have seen in the past).
    If Labour is to have a good chance of being returned to power in 2024 (or possibly earlier), they need to choose Starmer, if not RLB will ensure another defeat ... the British electorate will not accept another left-wing Corbynite, simples really.

    She is continuity Corbyn but even worse, presentationally she is appalling. She has an unfortunate issue (in the same way Corbyn always looks grumpy and Priti Patel looks a tad too pleased with herself) of looking perpetually confused.

    (Note I am giving her the benefit of the doubt and saying she looks perpetually confused rather than actually being perpetually confused. Your mileage may vary).
    I like Jess Phillip's look. She looks cheeky and confident and can show passion. She could be a match for Johnson. I can't think of any other contender who would be. The look matters.
    She is God-awful. She is the worst kind of politician, self promoting and unprincipled.

    She could be a Tony Blair for our times, but I think the temper of the times is not amenable to the charms of another Blair. A New Tony Blair could not do now what Blair did then. The past is another country.

    If Labour want a verbal match for Johnson, then Angela Rayner is best. If they want a thoughtful resetting of the party, then Lisa Nandy is best.

    If they want a full-scale civil war, then Jess Phillips is best. And if they want a woodentop, then Keir Starmer is best.
    On this we agree. She just emotes.
  • Options
    ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578

    Finally, a modicum of realism from PB Tories accepting that the SCons haven't a scooby of managing anything important in Scotland. Pinning their Unionist hopes on SLab and the SLDs is pretty hilarious though.

    Indulge me:

    Let's say Scotland does NOT vote indy in the next ten years, either through another NO vote, or the absence of a referendum. I've no doubt you think this all unlikely, but as I say, indulge me.

    Would you expect the SNP to ruile Scotland, in Holyrood and Westminster, supreme and unchallenged, for all those ten years, should they happen?

    I'd suggest that is highly unlikely. In which case another party MUST overtake them. So who would it be? Under a decent leader, my best guess would be Labour, however absurd this prediction seems now.
  • Options
    Byronic said:

    Byronic said:

    Byronic said:

    isam said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    Stocky said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    In that case Starmer fails on both fronts: he is neither idologically pure nor electorally appealing.
    Byronic said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    He also has the televisual charisma of a Victorian coffin lid. And he's an awful speaker.
    Have to say I am baffled as to why he is so short in the betting, and what appeal people think he has that will win back voters who like either Boris or Corbyn
    I think the wish is father to the thought. Moderate Labourites are DESPERATE for a sane, consensual, centrist leader, who looks very roughly like the kind of Labour leader that did OK in the past (Blair, Brown, Smith, etc).

    Starmer looks like them. Middle class middle aged man, not obviously stupid or a Marxist. Able to walk unaided. Has progressive politics of a modest sort.

    Labour's need is so great, Starmer will do.

    To beCameron.

    However I also agree with the commenters that it is very likely to be a woman, this time.

    My preferred candidate is Lisa Nandy. I just can’t see her getting into the contest.

    One thiness is a start.

    Scotland is gone. That’s why it’s so important the next Labour leader does not frighten potential LibDem voters in England (and Wales). Labour is not going to win a majority, but could be the biggest part of an alliance - formal or informal - that deprives the Tories of a majority.

    I don't understand this defeatism. Scotland is not going to become a Tory country any day soon, if ever. The SNP cannot rule eternally (especially if they either lose a referendum, or they implode in the absence of one).

    Labour need to be ready to seize the moment. Just giving up on the country is mad,

    The rot of fatalism is deep in Labour's psyche.
    I think if the SNP lost indyref2, many pro-indy left wing in Scotland would probably give Labour a hearing again if it could plausibly form a government. If they can't have indy, having a left of centre PM in Downing St is undoubtedly the next best thing.
    But that obviously depends on whether there is another indyref in the next parliament, and that the SNP would lose it.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,062
    Byronic said:

    Finally, a modicum of realism from PB Tories accepting that the SCons haven't a scooby of managing anything important in Scotland. Pinning their Unionist hopes on SLab and the SLDs is pretty hilarious though.

    Indulge me:

    Let's say Scotland does NOT vote indy in the next ten years, either through another NO vote, or the absence of a referendum. I've no doubt you think this all unlikely, but as I say, indulge me.

    Would you expect the SNP to ruile Scotland, in Holyrood and Westminster, supreme and unchallenged, for all those ten years, should they happen?

    I'd suggest that is highly unlikely. In which case another party MUST overtake them. So who would it be? Under a decent leader, my best guess would be Labour, however absurd this prediction seems now.
    Given the state of the regional parties in Scotland I would expect them to rule forever. The Tories are bad , but Labour and Lib Dems are absolutely rank rotten. Only a miracle or another SNP party could possibly change things. London parties are never ever going to get near power.
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,496



    That Marxist interpretation just doesn’t square with reality though. If anything we have seen the growth of the ‘comfortable classes’, outside of maybe London. School teachers, nurses, fireman etc have a pretty fine standard of living.

