politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Ladbrokes make it 2/1 that RLB will finish third behind Starme

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Ladbrokes make it 2/1 that RLB will finish third behind Starmer and Nandy in its leadership finishing order market

Ladbrokes have this market on the correct finishing order in the Labour leadership market after the final round.

Read the full story here

rcs1000

Humiliating?

Considering her talents, third is an extraordinary achievement, and she should be congratulated. It's as if a British skier managed a Bronze in the Olympic Downhill.

MattW

Yes, but which one is Konrad Bartelski?

"Skiing like a madman"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_OAU6tph_U&t=18

DecrepiterJohnL

rcs1000 said:

Humiliating?

Considering her talents, third is an extraordinary achievement, and she should be congratulated. It's as if a British skier managed a Bronze in the Olympic Downhill.

Given all the election reports from MPs canvassing that Corbyn's very name was toxic, and the post-election surveys that said the same thing, RLB's Corbynism-without-Corbyn is surely just the ticket.

On the other hand, if you think these surveys and reports are just Red Tory propaganda, and the real problem was Labour's muddled and perplexing Brexit position, oh hold on, no, that policy was due to Keir Starmer. Damn.

rcs1000

DecrepiterJohnL said:

rcs1000 said:

Humiliating?

Considering her talents, third is an extraordinary achievement, and she should be congratulated. It's as if a British skier managed a Bronze in the Olympic Downhill.

Given all the election reports from MPs canvassing that Corbyn's very name was toxic, and the post-election surveys that said the same thing, RLB's Corbynism-without-Corbyn is surely just the ticket.

On the other hand, if you think these surveys and reports are just Red Tory propaganda, and the real problem was Labour's muddled and perplexing Brexit position, oh hold on, no, that policy was due to Keir Starmer. Damn.

Ahhh... you're suffering from "Sole Actor Syndrome" which is a condition I invented for finance, but it true of almost anything.

Labour's disaster wasn't the result of a single problem, but a whole bunch working together to create utter unelectability.

DecrepiterJohnL

£50 to £60,000 does not seem a lot for a new Whitehall HR boss i/c SpAds, weirdos and misfits.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/alexwickham/civil-service-dominic-cummings-hr-rules

If you are up for it, the job advert is here:
https://www.civilservicejobs.service.gov.uk/csr/jobs.cgi?jcode=1666562

rcs1000

Bernie backers, here's an excellent article: https://nyti.ms/2uosZGZ

Now, though, Sanders has evidently decided that progressives will no longer accept impurities — or even much tactical vagueness. He, along with Elizabeth Warren, has embraced policies that are popular on the left and nowhere else: a ban on fracking; the decriminalization of border crossings; the provision of federal health benefits to undocumented immigrants; the elimination of private health insurance.

For many progressives, each of these issues has become a moral litmus test. Any restriction of immigration is considered a denial of human rights. Any compromise on guns or health care is an acceptance of preventable deaths.

And I understand the progressive arguments on these issues. But turning every compromise into an existential moral failing is not a smart way to practice politics. It comforts the persuaded while alienating the persuadable.

CarlottaVance

One reason Indonesia (so far) has no reported Covid-19 cases may be prompt deportation of foreign nationals:

https://coconuts.co/jakarta/news/health-ministry-waiting-on-official-reports-of-japanese-covid-19-patient-entering-indonesia/

Feb 15 Japanese national arrives in Indonesia.
Feb 19 he's been hospitalised in Tokyo.

While the health ministry won't go into specifics over who was deported when - a 2 day holiday with a sixteen hour round-trip flight seems unlikely.

rcs1000

DecrepiterJohnL said:

£50 to £60,000 does not seem a lot for a new Whitehall HR boss i/c SpAds, weirdos and misfits.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/alexwickham/civil-service-dominic-cummings-hr-rules

If you are up for it, the job advert is here:
https://www.civilservicejobs.service.gov.uk/csr/jobs.cgi?jcode=1666562

Do you report to Dominic Cummings? If so, pay is an order of magnitude too low..

DecrepiterJohnL

rcs1000 said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

rcs1000 said:

Humiliating?

Considering her talents, third is an extraordinary achievement, and she should be congratulated. It's as if a British skier managed a Bronze in the Olympic Downhill.

Given all the election reports from MPs canvassing that Corbyn's very name was toxic, and the post-election surveys that said the same thing, RLB's Corbynism-without-Corbyn is surely just the ticket.

On the other hand, if you think these surveys and reports are just Red Tory propaganda, and the real problem was Labour's muddled and perplexing Brexit position, oh hold on, no, that policy was due to Keir Starmer. Damn.

Ahhh... you're suffering from "Sole Actor Syndrome" which is a condition I invented for finance, but it true of almost anything.

Labour's disaster wasn't the result of a single problem, but a whole bunch working together to create utter unelectability.

No, I am not but everyone else is. This was reported by Labour MPs and ex-MPs, and by post-election surveys.

For instance: Corbyn name ‘toxified’ popular Labour policies in general election campaign, poll suggests.
Polling by BMG for The Independent suggested that voters liked the party’s policies on issues like nationalisation, climate change and taxation until they were told they were linked to Corbyn.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/corybn-labour-policies-toxic-general-election-2019-leadership-latest-a9279946.html

And there is lots more in the same vein thrown up by Google.

Fwiw, I believe the story of Labour's defeat was more complex and has yet to be told, and combines Corbyn's health and eyesight, an election programme so bad that it could have been directed by a Tory mole, and under-the-radar micro- targeted propaganda from CCHQ whose precise nature is yet to be revealed, but in any case, I do not have a vote in the leadership contest.

What I am pointing out is the paradoxical behaviour of Corbyn's opponents inside and outside Labour. If they believe what they (and many pb Tories) say then they should be voting for RLB. But they won't.

edmundintokyo

CarlottaVance said:

One reason Indonesia (so far) has no reported Covid-19 cases may be prompt deportation of foreign nationals:

https://coconuts.co/jakarta/news/health-ministry-waiting-on-official-reports-of-japanese-covid-19-patient-entering-indonesia/

Feb 15 Japanese national arrives in Indonesia.
Feb 19 he's been hospitalised in Tokyo.

While the health ministry won't go into specifics over who was deported when - a 2 day holiday with a sixteen hour round-trip flight seems unlikely.

The problem with this is that you may test negative then show up positive a week later, so deporting people when you detect them at the border doesn't really stop it getting in. Arguably it just makes it harder to detect and contain, because people who actually want to stay will avoid reporting symptoms. (I imagine if this guy's symptoms got worse on the way over or whatever he was happy to be back in Japan rather than experiencing an extended holiday in Indonesian quarantine.)

rcs1000

DecrepiterJohnL said:

rcs1000 said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

rcs1000 said:

Humiliating?

Considering her talents, third is an extraordinary achievement, and she should be congratulated. It's as if a British skier managed a Bronze in the Olympic Downhill.

Given all the election reports from MPs canvassing that Corbyn's very name was toxic, and the post-election surveys that said the same thing, RLB's Corbynism-without-Corbyn is surely just the ticket.

On the other hand, if you think these surveys and reports are just Red Tory propaganda, and the real problem was Labour's muddled and perplexing Brexit position, oh hold on, no, that policy was due to Keir Starmer. Damn.

Ahhh... you're suffering from "Sole Actor Syndrome" which is a condition I invented for finance, but it true of almost anything.

Labour's disaster wasn't the result of a single problem, but a whole bunch working together to create utter unelectability.

No, I am not but everyone else is. This was reported by Labour MPs and ex-MPs, and by post-election surveys.

