politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why a progressive alliance in Stoke Central might be doomed

SeanT said:

Is this old news of an old poll?

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/02/trump-democrats-poll-234778


American voters support Trump's "Muslim ban" by a whopping 54% over 38%

And many eu nation supporters by majority too, apparently.

kle4 said:

SeanT said:

Is this old news of an old poll?

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/02/trump-democrats-poll-234778


American voters support Trump's "Muslim ban" by a whopping 54% over 38%

And many eu nation supporters by majority too, apparently.

Yep.

https://www.chathamhouse.org/expert/comment/what-do-europeans-think-about-muslim-immigration#

Mr. T, still no sign of a burqa ban in the UK.

Incidentally, for those of you who enjoyed MTV's New Year advice to white guys, Netflix will soon be airing Dear White People.

It may have a worse like/dislike ratio (trailer on Youtube) than the first Ghostbusters remake trailer.

So the odds of Trump withdrawing Gorsuch's nomination?

Supreme court nominee Neil Gorsuch calls Trump judge attacks 'demoralizing'

Spokesman confirms Neil Gorsuch called president’s attack on federal judge James Robart ‘demoralizing’ in private meeting with senator

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2017/feb/08/neil-gorsuch-donald-trump-tweet-federal-judge

HYUFD said:

SouthamObserver said:

kle4 said:

SouthamObserver said:

felix said:

SouthamObserver said:

felix said:

logical_song said:

Sandpit said:

So I guess this is why Nick Clegg called AV "A miserable little compromise".

Also amusing that in the above scenarios, the result was either a Con majority or would have most likely been a Con/UKIP coalition, maybe with a few Ulstermen helping out. Is that really what all those of the left arguing for PR would have wanted?

It's not ALL about party advantage, some of it is about good governance, fairness and promoting voter involvement.

So that's why the LDs want a few hundred MPs to ignore the EU referendum result.

Aren't the LDs calling for voters to be given the opportunity of a second referendum? For some reason, Leavers have stopped trusting the British people and believe that they should not be allowed to vote again once the reality of the Brexit deal becomes known. Sad.

Silly - even by your usual standards. what next ? best of 3?

You don't trust the people. But that's the establishment for you.

Whether or not someone feels the people would return the same result -which I do - it is not absurd to ask where it would end? In all honesty it might be a good idea if we had referendums with minimum thresholds as in some countries or a rule about no repeats too soon, but we don't, so people are free to press ahead even if a vote was 50% plus one vote and people change their minds and yes, free to try to ask the people over and over again.

I struggle to see why the people should not be given the opportunity to approve the Brexit deal the government concludes. Isn't Brexit supposed to be about taking back control?

They can do that quite easily at the next general election. If they think the deal was too hard and they want another referendum they can vote LD and if they think it too soft they can vote UKIP. We only had a referendum on the EU in the first place because it was a Tory manifesto commitment and the Tories won a majority at the last general election

If the deal has been done by the time of the next GE it will be too late.

kle4 said:

HYUFD said:

kle4 said:

HYUFD said:

kle4 said:

Patrick said:

Corbyn just confirmed on BBC breakfast TV that he is absolutely going nowhere and will lead Labour through the 2020GE. :-)

Depending on Copeland and stoke it won't be up to him (I think he'll be fine), but I'd class that in the same vein as Cameron and others saying he wouldn't resign as pm - everyone knew it wasn't true, but all played the game of pretending otherwise. And corbyn knows if things don't pick up the men in grey suits will come, and for the party he will stand down.

Why? 170 MPs have already voted against him but he renewed his mandate with the members last September. As long as retains membership support the men in grey suits can say what they want but under Labour leadership rules Corbyn will lead Labour into the next general election

I was anticipating the men in grey suits would not make a move again until it seems the members themselves are turning in him - and I struggke to see how some more won't break if Copeland and stoke are lost. Plus anecdotally many formally enthusiastic corbynustas seem less keen.