    :

    What utter drivel. I’m willing to guess that your area of north wales has more teachers and nurses than ever before and has more police and fireman than it did twenty years ago. The only reason they would shut a school would be a stagnant population or to reopen a new school.

    As a special request, can I please ask you to put yourself forward to write labour’s next election manifesto.
    I have the unfortunate task of telling you that your post is "utter drivel". Firefighter numbers are down around 11000 in England and Wales since 2010. The Fire Service in general is on its arse, with the majority of Fire Services understaffed and in need of increased funding. The recent round of HMICFRS audits has been scathing.
    https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fires_in_the_UK.png

    As ever, hard numbers are interesting. The reason for the drop in fires is apparently due to

    1) Working out of the system of beds and sofas that don't meet the newer standards for fire safety.
    2) The spread of modern circuit breaker boxes.
    3) The reduction in smoking acceptability - even those who still smoke are much more likely to go outside now.
    I don't deny it. Cars are safer, modern buildings are in general less likely to catch fire and we fit smoke detectors like there's no tomorrow, but less firefighters mean a slower, lighter weight of attack which results in unnecessary loss of life and property. Then you have the flooding (not in our role map and we don't get funded for it) which is only going to get worse. We have had a few close shaves due to cuts, and one day we'll get bit on the arse.
    The biggest issue with flooding is that from 1997 onwards there were massive pull back from actually managing waterways properly. Justified in the name of environmentalism. Some of this has been reversed as of late, but the bizarre belief that abandoning drainage is "good" is ingrained in some part of the system.

    The funding that remained was diverted into building "proper" offices etc, rather than spending money on that nasty muddy stuff.

    An exception has been the work done on canals.
    We should be building more reservoirs. We've got enough holes. Keep more of the water so we don't get floods one minute and hosepipe bans the next.
  • Options



    That Marxist interpretation just doesn’t square with reality though. If anything we have seen the growth of the ‘comfortable classes’, outside of maybe London. School teachers, nurses, fireman etc have a pretty fine standard of living.

    But, for example, in my town North Wales, they are shutting schools and small local hospitals. They have shut the magistrates court. The nearest fire station is 21 miles way, the nearest police station is 43 miles away (though over an

    The town survives, barely. There has been no growth in "the comfortable classes".

    What utter drivel. I’m willing to guess that your area of north wales has more teachers and nurses than ever before and has more police and fireman than it did twenty years ago. The only reason they would shut a school would be a stagnant population or to reopen a new school.

    As a special request, can I please ask you to put yourself forward to write labour’s next election manifesto.
    I have the unfortunate task of telling you that your post is "utter drivel". Firefighter numbers are down around 11000 in England and Wales since 2010. The Fire Service in general is on its arse, with the majority of Fire Services understaffed and in need of increased funding. The recent round of HMICFRS audits has been scathing.
    https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fires_in_the_UK.png

    As ever, hard numbers are interesting. The reason for the drop in fires is apparently due to

    1) Working out of the system of beds and sofas that don't meet the newer standards for fire safety.
    2) The spread of modern circuit breaker boxes.
    3) The reduction in smoking acceptability - even those who still smoke are much more likely to go outside now.
    The Essex Fire & Rescue has done a lot of work on prevention. Always better than cure.
    They do a lot of “going round to little old ladies to fit smoke alarms”. This is really for two primary reasons. 1) they don’t have anything else to do for most of the time, 2) they took on John Prescott who happened to have bigger balls of steel than they had, and lost. This was his revenge.
    The unrelated reason of it reducing the damage caused by house fires is to be welcome.

    Outside of larger urban areas there is no need for manned full time firefighters. We are one of the few nations that have them.
  • Options
    RandallFlaggRandallFlagg Posts: 1,166
    edited December 2019

    Finally, a modicum of realism from PB Tories accepting that the SCons haven't a scooby of managing anything important in Scotland. Pinning their Unionist hopes on SLab and the SLDs is pretty hilarious though.

    I think Byronic is right though. The only pro-union party which could build a coalition of voters from which they could take power from the SNP is SLAB. Though they seem to be a million miles away from doing so right now, of course.
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,496


    Wish you well, especially with Hogmanay approaching.

    Same. Wishing you and your better half rampant and rude health in 2020 Malc.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,062


    Wish you well, especially with Hogmanay approaching.

