I know I don't pay as much attention to the goings on at oor toon council as I should but...who?
Poor junior minister who’s got the unenviable job of reading the Budget speech out today, after her boss screwed up in the most fantastic way possible.
Yes. She was born in 1990 (should she not still be at school?) She has quite an impressive academic record but I was genuinely unaware of her existence until this morning.
29/30 year olds should be at school?
I'm just getting old. 1990 seems very recent to me.
In 1990 I was still in prep school.
I feel young. Just about.
Presumably that was one of these well known northern working class prep schools? I had been working for 7 years and was pressing for partnership (which didn't come for another couple of years).
I know I don't pay as much attention to the goings on at oor toon council as I should but...who?
Poor junior minister who’s got the unenviable job of reading the Budget speech out today, after her boss screwed up in the most fantastic way possible.
Yes. She was born in 1990 (should she not still be at school?) She has quite an impressive academic record but I was genuinely unaware of her existence until this morning.
29/30 year olds should be at school?
I'm just getting old. 1990 seems very recent to me.
In 1990 I was still in prep school.
I feel young. Just about.
I hope you don’t feel as young as an SNP treasury minister.
I bet when she was a child, going round to Baker St to collect the rent off her Fathers tenants, she never dreamed she would be sending her own son to private school.
?
So he was a landlord collecting rents?
Edit for your edit: I see - so not exactly the Wolf of Willesden, meanwhile quite a nasty slur from you.
Where's the slur? She says it herself in the link I provide; she used to go to Paddington (not Baker St) and collect the rents of a Saturday.
No funnily enough it's the other way round. ut right.
Privately owning a home and renting out a second in the 1960s was privileged I would say, at a time when most working class people lived in council houses.
The other day I said "until they have control" meaning "until they have control" - you misinterpreted it as "until they are under control", because you prejudiced my post as being offensive to muslims and wanted to virtue signal. Oh well, it happens, people are desperate to win arguments and unable to admit mistakes on here, I dont mind.
This is what you wrote:
"A lot less immigration 40 odd years ago was the solution. I don't think there is one now really, the number of muslims will increase and, until they have some sort of official control, so will the radicals, so as @Cyclefree it is a counsel of despair."
It reads a lot better if you leave out words and don't repeat the entire quote, on that I do agree.
Yes I just quoted from memory. I agree it could be taken both ways - you took it as me being offensive and saying muslims should be controlled, presumably by non muslims, and tried to act a bit tough in your reply to me! I explained that wasn't what I meant (if it were I surely would have just confirmed it, else I wouldn't have written it to begin with), and thought that would be that. Seems not, as we have another case of interpreting the worst, insinuating some kind of slur and reluctance to believe the truth today.
Fair enough, you think I am motivated by racial and religious hatred, and interpret what I write thorough that prism.
I know I don't pay as much attention to the goings on at oor toon council as I should but...who?
Poor junior minister who’s got the unenviable job of reading the Budget speech out today, after her boss screwed up in the most fantastic way possible.
Yes. She was born in 1990 (should she not still be at school?) She has quite an impressive academic record but I was genuinely unaware of her existence until this morning.
29/30 year olds should be at school?
I'm just getting old. 1990 seems very recent to me.
In 1990 I was still in prep school.
I feel young. Just about.
I hope you don’t feel as young as an SNP treasury minister.
Yes I just quoted from memory. I agree it could be taken both ways - you took it as me being offensive and saying muslims should be controlled, presumably by non muslims, and tried to act a bit tough in your reply to me! I explained that wasn't what I meant (if it were I surely would have just confirmed it, else I wouldn't have written it to begin with), and thought that would be that. Seems not, as we have another case of interpreting the worst, insinuating some kind of slur and reluctance to believe the truth today.
Fair enough, you think I am motivated by racial and religious hatred, and interpret what I write thorough that prism.
You have often used terminology such as "white flight" and remarked upon the changes of character of places, for example where you say you grew up. Were you a member of UKIP also I think?
None of that makes you a racist or motivated by religious hatred, but it does mean that pronouncements you make, given that I don't know you, are liable to be examined in that context.
If none of that crossed your mind and you are race "blind" and you can't think of anything more ridiculous than categorising people by virtue of their race or colour or whatever, then I am happy to apologise to you and will take your posts and see them through the prism of an avowed anti-racist.
Yes I just quoted from memory. I agree it could be taken both ways - you took it as me being offensive and saying muslims should be controlled, presumably by non muslims, and tried to act a bit tough in your reply to me! I explained that wasn't what I meant (if it were I surely would have just confirmed it, else I wouldn't have written it to begin with), and thought that would be that. Seems not, as we have another case of interpreting the worst, insinuating some kind of slur and reluctance to believe the truth today.
Fair enough, you think I am motivated by racial and religious hatred, and interpret what I write thorough that prism.
You have often used terminology such as "white flight" and remarked upon the changes of character of places, for example where you say you grew up. Were you a member of UKIP also I think?
None of that makes you a racist or motivated by religious hatred, but it does mean that pronouncements you make, given that I don't know you, are liable to be examined in that context.
