politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Labour’s TINA* nightmare.
Comments
-
Labour have massive majorities. They won't fail in big cities Birmingham might.
Newcastle, Manchester etc, I don't think have one tory councillor.Paul_Bedfordshire said:
On the contrary. If thatcher had not done things like rate capping and abolishing the metropolitan councils the loony left would have ensured a continuous Tory government from then to now.Gardenwalker said:
I warned about this the other day.Black_Rook said:Interesting from this morning's Torygraph:
"With Manchester, Leeds, Newcastle and the London boroughs among the Labour authorities that will have all out local elections in May 2018, there will be a ripple effect. Selections for those contests will take place in summer 2017. At which time, members who have joined the Labour Party in support of Mr Corbyn over the last two years will be eligible to vote, including those blocked by the High Court in August.
It is for this reason that many moderate Labour leaders are now working on the assumption that they and their cabinets will be deselected. Many other Labour councillors are simply planning to walk away. It will be the Momentum wing of the Labour Party that fills the gap.
Couple that with the political polarisation of the country post-Brexit, lack of information about who runs councils and lack of engagement and turn out for local elections, and it is highly likely that areas with a strong Labour vote will turn out Labour councils anyway.
We could therefore see Corbynites taking over town halls as early as May next year and leading some of our major cities by 2018."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/27/how-jeremy-corbyns-followers-could-seize-control-of-your-town-ha/
It looks like Labour is going to keep on eviscerating and slowly torturing itself to death for the whole of the rest of this Parliament. There may not be enough Champagne in the country to keep the needs of Tory HQ and the Local Associations supplied by the time this is all over.
Shits and giggles if you're Tory HQ, but rather depressing if a bunch of Trots seize control of your local city council.
Thank sweet jesus for the coalition's education reforms.
Not much fun if you live in the Loony Left Wing Borough of Lambeth or wherever but, paraphrasing Lenin some very useful rope to let the useful (to Tories) idiots of the loony left metaphorically play with on the stairs and end up hanging themselves on the bannister.0 -
Allerdyce might have made a really crap English manager, in which the Telegraph would have done everyone a favour by going after him in the way that they did. But as it was, they couldn't wait. Allerdyce might very well have succeeded in the job, and the fact that he might was reason enough for the Telegraph to avoid trying to entrap him at the very first opportunity.0
-
A sh*t politician who won two elections, from a very low base.SeanT said:
But Cameron, fatally, was already on record saying this:Sean_F said:
My response would have been to say to the voters "They offered very little. Decide if you want to stay in the EU on these terms."kle4 said:
You play the hands you are dealt - clearly he was not willing to wait, not willing to try again (presumably feeling anti-EU feeling was only going to keep increasing and he needed it out the way quickly), so he tried to sell it.Sean_F said:
I agree, no one could have got a good deal.kle4 said:
I'm still inclined to bevel that even if his own shortcomings were a significant part of why that deal was so poor, it was also true that a good deal was in fact impossible from the EU at that stage (and of course likely still is) - they did not truly think they needed to offer anything, in fact some reported they felt they offered too much to Cameron. Therefore, odds are no one could have gotten a good deal, even if a better one than we got was possible.SeanT said:
You do realise that if this is true (which I doubt) that makes it even worse. Cameron did his best, and strained every sinew, to produce a "deal" so miserable that he never mentioned it again, during the entire campaign?Richard_Nabavi said:
Rubbish. He worked really hard on it.Gardenwalker said:Although I agree it seems unlikely, unfair to bring up Cameron's failure to deliver on Bloomberg.
He didn't even bother, the lazy twat.
He really is shit at politics.
I read the other day that when Cameron first delivered the "deal" to his Cabinet, there was total stony silence, even from his friends and supporters. They knew it was a dud. We knew it was a dud.
Cameron was a dud.
But, why try to sell a poor deal as a good deal?