Yet even post Brexit and low Labour poll ratings members backed Corbyn over the Europhile more centrist Owen Smith by more than 60%

They did. It was not the right time to move, clearly. But is it true now? In 6 months? I don't know, but unless I'm one of many wrong about labours prospects, how can the membership continue to support a leader taking them to oblivion? What would it take for him to realise he needs to handover? I'm not sure, but I do believe corbyn cares about the party, and despite his stubbornness will have a point he is made to realise he must go.

Unless polling comes out showing the members moving against him Corbyn will stay

Mr. Observer, maybe. We've had a lot (one every other year from 2010-16) recently but two were on clear manifesto issues (independence for Scotland, leaving the EU), and the other was a Coalition mish-mash.

That, and Cameron's career suicide, may mean we don't have another for a little while (a potential second Scottish vote is the only one plausible, I think).

AlsoIndigo said:

HYUFD said:

Innocent_Abroad said:

It doesn't matter what the voting system is. For every two lefties there are three right-wing voters. That is what Blair understood and mot Labour activists don't want to.

Actually most polls show left and right pretty evenly divided but given the choice between a right-wing or leftwing party the centre will more often than not choose the right-wing one

They probably tend to pick the more competent looking one if they are less fussed about ideology, recently the left has had a problem looking competent, when at the end of the 90's the Tories looked incompetent, the centre ground deserted them and they got kicked out.

Blair was more centre than left

PlatoSaid said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. T, still no sign of a burqa ban in the UK.

Incidentally, for those of you who enjoyed MTV's New Year advice to white guys, Netflix will soon be airing Dear White People.

It may have a worse like/dislike ratio (trailer on Youtube) than the first Ghostbusters remake trailer.

I mentioned it a bit earlier - lazy stuff. Netflix has made a mistake here on several levels. I remain baffled by commercial concerns getting political like this - it's guaranteed to piss off 50% off current/potential customers in exchange for chip paper virtue signalling.

And this sort of routine deleting of opinion just undermines trust more and more

BadNews Kelly Leak1 hour ago
Some on had a comment saying "Thank You Netflix for getting Trump elected again in 2020" with over 1,600 up votes just got deleted.

Don't like it; don't watch it.
Who are these people ? Social injustice warriors ?

Pulpstar said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

So the odds of Trump withdrawing Gorsuch's nomination?

Supreme court nominee Neil Gorsuch calls Trump judge attacks 'demoralizing'

Spokesman confirms Neil Gorsuch called president’s attack on federal judge James Robart ‘demoralizing’ in private meeting with senator

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2017/feb/08/neil-gorsuch-donald-trump-tweet-federal-judge

Do you want £20 at 5-1 ?

Would that pay if Gorsuch withdrew himself or didn't win a vote in the full Senate?

TheScreamingEagles said:

Pulpstar said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

So the odds of Trump withdrawing Gorsuch's nomination?

Supreme court nominee Neil Gorsuch calls Trump judge attacks 'demoralizing'

Spokesman confirms Neil Gorsuch called president’s attack on federal judge James Robart ‘demoralizing’ in private meeting with senator

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2017/feb/08/neil-gorsuch-donald-trump-tweet-federal-judge

Do you want £20 at 5-1 ?

Would that pay if Gorsuch withdrew himself or didn't win a vote in the full Senate?

If Trump withdraws the nomination, as per your request.

SouthamObserver said:

HYUFD said:

SouthamObserver said:

kle4 said:

SouthamObserver said:

felix said:

SouthamObserver said:

felix said:

logical_song said:

Sandpit said:

So I guess this is why Nick Clegg called AV "A miserable little compromise".

Also amusing that in the above scenarios, the result was either a Con majority or would have most likely been a Con/UKIP coalition, maybe with a few Ulstermen helping out. Is that really what all those of the left arguing for PR would have wanted?

It's not ALL about party advantage, some of it is about good governance, fairness and promoting voter involvement.

So that's why the LDs want a few hundred MPs to ignore the EU referendum result.

Aren't the LDs calling for voters to be given the opportunity of a second referendum? For some reason, Leavers have stopped trusting the British people and believe that they should not be allowed to vote again once the reality of the Brexit deal becomes known. Sad.

Silly - even by your usual standards. what next ? best of 3?

You don't trust the people. But that's the establishment for you.