    Same. Wishing you and your better half rampant and rude health in 2020 Malc.
    Cheers, I will even try to be less grumpy
  • Options
    YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172

    Barnesian said:

    Starmer has a hugely greater intellect in my opinion and will handle interviews far better than RLB (as we have seen in the past).
    If Labour is to have a good chance of being returned to power in 2024 (or possibly earlier), they need to choose Starmer, if not RLB will ensure another defeat ... the British electorate will not accept another left-wing Corbynite, simples really.

    She is continuity Corbyn but even worse, presentationally she is appalling. She has an unfortunate issue (in the same way Corbyn always looks grumpy and Priti Patel looks a tad too pleased with herself) of looking perpetually confused.

    (Note I am giving her the benefit of the doubt and saying she looks perpetually confused rather than actually being perpetually confused. Your mileage may vary).
    I like Jess Phillip's look. She looks cheeky and confident and can show passion. She could be a match for Johnson. I can't think of any other contender who would be. The look matters.
    She is God-awful. She is the worst kind of politician, self promoting and unprincipled.

    She could be a Tony Blair for our times, but I think the temper of the times is not amenable to the charms of another Blair. A New Tony Blair could not do now what Blair did then. The past is another country.

    If Labour want a verbal match for Johnson, then Angela Rayner is best. If they want a thoughtful resetting of the party, then Lisa Nandy is best.

    If they want a full-scale civil war, then Jess Phillips is best. And if they want a woodentop, then Keir Starmer is best.
    Ha! “She is the worst kind of politician, self promoting and unprincipled.”

    Unlike Boris, eh?
    I think Jess is pretty much like Boris, You love'em both, or leave'em both.

    Boris ran a clever, ruthless campaign, outfoxing Labour & the LibDems & the Remainers & Farage's TBP & the Tory Centrists.

    But, was Boris the cleverness behind the campaign?

    I very, very much doubt it. It was Dom.
  • Options
    ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578

    Barnesian said:

    Starmer has a hugely greater intellect in my opinion and will handle interviews far better than RLB (as we have seen in the past).
    If Labour is to have a good chance of being returned to power in 2024 (or possibly earlier), they need to choose Starmer, if not RLB will ensure another defeat ... the British electorate will not accept another left-wing Corbynite, simples really.

    She is continuity Corbyn but even worse, presentationally she is appalling. She has an unfortunate issue (in the same way Corbyn always looks grumpy and Priti Patel looks a tad too pleased with herself) of looking perpetually confused.

    (Note I am giving her the benefit of the doubt and saying she looks perpetually confused rather than actually being perpetually confused. Your mileage may vary).
    I like Jess Phillip's look. She looks cheeky and confident and can show passion. She could be a match for Johnson. I can't think of any other contender who would be. The look matters.
    She is God-awful. She is the worst kind of politician, self promoting and unprincipled.

    She could be a Tony Blair for our times, but I think the temper of the times is not amenable to the charms of another Blair. A New Tony Blair could not do now what Blair did then. The past is another country.

    If Labour want a verbal match for Johnson, then Angela Rayner is best. If they want a thoughtful resetting of the party, then Lisa Nandy is best.

    If they want a full-scale civil war, then Jess Phillips is best. And if they want a woodentop, then Keir Starmer is best.
    On this we agree. She just emotes.
    Jess Philips has this "ooh arent I common" shtick where she bangs on about her nan and her Brummie relatives and her childhood working in t'mill, like she was born in an early episode of Peaky Blinders.

    In reality her parents were CEO of NHS trusts, massively well paid. She went to a grammar school then Leeds Uni. She is entirely middle class. She is fake, sometimes likeable, but a total fake.
  • Options



    That Marxist interpretation just doesn’t square with reality though. If anything we have seen the growth of the ‘comfortable classes’, outside of maybe London. School teachers, nurses, fireman etc have a pretty fine standard of living.

    But, for example, in my town North Wales, they are shutting schools and small local hospitals. They have shut the magistrates court. The nearest fire station is 21 miles way, the nearest police station is 43 miles away (though over an

    The town survives, barely. There has been no growth in "the comfortable classes".

    What utter drivel. I’m willing to guess that your area of north wales has more teachers and nurses than ever before and has more police and fireman than it did twenty years ago. The only reason they would sh

    As a special request, can I please ask you to put yourself forward to write labour’s next election manifesto.
    I have the unfortunate task of telling you that your post is "utter drivel". Firefighter numbers are down around 11000 in England and Wales since 2010. The Fire Service in general is on its arse, with the majority of Fire Services understaffed and in need of increased funding. The recent round of HMICFRS audits has been scathing.
    https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fires_in_the_UK.png

    As ever, hard numbers are interesting. The reason for the drop in fires is apparently due to

    1) Working out of the system of beds and sofas that don't meet the newer standards for fire safety.
    2) The spread of modern circuit breaker boxes.
    3) The reduction in smoking acceptability - even those who still smoke are much more likely to go outside now.
    The Essex Fire & Rescue has done a lot of work on prevention. Always better than cure.
    They do a lot of “going round to little old ladies to fit smoke alarms”. This is really for two primary reasons. 1) they don’t have anything else to do for most of the time, 2) they took on John Prescott who happened to have bigger balls of steel than they had, and lost. This was his revenge.
    The unrelated reason of it reducing the damage caused by house fires is to be welcome.