Plus it's instinctive for politicians to claim their policy/deal is amazing even when its middling at best.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/9410061/David-Cameron-Ill-never-campaign-to-take-us-out-of-Europe.html
He was, and is, a shit politician. Overrated by all, most of all by himself0 -
We're currently in the phase where it's unfashionable to take a middle ground on Cameron.JosiasJessop said:
A sh*t politician who won two elections, from a very low base.SeanT said:
But Cameron, fatally, was already on record saying this:Sean_F said:
My response would have been to say to the voters "They offered very little. Decide if you want to stay in the EU on these terms."kle4 said:
You play the hands you are dealt - clearly he was not willing to wait, not willing to try again (presumably feeling anti-EU feeling was only going to keep increasing and he needed it out the way quickly), so he tried to sell it.Sean_F said:
I agree, no one could have got a good deal.kle4 said:
I'm still inclined to bevel that even if his own shortcomings were a significant part of why that deal was so poor, it was also true that a good deal was in fact impossible from the EU at that stage (and of course likely still is) - they did not truly think they needed to offer anything, in fact some reported they felt they offered too much to Cameron. Therefore, odds are no one could have gotten a good deal, even if a better one than we got was possible.SeanT said:
You do realise that if this is true (which I doubt) that makes it even worse. Cameron did his best, and strained every sinew, to produce a "deal" so miserable that he never mentioned it again, during the entire campaign?Richard_Nabavi said:
Rubbish. He worked really hard on it.Gardenwalker said:Although I agree it seems unlikely, unfair to bring up Cameron's failure to deliver on Bloomberg.
He didn't even bother, the lazy twat.
He really is shit at politics.
I read the other day that when Cameron first delivered the "deal" to his Cabinet, there was total stony silence, even from his friends and supporters. They knew it was a dud. We knew it was a dud.
Cameron was a dud.
But, why try to sell a poor deal as a good deal?
Plus it's instinctive for politicians to claim their policy/deal is amazing even when its middling at best.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/9410061/David-Cameron-Ill-never-campaign-to-take-us-out-of-Europe.html
He was, and is, a shit politician. Overrated by all, most of all by himself0 -
Are you saying corruption should not be ignored because someone *might* be successful, yet alone is so?Wulfrun_Phil said:Allerdyce might have made a really crap English manager, in which the Telegraph would have done everyone a favour by going after him in the way that they did. But as it was, they couldn't wait. Allerdyce might very well have succeeded in the job, and the fact that he might was reason enough for the Telegraph to avoid trying to entrap him at the very first opportunity.
He allowed himself to be trapped. If he was honest, he would not have been caught.0 -
And lost a EU referendum, losing his Premiership and his seat in the process....JosiasJessop said:
A sh*t politician who won two elections, from a very low base.SeanT said:
But Cameron, fatally, was already on record saying this:Sean_F said:
My response would have been to say to the voters "They offered very little. Decide if you want to stay in the EU on these terms."kle4 said:
You play the hands you are dealt - clearly he was not willing to wait, not willing to try again (presumably feeling anti-EU feeling was only going to keep increasing and he needed it out the way quickly), so he tried to sell it.Sean_F said:
I agree, no one could have got a good deal.kle4 said:
I'm still inclined to bevel that even if his own shortcomings were a significant part of why that deal was so poor, it was also true that a good deal was in fact impossible from the EU at that stage (and of course likely still is) - they did not truly think they needed to offer anything, in fact some reported they felt they offered too much to Cameron. Therefore, odds are no one could have gotten a good deal, even if a better one than we got was possible.SeanT said:
You do realise that if this is true (which I doubt) that makes it even worse. Cameron did his best, and strained every sinew, to produce a "deal" so miserable that he never mentioned it again, during the entire campaign?Richard_Nabavi said:
Rubbish. He worked really hard on it.Gardenwalker said:Although I agree it seems unlikely, unfair to bring up Cameron's failure to deliver on Bloomberg.
He didn't even bother, the lazy twat.
He really is shit at politics.
I read the other day that when Cameron first delivered the "deal" to his Cabinet, there was total stony silence, even from his friends and supporters. They knew it was a dud. We knew it was a dud.
Cameron was a dud.
But, why try to sell a poor deal as a good deal?
Plus it's instinctive for politicians to claim their policy/deal is amazing even when its middling at best.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/9410061/David-Cameron-Ill-never-campaign-to-take-us-out-of-Europe.html
He was, and is, a shit politician. Overrated by all, most of all by himself0 -
Watching the latest Telegraph video....some people are going to prison....0
-
Well the earth was already proven to be round by 1492, and portuguese explorers where already on the high seas with ships that could float and sail the distance (a critical difference with Musk's plans).JosiasJessop said:
Tell that to Elcano or the crew of the Pinta. The world would be so much better if they hadn't embarked.Speedy said:
An appropiate name for an overpriced space coffin.Pulpstar said:First mars ship named - "Hard gold"
Although we can save countless of lives if Musk is the first to try his own spaceship.