Whether or not someone feels the people would return the same result -which I do - it is not absurd to ask where it would end? In all honesty it might be a good idea if we had referendums with minimum thresholds as in some countries or a rule about no repeats too soon, but we don't, so people are free to press ahead even if a vote was 50% plus one vote and people change their minds and yes, free to try to ask the people over and over again.

I struggle to see why the people should not be given the opportunity to approve the Brexit deal the government concludes. Isn't Brexit supposed to be about taking back control?

They can do that quite easily at the next general election. If they think the deal was too hard and they want another referendum they can vote LD and if they think it too soft they can vote UKIP. We only had a referendum on the EU in the first place because it was a Tory manifesto commitment and the Tories won a majority at the last general election

If the deal has been done by the time of the next GE it will be too late.

Not if the LDs won a general election on a platform of a referendum to rejoin the Single Market and restore unfettered free movement which the EU would happily accept

Mr. B, generally, I agree.

One of the reasons I'm not getting Mass Effect: Andromeda is that Manveer Heir, one of the people working on it, has a range of interesting tweets about white people.

I think it's legitimate to be pissed off about double standards when it comes to racism and equality, however. Similarly, the title of the Women and Equalities Committee is simultaneously ironically hilarious and horrendous.

Pulpstar said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Pulpstar said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

So the odds of Trump withdrawing Gorsuch's nomination?

Supreme court nominee Neil Gorsuch calls Trump judge attacks 'demoralizing'

Spokesman confirms Neil Gorsuch called president’s attack on federal judge James Robart ‘demoralizing’ in private meeting with senator

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2017/feb/08/neil-gorsuch-donald-trump-tweet-federal-judge

Do you want £20 at 5-1 ?

Would that pay if Gorsuch withdrew himself or didn't win a vote in the full Senate?

If Trump withdraws the nomination, as per your request.

I'll have to decline your generous offer.

If Len says he would like a new Labour leadership election, then there will be one. And if he backs someone different to Corbyn, it's game over.

Fake laird.

'Academic touted as Trump’s EU envoy embellished autobiography

Mr Malloch also wrote that he was “made a laird by Lord Lyon of Scotland and given a personal coat of arms with a fancy Latin inscription”.

However, the Clerk and Keeper of the Records at the court of the Lord Lyon said: “The Lord Lyon does not, nor could he, create a person a laird . . . It would certainly be incorrect [for Mr Malloch] to say that ‘he was made a laird by the Lord Lyon King of Arms’.” Mr Malloch told the FT that he had a scroll showing his position as laird.'

http://tinyurl.com/jhejpk5

He has a scroll!

#Drowinginthecentre

SouthamObserver said:

If Len says he would like a new Labour leadership election, then there will be one. And if he backs someone different to Corbyn, it's game over.

Not unless the members change their mind it won't. The unions now have no votes in the leadership election

Patrick said:

Corbyn just confirmed on BBC breakfast TV that he is absolutely going nowhere and will lead Labour through the 2020GE. :-)

I didn't believe the rumours, but if he is saying that maybe there is something in them after all.

Lindsay Hoyle for Speaker:

https://www.politicshome.com/news/europe/eu-policy-agenda/brexit/dot-commons-diary/83208/watch-deputy-speaker-raps-snp-commons-

#GetBercow

felix said:

SouthamObserver said:

felix said:

logical_song said:

Sandpit said:

So I guess this is why Nick Clegg called AV "A miserable little compromise".

Also amusing that in the above scenarios, the result was either a Con majority or would have most likely been a Con/UKIP coalition, maybe with a few Ulstermen helping out. Is that really what all those of the left arguing for PR would have wanted?

It's not ALL about party advantage, some of it is about good governance, fairness and promoting voter involvement.

So that's why the LDs want a few hundred MPs to ignore the EU referendum result.

Aren't the LDs calling for voters to be given the opportunity of a second referendum? For some reason, Leavers have stopped trusting the British people and believe that they should not be allowed to vote again once the reality of the Brexit deal becomes known. Sad.

Silly - even by your usual standards. what next ? best of 3?