For instance: Corbyn name ‘toxified’ popular Labour policies in general election campaign, poll suggests.
Polling by BMG for The Independent suggested that voters liked the party’s policies on issues like nationalisation, climate change and taxation until they were told they were linked to Corbyn.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/corybn-labour-policies-toxic-general-election-2019-leadership-latest-a9279946.html

And there is lots more in the same vein thrown up by Google.

Fwiw, I believe the story of Labour's defeat was more complex and has yet to be told, and combines Corbyn's health and eyesight, an election programme so bad that it could have been directed by a Tory mole, and under-the-radar micro- targeted propaganda from CCHQ whose precise nature is yet to be revealed, but in any case, I do not have a vote in the leadership contest.

What I am pointing out is the paradoxical behaviour of Corbyn's opponents inside and outside Labour. If they believe what they (and many pb Tories) say then they should be voting for RLB. But they won't.

Good post.

DecrepiterJohnL

rcs1000 said:

Bernie backers, here's an excellent article: https://nyti.ms/2uosZGZ

Now, though, Sanders has evidently decided that progressives will no longer accept impurities — or even much tactical vagueness. He, along with Elizabeth Warren, has embraced policies that are popular on the left and nowhere else: a ban on fracking; the decriminalization of border crossings; the provision of federal health benefits to undocumented immigrants; the elimination of private health insurance.

For many progressives, each of these issues has become a moral litmus test. Any restriction of immigration is considered a denial of human rights. Any compromise on guns or health care is an acceptance of preventable deaths.

And I understand the progressive arguments on these issues. But turning every compromise into an existential moral failing is not a smart way to practice politics. It comforts the persuaded while alienating the persuadable.

Ah but at least Bernie (and Elizabeth Warren) believe in something. Admittedly it is two or three weeks since I checked Mayor Pete's position but so far as I could see, he was campaigning on thin air, platitudes and general niceness. So vague was Buttigieg's programme, I could not even be sure he is in favour of motherhood and apple pie.

CarlottaVance

edmundintokyo said:

CarlottaVance said:

One reason Indonesia (so far) has no reported Covid-19 cases may be prompt deportation of foreign nationals:

https://coconuts.co/jakarta/news/health-ministry-waiting-on-official-reports-of-japanese-covid-19-patient-entering-indonesia/

Feb 15 Japanese national arrives in Indonesia.
Feb 19 he's been hospitalised in Tokyo.

While the health ministry won't go into specifics over who was deported when - a 2 day holiday with a sixteen hour round-trip flight seems unlikely.

The problem with this is that you may test negative then show up positive a week later, so deporting people when you detect them at the border doesn't really stop it getting in. Arguably it just makes it harder to detect and contain, because people who actually want to stay will avoid reporting symptoms. (I imagine if this guy's symptoms got worse on the way over or whatever he was happy to be back in Japan rather than experiencing an extended holiday in Indonesian quarantine.)

I thought people were more infectious when they were displaying symptoms (coughing, sneezing)? The individual deported was caught with an elevated temperature at the border. It won't stop it getting in, but it may help minimise spread.

rcs1000

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Ah but at least Bernie (and Elizabeth Warren) believe in something. Admittedly it is two or three weeks since I checked Mayor Pete's position but so far as I could see, he was campaigning on thin air, platitudes and general niceness. So vague was Buttigieg's programme, I could not even be sure he is in favour of motherhood and apple pie.

Why on earth would we want to elect someone who believes things?

CarlottaVance

On topic:

https://twitter.com/JMagosh/status/1231192177595895808?s=20

DecrepiterJohnL

CarlottaVance said:

On topic:

twitter.com/JMagosh/status/1231192177595895808?s=20

Labour is electing the Leader of the Opposition. That's not quite the same thing as Prime Minister.

CarlottaVance

DecrepiterJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

On topic:

twitter.com/JMagosh/status/1231192177595895808?s=20

Labour is electing the Leader of the Opposition. That's not quite the same thing as Prime Minister.

Only if Labour want to form a government.

DecrepiterJohnL

CarlottaVance said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

On topic:

twitter.com/JMagosh/status/1231192177595895808?s=20

Labour is electing the Leader of the Opposition. That's not quite the same thing as Prime Minister.

Only if Labour want to form a government.

Just looking prime ministerial is not enough: ask Michael Howard. The new LotO needs to discredit Boris and the Tories first.

CarlottaVance

DecrepiterJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

On topic:

twitter.com/JMagosh/status/1231192177595895808?s=20

Labour is electing the Leader of the Opposition. That's not quite the same thing as Prime Minister.

Only if Labour want to form a government.

Just looking prime ministerial is not enough: ask Michael Howard. The new LotO needs to discredit Boris and the Tories first.

I think he's got bigger problems than the government.

rcs1000

DecrepiterJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

On topic:

twitter.com/JMagosh/status/1231192177595895808?s=20

Labour is electing the Leader of the Opposition. That's not quite the same thing as Prime Minister.

Only if Labour want to form a government.

Just looking prime ministerial is not enough: ask Michael Howard. The new LotO needs to discredit Boris and the Tories first.

I'm not sure Michael Howard looked Prime Ministerial...

Sandpit

Asian markets are having a bad morning. Korea down 3%, Shanghai, Sydney and oil all down more than 2%.

Sandpit

On topic, that 2/1 looks like a good bet. Nandy seems to be picking up support from the hustings, and general membership rather than hardcore activists.

rcs1000

Sandpit said:

Asian markets are having a bad morning. Korea down 3%, Shanghai, Sydney and oil all down more than 2%.

Markets have looked pretty toppy for a while.

Sandpit

Back prices for the eight layable Dem candidates now total 87.5%, thats 7/1 on someone else.

Klobuchar almost unlayable now at 950. She’s 540 to back, which might be worth 10p

Betfair also have a Dem VP nom market, someone was asking on the last thread. It’s a bit thin at the moment though, probably because the President nom market is still so open.
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/event/28009878/multi-market?marketIds=1.168954647

Gallowgate

Snow on the Tyne this morning.

IanB2

Sandpit said:

Asian markets are having a bad morning. Korea down 3%, Shanghai, Sydney and oil all down more than 2%.

Yep. Looks like today is the day stock markets start thinking about the killer virus.

SouthamObserver

I would be very surprised indeed if Long-Bailey finishes behind Nandy. However, it’s clear there are multiple splits on the hard left and Long-Bailey is not inspiring any great enthusiasm. It could just be that a lot of people do not bother to vote at all. I always thought that a lot of Corbyn’s vote was personal. We may now see that confirmed.

Philip_Thompson

Sandpit said:

Back prices for the eight layable Dem candidates now total 87.5%, thats 7/1 on someone else.

Klobuchar almost unlayable now at 950. She’s 540 to back, which might be worth 10p

Betfair also have a Dem VP nom market, someone was asking on the last thread. It’s a bit thin at the moment though, probably because the President nom market is still so open.
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/event/28009878/multi-market?marketIds=1.168954647

Technically isn't it only 7/1 on someone else if the lay prices are at that percentage?

Fysics_Teacher

DecrepiterJohnL said:

rcs1000 said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

rcs1000 said:

Humiliating?

Considering her talents, third is an extraordinary achievement, and she should be congratulated. It's as if a British skier managed a Bronze in the Olympic Downhill.

Given all the election reports from MPs canvassing that Corbyn's very name was toxic, and the post-election surveys that said the same thing, RLB's Corbynism-without-Corbyn is surely just the ticket.

On the other hand, if you think these surveys and reports are just Red Tory propaganda, and the real problem was Labour's muddled and perplexing Brexit position, oh hold on, no, that policy was due to Keir Starmer. Damn.