If none of that crossed your mind and you are race "blind" and you can't think of anything more ridiculous than categorising people by virtue of their race or colour or whatever, then I am happy to apologise to you and will take your posts and see them through the prism of an avowed anti-racist.
Bring a member of UKIP and arguing that Enoch Powell was right are decent credentials for being viewed as a racist and a xenophobe I suppose.
Anyway it’s not for me to tell you how to interpret what you read, I’ll just correct you when you misinterpret what I write and have a pop at me on the back of it.
I know I don't pay as much attention to the goings on at oor toon council as I should but...who?
Poor junior minister who’s got the unenviable job of reading the Budget speech out today, after her boss screwed up in the most fantastic way possible.
Yes. She was born in 1990 (should she not still be at school?) She has quite an impressive academic record but I was genuinely unaware of her existence until this morning.
I know I don't pay as much attention to the goings on at oor toon council as I should but...who?
Poor junior minister who’s got the unenviable job of reading the Budget speech out today, after her boss screwed up in the most fantastic way possible.
Yes. She was born in 1990 (should she not still be at school?) She has quite an impressive academic record but I was genuinely unaware of her existence until this morning.
29/30 year olds should be at school?
I'm just getting old. 1990 seems very recent to me.
Porn stars were now born in 2002 - according to my friend who watches porn.
I know I don't pay as much attention to the goings on at oor toon council as I should but...who?
Poor junior minister who’s got the unenviable job of reading the Budget speech out today, after her boss screwed up in the most fantastic way possible.
Yes. She was born in 1990 (should she not still be at school?) She has quite an impressive academic record but I was genuinely unaware of her existence until this morning.
I know I don't pay as much attention to the goings on at oor toon council as I should but...who?
Poor junior minister who’s got the unenviable job of reading the Budget speech out today, after her boss screwed up in the most fantastic way possible.
Yes. She was born in 1990 (should she not still be at school?) She has quite an impressive academic record but I was genuinely unaware of her existence until this morning.
29/30 year olds should be at school?
I'm just getting old. 1990 seems very recent to me.
Porn stars were now born in 2002 - according to my friend who watches porn.
This one did 19mpg. But (spoiler alert) the Pious it was chasing did 17.
So how the fuck did they get 17mpg from a Prius (which is a 60mpg car under normal conditions)?
Disclaimer: I have never seen a full episode of Top Gear as it appears to be a program for children and people who use 'ace' as an adjective.
The test was, the Prius would be driven as fast as it could around the track and the M3 would follow it. So, quite a specific test to get that result.
Right, I don't know why the fuck you'd want to do that but anyway. The Prius uses a very long intake cam duration to simulate the Atkinson Cycle which decreases power density of the intake charge. This makes it relatively inefficient when it's flat out. It's a disadvantage of Atkinson Cycle engines rather than hybrids in particular. It does make the Prius IC engine very efficient at charging the batteries though.
The other day I argued that terrorists should get a life sentence and only be released after a parole board considers themselves no longer a risk to the public. Looking at the case coming up which the government is considering rushing its legislation forward for to prevent early release, I don't see why we should be squabbling over 2 or 4 years, this guy should be locked up for life unless or until he is rehabilitated: https://news.sky.com/story/terror-prisoner-set-for-release-had-called-for-year-of-fear-11927196
Encouraging murder should be considered as serious as committing murder. If you pay someone to murder your wife you'd be eligible for a life sentence so why shouldn't this terrorist?
Won a place at Cambridge back before the days of positive discrimination.
Smashed the poverty of expectations to become the first ever black female MP.
Great track record on civil liberties.
30 years of service to parliament and the Labour Party.
All in spite of poor health. All of it against the odds.
An icon.
Yep, the first half of her career was spectacular, she gave perhaps one of the finest speeches ever seen in the chamber. However over the past decade she's declined massively to the point where she is perhaps the most ridiculed MP ever due to her stunning innumeracy and overall incompetence. A great example of how (almost) all political careers end in failure and ridicule.
Conservatives are on 47 per cent, up two points from the election result of December 12, and Labour is down three to 30 per cent. The Lib Dems are down a point to 11 with the Greens up two to five. Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party has faded to just one per cent, suggesting it is currently deemed redundant in Boris Johnson’s Britain.
I know I don't pay as much attention to the goings on at oor toon council as I should but...who?
Poor junior minister who’s got the unenviable job of reading the Budget speech out today, after her boss screwed up in the most fantastic way possible.
Yes. She was born in 1990 (should she not still be at school?) She has quite an impressive academic record but I was genuinely unaware of her existence until this morning.
29/30 year olds should be at school?
I'm just getting old. 1990 seems very recent to me.
1990 seems recent to me as well, although I was still (just) in primary school at the time. I don't think life has changed much since 1990. Most of the big changes happened between about 1960 and 1985/1990 IMO. For instance, I remember using touch screen computers at a science fair in the late 1980s, so I don't particularly regard smartphones as a big development of recent years. Also I tried out using a fibre-optic internet connection in about 1994 in Florida.
Rebecca Long-Bailey is trailing in last place in the Labour leadership contest among the ordinary voters who the party most needs to impress, an exclusive poll reveals today.
The Left-winger dubbed “Continuity Corbyn” has even fallen behind Emily Thornberry when it comes to public support, found Ipsos MORI, despite being backed by some trade union leaders and Labour branches.
