This is perhaps not as high risk a move as meets the eye. The two big UK political parties are broad churches, its just about the idealogues not being in charge so in that way its not so good if Labour can't encompass the hard left, even if it is effectively muzzled. On the risk of a breakaway party, I'm not sure in electoral terms how much damage it would really do to Labour IF Starmer can connect with the public on a personal level whilst steering a don't frighten the horses Social Democrat path. Those hard left Labour types prepared to die in a ditch vs getting the Conservatives out may be surprisingly small.
An anonymous "Labour insider" who talks about CowardlyKeir? A likely story.
Most pupils would do worse than their predictions and probably worse than the algorithm given that most will not have looked at the subjects since March.
Certainly and many would have done worse if they had taken their exams in June.
So we have:
1) Pupils who have got better grades than they would have
2) Pupils who have got the grades they would have without the risk and work in taking the exams
3) Pupils who have received worse grades than they would have expected but who will have an risk free opportunity to take exams if they want to improve their grades
4) Pupils who have received worse grades than they might have got but don't really care because the marks are still good enough
Its a situation I would have happily accepted throughout all the exams I've ever taken.
A phrase about stable doors and horses bolting springs to mind.
Maybe but good move
Abolished, or having responsibility for Covid-19 removed? I doubt it could be abolished completely in a month!
Merged as far as I read
Twitter screen grab says "scrapped and replaced". But then says "Covid 19 work to be merged with NHS test and trace". Covid-19 may have been PHE's biggest test. But it's hardly the only thing it's responsible for.
Hopefully as wife works at phe at porton down, lots of rebadging i.e same people but reorganised...
Is this correct? I am afraid I am ignorant of such customs, I feel very ashamed
It's crass. Like greeting a black guy with jazz hands.
Yes saluting a veteran is just like being a racist. Jeez...
I didn't mean quite that. What I'm getting at is that jovial lack of introspection with which the upper classes blunder about their business. Perhaps you don't pick it up as I do or see it as I do in Johnson.
Different example - not giving a shit if your fly is undone.
Voting by mail is not done inalienable democratic right. The Dems are pushing it for partisan reasons (and the GOP are resisting it for the same reason)
Limitations on the number of polling stations is far more serious from a democratic perspective. There is no reasonable argument that can be made as to why that might be acceptable.
Actually Covid-19 might provide cover for restrictions on in-person voting, and even in the best years there can be hours-long queues.
The new Trump-appointed USPS boss is actively reducing capacity. That's the problem.
May be “cover” but not justification.
There was one case a while back someone posted of a single county representing around 20% of a states population with 1 polling station. That’s just not right (and unhelpful in Covid)
The USPS boss is trying to make the organisation break even rather than losing $20bn a year.
Managed to happen upon one of Catania's Michelin star restaurants without a booking tonight. €40 per person including wine and 3 courses of incredible food. London this isn't.
Voting by mail is not done inalienable democratic right. The Dems are pushing it for partisan reasons (and the GOP are resisting it for the same reason)
Limitations on the number of polling stations is far more serious from a democratic perspective. There is no reasonable argument that can be made as to why that might be acceptable.
What a bizarre and frankly antidemocratic comment. So many people rely on postal voting. You nay as well say the same about polling stations.
Voting by mail is necessary in some cases (illness, infirmity, etc)
But it should be for people who are unable to make it to the polling station in person.
Not available on demand.
I don’t get your final point though as I explicitly criticised restrictions on numbers of polling stations
For what it's worth, I reckon Watson should not be in the Lords but I just am watching the Corbynite response to this with popcorn
Watson should be in the Lords. An excellent move by Starmer, designed to promote party unity. How could Corbynites ever object given that their man had nominated him?
AFAIK he's our leading politician. The bloke who won Newcastle-under-Lyme for the Tories last year used to post here regularly, but left when he won his seat.
It's generally thought that Denis Macshane was a regular contributor, and when I was in the Commons I often met MPs who followed PB. We've got several councillors, I think. It has its hazards, like all internet posting under your own name - a lady who used to post here (now sadly deceased) tried to get me into trouble in Broxtowe because of some opinion that I'd posted. Broxtowe voters tend to take their politics on a low flame and I was never too worried, and expressing one's opinion has always seemed to me part of the job.
Managed to happen upon one of Catania's Michelin star restaurants without a booking tonight. €40 per person including wine and 3 courses of incredible food. London this isn't.
Most pupils would do worse than their predictions and probably worse than the algorithm given that most will not have looked at the subjects since March.
Certainly and many would have done worse if they had taken their exams in June.
So we have:
1) Pupils who have got better grades than they would have
2) Pupils who have got the grades they would have without the risk and work in taking the exams
3) Pupils who have received worse grades than they would have expected but who will have an risk free opportunity to take exams if they want to improve their grades
4) Pupils who have received worse grades than they might have got but don't really care because the marks are still good enough
Its a situation I would have happily accepted throughout all the exams I've ever taken.
I still think someone made a mistake adding up my O-level French mark: I was expecting to fail as I had got -60 out of 20 on one of the mock papers (did a bit better on the others) but ended up with a B.
Is this correct? I am afraid I am ignorant of such customs, I feel very ashamed
No, unless you are jumped up arsehole who takes yourself too seriously. Civvies have saluted uniforms forever. That the military personnel might find them a bit of a dick isn't the same thing as being them being disrespectful by saluting.
It's like everything. Case by case. Just depends. The context. The atmosphere. The saluter and the salutee. In this case I think a smile and a bow - and possibly an elbow bump - would have been better.
The context was a minute or so of chat between a nonagenarian veteran of the war against Japan and the PM. I don’t remember this one being shown, but the one they did show looked fine (Prince Charles was getting a lot more air time).
Yes ok. But have I managed to articulate what I mean even if iyo it doesn't apply here? Because it's one of those things that's quite hard to describe. Least for me it is. Others could probably nail it better.
This is perhaps not as high risk a move as meets the eye. The two big UK political parties are broad churches, its just about the idealogues not being in charge so in that way its not so good if Labour can't encompass the hard left, even if it is effectively muzzled. On the risk of a breakaway party, I'm not sure in electoral terms how much damage it would really do to Labour IF Starmer can connect with the public on a personal level whilst steering a don't frighten the horses Social Democrat path. Those hard left Labour types prepared to die in a ditch vs getting the Conservatives out may be surprisingly small.
An anonymous "Labour insider" who talks about CowardlyKeir? A likely story.
This expulsion of Corbyn is not happening, Nick, is it? I have it down as wild rumour created by the heatwave.
Voting by mail is not done inalienable democratic right. The Dems are pushing it for partisan reasons (and the GOP are resisting it for the same reason)
Limitations on the number of polling stations is far more serious from a democratic perspective. There is no reasonable argument that can be made as to why that might be acceptable.
I remember a local council election where the (LibDem) town council decided to move some of the polling stations AND "save money" by not sending out polling cards or informing residents of where they'd moved the stations to. People were supposed to read the announcement in modest print affixed to a notice outside the town hall, or read the leaflets put out by parties. On the day, we had to put tellers at the "wrong" stations to redirect voters. It was a safe LD seat and they felt that other parties contesting it was an offensive waste of time and money.
Because it was a town council election and a safe seat, opponents were only midly outraged, and even amused at the effrontery. We teased the LDs about it for years, though. That sort of thing at the level of the US Presidency is less entertaining.
