politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Now you can bet on how many LAB MPs will quit as during 2017
Comments
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTmXHvGZiSYviewcode said:
I think you may have added too many noughts to that.Big_G_NorthWales said:How many know the Government has allocated in excess of 500,000 million for this improved GP service
* 500,000 million is half-a-trillion. That's 500,000,000,000, ie 5x10^11
* There are about 50,000 GPs in the UK, ie 5x 10^4
* So that's 10^7 each, that's £10 million each
So if your number is correct, the Government is planning to give each GP ten million quid each to work weekends.0 -
I agree with that.HYUFD said:
The Tories will get some of the Remain and most of them will stick with Labour, there will be small leakage to the LDs at most. I was phoning in Copeland last week for 2 hours and got 1 LD the entire time. In both seats the LDs did worse than they did nationally at the general election and both areas also voted Leave, as was the case in Sleaford and Hykeham where they came thirdsurbiton said:
60% of the 69% will vote for Con, UKIP or Labour. 9% of the Remain [ mostly Labour ] + the 31% will vote LD.HYUFD said:
Stoke voted 69% Leave, the LDs have no chance there, if they won it Farron would be heading for number 10 with a landslide majority. For example the LDs got just 11% in Sleaford and Hykeham in an area which voted 62% Leave. It will be a Labour hold with a reduced majority. Copeland will be neck and neck between the Tories and Laboursurbiton said:
Copeland should be Labour with the right [ literally ] selection. That selection will not please me though.Pulpstar said:
Stoke is a gone-er as long as the Lib Dems stick to hard REMAIN. The opposition will be split three ways.
LD will get the Remain vote and the NOTA vote. They should not be ruled out in Copeland either.0 -
Has there been briefing that May is going to say we're leaving the Single Market?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/news/article-4120378/City-braced-turmoil-swings-pound-Theresa-s-single-market-exit.html0 -
I shall clarify: we have passed a particular point in the Parliament when the value that Labour achieves in the polls has always (in Opposition, and at any point in the last 50 years) proven to be higher than what they eventually score in the subsequent general election.justin124 said:Black_Rook said:
' We have already passed the point in this Parliament relative to which - when the election eventually occurred - a Labour Party in Opposition has ALWAYS polled lower. '
That is not ACTUALLY true! To take the 1987 - 1992 Parliament - there were polls in early 1991 giving Labour ratings of 34 and 32% - yet at the 1992 election they polled 35.2%. Going back to the 1959 - 1964 Parliament there were polls as late as October 1962 giving Labour a poll rating several points lower than achieved in October 1964.
Their figures may have wobbled up and down in the intervening period, but the share ultimately achieved at the election itself is lower than at the critical point.
Further information here:
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2016/11/moment-when-labours-poll-rating-gets-lot-lot-worse0 -
Suggests she is seeking a transition deal but obviously control of free movement requires ceasing full membership of the Single Market, better that the City realises that now rather than laterwilliamglenn said:Has there been briefing that May is going to say we're leaving the Single Market?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/news/article-4120378/City-braced-turmoil-swings-pound-Theresa-s-single-market-exit.html0 -
It is.FeersumEnjineeya said:
It's good to see private industry replicating what state industries managed 60 years ago. Can we expect to see Elon Musk walking in Neil Armstrong's footsteps in another 12 years?JosiasJessop said:SpaceX have completed their primary mission and delivered ten Iridium satellites into orbit, and have also completed their secondary mission in successfully landing the first stage.
Woohoo!
Now they just need to refly a landed first stage - hopefully next month on SES-10.
Only kidding. It is quite an achievement!
As for insanely rich madman Musk walking in Neil Armstrong's footsteps: nah. He wants to go to Mars, and sees the Moon as a distraction. Jeff Bezos is the insanely rich madman who wants to go to the Moon.
I'm so glad to be living through a bit if a resurgence in space. I remember trying to get as much information as possible on the DCX Clipper twenty years ago, and being devastated when it went kaboom and the project was cancelled.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzXcTFfV3Ls0 -
Debt, deficit what's the difference?surbiton said:
What's the deficit now ? 560 billion ?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Despite the constant negative stories on the NHS I do believe that people are beginning to question the constant demand for billions more and even if it is forthcoming how it is spent will be of most concern.TOPPING said:
One would hope that people are beginning to realise that the largest injection of money into the NHS came under Tone & Gordo and that we are still where we are.Slackbladder said:
I know I'm a tory supporter, but how the flying f*** are they not being hammered on the NHS?TheScreamingEagles said:The NHS findings really are a kick in the nuts for Labour.
More people agree than disagree that the Red Cross was right to describe the NHS was experiencing a humanitarian crisis (47% to 36%) but on who do they think would be better at managing the NHS winter crisis
Theresa May/Tories - 43%
Jeremy Corbyn/Labour - 31%
So a 12% lead for the Tories on the NHS.
Corbyn is utter shite.
I appreciate that there is a huge social care dimension to the state of the NHS atm but nevertheless, perhaps people realise that spunking money up the (ward) wall isn't always the answer.
Sky reporting this morning big support for Theresa May on withholding funds on doctors not opening 8 - 8 - 7 days a week. How many know the Government has allocated in excess of 500,000 million for this improved GP service
There will be a big clamour to increase salaries but that will not address the massive increase in demand and you can bet that if Corbyn was given cart blanche it would go on salaries.0 -
ExactlyBlack_Rook said:
Note: funny how, in all the excitement about a local government ward, people seem to have banished Sleaford from their minds.HYUFD said:
The Tories will get some of the Remain and most of them will stick with Labour, there will be small leakage to the LDs at most. I was phoning in Copeland last week for 2 hours and got 1 LD the entire time. In both seats the LDs did worse than they did nationally at the general election and both areas also voted Leave, as was the case in Sleaford and Hykeham where they came thirdsurbiton said:
60% of the 69% will vote for Con, UKIP or Labour. 9% of the Remain [ mostly Labour ] + the 31% will vote LD.HYUFD said:
Stoke voted 69% Leave, the LDs have no chance there, if they won it Farron would be heading for number 10 with a landslide majority. For example the LDs got just 11% in Sleaford and Hykeham in an area which voted 62% Leave. It will be a Labour hold with a reduced majority. Copeland will be neck and neck between the Tories and Laboursurbiton said:
Copeland should be Labour with the right [ literally ] selection. That selection will not please me though.Pulpstar said:
Stoke is a gone-er as long as the Lib Dems stick to hard REMAIN. The opposition will be split three ways.