The findings are a major setback to the Long-Bailey bandwagon, which started out as favourite to inherit the Labour crown from mentor Jeremy Corbyn. Her campaign failed to gather momentum amid divisions among supporters and internal rows over tactics. Researchers from Ipsos MORI asked which of the four candidates had “what it takes to be prime minister” and whether people would be likely to consider voting Labour with them in charge.
Sir Keir Starmer, the current frontrunner and shadow Brexit secretary, had the best score with 32 per cent of the public and 45 per cent of Labour voters saying he has what it takes to run Britain. Some 35 per cent of the public said they could back Labour with him in charge.
Lisa Nandy, the long-shot rising star of the campaign, came second with 23 per cent of the public and 33 per cent of Labour voters saying she is made of the right stuff for a premier. Some 32 per cent said they would be tempted to back a Labour party led by her.
I know I don't pay as much attention to the goings on at oor toon council as I should but...who?
Poor junior minister who’s got the unenviable job of reading the Budget speech out today, after her boss screwed up in the most fantastic way possible.
Yes. She was born in 1990 (should she not still be at school?) She has quite an impressive academic record but I was genuinely unaware of her existence until this morning.
29/30 year olds should be at school?
I'm just getting old. 1990 seems very recent to me.
1990 seems recent to me as well, although I was still (just) in primary school at the time. I don't think life has changed much since 1990. Most of the big changes happened between about 1960 and 1985 in my opinion.
Really? The internet wasn't really a thing in the 1990s. Now our lives revolve around online services. The iPhone is only 10 years old, and now look what the magical machine in our pockets can do.
Conservatives are on 47 per cent, up two points from the election result of December 12, and Labour is down three to 30 per cent. The Lib Dems are down a point to 11 with the Greens up two to five. Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party has faded to just one per cent, suggesting it is currently deemed redundant in Boris Johnson’s Britain.
The poll finds 35% could vote Labour under Starmer, 33% under Thornberry, 32% under Nandy but just 28% under Long Bailey.
So Starmer would take Labour back to 2005 levels, Thornberry and Nandy would see no change on Labour's 2019 vote and Long Bailey would lead Labour to an even worse result than Corbyn did last year and polling even worse than the 30% they are now on
I know I don't pay as much attention to the goings on at oor toon council as I should but...who?
Poor junior minister who’s got the unenviable job of reading the Budget speech out today, after her boss screwed up in the most fantastic way possible.
Yes. She was born in 1990 (should she not still be at school?) She has quite an impressive academic record but I was genuinely unaware of her existence until this morning.
29/30 year olds should be at school?
I'm just getting old. 1990 seems very recent to me.
1990 seems recent to me as well, although I was still (just) in primary school at the time. I don't think life has changed much since 1990. Most of the big changes happened between about 1960 and 1990 IMO. For instance, I remember using touch screen computers at a science fair in the late 1980s, so I don't particularly regard smartphones as a big development of recent years. Also I tried out using a fibre-optic internet connection in about 1994 in Florida.
BBC4 is rescreening the hit/cult 1990s TV series “This Life” right now. A reminder of how far away the 1990s was, in many aspects of lifestyle and working culture at least, with London feeling a very different place
The other day I argued that terrorists should get a life sentence and only be released after a parole board considers themselves no longer a risk to the public. Looking at the case coming up which the government is considering rushing its legislation forward for to prevent early release, I don't see why we should be squabbling over 2 or 4 years, this guy should be locked up for life unless or until he is rehabilitated: https://news.sky.com/story/terror-prisoner-set-for-release-had-called-for-year-of-fear-11927196
Encouraging murder should be considered as serious as committing murder. If you pay someone to murder your wife you'd be eligible for a life sentence so why shouldn't this terrorist?
Slightly unrelated to your point but I think one factor behind the Government’s move to decriminalise payment of the licence fee is to free up the courts.
Prosecutions run into the hundreds of thousands at the moment. I think they represent over 10% of all cases.
They take up far less court time (because it’s a standard script, and guilty/not guilty plea followed by a fine) but the sheer volume and bureaucracy of the process is perhaps something they’re trying to relieve off the magistrates.
Conservatives are on 47 per cent, up two points from the election result of December 12, and Labour is down three to 30 per cent. The Lib Dems are down a point to 11 with the Greens up two to five. Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party has faded to just one per cent, suggesting it is currently deemed redundant in Boris Johnson’s Britain.
The poll finds 35% would vote Labour under Starmer, 33% under Thornberry, 32% under Nandy but just 28% under Long Bailey.
So Starmer would take Labour back to 2005 levels, Thornberry and Nandy would see no change in Labour's vote and Long Bailey would lead Labour to an even worse result than Corbyn did last year
I think Labour are going to choose Starmer although Ms Nandy would probably be a slightly better choice IMO.
The other day I argued that terrorists should get a life sentence and only be released after a parole board considers themselves no longer a risk to the public. Looking at the case coming up which the government is considering rushing its legislation forward for to prevent early release, I don't see why we should be squabbling over 2 or 4 years, this guy should be locked up for life unless or until he is rehabilitated: https://news.sky.com/story/terror-prisoner-set-for-release-had-called-for-year-of-fear-11927196
Encouraging murder should be considered as serious as committing murder. If you pay someone to murder your wife you'd be eligible for a life sentence so why shouldn't this terrorist?