Life without some risk is no life. We all take calculated (and uncalculated) risks: sometimes these risks are how the world progresses.
Avoiding risks means stagnation; doubly so for a society.
Colombus was proposing something that could be done with aleady existing and tested technology, Musk is proposing something that can't be done with existing and tested technology.
Musk is simply trying to sell a Star Treck episode to Wall Street, not to actually make a trip to Mars.0 -
Google's aggregation is weird for Google trends. If you look at it for the last day rather than 7 days it matches the debate with the biggest spike at the very end.RobD said:
Strangely enough it looks like it peaked before the debate?Alistair said:Google trends for "registrarse para votar" is certainly intersting when visualised over the last 7 days
For me the interesting thing is the states that get the most interest.0 -
So misconduct is okay as long as they are good at their job?Wulfrun_Phil said:Allerdyce might have made a really crap English manager, in which the Telegraph would have done everyone a favour by going after him in the way that they did. But as it was, they couldn't wait. Allerdyce might very well have succeeded in the job, and the fact that he might was reason enough for the Telegraph to avoid trying to entrap him at the very first opportunity.
0 -
A few years ago, Radio 5 had a segment discussing corruption in football. On the panel, they had two agents and a player. They all agreed there was no corruption.TheScreamingEagles said:
An amazing conclusion.0 -
During his meetings with the undercover reporters, Mr Pagliara moaned about a “reformed rogue” of a manager who “used to need the money but he’s had so much now that all of a sudden he’s whiter than white”. He said: “I felt like saying '[X], you’ve had more backhanders than Wimbledon, what are you talking about?’ “You know he’s a wheeler and dealer don’t you?... he gambles 20 grand a day, he needs to make money… he’ll be earning three or four million, he still wants 50 grand in cash.”
The manager last night denied taking bungs. Another coach who has managed several British clubs was allegedly sacked by one club after being “caught with his fingers in the till”.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/27/exclusive-eight-premier-league-managers-took-transfer-bungs-clai/0 -
-
Just watched Portillo - I visited Geneva two years ago this week
0 -
No names for legal reasons but...tlg86 said:@TSE - any names mentioned?
Manager 1
Ex-Premier League manager allegedly liked “bungs” in cash or deposited in a Swiss bank account. Pagliara said: “I can call [X] now and all it is with [X] is 'How much, Pino? And will it be the same Swiss bank account?’”
Manager 2
Ex-top flight manager has had “more backhanders than Wimbledon”. Pagliara said: “This is what I hate... the guy that used to need the money but he’s had so much now that all of a sudden he’s whiter than white.”
Manager 3
After managing several British clubs, he was allegedly fired by one for having “his fingers in the till”. Pagliara said he would get involved if “you understand that when we do deals I have to have a carrier bag with some cash”.
Manager 4
Pagliara said of this boss with Premier League experience: “We know him very, very well. We do a transfer, [X] has winked at us and said 'Yeah, I want the player. Is there a little coffee for me, Pino?’ Yeah, course there is.”
Manager 5
Ex-Premier League manager who, said Pagliara, would call him and say “here’s the number”, and give him details of a Swiss account. He said: “It was always numbered accounts.”
Manager 6
A former player who now manages, he allegedly likes extra money to secure deals because he is not on a big salary at his club. Pagliara said: “[X] takes a few [inaudible] because he’s not being paid big money.”
Manager 7
Ex-Premier League manager is another “we can put on the payroll”. If a player was transferred for £10m, “we’ll turn round to [X] and say, listen, if you take this player we’ll look after you. OK? OK, boom.”
Manager 8
Agent Dax Price said this long-serving manager would pick three trusted players and tell them he was paying them an extra £8,000 per month, on condition that they paid him £4,000 per month each.0 -
Kind of how sport is, generally.RobD said:
So misconduct is okay as long as they are good at their job?Wulfrun_Phil said:Allerdyce might have made a really crap English manager, in which the Telegraph would have done everyone a favour by going after him in the way that they did. But as it was, they couldn't wait. Allerdyce might very well have succeeded in the job, and the fact that he might was reason enough for the Telegraph to avoid trying to entrap him at the very first opportunity.