Ahhh... you're suffering from "Sole Actor Syndrome" which is a condition I invented for finance, but it true of almost anything.

Labour's disaster wasn't the result of a single problem, but a whole bunch working together to create utter unelectability.

No, I am not but everyone else is. This was reported by Labour MPs and ex-MPs, and by post-election surveys.

For instance: Corbyn name ‘toxified’ popular Labour policies in general election campaign, poll suggests.
Polling by BMG for The Independent suggested that voters liked the party’s policies on issues like nationalisation, climate change and taxation until they were told they were linked to Corbyn.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/corybn-labour-policies-toxic-general-election-2019-leadership-latest-a9279946.html

And there is lots more in the same vein thrown up by Google.

Fwiw, I believe the story of Labour's defeat was more complex and has yet to be told, and combines Corbyn's health and eyesight, an election programme so bad that it could have been directed by a Tory mole, and under-the-radar micro- targeted propaganda from CCHQ whose precise nature is yet to be revealed, but in any case, I do not have a vote in the leadership contest.

What I am pointing out is the paradoxical behaviour of Corbyn's opponents inside and outside Labour. If they believe what they (and many pb Tories) say then they should be voting for RLB. But they won't.

There is a fascinating series of podcasts by Oz Katerji called “Corbynism - a post-mortem” which looks at much of this (although not the Tory side as yet).

https://audioboom.com/channels/5016299

Sandpit

Philip_Thompson said:

Sandpit said:

Back prices for the eight layable Dem candidates now total 87.5%, thats 7/1 on someone else.

Klobuchar almost unlayable now at 950. She’s 540 to back, which might be worth 10p

Betfair also have a Dem VP nom market, someone was asking on the last thread. It’s a bit thin at the moment though, probably because the President nom market is still so open.
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/event/28009878/multi-market?marketIds=1.168954647

Technically isn't it only 7/1 on someone else if the lay prices are at that percentage?

The difference between the back and lay prices simply mean that you get the 7/1 by laying all eight candidates.

Let me do another spreadsheet of the lay prices...

Morris_Dancer

Good morning, everyone.

Mr. Gate, bit surprised (hadn't seen any forecasts) to find a little snow here in Yorkshire too.

DecrepiterJohnL

CarlottaVance said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

On topic:

twitter.com/JMagosh/status/1231192177595895808?s=20

Labour is electing the Leader of the Opposition. That's not quite the same thing as Prime Minister.

Only if Labour want to form a government.

Just looking prime ministerial is not enough: ask Michael Howard. The new LotO needs to discredit Boris and the Tories first.

I think he's got bigger problems than the government.

Labour's biggest problem is Boris shot all their foxes. Boris won a near landslide victory by running against the Cameron and May governments. Boris won by being a better Corbyn than Corbyn: a populist leader promising to end austerity and invest in public services; more police, more nurses, more hospitals; even nationalising the sodding railways!

There is not much left for Labour. In three or four years time, maybe the Tories won't have delivered so Labour can run on managerialism, but right now, what is there?

The new leader's job is to undermine the government and especially the prime minister. New policies are an irrelevance. It is exposing the gap between Conservative rhetoric and reality that matters. Before Labour can win the next election, they need voters to think the Tories deserve to lose it.

TheScreamingEagles

Eesh, no one has got my 80s quiz show reference.

That’s my problem, I’m too damn subtle.

Sandpit

Okay, so the lay prices for the eight layable candidates sum to 84.1%, so you get about 7.2 on someone else (rather than 8 by) laying all eight.

(If I can do maths right before coffee).

Sandpit

TheScreamingEagles said:

Eesh, no one has got my 80s quiz show reference.

That’s my problem, I’m too damn subtle.

I’ll get that reference in 3, 2, 1..

squareroot2

Gallowgate said:

Snow on the Tyne this morning.

Wot no FOG?

Theuniondivvie

rcs1000 said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

On topic:

twitter.com/JMagosh/status/1231192177595895808?s=20

Labour is electing the Leader of the Opposition. That's not quite the same thing as Prime Minister.

Only if Labour want to form a government.

Just looking prime ministerial is not enough: ask Michael Howard. The new LotO needs to discredit Boris and the Tories first.

I'm not sure Michael Howard looked Prime Ministerial...

You WERE thinking what I was thinking.

ydoethur

Fysics_Teacher said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

rcs1000 said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

rcs1000 said:

Humiliating?

Considering her talents, third is an extraordinary achievement, and she should be congratulated. It's as if a British skier managed a Bronze in the Olympic Downhill.

Given all the election reports from MPs canvassing that Corbyn's very name was toxic, and the post-election surveys that said the same thing, RLB's Corbynism-without-Corbyn is surely just the ticket.

On the other hand, if you think these surveys and reports are just Red Tory propaganda, and the real problem was Labour's muddled and perplexing Brexit position, oh hold on, no, that policy was due to Keir Starmer. Damn.

Ahhh... you're suffering from "Sole Actor Syndrome" which is a condition I invented for finance, but it true of almost anything.

Labour's disaster wasn't the result of a single problem, but a whole bunch working together to create utter unelectability.

No, I am not but everyone else is. This was reported by Labour MPs and ex-MPs, and by post-election surveys.

For instance: Corbyn name ‘toxified’ popular Labour policies in general election campaign, poll suggests.
Polling by BMG for The Independent suggested that voters liked the party’s policies on issues like nationalisation, climate change and taxation until they were told they were linked to Corbyn.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/corybn-labour-policies-toxic-general-election-2019-leadership-latest-a9279946.html

And there is lots more in the same vein thrown up by Google.

Fwiw, I believe the story of Labour's defeat was more complex and has yet to be told, and combines Corbyn's health and eyesight, an election programme so bad that it could have been directed by a Tory mole, and under-the-radar micro- targeted propaganda from CCHQ whose precise nature is yet to be revealed, but in any case, I do not have a vote in the leadership contest.

What I am pointing out is the paradoxical behaviour of Corbyn's opponents inside and outside Labour. If they believe what they (and many pb Tories) say then they should be voting for RLB. But they won't.

There is a fascinating series of podcasts by Oz Katerji called “Corbynism - a post-mortem” which looks at much of this (although not the Tory side as yet).

https://audioboom.com/channels/5016299

I’ve only listened to one so far, but it was pretty shocking. I hadn’t come across this specific incident before:

https://www.thejc.com/comment/columnists/when-corbyn-insulted-me-what-did-he-mean-1.495769

SouthamObserver

DecrepiterJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

On topic:

twitter.com/JMagosh/status/1231192177595895808?s=20

Labour is electing the Leader of the Opposition. That's not quite the same thing as Prime Minister.

Only if Labour want to form a government.

Just looking prime ministerial is not enough: ask Michael Howard. The new LotO needs to discredit Boris and the Tories first.

I think he's got bigger problems than the government.

Labour's biggest problem is Boris shot all their foxes. Boris won a near landslide victory by running against the Cameron and May governments. Boris won by being a better Corbyn than Corbyn: a populist leader promising to end austerity and invest in public services; more police, more nurses, more hospitals; even nationalising the sodding railways!

There is not much left for Labour. In three or four years time, maybe the Tories won't have delivered so Labour can run on managerialism, but right now, what is there?

The new leader's job is to undermine the government and especially the prime minister. New policies are an irrelevance. It is exposing the gap between Conservative rhetoric and reality that matters. Before Labour can win the next election, they need voters to think the Tories deserve to lose it.

Spot on. Cummings/Johnson made many promises and must now be held to account on delivery. We have forgotten what a government with a big majority can do, but we have also forgotten what meaningful opposition looks like. It’s time for that to change.