Smearing people by quoting what they've written, a novel interpretation. No doubt the weasel phrase 'out of context' crops up, but if anything is guaranteed to stop me from reading further, it's having to take a subscription to the Speccie to read a Big Bren article.
This is perhaps not as high risk a move as meets the eye. The two big UK political parties are broad churches, its just about the idealogues not being in charge so in that way its not so good if Labour can't encompass the hard left, even if it is effectively muzzled. On the risk of a breakaway party, I'm not sure in electoral terms how much damage it would really do to Labour IF Starmer can connect with the public on a personal level whilst steering a don't frighten the horses Social Democrat path. Those hard left Labour types prepared to die in a ditch vs getting the Conservatives out may be surprisingly small.
An anonymous "Labour insider" who talks about CowardlyKeir? A likely story.
This expulsion of Corbyn is not happening, Nick, is it? I have it down as wild rumour created by the heatwave.
Is this correct? I am afraid I am ignorant of such customs, I feel very ashamed
No, unless you are jumped up arsehole who takes yourself too seriously. Civvies have saluted uniforms forever. That the military personnel might find them a bit of a dick isn't the same thing as being them being disrespectful by saluting.
It's like everything. Case by case. Just depends. The context. The atmosphere. The saluter and the salutee. In this case I think a smile and a bow - and possibly an elbow bump - would have been better.
The context was a minute or so of chat between a nonagenarian veteran of the war against Japan and the PM. I don’t remember this one being shown, but the one they did show looked fine (Prince Charles was getting a lot more air time).
Yes ok. But have I managed to articulate what I mean even if iyo it doesn't apply here? Because it's one of those things that's quite hard to describe. Least for me it is. Others could probably nail it better.
Not really I think. He did more than smile and nod or bow, he had a bit of a chat with him. I would think getting that personal attention meant more than any silly salutes he may have made could take away, but now I’m projecting in the opposite direction.
The main thing I would say is withhold judgment on this case until you have seen the video (which I haven’t either). If he is being stupid in that then fair enough.
Remember the photo of Obama apparently staring at the rear of a woman on the stairs in front of him? When you saw the video it showed it in a completely different light.
Smearing people by quoting what they've written, a novel interpretation. No doubt the weasel phrase 'out of context' crops up, but if anything is guaranteed to stop me from reading further, it's having to take a subscription to the Speccie to read a Big Bren article.
To be fair it was the usual excuse used for Jeremy as well
Voting by mail is not done inalienable democratic right. The Dems are pushing it for partisan reasons (and the GOP are resisting it for the same reason)
Limitations on the number of polling stations is far more serious from a democratic perspective. There is no reasonable argument that can be made as to why that might be acceptable.
What a bizarre and frankly antidemocratic comment. So many people rely on postal voting. You nay as well say the same about polling stations.
Voting by mail is necessary in some cases (illness, infirmity, etc)
But it should be for people who are unable to make it to the polling station in person.
Not available on demand.
I don’t get your final point though as I explicitly criticised restrictions on numbers of polling stations
So you think postal voting here in the UK should be subject to doctor's note or equivalent?
Voting by mail is not done inalienable democratic right. The Dems are pushing it for partisan reasons (and the GOP are resisting it for the same reason)
Limitations on the number of polling stations is far more serious from a democratic perspective. There is no reasonable argument that can be made as to why that might be acceptable.
What a bizarre and frankly antidemocratic comment. So many people rely on postal voting. You nay as well say the same about polling stations.
Voting by mail is necessary in some cases (illness, infirmity, etc)
But it should be for people who are unable to make it to the polling station in person.
Not available on demand.
I don’t get your final point though as I explicitly criticised restrictions on numbers of polling stations
So voting should be made more difficult for those who can’t easily take the day off work in your view ?
The majority of US states allow voting by mail on demand, and a tenth of them have mail only voting.
Most pupils would do worse than their predictions and probably worse than the algorithm given that most will not have looked at the subjects since March.
Certainly and many would have done worse if they had taken their exams in June.
So we have:
1) Pupils who have got better grades than they would have
2) Pupils who have got the grades they would have without the risk and work in taking the exams
3) Pupils who have received worse grades than they would have expected but who will have an risk free opportunity to take exams if they want to improve their grades
4) Pupils who have received worse grades than they might have got but don't really care because the marks are still good enough
Its a situation I would have happily accepted throughout all the exams I've ever taken.
I still think someone made a mistake adding up my O-level French mark: I was expecting to fail as I had got -60 out of 20 on one of the mock papers (did a bit better on the others) but ended up with a B.
While there are significant advantages to postal voting, don’t forget that it also gets away from being a secret ballot. When you vote at a polling station you can vote for who you want as no one can see you (which reduces coercion) and you can’t prove to anyone which way you voted (reducing the chance of vote buying). Neither of those is true with postal votes, though I don’t think there is any evidence yet that either of the problems I’ve mentioned is happening on a wide scale, in the UK at least.
What's interesting is that Republicans have a higher opinion of state agencies than Democrats.
Whereas Republicans are supposed to be anti-state/socialism capitalists and libertarians.
There is that - but look for instance at who’s been running the DOJ, and what they’ve been up to. And as for the bunch of sociopaths and criminals who constitute ICE...
Most pupils would do worse than their predictions and probably worse than the algorithm given that most will not have looked at the subjects since March.
Certainly and many would have done worse if they had taken their exams in June.
So we have:
1) Pupils who have got better grades than they would have
2) Pupils who have got the grades they would have without the risk and work in taking the exams
3) Pupils who have received worse grades than they would have expected but who will have an risk free opportunity to take exams if they want to improve their grades
4) Pupils who have received worse grades than they might have got but don't really care because the marks are still good enough
Its a situation I would have happily accepted throughout all the exams I've ever taken.
I still think someone made a mistake adding up my O-level French mark: I was expecting to fail as I had got -60 out of 20 on one of the mock papers (did a bit better on the others) but ended up with a B.
How did you get -60 ?
Penalised for fluent obscenities ? Or perhaps a Tory education secretary was doing the marking.
Most pupils would do worse than their predictions and probably worse than the algorithm given that most will not have looked at the subjects since March.
Certainly and many would have done worse if they had taken their exams in June.
So we have:
1) Pupils who have got better grades than they would have
2) Pupils who have got the grades they would have without the risk and work in taking the exams
3) Pupils who have received worse grades than they would have expected but who will have an risk free opportunity to take exams if they want to improve their grades
4) Pupils who have received worse grades than they might have got but don't really care because the marks are still good enough
Its a situation I would have happily accepted throughout all the exams I've ever taken.
I still think someone made a mistake adding up my O-level French mark: I was expecting to fail as I had got -60 out of 20 on one of the mock papers (did a bit better on the others) but ended up with a B.
How did you get -60 ?
French dictation. Lose one mark per spelling mistake (and the wrong accent counts).
Is this correct? I am afraid I am ignorant of such customs, I feel very ashamed
No, unless you are jumped up arsehole who takes yourself too seriously. Civvies have saluted uniforms forever. That the military personnel might find them a bit of a dick isn't the same thing as being them being disrespectful by saluting.
It's like everything. Case by case. Just depends. The context. The atmosphere. The saluter and the salutee. In this case I think a smile and a bow - and possibly an elbow bump - would have been better.
The context was a minute or so of chat between a nonagenarian veteran of the war against Japan and the PM. I don’t remember this one being shown, but the one they did show looked fine (Prince Charles was getting a lot more air time).