Or film making I suppose.0 -
Hah, I've had dinner in San Carlo's quite a few times, where some of these agent discussions took place.0
-
Asparagus spelt backwards is Sugarapsa.SeanT said:
Venables backwards is "Selbanev", a little-known fact which became a plot-point in one of the better Jennings books.Stickytroll said:
The best England manager of modern times, Sir Bobby Robson, was certainly no rogue.HYUFD said:
I wouldn't say he was terrible, Middlesborough normally made the top 10 in the Premier League when he was manager. However it is true that rogues often make the best England managers, Terry Venables being a case in point, Allerdyce too won his first game, so if you do not want the rogues you may not always get the results either
I'm a bit bored.0 -
A lesson from FIFA, Football is as corrupt as any organized crime syndicate.TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
Interesting, and I always wonder why there isn't an absolute scale on these things.Alistair said:
Google's aggregation is weird for Google trends. If you look at it for the last day rather than 7 days it matches the debate with the biggest spike at the very end.RobD said:
Strangely enough it looks like it peaked before the debate?Alistair said:Google trends for "registrarse para votar" is certainly intersting when visualised over the last 7 days
For me the interesting thing is the states that get the most interest.0 -
I think we can all guess the name of at least one they are talking about, but obviously don't want to get myself or OGH in trouble.TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
Forget bungs, this is explosive
The same individual, who used to manage a high profile team, had also fixed a game, Mr Pagliara claimed. The manager’s representatives yesterday described the allegations as “completely false”. In several instances, he admitted that he had personally paid the officials “bungs” to secure deals.0 -
Political betting backwards is Gnitteb Lacitilopstjohn said:
Asparagus spelt backwards is Sugarapsa.SeanT said:
Venables backwards is "Selbanev", a little-known fact which became a plot-point in one of the better Jennings books.Stickytroll said:
The best England manager of modern times, Sir Bobby Robson, was certainly no rogue.HYUFD said:
I wouldn't say he was terrible, Middlesborough normally made the top 10 in the Premier League when he was manager. However it is true that rogues often make the best England managers, Terry Venables being a case in point, Allerdyce too won his first game, so if you do not want the rogues you may not always get the results either
I'm a bit bored.0 -
Educated people knew the Earth was round in ancient times.Speedy said:
Well the earth was already proven to be round by 1492, and portuguese explorers where already on the high seas with ships that could float and sail the distance (a critical difference with Musk's plans).JosiasJessop said:
Tell that to Elcano or the crew of the Pinta. The world would be so much better if they hadn't embarked.Speedy said:
An appropiate name for an overpriced space coffin.Pulpstar said:First mars ship named - "Hard gold"
Although we can save countless of lives if Musk is the first to try his own spaceship.
Life without some risk is no life. We all take calculated (and uncalculated) risks: sometimes these risks are how the world progresses.
Avoiding risks means stagnation; doubly so for a society.
Colombus was proposing something that could be done with aleady existing and tested technology, Musk is proposing something that can't be done with existing and tested technology.
Musk is simply trying to sell a Star Treck episode to Wall Street, not to actually make a trip to Mars.
But sailing West was a huge risk in 1492. And, we owe a lot to people who are willing to blow fortunes and/or risk their lives purely in order to satisfy intellectual curiosity.0 -
Beatles backwards isstjohn said:
Asparagus spelt backwards is Sugarapsa.SeanT said:
Venables backwards is "Selbanev", a little-known fact which became a plot-point in one of the better Jennings books.Stickytroll said:
The best England manager of modern times, Sir Bobby Robson, was certainly no rogue.HYUFD said:
I wouldn't say he was terrible, Middlesborough normally made the top 10 in the Premier League when he was manager. However it is true that rogues often make the best England managers, Terry Venables being a case in point, Allerdyce too won his first game, so if you do not want the rogues you may not always get the results either
I'm a bit bored.