RochdalePioneers

RLB will be unveiled as leader, elected by the "silent majority" of members who remain loyal to the Jeremy.

Yes I know that CLP meetings largely endorsed Starmer. My former CLP nomination meeting had just 26 of the 700 members there...

ydoethur

RochdalePioneers said:

RLB will be unveiled as leader, elected by the "silent majority" of members who remain loyal to the Jeremy.

Yes I know that CLP meetings largely endorsed Starmer. My former CLP nomination meeting had just 26 of the 700 members there...

If after all this RLB becomes leader, Labour really is finished, it’s over. It would be the equivalent of replacing Michael Foot with Derek Hatton.

Casino_Royale

DecrepiterJohnL said:

rcs1000 said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

rcs1000 said:

.

A.

N

For instance: Corbyn name ‘toxified’ popular Labour policies in general election campaign, poll suggests.
Polling by BMG for The Independent suggested that voters liked the party’s policies on issues like nationalisation, climate change and taxation until they were told they were linked to Corbyn.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/corybn-labour-policies-toxic-general-election-2019-leadership-latest-a9279946.html

And there is lots more in the same vein thrown up by Google.

Fwiw, I believe the story of Labour's defeat was more complex and has yet to be told, and combines Corbyn's health and eyesight, an election programme so bad that it could have been directed by a Tory mole, and under-the-radar micro- targeted propaganda from CCHQ whose precise nature is yet to be revealed, but in any case, I do not have a vote in the leadership contest.

What I am pointing out is the paradoxical behaviour of Corbyn's opponents inside and outside Labour. If they believe what they (and many pb Tories) say then they should be voting for RLB. But they won't.

I’m not sure about this. I think dislike of a leader and dislike of policy are far more fungible than people make out.

I saw similar polling when the Tories did a post 2001 GE analysis - the policies were popular but not the leader. And then a very similar thing happened in 2005 as well.

For many policies, in the abstract, the average voter might think, “hmm, doesn’t sound a bad idea.” But, the leader is the prism through which the reality of the implementation of those policies is viewed. That makes the prospect of them very real and if they know the leader is a bit of a Trot and believes in socialism then when faced with actually putting them into practice voters think, “god, no, that doesn’t make sense at all and I don’t trust him either.”

Consider if Starmer seals a reputation as being a Corbyn tribute act - a real Lefty - except without the foreign policy baggage. Then, when the Tories major on the domestic economy during the 2024GE campaign, and after he loses, polling will then say many people liked his policies but didn’t when they were linked with Starmer.

People need to trust you’re sensible and sane, and that you’re on their side, so they can have the confidence to leave the details to you.

Casino_Royale

Sandpit said:

Back prices for the eight layable Dem candidates now total 87.5%, thats 7/1 on someone else.

Klobuchar almost unlayable now at 950. She’s 540 to back, which might be worth 10p

Betfair also have a Dem VP nom market, someone was asking on the last thread. It’s a bit thin at the moment though, probably because the President nom market is still so open.
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/event/28009878/multi-market?marketIds=1.168954647

I’m keeping candidates like Warren, Steyer and Klobuchar on side due to erraticness, events and actuarial risk.

Yes, I could lay off and make £8-£9 extra at those sort of odds. But given what’s happened so far, and how old Sanders is and divisive Bloomberg is, is it worth it?

Casino_Royale

rcs1000 said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Ah but at least Bernie (and Elizabeth Warren) believe in something. Admittedly it is two or three weeks since I checked Mayor Pete's position but so far as I could see, he was campaigning on thin air, platitudes and general niceness. So vague was Buttigieg's programme, I could not even be sure he is in favour of motherhood and apple pie.

Why on earth would we want to elect someone who believes things?

You need to tell a story about yourself - who you are and what you are - to win.

Obama managed this. I’m not sure Buttigieg has yet.

ydoethur

If this is the best side Australia can produce from their reserves, they’re in a bigger mess than somebody who laid Bernie Sanders for the Dem nomination. They’ve just lost 3 for 4 following on. It’s not as though this lineup is a true reflection of our reserve bowling attack either.

Now I’ve said that Patterson will probably score a triple and save the match.

squareroot2

TheScreamingEagles said:

Eesh, no one has got my 80s quiz show reference.

That’s my problem, I’m too damn subtle.

It was the worst show on Television, one doesn't really want to be reminded

Sandpit

Casino_Royale said:

Sandpit said:

Back prices for the eight layable Dem candidates now total 87.5%, thats 7/1 on someone else.

Klobuchar almost unlayable now at 950. She’s 540 to back, which might be worth 10p

Betfair also have a Dem VP nom market, someone was asking on the last thread. It’s a bit thin at the moment though, probably because the President nom market is still so open.
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/event/28009878/multi-market?marketIds=1.168954647

I’m keeping candidates like Warren, Steyer and Klobuchar on side due to erraticness, events and actuarial risk.

Yes, I could lay off and make £8-£9 extra at those sort of odds. But given what’s happened so far, and how old Sanders is and divisive Bloomberg is, is it worth it?

It’s a really weird market, possibly the weirdest political market I’ve ever seen. I ignored it for ages, becuase I had no particular insight and had too many work commitments to spend time on it.

Playing now for small money only, the only sensible conclusion is that Sanders is massive value (he’d be around 1.5 in a more usual 105% market) because everyone expects that somehow it won’t come about due to convention shenanigans.

Witness Hillary Clinton and Michelle Obama still being within the eight candidates, despite it being quite clear that neither of them are standing!

YBarddCwsc

I think some of the shine has come off Nandy.

Her comments on Queen Meghan, transgender rights and Scotland all seem rather naive to me.

She has begun to remind me of Jo Swinson, too inexperienced & callow for the top job at the moment.

So, I think RLB will get second safely enough.

ydoethur

squareroot2 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Eesh, no one has got my 80s quiz show reference.

That’s my problem, I’m too damn subtle.

It was the worst show on Television, one doesn't really want to be reminded

Have you forgotten this one?

https://youtu.be/hgdKFcOssnA

malcolmg

DecrepiterJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

On topic:

twitter.com/JMagosh/status/1231192177595895808?s=20

Labour is electing the Leader of the Opposition. That's not quite the same thing as Prime Minister.

Only if Labour want to form a government.

Just looking prime ministerial is not enough: ask Michael Howard. The new LotO needs to discredit Boris and the Tories first.

An average 5 year old could achieve that easily

Sandpit

IanB2 said:

Sandpit said:

Asian markets are having a bad morning. Korea down 3%, Shanghai, Sydney and oil all down more than 2%.

Yep. Looks like today is the day stock markets start thinking about the killer virus.

Looks like the events in Iran and Italy are confirming that this has spread out of Asia, and is now pretty much unstoppable as a global pandemic - unless everyone immediately ceases travelling for the next few months. Countries surrounding Iran and Italy have been closing borders overnight.

England are supposed to be travelling to Rome for the last 6N fixture, three weeks from now. That’s very likely to be either called off or played elsewhere, possibly in an empty stadium. Football matches are already being postponed in Serie A.

IanB2

US daredevil trying to prove Earth is flat is killed in homemade rocket crash

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/mad-mike-hughes-death-us-072600269.html

Gallowgate

RochdalePioneers said:

RLB will be unveiled as leader, elected by the "silent majority" of members who remain loyal to the Jeremy.

Yes I know that CLP meetings largely endorsed Starmer. My former CLP nomination meeting had just 26 of the 700 members there...

Don’t

Casino_Royale

YBarddCwsc said:

I think some of the shine has come off Nandy.

Her comments on Queen Meghan, transgender rights and Scotland all seem rather naive to me.