Yes ok. But have I managed to articulate what I mean even if iyo it doesn't apply here? Because it's one of those things that's quite hard to describe. Least for me it is. Others could probably nail it better.
Not really I think. He did more than smile and nod or bow, he had a bit of a chat with him. I would think getting that personal attention meant more than any silly salutes he may have made could take away, but now I’m projecting in the opposite direction.
The main thing I would say is withhold judgment on this case until you have seen the video (which I haven’t either). If he is being stupid in that then fair enough.
Remember the photo of Obama apparently staring at the rear of a woman on the stairs in front of him? When you saw the video it showed it in a completely different light.
Stills can be very misleading this is true. We're talking "Boris" here though - hence one has to assume the worst. But I do wish it were otherwise. I'm quite keen to see some positives. 2024 is a long long time.
Voting by mail is not done inalienable democratic right. The Dems are pushing it for partisan reasons (and the GOP are resisting it for the same reason)
Limitations on the number of polling stations is far more serious from a democratic perspective. There is no reasonable argument that can be made as to why that might be acceptable.
What a bizarre and frankly antidemocratic comment. So many people rely on postal voting. You nay as well say the same about polling stations.
Voting by mail is necessary in some cases (illness, infirmity, etc)
But it should be for people who are unable to make it to the polling station in person.
Not available on demand.
I don’t get your final point though as I explicitly criticised restrictions on numbers of polling stations
So voting should be made more difficult for those who can’t easily take the day off work in your view ?
The majority of US states allow voting by mail on demand, and a tenth of them have mail only voting.
How many allow early voting, and how soon does that start?
While there are significant advantages to postal voting, don’t forget that it also gets away from being a secret ballot. When you vote at a polling station you can vote for who you want as no one can see you (which reduces coercion) and you can’t prove to anyone which way you voted (reducing the chance of vote buying). Neither of those is true with postal votes, though I don’t think there is any evidence yet that either of the problems I’ve mentioned is happening on a wide scale, in the UK at least.
Although they do record the serial number of the ballot paper they give you. So, theoretically someone involved in the count could cross check. Admittedly that would not be easy.
Is this correct? I am afraid I am ignorant of such customs, I feel very ashamed
No. It’s not disrespectful at all.
It’s anachronistic - based on lots of films with POTUS saluting soldiers but ignoring the fact that POTUS is the commander in chief, while in the U.K. the Queen is head of the armed forces not the PM.
Is this correct? I am afraid I am ignorant of such customs, I feel very ashamed
No, unless you are jumped up arsehole who takes yourself too seriously. Civvies have saluted uniforms forever. That the military personnel might find them a bit of a dick isn't the same thing as being them being disrespectful by saluting.
It's like everything. Case by case. Just depends. The context. The atmosphere. The saluter and the salutee. In this case I think a smile and a bow - and possibly an elbow bump - would have been better.
The context was a minute or so of chat between a nonagenarian veteran of the war against Japan and the PM. I don’t remember this one being shown, but the one they did show looked fine (Prince Charles was getting a lot more air time).
Yes ok. But have I managed to articulate what I mean even if iyo it doesn't apply here? Because it's one of those things that's quite hard to describe. Least for me it is. Others could probably nail it better.
Not really I think. He did more than smile and nod or bow, he had a bit of a chat with him. I would think getting that personal attention meant more than any silly salutes he may have made could take away, but now I’m projecting in the opposite direction.
The main thing I would say is withhold judgment on this case until you have seen the video (which I haven’t either). If he is being stupid in that then fair enough.
Remember the photo of Obama apparently staring at the rear of a woman on the stairs in front of him? When you saw the video it showed it in a completely different light.
Stills can be very misleading this is true. We're talking "Boris" here though - hence one has to assume the worst. But I do wish it were otherwise. I'm quite keen to see some positives. 2024 is a long long time.
If you have the time watch this morning’s commemoration: it’s on iPlayer. Boris was on his best behaviour in the parts I saw.
There are an awful lot of things he does to get annoyed over: I just don’t think this one is worth it.
This is perhaps not as high risk a move as meets the eye. The two big UK political parties are broad churches, its just about the idealogues not being in charge so in that way its not so good if Labour can't encompass the hard left, even if it is effectively muzzled. On the risk of a breakaway party, I'm not sure in electoral terms how much damage it would really do to Labour IF Starmer can connect with the public on a personal level whilst steering a don't frighten the horses Social Democrat path. Those hard left Labour types prepared to die in a ditch vs getting the Conservatives out may be surprisingly small.
An anonymous "Labour insider" who talks about CowardlyKeir? A likely story.
This expulsion of Corbyn is not happening, Nick, is it? I have it down as wild rumour created by the heatwave.
EHRC surely gives grounds if Corbyn is implicated
It would if there's evidence he engaged in antisemitism. But poor management or a failure of leadership on the issue would not suffice.
While there are significant advantages to postal voting, don’t forget that it also gets away from being a secret ballot. When you vote at a polling station you can vote for who you want as no one can see you (which reduces coercion) and you can’t prove to anyone which way you voted (reducing the chance of vote buying). Neither of those is true with postal votes, though I don’t think there is any evidence yet that either of the problems I’ve mentioned is happening on a wide scale, in the UK at least.
Although they do record the serial number of the ballot paper they give you. So, theoretically someone involved in the count could cross check. Admittedly that would not be easy.
I think it would require either a court order or major corruption at the count, and if the latter why bother? Just make up the numbers you want.
This is perhaps not as high risk a move as meets the eye. The two big UK political parties are broad churches, its just about the idealogues not being in charge so in that way its not so good if Labour can't encompass the hard left, even if it is effectively muzzled. On the risk of a breakaway party, I'm not sure in electoral terms how much damage it would really do to Labour IF Starmer can connect with the public on a personal level whilst steering a don't frighten the horses Social Democrat path. Those hard left Labour types prepared to die in a ditch vs getting the Conservatives out may be surprisingly small.
An anonymous "Labour insider" who talks about CowardlyKeir? A likely story.
This expulsion of Corbyn is not happening, Nick, is it? I have it down as wild rumour created by the heatwave.
EHRC surely gives grounds if Corbyn is implicated
It would if there's evidence he engaged in antisemitism. But poor management or a failure of leadership on the issue would not suffice.
Voting by mail is not done inalienable democratic right. The Dems are pushing it for partisan reasons (and the GOP are resisting it for the same reason)
Limitations on the number of polling stations is far more serious from a democratic perspective. There is no reasonable argument that can be made as to why that might be acceptable.
What a bizarre and frankly antidemocratic comment. So many people rely on postal voting. You nay as well say the same about polling stations.
Voting by mail is necessary in some cases (illness, infirmity, etc)
But it should be for people who are unable to make it to the polling station in person.
Not available on demand.
I don’t get your final point though as I explicitly criticised restrictions on numbers of polling stations
The first point is some people have to work for a living, for example.
The final point is that someone could just as easily say "having a local polling station isn't an inalienable democratic right"
I know people like to say "Democrats want to increase turnout because it improves their chances, and Republicans want to decrease turnout because it improves their chances, therefore they are both playing the same game" But increasing turnout is a good thing, irrespective of which party benefits, and trying to reduce turnout is a bad thing. There is no equivalence.
Republicans trying to stop postal votes during a pandemic because they think it might help them win is really not a grey area. It is antidemocratic, and continues their antidemocratic tradition of trying to prevent people from voting. Apologists for this are not democrats at all.