Seltaeb
0 -
Sunil spelt backwards is Linus.Sunil_Prasannan said:
Political betting backwards is Gnitteb Lacitilopstjohn said:
Asparagus spelt backwards is Sugarapsa.SeanT said:
Venables backwards is "Selbanev", a little-known fact which became a plot-point in one of the better Jennings books.Stickytroll said:
The best England manager of modern times, Sir Bobby Robson, was certainly no rogue.HYUFD said:
I wouldn't say he was terrible, Middlesborough normally made the top 10 in the Premier League when he was manager. However it is true that rogues often make the best England managers, Terry Venables being a case in point, Allerdyce too won his first game, so if you do not want the rogues you may not always get the results either
I'm a bit bored.0 -
"portuguese explorers where already on the high seas with ships that could float and sail the distance"Speedy said:
Well the earth was already proven to be round by 1492, and portuguese explorers where already on the high seas with ships that could float and sail the distance (a critical difference with Musk's plans).JosiasJessop said:
Tell that to Elcano or the crew of the Pinta. The world would be so much better if they hadn't embarked.Speedy said:
An appropiate name for an overpriced space coffin.Pulpstar said:First mars ship named - "Hard gold"
Although we can save countless of lives if Musk is the first to try his own spaceship.
Life without some risk is no life. We all take calculated (and uncalculated) risks: sometimes these risks are how the world progresses.
Avoiding risks means stagnation; doubly so for a society.
Colombus was proposing something that could be done with aleady existing and tested technology, Musk is proposing something that can't be done with existing and tested technology.
Musk is simply trying to sell a Star Treck episode to Wall Street, not to actually make a trip to Mars.
Someone had to take the risk to prove that they could sail the distance. Someone had to go a little beyond what was already known as possible. Otherwise we wouldn't have progressed out of sight of land - ~3-15 miles.
Columbus was proposing to travel to the east to pick up spices. He failed. But in failing, he found far greater riches, both fiscal and scientific.
I'm a critic of Musk, but there is a coherent plan in everything he does: and that is Mars. I honestly believe that if he end up penniless in the gutter but we have a viable society on Mars, he'd die happy.0 -
Columbus and others thought that they could sail straight over to Asia by sailing west, There was no knowledge of the New World, and Ptolemy (1st cen. AD) underestimated the circumference on his world map.Sean_F said:
Educated people knew the Earth was round in ancient times.Speedy said:
Well the earth was already proven to be round by 1492, and portuguese explorers where already on the high seas with ships that could float and sail the distance (a critical difference with Musk's plans).JosiasJessop said:
Tell that to Elcano or the crew of the Pinta. The world would be so much better if they hadn't embarked.Speedy said:
An appropiate name for an overpriced space coffin.Pulpstar said:First mars ship named - "Hard gold"
Although we can save countless of lives if Musk is the first to try his own spaceship.
Life without some risk is no life. We all take calculated (and uncalculated) risks: sometimes these risks are how the world progresses.
Avoiding risks means stagnation; doubly so for a society.
Colombus was proposing something that could be done with aleady existing and tested technology, Musk is proposing something that can't be done with existing and tested technology.
Musk is simply trying to sell a Star Treck episode to Wall Street, not to actually make a trip to Mars.
But sailing West was a huge risk in 1492. And, we owe a lot to people who are willing to blow fortunes and/or risk their lives purely in order to satisfy intellectual curiosity.0 -
Oh lordy, don't tell me Sunil is a Linux geek.stjohn said:
Sunil spelt backwards is Linus.Sunil_Prasannan said:
Political betting backwards is Gnitteb Lacitilopstjohn said:
Asparagus spelt backwards is Sugarapsa.SeanT said:
Venables backwards is "Selbanev", a little-known fact which became a plot-point in one of the better Jennings books.Stickytroll said:
The best England manager of modern times, Sir Bobby Robson, was certainly no rogue.HYUFD said:
I wouldn't say he was terrible, Middlesborough normally made the top 10 in the Premier League when he was manager. However it is true that rogues often make the best England managers, Terry Venables being a case in point, Allerdyce too won his first game, so if you do not want the rogues you may not always get the results either
I'm a bit bored.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linus_Torvalds0 -
Or banking.kle4 said:
Kind of how sport is, generally.RobD said:
So misconduct is okay as long as they are good at their job?Wulfrun_Phil said:Allerdyce might have made a really crap English manager, in which the Telegraph would have done everyone a favour by going after him in the way that they did. But as it was, they couldn't wait. Allerdyce might very well have succeeded in the job, and the fact that he might was reason enough for the Telegraph to avoid trying to entrap him at the very first opportunity.
Or film making I suppose.
The test of integrity is that people are sacked if in breach of the company values despite being good at their job.
0 -
NEW THREAD
0 -
I was there in July on the recommendation of someone on here. Fabulous place and atmosphere which the food did not quite match.TheScreamingEagles said:Hah, I've had dinner in San Carlo's quite a few times, where some of these agent discussions took place.