But this guy, to take a specific example, was convicted of downloading offensive material from the internet. It was a legitimate concern (as it turned out) but locked up for life?
The other day I argued that terrorists should get a life sentence and only be released after a parole board considers themselves no longer a risk to the public. Looking at the case coming up which the government is considering rushing its legislation forward for to prevent early release, I don't see why we should be squabbling over 2 or 4 years, this guy should be locked up for life unless or until he is rehabilitated: https://news.sky.com/story/terror-prisoner-set-for-release-had-called-for-year-of-fear-11927196
Encouraging murder should be considered as serious as committing murder. If you pay someone to murder your wife you'd be eligible for a life sentence so why shouldn't this terrorist?
But this guy, to take a specific example, was convicted of downloading offensive material from the internet. It was a legitimate concern (as it turned out) but locked up for life?
Yes life. Unless or until he is rehabilitated and only if he is convicted after a free and fair trial.
I bet when she was a child, going round to Baker St to collect the rent off her Fathers tenants, she never dreamed she would be sending her own son to private school.
Father welder according to god of Wiki.
Parents got divorced - mother didn't remarry Rachman did she?
I cant remember what he did for a living, she spoke of it on her Desert Island Discs. They moved to Harrow and her Dad had a place in town he rented out.
So he was a landlord collecting rents?
Edit for your edit: I see - so not exactly the Wolf of Willesden, meanwhile quite a nasty slur from you.
Where's the slur? She says it herself in the link I provide; she used to go to Paddington (not Baker St) and collect the rents of a Saturday.
Still smarting after you misinterpreted my comments about Muslims the other day, and looking for an equaliser... I didn't think you'd be ready to leave it yet to be fair.
No funnily enough it's the other way round. ut right.
Privately owning a home and renting out a second in the 1960s was privileged I would say, at a time when most working class people lived in council houses.
The other day I said "until they have control" meaning "until they have control" - you misinterpreted it as "until they are under control", because you prejudiced my post as being offensive to muslims and wanted to virtue signal. Oh well, it happens, people are desperate to win arguments and unable to admit mistakes on here, I dont mind.
This is what you wrote:
"A lot less immigration 40 odd years ago was the solution. I don't think there is one now really, the number of muslims will increase and, until they have some sort of official control, so will the radicals, so as @Cyclefree it is a counsel of despair."
It reads a lot better if you leave out words and don't repeat the entire quote, on that I do agree.
Quite funny that what you have reproduced there is not the entire quote, as in the next sentence I said “having official representation” which should have made clear what I meant by ‘having control’
I know I don't pay as much attention to the goings on at oor toon council as I should but...who?
Poor junior minister who’s got the unenviable job of reading the Budget speech out today, after her boss screwed up in the most fantastic way possible.
Yes. She was born in 1990 (should she not still be at school?) She has quite an impressive academic record but I was genuinely unaware of her existence until this morning.
29/30 year olds should be at school?
I'm just getting old. 1990 seems very recent to me.
1990 seems recent to me as well, although I was still (just) in primary school at the time. I don't think life has changed much since 1990. Most of the big changes happened between about 1960 and 1985 in my opinion.
Really? The internet wasn't really a thing in the 1990s. Now our lives revolve around online services. The iPhone is only 10 years old, and now look what the magical machine in our pockets can do.
I agree. I called at the Scottish bar in 2000. We still had pagers so that we could know to pick up phone calls on land lines. Most of us had mobiles but they weren't the main mode of communication for work related matters. Our mobile numbers tended to be kept private.
I used to get papers made from dead trees. Now I seem to have to print them out all the time. Working out what the current state of play on a statute could take hours. Now Westlaw gives this instantly, not only on the day but any other day that might be relevant. Things have changed massively over the last 20 years, far more than they did 1983-2000 (although there were changes in that period as well, of course).
Conservatives are on 47 per cent, up two points from the election result of December 12, and Labour is down three to 30 per cent. The Lib Dems are down a point to 11 with the Greens up two to five. Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party has faded to just one per cent, suggesting it is currently deemed redundant in Boris Johnson’s Britain.
The poll finds 35% would vote Labour under Starmer, 33% under Thornberry, 32% under Nandy but just 28% under Long Bailey.
So Starmer would take Labour back to 2005 levels, Thornberry and Nandy would see no change in Labour's vote and Long Bailey would lead Labour to an even worse result than Corbyn did last year
I think Labour are going to choose Starmer although Ms Nandy would probably be a slightly better choice IMO.
Starmer would be the best choice for Labour if it wants to appeal to middle class Tory and LD and SNP voting Remainers, Nandy if it wants to appeal to working class Tory and Brexit Party Leavers, Long Bailey though would appeal to neither
Rowena Mason ✔ @rowenamason From lobby: -Stanley Johnson was acting as a “private citizen” -PM denies calling Sturgeon “that wee Jimmy Crankie woman” over COP26 row -Govt and Royal Family reviewing whether flag should fly for Prince Andrew bday -Govt won’t necessarily support 2nd term for Baroness Scotland
People tend to say opinion polls are a waste of time at present, but if they stay like this until May the Tories could really clean up at the local elections.