LD will get the Remain vote and the NOTA vote. They should not be ruled out in Copeland either.
If the Leave/Remain divide is really so very, very important, then why should the Lib Dems win in Copeland from a low base, when they accumulated 11% from a low base in Sleaford?0 -
Possibly because they will have longer to campaign.Black_Rook said:If the Leave/Remain divide is really so very, very important, then why should the Lib Dems win in Copeland from a low base, when they accumulated 11% from a low base in Sleaford?
0 -
Indeed, there is a danger of the LDs hyping up expectations in both seats to such an extent that if they fail to win or at least come second in Stoke and Copeland it will be seen as a blow to them.justin124 said:
I agree with that.HYUFD said:
The Tories will get some of the Remain and most of them will stick with Labour, there will be small leakage to the LDs at most. I was phoning in Copeland last week for 2 hours and got 1 LD the entire time. In both seats the LDs did worse than they did nationally at the general election and both areas also voted Leave, as was the case in Sleaford and Hykeham where they came thirdsurbiton said:
60% of the 69% will vote for Con, UKIP or Labour. 9% of the Remain [ mostly Labour ] + the 31% will vote LD.HYUFD said:
Stoke voted 69% Leave, the LDs have no chance there, if they won it Farron would be heading for number 10 with a landslide majority. For example the LDs got just 11% in Sleaford and Hykeham in an area which voted 62% Leave. It will be a Labour hold with a reduced majority. Copeland will be neck and neck between the Tories and Laboursurbiton said:
Copeland should be Labour with the right [ literally ] selection. That selection will not please me though.Pulpstar said:
Stoke is a gone-er as long as the Lib Dems stick to hard REMAIN. The opposition will be split three ways.
LD will get the Remain vote and the NOTA vote. They should not be ruled out in Copeland either.0 -
Thanks for the local knowledge - also wasn't turnout poorHYUFD said:
The Sunderland result in the Sandill Ward was almost entirely down to the local councillor resigning due to non-attendance and a massive protest vote, the LDs were second in the ward in 2010, it was not a sign all Sunderland voters have suddenly swung in favour of free movement of workersBig_G_NorthWales said:
Think the same applies to labour. The Sunderland result was astonishingSandyRentool said:To help us assess UKIP chances in Stoke, there are two by-elections coming up in Rotherham on Feb 2.
Two more failures like Sunderland last week and it points at defeat in the Potteries.
http://www.sunderland.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=8510&p=0&fsize=40kb&ftype=Results of Poll - Local Government Election on Thursday 6 May 2010.PDF0 -
0
-
The odds for more than 7 MP's resigning are very poor and not worth it.0
-
The figure was £500,000 - I do wonder if this hacking cough and cold I and my wife have had for the last 14 days is having an adverse effect on meviewcode said:
I think you may have added too many noughts to that.Big_G_NorthWales said:How many know the Government has allocated in excess of 500,000 million for this improved GP service
* 500,000 million is half-a-trillion. That's 500,000,000,000, ie 5x10^11
* There are about 50,000 GPs in the UK, ie 5x 10^4
* So that's 10^7 each, that's £10 million each
So if your number is correct, the Government is planning to give each GP ten million quid each to work weekends.0 -
Wage caps and wage ratios alike are, under most circumstances, a terrible idea, and it only takes the length of time that people take to really consider the implications to work out why. As you imply, it would kill the Premier League stone dead for starters: If ManU were made to stick to a 20:1 ratio then, based on Paul Pogba's reported salary, they'd have to pay every single member of their staff at least £14.5K a week. That is not realistic.another_richard said:Are they any views as to the effects (political, economic or otherwise) if the government:
1) Got rid of the 45% tax 'encourage wealth creating entrepreneurs and the highly skilled'
2) Brought in a 100% tax on incomes over £1m 'fatcats and footballers'
As with many other initiatives that aim for equality of outcome rather than equality of opportunity, this has really serious negative consequences. Unless you are going to imprison the entire population within our borders like Cuba, these wage policies will do nothing to punish the wealthy, or stop people earning what Mr Corbyn considers to be an excessive wage, or whatever the Hell they are meant to achieve.
The market sets wage levels for high earners, and if they can't get the going rate in Britain they'll just emigrate and get it elsewhere. They get what they want anyway, the Treasury loses all their taxes, the country cuts its nose off to spite its face. It's ludicrous.0 -
0
-
Yes, 24%Big_G_NorthWales said:
Thanks for the local knowledge - also wasn't turnout poorHYUFD said:
The Sunderland result in the Sandill Ward was almost entirely down to the local councillor resigning due to non-attendance and a massive protest vote, the LDs were second in the ward in 2010, it was not a sign all Sunderland voters have suddenly swung in favour of free movement of workersBig_G_NorthWales said:
Think the same applies to labour. The Sunderland result was astonishingSandyRentool said:To help us assess UKIP chances in Stoke, there are two by-elections coming up in Rotherham on Feb 2.