A vote in principle followed by a vote on the actual deal would have been a perfectly logical way to go about Brexit. There are two aspects to every issue of this nature - (A) do you want to stop doing something and (b) what do you want to do instead

But Leavers know only to well that no specific deal would be likely to command a majority. Which is precisely why during the referendum you could find Leavers promising every type of Brexit and refusing to be nailed down on what Brexit would look like. Don't blame them for that - it was Cameron's fault for structuring the thing in the way he did.

But the consequences are that we are likely to be leaving on a deal that doesn't even command majority support at the time we leave let alone once it gets played out. We are still in a phony war and political turbulence for Brexiters in general and the Tories in particular I suspect lay ahead of us.

Theuniondivvie said:

Fake laird.

'Academic touted as Trump’s EU envoy embellished autobiography

Mr Malloch also wrote that he was “made a laird by Lord Lyon of Scotland and given a personal coat of arms with a fancy Latin inscription”.

However, the Clerk and Keeper of the Records at the court of the Lord Lyon said: “The Lord Lyon does not, nor could he, create a person a laird . . . It would certainly be incorrect [for Mr Malloch] to say that ‘he was made a laird by the Lord Lyon King of Arms’.” Mr Malloch told the FT that he had a scroll showing his position as laird.'

http://tinyurl.com/jhejpk5

He has a scroll!

One of these, perhaps:

https://www.highlandtitles.com

(Got one, similar for a birthday, and no, I don't use it...)

HYUFD said:

SouthamObserver said:

HYUFD said:

SouthamObserver said:

kle4 said:

SouthamObserver said:

felix said:

SouthamObserver said:

felix said:

logical_song said:

Sandpit said:

So I guess this is why Nick Clegg called AV "A miserable little compromise".

Also amusing that in the above scenarios, the result was either a Con majority or would have most likely been a Con/UKIP coalition, maybe with a few Ulstermen helping out. Is that really what all those of the left arguing for PR would have wanted?

It's not ALL about party advantage, some of it is about good governance, fairness and promoting voter involvement.

So that's why the LDs want a few hundred MPs to ignore the EU referendum result.

Aren't the LDs calling for voters to be given the opportunity of a second referendum? For some reason, Leavers have stopped trusting the British people and believe that they should not be allowed to vote again once the reality of the Brexit deal becomes known. Sad.

Silly - even by your usual standards. what next ? best of 3?

You don't trust the people. But that's the establishment for you.

Whether or not someone feels the people would return the same result -which I do - it is not absurd to ask where it would end? In all honesty it might be a good idea if we had referendums with minimum thresholds as in some countries or a rule about no repeats too soon, but we don't, so people are free to press ahead even if a vote was 50% plus one vote and people change their minds and yes, free to try to ask the people over and over again.

I struggle to see why the people should not be given the opportunity to approve the Brexit deal the government concludes. Isn't Brexit supposed to be about taking back control?

They can do that quite easily at the next general election. If they think the deal was too hard and they want another referendum they can vote LD and if they think it too soft they can vote UKIP. We only had a referendum on the EU in the first place because it was a Tory manifesto commitment and the Tories won a majority at the last general election

If the deal has been done by the time of the next GE it will be too late.

Not if the LDs won a general election on a platform of a referendum to rejoin the Single Market and restore unfettered free movement which the EU would happily accept

Parties advocating just that could quite conceivably win most votes at the next election, but not a majority in the Commons.

Mr. Pulpstar, has the Speaker replied to the Lords Speaker's statement the other day?

Mr. Chestnut, I agree, but, as with foreign aid, it doesn't matter if the political class has a consensus around a position entirely separate from public opinion unless there's some other party for whom to vote. UKIP seems to be declining (we'll see how well Nuttall does and whether he can hold the party, and its funding, together).

If UKIP drops off into irrelevance, I can't see any other party advocating a burqa ban.

HYUFD said:

SouthamObserver said:

HYUFD said:

SouthamObserver said:

If Len says he would like a new Labour leadership election, then there will be one. And if he backs someone different to Corbyn, it's game over.

Not unless the members change their mind it won't. The unions now have no votes in the leadership election

Whether you like it or not the memberships' views are changing. To anyone who follows what is going on inside Labour that is absolutely clear.