People tend to say opinion polls are a waste of time at present, but if they stay like this until May the Tories could really clean up at the local elections.
They're at a very high bar already from May 2017 though.
I think the odds are about right, but if I was having a nibble it would be on Byrne. It was very close last time and Labour weren't that popular in 2017 either. This was at the height of Corbyn's surge, which is in Street's favour (since no such surge is happening now). But on the other hand the 2019 election showed bigger anti-Tory tactical voting than 2017. It didn't matter because the Tory lead was too much and there were too many seats where it wasn't obvious who to switch to, but neither of those apply here so it might be helpful to Labour (more LD/Grn votes in 2017 than UKIP).
People tend to say opinion polls are a waste of time at present, but if they stay like this until May the Tories could really clean up at the local elections.
And it could define the new Lab leader if within his first month i office Labour lost 3-400 councilors.
Looking at the wikipidia page, the greens seem to be defending almost as many seats as the Lib Dems. that doesn't seem right, has somebody added the total amount of Green councilors to that page, or have the greens done much better than I realized?
People tend to say opinion polls are a waste of time at present, but if they stay like this until May the Tories could really clean up at the local elections.
They're at a very high bar already from May 2017 though.
It's May 2016 that are up this year - when Corbyn beat Cameron.
People tend to say opinion polls are a waste of time at present, but if they stay like this until May the Tories could really clean up at the local elections.
By May Starmer will likely be Labour leader and 35% will then vote Labour if Mori is correct, however Labour would collapse to just 28% under Long Bailey.
The Tories need Long Bailey to win to make big gains rather than minimise losses given Labour got 31% in 2016 when the wards up this year were last up
People tend to say opinion polls are a waste of time at present, but if they stay like this until May the Tories could really clean up at the local elections.
They're at a very high bar already from May 2017 though.
It's May 2016 that are up this year - when Corbyn beat Cameron.
Quite funny that what you have reproduced there is not the entire quote, as in the next sentence I said “having official representation” which should have made clear what I meant by ‘having control’
This was the next sentence:
The only thing that will stop Islamic extremism is Islamic representation, and then we will see more right wing extremism, so its all bad
I'm not 100% sure that at the time, pre-clarification, it was clear what you meant. I now will hazard a guess that you meant that there should be some kind of official (and yes Muslim) body which can oversee and control Muslims. In which case there would, apparently, be a rise of right wing extremism to combat this. I'm not sure any of that follows.
As I said Sam, I am delighted that you are not a racist, or xenophobe, and will take all your posts in that light. But as you have acknowledged, and I appreciate that life isn't fair like this, when you laud Enoch Powell, who most certainly was a racist; are a former member of UKIP; say that the solution was to have had less immigration 40 years ago; bemoan the changing character of the streets you grew up in, and not because there are now two Costas and a Starbucks there; and have talked about white flight, you must accept that the burden of proof is slightly higher as otherwise we are talking duck profiling here.
Now I also accept that you say you are not a racist and that you might say, indeed have said sod it, who cares what they think burden of proof, schmurden of proof. And that is your right and we are an internet chat room so actually who cares. And also as I'm sure it is for you, this exchange is getting very boring.
So look - you say what you say, I'll say what I say - that's how these chat rooms work and we'll take it from there.
538 now has Sanders as favourite in every single primary and caucus.
Though it may be overestimating the impact of Iowa, since it will have been blunted by the drip-feeding of results and the impeachment news.
I agree, if Sanders wins Iowa on all 3 counts then the perception would be that he not only won, but that he beat those who tried to cheat him out of victory.
Conservatives are on 47 per cent, up two points from the election result of December 12, and Labour is down three to 30 per cent. The Lib Dems are down a point to 11 with the Greens up two to five. Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party has faded to just one per cent, suggesting it is currently deemed redundant in Boris Johnson’s Britain.
The poll finds 35% could vote Labour under Starmer, 33% under Thornberry, 32% under Nandy but just 28% under Long Bailey.
So Starmer would take Labour back to 2005 levels, Thornberry and Nandy would see no change on Labour's 2019 vote and Long Bailey would lead Labour to an even worse result than Corbyn did last year and polling even worse than the 30% they are now on
People tend to say opinion polls are a waste of time at present, but if they stay like this until May the Tories could really clean up at the local elections.
Starmer might be basking in his honeymoon by then.
538 now has Sanders as favourite in every single primary and caucus.
Though it may be overestimating the impact of Iowa, since it will have been blunted by the drip-feeding of results and the impeachment news.
I agree, if Sanders wins Iowa on all 3 counts then the perception would be that he not only won, but that he beat those who tried to cheat him out of victory.
It will be an entirely different race.
Especially since he's very likely to win NH, and at that point- if he finishes ahead in Iowa- it's hard to report that as anything except "won the first two states".
Conservatives are on 47 per cent, up two points from the election result of December 12, and Labour is down three to 30 per cent. The Lib Dems are down a point to 11 with the Greens up two to five. Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party has faded to just one per cent, suggesting it is currently deemed redundant in Boris Johnson’s Britain.