She has begun to remind me of Jo Swinson, too inexperienced & callow for the top job at the moment.

So, I think RLB will get second safely enough.

She’s put me off with all of that but, given I’m the precise opposite of her target audience, that’s probably a good thing for her vote amongst the members.

She certainly isn’t a Liz Kendall Mark II.

Casino_Royale

rcs1000 said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

On topic:

twitter.com/JMagosh/status/1231192177595895808?s=20

Labour is electing the Leader of the Opposition. That's not quite the same thing as Prime Minister.

Only if Labour want to form a government.

Just looking prime ministerial is not enough: ask Michael Howard. The new LotO needs to discredit Boris and the Tories first.

I'm not sure Michael Howard looked Prime Ministerial...

To be fair, next to IDS, virtually anyone did.

The Tories weren’t exactly spoilt for choice back then.

Luckyguy1983

Theuniondivvie said:

rcs1000 said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

On topic:

twitter.com/JMagosh/status/1231192177595895808?s=20

Labour is electing the Leader of the Opposition. That's not quite the same thing as Prime Minister.

Only if Labour want to form a government.

Just looking prime ministerial is not enough: ask Michael Howard. The new LotO needs to discredit Boris and the Tories first.

I'm not sure Michael Howard looked Prime Ministerial...

You WERE thinking what I was thinking.

Sandpit

IanB2 said:

US daredevil trying to prove Earth is flat is killed in homemade rocket crash

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/mad-mike-hughes-death-us-072600269.html

First Darwin Award of 2020. Idiot.

Casino_Royale

Sandpit said:

Casino_Royale said:

Sandpit said:

Back prices for the eight layable Dem candidates now total 87.5%, thats 7/1 on someone else.

Klobuchar almost unlayable now at 950. She’s 540 to back, which might be worth 10p

Betfair also have a Dem VP nom market, someone was asking on the last thread. It’s a bit thin at the moment though, probably because the President nom market is still so open.
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/event/28009878/multi-market?marketIds=1.168954647

I’m keeping candidates like Warren, Steyer and Klobuchar on side due to erraticness, events and actuarial risk.

Yes, I could lay off and make £8-£9 extra at those sort of odds. But given what’s happened so far, and how old Sanders is and divisive Bloomberg is, is it worth it?

It’s a really weird market, possibly the weirdest political market I’ve ever seen. I ignored it for ages, becuase I had no particular insight and had too many work commitments to spend time on it.

Playing now for small money only, the only sensible conclusion is that Sanders is massive value (he’d be around 1.5 in a more usual 105% market) because everyone expects that somehow it won’t come about due to convention shenanigans.

Witness Hillary Clinton and Michelle Obama still being within the eight candidates, despite it being quite clear that neither of them are standing!

Good analysis. Agree with all of that.

Convention shenanigans are a possibility but it’s overcooked. I think if Sanders got a clear plurality (anything above 35% of delegates) then he’d probably get it because I think the Democratic delegates will baulk at giving it to anyone else who hasn’t stood, or is far less popular in the vote or delegate count.

The exception is Elizabeth Warren, who’s effectively Sanders understudy.

Charles

rcs1000 said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

On topic:

twitter.com/JMagosh/status/1231192177595895808?s=20

Labour is electing the Leader of the Opposition. That's not quite the same thing as Prime Minister.

Only if Labour want to form a government.

Just looking prime ministerial is not enough: ask Michael Howard. The new LotO needs to discredit Boris and the Tories first.

I'm not sure Michael Howard looked Prime Ministerial...

Of Transylvania...?

squareroot2

ydoethur said:

squareroot2 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Eesh, no one has got my 80s quiz show reference.

That’s my problem, I’m too damn subtle.

It was the worst show on Television, one doesn't really want to be reminded

Have you forgotten this one?

https://youtu.be/hgdKFcOssnA

nooo!!!!! never saw it. It couldn't have lasted long.... and a quick google check shows us that


"The show was dropped four episodes after it started in 2001, and was listed as the worst British television show of the 2000s in the Penguin TV Companion (2006).[1]

On 26 March 2012, Pointless co-presenter Richard Osman, writing for The Guardian named Shafted among four of UK TV's worst ever gameshows.[2]"

Philip_Thompson

Casino_Royale said:

rcs1000 said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

On topic:

twitter.com/JMagosh/status/1231192177595895808?s=20

Labour is electing the Leader of the Opposition. That's not quite the same thing as Prime Minister.

Only if Labour want to form a government.

Just looking prime ministerial is not enough: ask Michael Howard. The new LotO needs to discredit Boris and the Tories first.

I'm not sure Michael Howard looked Prime Ministerial...

To be fair, next to IDS, virtually anyone did.

The Tories weren’t exactly spoilt for choice back then.

Funny how quickly these things can change though. Then very few people had heard of Cameron or Osborne who came to quickly dominate the party and British politics for more than a decade after Howard.

There's every chance a Labour version of Cameron and Osborne has been newly elected but we haven't cottoned on yet and after the next election they might come to the fore. It requires the leadership bringing through fresh blood though rather than returning to tired old faces (or batshit crazy loons like Burgon).

IanB2

Casino_Royale said:

Sandpit said:

Back prices for the eight layable Dem candidates now total 87.5%, thats 7/1 on someone else.

Klobuchar almost unlayable now at 950. She’s 540 to back, which might be worth 10p

Betfair also have a Dem VP nom market, someone was asking on the last thread. It’s a bit thin at the moment though, probably because the President nom market is still so open.
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/event/28009878/multi-market?marketIds=1.168954647

I’m keeping candidates like Warren, Steyer and Klobuchar on side due to erraticness, events and actuarial risk.

Yes, I could lay off and make £8-£9 extra at those sort of odds. But given what’s happened so far, and how old Sanders is and divisive Bloomberg is, is it worth it?

I cant see Steyer sticking around.

Foxy

Sandpit said:

IanB2 said:

Sandpit said:

Asian markets are having a bad morning. Korea down 3%, Shanghai, Sydney and oil all down more than 2%.

Yep. Looks like today is the day stock markets start thinking about the killer virus.

Looks like the events in Iran and Italy are confirming that this has spread out of Asia, and is now pretty much unstoppable as a global pandemic - unless everyone immediately ceases travelling for the next few months. Countries surrounding Iran and Italy have been closing borders overnight.

England are supposed to be travelling to Rome for the last 6N fixture, three weeks from now. That’s very likely to be either called off or played elsewhere, possibly in an empty stadium. Football matches are already being postponed in Serie A.

Bahrain and Kuwait reporting cases in travellers from Iran. If it breaks out in Syria and the refugee camps on the Turkish border that will be very bad indeed.

The Italian measures look appropriate to me. It won't stop it but it will attenuate it.

Philip_Thompson

Charles said:

rcs1000 said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

On topic:

twitter.com/JMagosh/status/1231192177595895808?s=20

Labour is electing the Leader of the Opposition. That's not quite the same thing as Prime Minister.

Only if Labour want to form a government.

Just looking prime ministerial is not enough: ask Michael Howard. The new LotO needs to discredit Boris and the Tories first.

I'm not sure Michael Howard looked Prime Ministerial...

Of Transylvania...?

I'd rather vote for Frank N Furter . . .

Gallowgate

In classic British spirit the tiny amount of snow has brought the entire city to a grinding halt.

Quincel

Joe Biden:

2nd in Nevada
Polling narrowly 1st in South Carolina
Polling 2nd nationally

19.5 on Betfair

Mayor Pete:

3rd in Nevada
Polling narrowly 4th in South Carolina
Polling 5th nationally

15 on Betfair

???