Two more failures like Sunderland last week and it points at defeat in the Potteries.
http://www.sunderland.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=8510&p=0&fsize=40kb&ftype=Results of Poll - Local Government Election on Thursday 6 May 2010.PDF
http://www.sunderland.gov.uk/committees/cmis5/Elections/tabid/63/ctl/ViewCandidates/mid/386/ID/135/Default.aspx
0 -
If any populist party is going to win in the EU in the next year or two it will be M5SBlack_Rook said:Meanwhile, in other news:
https://twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/8203584920789606400 -
Some etiolated sapling from the Spectator (James Forsythe?) has a column in the Saturday Sun[1] saying that they intend to leave the single market and the customs union. So sell everything with a pound sign on it.williamglenn said:Has there been briefing that May is going to say we're leaving the Single Market?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/news/article-4120378/City-braced-turmoil-swings-pound-Theresa-s-single-market-exit.html
[1] It's more fun than the weekday version. The weekday version has Kelvin McKenzie, Jane Moore and Rod Liddle, each doing their impression of an arse sucking a lemon. The Saturday version has Clarkson and The Lovely Lorraine Kelly and is much less Saw0 -
I have just given you examples which contradict that though - and maybe the article as well because journalists often have little idea when it comes to psephology. In the 1992 election Labour polled 35.2% in GB . There were polls in January and March 1991 giving Labour 34 and 32% respectively. Ergo Labour did poll higher in the April 1992 election than the level at which at least some polls were rating them just over a year earlier.Black_Rook said:
I shall clarify: we have passed a particular point in the Parliament when the value that Labour achieves in the polls has always (in Opposition, and at any point in the last 50 years) proven to be higher than what they eventually score in the subsequent general election.justin124 said:Black_Rook said:
' We have already passed the point in this Parliament relative to which - when the election eventually occurred - a Labour Party in Opposition has ALWAYS polled lower. '
That is not ACTUALLY true! To take the 1987 - 1992 Parliament - there were polls in early 1991 giving Labour ratings of 34 and 32% - yet at the 1992 election they polled 35.2%. Going back to the 1959 - 1964 Parliament there were polls as late as October 1962 giving Labour a poll rating several points lower than achieved in October 1964.
Their figures may have wobbled up and down in the intervening period, but the share ultimately achieved at the election itself is lower than at the critical point.
Further information here:
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2016/11/moment-when-labours-poll-rating-gets-lot-lot-worse
I can add another example. In the Summer and Autumn of 1973 there were several polls giving Labour a lower vote share than actually achieved at the February 1974 election. Perhaps the article refers to 'Averages' - I have yet to read it.0 -
The major effect would be to move all the high earning positions in companies abroad. It would be pretty much impossible to stop the company re-headquartering to Paris, say, while keeping it's lower level operations here.Black_Rook said:
Wage caps and wage ratios alike are, under most circumstances, a terrible idea, and it only takes the length of time that people take to really consider the implications to work out why. As you imply, it would kill the Premier League stone dead for starters: If ManU were made to stick to a 20:1 ratio then, based on Paul Pogba's reported salary, they'd have to pay every single member of their staff at least £14.5K a week. That is not realistic.another_richard said:Are they any views as to the effects (political, economic or otherwise) if the government:
1) Got rid of the 45% tax 'encourage wealth creating entrepreneurs and the highly skilled'
2) Brought in a 100% tax on incomes over £1m 'fatcats and footballers'
As with many other initiatives that aim for equality of outcome rather than equality of opportunity, this has really serious negative consequences. Unless you are going to imprison the entire population within our borders like Cuba, these wage policies will do nothing to punish the wealthy, or stop people earning what Mr Corbyn considers to be an excessive wage, or whatever the Hell they are meant to achieve.
The market sets wage levels for high earners, and if they can't get the going rate in Britain they'll just emigrate and get it elsewhere. They get what they want anyway, the Treasury loses all their taxes, the country cuts its nose off to spite its face. It's ludicrous.
A side note: When I was young, I was tutored in maths by the ex-head of maths at Rugby. He told me that back in the 70s/80s when there was talk of the Labour Party banning/closing all private schools, the French political machine (left, right and middle) had quietly sprung into action. They promised that (a) a cast iron law protecting private schools in France (b) charitable status enshrined in law. The only requirement - that French be the prime language of the school. As he put it - "They saw the chance to capture the leadership of Britain, and turn them into Frenchmen at heart."
Apparently some the leading private schools in this country still own land/properties they bought in case this would actually happen.0 -
Think of all the jobs created - high skilled policemen, translators, prison guards, far-right website editors, anti-fascist protesters, talking heads on TV........isam said:Good ol' mass immigration
https://twitter.com/mailonline/status/8203592508872744960 -
There was little effort in Sleaford because of the Richmond Park election.PClipp said:
Possibly because they will have longer to campaign.Black_Rook said:If the Leave/Remain divide is really so very, very important, then why should the Lib Dems win in Copeland from a low base, when they accumulated 11% from a low base in Sleaford?
I don't think either are winnable, but second place is doable. I wouldn't divert too much effort from the council elections.0 -
Good evening all. I attended a gather of the clan to celebrate my Mum's 80th. This involved me going North of the Trent.
I can report that Brexit has resulted in at least one couple not speaking (she a Brexiteer, he a Remoaner who considers the Freddo price increase an unequivocal evidence that it's all a disaster).