The poll finds 35% could vote Labour under Starmer, 33% under Thornberry, 32% under Nandy but just 28% under Long Bailey.
So Starmer would take Labour back to 2005 levels, Thornberry and Nandy would see no change on Labour's 2019 vote and Long Bailey would lead Labour to an even worse result than Corbyn did last year and polling even worse than the 30% they are now on
In reality, I expect Labour to hit 40% quite early on if Starmer is elected - a bounce for new leader combined with fading of Johnson honeymoon.
I doubt it will be that high, Cameron took the Tories up to about 35/36% when he took over in late 2005 and on this poll Starmer would get about the same.
Leavers will stick with the Tories even if some Remainers shift from Tory to Labour or LD if Starmer wins the Labour leadership
I don't think its appropriate to align all the Mayoral elections together. If anything given how London-dominated our media is I'd try to deliberately ensure they vote at a different time to London.
Having much of the whole country elect a Mayor at the same time risks turning this into a national campaign rather than local individual campaigns.
I don't think its appropriate to align all the Mayoral elections together. If anything given how London-dominated our media is I'd try to deliberately ensure they vote at a different time to London.
Having much of the whole country elect a Mayor at the same time risks turning this into a national campaign rather than local individual campaigns.
538 now has Sanders as favourite in every single primary and caucus.
Though it may be overestimating the impact of Iowa, since it will have been blunted by the drip-feeding of results and the impeachment news.
I agree, if Sanders wins Iowa on all 3 counts then the perception would be that he not only won, but that he beat those who tried to cheat him out of victory.
It will be an entirely different race.
Especially since he's very likely to win NH, and at that point- if he finishes ahead in Iowa- it's hard to report that as anything except "won the first two states".
It looks like it will end up with Buttigieg chasing Sanders to the convention to me, with Bloomberg doing his best to cockblock the second but actually ending up cockblocking the first instead.
538 now has Sanders as favourite in every single primary and caucus.
Though it may be overestimating the impact of Iowa, since it will have been blunted by the drip-feeding of results and the impeachment news.
I agree, if Sanders wins Iowa on all 3 counts then the perception would be that he not only won, but that he beat those who tried to cheat him out of victory.
It will be an entirely different race.
Especially since he's very likely to win NH, and at that point- if he finishes ahead in Iowa- it's hard to report that as anything except "won the first two states".
It looks like it will end up with Buttigieg chasing Sanders to the convention to me, with Bloomberg doing his best to cockblock the second but actually ending up cockblocking the first instead.
Boomerberg is an amazing candidate for Sanders to be against tbh.
538 now has Sanders as favourite in every single primary and caucus.
Though it may be overestimating the impact of Iowa, since it will have been blunted by the drip-feeding of results and the impeachment news.
I agree, if Sanders wins Iowa on all 3 counts then the perception would be that he not only won, but that he beat those who tried to cheat him out of victory.
It will be an entirely different race.
Especially since he's very likely to win NH, and at that point- if he finishes ahead in Iowa- it's hard to report that as anything except "won the first two states".
It looks like it will end up with Buttigieg chasing Sanders to the convention to me, with Bloomberg doing his best to cockblock the second but actually ending up cockblocking the first instead.
I'm really confused now. Has Sanders actually moved ahead? According to the NYT Buttigieg is still all of 0.1% ahead after 97% of the vote has allegedly been counted.
To call that pro-Brexit thing a song is stretching the definition of a song. Its just a list of complaints of individuals who were anti-Brexit. Its not even clever or funny.
I'm really confused now. Has Sanders actually moved ahead? According to the NYT Buttigieg is still all of 0.1% ahead after 97% of the vote has allegedly been counted.
From what we know of the remaining district (a satellite district) it's likely to be strong for Sanders. Whether it will be enough for him to overtake is unclear- the NYT needle makes him a narrow favourite at 54%.
538 now has Sanders as favourite in every single primary and caucus.
Though it may be overestimating the impact of Iowa, since it will have been blunted by the drip-feeding of results and the impeachment news.
I agree, if Sanders wins Iowa on all 3 counts then the perception would be that he not only won, but that he beat those who tried to cheat him out of victory.
It will be an entirely different race.
Especially since he's very likely to win NH, and at that point- if he finishes ahead in Iowa- it's hard to report that as anything except "won the first two states".
It looks like it will end up with Buttigieg chasing Sanders to the convention to me, with Bloomberg doing his best to cockblock the second but actually ending up cockblocking the first instead.
538 now has Sanders as favourite in every single primary and caucus.
Though it may be overestimating the impact of Iowa, since it will have been blunted by the drip-feeding of results and the impeachment news.
I agree, if Sanders wins Iowa on all 3 counts then the perception would be that he not only won, but that he beat those who tried to cheat him out of victory.
It will be an entirely different race.
Especially since he's very likely to win NH, and at that point- if he finishes ahead in Iowa- it's hard to report that as anything except "won the first two states".
It looks like it will end up with Buttigieg chasing Sanders to the convention to me, with Bloomberg doing his best to cockblock the second but actually ending up cockblocking the first instead.
Buttigieg isn't going to get a sniff after NH.