Most pupils would do worse than their predictions and probably worse than the algorithm given that most will not have looked at the subjects since March.
Certainly and many would have done worse if they had taken their exams in June.
So we have:
1) Pupils who have got better grades than they would have
2) Pupils who have got the grades they would have without the risk and work in taking the exams
3) Pupils who have received worse grades than they would have expected but who will have an risk free opportunity to take exams if they want to improve their grades
4) Pupils who have received worse grades than they might have got but don't really care because the marks are still good enough
Its a situation I would have happily accepted throughout all the exams I've ever taken.
Unless people knew they would need to retake the exam and started preparing months ago the odds of getting a better grade in the October exams is probably zero.
We looked at it as an option and the school said the chances of it working out are zero ...
Singapore has 55,600 confirmed cases. And just 27 deaths. There are only 83 confirmed cases still in hospital and “most are stable or improving and none is in ICU”.
So the Singapore CFR looks to be below 0.1%.
Is there something unique to Singapore (or APAC more generally, given the experience of Vietnam, Indonesia, Japan etc...)? If so what, let’s have a bit of that please.
Or is the CFR actually very very low and we’ve missed this fact because we’ve hugely over counted the fatalities combined with flaws in antibody testing that mean most people in the UK that can catch it already have done?
This is perhaps not as high risk a move as meets the eye. The two big UK political parties are broad churches, its just about the idealogues not being in charge so in that way its not so good if Labour can't encompass the hard left, even if it is effectively muzzled. On the risk of a breakaway party, I'm not sure in electoral terms how much damage it would really do to Labour IF Starmer can connect with the public on a personal level whilst steering a don't frighten the horses Social Democrat path. Those hard left Labour types prepared to die in a ditch vs getting the Conservatives out may be surprisingly small.
Polling 3% or 4% in key seats such a party could do serious damage to Labour prospects.
Voting by mail is not done inalienable democratic right. The Dems are pushing it for partisan reasons (and the GOP are resisting it for the same reason)
Limitations on the number of polling stations is far more serious from a democratic perspective. There is no reasonable argument that can be made as to why that might be acceptable.
What a bizarre and frankly antidemocratic comment. So many people rely on postal voting. You nay as well say the same about polling stations.
Voting by mail is necessary in some cases (illness, infirmity, etc)
But it should be for people who are unable to make it to the polling station in person.
Not available on demand.
I don’t get your final point though as I explicitly criticised restrictions on numbers of polling stations
So you think postal voting here in the UK should be subject to doctor's note or equivalent?
I’d roll it back to where it was before the expansion to on demand postal voting (I think under Blair).
Voting by mail is not done inalienable democratic right. The Dems are pushing it for partisan reasons (and the GOP are resisting it for the same reason)
Limitations on the number of polling stations is far more serious from a democratic perspective. There is no reasonable argument that can be made as to why that might be acceptable.
What a bizarre and frankly antidemocratic comment. So many people rely on postal voting. You nay as well say the same about polling stations.
Voting by mail is necessary in some cases (illness, infirmity, etc)
But it should be for people who are unable to make it to the polling station in person.
Not available on demand.
I don’t get your final point though as I explicitly criticised restrictions on numbers of polling stations
So voting should be made more difficult for those who can’t easily take the day off work in your view ?
The majority of US states allow voting by mail on demand, and a tenth of them have mail only voting.
How many allow early voting, and how soon does that start?
Voting by mail is not done inalienable democratic right. The Dems are pushing it for partisan reasons (and the GOP are resisting it for the same reason)
Limitations on the number of polling stations is far more serious from a democratic perspective. There is no reasonable argument that can be made as to why that might be acceptable.
What a bizarre and frankly antidemocratic comment. So many people rely on postal voting. You nay as well say the same about polling stations.
Voting by mail is necessary in some cases (illness, infirmity, etc)
But it should be for people who are unable to make it to the polling station in person.
Not available on demand.
I don’t get your final point though as I explicitly criticised restrictions on numbers of polling stations
So voting should be made more difficult for those who can’t easily take the day off work in your view ?
The majority of US states allow voting by mail on demand, and a tenth of them have mail only voting.
I would have many more polling stations to reduce the queuing time.
While there are significant advantages to postal voting, don’t forget that it also gets away from being a secret ballot. When you vote at a polling station you can vote for who you want as no one can see you (which reduces coercion) and you can’t prove to anyone which way you voted (reducing the chance of vote buying).
This used to be true but nowadays everybody is carrying a little camera, and it's impractical to stop someone concealing one, so I don't think it works any more.
This is perhaps not as high risk a move as meets the eye. The two big UK political parties are broad churches, its just about the idealogues not being in charge so in that way its not so good if Labour can't encompass the hard left, even if it is effectively muzzled. On the risk of a breakaway party, I'm not sure in electoral terms how much damage it would really do to Labour IF Starmer can connect with the public on a personal level whilst steering a don't frighten the horses Social Democrat path. Those hard left Labour types prepared to die in a ditch vs getting the Conservatives out may be surprisingly small.
Polling 3% or 4% in key seats such a party could do serious damage to Labour prospects.
Momentum is very big in London, I highly doubt it impacts Labour very much.
Voting by mail is not done inalienable democratic right. The Dems are pushing it for partisan reasons (and the GOP are resisting it for the same reason)
Limitations on the number of polling stations is far more serious from a democratic perspective. There is no reasonable argument that can be made as to why that might be acceptable.
What a bizarre and frankly antidemocratic comment. So many people rely on postal voting. You nay as well say the same about polling stations.
Voting by mail is necessary in some cases (illness, infirmity, etc)
But it should be for people who are unable to make it to the polling station in person.
Not available on demand.
I don’t get your final point though as I explicitly criticised restrictions on numbers of polling stations
So voting should be made more difficult for those who can’t easily take the day off work in your view ?
The majority of US states allow voting by mail on demand, and a tenth of them have mail only voting.
I would have many more polling stations to reduce the queuing time.
It’s very much up to individual states what they do. If you mean that, as president, you would try to provide extra funding to facilitate such a thing, then you would be acting in quite the opposite manner to the current incumbent.
This is perhaps not as high risk a move as meets the eye. The two big UK political parties are broad churches, its just about the idealogues not being in charge so in that way its not so good if Labour can't encompass the hard left, even if it is effectively muzzled. On the risk of a breakaway party, I'm not sure in electoral terms how much damage it would really do to Labour IF Starmer can connect with the public on a personal level whilst steering a don't frighten the horses Social Democrat path. Those hard left Labour types prepared to die in a ditch vs getting the Conservatives out may be surprisingly small.
An anonymous "Labour insider" who talks about CowardlyKeir? A likely story.
This expulsion of Corbyn is not happening, Nick, is it? I have it down as wild rumour created by the heatwave.
EHRC surely gives grounds if Corbyn is implicated
It would if there's evidence he engaged in antisemitism. But poor management or a failure of leadership on the issue would not suffice.
We will see soon.
CHB, do you not think that your desire to purge the party of Corbyn, and Momentum, is a bit of a mirror image of the left's desire to get rid of the 'Blairites'? You really should relax a bit. If Corbyn is found 'guilty' by the EHRC, he'll be off; if not, he'll hang around just as he has for thirty years or so. The Momentum lot will either leave of their own accord, or go with the Starmer flow - no need to purge, as they will not be a significant force in the future. There have always been internal pressure groups, of both left and right, in the LP. It's a broad church, you know.
