If true and Fillon withdraws that would probably see Juppe become LR candidate which would eat into Macron's vote and leave the nationalist right to Le Pen
Spot on from Neil and Goodwin on bbcsp. We spend far too much time obsessing about Corbyn, which is a "surface issue" distracting from the fundamental problems that Labour will face under any leader.
Problem is Corbyn doesn't have the ability to fix those problems. At best he is wasting time.
No, the problem is that there is no-one (currently apparent) who has that ability. So at worst he is wasting time.
Crudas and Nandy are writing a book of policy themes and ideas, to be out this summer, iirc.
That might shed some light on what is the point of Labour.
This would be the Cruddas that produced an excellent paper on why Labour lost the last election:
These findings offer three lessons. Firstly, the electorate is both economically radical and fiscally conservative. But fiscal responsibility trumps economic reform. If people do not trust Labour with their taxes they will not support it however much they might agree with its economic policies. Second, identity and belonging drive politics. Culture and values have increasing salience. In Scotland Labour has been marginalised as the party of Westminster. In England UKIP appeals to Labour voters with its conservative values.
The third lesson is that Labour is becoming an exclusive cultural brand. It is now largely a party of progressive, social liberals who value abstract, universalist principles such as equality, sustainability and social justice. It is losing connection with the majority of voters who are either pragmatists in their voting habits or who hold socially conservative values of family, work, security, and fairness.
It's a liberal policy not a left-wing policy, so it's not surprising to see a union oppose it. If you don't need to take a shitty job because you have a basic income and employers have to make their jobs attractive to get someone to take them, you no longer need a union to make your job less shitty...
Spot on from Neil and Goodwin on bbcsp. We spend far too much time obsessing about Corbyn, which is a "surface issue" distracting from the fundamental problems that Labour will face under any leader.
Problem is Corbyn doesn't have the ability to fix those problems. At best he is wasting time.
No, the problem is that there is no-one (currently apparent) who has that ability. So at worst he is wasting time.
Crudas and Nandy are writing a book of policy themes and ideas, to be out this summer, iirc.
That might shed some light on what is the point of Labour.
This would be the Cruddas that produced an excellent paper on why Labour lost the last election:
These findings offer three lessons. Firstly, the electorate is both economically radical and fiscally conservative. But fiscal responsibility trumps economic reform. If people do not trust Labour with their taxes they will not support it however much they might agree with its economic policies. Second, identity and belonging drive politics. Culture and values have increasing salience. In Scotland Labour has been marginalised as the party of Westminster. In England UKIP appeals to Labour voters with its conservative values.
The third lesson is that Labour is becoming an exclusive cultural brand. It is now largely a party of progressive, social liberals who value abstract, universalist principles such as equality, sustainability and social justice. It is losing connection with the majority of voters who are either pragmatists in their voting habits or who hold socially conservative values of family, work, security, and fairness.
so they elected Corbyn...
They did. For two reasons, one being as Crudas argued: "It is now largely a party of progressive, social liberals who value abstract, universalist principles such as equality, sustainability and social justice."
And secondly, they opened membership to the additional £3 people, who who it seems were also all "progressive, social liberals".
Labour's flight to the big urban centres and uni towns continues apace.
If true and Fillon withdraws that would probably see Juppe become LR candidate which would eat into Macron's vote and leave the nationalist right to Le Pen
Anyone know what the process would be? Would they rerun the primary? With new candidates.
I have a hefty book on this now, mostly green, except for black swan characters emerging via a new primary. Getting nervous...
Is this a fucking joke? She looks and sounds like she should be pulling pints in the Rovers Return.
Harsh, but true.
Just harsh.
She is a self-made working class woman from a poor background who believes in making the best of herself. I'm not a fan of her as a leadership candidate but I can see why the prospect of a hardworking, well presented grafter as Labour leader would irritate some Tories.
If true and Fillon withdraws that would probably see Juppe become LR candidate which would eat into Macron's vote and leave the nationalist right to Le Pen
Guess Juppe COULD be persuaded, "for the sake of the Party and the nation", but he stated several times that he would not be a replacement, saying that he did not wish to open up his family to the kind of pressures that Fillon's family had been subjected to.
Can not believe the emphasis on RLB accent. She has the well spoken tones of an educated person from Salford and would be teased as posh in the schools I taught in. Perhaps a comprehensive list of acceptable parts of the country could be drawn up so those of us not fortunate enough to be born there could know our place and not get crazy ideas above our station?
"There is a wave of disappointment with Jeremy Corbyn among the 313,000 who voted for him just five months ago. The social media citadels of Corbynism have fallen silent. In local parties a lot of the new members have melted away. It is dawning on them not just that Corbyn is a hopeless leader but that he asked Labour MPs to vote with the Conservatives to let Theresa May get on with leaving the European Union. "
Is this a fucking joke? She looks and sounds like she should be pulling pints in the Rovers Return.
Harsh, but true.
Just harsh.
She is a self-made working class woman from a poor background who believes in making the best of herself. I'm not a fan of her as a leadership candidate but I can see why the prospect of a hardworking, well presented grafter as Labour leader would irritate some Tories.
It's a liberal policy not a left-wing policy, so it's not surprising to see a union oppose it. If you don't need to take a shitty job because you have a basic income and employers have to make their jobs attractive to get someone to take them, you no longer need a union to make your job less shitty...
If true and Fillon withdraws that would probably see Juppe become LR candidate which would eat into Macron's vote and leave the nationalist right to Le Pen
Anyone know what the process would be? Would they rerun the primary? With new candidates.
I have a hefty book on this now, mostly green, except for black swan characters emerging via a new primary. Getting nervous...