Surely Biden should be the same or shorter than Bloomberg now the polling looks like the latter has stalled at or just below Biden's support?

Casino_Royale

Sandpit said:

IanB2 said:

US daredevil trying to prove Earth is flat is killed in homemade rocket crash

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/mad-mike-hughes-death-us-072600269.html

First Darwin Award of 2020. Idiot.

Sandpit said:

IanB2 said:

US daredevil trying to prove Earth is flat is killed in homemade rocket crash

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/mad-mike-hughes-death-us-072600269.html

First Darwin Award of 2020. Idiot.

I wonder, if deep-down, such people really do know. But, they like the attention and so practice disciplined cognitive dissonance to convince themselves otherwise.

It’s the same with coronavirus. There will be some people who know they’ve got it and deliberately spread it because they’ll like the feeling of power and control it gives them.

Humans are weird.

malcolmg

Sandpit said:

IanB2 said:

Sandpit said:

Asian markets are having a bad morning. Korea down 3%, Shanghai, Sydney and oil all down more than 2%.

Yep. Looks like today is the day stock markets start thinking about the killer virus.

Looks like the events in Iran and Italy are confirming that this has spread out of Asia, and is now pretty much unstoppable as a global pandemic - unless everyone immediately ceases travelling for the next few months. Countries surrounding Iran and Italy have been closing borders overnight.

England are supposed to be travelling to Rome for the last 6N fixture, three weeks from now. That’s very likely to be either called off or played elsewhere, possibly in an empty stadium. Football matches are already being postponed in Serie A.

Only idiots or cretins are still travelling in any case, just lock the idiots up when they arrive.

Casino_Royale

Quincel said:

Joe Biden:

2nd in Nevada
Polling narrowly 1st in South Carolina
Polling 2nd nationally

19.5 on Betfair

Mayor Pete:

3rd in Nevada
Polling narrowly 4th in South Carolina
Polling 5th nationally

15 on Betfair

???

Surely Biden should be the same or shorter than Bloomberg now the polling looks like the latter has stalled at or just below Biden's support?

I’ve Judge-d that the Booty simply isn’t there either for Mayor Pete anymore. He’s lost his Edge Edge.

So, I’ve laid him down below zero.

IshmaelZ

Casino_Royale said:

Sandpit said:

IanB2 said:

US daredevil trying to prove Earth is flat is killed in homemade rocket crash

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/mad-mike-hughes-death-us-072600269.html

First Darwin Award of 2020. Idiot.

Sandpit said:

IanB2 said:

US daredevil trying to prove Earth is flat is killed in homemade rocket crash

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/mad-mike-hughes-death-us-072600269.html

First Darwin Award of 2020. Idiot.

I wonder, if deep-down, such people really do know. But, they like the attention and so practice disciplined cognitive dissonance to convince themselves otherwise.

It’s the same with coronavirus. There will be some people who know they’ve got it and deliberately spread it because they’ll like the feeling of power and control it gives them.

Humans are weird.

I doubt he really thought the earth was flat, and anyway it's irrelevant to what he was doing - there's easier ways to get higher than 1500 metres to do a visual check. I am guessing it was just a publicity and sponsorship attracting gag.

Sandpit

Foxy said:

Sandpit said:

IanB2 said:

Sandpit said:

Asian markets are having a bad morning. Korea down 3%, Shanghai, Sydney and oil all down more than 2%.

Yep. Looks like today is the day stock markets start thinking about the killer virus.

Looks like the events in Iran and Italy are confirming that this has spread out of Asia, and is now pretty much unstoppable as a global pandemic - unless everyone immediately ceases travelling for the next few months. Countries surrounding Iran and Italy have been closing borders overnight.

England are supposed to be travelling to Rome for the last 6N fixture, three weeks from now. That’s very likely to be either called off or played elsewhere, possibly in an empty stadium. Football matches are already being postponed in Serie A.

Bahrain and Kuwait reporting cases in travellers from Iran. If it breaks out in Syria and the refugee camps on the Turkish border that will be very bad indeed.

The Italian measures look appropriate to me. It won't stop it but it will attenuate it.

Two UAE cases over the weekend were Iranians too. Saudi have banned their nationals from travelling to Iran (there’s a lot of religious tourism both ways between the two countries) and are quarantining returnees.

Yes I think the Italians are doing all they can, whilst being a free democracy. It’s obviously going to be politically impossible for any other country to replicate the Chinese approach to containment.

Casino_Royale

Philip_Thompson said:

Casino_Royale said:

rcs1000 said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

On topic:

twitter.com/JMagosh/status/1231192177595895808?s=20

Labour is electing the Leader of the Opposition. That's not quite the same thing as Prime Minister.

Only if Labour want to form a government.

Just looking prime ministerial is not enough: ask Michael Howard. The new LotO needs to discredit Boris and the Tories first.

I'm not sure Michael Howard looked Prime Ministerial...

To be fair, next to IDS, virtually anyone did.

The Tories weren’t exactly spoilt for choice back then.

Funny how quickly these things can change though. Then very few people had heard of Cameron or Osborne who came to quickly dominate the party and British politics for more than a decade after Howard.

There's every chance a Labour version of Cameron and Osborne has been newly elected but we haven't cottoned on yet and after the next election they might come to the fore. It requires the leadership bringing through fresh blood though rather than returning to tired old faces (or batshit crazy loons like Burgon).

Cameron was tipped as the next big thing, though, in the Spectator in 2002. By Boris of all people.

You can usually spot a bit of potential or talent in the ranks.

Admittedly, I haven’t done this exercise on the current Labour crop.

Casino_Royale

IanB2 said:

Casino_Royale said:

Sandpit said:

Back prices for the eight layable Dem candidates now total 87.5%, thats 7/1 on someone else.

Klobuchar almost unlayable now at 950. She’s 540 to back, which might be worth 10p

Betfair also have a Dem VP nom market, someone was asking on the last thread. It’s a bit thin at the moment though, probably because the President nom market is still so open.
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/event/28009878/multi-market?marketIds=1.168954647

I’m keeping candidates like Warren, Steyer and Klobuchar on side due to erraticness, events and actuarial risk.

Yes, I could lay off and make £8-£9 extra at those sort of odds. But given what’s happened so far, and how old Sanders is and divisive Bloomberg is, is it worth it?

I cant see Steyer sticking around.

Me neither but I’m holding him at over 500s pending South Carolina.

You never know if he might become the new Hillary Clinton.

Sandpit

Casino_Royale said:

Sandpit said:

IanB2 said:

US daredevil trying to prove Earth is flat is killed in homemade rocket crash

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/mad-mike-hughes-death-us-072600269.html

First Darwin Award of 2020. Idiot.

Sandpit said:

IanB2 said:

US daredevil trying to prove Earth is flat is killed in homemade rocket crash

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/mad-mike-hughes-death-us-072600269.html

First Darwin Award of 2020. Idiot.

I wonder, if deep-down, such people really do know. But, they like the attention and so practice disciplined cognitive dissonance to convince themselves otherwise.

It’s the same with coronavirus. There will be some people who know they’ve got it and deliberately spread it because they’ll like the feeling of power and control it gives them.

Humans are weird.

To be a daredevil is human nature, but to do it with the bare minimum of safety equipment and ways out in an emergency is at best reckless.

People have been convicted of spreading AIDS willingly through sexual encounters in the U.K. and elsewhere - GBH usually the charge, from memory. It’s either denial, or refusal to adapt to changing circumstances.

Sandpit

malcolmg said:

Sandpit said:

IanB2 said:

Sandpit said:

Asian markets are having a bad morning. Korea down 3%, Shanghai, Sydney and oil all down more than 2%.