Managed to happen upon one of Catania's Michelin star restaurants without a booking tonight. €40 per person including wine and 3 courses of incredible food. London this isn't.
blimey. does italy have a minimum wage?
Catania is in Sicily, so will be inexpensive versus (say) Milan.
This is perhaps not as high risk a move as meets the eye. The two big UK political parties are broad churches, its just about the idealogues not being in charge so in that way its not so good if Labour can't encompass the hard left, even if it is effectively muzzled. On the risk of a breakaway party, I'm not sure in electoral terms how much damage it would really do to Labour IF Starmer can connect with the public on a personal level whilst steering a don't frighten the horses Social Democrat path. Those hard left Labour types prepared to die in a ditch vs getting the Conservatives out may be surprisingly small.
An anonymous "Labour insider" who talks about CowardlyKeir? A likely story.
This expulsion of Corbyn is not happening, Nick, is it? I have it down as wild rumour created by the heatwave.
EHRC surely gives grounds if Corbyn is implicated
How many Tory MPs were expelled for their support of Ian Smith's Rhodesia regime or for being openly sympathetic to Apartheid South Africa? Terry Dicks advocated hanging Nelson Mandela - did he suffer any penalty for airing such views?
This is perhaps not as high risk a move as meets the eye. The two big UK political parties are broad churches, its just about the idealogues not being in charge so in that way its not so good if Labour can't encompass the hard left, even if it is effectively muzzled. On the risk of a breakaway party, I'm not sure in electoral terms how much damage it would really do to Labour IF Starmer can connect with the public on a personal level whilst steering a don't frighten the horses Social Democrat path. Those hard left Labour types prepared to die in a ditch vs getting the Conservatives out may be surprisingly small.
An anonymous "Labour insider" who talks about CowardlyKeir? A likely story.
This expulsion of Corbyn is not happening, Nick, is it? I have it down as wild rumour created by the heatwave.
EHRC surely gives grounds if Corbyn is implicated
It would if there's evidence he engaged in antisemitism. But poor management or a failure of leadership on the issue would not suffice.
We will see soon.
CHB, do you not think that your desire to purge the party of Corbyn, and Momentum, is a bit of a mirror image of the left's desire to get rid of the 'Blairites'? You really should relax a bit. If Corbyn is found 'guilty' by the EHRC, he'll be off; if not, he'll hang around just as he has for thirty years or so. The Momentum lot will either leave of their own accord, or go with the Starmer flow - no need to purge, as they will not be a significant force in the future. There have always been internal pressure groups, of both left and right, in the LP. It's a broad church, you know.
If Corbyn is implicated in the EHRC he deserves to be expelled.
You're right I should calm down on Momentum but Corbyn and Momentum have really pissed me off recently because they implied people that support Starmer aren't real lefties and we deserve to be kicked out.
Voting by mail is not done inalienable democratic right. The Dems are pushing it for partisan reasons (and the GOP are resisting it for the same reason)
Limitations on the number of polling stations is far more serious from a democratic perspective. There is no reasonable argument that can be made as to why that might be acceptable.
What a bizarre and frankly antidemocratic comment. So many people rely on postal voting. You nay as well say the same about polling stations.
Voting by mail is necessary in some cases (illness, infirmity, etc)
But it should be for people who are unable to make it to the polling station in person.
Not available on demand.
I don’t get your final point though as I explicitly criticised restrictions on numbers of polling stations
So you think postal voting here in the UK should be subject to doctor's note or equivalent?
Well that was the position until the 1990s - unless a voter had a job likely to result in their not being able to vote in person on election day.
This is perhaps not as high risk a move as meets the eye. The two big UK political parties are broad churches, its just about the idealogues not being in charge so in that way its not so good if Labour can't encompass the hard left, even if it is effectively muzzled. On the risk of a breakaway party, I'm not sure in electoral terms how much damage it would really do to Labour IF Starmer can connect with the public on a personal level whilst steering a don't frighten the horses Social Democrat path. Those hard left Labour types prepared to die in a ditch vs getting the Conservatives out may be surprisingly small.
An anonymous "Labour insider" who talks about CowardlyKeir? A likely story.
This expulsion of Corbyn is not happening, Nick, is it? I have it down as wild rumour created by the heatwave.
EHRC surely gives grounds if Corbyn is implicated
How many Tory MPs were expelled for their support of Ian Smith's Rhodesia regime or for being openly sympathetic to Apartheid South Africa? Terry Dicks advocated hanging Nelson Mandela - did he suffer any penalty for airing such views?
I'm not interested in what the Tory Party does, I am interested in what my party does.
This is perhaps not as high risk a move as meets the eye. The two big UK political parties are broad churches, its just about the idealogues not being in charge so in that way its not so good if Labour can't encompass the hard left, even if it is effectively muzzled. On the risk of a breakaway party, I'm not sure in electoral terms how much damage it would really do to Labour IF Starmer can connect with the public on a personal level whilst steering a don't frighten the horses Social Democrat path. Those hard left Labour types prepared to die in a ditch vs getting the Conservatives out may be surprisingly small.
An anonymous "Labour insider" who talks about CowardlyKeir? A likely story.
This expulsion of Corbyn is not happening, Nick, is it? I have it down as wild rumour created by the heatwave.
EHRC surely gives grounds if Corbyn is implicated
How many Tory MPs were expelled for their support of Ian Smith's Rhodesia regime or for being openly sympathetic to Apartheid South Africa? Terry Dicks advocated hanging Nelson Mandela - did he suffer any penalty for airing such views?
I'm not interested in what the Tory Party does, I am interested in what my party does.
Corbyn did not support those advocating expulsion of Blair for his activities as a war criminal whilst in office!
This is perhaps not as high risk a move as meets the eye. The two big UK political parties are broad churches, its just about the idealogues not being in charge so in that way its not so good if Labour can't encompass the hard left, even if it is effectively muzzled. On the risk of a breakaway party, I'm not sure in electoral terms how much damage it would really do to Labour IF Starmer can connect with the public on a personal level whilst steering a don't frighten the horses Social Democrat path. Those hard left Labour types prepared to die in a ditch vs getting the Conservatives out may be surprisingly small.
An anonymous "Labour insider" who talks about CowardlyKeir? A likely story.
This expulsion of Corbyn is not happening, Nick, is it? I have it down as wild rumour created by the heatwave.
EHRC surely gives grounds if Corbyn is implicated
How many Tory MPs were expelled for their support of Ian Smith's Rhodesia regime or for being openly sympathetic to Apartheid South Africa? Terry Dicks advocated hanging Nelson Mandela - did he suffer any penalty for airing such views?
I'm not interested in what the Tory Party does, I am interested in what my party does.
Corbyn did not support those advocating expulsion of Blair for his activities as a war criminal whilst in office!
If Corbyn is implicated and he is not expelled, Labour will not be winning the next general election, no way.
Voting by mail is not done inalienable democratic right. The Dems are pushing it for partisan reasons (and the GOP are resisting it for the same reason)
Limitations on the number of polling stations is far more serious from a democratic perspective. There is no reasonable argument that can be made as to why that might be acceptable.
What a bizarre and frankly antidemocratic comment. So many people rely on postal voting. You nay as well say the same about polling stations.
Voting by mail is necessary in some cases (illness, infirmity, etc)
But it should be for people who are unable to make it to the polling station in person.
Not available on demand.
I don’t get your final point though as I explicitly criticised restrictions on numbers of polling stations
So voting should be made more difficult for those who can’t easily take the day off work in your view ?