There is unlikely to be time to orgnaise another Primary before March 13th, which is the closing dates for candidates. And even if they WERE to squeeze in another primary within a month, it would mean that Le Pen and Macron get a full month campaigning time under their belts. It would probably have to be an appointed replacement.
If true and Fillon withdraws that would probably see Juppe become LR candidate which would eat into Macron's vote and leave the nationalist right to Le Pen
Guess Juppe COULD be persuaded, "for the sake of the Party and the nation", but he stated several times that he would not be a replacement, saying that he did not wish to open up his family to the kind of pressures that Fillon's family had been subjected to.
Does that mean he is also on the fiddle (allegedly)? In which case, we are looking a younger politicians whose names I don't even know. Nightmare for betting.
Is this a fucking joke? She looks and sounds like she should be pulling pints in the Rovers Return.
Harsh, but true.
Just harsh.
She is a self-made working class woman from a poor background who believes in making the best of herself. I'm not a fan of her as a leadership candidate but I can see why the prospect of a hardworking, well presented grafter as Labour leader would irritate some Tories.
No problem with that, but get a grip, she way way too inexperienced. It would engulf her.
The Dukedom of Gloucester will eventually have the "X" factor. The heir apparent to the title, the Earl of Ulster's, eldest son is Xan Windsor.
this morning's discussion has convinced me that the Duchy of Gloucester needs a re-brand. Perhaps we could run "Cheltenham" past a Mancunian focus group, see if it'll fly?
Cheltenham? Home of Britain's biggest and most reclusive spy agency? Not to be trusted, surely.
Can not believe the emphasis on RLB accent. She has the well spoken tones of an educated person from Salford and would be teased as posh in the schools I taught in. Perhaps a comprehensive list of acceptable parts of the country could be drawn up so those of us not fortunate enough to be born there could know our place and not get crazy ideas above our station?
Such silliness - all parts of the country are acceptable and people are welcome to rise above their station, you just need to speak in the neutral refined tones of a southerner.
Is this a fucking joke? She looks and sounds like she should be pulling pints in the Rovers Return.
Harsh, but true.
Just harsh.
She is a self-made working class woman from a poor background who believes in making the best of herself. I'm not a fan of her as a leadership candidate but I can see why the prospect of a hardworking, well presented grafter as Labour leader would irritate some Tories.
No problem with that, but get a grip, she way way too inexperienced. It would engulf her.
She's being touted on the basis that she's better than Angela Rayner. That's not a particularly high bar, it has to be said.
All to play for in a 3 way contest during the next 11days?
"At any rate, Lovell’s main point is that UKIP’s ground game is no good, that the LibDems can unify the Remain vote in their column while the Leave vote is split, and that voters of Kashmiri origin will rally behind the party’s Pakistan-origin cardiologist candidate."
If that were the case Labour would be in far worse trouble than the murmourings from their canvassers suggest, so I would take with a mountain of salt.
If true and Fillon withdraws that would probably see Juppe become LR candidate which would eat into Macron's vote and leave the nationalist right to Le Pen
Guess Juppe COULD be persuaded, "for the sake of the Party and the nation", but he stated several times that he would not be a replacement, saying that he did not wish to open up his family to the kind of pressures that Fillon's family had been subjected to.
Does that mean he is also on the fiddle (allegedly)? In which case, we are looking a younger politicians whose names I don't even know. Nightmare for betting.
It IS a nightmare for betting, but it is also a betting opportunity!
I covered several who were touted as possiblities in news articles at long odds, just in case. Baroin, Bertrand, Wauquiez and Larcher mainly, but even then I may come unstuck and a previously unmentioned candidate from left field eventually gets the gig, if Fillon est fini.
If true and Fillon withdraws that would probably see Juppe become LR candidate which would eat into Macron's vote and leave the nationalist right to Le Pen
Guess Juppe COULD be persuaded, "for the sake of the Party and the nation", but he stated several times that he would not be a replacement, saying that he did not wish to open up his family to the kind of pressures that Fillon's family had been subjected to.
He ran for the nomination and, as such, opened himself to exactly the same scrutiny. What's changed? I agree with your implied conclusion: he wants LR to come to him rather than the other way round.
Is this a fucking joke? She looks and sounds like she should be pulling pints in the Rovers Return.
Harsh, but true.
Just harsh.
She is a self-made working class woman from a poor background who believes in making the best of herself. I'm not a fan of her as a leadership candidate but I can see why the prospect of a hardworking, well presented grafter as Labour leader would irritate some Tories.
No problem with that, but get a grip, she way way too inexperienced. It would engulf her.
She's being touted on the basis that she's better than Angela Rayner. That's not a particularly high bar, it has to be said.
As I said the other day, beginning to appear like the episode from The Thick of It, where Clare Ballantine is alighted on as the one for leader.
"There is a wave of disappointment with Jeremy Corbyn among the 313,000 who voted for him just five months ago. The social media citadels of Corbynism have fallen silent. In local parties a lot of the new members have melted away. It is dawning on them not just that Corbyn is a hopeless leader but that he asked Labour MPs to vote with the Conservatives to let Theresa May get on with leaving the European Union. "
New members have "melted away". What a surprise. Widely predicted by many of us on PB.
They were never really there. In Labour elections that involve people attending meetings, moderate candidates almost always win. Yu can vote for leader and the CLP NEC places from behind your keyboard, so the far left has been more successful. Whether that continues, though, is very open to question.
If true and Fillon withdraws that would probably see Juppe become LR candidate which would eat into Macron's vote and leave the nationalist right to Le Pen
Guess Juppe COULD be persuaded, "for the sake of the Party and the nation", but he stated several times that he would not be a replacement, saying that he did not wish to open up his family to the kind of pressures that Fillon's family had been subjected to.