There is no polling evidence of that as yet just 5 months after Labour members re elected Corbyn by a landslide

Yes, I know. That's why you need to be following what is going on inside Labour.

Mr. T, heard something of that yesterday, with a second senior policeman backing up the claims (essentially, a shitload of serious crime is being committed by the migrants we let in, and Sweden's stupid laws on racial discrimination mean reporting this truth may be a crime).

Mr. Chestnut, English and Welsh nationalism could be a way to go for UKIP. That, or trying to supplant Labour as a white working class party.

Mr. Pulpstar, I wonder if HM prefers male PMs.

SouthamObserver said:

PlatoSaid said:

rottenborough said:

Pulpstar said:

Gorsuch is not a fan of Trump's attacks on the judiciary. It will not affect his supreme court judgements.

I doubt you find any judge who is a fan of presidential abuse about judges.

Obama was very rude a few years back - but the media loved him so didn't apply the same test.


Obama Criticizes Supreme Court in State of the Union Address


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BiDiHX50zT4

Criticising judgments and courts is very different to criticising judges as individuals.

Presidents should do neither.

TheScreamingEagles said:

CarlottaVance said:

Lindsay Hoyle for Speaker:

https://www.politicshome.com/news/europe/eu-policy-agenda/brexit/dot-commons-diary/83208/watch-deputy-speaker-raps-snp-commons-

#GetBercow

I think Lindsay Hoyle will make a brilliant speaker but the Commons should choose Douglas Carswell as speaker.

Hoyle is a very good egg but I do wish he was a bit more articulate.

SouthamObserver said:

HYUFD said:

SouthamObserver said:

HYUFD said:

SouthamObserver said:

If Len says he would like a new Labour leadership election, then there will be one. And if he backs someone different to Corbyn, it's game over.

Not unless the members change their mind it won't. The unions now have no votes in the leadership election

Whether you like it or not the memberships' views are changing. To anyone who follows what is going on inside Labour that is absolutely clear.

There is no polling evidence of that as yet just 5 months after Labour members re elected Corbyn by a landslide

Yes, I know. That's why you need to be following what is going on inside Labour.

I've no idea what is going on inside Labour. I can't even keep my fridge stocked with milk. But if Corbyn does go and Labour gets a new leader they won't have much in the way of baggage associating themselves with the failings of the Blair/Brown/Miliband years. So that would be plus.

Pulpstar said:

SouthamObserver said:

PlatoSaid said:

rottenborough said:

Pulpstar said:

Gorsuch is not a fan of Trump's attacks on the judiciary. It will not affect his supreme court judgements.

I doubt you find any judge who is a fan of presidential abuse about judges.

Obama was very rude a few years back - but the media loved him so didn't apply the same test.


Obama Criticizes Supreme Court in State of the Union Address


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BiDiHX50zT4

Criticising judgments and courts is very different to criticising judges as individuals.

Presidents should do neither.

They always do the former.

OllyT said:

felix said:

SouthamObserver said:

felix said:

logical_song said:

Sandpit said:

So I guess this is why Nick Clegg called AV "A miserable little compromise".

Also amusing that in the above scenarios, the result was either a Con majority or would have most likely been a Con/UKIP coalition, maybe with a few Ulstermen helping out. Is that really what all those of the left arguing for PR would have wanted?

It's not ALL about party advantage, some of it is about good governance, fairness and promoting voter involvement.

So that's why the LDs want a few hundred MPs to ignore the EU referendum result.

Aren't the LDs calling for voters to be given the opportunity of a second referendum? For some reason, Leavers have stopped trusting the British people and believe that they should not be allowed to vote again once the reality of the Brexit deal becomes known. Sad.

Silly - even by your usual standards. what next ? best of 3?

A vote in principle followed by a vote on the actual deal would have been a perfectly logical way to go about Brexit. There are two aspects to every issue of this nature - (A) do you want to stop doing something and (b) what do you want to do instead

But Leavers know only to well that no specific deal would be likely to command a majority. Which is precisely why during the referendum you could find Leavers promising every type of Brexit and refusing to be nailed down on what Brexit would look like. Don't blame them for that - it was Cameron's fault for structuring the thing in the way he did.