The majority of US states allow voting by mail on demand, and a tenth of them have mail only voting.
I would have many more polling stations to reduce the queuing time.
Part of the problem, of course, is that US states tend to have much shorter voting hours than (for example) the UK.
In Kentucky, for example, the polls close at 6pm, and most other states close at 7pm. This makes it much more difficult for average working joes to vote than in places where polling booths stay open until 10pm.
This is perhaps not as high risk a move as meets the eye. The two big UK political parties are broad churches, its just about the idealogues not being in charge so in that way its not so good if Labour can't encompass the hard left, even if it is effectively muzzled. On the risk of a breakaway party, I'm not sure in electoral terms how much damage it would really do to Labour IF Starmer can connect with the public on a personal level whilst steering a don't frighten the horses Social Democrat path. Those hard left Labour types prepared to die in a ditch vs getting the Conservatives out may be surprisingly small.
An anonymous "Labour insider" who talks about CowardlyKeir? A likely story.
This expulsion of Corbyn is not happening, Nick, is it? I have it down as wild rumour created by the heatwave.
EHRC surely gives grounds if Corbyn is implicated
How many Tory MPs were expelled for their support of Ian Smith's Rhodesia regime or for being openly sympathetic to Apartheid South Africa? Terry Dicks advocated hanging Nelson Mandela - did he suffer any penalty for airing such views?
I'm not interested in what the Tory Party does, I am interested in what my party does.
Corbyn did not support those advocating expulsion of Blair for his activities as a war criminal whilst in office!
If Corbyn is implicated and he is not expelled, Labour will not be winning the next general election, no way.
Do we want to win or not, I do.
I seriously question your judgement - that really is a 'non sequitur'. Someone who has lurched from being a strong advocate of Corbyn to now being ultra critical is not likely to be blessed with a very balanced view on this issue.
It does indeed look as if the dog has eaten Qfqual's homework on the appeals system. The guidance has been withdrawn tonight. Sloppy work, must do better, says Dom. Gavin will be in detention, if not expelled.
It does indeed look as if the dog has eaten Qfqual's homework on the appeals system. The guidance has been withdrawn tonight. Sloppy work, must do better, says Dom. Gavin will be in detention, if not expelled.
This is perhaps not as high risk a move as meets the eye. The two big UK political parties are broad churches, its just about the idealogues not being in charge so in that way its not so good if Labour can't encompass the hard left, even if it is effectively muzzled. On the risk of a breakaway party, I'm not sure in electoral terms how much damage it would really do to Labour IF Starmer can connect with the public on a personal level whilst steering a don't frighten the horses Social Democrat path. Those hard left Labour types prepared to die in a ditch vs getting the Conservatives out may be surprisingly small.
An anonymous "Labour insider" who talks about CowardlyKeir? A likely story.
This expulsion of Corbyn is not happening, Nick, is it? I have it down as wild rumour created by the heatwave.
EHRC surely gives grounds if Corbyn is implicated
How many Tory MPs were expelled for their support of Ian Smith's Rhodesia regime or for being openly sympathetic to Apartheid South Africa? Terry Dicks advocated hanging Nelson Mandela - did he suffer any penalty for airing such views?
I'm not interested in what the Tory Party does, I am interested in what my party does.
Corbyn did not support those advocating expulsion of Blair for his activities as a war criminal whilst in office!
If Corbyn is implicated and he is not expelled, Labour will not be winning the next general election, no way.
Do we want to win or not, I do.
I seriously question your judgement - that really is a 'non sequitur'. Someone who has lurched from being a strong advocate of Corbyn to now being ultra critical is not likely to be blessed with a very balanced view on this issue.
I'm critical because I'm pissed off with his remaining fan club that attacks people like me for supporting Keir Starmer. And the fact he won't sod off and be quiet, instead choosing to attack the leadership.
My opinion on him has changed, I am not afraid to say that.
If he isn't found guilty by the EHRC, then that's fine. I want him gone but I accept there are no grounds to do so. And the same for Momentum.
My point was that Momentum and Corbyn I'm afraid, are electoral poison for Labour and it would be better if they weren't in the party. I also accept that we can't just boot people out for no reason.
This is perhaps not as high risk a move as meets the eye. The two big UK political parties are broad churches, its just about the idealogues not being in charge so in that way its not so good if Labour can't encompass the hard left, even if it is effectively muzzled. On the risk of a breakaway party, I'm not sure in electoral terms how much damage it would really do to Labour IF Starmer can connect with the public on a personal level whilst steering a don't frighten the horses Social Democrat path. Those hard left Labour types prepared to die in a ditch vs getting the Conservatives out may be surprisingly small.
An anonymous "Labour insider" who talks about CowardlyKeir? A likely story.
This expulsion of Corbyn is not happening, Nick, is it? I have it down as wild rumour created by the heatwave.
EHRC surely gives grounds if Corbyn is implicated
How many Tory MPs were expelled for their support of Ian Smith's Rhodesia regime or for being openly sympathetic to Apartheid South Africa? Terry Dicks advocated hanging Nelson Mandela - did he suffer any penalty for airing such views?
I'm not interested in what the Tory Party does, I am interested in what my party does.
Corbyn did not support those advocating expulsion of Blair for his activities as a war criminal whilst in office!
If Corbyn is implicated and he is not expelled, Labour will not be winning the next general election, no way.
Do we want to win or not, I do.
I seriously question your judgement - that really is a 'non sequitur'. Someone who has lurched from being a strong advocate of Corbyn to now being ultra critical is not likely to be blessed with a very balanced view on this issue.
I'm critical because I'm pissed off with his remaining fan club that attacks people like me for supporting Keir Starmer. And the fact he won't sod off and be quiet, instead choosing to attack the leadership.
My opinion on him has changed, I am not afraid to say that.
If he isn't found guilty by the EHRC, then that's fine. I want him gone but I accept there are no grounds to do so. And the same for Momentum.
That would be on a par with Corbyn removing all Blairites from the party following his election in 2015 - or Thatcher getting rid of the 'Wets' post 1979. Far too destructive and divisive.
This is perhaps not as high risk a move as meets the eye. The two big UK political parties are broad churches, its just about the idealogues not being in charge so in that way its not so good if Labour can't encompass the hard left, even if it is effectively muzzled. On the risk of a breakaway party, I'm not sure in electoral terms how much damage it would really do to Labour IF Starmer can connect with the public on a personal level whilst steering a don't frighten the horses Social Democrat path. Those hard left Labour types prepared to die in a ditch vs getting the Conservatives out may be surprisingly small.
An anonymous "Labour insider" who talks about CowardlyKeir? A likely story.
This expulsion of Corbyn is not happening, Nick, is it? I have it down as wild rumour created by the heatwave.
EHRC surely gives grounds if Corbyn is implicated
How many Tory MPs were expelled for their support of Ian Smith's Rhodesia regime or for being openly sympathetic to Apartheid South Africa? Terry Dicks advocated hanging Nelson Mandela - did he suffer any penalty for airing such views?
I'm not interested in what the Tory Party does, I am interested in what my party does.
Corbyn did not support those advocating expulsion of Blair for his activities as a war criminal whilst in office!
If Corbyn is implicated and he is not expelled, Labour will not be winning the next general election, no way.
Do we want to win or not, I do.