He ran for the nomination and, as such, opened himself to exactly the same scrutiny. What's changed? I agree with your implied conclusion: he wants LR to come to him rather than the other way round.
Yes he did run for nomination. Perhaps after seeing what has happened to Fillon he is thinking "there but for the grace of God go I". Plus he knows that any replacement for Fillon is likely to be scrutinised very carefully by the media in a similar way.
I agree. And I don't think she is up to it. But having read some of sexist snobbish bile on here this morning, I'm warming to the idea of giving the lass a chance.
I agree. And I don't think she is up to it. But having read some of sexist snobbish bile on here this morning, I'm warming to the idea of giving the lass a chance.
Is this a fucking joke? She looks and sounds like she should be pulling pints in the Rovers Return.
Harsh, but true.
Just harsh.
She is a self-made working class woman from a poor background who believes in making the best of herself. I'm not a fan of her as a leadership candidate but I can see why the prospect of a hardworking, well presented grafter as Labour leader would irritate some Tories.
Personally, I couldn't give a toss what a politician sounds like. Nor am I impressed by someone who has come from a humble background, got themselves educated and carved out a reasonable career. I did that and so have several others who post on this site. It is not that big a deal.
What is more important to me is a politician's beliefs, ability and skill set. Is a youngish person who has only been an MP for a short while, who has no experience of operating the levers of power and who has no track record of political leadership at any level likely to make a good Prime Minister?
I think one of the problems we currently have in this country is that far too many of our politicians get to the top of the tree too quickly and as soon as they suffer a reverse in electoral fortunes they scuttle off to make money. The result is that senior positions are increasingly going to people without the knowledge or skills to handle them.
Personally, I couldn't give a toss what a politician sounds like. Nor am I impressed by someone who has come from a humble background, got themselves educated and carved out a reasonable career. I did that and so have several others who post on this site. It is not that big a deal.
What is more important to me is a politician's beliefs, ability and skill set. Is a youngish person who has only been an MP for a short while, who has no experience of operating the levers of power and who has no track record of political leadership at any level likely to make a good Prime Minister?
On the subject of Lewis' military record... the fact that he was unlikely to have been in a firefight hardly disproves the fact that he might have shot a civilian. This isn't Hilary Clinton ducking sniper fire.
Well, I’m sure it won’t be long before one of his team surfaces. For myself, I’m prepared to believe people who go on the record, give their names and so on. “Military sources’ suggests a bored ex-squaddy wanting another drink!
If the MSM are doing hatchet jobs on Lewis, then that suggests to me that they they are a little concerned that he might actually be able to lead a Party that could become a threat to the Tories.
The mainstream media is not only Tory leaning, it's so Tory supporting it will hatchet anyone who might make someone a threat to the tories? Ookay. One wonders how we've ever ended up with labour governments.
On the subject of Lewis' military record... the fact that he was unlikely to have been in a firefight hardly disproves the fact that he might have shot a civilian. This isn't Hilary Clinton ducking sniper fire.
Well, I’m sure it won’t be long before one of his team surfaces. For myself, I’m prepared to believe people who go on the record, give their names and so on. “Military sources’ suggests a bored ex-squaddy wanting another drink!
If the MSM are doing hatchet jobs on Lewis, then that suggests to me that they they are a little concerned that he might actually be able to lead a Party that could become a threat to the Tories.
The mainstream media is not only Tory leaning, it's so Tory supporting it will hatchet anyone who might make someone a threat to the tories? Ookay. One wonders how we've ever ended up with labour governments.
The only Labour Prime Minister elected in the last 50 years is Tony Blair, a person described by Margaret Thatcher as her greatest acheivement and someone who would have been quite at home in the Tory Party.
They have to have a Labour Party elected now and again, it helps to deflect criticism. We are still hearing about how Labour's mismanagement nearly ten years ago has created the financial mess we are currently in.
Harold Wilson was elected in 1974 - less than 50 years ago.
It is the Remainers, not the Leavers, who appear to have been attempting to defy the democratic will of the people. And crucially, May has been backed so far into a corner, she has been given no option but to make common cause with Brexit’s true believers.
She now needs to be freed from that corner. When the Prime Minister says: ‘I’m not a crazed Brexiteer’, she is telling the truth. Behind the negotiating stance she does not crave a hard Brexit, so much as a fair Brexit. When she said in her New Year message that she would seek the ‘right deal, not just for those who voted to leave, but for every single person in this country’, she meant it. And she now needs to be given the space to deliver it.
Those who opposed Brexit have had their moment. They have had their day in court, and they have had their day in Parliament. They have tried – and failed – to save the country from a hard Brexit. Now they need to step back and leave it to the only person who can. Theresa May.
On the subject of Lewis' military record... the fact that he was unlikely to have been in a firefight hardly disproves the fact that he might have shot a civilian. This isn't Hilary Clinton ducking sniper fire.
Well, I’m sure it won’t be long before one of his team surfaces. For myself, I’m prepared to believe people who go on the record, give their names and so on. “Military sources’ suggests a bored ex-squaddy wanting another drink!
If the MSM are doing hatchet jobs on Lewis, then that suggests to me that they they are a little concerned that he might actually be able to lead a Party that could become a threat to the Tories.
The mainstream media is not only Tory leaning, it's so Tory supporting it will hatchet anyone who might make someone a threat to the tories? Ookay. One wonders how we've ever ended up with labour governments.
On the subject of Lewis' military record... the fact that he was unlikely to have been in a firefight hardly disproves the fact that he might have shot a civilian. This isn't Hilary Clinton ducking sniper fire.
Well, I’m sure it won’t be long before one of his team surfaces. For myself, I’m prepared to believe people who go on the record, give their names and so on. “Military sources’ suggests a bored ex-squaddy wanting another drink!