    Outside of larger urban areas there is no need for manned full time firefighters. We are one of the few nations that have them.
    OK, I'll bite. The only locations you have whole time crewed Fire Stations is in the urban towns and cities, and in the towns, that's open to conjecture. The rural areas are served by local On Call Firefighters on a paging system.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,093

    HYUFD said:

    Byronic said:

    isam said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    Stocky said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    In that case Starmer fails on both fronts: he is neither idologically pure nor electorally appealing.
    Byronic said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Starmer may have IQ but he is devoid of any vision or approach to help Labour win.

    He also has the televisual charisma of a Victorian coffin lid. And he's an awful speaker.
    Have to say I am baffled as to why he is so short in the betting, and what appeal people think he has that will win back voters who like either Boris or Corbyn
    I think the wish is father to the thought. Moderate Labourites are DESPERATE for a sane, consensual, centrist leader, who looks very roughly like the kind of Labour leader that did OK in the past (Blair, Brown, Smith, etc).

    Starmer looks like them. Middle class middle aged man, not obviously stupid or a Marxist. Able to walk unaided. Has progressive politics of a modest sort.

    Labour's need is so great, Starmer will do.

    To be fair to them, I can see Starmer as a Michael Howard figure. Steadying the ship, slowly rebuilding the party, boring the nutters til they leave or go quiet. Then, after another defeat, Labour could find and elect their Cameron.

    However I also agree with the commenters that it is very likely to be a woman, this time.

    Yes, remember after the Tories pass the boundary changes they will have a majority of 102 ie identical to Thatcher's 1987 win and the biggest majority for any Government since the Blair government of 2001 to 2005.

    Labour are now thus really looking for a Kinnock or Howard figure before they get to a Blair or Cameron
    They won’t have a majority of 102 unless they win it in a future election.
    If they pass the boundary changes the Tories will be defending a majority of 102 not 80
  • Options
    Byronic said:

    Barnesian said:

    Starmer has a hugely greater intellect in my opinion and will handle interviews far better than RLB (as we have seen in the past).
    If Labour is to have a good chance of being returned to power in 2024 (or possibly earlier), they need to choose Starmer, if not RLB will ensure another defeat ... the British electorate will not accept another left-wing Corbynite, simples really.

    She is continuity Corbyn but even worse, presentationally she is appalling. She has an unfortunate issue (in the same way Corbyn always looks grumpy and Priti Patel looks a tad too pleased with herself) of looking perpetually confused.

    (Note I am giving her the benefit of the doubt and saying she looks perpetually confused rather than actually being perpetually confused. Your mileage may vary).
    I like Jess Phillip's look. She looks cheeky and confident and can show passion. She could be a match for Johnson. I can't think of any other contender who would be. The look matters.
    She is God-awful. She is the worst kind of politician, self promoting and unprincipled.

    She could be a Tony Blair for our times, but I think the temper of the times is not amenable to the charms of another Blair. A New Tony Blair could not do now what Blair did then. The past is another country.

    If Labour want a verbal match for Johnson, then Angela Rayner is best. If they want a thoughtful resetting of the party, then Lisa Nandy is best.

    If they want a full-scale civil war, then Jess Phillips is best. And if they want a woodentop, then Keir Starmer is best.
    On this we agree. She just emotes.
    Jess Philips has this "ooh arent I common" shtick where she bangs on about her nan and her Brummie relatives and her childhood working in t'mill, like she was born in an early episode of Peaky Blinders.

    In reality her parents were CEO of NHS trusts, massively well paid. She went to a grammar school then Leeds Uni. She is entirely middle class. She is fake, sometimes likeable, but a total fake.
    Absolutely absolutely. But that’s just what Boris does. He has a shtick and it works for him. Lovable buffoon who amusingly falls over his words and then spontaneously makes a joke over it. Except he does the same speech over and over and does the whole spontaneous outbursts and witticisms at exactly the same parts etc.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,348

    Dura_Ace said:



    We are heading towards the kind of societies depicted in HG Wells, with a barbarous underclass and a gilded, ineffectual elite, the Morlocks and the Eloi.