0 -
Surely not? Something where billions of pounds are throw around, yet there are no proper checks?Speedy said:
A lesson from FIFA, Football is as corrupt as any organized crime syndicate.TheScreamingEagles said:
Corruption?
Never!
(/sarcasm)0 -
What is interesting in that?Alistair said:
Google's aggregation is weird for Google trends. If you look at it for the last day rather than 7 days it matches the debate with the biggest spike at the very end.RobD said:
Strangely enough it looks like it peaked before the debate?Alistair said:Google trends for "registrarse para votar" is certainly intersting when visualised over the last 7 days
For me the interesting thing is the states that get the most interest.
Texas, Florida, California have the largest hispanic populations.
You can search back to 2004 in google trends and it's still about the same result with the same states as in 2012.0 -
Turkeys not voting for Christmas - whatever next.JosiasJessop said:
A few years ago, Radio 5 had a segment discussing corruption in football. On the panel, they had two agents and a player. They all agreed there was no corruption.TheScreamingEagles said:
An amazing conclusion.0 -
"with ships that could float and sail the distance" - but they didn't know what the distance was so had no way of knowing whether they had enough provisions with them. Musk knows exactly the problems he has to overcome, and in principle how to overcome them.Speedy said:
Well the earth was already proven to be round by 1492, and portuguese explorers where already on the high seas with ships that could float and sail the distance (a critical difference with Musk's plans).JosiasJessop said:
Tell that to Elcano or the crew of the Pinta. The world would be so much better if they hadn't embarked.Speedy said:
An appropiate name for an overpriced space coffin.Pulpstar said:First mars ship named - "Hard gold"
Although we can save countless of lives if Musk is the first to try his own spaceship.
Life without some risk is no life. We all take calculated (and uncalculated) risks: sometimes these risks are how the world progresses.
Avoiding risks means stagnation; doubly so for a society.
Colombus was proposing something that could be done with aleady existing and tested technology, Musk is proposing something that can't be done with existing and tested technology.
Musk is simply trying to sell a Star Treck episode to Wall Street, not to actually make a trip to Mars.
OTOH if Columbus had known that his destination was a freezing airless and radioactive desert he would probably have had the sense not to bother.0 -
Wulfrun_Phil said:
Allerdyce might have made a really crap English manager, in which the Telegraph would have done everyone a favour by going after him in the way that they did. But as it was, they couldn't wait. Allerdyce might very well have succeeded in the job, and the fact that he might was reason enough for the Telegraph to avoid trying to entrap him at the very first opportunity.
People who don't match up to the values of an organisation should be sacked however good they are. That is the test of integrity.
0 -
Is there any possibility that criminal charges could be brought against him based on what has to date been disclosed? No.JosiasJessop said:
Are you saying corruption should not be ignored because someone *might* be successful, yet alone is so?Wulfrun_Phil said:Allerdyce might have made a really crap English manager, in which the Telegraph would have done everyone a favour by going after him in the way that they did. But as it was, they couldn't wait. Allerdyce might very well have succeeded in the job, and the fact that he might was reason enough for the Telegraph to avoid trying to entrap him at the very first opportunity.
He allowed himself to be trapped. If he was honest, he would not have been caught.0 -
No, it really isn't.SeanT said:Against Gordon Brown and Ed Miliband. And the first time around he couldn't even get a majority.
Besides, he will always be remembered for Brexit. And on his own terms, that's a catastrophe.
Claiming Cameron is good coz he went into Coalition with Clegg is like saying Hitler was good at motorways, if you ignore the whole war and Holocaust thing, towards the end of his career.
And you've Godwinned yourself.
Cameron started from a low base. In 2010 he gained 97 seats. Compare that to his immediate Conservative predecessors. And if you count Labour, Blair only managed 145 gains in 1997 against a divided and tired Conservative party.