If the MSM are doing hatchet jobs on Lewis, then that suggests to me that they they are a little concerned that he might actually be able to lead a Party that could become a threat to the Tories.
The mainstream media is not only Tory leaning, it's so Tory supporting it will hatchet anyone who might make someone a threat to the tories? Ookay. One wonders how we've ever ended up with labour governments.
The only Labour Prime Minister elected in the last 50 years is Tony Blair, a person described by Margaret Thatcher as her greatest acheivement and someone who would have been quite at home in the Tory Party.
They have to have a Labour Party elected now and again, it helps to deflect criticism. We are still hearing about how Labour's mismanagement nearly ten years ago has created the financial mess we are currently in.
Harold Wilson was elected in 1974 - less than 50 years ago.
Yes, that was kindly pointed out to me a couple of hours ago, I blamed it on only being half awake!!
Hi all - gambling question: I made a small bet on an obscure football match with Sportingbet where the odds seemed surprisingly favourable. They accepted the bet, but subsequently voided it. I queried this, and they came back to me to tell me that they had priced the match wrong in error and so voided all bets. I know bets aren't binding, but has anyone faced this situation before, and how did they deal with it? It's annoying as I balanced it with other bets in order to make a small profit whatever happened and as a result I ended up out of pocket. It wasn't a massive bet but it's rather annoying nonetheless.
It is the Remainers, not the Leavers, who appear to have been attempting to defy the democratic will of the people. And crucially, May has been backed so far into a corner, she has been given no option but to make common cause with Brexit’s true believers.
She now needs to be freed from that corner. When the Prime Minister says: ‘I’m not a crazed Brexiteer’, she is telling the truth. Behind the negotiating stance she does not crave a hard Brexit, so much as a fair Brexit. When she said in her New Year message that she would seek the ‘right deal, not just for those who voted to leave, but for every single person in this country’, she meant it. And she now needs to be given the space to deliver it.
Those who opposed Brexit have had their moment. They have had their day in court, and they have had their day in Parliament. They have tried – and failed – to save the country from a hard Brexit. Now they need to step back and leave it to the only person who can. Theresa May.
I don't believe she wants to, that seems to be wishful thinking. Most of her supporters are clear she has not been backed into anything, she is doing exactly what she wants. and thinks is the best position.
Can not believe the emphasis on RLB accent. She has the well spoken tones of an educated person from Salford and would be teased as posh in the schools I taught in. Perhaps a comprehensive list of acceptable parts of the country could be drawn up so those of us not fortunate enough to be born there could know our place and not get crazy ideas above our station?
Such silliness - all parts of the country are acceptable and people are welcome to rise above their station, you just need to speak in the neutral refined tones of a southerner.
Such silliness - all parts of the country are acceptable and people are welcome to rise above their station, you just need to speak in the neutral refined tones of a southerner. sense, not badly thought out, unsupported and vacuous nonsense.
There isn't a million miles between Universal Basic Income, Milton Friedman's negative income tax proposal and the Working Tax Credit. But a "proper" UBI would ease the problem of punitive benefit withdrawal rates that are equivalent to 90%+ marginal income tax rates on the poor.
I did wonder if UBI would become more politically palatable in the UK post-Brexit - the "economically correct" level of UBI ought to sustain an austere but acceptably comfortable, non-poverty-stricken standard of living And in the UK such a standard of living would be beyond what e.g. many rural Romanians and Bulgarians can sustain through hard toil. With free movement, and given that restriction to citizens only would be unacceptable, the implications are obvious, and this alone would be a clincher of an argument against. Post-Brexit though, the terms of the debate are different.
Here's a fun fact for fans of alternative history. Although the Beveridge Committee in the end opted for a social insurance system, UBI was also considered and one of its members, Juliet Rhys-Williams (a Liberal politician who later became a Tory and member of the Monday Club!), strongly dissented with the final proposal, preferring a negative income tax.
Can not believe the emphasis on RLB accent. She has the well spoken tones of an educated person from Salford and would be teased as posh in the schools I taught in. Perhaps a comprehensive list of acceptable parts of the country could be drawn up so those of us not fortunate enough to be born there could know our place and not get crazy ideas above our station?
Such silliness - all parts of the country are acceptable and people are welcome to rise above their station, you just need to speak in the neutral refined tones of a southerner.
Such silliness - all parts of the country are acceptable and people are welcome to rise above their station, you just need to speak in the neutral refined tones of a southerner. sense, not badly thought out, unsupported and vacuous nonsense.
Well sure, ideally, but if you cannot manage that, at least sound right.
Ah yes I was forgetting that the Punic Wars are still being debated in your house.
I think Morris was distinguishing the modern from the medieval. The date exact date of crossover is disputed, but I've always liked 1649.
1689 is more significant. Power passed irrevocably from monarch to parliament at that point.
I see your point but the Medieval period was over a long way before 1689. Dividing up history into chunks is a convenience for historians but inasmuch as it has value I would put the date as 1536.
That was the year when it was shown that the power of the Papacy could be ignored and ushered in a new style of thinking in which the Church did not predominate and which in due course led to 1689, the enlightenment and the industrial revolution.
The old dividing line of 1485 that I was taught at school was, I think, just a hangover from Tudor propoganda.
I wonder whether the story about Clive Lewis at the foot of the header is the one Bunnco Your Man On The Spot might have been obliquely referring to in his post a couple of days ago about the M.P. for Norwich South?
It is a lovely number; it is 4 squared followed by 7 squared, and its prime factors are 17 and 97, giving us the date of the battle of Cape St Vincent. Primeness is overrated.
Is this a fucking joke? She looks and sounds like she should be pulling pints in the Rovers Return.
Harsh, but true.
Just harsh.