    The Morlocks do all the work in TTM. It is a largely Marxist analysis with a typically English Victorian overlay of Lamarckism.

    Anathem is a better literary analogy for modern Britain.

    Thanks for this -- I have just ordered the book (which I did not know).
    I found it an entertaining and thought provoking read but an analogy of modern Britain? That passed me by.
  • Options
    malcolmg said:


    Wish you well, especially with Hogmanay approaching.

    Same. Wishing you and your better half rampant and rude health in 2020 Malc.
    Cheers, I will even try to be less grumpy
    And, I apologise, you never know what someone is going through. Best wishes.
  • Options
    FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Floater said:

    malcolmg said:

    Jonathan said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    FF43 said:



    SNIP

    As a somewhat convicted unionist, I wonder if our energies are better spent trying to make a success of independence rather than arguing about process. Brexit is an example to avoid I think. Not only is it a bad idea from my point of view, but Leavers/Tories are going about it in the most cackhanded, divisive and destructive way possible. Can't we do better than that?

    I have always said that the SNP have gone about this the dence now is a vote for considerable hardship.
    David, how do you build anything when the vast majority of your budget is determined by and controlled by Westminster. The SNP have virtually what London wants.
    ...

    Why would it not do as well as similarly sized, located and resourced countries like Ireland, Norway and Denmark?
    I agree - Though there would be sacrifices,on the weaponisation of people's most negative instincts.
    SNIP
    Scotland voted YES.
    Based on it being only way to stay in the EU and on a shedload of promises, all BROKEN, usual lies and cheating the mugs get every time.
    So, you appear to be stating that if you leave the UK you leave the EU.

    You had better play nice with Spain then....
    Spain is not a problem. There is a constitutional way for Scotland to leave the UK. There is no constitutional way for Catalonia to leave Spain.
    Yes there is, by constitutional amendmemt just the Federal Spanish government is unlikely to agree that and simply arrested Catalan nationalists when they held an illegal referendum and declared UDI

    The Spanish government, like the UK government, doesn’t arrest anyone.

    The Spanish police and civil guard arrested Catalan nationalists on behalf of the Spanish government if they had not already fled into exile
    Tories would absolutely love to be able to arrest SNP members just like their fascist pals in Spain.
    Go and have a nice lie down Malc

    But that does tell you Spain will not allow an independent Scotland into the EU

    True independence for Scotland then
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,952
    Byronic said:

    Barnesian said:

    Starmer has a hugely greater intellect in my opinion and will handle interviews far better than RLB (as we have seen in the past).
    If Labour is to have a good chance of being returned to power in 2024 (or possibly earlier), they need to choose Starmer, if not RLB will ensure another defeat ... the British electorate will not accept another left-wing Corbynite, simples really.

    She is continuity Corbyn but even worse, presentationally she is appalling. She has an unfortunate issue (in the same way Corbyn always looks grumpy and Priti Patel looks a tad too pleased with herself) of looking perpetually confused.

    (Note I am giving her the benefit of the doubt and saying she looks perpetually confused rather than actually being perpetually confused. Your mileage may vary).
    I like Jess Phillip's look. She looks cheeky and confident and can show passion. She could be a match for Johnson. I can't think of any other contender who would be. The look matters.
    She is God-awful. She is the worst kind of politician, self promoting and unprincipled.

    She could be a Tony Blair for our times, but I think the temper of the times is not amenable to the charms of another Blair. A New Tony Blair could not do now what Blair did then. The past is another country.

    If Labour want a verbal match for Johnson, then Angela Rayner is best. If they want a thoughtful resetting of the party, then Lisa Nandy is best.

    If they want a full-scale civil war, then Jess Phillips is best. And if they want a woodentop, then Keir Starmer is best.
    On this we agree. She just emotes.
    Jess Philips has this "ooh arent I common" shtick where she bangs on about her nan and her Brummie relatives and her childhood working in t'mill, like she was born in an early episode of Peaky Blinders.

    In reality her parents were CEO of NHS trusts, massively well paid. She went to a grammar school then Leeds Uni. She is entirely middle class. She is fake, sometimes likeable, but a total fake.
    On BBC This Week I remember her saying "There was no one like Nigel Farage at MY school" and laughing to herself, with the obvious intention to lead people to believe she went to a down and dirty comp. An all girls grammar school in the 90s is properly posh to most working class people. It's not like the 60s when Grammar school education was common among the poorer parts of the population. But she plays the part well, and middle class Uni types who yearn to be working class seem to love her
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,062

    malcolmg said:


    Wish you well, especially with Hogmanay approaching.