Nevertheless no remorse shown by all other Brexiteers present. The real surprise was my Mum (who used to be Labour through and through) stating that Theresa May is her favourite politician. It may be early evidence of senility, but she seems terribly taken with her ("so much better than The Snatcher").0 -
None of the examples that you gave were from the point to which I, and the article, referred - eighteen months into the Parliament in question. They are from the year before the election.justin124 said:
I have just given you examples which contradict that though - and maybe the article as well because journalists often have little idea when it comes to psephology. In the 1992 election Labour polled 35.2% in GB . There were polls in January and March 1991 giving Labour 34 and 32% respectively. Ergo Labour did poll higher in the April 1992 election than the level at which at least some polls were rating them just over a year earlier.Black_Rook said:
I shall clarify: we have passed a particular point in the Parliament when the value that Labour achieves in the polls has always (in Opposition, and at any point in the last 50 years) proven to be higher than what they eventually score in the subsequent general election.justin124 said:Black_Rook said:
' We have already passed the point in this Parliament relative to which - when the election eventually occurred - a Labour Party in Opposition has ALWAYS polled lower. '
That is not ACTUALLY true! To take the 1987 - 1992 Parliament - there were polls in early 1991 giving Labour ratings of 34 and 32% - yet at the 1992 election they polled 35.2%. Going back to the 1959 - 1964 Parliament there were polls as late as October 1962 giving Labour a poll rating several points lower than achieved in October 1964.
Their figures may have wobbled up and down in the intervening period, but the share ultimately achieved at the election itself is lower than at the critical point.
Further information here:
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2016/11/moment-when-labours-poll-rating-gets-lot-lot-worse
I can add another example. In the Summer and Autumn of 1973 there were several polls giving Labour a lower vote share than actually achieved at the February 1974 election. Perhaps the article refers to 'Averages' - I have yet to read it.
The author of the NS article is a modern history professor who knows plenty about psephology.0 -
When I was younger we used to take the piss out of old people who said "I remember when you could leave your front door open and no one would nick stuff from your house", thinking they were making it up... then it dawned on me they weren't, & how they must miss those days.Malmesbury said:
Think of all the jobs created - high skilled policemen, translators, prison guards, far-right website editors, anti-fascist protesters, talking heads on TV........isam said:Good ol' mass immigration
https://twitter.com/mailonline/status/820359250887274496
In a decade or so, youngsters will find it hard to believe us when we say you used to go around London and not see armed police0 -
If it is the Belgium plod leading it they will.more than likely f##k it up and the suspects get away.isam said:Good ol' mass immigration
https://twitter.com/mailonline/status/8203592508872744960 -
Eventually all the police will be routinely armed, and we'll end up with the same torrent of nastiness as they have in the US - accusations of people being blown away by trigger happy cops, and that a disproportionate number of them are black and so all the police are racist, etc, etc.isam said:
When I was younger we used to take the piss out of old people who said "I remember when you could leave your front door open and no one would nick stuff from your house", thinking they were making it up... then it dawned on me they weren't, & how they must miss those days.Malmesbury said:
Think of all the jobs created - high skilled policemen, translators, prison guards, far-right website editors, anti-fascist protesters, talking heads on TV........isam said:Good ol' mass immigration
https://twitter.com/mailonline/status/820359250887274496
In a decade or so, youngsters will find it hard to believe us when we say you used to go around London and not see armed police
This is entirely down to the threat of terrorism. However much we like to pretend that we won't let these people change our society, it's happening and it will keep on happening. Damn 'em.0 -
I have now read that New Statesman article - or re-read it as it did come my way when published last November. At the time I found it to be very unsound and not very accurate historically. He was referring to the 19 month point of a Parliament and gave the example of Kinnock being 8 points adrift at that point.He totally ignored the fact that at the 20 month point there were four polls giving the Tories leads of between 10 and 13%. He also made no mention of big Tory leads chalked up in the early months of Majors Premiership. So again , from the 20 month point Labour's position did improve by April 1992 - which it lost by 7.6%.
A much more persuasive analysis was alluded to in one of Keiren Pedley's Podcasts late last year, and made the point that - looking at the period since 1945 - whenever a party has enjoyed a really commanding poll lead, it has failed to be confirmed at the subsequent General Election.This applied to Labour's big leads leading up to the elections of 1966 and October 1974. It even applies to the Thatcher landslide of 1983 in that the Tory lead of just over 15% was significantly less than predicted by both the final polls and from the previous summer. As discussed above, the big lead the Tories had from mid-1987 to early 1989 was not reflected in the 1992 result. Again both Blair landslides fell well short of midterm poll predictions, and the big Labour leads of 2002 and 2003 narrowed to an advantage of just 3% at the 2005 election.
So I really don't believe that O'Hara's New Statesman article rings true at all - but people have to judge the evidence for themselves and hopefully reach an objective conclusion!
0 -
The thing is that the change was down to home grown scrotes. British crimes for British criminals....isam said:
When I was younger we used to take the piss out of old people who said "I remember when you could leave your front door open and no one would nick stuff from your house", thinking they were making it up... then it dawned on me they weren't, & how they must miss those days.Malmesbury said:
Think of all the jobs created - high skilled policemen, translators, prison guards, far-right website editors, anti-fascist protesters, talking heads on TV........isam said:Good ol' mass immigration
https://twitter.com/mailonline/status/820359250887274496
In a decade or so, youngsters will find it hard to believe us when we say you used to go around London and not see armed police0 -
Oxford Brookes Polytechnic - sorry University.Black_Rook said:
None of the examples that you gave were from the point to which I, and the article, referred - eighteen months into the Parliament in question. They are from the year before the election.justin124 said:
I have just given you examples which contradict that though - and maybe the article as well because journalists often have little idea when it comes to psephology. In the 1992 election Labour polled 35.2% in GB . There were polls in January and March 1991 giving Labour 34 and 32% respectively. Ergo Labour did poll higher in the April 1992 election than the level at which at least some polls were rating them just over a year earlier.Black_Rook said:
I shall clarify: we have passed a particular point in the Parliament when the value that Labour achieves in the polls has always (in Opposition, and at any point in the last 50 years) proven to be higher than what they eventually score in the subsequent general election.justin124 said:Black_Rook said:
' We have already passed the point in this Parliament relative to which - when the election eventually occurred - a Labour Party in Opposition has ALWAYS polled lower. '
That is not ACTUALLY true! To take the 1987 - 1992 Parliament - there were polls in early 1991 giving Labour ratings of 34 and 32% - yet at the 1992 election they polled 35.2%. Going back to the 1959 - 1964 Parliament there were polls as late as October 1962 giving Labour a poll rating several points lower than achieved in October 1964.