She is a self-made working class woman from a poor background who believes in making the best of herself. I'm not a fan of her as a leadership candidate but I can see why the prospect of a hardworking, well presented grafter as Labour leader would irritate some Tories.
Personally, I couldn't give a toss what a politician sounds like. Nor am I impressed by someone who has come from a humble background, got themselves educated and carved out a reasonable career. I did that and so have several others who post on this site. It is not that big a deal.
What is more important to me is a politician's beliefs, ability and skill set. Is a youngish person who has only been an MP for a short while, who has no experience of operating the levers of power and who has no track record of political leadership at any level likely to make a good Prime Minister?
I think one of the problems we currently have in this country is that far too many of our politicians get to the top of the tree too quickly and as soon as they suffer a reverse in electoral fortunes they scuttle off to make money. The result is that senior positions are increasingly going to people without the knowledge or skills to handle them.
It is the Remainers, not the Leavers, who appear to have been attempting to defy the democratic will of the people. And crucially, May has been backed so far into a corner, she has been given no option but to make common cause with Brexit’s true believers.
She now needs to be freed from that corner. When the Prime Minister says: ‘I’m not a crazed Brexiteer’, she is telling the truth. Behind the negotiating stance she does not crave a hard Brexit, so much as a fair Brexit. When she said in her New Year message that she would seek the ‘right deal, not just for those who voted to leave, but for every single person in this country’, she meant it. And she now needs to be given the space to deliver it.
Those who opposed Brexit have had their moment. They have had their day in court, and they have had their day in Parliament. They have tried – and failed – to save the country from a hard Brexit. Now they need to step back and leave it to the only person who can. Theresa May.
I don't believe she wants to, that seems to be wishful thinking. Most of her supporters are clear she has not been backed into anything, she is doing exactly what she wants. and thinks is the best position.
I read it as Dan getting himself out of his own painted corner.
The Dukedom of Gloucester will eventually have the "X" factor. The heir apparent to the title, the Earl of Ulster's, eldest son is Xan Windsor.
Alex Ulster was known as "Xander" when he was at Wetherby's. Assume "Xan" is also Alexander.
Xan is Lord Culloden's full christian name. As I noted earlier his grandfather, under salic law, would have been King Richard IV and accordingly Lord Culloden would be King Xan I ....
Ah yes I was forgetting that the Punic Wars are still being debated in your house.
I think Morris was distinguishing the modern from the medieval. The date exact date of crossover is disputed, but I've always liked 1649.
1689 is more significant. Power passed irrevocably from monarch to parliament at that point.
I see your point but the Medieval period was over a long way before 1689. Dividing up history into chunks is a convenience for historians but inasmuch as it has value I would put the date as 1536.
That was the year when it was shown that the power of the Papacy could be ignored and ushered in a new style of thinking in which the Church did not predominate and which in due course led to 1689, the enlightenment and the industrial revolution.
The old dividing line of 1485 that I was taught at school was, I think, just a hangover from Tudor propoganda.
1485 is parochial, apart from anything, but in the right century. 1453 - fall of Byzantium, battle of Castillon effectively ending the 100 years war (don't tell TSE but: we lost) and the Gutenberg Bible is in press.
It is the Remainers, not the Leavers, who appear to have been attempting to defy the democratic will of the people. And crucially, May has been backed so far into a corner, she has been given no option but to make common cause with Brexit’s true believers.
She now needs to be freed from that corner. When the Prime Minister says: ‘I’m not a crazed Brexiteer’, she is telling the truth. Behind the negotiating stance she does not crave a hard Brexit, so much as a fair Brexit. When she said in her New Year message that she would seek the ‘right deal, not just for those who voted to leave, but for every single person in this country’, she meant it. And she now needs to be given the space to deliver it.
Those who opposed Brexit have had their moment. They have had their day in court, and they have had their day in Parliament. They have tried – and failed – to save the country from a hard Brexit. Now they need to step back and leave it to the only person who can. Theresa May.
I don't believe she wants to, that seems to be wishful thinking. Most of her supporters are clear she has not been backed into anything, she is doing exactly what she wants. and thinks is the best position.
There is no such thing as a "soft" Brexit, it is a Remoaner fantasy. For a start, the EU won't let us have it. Secondly, there is no point remaining part of a customs union if you want free trade, or giving up our recently-won freedoms for the unnecessary rules and complications if staying in the single market. I believe in visa-free travel for EU citizens, allowing current EU residents the right of residency, with fast-tracked citizenship, and tariff free trade with the EU, we should simply grant these things unilaterally as a sovereign nation.
Hi all - gambling question: I made a small bet on an obscure football match with Sportingbet where the odds seemed surprisingly favourable. They accepted the bet, but subsequently voided it. I queried this, and they came back to me to tell me that they had priced the match wrong in error and so voided all bets. I know bets aren't binding, but has anyone faced this situation before, and how did they deal with it? It's annoying as I balanced it with other bets in order to make a small profit whatever happened and as a result I ended up out of pocket. It wasn't a massive bet but it's rather annoying nonetheless.
It is the Remainers, not the Leavers, who appear to have been attempting to defy the democratic will of the people. And crucially, May has been backed so far into a corner, she has been given no option but to make common cause with Brexit’s true believers.
She now needs to be freed from that corner. When the Prime Minister says: ‘I’m not a crazed Brexiteer’, she is telling the truth. Behind the negotiating stance she does not crave a hard Brexit, so much as a fair Brexit. When she said in her New Year message that she would seek the ‘right deal, not just for those who voted to leave, but for every single person in this country’, she meant it. And she now needs to be given the space to deliver it.
Those who opposed Brexit have had their moment. They have had their day in court, and they have had their day in Parliament. They have tried – and failed – to save the country from a hard Brexit. Now they need to step back and leave it to the only person who can. Theresa May.