    Same. Wishing you and your better half rampant and rude health in 2020 Malc.
    Cheers, I will even try to be less grumpy
    And, I apologise, you never know what someone is going through. Best wishes.
    np, if only I had had a nip, have not had notion to have anything. No excuse for my grumpiness though.
  • Options
    Byronic said:

    Finally, a modicum of realism from PB Tories accepting that the SCons haven't a scooby of managing anything important in Scotland. Pinning their Unionist hopes on SLab and the SLDs is pretty hilarious though.

    Indulge me:

    Let's say Scotland does NOT vote indy in the next ten years, either through another NO vote, or the absence of a referendum. I've no doubt you think this all unlikely, but as I say, indulge me.

    Would you expect the SNP to ruile Scotland, in Holyrood and Westminster, supreme and unchallenged, for all those ten years, should they happen?

    I'd suggest that is highly unlikely. In which case another party MUST overtake them. So who would it be? Under a decent leader, my best guess would be Labour, however absurd this prediction seems now.
    I'd say the SNP's coat might be on a shoogly peg now if there was any other party offering a coherent and consistent vision for Scotland (I've tediously noted several times SLab's failure to become the Devomax party); no Unionist party, and I can't emphasise this enough, has. SLab: yes, no, maybe, SCons: No to indyref II, SLDs: a big lump of who gives a feck what they think.

    If you think UK Lab's leadership options are a big talent vacuum, wait till the next Buggin's turn for SLab leader comes around.
  • Options
    ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578

    Byronic said:

    Barnesian said:

    Starmer has a hugely greater intellect in my opinion and will handle interviews far better than RLB (as we have seen in the past).
    If Labour is to have a good chance of being returned to power in 2024 (or possibly earlier), they need to choose Starmer, if not RLB will ensure another defeat ... the British electorate will not accept another left-wing Corbynite, simples really.

    She is cofused. Your mileage may vary).
    I like Jess s.
    She is God-awful. She is the worst kind of politician, self promoting and unprincipled.

    She could be a Tony Blair for our times, but I think the temper of the times is not amenable to the charms of another Blair. A New Tony Blair could not do now what Blair did then. The past is another country.

    If Labour want a verbal match for Johnson, then Angela Rayner is best. If they want a thoughtful resetting of the party, then Lisa Nandy is best.

    If they want a full-scale civil war, then Jess Phillips is best. And if they want a woodentop, then Keir Starmer is best.
    On this we agree. She just emotes.
    Jess Philips has this "ooh arent I common" shtick where she bangs on about her nan and her Brummie relatives and her childhood working in t'mill, like she was born in an early episode of Peaky Blinders.

    In reality her parents were CEO of NHS trusts, massively well paid. She went to a grammar school then Leeds Uni. She is entirely middle class. She is fake, sometimes likeable, but a total fake.
    Absolutely absolutely. But that’s just what Boris does. He has a shtick and it works for him. Lovable buffoon who amusingly falls over his words and then spontaneously makes a joke over it. Except he does the same speech over and over and does the whole spontaneous outbursts and witticisms at exactly the same parts etc.
    All fair.

    Maybe I just find Boris more tolerable because he laces his contrived personality with genuine wit. He is funny. And that helps.

    I don't particularly dislike Jess Phillips, she has her virtues; I just don't think she is the panacea for Labour's ills.

    Maybe there isn't a panacea? And on that cheering note, I must go and do some work. Later.
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,027
    Byronic said:

    Barnesian said:

    Starmer has a hugely greater intellect in my opinion and will handle interviews far better than RLB (as we have seen in the past).
    If Labour is to have a good chance of being returned to power in 2024 (or possibly earlier), they need to choose Starmer, if not RLB will ensure another defeat ... the British electorate will not accept another left-wing Corbynite, simples really.

    She is continuity Corbyn but even worse, presentationally she is appalling. She has an unfortunate issue (in the same way Corbyn always looks grumpy and Priti Patel looks a tad too pleased with herself) of looking perpetually confused.

    (Note I am giving her the benefit of the doubt and saying she looks perpetually confused rather than actually being perpetually confused. Your mileage may vary).
    I like Jess Phillip's look. She looks cheeky and confident and can show passion. She could be a match for Johnson. I can't think of any other contender who would be. The look matters.
    She is God-awful. She is the worst kind of politician, self promoting and unprincipled.

    She could be a Tony Blair for our times, but I think the temper of the times is not amenable to the charms of another Blair. A New Tony Blair could not do now what Blair did then. The past is another country.

    If Labour want a verbal match for Johnson, then Angela Rayner is best. If they want a thoughtful resetting of the party, then Lisa Nandy is best.

    If they want a full-scale civil war, then Jess Phillips is best. And if they want a woodentop, then Keir Starmer is best.
    On this we agree. She just emotes.
    Jess Philips has this "ooh arent I common" shtick where she bangs on about her nan and her Brummie relatives and her childhood working in t'mill, like she was born in an early episode of Peaky Blinders.