I seriously question your judgement - that really is a 'non sequitur'. Someone who has lurched from being a strong advocate of Corbyn to now being ultra critical is not likely to be blessed with a very balanced view on this issue.
I'm critical because I'm pissed off with his remaining fan club that attacks people like me for supporting Keir Starmer. And the fact he won't sod off and be quiet, instead choosing to attack the leadership.
My opinion on him has changed, I am not afraid to say that.
If he isn't found guilty by the EHRC, then that's fine. I want him gone but I accept there are no grounds to do so. And the same for Momentum.
That would be on a par with Corbyn removing all Blairites from the party following his election in 2015 - or Thatcher getting red of the 'Wets' post 1979. Far too destructive and divisive.
And if there are not grounds to do so, I accept that. That's fine.
I don't think it makes me any less wrong about their hurting Labour's electoral chances, though.
My point was that Momentum and Corbyn I'm afraid, are electoral poison for Labour and it would be better if they weren't in the party. I also accept that we can't just boot people out for no reason.
This is perhaps not as high risk a move as meets the eye. The two big UK political parties are broad churches, its just about the idealogues not being in charge so in that way its not so good if Labour can't encompass the hard left, even if it is effectively muzzled. On the risk of a breakaway party, I'm not sure in electoral terms how much damage it would really do to Labour IF Starmer can connect with the public on a personal level whilst steering a don't frighten the horses Social Democrat path. Those hard left Labour types prepared to die in a ditch vs getting the Conservatives out may be surprisingly small.
An anonymous "Labour insider" who talks about CowardlyKeir? A likely story.
This expulsion of Corbyn is not happening, Nick, is it? I have it down as wild rumour created by the heatwave.
EHRC surely gives grounds if Corbyn is implicated
How many Tory MPs were expelled for their support of Ian Smith's Rhodesia regime or for being openly sympathetic to Apartheid South Africa? Terry Dicks advocated hanging Nelson Mandela - did he suffer any penalty for airing such views?
I'm not interested in what the Tory Party does, I am interested in what my party does.
Corbyn did not support those advocating expulsion of Blair for his activities as a war criminal whilst in office!
If Corbyn is implicated and he is not expelled, Labour will not be winning the next general election, no way.
Do we want to win or not, I do.
I seriously question your judgement - that really is a 'non sequitur'. Someone who has lurched from being a strong advocate of Corbyn to now being ultra critical is not likely to be blessed with a very balanced view on this issue.
I'm critical because I'm pissed off with his remaining fan club that attacks people like me for supporting Keir Starmer. And the fact he won't sod off and be quiet, instead choosing to attack the leadership.
My opinion on him has changed, I am not afraid to say that.
If he isn't found guilty by the EHRC, then that's fine. I want him gone but I accept there are no grounds to do so. And the same for Momentum.
This is perhaps not as high risk a move as meets the eye. The two big UK political parties are broad churches, its just about the idealogues not being in charge so in that way its not so good if Labour can't encompass the hard left, even if it is effectively muzzled. On the risk of a breakaway party, I'm not sure in electoral terms how much damage it would really do to Labour IF Starmer can connect with the public on a personal level whilst steering a don't frighten the horses Social Democrat path. Those hard left Labour types prepared to die in a ditch vs getting the Conservatives out may be surprisingly small.
An anonymous "Labour insider" who talks about CowardlyKeir? A likely story.
This expulsion of Corbyn is not happening, Nick, is it? I have it down as wild rumour created by the heatwave.
EHRC surely gives grounds if Corbyn is implicated
How many Tory MPs were expelled for their support of Ian Smith's Rhodesia regime or for being openly sympathetic to Apartheid South Africa? Terry Dicks advocated hanging Nelson Mandela - did he suffer any penalty for airing such views?
I'm not interested in what the Tory Party does, I am interested in what my party does.
Corbyn did not support those advocating expulsion of Blair for his activities as a war criminal whilst in office!
If Corbyn is implicated and he is not expelled, Labour will not be winning the next general election, no way.
Do we want to win or not, I do.
I seriously question your judgement - that really is a 'non sequitur'. Someone who has lurched from being a strong advocate of Corbyn to now being ultra critical is not likely to be blessed with a very balanced view on this issue.
I'm critical because I'm pissed off with his remaining fan club that attacks people like me for supporting Keir Starmer. And the fact he won't sod off and be quiet, instead choosing to attack the leadership.
My opinion on him has changed, I am not afraid to say that.
If he isn't found guilty by the EHRC, then that's fine. I want him gone but I accept there are no grounds to do so. And the same for Momentum.
That would be on a par with Corbyn removing all Blairites from the party following his election in 2015 - or Thatcher getting red of the 'Wets' post 1979. Far too destructive and divisive.
And if there are not grounds to do so, I accept that. That's fine.
I don't think it makes me any less wrong about their hurting Labour's electoral chances, though.
I believe you are very wrong . Corbyn will be a very peripheral figure by 2024 - indeed many believe he already is - in the same way that Ted Heath was in the Tory party in the 1980s.
My point was that Momentum and Corbyn I'm afraid, are electoral poison for Labour and it would be better if they weren't in the party. I also accept that we can't just boot people out for no reason.
How do you explain 2017 GE result?
We offered a broadly soft-left manifesto and our leader then wasn't polling -60.
In 2019 we went into nutty territory with an unpopular leader.
Now we have a popular leader and will have a 2017-lite manifesto. Seems like a sensible step to me.
This is perhaps not as high risk a move as meets the eye. The two big UK political parties are broad churches, its just about the idealogues not being in charge so in that way its not so good if Labour can't encompass the hard left, even if it is effectively muzzled. On the risk of a breakaway party, I'm not sure in electoral terms how much damage it would really do to Labour IF Starmer can connect with the public on a personal level whilst steering a don't frighten the horses Social Democrat path. Those hard left Labour types prepared to die in a ditch vs getting the Conservatives out may be surprisingly small.
An anonymous "Labour insider" who talks about CowardlyKeir? A likely story.
This expulsion of Corbyn is not happening, Nick, is it? I have it down as wild rumour created by the heatwave.
EHRC surely gives grounds if Corbyn is implicated
How many Tory MPs were expelled for their support of Ian Smith's Rhodesia regime or for being openly sympathetic to Apartheid South Africa? Terry Dicks advocated hanging Nelson Mandela - did he suffer any penalty for airing such views?
I'm not interested in what the Tory Party does, I am interested in what my party does.
Corbyn did not support those advocating expulsion of Blair for his activities as a war criminal whilst in office!
If Corbyn is implicated and he is not expelled, Labour will not be winning the next general election, no way.
Do we want to win or not, I do.
I seriously question your judgement - that really is a 'non sequitur'. Someone who has lurched from being a strong advocate of Corbyn to now being ultra critical is not likely to be blessed with a very balanced view on this issue.
I'm critical because I'm pissed off with his remaining fan club that attacks people like me for supporting Keir Starmer. And the fact he won't sod off and be quiet, instead choosing to attack the leadership.
My opinion on him has changed, I am not afraid to say that.
If he isn't found guilty by the EHRC, then that's fine. I want him gone but I accept there are no grounds to do so. And the same for Momentum.