Yep. Looks like today is the day stock markets start thinking about the killer virus.

Looks like the events in Iran and Italy are confirming that this has spread out of Asia, and is now pretty much unstoppable as a global pandemic - unless everyone immediately ceases travelling for the next few months. Countries surrounding Iran and Italy have been closing borders overnight.

England are supposed to be travelling to Rome for the last 6N fixture, three weeks from now. That’s very likely to be either called off or played elsewhere, possibly in an empty stadium. Football matches are already being postponed in Serie A.

Only idiots or cretins are still travelling in any case, just lock the idiots up when they arrive.

Starting with the Scotland team and fans returning from Rome this morning?

Casino_Royale

I do wonder if Buttigieg and Klobuchar would be doing better if they didn’t have such totally unpronounceable names.

Sandpit

Back on Topic, Labour Uncut not too happy with how the contest is progressing:

http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2020/02/20/labours-leadership-contest-is-a-disaster/

It’s a hopeless vista. I honestly don’t think there’s much between any of the remaining three. They are all in the wrong place on policy and in thrall to an activist base that refuses to make any concessions with the electorate. There’s no sense of urgency coming from any of them. Rather than serving as a platform to showcase the renewal of the party this leadership race is a grimy shop window for its continued decline.

TheScreamingEagles

https://twitter.com/tseofpb/status/1231857789204606979?s=21

Gallowgate

Sandpit said:

Back on Topic, Labour Uncut not too happy with how the contest is progressing:

http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2020/02/20/labours-leadership-contest-is-a-disaster/

It’s a hopeless vista. I honestly don’t think there’s much between any of the remaining three. They are all in the wrong place on policy and in thrall to an activist base that refuses to make any concessions with the electorate. There’s no sense of urgency coming from any of them. Rather than serving as a platform to showcase the renewal of the party this leadership race is a grimy shop window for its continued decline.

Not my experience at all with Lisa Nandy. She was telling very hard truths when I heard her speak yesterday. Much more than Keir did.

TheScreamingEagles

https://twitter.com/tseofpb/status/1231858176816971779?s=21

HYUFD

Long Bailey has had some OK debate performances recently and has the Momentum machine behind her, she would still beat Nandy even if Starmer wins comfortably

Philip_Thompson

Gallowgate said:

Sandpit said:

Back on Topic, Labour Uncut not too happy with how the contest is progressing:

http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2020/02/20/labours-leadership-contest-is-a-disaster/

It’s a hopeless vista. I honestly don’t think there’s much between any of the remaining three. They are all in the wrong place on policy and in thrall to an activist base that refuses to make any concessions with the electorate. There’s no sense of urgency coming from any of them. Rather than serving as a platform to showcase the renewal of the party this leadership race is a grimy shop window for its continued decline.

Not my experience at all with Lisa Nandy. She was telling very hard truths when I heard her speak yesterday. Much more than Keir did.

Keir is a poundshop Jeremy Corbyn.

HYUFD

Gallowgate said:

Sandpit said:

Back on Topic, Labour Uncut not too happy with how the contest is progressing:

http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2020/02/20/labours-leadership-contest-is-a-disaster/

It’s a hopeless vista. I honestly don’t think there’s much between any of the remaining three. They are all in the wrong place on policy and in thrall to an activist base that refuses to make any concessions with the electorate. There’s no sense of urgency coming from any of them. Rather than serving as a platform to showcase the renewal of the party this leadership race is a grimy shop window for its continued decline.

Not my experience at all with Lisa Nandy. She was telling very hard truths when I heard her speak yesterday. Much more than Keir did.

Nandy is anti Trident renewal and anti monarchy, in some respects she is worse than Long Bailey

Nigelb

Sandpit said:

Foxy said:

Sandpit said:

IanB2 said:

Sandpit said:

Asian markets are having a bad morning. Korea down 3%, Shanghai, Sydney and oil all down more than 2%.

Yep. Looks like today is the day stock markets start thinking about the killer virus.

Looks like the events in Iran and Italy are confirming that this has spread out of Asia, and is now pretty much unstoppable as a global pandemic - unless everyone immediately ceases travelling for the next few months. Countries surrounding Iran and Italy have been closing borders overnight.

England are supposed to be travelling to Rome for the last 6N fixture, three weeks from now. That’s very likely to be either called off or played elsewhere, possibly in an empty stadium. Football matches are already being postponed in Serie A.

Bahrain and Kuwait reporting cases in travellers from Iran. If it breaks out in Syria and the refugee camps on the Turkish border that will be very bad indeed.

The Italian measures look appropriate to me. It won't stop it but it will attenuate it.

Two UAE cases over the weekend were Iranians too. Saudi have banned their nationals from travelling to Iran (there’s a lot of religious tourism both ways between the two countries) and are quarantining returnees.

Yes I think the Italians are doing all they can, whilst being a free democracy. It’s obviously going to be politically impossible for any other country to replicate the Chinese approach to containment.

Are you publicly disparaging Kim Jong Un ?
To be a daredevil is human nature...

Mexicanpete

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/tseofpb/status/1231858176816971779?s=21

Sacking everyone at MI5 might take a bit more planning than firing the Home Office Permanent Secretary.

HYUFD

Philip_Thompson said:

Casino_Royale said:

rcs1000 said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

On topic:

twitter.com/JMagosh/status/1231192177595895808?s=20

Labour is electing the Leader of the Opposition. That's not quite the same thing as Prime Minister.

Only if Labour want to form a government.

Just looking prime ministerial is not enough: ask Michael Howard. The new LotO needs to discredit Boris and the Tories first.

I'm not sure Michael Howard looked Prime Ministerial...

To be fair, next to IDS, virtually anyone did.

The Tories weren’t exactly spoilt for choice back then.

Funny how quickly these things can change though. Then very few people had heard of Cameron or Osborne who came to quickly dominate the party and British politics for more than a decade after Howard.

There's every chance a Labour version of Cameron and Osborne has been newly elected but we haven't cottoned on yet and after the next election they might come to the fore. It requires the leadership bringing through fresh blood though rather than returning to tired old faces (or batshit crazy loons like Burgon).

The next general election will be 13 years after Labour lost power, the same period in opposition for the Tories before Cameron won most seats but not a majority in 2010.

If as looks increasingly likely we go to No Trade Deal WTO+ terms in December and recession follows it is complacent from Tories to say Starmer could not get enough seats next time to become PM, even if he requires LD support as Cameron did in 2010 and falls short of a majority

Gallowgate

HYUFD said:

Gallowgate said:

Sandpit said:

Back on Topic, Labour Uncut not too happy with how the contest is progressing:

http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2020/02/20/labours-leadership-contest-is-a-disaster/

It’s a hopeless vista. I honestly don’t think there’s much between any of the remaining three. They are all in the wrong place on policy and in thrall to an activist base that refuses to make any concessions with the electorate. There’s no sense of urgency coming from any of them. Rather than serving as a platform to showcase the renewal of the party this leadership race is a grimy shop window for its continued decline.

Not my experience at all with Lisa Nandy. She was telling very hard truths when I heard her speak yesterday. Much more than Keir did.

Nandy is anti Trident renewal and anti monarchy, in some respects she is worse than Long Bailey

No one cares.

not_on_fire

Casino_Royale said:

I do wonder if Buttigieg and Klobuchar would be doing better if they didn’t have such totally unpronounceable names.

Just imagine them running together on a President/VP ticket ...