I don't believe she wants to, that seems to be wishful thinking. Most of her supporters are clear she has not been backed into anything, she is doing exactly what she wants. and thinks is the best position.
There is no such thing as a "soft" Brexit, it is a Remoaner fantasy.
Depending on mood swings, it seems a fantasy that several leavers on here share.
It is the Remainers, not the Leavers, who appear to have been attempting to defy the democratic will of the people. And crucially, May has been backed so far into a corner, she has been given no option but to make common cause with Brexit’s true believers.
She now needs to be freed from that corner. When the Prime Minister says: ‘I’m not a crazed Brexiteer’, she is telling the truth. Behind the negotiating stance she does not crave a hard Brexit, so much as a fair Brexit. When she said in her New Year message that she would seek the ‘right deal, not just for those who voted to leave, but for every single person in this country’, she meant it. And she now needs to be given the space to deliver it.
Those who opposed Brexit have had their moment. They have had their day in court, and they have had their day in Parliament. They have tried – and failed – to save the country from a hard Brexit. Now they need to step back and leave it to the only person who can. Theresa May.
I don't believe she wants to, that seems to be wishful thinking. Most of her supporters are clear she has not been backed into anything, she is doing exactly what she wants. and thinks is the best position.
There is no such thing as a "soft" Brexit, it is a Remoaner fantasy. For a start, the EU won't let us have it. Secondly, there is no point remaining part of a customs union if you want free trade, or giving up our recently-won freedoms for the unnecessary rules and complications if staying in the single market. I believe in visa-free travel for EU citizens, allowing current EU residents the right of residency, with fast-tracked citizenship, and tariff free trade with the EU, we should simply grant these things unilaterally as a sovereign nation.
And if your wish list is not reciprocated? The Ultras in UK would not stand for it.
Ah yes I was forgetting that the Punic Wars are still being debated in your house.
I think Morris was distinguishing the modern from the medieval. The date exact date of crossover is disputed, but I've always liked 1649.
1689 is more significant. Power passed irrevocably from monarch to parliament at that point.
I see your point but the Medieval period was over a long way before 1689. Dividing up history into chunks is a convenience for historians but inasmuch as it has value I would put the date as 1536.
That was the year when it was shown that the power of the Papacy could be ignored and ushered in a new style of thinking in which the Church did not predominate and which in due course led to 1689, the enlightenment and the industrial revolution.
The old dividing line of 1485 that I was taught at school was, I think, just a hangover from Tudor propoganda.
1485 is parochial, apart from anything, but in the right century. 1453 - fall of Byzantium, battle of Castillon effectively ending the 100 years war (don't tell TSE but: we lost) and the Gutenberg Bible is in press.
We were a bit ahead of the Continent with moves towards less despotic government and separating Church and State. I think there is an argument for starting the modern era with the Treaty of Westphalia.
"There is a wave of disappointment with Jeremy Corbyn among the 313,000 who voted for him just five months ago. The social media citadels of Corbynism have fallen silent. In local parties a lot of the new members have melted away. It is dawning on them not just that Corbyn is a hopeless leader but that he asked Labour MPs to vote with the Conservatives to let Theresa May get on with leaving the European Union. "
The Dukedom of Gloucester will eventually have the "X" factor. The heir apparent to the title, the Earl of Ulster's, eldest son is Xan Windsor.
Alex Ulster was known as "Xander" when he was at Wetherby's. Assume "Xan" is also Alexander.
Xan is Lord Culloden's full christian name. As I noted earlier his grandfather, under salic law, would have been King Richard IV and accordingly Lord Culloden would be King Xan I ....
It is the Remainers, not the Leavers, who appear to have been attempting to defy the democratic will of the people. And crucially, May has been backed so far into a corner, she has been given no option but to make common cause with Brexit’s true believers.
She now needs to be freed from that corner. When the Prime Minister says: ‘I’m not a crazed Brexiteer’, she is telling the truth. Behind the negotiating stance she does not crave a hard Brexit, so much as a fair Brexit. When she said in her New Year message that she would seek the ‘right deal, not just for those who voted to leave, but for every single person in this country’, she meant it. And she now needs to be given the space to deliver it.
Those who opposed Brexit have had their moment. They have had their day in court, and they have had their day in Parliament. They have tried – and failed – to save the country from a hard Brexit. Now they need to step back and leave it to the only person who can. Theresa May.
I don't believe she wants to, that seems to be wishful thinking. Most of her supporters are clear she has not been backed into anything, she is doing exactly what she wants. and thinks is the best position.
There is no such thing as a "soft" Brexit, it is a Remoaner fantasy. For a start, the EU won't let us have it. Secondly, there is no point remaining part of a customs union if you want free trade, or giving up our recently-won freedoms for the unnecessary rules and complications if staying in the single market. I believe in visa-free travel for EU citizens, allowing current EU residents the right of residency, with fast-tracked citizenship, and tariff free trade with the EU, we should simply grant these things unilaterally as a sovereign nation.
And if your wish list is not reciprocated? The Ultras in UK would not stand for it.
It doesn't matter. The above will all be good for the UK so we should do them even if not reciprocated. It will also be a big divide and rule thing as a lot if EU countries would be sympathetic. And as a sovereign nation we make our own decisions. In any case, the fortress England approach isn't prevalent among Brexiteers, most of us are internationalists and free traders
Hi all - gambling question: I made a small bet on an obscure football match with Sportingbet where the odds seemed surprisingly favourable. They accepted the bet, but subsequently voided it. I queried this, and they came back to me to tell me that they had priced the match wrong in error and so voided all bets. I know bets aren't binding, but has anyone faced this situation before, and how did they deal with it? It's annoying as I balanced it with other bets in order to make a small profit whatever happened and as a result I ended up out of pocket. It wasn't a massive bet but it's rather annoying nonetheless.