But the consequences are that we are likely to be leaving on a deal that doesn't even command majority support at the time we leave let alone once it gets played out. We are still in a phony war and political turbulence for Brexiters in general and the Tories in particular I suspect lay ahead of us.

Except that once Article 50 is triggered it can't be unilaterally untriggered. So we would have a referendum on "accept this deal" or "crash out with no deal". Is that what you really want?

It's not the Leavers fault this is the case - it is the fault of Gordon Brown's Labour government which with the connivance of the Lib Dems ratified without a referendum the Lisbon Treaty that made this the procedure for anyone leaving. Two years to the day after Article 50 is invoked we are out come what may unless we can get unanimous agreement to postpone our exit and there is no guarantee we will get that. Many on the continent are quite happy now to see us leave.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Casino_Royale said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

CarlottaVance said:

Lindsay Hoyle for Speaker:

https://www.politicshome.com/news/europe/eu-policy-agenda/brexit/dot-commons-diary/83208/watch-deputy-speaker-raps-snp-commons-

#GetBercow

I think Lindsay Hoyle will make a brilliant speaker but the Commons should choose Douglas Carswell as speaker.

Hoyle is a very good egg but I do wish he was a bit more articulate.

Well he is a Lancastrian, you have to make allowances

He gave a cracking call to order !
Some voice.

I see jahadi jez had another Trumpian outburst on the been this morning ....Failing Fake News BBC...

If we should have a referendum on the EU deal why shouldn't we have one on every trade deal we do with a foreign country?

Philip_Thompson said:

OllyT said:

felix said:

SouthamObserver said:

felix said:

logical_song said:

Sandpit said:

So I guess this is why Nick Clegg called AV "A miserable little compromise".

Also amusing that in the above scenarios, the result was either a Con majority or would have most likely been a Con/UKIP coalition, maybe with a few Ulstermen helping out. Is that really what all those of the left arguing for PR would have wanted?

It's not ALL about party advantage, some of it is about good governance, fairness and promoting voter involvement.

So that's why the LDs want a few hundred MPs to ignore the EU referendum result.

Aren't the LDs calling for voters to be given the opportunity of a second referendum? For some reason, Leavers have stopped trusting the British people and believe that they should not be allowed to vote again once the reality of the Brexit deal becomes known. Sad.

Silly - even by your usual standards. what next ? best of 3?

A vote in principle followed by a vote on the actual deal would have been a perfectly logical way to go about Brexit. There are two aspects to every issue of this nature - (A) do you want to stop doing something and (b) what do you want to do instead

But Leavers know only to well that no specific deal would be likely to command a majority. Which is precisely why during the referendum you could find Leavers promising every type of Brexit and refusing to be nailed down on what Brexit would look like. Don't blame them for that - it was Cameron's fault for structuring the thing in the way he did.

But the consequences are that we are likely to be leaving on a deal that doesn't even command majority support at the time we leave let alone once it gets played out. We are still in a phony war and political turbulence for Brexiters in general and the Tories in particular I suspect lay ahead of us.

Except that once Article 50 is triggered it can't be unilaterally untriggered. So we would have a referendum on "accept this deal" or "crash out with no deal". Is that what you really want?

Absolutely yes. Even if it is no deal at all we will soon enough settle into a perfectly OK M.O. and the sun will still come up in the east. What I cannot accept at all is some process whereby we might fail actually to leave.

isam said:

If we should have a referendum on the EU deal why shouldn't we have one on every trade deal we do with a foreign country?

The Brexit deal will not just be about trade.

SouthamObserver said:

isam said:

If we should have a referendum on the EU deal why shouldn't we have one on every trade deal we do with a foreign country?

The Brexit deal will not just be about trade.

In theory it won't be a trade deal at all.

rottenborough said:

Pulpstar said:

Gorsuch is not a fan of Trump's attacks on the judiciary. It will not affect his supreme court judgements.

I doubt you find any judge who is a fan of presidential abuse about judges.