RobD

Gallowgate said:

HYUFD said:

Gallowgate said:

Sandpit said:

Back on Topic, Labour Uncut not too happy with how the contest is progressing:

http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2020/02/20/labours-leadership-contest-is-a-disaster/

It’s a hopeless vista. I honestly don’t think there’s much between any of the remaining three. They are all in the wrong place on policy and in thrall to an activist base that refuses to make any concessions with the electorate. There’s no sense of urgency coming from any of them. Rather than serving as a platform to showcase the renewal of the party this leadership race is a grimy shop window for its continued decline.

Not my experience at all with Lisa Nandy. She was telling very hard truths when I heard her speak yesterday. Much more than Keir did.

Nandy is anti Trident renewal and anti monarchy, in some respects she is worse than Long Bailey

No one cares.

Demonstrably not true. HYUFD cares.

HYUFD

RochdalePioneers said:

RLB will be unveiled as leader, elected by the "silent majority" of members who remain loyal to the Jeremy.

Yes I know that CLP meetings largely endorsed Starmer. My former CLP nomination meeting had just 26 of the 700 members there...

Yougov did a full members poll with Starmer miles ahead

TheScreamingEagles

Mexicanpete said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/tseofpb/status/1231858176816971779?s=21

Sacking everyone at MI5 might take a bit more planning than firing the Home Office Permanent Secretary.

We’re governed by petulant children, from the PM downwards.

not_on_fire

Casino_Royale said:

I do wonder if Buttigieg and Klobuchar would be doing better if they didn’t have such totally unpronounceable names.

Names do often matter in history. Hitler’s surname would have been Shickelgruber had his father not suddenly returned to his mother when he was young, having been away for many years. It’s difficult to imagine thousands of Nazis chanting “Heil Shickelgruber”

HYUFD

rcs1000 said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

On topic:

twitter.com/JMagosh/status/1231192177595895808?s=20

Labour is electing the Leader of the Opposition. That's not quite the same thing as Prime Minister.

Only if Labour want to form a government.

Just looking prime ministerial is not enough: ask Michael Howard. The new LotO needs to discredit Boris and the Tories first.

I'm not sure Michael Howard looked Prime Ministerial...

Michael Howard looked like an effective opposition leader rather than PM but against Brown in 2010 even Howard might have won most seats

HYUFD

RobD said:

Gallowgate said:

HYUFD said:

Gallowgate said:

Sandpit said:

Back on Topic, Labour Uncut not too happy with how the contest is progressing:

http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2020/02/20/labours-leadership-contest-is-a-disaster/

It’s a hopeless vista. I honestly don’t think there’s much between any of the remaining three. They are all in the wrong place on policy and in thrall to an activist base that refuses to make any concessions with the electorate. There’s no sense of urgency coming from any of them. Rather than serving as a platform to showcase the renewal of the party this leadership race is a grimy shop window for its continued decline.

Not my experience at all with Lisa Nandy. She was telling very hard truths when I heard her speak yesterday. Much more than Keir did.

Nandy is anti Trident renewal and anti monarchy, in some respects she is worse than Long Bailey

No one cares.

Demonstrably not true. HYUFD cares.

As will working class Leave voters who went Tory this time and who Nandy is supposed to appeal to

Nigelb

not_on_fire said:

Casino_Royale said:

I do wonder if Buttigieg and Klobuchar would be doing better if they didn’t have such totally unpronounceable names.

Just imagine them running together on a President/VP ticket ...

The BK brand is quite a strong one in the US...

DecrepiterJohnL

not_on_fire said:

Casino_Royale said:

I do wonder if Buttigieg and Klobuchar would be doing better if they didn’t have such totally unpronounceable names.

Names do often matter in history. Hitler’s surname would have been Shickelgruber had his father not suddenly returned to his mother when he was young, having been away for many years. It’s difficult to imagine thousands of Nazis chanting “Heil Shickelgruber”

The stereotype, even on pb where someone included it as a tongue-in-cheek justification for tipping John Hickenlooper, is that American candidates have unpronounceable names but they do not: Trump, Obama, Bush, Clinton, all plain and straightforward.

RochdalePioneers

HYUFD said:

RochdalePioneers said:

RLB will be unveiled as leader, elected by the "silent majority" of members who remain loyal to the Jeremy.

Yes I know that CLP meetings largely endorsed Starmer. My former CLP nomination meeting had just 26 of the 700 members there...

Yougov did a full members poll with Starmer miles ahead

The cult have been rubbishing polls for years, especially fake ones produced by Tory owned YouGov to attack Jeremy. They have spent 4 years seizing control to build True Socialism. Why give all that up because of a vote? Did they give up their Europe policy just because Conference voted against it? No! They simply declared that the vote was actually the other way despite the obvious truth that it wasn't.

I genuinely will be surprised if they don't rig this.

IanB2

HYUFD said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Casino_Royale said:

rcs1000 said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

On topic:

twitter.com/JMagosh/status/1231192177595895808?s=20

Labour is electing the Leader of the Opposition. That's not quite the same thing as Prime Minister.

Only if Labour want to form a government.

Just looking prime ministerial is not enough: ask Michael Howard. The new LotO needs to discredit Boris and the Tories first.

I'm not sure Michael Howard looked Prime Ministerial...

To be fair, next to IDS, virtually anyone did.

The Tories weren’t exactly spoilt for choice back then.

Funny how quickly these things can change though. Then very few people had heard of Cameron or Osborne who came to quickly dominate the party and British politics for more than a decade after Howard.

There's every chance a Labour version of Cameron and Osborne has been newly elected but we haven't cottoned on yet and after the next election they might come to the fore. It requires the leadership bringing through fresh blood though rather than returning to tired old faces (or batshit crazy loons like Burgon).

The next general election will be 13 years after Labour lost power, the same period in opposition for the Tories before Cameron won most seats but not a majority in 2010.

If as looks increasingly likely we go to No Trade Deal WTO+ terms in December and recession follows it is complacent from Tories to say Starmer could not get enough seats next time to become PM, even if he requires LD support as Cameron did in 2010 and falls short of a majority

Brexit will lead to recession?

Tories are complacent?

Next PM might be Labour?

Has HY's account been hacked???

HYUFD

Philip_Thompson said:

Gallowgate said:

Sandpit said:

Back on Topic, Labour Uncut not too happy with how the contest is progressing:

http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2020/02/20/labours-leadership-contest-is-a-disaster/

It’s a hopeless vista. I honestly don’t think there’s much between any of the remaining three. They are all in the wrong place on policy and in thrall to an activist base that refuses to make any concessions with the electorate. There’s no sense of urgency coming from any of them. Rather than serving as a platform to showcase the renewal of the party this leadership race is a grimy shop window for its continued decline.

Not my experience at all with Lisa Nandy. She was telling very hard truths when I heard her speak yesterday. Much more than Keir did.

Keir is a poundshop Jeremy Corbyn.

Starmer has a +5% rating with voters with Mori, compared to -46% for Corbyn and -8% for Boris

https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/low-public-awareness-all-labour-leadership-candidates-although-keir-starmer-starting-stronger.

As a Tory I am shocked by the complacency of some rightwingers on here

Nigelb

DecrepiterJohnL said:

not_on_fire said:

Casino_Royale said:

I do wonder if Buttigieg and Klobuchar would be doing better if they didn’t have such totally unpronounceable names.

Names do often matter in history. Hitler’s surname would have been Shickelgruber had his father not suddenly returned to his mother when he was young, having been away for many years. It’s difficult to imagine thousands of Nazis chanting “Heil Shickelgruber”

The stereotype, even on pb where someone included it as a tongue-in-cheek justification for tipping John Hickenlooper, is that American candidates have unpronounceable names but they do not: Trump, Obama, Bush, Clinton, all plain and straightforward.

Not entirely true. They just initialise the odder ones - FDR, for example.

Or call them Ike.