"Priti Patel in racist French storm: Home Secretary enrages Paris by telling Tory MPs migrants want to cross Channel to escape prejudice
The Home Secratary claimed crossing migrants are escaping 'racist' France Her comments game in a private meeting with Tory MPs, sparking the row Row comes after Europe’s top judges condemned France for ‘degrading and inhumane’ treatment of asylum seekers by forcing them to sleep rough"
"Priti Patel in racist French storm: Home Secretary enrages Paris by telling Tory MPs migrants want to cross Channel to escape prejudice
The Home Secratary claimed crossing migrants are escaping 'racist' France Her comments game in a private meeting with Tory MPs, sparking the row Row comes after Europe’s top judges condemned France for ‘degrading and inhumane’ treatment of asylum seekers by forcing them to sleep rough"
This is perhaps not as high risk a move as meets the eye. The two big UK political parties are broad churches, its just about the idealogues not being in charge so in that way its not so good if Labour can't encompass the hard left, even if it is effectively muzzled. On the risk of a breakaway party, I'm not sure in electoral terms how much damage it would really do to Labour IF Starmer can connect with the public on a personal level whilst steering a don't frighten the horses Social Democrat path. Those hard left Labour types prepared to die in a ditch vs getting the Conservatives out may be surprisingly small.
An anonymous "Labour insider" who talks about CowardlyKeir? A likely story.
This expulsion of Corbyn is not happening, Nick, is it? I have it down as wild rumour created by the heatwave.
EHRC surely gives grounds if Corbyn is implicated
How many Tory MPs were expelled for their support of Ian Smith's Rhodesia regime or for being openly sympathetic to Apartheid South Africa? Terry Dicks advocated hanging Nelson Mandela - did he suffer any penalty for airing such views?
I'm not interested in what the Tory Party does, I am interested in what my party does.
Corbyn did not support those advocating expulsion of Blair for his activities as a war criminal whilst in office!
If Corbyn is implicated and he is not expelled, Labour will not be winning the next general election, no way.
Do we want to win or not, I do.
I seriously question your judgement - that really is a 'non sequitur'. Someone who has lurched from being a strong advocate of Corbyn to now being ultra critical is not likely to be blessed with a very balanced view on this issue.
I'm critical because I'm pissed off with his remaining fan club that attacks people like me for supporting Keir Starmer. And the fact he won't sod off and be quiet, instead choosing to attack the leadership.
My opinion on him has changed, I am not afraid to say that.
If he isn't found guilty by the EHRC, then that's fine. I want him gone but I accept there are no grounds to do so. And the same for Momentum.
Silly boy
"When I am wrong, I change my mind."
John Maynard Keynes
Ah hem, he said
"When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?"
Comments
So we have:
1) Pupils who have got better grades than they would have
2) Pupils who have got the grades they would have without the risk and work in taking the exams
3) Pupils who have received worse grades than they would have expected but who will have an risk free opportunity to take exams if they want to improve their grades
4) Pupils who have received worse grades than they might have got but don't really care because the marks are still good enough
Its a situation I would have happily accepted throughout all the exams I've ever taken.
Different example - not giving a shit if your fly is undone.
I know what I mean anyway.
There was one case a while back someone posted of a single county representing around 20% of a states population with 1 polling station. That’s just not right (and unhelpful in Covid)
The USPS boss is trying to make the organisation break even rather than losing $20bn a year.
But it should be for people who are unable to make it to the polling station in person.
Not available on demand.
I don’t get your final point though as I explicitly criticised restrictions on numbers of polling stations
The main thing I would say is withhold judgment on this case until you have seen the video (which I haven’t either). If he is being stupid in that then fair enough.
Remember the photo of Obama apparently staring at the rear of a woman on the stairs in front of him? When you saw the video it showed it in a completely different light.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Postal_Service_creed
https://twitter.com/ForecasterEnten/status/1294663874269138945
https://twitter.com/afneil/status/1294753230304485377?s=20
The majority of US states allow voting by mail on demand, and a tenth of them have mail only voting.
Whereas Republicans are supposed to be anti-state/socialism capitalists and libertarians.
“NEITHER RAIN NOR SNOW NOR GLOM OF NIT CAN STAY THESE MESENGERS ABOT THEIR DUTY”
Comes from Going Postal!
When you vote at a polling station you can vote for who you want as no one can see you (which reduces coercion) and you can’t prove to anyone which way you voted (reducing the chance of vote buying). Neither of those is true with postal votes, though I don’t think there is any evidence yet that either of the problems I’ve mentioned is happening on a wide scale, in the UK at least.
And as for the bunch of sociopaths and criminals who constitute ICE...
Or perhaps a Tory education secretary was doing the marking.
Admittedly that would not be easy.
It’s anachronistic - based on lots of films with POTUS saluting soldiers but ignoring the fact that POTUS is the commander in chief, while in the U.K. the Queen is head of the armed forces not the PM.
There are an awful lot of things he does to get annoyed over: I just don’t think this one is worth it.
Grayling is just a common grade fool
Ironic
The final point is that someone could just as easily say "having a local polling station isn't an inalienable democratic right"
I know people like to say "Democrats want to increase turnout because it improves their chances, and Republicans want to decrease turnout because it improves their chances, therefore they are both playing the same game"
But increasing turnout is a good thing, irrespective of which party benefits, and trying to reduce turnout is a bad thing. There is no equivalence.
Republicans trying to stop postal votes during a pandemic because they think it might help them win is really not a grey area. It is antidemocratic, and continues their antidemocratic tradition of trying to prevent people from voting. Apologists for this are not democrats at all.
We looked at it as an option and the school said the chances of it working out are zero ...
So the Singapore CFR looks to be below 0.1%.
Is there something unique to Singapore (or APAC more generally, given the experience of Vietnam, Indonesia, Japan etc...)? If so what, let’s have a bit of that please.
Or is the CFR actually very very low and we’ve missed this fact because we’ve hugely over counted the fatalities combined with flaws in antibody testing that mean most people in the UK that can catch it already have done?
https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/absentee-and-early-voting.aspx
And...
https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/early-voting-in-state-elections.aspx
If you mean that, as president, you would try to provide extra funding to facilitate such a thing, then you would be acting in quite the opposite manner to the current incumbent.
To hang some numbers on that, Lomardy's GRP is EUR38,000, while Sicily's is EUR17,500. (See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Italian_regions_by_GRP_per_capita)
That's a pretty massive difference.
You're right I should calm down on Momentum but Corbyn and Momentum have really pissed me off recently because they implied people that support Starmer aren't real lefties and we deserve to be kicked out.
Utter joke.
Do we want to win or not, I do.
In Kentucky, for example, the polls close at 6pm, and most other states close at 7pm. This makes it much more difficult for average working joes to vote than in places where polling booths stay open until 10pm.
My opinion on him has changed, I am not afraid to say that.
If he isn't found guilty by the EHRC, then that's fine. I want him gone but I accept there are no grounds to do so. And the same for Momentum.
I don't think it makes me any less wrong about their hurting Labour's electoral chances, though.
In 2019 we went into nutty territory with an unpopular leader.
Now we have a popular leader and will have a 2017-lite manifesto. Seems like a sensible step to me.
John Maynard Keynes
The Home Secratary claimed crossing migrants are escaping 'racist' France
Her comments game in a private meeting with Tory MPs, sparking the row
Row comes after Europe’s top judges condemned France for ‘degrading and inhumane’ treatment of asylum seekers by forcing them to sleep rough"
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8631389/Home-Secretary-enrages-Paris-telling-Tory-MPs-migrants-want-cross-Channel-escape-prejudice.html
Difficult to prove because they make a point of not collating information on ethnicity or religion in official stats
Hancock as SoS is responsible for PHE whatever their successes or failures.
"When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?"