Well quite. Judges always get upset with politicians sticking their oar in.

https://twitter.com/SkyData/status/829627870330941440

Patrick said:

logical_song said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

CarlottaVance said:

Lindsay Hoyle for Speaker:

https://www.politicshome.com/news/europe/eu-policy-agenda/brexit/dot-commons-diary/83208/watch-deputy-speaker-raps-snp-commons-

#GetBercow

I think Lindsay Hoyle will make a brilliant speaker but the Commons should choose Douglas Carswell as speaker.

I'm sure that there's an easier way of reducing UKIP to zero MPs. Having said that I think Carswell would be OK as Speaker, he came out well in the expenses scandal. How unlike his UKIP colleagues when it comes to expenses.

Carswell has always been a very decent and principled Leaver (working closely with Hannan). Under Dave and George the Tory party moved away from him. Post Brexit, with them gone and Mrs May / David Davis running the show, the Tory party has moved right back to his long term position. If UKIP is a damp squib in Stoke they're done. Carswell may well cross the floor back to his original home.

That makes sense, the players have changed and the path cleared for Carswell to return, if he was so inclined. Not sure what qualifies him for the role speaker though and we’re long overdue another lady speaker, perhaps we can clone Betty...

Casino_Royale said:

How will Lords vote?

I reckon about ~600 may turn up to vote and I'd expect 400-200 or so at 2nd reading.

It's amendments I'm not sure about.

I think the Lords will support the £350m per week for the NHS amendment.

Salisbury-Addison convention here we come.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Casino_Royale said:

How will Lords vote?

I reckon about ~600 may turn up to vote and I'd expect 400-200 or so at 2nd reading.

It's amendments I'm not sure about.

I think the Lords will support the £350m per week for the NHS amendment.

Salisbury-Addison convention here we come.

Hain was banging on about amendment for commitment to being in single market on newsnight last night. Wouldn't surprise me if that view is wider held in HoL.

SimonStClare said:

Patrick said:

logical_song said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

CarlottaVance said:

Lindsay Hoyle for Speaker:

https://www.politicshome.com/news/europe/eu-policy-agenda/brexit/dot-commons-diary/83208/watch-deputy-speaker-raps-snp-commons-

#GetBercow

I think Lindsay Hoyle will make a brilliant speaker but the Commons should choose Douglas Carswell as speaker.

I'm sure that there's an easier way of reducing UKIP to zero MPs. Having said that I think Carswell would be OK as Speaker, he came out well in the expenses scandal. How unlike his UKIP colleagues when it comes to expenses.

Carswell has always been a very decent and principled Leaver (working closely with Hannan). Under Dave and George the Tory party moved away from him. Post Brexit, with them gone and Mrs May / David Davis running the show, the Tory party has moved right back to his long term position. If UKIP is a damp squib in Stoke they're done. Carswell may well cross the floor back to his original home.

That makes sense, the players have changed and the path cleared for Carswell to return, if he was so inclined. Not sure what qualifies him for the role speaker though and we’re long overdue another lady speaker, perhaps we can clone Betty...

Actually becoming the Speaker could be a perfect out for Carswell. He would ostensibly be a Ukip MP, so wouldn't need to suffer the indignity of reratting, but would be compelled not to show any support for them, which may suit him very well.

His twitter bio doesn't mention Ukip, he is already an independent MP to all intents and purposes.

SeanT said:

Skal!

I have just also found out, via the bizarre medium of a Turkish website, that Cornish thriller-meister's masterpiece FALDET went to number 3 in Denmark last September

http://www.karar.com/hayat-haberleri/demir-perde-bir-kalemde-yerle-yeksan-248497#

I can tell you're all excited. OK, you're not excited, but I am. No one tells me these things, I have to google.

Basically this book has been a bloody great hit right across the world with the Notable Exception of America, the biggest market of all. Pffff!

I'm going to the gym to work off my rage against the Yanks.

Failing Cornish thriller writer..sad!

TheScreamingEagles said:

Does anyone know when the council tax valuations will be updated.

I know back in 1991 ours was a band D, and I'm fairly certain houses prices have increased a bit since then, even before all the extensions we've had.

Never.

Perhaps once we've left the EU we might introduce a better method of local government revenue raising, including local sales taxes etc., in the 2020s.

But not holding my breath.