Hi Cookie - All bookies' rules contain provisions enabling them to void bets which are palpable errors on their part (or "palps" as they are known in the trade). But they clearly have to be just that, as opposed to a simple misjudgement on their part. So we are talking here about degree. Should you feel you've been deliberately cheated out of your rightful winnings then you could always appeal to the Independent Betting Arbitration Service, or "IBAS" as it is known, who will adjudicate in accordance with the Bookmaker's rules. Without knowing any of the details of your particular case, it's difficult to offer any further meaningful advice.
It is a lovely number; it is 4 squared followed by 7 squared, and its prime factors are 17 and 97, giving us the date of the battle of Cape St Vincent. Primeness is overrated.
edit:vanilla doesn't do tags.
Primes are the root of all numbers. 1681 would be a better date, it is 41 squared. 41 is prime and also appears in the prime generating quadratic n^2 - n + 41 which generates primes for n=1..40.
Also 1681 was the expiry of the Exclusion Bill to prevent James, Duke of York (a converted catholic) from becoming king.
Hi all - gambling question: I made a small bet on an obscure football match with Sportingbet where the odds seemed surprisingly favourable. They accepted the bet, but subsequently voided it. I queried this, and they came back to me to tell me that they had priced the match wrong in error and so voided all bets. I know bets aren't binding, but has anyone faced this situation before, and how did they deal with it? It's annoying as I balanced it with other bets in order to make a small profit whatever happened and as a result I ended up out of pocket. It wasn't a massive bet but it's rather annoying nonetheless.
They'll call it a palpable error, and admitting you hedged it elsewhere is like asking to be banned!
Take legal advice. Most solicitors offer 30 mins. free to see if there's money in the case for them. Betting contracts have been enforceable for around ten years.
It is the Remainers, not the Leavers, who appear to have been attempting to defy the democratic will of the people. And crucially, May has been backed so far into a corner, she has been given no option but to make common cause with Brexit’s true believers.
She now needs to be freed from that corner. When the Prime Minister says: ‘I’m not a crazed Brexiteer’, she is telling the truth. Behind the negotiating stance she does not crave a hard Brexit, so much as a fair Brexit. When she said in her New Year message that she would seek the ‘right deal, not just for those who voted to leave, but for every single person in this country’, she meant it. And she now needs to be given the space to deliver it.
Those who opposed Brexit have had their moment. They have had their day in court, and they have had their day in Parliament. They have tried – and failed – to save the country from a hard Brexit. Now they need to step back and leave it to the only person who can. Theresa May.
I don't believe she wants to, that seems to be wishful thinking. Most of her supporters are clear she has not been backed into anything, she is doing exactly what she wants. and thinks is the best position.
There is no such thing as a "soft" Brexit, it is a Remoaner fantasy. For a start, the EU won't let us have it. Secondly, there is no point remaining part of a customs union if you want free trade, or giving up our recently-won freedoms for the unnecessary rules and complications if staying in the single market. I believe in visa-free travel for EU citizens, allowing current EU residents the right of residency, with fast-tracked citizenship, and tariff free trade with the EU, we should simply grant these things unilaterally as a sovereign nation.
And if your wish list is not reciprocated? The Ultras in UK would not stand for it.
It doesn't matter. The above will all be good for the UK so we should do them even if not reciprocated. It will also be a big divide and rule thing as a lot if EU countries would be sympathetic. And as a sovereign nation we make our own decisions. In any case, the fortress England approach isn't prevalent among Brexiteers, most of us are internationalists and free traders
I have the greatest admiration of your confidence in your fellow man.
It is the Remainers, not the Leavers, who appear to have been attempting to defy the democratic will of the people. And crucially, May has been backed so far into a corner, she has been given no option but to make common cause with Brexit’s true believers.
She now needs to be freed from that corner. When the Prime Minister says: ‘I’m not a crazed Brexiteer’, she is telling the truth. Behind the negotiating stance she does not crave a hard Brexit, so much as a fair Brexit. When she said in her New Year message that she would seek the ‘right deal, not just for those who voted to leave, but for every single person in this country’, she meant it. And she now needs to be given the space to deliver it.
Those who opposed Brexit have had their moment. They have had their day in court, and they have had their day in Parliament. They have tried – and failed – to save the country from a hard Brexit. Now they need to step back and leave it to the only person who can. Theresa May.
I don't believe she wants to, that seems to be wishful thinking. Most of her supporters are clear she has not been backed into anything, she is doing exactly what she wants. and thinks is the best position.
There is no such thing as a "soft" Brexit, it is a Remoaner fantasy. For a start, the EU won't let us have it. Secondly, there is no point remaining part of a customs union if you want free trade, or giving up our recently-won freedoms for the unnecessary rules and complications if staying in the single market. I believe in visa-free travel for EU citizens, allowing current EU residents the right of residency, with fast-tracked citizenship, and tariff free trade with the EU, we should simply grant these things unilaterally as a sovereign nation.
And if your wish list is not reciprocated? The Ultras in UK would not stand for it.
It doesn't matter. The above will all be good for the UK so we should do them even if not reciprocated. It will also be a big divide and rule thing as a lot if EU countries would be sympathetic. And as a sovereign nation we make our own decisions. In any case, the fortress England approach isn't prevalent among Brexiteers, most of us are internationalists and free traders
I have the greatest admiration of your confidence in your fellow man.
Indeed. Some would say optimistic. Others might use the word delusional.
Hi all - gambling question: I made a small bet on an obscure football match with Sportingbet where the odds seemed surprisingly favourable. They accepted the bet, but subsequently voided it. I queried this, and they came back to me to tell me that they had priced the match wrong in error and so voided all bets. I know bets aren't binding, but has anyone faced this situation before, and how did they deal with it? It's annoying as I balanced it with other bets in order to make a small profit whatever happened and as a result I ended up out of pocket. It wasn't a massive bet but it's rather annoying nonetheless.