Amusing Buttigieg comes second, countably beating Biden, then I think its more likely he will be perceived as the standard barre of the moderators, and then the Nevada Caucus, could produce the same results.
Twitter seem to be getting rather busy on the using the ban hammer recently. First it was baby yoda parody account, then katie hopkins, zerohedge and now James O'Keefe.
538 now has Sanders as favourite in every single primary and caucus.
Though it may be overestimating the impact of Iowa, since it will have been blunted by the drip-feeding of results and the impeachment news.
I agree, if Sanders wins Iowa on all 3 counts then the perception would be that he not only won, but that he beat those who tried to cheat him out of victory.
It will be an entirely different race.
Especially since he's very likely to win NH, and at that point- if he finishes ahead in Iowa- it's hard to report that as anything except "won the first two states".
It looks like it will end up with Buttigieg chasing Sanders to the convention to me, with Bloomberg doing his best to cockblock the second but actually ending up cockblocking the first instead.
Buttigieg isn't going to get a sniff after NH.
Why?
Look at how he's been polling in those states. Iowa was demographically a dream for him, his campaign threw all of its resources there, and this was the best he could do. If he maintains his lead in Iowa pulls off an upset in NH then that might just give him a boost, but otherwise he's going to run smack into Nevada and SC where he's polling at an average of 7% and 5%, then limp into super Tuesday with no momentum, dreadful national numbers, and massive liabilities in the minority vote. Basically, he's just not very popular.
This bit? The bit where the writer of Die Hard gets asked if it's a Christmas movie and says "Yes", and then adds the hashtag #DieHardIsAChristmasMovie.. That convinced you?!
Quite funny that what you have reproduced there is not the entire quote, as in the next sentence I said “having official representation” which should have made clear what I meant by ‘having control’
This was the next sentence:
The only thing that will stop Islamic extremism is Islamic representation, and then we will see more right wing extremism, so its all bad
I'm not 100% sure that at the time, pre-clarification, it was clear what you meant. I now will hazard a guess that you meant that there should be some kind of official (and yes Muslim) body which can oversee and control Muslims. In which case there would, apparently, be a rise of right wing extremism to combat this. I'm not sure any of that follows.
As I said Sam, I am delighted that you are not a racist, or xenophobe, and will take all your posts in that light. But as you have acknowledged, and I appreciate that life isn't fair like this, when you laud Enoch Powell, who most certainly was a racist; are a former member of UKIP; say that the solution was to have had less immigration 40 years ago; bemoan the changing character of the streets you grew up in, and not because there are now two Costas and a Starbucks there; and have talked about white flight, you must accept that the burden of proof is slightly higher as otherwise we are talking duck profiling here.
Now I also accept that you say you are not a racist and that you might say, indeed have said sod it, who cares what they think burden of proof, schmurden of proof. And that is your right and we are an internet chat room so actually who cares. And also as I'm sure it is for you, this exchange is getting very boring.
So look - you say what you say, I'll say what I say - that's how these chat rooms work and we'll take it from there.
No you are wrong again as you strain to be right the first time. I meant representation for Muslims as in they would have a party elected that prioritised them, not done official body that controls them. A mechanism that gives THEM control. I don’t think they should be ‘controlled’ it’s a figment if your imagination
Comments
Disclaimer: I have never seen a full episode of Top Gear as it appears to be a program for children and people who use 'ace' as an adjective.
Fair enough, you think I am motivated by racial and religious hatred, and interpret what I write thorough that prism.
BTW Derek Mackay joins Mark McDonald on the Holyrood naughty step.
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/4565715/sleaze-shame-msp-mark-mcdonald-split-wife-mum/
None of that makes you a racist or motivated by religious hatred, but it does mean that pronouncements you make, given that I don't know you, are liable to be examined in that context.
If none of that crossed your mind and you are race "blind" and you can't think of anything more ridiculous than categorising people by virtue of their race or colour or whatever, then I am happy to apologise to you and will take your posts and see them through the prism of an avowed anti-racist.
Anyway it’s not for me to tell you how to interpret what you read, I’ll just correct you when you misinterpret what I write and have a pop at me on the back of it.
There’s something in it for both sides to be seen to have struck some sort of non-contentious deal they can ‘build on’ later, but never will.
https://twitter.com/jonwalker121/status/1225386026992050176
Encouraging murder should be considered as serious as committing murder. If you pay someone to murder your wife you'd be eligible for a life sentence so why shouldn't this terrorist?
Conservatives are on 47 per cent, up two points from the election result of December 12, and Labour is down three to 30 per cent. The Lib Dems are down a point to 11 with the Greens up two to five. Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party has faded to just one per cent, suggesting it is currently deemed redundant in Boris Johnson’s Britain.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/rebecca-longbailey-labour-leadership-standard-poll-ipsos-mori-a4355286.html
Rebecca Long-Bailey is trailing in last place in the Labour leadership contest among the ordinary voters who the party most needs to impress, an exclusive poll reveals today.
The Left-winger dubbed “Continuity Corbyn” has even fallen behind Emily Thornberry when it comes to public support, found Ipsos MORI, despite being backed by some trade union leaders and Labour branches.