Their figures may have wobbled up and down in the intervening period, but the share ultimately achieved at the election itself is lower than at the critical point.
Further information here:
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2016/11/moment-when-labours-poll-rating-gets-lot-lot-worse
I can add another example. In the Summer and Autumn of 1973 there were several polls giving Labour a lower vote share than actually achieved at the February 1974 election. Perhaps the article refers to 'Averages' - I have yet to read it.
The author of the NS article is a modern history professor who knows plenty about psephology.0 -
As good a display as I can remember. Can't pick a player scoring less than 8 outof 10. Hugo probably not so much as nothing to do.SouthamObserver said:
They were superb today. What a team Poch is building. And on half the wage bill of the other top 6 clubs.Scrapheap_as_was said:
Everyone is a spurs fan eventually... welcomeTheScreamingEagles said:William Hill to torch their rivals shops
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jan/13/william-hill-tells-staff-to-shine-torches-through-rival-bookies-windows-racing-partnership0 -
Is that still available? With Hills?Pulpstar said:
I think people are getting a bit carried away with the idea of the Chuck Norris Lib Dems.
0 -
More than a bit. Why anyone should think the Lib Dems have a realistic chance in Copeland is beyond me. All that favours them there over Sleaford is that the seat is next door to Farron's. Surely that's not enough to get them from 4% to the win in Copeland, when they only advanced from 6% to 11% in Sleaford?Casino_Royale said:
Is that still available? With Hills?Pulpstar said:
I think people are getting a bit carried away with the idea of the Chuck Norris Lib Dems.
Doesn't seem terribly likely in Stoke Central, either.0 -
Ordinarily I'd agree, but these are the days of miracles and wonder.Black_Rook said:
More than a bit. Why anyone should think the Lib Dems have a realistic chance in Copeland is beyond me. All that favours them there over Sleaford is that the seat is next door to Farron's. Surely that's not enough to get them from 4% to the win in Copeland, when they only advanced from 6% to 11% in Sleaford?Casino_Royale said:
Is that still available? With Hills?Pulpstar said:
I think people are getting a bit carried away with the idea of the Chuck Norris Lib Dems.
Doesn't seem terribly likely in Stoke Central, either.0 -
Chilean wine is IMO the best value in the world.SeanT said:WINE RECOMMENDATION
For anyone on a bit of a budget, but wanting a big wine experience
THIS:
http://www.wine.com/v6/Concha-y-Toro-Marques-de-Casa-Concha-Syrah-2011/wine/130576/Detail.aspx?state=CA
It tastes like a SuperTuscan, it tastes like a £30 Barossa shiraz, it has depth, fruit, power and finish, it has been in the world's top 100 wines 5 times over, and right now you can buy it for.... £9, from Ocado
https://www.ocado.com/webshop/product/Marques-de-Casa-Concha-Syrah/231046011
Really. BUY THIS at that price. I just got a dozen. Gorgeous wine. Open it a few hours before you drink, ideally with steak, game, funky cheeses.
Here Endeth The Sermon.
0 -
Nice that we can all enjoy the benefits of the EU free trade deal with Chile.SeanT said:https://www.ocado.com/webshop/product/Marques-de-Casa-Concha-Syrah/231046011
Really. BUY THIS at that price. I just got a dozen. Gorgeous wine. Open it a few hours before you drink, ideally with steak, game, funky cheeses.
0 -
LOL! They are indeed.John_M said:
Ordinarily I'd agree, but these are the days of miracles and wonder.Black_Rook said:
More than a bit. Why anyone should think the Lib Dems have a realistic chance in Copeland is beyond me. All that favours them there over Sleaford is that the seat is next door to Farron's. Surely that's not enough to get them from 4% to the win in Copeland, when they only advanced from 6% to 11% in Sleaford?Casino_Royale said:
Is that still available? With Hills?Pulpstar said:
I think people are getting a bit carried away with the idea of the Chuck Norris Lib Dems.
Doesn't seem terribly likely in Stoke Central, either.0 -
And loose affiliations of millionaires and billionaires...John_M said:
Ordinarily I'd agree, but these are the days of miracles and wonder.Black_Rook said:
More than a bit. Why anyone should think the Lib Dems have a realistic chance in Copeland is beyond me. All that favours them there over Sleaford is that the seat is next door to Farron's. Surely that's not enough to get them from 4% to the win in Copeland, when they only advanced from 6% to 11% in Sleaford?Casino_Royale said:
Is that still available? With Hills?Pulpstar said:
I think people are getting a bit carried away with the idea of the Chuck Norris Lib Dems.
Doesn't seem terribly likely in Stoke Central, either. 0 -
Want to know a way to annoy a lefty ?SeanT said:
I agree. And I've been to the Chilean winelands to see how they do it.another_richard said:
Chilean wine is IMO the best value in the world.SeanT said:WINE RECOMMENDATION
For anyone on a bit of a budget, but wanting a big wine experience
THIS:
http://www.wine.com/v6/Concha-y-Toro-Marques-de-Casa-Concha-Syrah-2011/wine/130576/Detail.aspx?state=CA
It tastes like a SuperTuscan, it tastes like a £30 Barossa shiraz, it has depth, fruit, power and finish, it has been in the world's top 100 wines 5 times over, and right now you can buy it for.... £9, from Ocado
https://www.ocado.com/webshop/product/Marques-de-Casa-Concha-Syrah/231046011
Really. BUY THIS at that price. I just got a dozen. Gorgeous wine. Open it a few hours before you drink, ideally with steak, game, funky cheeses.
Here Endeth The Sermon.
It is the new Australia. They have it all: western coasts facing intriguing microclimates, lots of bright, determined wine making people, cheap land, cheapish labour, no hang-ups.