    In reality her parents were CEO of NHS trusts, massively well paid. She went to a grammar school then Leeds Uni. She is entirely middle class. She is fake, sometimes likeable, but a total fake.
    Have a look at Wikipedia. Somewhere between your paragraphs!
  • Options
    FishingFishing Posts: 4,561
    On topic, coincidentally I audited my own projections of the first two decades of this century a little while ago. I found that:

    - I was right to believe, as early as the mid-90s, that the UK might well leave the EU, but wrong to believe it would come about through inadvertance, or us being expelled, rather than from a direct democratic vote. I was also right to think that, over the long term, the European issue was as dangerous to Labour as it was to the Conservatives
    - I was also right to see that the euro would be a disaster for many of its member countries, though wrong to believe that it would therefore fall apart
    - I was wrong to believe that the UK and US would be able to install a successful democratic government in Iraq
    - I was wrong to believe that the Greens would become much more successful
    - I was right to take right-wing charismatic individuals such as Johnson and Trump more seriously than many other people did
    - I was right to think that the LibDems would continue to disappoint nationally

    Things I missed:

    - the increasing salience of the age divide replacing that of class
    - the extreme left taking over the Labour Party
    - the length of time it took for the electorate to find Blair out
    - the growth of Scottish nationalism.
  • Options
    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:


    Wish you well, especially with Hogmanay approaching.

    Same. Wishing you and your better half rampant and rude health in 2020 Malc.
    Cheers, I will even try to be less grumpy
    And, I apologise, you never know what someone is going through. Best wishes.
    np, if only I had had a nip, have not had notion to have anything. No excuse for my grumpiness though.
    Malc, Woodford Reserve 20 quid at Tesco. In fact, my local big Tesco seems to be encouraging me to fill up oncut price decent Bourbon. It looks like it was the wrong time for me to quit drinking!
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,062

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:


    Wish you well, especially with Hogmanay approaching.

    Same. Wishing you and your better half rampant and rude health in 2020 Malc.
    Cheers, I will even try to be less grumpy
    And, I apologise, you never know what someone is going through. Best wishes.
    np, if only I had had a nip, have not had notion to have anything. No excuse for my grumpiness though.
    Malc, Woodford Reserve 20 quid at Tesco. In fact, my local big Tesco seems to be encouraging me to fill up oncut price decent Bourbon. It looks like it was the wrong time for me to quit drinking!
    TWS, cheers I will top up once I am feeling a bit better
  • Options
    felixfelix Posts: 15,124
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Floater said:

    malcolmg said:

    Jonathan said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    FF43 said:



    If there's another referendum, I am confident independence will win. There isn't a consensus for the Union anymore and the British, not Scottish, crowd only make up a 25% hardcore, not enough to win a50% vote.

    As a somewhat convicted unionist, I wonder if our energies are better spent trying to make a success of independence rather than arguing about process. Brexit is an example to avoid I think. Not only is it a bad idea from my point of view, but Leavers/Tories are going about it in the most cackhanded, divisive and destructive way possible. Can't we do better than that?

    I have always said that the SNP have gone about this the dence now is a vote for considerable hardship.
    David, how do you build anything when the vast majority of your budget is determined by and controlled by Westminster. The SNP have virtually what London wants.
    ...

    Why would it not do as well as similarly sized, located and resourced countries like Ireland, Norway and Denmark?
    I agree - Though there would be sacrifices,on the weaponisation of people's most negative instincts.
    You can only treat people like crap for so long , even the weakest will get a backbone at some point. Completely shutting Scotland out of Brexit etc and taking back the powers was the final insult, we are not dogs to be ordered about.
    Scotland voted YES.
    Based on it being only way to stay in the EU and on a shedload of promises, all BROKEN, usual lies and cheating the mugs get every time.
    So, you appear to be stating that if you leave the UK you leave the EU.

    You had better play nice with Spain then....
    Spain is not a problem. There is a constitutional way for Scotland to leave the UK. There is no constitutional way for Catalonia to leave Spain.
    Yes there is, by constitutional amendmemt just the Federal Spanish government is unlikely to agree that and simply arrested Catalan nationalists when they held an illegal referendum and declared UDI

    The Spanish government, like the UK government, doesn’t arrest anyone.

    The Spanish police and civil guard arrested Catalan nationalists on behalf of the Spanish government if they had not already fled into exile
    No - only the courts can authorise such arrests in Spain.
  • Options
    ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578

    Byronic said:

    Finally, a modicum of realism from PB Tories accepting that the SCons haven't a scooby of managing anything important in Scotland. Pinning their Unionist hopes on SLab and the SLDs is pretty hilarious though.

