politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Betting on will Boris Johnson’s tenure as Foreign Secretary
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Betting on will Boris Johnson’s tenure as Foreign Secretary will end
Like many I suspect Boris thought his ambition to be Prime Minister was over after Michael Gove’s transformation into Frank Underwood, but Gove is now looking more like Frank Spencer than Frank Underwood whilst Boris is now Foreign Secretary.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
(only kidding!)
What political framework will the Commonwealth use?
Typical of the buffoon. Shooting from his hip.
Evidence?
That will make it incredibly successful. An alliance of free trading sovereign democracies sharing common values with the Queen or King as its titular head - much as the Statute of Westminster intended.
And yes, I suspect both the USA and Ireland will eventually join it.
Actually not. Replays can decide otherwise.
Consequently, not only is 2019 the most likely year, it's also inexplicably the most generously priced at 10/1. Accordingly, I've invested a pint's worth of Old Speckled Hen.
DYOR.
48% REMAIN
When you say "We will get what we want." .....
Who is "we", and what is "what we want"?
Decided to have a look back at the last nuclear power station that we built, Sizewell-B. It just confirms that we're crap at planning and making decisions. It was originally envisaged in 1969(!). Design decision for an AGR was announced in 1980. the public enquiry took over three years. Ground was broken in 1987 and it entered service in 1995.
We have got to be more decisive as a country.
But India did and it was a disaster that they were not included, had they been partition might have been avoided.
Similarly with a Referendum or an election. When one side goes in for downright lies and promises that it knows cannot be implemented, that also makes nonsense of the result.
Our political system depends on respect for the rules. With his dishonesty and buffoonery, Boris Johnson runs the risk of bringing down our whole democratic system. I have no respect for the result of the referendum, nor for this government.
"Actually not. Replays can decide otherwise."
It's a replay of what has already occurred, not a re-run. So by all means have a recount. I suspect you'll find that Leave wins no matter how many times you count the ballot papers.
Rejoice Surby, the people have spoken and the verdict is clear.
Probably do it quicker as well if they didn't keep finding rare species on the site that are not even domicile or haven't been seen in the area for centuries but just happen to "reappear" right st the point the planning is being considered.
Swampy up a tree doesn't help either.
Pokemon Go player calls the police because someone 'stole their Pokemon'
We did not create the legal system of the United States (although we are recognised as a source).
We did not create the Parliamentary system: from memory, parliaments (in the sense of people coming together to discuss problems - hence "parlement", from the Old French) existed prior to England.
We did create the Westminster System, but the USA does not use it: in fact they specifically rejected it after the Revolution. The Australians also use a variation (the "Washminster Mutation") which no longer easily maps to it.
Stating that we created the Anglosphere is like the middle guy in a relay race saying he created the win, or like saying one man wrote a Wikipedia article. People before us developed principles, we developed them further and included different sources, people after us developed them further still. We are not the progenitor nor owner of it.
We should expect some fireworks this week.
*crowd cheers*
He has a lot of potential enemies on the right of the party who see him as a useful idiot that should be disposed of asap.
So don't preach to me about lies and the EU. I've had a bellyfull from the europhiles over the years - the worst culprits being the LibDems.
"I have no respect for the result of the referendum."
Oh, the horror. I'll never sleep peacefully again.
Diddums.
"So don't preach to me about lies and the EU. I've had a bellyfull from the europhiles over the years."
The sulky Remainers tend to be those of tender years - the "Snowflake generation." All their childhood dreams have died in a burst of reality. Tread softly with them.
It's all very well being angry about lies or misleading statements made - they were definitely made - but people who heard them and were affected by them were given the 'truth' from the other side and made their own judgement to ignore it. People vote for stupid reasons all the time, we cannot know precisely which stupid reason they voted for, so you cannot exactly screen out the votes or invalidate the contest because of stupid claims made during the campaign, and the same applies to lies - tell people reason x they voted was a lie, and most, if they believe it, will say they voted for another reason.
But let's pretend we live in a world where only one side ever tells lies, that we know exactly why people voted as they did en masse, and that despite the claims being countered publicly and apparently ignored, that it is fair to overturn it. Let's pretend similar claims like because old people won't experience the aftermath as much, they shouldn't get to vote on certain matters (presumably if life expectancy is within 5 years of death at an election they should be disqualified). This is all terribly helpful in figuring out the next step.
Mr Clipp and others - the fight for the best possible Brexit terms is still on. Plenty of Leavers and Remainers may now have common cause. But it is also possible they don't work together and Harder Brexiteers will win the day. Is that better?
I don't know how well that skill set moves to the role of Foreign Secretary.
What is wrong with Helmut Hans and A....
Indeed. Lies are the conversation of politics and your definition of lie depends on whether it's said by your side or the other side. When people mature, they begin to realise this. Hence I try not to be too unkind to those young people who have problems facing reality.
Said civil war also resulted in baseball eclipsing it because it was easier to set up baseball.
Fortunately immigrants from India are doing good work in helping to revive it in US and Canada.
In the old days, the electricity generation model (predict and provision), was based around getting a bunch of baseload (inflexibly, high capital cost, low marginal cost) that constantly provided the minimum electricity levels for the country. So, you'd look to fill (say) 60% of minimum demand with nuclear, and another 50% or so with coal. (One of the pains about nuclear is that load factors - i.e. how often the plant is on-line and generating - are almost always sub 80%. In other words, one week in five, they're off-line for scheduled, or more often unschedule, maintenance work.) The rest of the generating capacity would be taken up with peaking plants: these would vary from CCGTs, which took a while to spin up; OCGTs; and diesel generators.
Two things have changed:
1. Gas was always considered the expensive option, which you'd use to provide additional power on top of coal. Gas is now a lot cheaper than coal because (a) gas plants require a lot less maintenance (no troublesome ash to deal with, no difficult mechanical belts to get coal into the furnace); (b) the cost of gas has collapsed; and (c) CCGTs are a lot more efficient at turning calories into kilowatts.
2. We've introduced renewables into the mix, which mean that the grid prefers electricity sources that can ramp up and ramp down incredibly quickly. Those old coal plants can take up to nine hours to reach full efficiency; if the wind stops blowing, they are genuinely useless. As renewables - and particularly "behind the meter" renewables - become more common, they start eating into baseload.
Finally, we now have metric shit tonnes (that's a technical term) of gas available from friendly countries. Two friendly countries - Australia, and the United States - will be 2020 be producing as much LNG as the world market was in 2010.
Anyone building anything other than a CCGT today needs their head examining.
Donald Trump has said people from France and Germany could face 'extreme vetting' before entering the United States because their countries have been 'compromised by terrorism'.
In his nomination acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention, he said he wanted to crack down on immigration with countries where terror attacks were rife.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3705400/Trump-says-French-Germans-face-extreme-vetting-entering-compromised-terrorism.html#ixzz4FMQ06tf5
[EDIT: Unnest blockquotes]
The qualities men want in a wife versus those they want in an adult daughter. https://t.co/ibcI4S0KOm https://t.co/phBpYLCcPk
Times like these you actually wish for it to be a gas cylinder accident.
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/07/poll-americans-fear-election-clinton-trump-160715092852340.html