They are now making great great wine.
If I'd tasted this wine blind I would have priced it at £20-£30. Apparently Tesco recently offered it for £6!
After giving them some nice Chilean wine say that the Chilean wine industry wouldn't exist with Pinochet and that the Pinochet family are part owners of the brand they've just been drinking.
0 -
Just sowilliamglenn said:
And loose affiliations of millionaires and billionaires...John_M said:
Ordinarily I'd agree, but these are the days of miracles and wonder.Black_Rook said:
More than a bit. Why anyone should think the Lib Dems have a realistic chance in Copeland is beyond me. All that favours them there over Sleaford is that the seat is next door to Farron's. Surely that's not enough to get them from 4% to the win in Copeland, when they only advanced from 6% to 11% in Sleaford?Casino_Royale said:
Is that still available? With Hills?Pulpstar said:
I think people are getting a bit carried away with the idea of the Chuck Norris Lib Dems.
Doesn't seem terribly likely in Stoke Central, either.. 0 -
To be honest, the lefties seem to be perfectly capable of annoying themselves. On my timeline it's handbags morning, noon and night.another_richard said:
Want to know a way to annoy a lefty ?SeanT said:
I agree. And I've been to the Chilean winelands to see how they do it.another_richard said:
Chilean wine is IMO the best value in the world.SeanT said:WINE RECOMMENDATION
For anyone on a bit of a budget, but wanting a big wine experience
THIS:
http://www.wine.com/v6/Concha-y-Toro-Marques-de-Casa-Concha-Syrah-2011/wine/130576/Detail.aspx?state=CA
It tastes like a SuperTuscan, it tastes like a £30 Barossa shiraz, it has depth, fruit, power and finish, it has been in the world's top 100 wines 5 times over, and right now you can buy it for.... £9, from Ocado
https://www.ocado.com/webshop/product/Marques-de-Casa-Concha-Syrah/231046011
Really. BUY THIS at that price. I just got a dozen. Gorgeous wine. Open it a few hours before you drink, ideally with steak, game, funky cheeses.
Here Endeth The Sermon.
It is the new Australia. They have it all: western coasts facing intriguing microclimates, lots of bright, determined wine making people, cheap land, cheapish labour, no hang-ups.
They are now making great great wine.
If I'd tasted this wine blind I would have priced it at £20-£30. Apparently Tesco recently offered it for £6!
After giving them some nice Chilean wine say that the Chilean wine industry wouldn't exist with Pinochet and that the Pinochet family are part owners of the brand they've just been drinking.0 -
-
What is a clean Brexit. Front pages currently throwing up a new strain of Brexit.0
-
Leaving the EU lock stock and barrel - Brexit means BrexitScott_P said:0 -
Looks like she meant what she said in July...Big_G_NorthWales said:
Leaving the EU lock stock and barrel - Brexit means BrexitScott_P said:0 -
Defining moment for the Country and her political career - no more muddled thinking eitherSunil_Prasannan said:
Looks like she meant what she said in July...Big_G_NorthWales said:
Leaving the EU lock stock and barrel - Brexit means BrexitScott_P said:0 -
I wonder if the boss of Nissan has been on the phone yet...0
-
It's better to resign from a job before you get fired. It's better to state that we're leaving the Single Market rather than the EU27 telling us to go fuck ourselves if we don't fully implement the Four Freedoms.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Leaving the EU lock stock and barrel - Brexit means BrexitScott_P said:0 -
6 months and counting. Dither Dither DitherBig_G_NorthWales said:
Defining moment for the Country and her political career - no more muddled thinking eitherSunil_Prasannan said:
Looks like she meant what she said in July...Big_G_NorthWales said:
Leaving the EU lock stock and barrel - Brexit means BrexitScott_P said:0 -
Thought it was the end of marchbigjohnowls said:
6 months and counting. Dither Dither DitherBig_G_NorthWales said:
Defining moment for the Country and her political career - no more muddled thinking eitherSunil_Prasannan said:
Looks like she meant what she said in July...Big_G_NorthWales said:
Leaving the EU lock stock and barrel - Brexit means BrexitScott_P said:0 -
-
Mr Black Rock, are you trying to convert me to the Corbynite Labour cause?Black_Rook said:Wage caps and wage ratios alike are, under most circumstances, a terrible idea, and it only takes the length of time that people take to really consider the implications to work out why. As you imply, it would kill the Premier League stone dead for starters:
0 -
Only a queen of dither with muddled thinking thrown in would require so longBig_G_NorthWales said:
Thought it was the end of marchbigjohnowls said:
6 months and counting. Dither Dither DitherBig_G_NorthWales said:
Defining moment for the Country and her political career - no more muddled thinking eitherSunil_Prasannan said:
Looks like she meant what she said in July...Big_G_NorthWales said:
Leaving the EU lock stock and barrel - Brexit means BrexitScott_P said:0 -
https://twitter.com/telepolitics/status/820391806223253504
Definitive proof of how weak her position within the Party is...0 -
Or in other words what will happen is the EU will offer some temporary fig leaf which will be spun as a concession and we'll remain in the single market.dr_spyn said:0 -
-
"The People's Brexit"
0 -
I could never be that cruel to any human being.PClipp said:
Mr Black Rock, are you trying to convert me to the Corbynite Labour cause?Black_Rook said:Wage caps and wage ratios alike are, under most circumstances, a terrible idea, and it only takes the length of time that people take to really consider the implications to work out why. As you imply, it would kill the Premier League stone dead for starters:
0 -
Good politics to get it out at the weekend and to see just how the markets react on monday and tuesday.SeanT said:Let's Do It.
We are England. We can do this.
Ave!
However can anyone really say they did not expect this having listened to Theresa May since she became PM0 -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KaBdajHOsSMSeanT said:Let's Do It.
We are England. We can do this.