The findings are a major setback to the Long-Bailey bandwagon, which started out as favourite to inherit the Labour crown from mentor Jeremy Corbyn. Her campaign failed to gather momentum amid divisions among supporters and internal rows over tactics. Researchers from Ipsos MORI asked which of the four candidates had “what it takes to be prime minister” and whether people would be likely to consider voting Labour with them in charge.
Sir Keir Starmer, the current frontrunner and shadow Brexit secretary, had the best score with 32 per cent of the public and 45 per cent of Labour voters saying he has what it takes to run Britain. Some 35 per cent of the public said they could back Labour with him in charge.
Lisa Nandy, the long-shot rising star of the campaign, came second with 23 per cent of the public and 33 per cent of Labour voters saying she is made of the right stuff for a premier. Some 32 per cent said they would be tempted to back a Labour party led by her.
So Starmer would take Labour back to 2005 levels, Thornberry and Nandy would see no change on Labour's 2019 vote and Long Bailey would lead Labour to an even worse result than Corbyn did last year and polling even worse than the 30% they are now on
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/rebecca-longbailey-labour-leadership-standard-poll-ipsos-mori-a4355286.html
Prosecutions run into the hundreds of thousands at the moment. I think they represent over 10% of all cases.
They take up far less court time (because it’s a standard script, and guilty/not guilty plea followed by a fine) but the sheer volume and bureaucracy of the process is perhaps something they’re trying to relieve off the magistrates.
New market, what are your thoughts?
I used to get papers made from dead trees. Now I seem to have to print them out all the time. Working out what the current state of play on a statute could take hours. Now Westlaw gives this instantly, not only on the day but any other day that might be relevant. Things have changed massively over the last 20 years, far more than they did 1983-2000 (although there were changes in that period as well, of course).
Rowena Mason
✔
@rowenamason
From lobby:
-Stanley Johnson was acting as a “private citizen”
-PM denies calling Sturgeon “that wee Jimmy Crankie woman” over COP26 row
-Govt and Royal Family reviewing whether flag should fly for Prince Andrew bday
-Govt won’t necessarily support 2nd term for Baroness Scotland
1
11:24 AM - Feb 6, 2020
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_Kingdom_local_elections
Looking at the wikipidia page, the greens seem to be defending almost as many seats as the Lib Dems. that doesn't seem right, has somebody added the total amount of Green councilors to that page, or have the greens done much better than I realized?
Though it may be overestimating the impact of Iowa, since it will have been blunted by the drip-feeding of results and the impeachment news.
I had a bad feeling on the first night that this controversial coin toss will be the one that would determine the Winner:
https://twitter.com/awzurcher/status/1224533900946485250
He caught the coin between his fingers and they arbitrarily decided that Buttigieg won the coin toss.
Of course the lawyers will have a word about that.
The Tories need Long Bailey to win to make big gains rather than minimise losses given Labour got 31% in 2016 when the wards up this year were last up
How is the record and reputation of Street in Birmingham?
The only thing that will stop Islamic extremism is Islamic representation, and then we will see more right wing extremism, so its all bad
I'm not 100% sure that at the time, pre-clarification, it was clear what you meant. I now will hazard a guess that you meant that there should be some kind of official (and yes Muslim) body which can oversee and control Muslims. In which case there would, apparently, be a rise of right wing extremism to combat this. I'm not sure any of that follows.
As I said Sam, I am delighted that you are not a racist, or xenophobe, and will take all your posts in that light. But as you have acknowledged, and I appreciate that life isn't fair like this, when you laud Enoch Powell, who most certainly was a racist; are a former member of UKIP; say that the solution was to have had less immigration 40 years ago; bemoan the changing character of the streets you grew up in, and not because there are now two Costas and a Starbucks there; and have talked about white flight, you must accept that the burden of proof is slightly higher as otherwise we are talking duck profiling here.
Now I also accept that you say you are not a racist and that you might say, indeed have said sod it, who cares what they think burden of proof, schmurden of proof. And that is your right and we are an internet chat room so actually who cares. And also as I'm sure it is for you, this exchange is getting very boring.
So look - you say what you say, I'll say what I say - that's how these chat rooms work and we'll take it from there.
It will be an entirely different race.
Leavers will stick with the Tories even if some Remainers shift from Tory to Labour or LD if Starmer wins the Labour leadership
Having much of the whole country elect a Mayor at the same time risks turning this into a national campaign rather than local individual campaigns.
However. I'm glad it did not win, we should be trying to bring the contrary together not gloating, or trolling the other side.
But there we go.
https://twitter.com/MrJohnBates/status/1225137587523923968
(I know the video is fake, so don't @ me)
Is it the bit where he says Merry Christmas in the middle of Ode to Joy (1:45) that convinces you?
https://ew.com/movies/2018/07/15/bruce-willis-die-hard-not-christmas-movie/
NEW THREAD
Either that or Dems have totally lost their minds and decided to help Trump to four more years.
https://twitter.com/StevenEdeSouza/status/944812347461218305?s=20
This bit? The bit where the writer of Die Hard gets asked if it's a Christmas movie and says "Yes", and then adds the hashtag #DieHardIsAChristmasMovie.. That convinced you?!
... and I didn’t say I wasn’t a racist!