The Conservatives had much to do to 'prove' themselves to the public after the Thatcher and Major years. Cameron did that.0 -
Enjoying the Labour conference, not just for obvious reasons, but because it's in Liverpool, which like Glasgow has so reinvented itself. I'm staying out in the sticks in a weird B&B (zero staff - you find your room by looking for a door with a key hanging in it. Breakfast? Forget it.) so have been taking a lot of (very cheap) taxis, and encountering really politicised, well-informed taxi-drivers. Some are spontaneously more enthusiastic pro-Europeans and left-wing than anyone I've met outside Guardian circles - sample tonight (obviously from memory): "Really it was dying - just pubs and drunks and fighting. What saved us was the European Year of Culture, they European poured help into the city, they built the big galleries, they restored the grand old buildings, and then when the year was over it was like we'd got a new fucking life, a fucking second chance, like, and we took it, we had a food festival and a book festival and the giant puppet festival twice and it all took off. We mostly voted to stay in, I think the wankers who didn't were mad." Corbyn? "They say he's left-wing, but what's the fucking point of a Labour Party that isn't? They say he won because he got 300,000 new members, but they don't see that's a success. He's honest, and up here we're tired of people who pretend to us and then forget us."0
-
HYUFD said:Stickytroll said:
The best England manager of modern times, Sir Bobby Robson, was certainly no rogue.HYUFD said:
I wouldn't say he was terrible, Middlesborough normally made the top 10 in the Premier League when he was manager. However it is true that rogues often make the best England managers, Terry Venables being a case in point, Allerdyce too won his first game, so if you do not want the rogues you may not always get the results either
Alf Ramsey was a man of integrity and ourmost successful manager.0 -
Football is corrupt from top to bottom, on a massive scale, starting with the ownership of the clubs. We know it is and going after the small fry will do absolutely nothing to change that, because nothing can.David_Evershed said:Wulfrun_Phil said:Allerdyce might have made a really crap English manager, in which the Telegraph would have done everyone a favour by going after him in the way that they did. But as it was, they couldn't wait. Allerdyce might very well have succeeded in the job, and the fact that he might was reason enough for the Telegraph to avoid trying to entrap him at the very first opportunity.
People who don't match up to the values of an organisation should be sacked however good they are. That is the test of integrity.
However, there is plenty that can be done to mess up the already limited chances of the England football team, and that is the contribution that the Telegraph may well have made. They didn't have to go after Allerdyce - that was their choice, and I'm not thanking them for it.
0 -
But Allerdyce stuck by Rooney. When ManU left him on the bench Saturday and were 4-0 by half-time... "Release the tapes...."Wulfrun_Phil said:
Football is corrupt from top to bottom, on a massive scale, starting with the ownership of the clubs. We know it is and going after the small fry will do absolutely nothing to change that, because nothing can.David_Evershed said:Wulfrun_Phil said:Allerdyce might have made a really crap English manager, in which the Telegraph would have done everyone a favour by going after him in the way that they did. But as it was, they couldn't wait. Allerdyce might very well have succeeded in the job, and the fact that he might was reason enough for the Telegraph to avoid trying to entrap him at the very first opportunity.
People who don't match up to the values of an organisation should be sacked however good they are. That is the test of integrity.
However, there is plenty that can be done to mess up the already limited chances of the England football team, and that is the contribution that the Telegraph may well have made. They didn't have to go after Allerdyce - that was their choice, and I'm not thanking them for it.0 -
Cameron had the skills to potentially be a great PM. But his choice in the people close to him was based on mates and not merit. That reduced the talent pool and stopped him firing/moving the failures such as Osborne and his multiple omnishambles budgets.JosiasJessop said:
SNIP Cameron started from a low base. In 2010 he gained 97 seats. Compare that to his immediate Conservative predecessors. And if you count Labour, Blair only managed 145 gains in 1997 against a divided and tired Conservative party.SeanT said:Against Gordon Brown and Ed Miliband. And the first time around he couldn't even get a majority.
Besides, he will always be remembered for Brexit. And on his own terms, that's a catastrophe.
Claiming Cameron is good coz he went into Coalition with Clegg is like saying Hitler was good at motorways, if you ignore the whole war and Holocaust thing, towards the end of his career.
The Conservatives had much to do to 'prove' themselves to the public after the Thatcher and Major years. Cameron did that.
This article sums it up.
http://life.spectator.co.uk/2016/09/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-cameron-chumocracy/
" What made Cameron a good friend also made him a bad politician because he never asked if there was anyone better for the job.’"
"Dave had carefully curated a coterie of yes men ever since he was eight years old (which was the last time anyone told him what to do, according to his late father). He was so cut off from the rest of the populace he could not foresee imminent doom: relying not just on the utterly hopeless pollster Andrew Cooper, but all the smug Remainers to whom he later gave gongs."0