Ave!0 -
Let me know when Labour can tell the difference between its arse and its elbow. That's its problem; May's Tories aren't very good, but compared to Labour they're Rolls Royce, and the country knows it.bigjohnowls said:
Only a queen of dither with muddled thinking thrown in would require so longBig_G_NorthWales said:
Thought it was the end of marchbigjohnowls said:
6 months and counting. Dither Dither DitherBig_G_NorthWales said:
Defining moment for the Country and her political career - no more muddled thinking eitherSunil_Prasannan said:
Looks like she meant what she said in July...Big_G_NorthWales said:
Leaving the EU lock stock and barrel - Brexit means BrexitScott_P said:
I think she wants the GBP pain as front-loaded as possible. Buy your holiday currency sharpish ladies.0 -
"Downing Street expect her remarks to cause a 'market correction'..."Big_G_NorthWales said:Good politics to get it out at the weekend and to see just how the markets react on monday and tuesday.
However can anyone really say they did not expect this having listened to Theresa May since she became PM0 -
The Orwellian ability of some posters to forget what they posted last night is comic rather than chilling.
"We want hard Brexit. We have always wanted hard Brexit. Down with the Single Market!"0 -
The EU must be shaking.SeanT said:Let's Do It.
We are England. We can do this.
Ave!
I mean we have all the best cards
This is why i voted BREXIT0 -
A turd wrapped in a Union Jack...AlastairMeeks said:The Orwellian ability of some posters to forget what they posted last night is comic rather than chilling.
"We want hard Brexit. We have always wanted hard Brexit. Down with the Single Market!"-1 -
I'd hoped we'd join the EEA. I'm rather disappointed, and have eaten another slice of cake in protest. I might summon up the energy to climb on the outrage bus tomorrow.AlastairMeeks said:The Orwellian ability of some posters to forget what they posted last night is comic rather than chilling.
"We want hard Brexit. We have always wanted hard Brexit. Down with the Single Market!"0 -
Did you watch Panorama earlier in the week? It was about your holidays a couple of years back!bigjohnowls said:
The EU must be shaking.SeanT said:Let's Do It.
We are England. We can do this.
Ave!
I mean we have all the best cards
This is why i voted BREXIT0 -
No, the EU isn't in a position to do this. There'll be no special rules or exceptions. The UK will simply cease to be a member of the EU in 2 years and all that entails. Negotiators will be fully occupied just with preparing for this, let alone trying to negotiate any special trading arrangements.brokenwheel said:
Or in other words what will happen is the EU will offer some temporary fig leaf which will be spun as a concession and we'll remain in the single market.dr_spyn said:0 -
BREAKING: Nottingham Forest sack head coach Philippe Montanier:
BREXIT has started0 -
The reason why Pinochet is hated by Western lefties is that he was successful. He was best compared to the leaders of South Korea, Taiwan etc rather than the standard Latin American dictators.SeanT said:
The Chileans understand this. They are very very ambivalent about Pinochet. He's not the Hitler figure we perceive in the West. They realise without him they could be Venezuela.another_richard said:
Want to know a way to annoy a lefty ?SeanT said:
I agree. And I've been to the Chilean winelands to see how they do it.another_richard said:
Chilean wine is IMO the best value in the world.SeanT said:WINE RECOMMENDATION
For anyone on a bit of a budget, but wanting a big wine experience
THIS:
http://www.wine.com/v6/Concha-y-Toro-Marques-de-Casa-Concha-Syrah-2011/wine/130576/Detail.aspx?state=CA
It tastes like a SuperTuscan, it tastes like a £30 Barossa shiraz, it has depth, fruit, power and finish, it has been in the world's top 100 wines 5 times over, and right now you can buy it for.... £9, from Ocado
https://www.ocado.com/webshop/product/Marques-de-Casa-Concha-Syrah/231046011
Really. BUY THIS at that price. I just got a dozen. Gorgeous wine. Open it a few hours before you drink, ideally with steak, game, funky cheeses.
Here Endeth The Sermon.
It is the new Australia. They have it all: western coasts facing intriguing microclimates, lots of bright, determined wine making people, cheap land, cheapish labour, no hang-ups.
They are now making great great wine.
If I'd tasted this wine blind I would have priced it at £20-£30. Apparently Tesco recently offered it for £6!
After giving them some nice Chilean wine say that the Chilean wine industry wouldn't exist with Pinochet and that the Pinochet family are part owners of the brand they've just been drinking.
Latin America did not lack for military strong men and other dictators oppressing their people but who were given a free pass by leftwingers in the West.
For example this general
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juan_Velasco_Alvarado
who overthrew the democratically elected Peruvian government and installed himself as head of a military junta followed by the jailing of political opponents, the closure of newspapers and a massive military build-up.
0 -
No matter which side of the argument you are on this a decisive decision and I would expect it to be popular among votersScott_P said:
"Downing Street expect her remarks to cause a 'market correction'..."Big_G_NorthWales said:Good politics to get it out at the weekend and to see just how the markets react on monday and tuesday.
However can anyone really say they did not expect this having listened to Theresa May since she became PM
Now what about those two bye elections in leave areas. Does this change the betting0 -
We are therefore leaving the Single Market.dr_spyn said:
This looks very much like a smokescreen, to enable/convince some soft Brexit-leaning voters to blame our departure on the EU being unreasonable, rather than the PM. In point of fact, given that May has already stated quite categorically that the "authority of EU law in Britain will end" - i.e. the UK will be removed from the jurisdiction of the ECJ - it's impossible to see how we could've remained fully engaged anyway.
It's simple logic, really, and has been obvious for months - hence the fact that the pound lost seven cents against the dollar in the period after the October 2nd conference speech, but is only off about one cent since the Sophy Ridge interview last Sunday. The markets know that this is coming, and have already priced it in.