    Indulge me:

    Let's say Scotland does NOT vote indy in the next ten years, either through another NO vote, or the absence of a referendum. I've no doubt you think this all unlikely, but as I say, indulge me.

    Would you expect the SNP to ruile Scotland, in Holyrood and Westminster, supreme and unchallenged, for all those ten years, should they happen?

    I'd suggest that is highly unlikely. In which case another party MUST overtake them. So who would it be? Under a decent leader, my best guess would be Labour, however absurd this prediction seems now.
    I'd say the SNP's coat might be on a shoogly peg now if there was any other party offering a coherent and consistent vision for Scotland (I've tediously noted several times SLab's failure to become the Devomax party); no Unionist party, and I can't emphasise this enough, has. SLab: yes, no, maybe, SCons: No to indyref II, SLDs: a big lump of who gives a feck what they think.

    If you think UK Lab's leadership options are a big talent vacuum, wait till the next Buggin's turn for SLab leader comes around.
    That's genuinely enlightening. I hadn't thought of it that way.

    Yes it's amazing that Labour is not going for Devomax. That's a wide open goal. It sounds progressive (so good for Labour). It would unite warring factions. It gives Labour a USP. It's apparently pro-Scottish. It gives the SNP a headache.

    Win win win for Labour. They really are fecked if they haven't worked this out, and you have.
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,496

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:


    Wish you well, especially with Hogmanay approaching.

    Same. Wishing you and your better half rampant and rude health in 2020 Malc.
    Cheers, I will even try to be less grumpy
    And, I apologise, you never know what someone is going through. Best wishes.
    np, if only I had had a nip, have not had notion to have anything. No excuse for my grumpiness though.
    Malc, Woodford Reserve 20 quid at Tesco. In fact, my local big Tesco seems to be encouraging me to fill up oncut price decent Bourbon. It looks like it was the wrong time for me to quit drinking!
    Can't stand Bourbon. Filthy stuff. Hope plenty continue to drink it though, or we wouldn't have anything to mature Scotch in.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,728
    Byronic said:

    Byronic said:

    Barnesian said:

    Starmer has a hugely greater intellect in my opinion and will handle interviews far better than RLB (as we have seen in the past).
    If Labour is to have a good chance of being returned to power in 2024 (or possibly earlier), they need to choose Starmer, if not RLB will ensure another defeat ... the British electorate will not accept another left-wing Corbynite, simples really.

    She is cofused. Your mileage may vary).
    I like Jess s.
    She is God-awful. She is the worst kind of politician, self promoting and unprincipled.

    She could be a Tony Blair for our times, but I think the temper of the times is not amenable to the charms of another Blair. A New Tony Blair could not do now what Blair did then. The past is another country.

    If Labour want a verbal match for Johnson, then Angela Rayner is best. If they want a thoughtful resetting of the party, then Lisa Nandy is best.

    If they want a full-scale civil war, then Jess Phillips is best. And if they want a woodentop, then Keir Starmer is best.
    On this we agree. She just emotes.
    Jess Philips has this "ooh arent I common" shtick where she bangs on about her nan and her Brummie relatives and her childhood working in t'mill, like she was born in an early episode of Peaky Blinders.

    In reality her parents were CEO of NHS trusts, massively well paid. She went to a grammar school then Leeds Uni. She is entirely middle class. She is fake, sometimes likeable, but a total fake.
    Absolutely absolutely. But that’s just what Boris does. He has a shtick and it works for him. Lovable buffoon who amusingly falls over his words and then spontaneously makes a joke over it. Except he does the same speech over and over and does the whole spontaneous outbursts and witticisms at exactly the same parts etc.
    All fair.

    Maybe I just find Boris more tolerable because he laces his contrived personality with genuine wit. He is funny. And that helps.

    I don't particularly dislike Jess Phillips, she has her virtues; I just don't think she is the panacea for Labour's ills.

    Maybe there isn't a panacea? And on that cheering note, I must go and do some work. Later.
    More fashion shoots? 😉
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,093
    edited December 2019
    Boris and his partner Carrie Symonds save the taxpayer thousands by flying BA economy to their winter New Year break at a villa in Mystique in the Caribbean

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7832423/Prime-Minister-girlfriend-Carrie-Symonds-help-taxpayers-flying-British-Airways-economy.html
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    Boris and his partner Carrie Symonds save the taxpayer thousands by flying BA economy to their winter New Year break to a villa in Mystique in the Caribbean

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7832423/Prime-Minister-girlfriend-Carrie-Symonds-help-taxpayers-flying-British-Airways-economy.html

    Big effing deal.
This discussion has been closed.