(The pound will probably take another tumble this coming week now, just to spite me...)0 -
Aye still watching from behind the Sofaisam said:
Did you watch Panorama earlier in the week? It was about your holidays a couple of years back!bigjohnowls said:
The EU must be shaking.SeanT said:Let's Do It.
We are England. We can do this.
Ave!
I mean we have all the best cards
This is why i voted BREXIT0 -
Brexit with Marr tomorrow morning could be frosty for Corbyn.0
-
LEAVE 52%AlastairMeeks said:The Orwellian ability of some posters to forget what they posted last night is comic rather than chilling.
"We want hard Brexit. We have always wanted hard Brexit. Down with the Single Market!"
REMAIN 48%
0 -
-
Not what I wanted, not what the country voted for - and delivered by a PM without a mandate. The once Great Britain withdraws from the world and takes the Japanese option.
Or maybe it's going to be like Cuba since the 60's.
I recon our young smart people will just emigrate.0 -
This is just stating directly what she's hinted at in every speech from the beginning. I still think it's fundamentally a negotiation bluff, and the market reaction will be very interesting to watch.0
-
The EU is not the World - Those international trade deals with the World are the futurePong said:Not what I wanted, not what the country voted for - and delivered by a PM without a mandate.
The once Great Britain withdraws from the world.
We've gone all Japan.0 -
Tezza is claiming a mandate from the Brexit vote.Pong said:Not what I wanted, not what the country voted for - and delivered by a PM without a mandate.
The once Great Britain withdraws from the world.
We've gone all Japan.
Or maybe it's going to be like cuba since the 60's. Our young smart people will emigrate.
Bullshit, but she needs to keep the headbangers onside0 -
Though ironically Leaverstan is solving its #Nhscrisis by recruiting East Europeans.bigjohnowls said:BREAKING: Nottingham Forest sack head coach Philippe Montanier:
BREXIT has started
Paying them with some of the £350 million per week no doubt.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/11/nhs-recruit-hundreds-gps-poland-lithuania-greece/amp/?client=ms-android-sonymobile0 -
What a load of rubbish - the EU is not the rest of the world (edit - as Big G says!)Pong said:Not what I wanted, not what the country voted for - and delivered by a PM without a mandate.
The once Great Britain withdraws from the world.
We've gone all Japan.
Or maybe it's going to be like cuba since the 60's. Our young smart people will emigrate.0 -
Yeah, who needs BMWs from Germany when we can buy Vauxhalls from Australia instead...Big_G_NorthWales said:The EU is not the World - Those international trade deals with the World are the future
0 -
We've seen evidence on this very thread of the EU's ability to open up trade with the wider world. Look at the price difference between here and the USA on that bottle of Shiraz. £9 or $30.Razedabode said:
What a load of rubbish - the EU is not the rest of the worldPong said:Not what I wanted, not what the country voted for - and delivered by a PM without a mandate.
The once Great Britain withdraws from the world.
We've gone all Japan.
Or maybe it's going to be like cuba since the 60's. Our young smart people will emigrate.0 -
I think you mean Holdens, but sadly automobile production in Australia is over.Scott_P said:
Yeah, who needs BMWs from Germany when we can buy Vauxhalls from Australia instead...Big_G_NorthWales said:The EU is not the World - Those international trade deals with the World are the future
0 -
There was a time we ruled Europe....bigjohnowls said:BREAKING: Nottingham Forest sack head coach Philippe Montanier:
BREXIT has started0 -
Theresa's put the cat among the pidgeon's tonight or more correctly among the remainers0
-
EU = 27Scott_P said:
Yeah, who needs BMWs from Germany when we can buy Vauxhalls from Australia instead...Big_G_NorthWales said:The EU is not the World - Those international trade deals with the World are the future
Non-EU = 165 (or 166 including the UK!)0 -
There will be many, many Brexiteers upset by this newsBig_G_NorthWales said:Theresa's put the cat among the pidgeon's tonight or more correctly among the remainers
0 -
Why we will still have BMW'sScott_P said:
Yeah, who needs BMWs from Germany when we can buy Vauxhalls from Australia instead...Big_G_NorthWales said:The EU is not the World - Those international trade deals with the World are the future
0 -
Ok, we can get VW Beetles from Brazil instead...foxinsoxuk said:I think you mean Holdens, but sadly automobile production in Australia is over.
0 -
-
1966 the WorldMarqueeMark said:
There was a time we ruled Europe....bigjohnowls said:BREAKING: Nottingham Forest sack head coach Philippe Montanier:
BREXIT has started
2017 not so much but barricade them borders0 -
Hmm lovely, a nice, clean Brexit. None of that foreign muck!0
-
...and don't cry baby, don't cry…John_M said:Ordinarily I'd agree, but these are the days of miracles and wonder...
Pause.
I wish I hadn't just thought of that...
0 -
I think it's positioning as the article implies. We'd love to stay in the Single Market (the 'Have Cake, Eat Cake' gambit), but if FoM is truly non-negotiable, then we're prepared to, and will, leave it ('with heavy hearts due to EU27 intransigence').williamglenn said:This is just stating directly what she's hinted at in every speech from the beginning. I still think it's fundamentally a negotiation bluff, and the market reaction will be very interesting to watch.
0 -
The timing is interesting. Before the Supreme Court and within days of Trump taking office. Perhaps she's trying to create maximum panic in Brussels.0
-
Indeed, the complete opposite of that muppet Cameron's negotiation 'tactics'.John_M said:
I think it's positioning as the article implies. We'd love to stay in the Single Market (the 'Have Cake, Eat Cake' gambit), but if FoM is truly non-negotiable, then we're prepared to, and will, leave it ('with heavy hearts due to EU27 intransigence').williamglenn said:This is just stating directly what she's hinted at in every speech from the beginning. I still think it's fundamentally a negotiation bluff, and the market reaction will be very interesting to watch.
0