Hi Cookie - All bookies' rules contain provisions enabling them to void bets which are palpable errors on their part (or "palps" as they are known in the trade). But they clearly have to be just that, as opposed to a simple misjudgement on their part. So we are talking here about degree. Should you feel you've been deliberately cheated out of your rightful winnings then you could always appeal to the Independent Betting Arbitration Service, or "IBAS" as it is known, who will adjudicate in accordance with the Bookmaker's rules. Without knowing any of the details of your particular case, it's difficult to offer any further meaningful advice.
I have a dispute that I have sent to IBAS,, it has been nearly 3 months and I still haven't heard!
I went into the Bookies to back Ricardo Quaresma to score first, £100 at 10/1 and £100 anytime at 4/1
The cashier phoned the bet and said the first goal price was now 17/2, but anytime was still 4/1, so I had £25 on first goal and £175 anytime
He scored the 5th goal of the game, but when I went to collect they said it should have been 3/1 and only offered £700 instead of £875.
I said if I had known it was 3/1 I wouldn't have had as much on, but if it had lost I would never have known I was on at the wrong price. Why stop at 3/1? They could have said it was 1/10!!
If this is true, it's hilarious - if not - it's still hilarious
Swedish city Gothenburg is building a camel park which it hopes will create jobs for migrants, bu the plans have been slammed as racist and “absurd” by a charity boss. The city hopes the camel centre being built in the migrant-dominated suburb of Angered will be able to provide jobs for foreign residents who are otherwise struggling to find a place in the country’s labour market.
“The largest source of income will be from tourism. There is a huge interest in camels both in Sweden and abroad. We expect tourists from around the world, including from Japan and China.
“We think that Volvo or other companies can photograph their products with camels. We can also have fashion shows and sell various camel products”, he told Göteborgs-Posten.
Can't say I've come across 'norks' before. Classy.
Donald Trump is such a tit even on rare occasions he might make a decent point I have an inclination to disregard it. And I voted Leave, so I cannot be a metropolitan liberal.
Lib Dems has over a 100 volunteers yesterday at Stoke Central. Local BBC TV showing an interest in them and had their candidate on TV this morning. Popped in there HQ this morning plenty of personnel and activity, reckon they've dropped 20,000 odd leaflets this weekend slagging off the other parties over the NHS, highlighting their candidate a Doctor at the local Hospital. Is it moving from they've no chance, to they might do quite well, to they could win, to they will win. They seem to have momentum. People have complained they are getting leaflet after leaflet from the party but what they have done is to insure people know the party is standing and who the candidate is, he has the advantage of being number 1 or 2 on the ballot paper and is completely local. Things are moving in Stoke.
It is a lovely number; it is 4 squared followed by 7 squared, and its prime factors are 17 and 97, giving us the date of the battle of Cape St Vincent. Primeness is overrated.
edit:vanilla doesn't do tags.
Primes are the root of all numbers. 1681 would be a better date, it is 41 squared. 41 is prime and also appears in the prime generating quadratic n^2 - n + 41 which generates primes for n=1..40.
Also 1681 was the expiry of the Exclusion Bill to prevent James, Duke of York (a converted catholic) from becoming king.
An excellent post, Mrs C! Combining as it does obscure knowledge with solid fact, it is within the highest traditions of PB (just needed a touch of pedantry to have hit the highest award level).
However, the use of number theory to decide the changeover date from Medieval to Modern periods looks a bit too much numerology to me.
Evolution is only a "Theory" in the scientific sense. "A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method and repeatedly tested and confirmed..." (Wikipedia)
There is nothing theoretical (in the common meaning of the word) about Evolution. It has been proven many, many times and examples exist even within one human lifetime. It happens, no doubt about it.
Evolution is only a "Theory" in the scientific sense. <</p>
I would bet many scientists now wish there was a different word that could have been used, given how often the intractable regard the word theory as the colloquial 'I have a theory' eg 'I have a guess'.
I thought Trump was more a pu**y man than a breast man.
More seriously, I have never heard of that description for North Koreans....I am going to guess it probably belongs in the same bucket as some similar racist terms to describe the likes of the Japanese.
Can't say I've come across 'norks' before. Classy.
Donald Trump is such a tit even on rare occasions he might make a decent point I have an inclination to disregard it. And I voted Leave, so I cannot be a metropolitan liberal.
Increasingly the question will arise what the hell are you doing about it then? Whinging by Twitter has a limited shelf life when you control all branches of govt.
Hi all - gambling question: I made a small bet on an obscure football match with Sportingbet where the odds seemed surprisingly favourable. They accepted the bet, but subsequently voided it. I queried this, and they came back to me to tell me that they had priced the match wrong in error and so voided all bets. I know bets aren't binding, but has anyone faced this situation before, and how did they deal with it? It's annoying as I balanced it with other bets in order to make a small profit whatever happened and as a result I ended up out of pocket. It wasn't a massive bet but it's rather annoying nonetheless.
Hi Cookie - All bookies' rules contain provisions enabling them to void bets which are palpable errors on their part (or "palps" as they are known in the trade). But they clearly have to be just that, as opposed to a simple misjudgement on their part. So we are talking here about degree. Should you feel you've been deliberately cheated out of your rightful winnings then you could always appeal to the Independent Betting Arbitration Service, or "IBAS" as it is known, who will adjudicate in accordance with the Bookmaker's rules. Without knowing any of the details of your particular case, it's difficult to offer any further meaningful advice.
I have a dispute that I have sent to IBAS,, it has been nearly 3 months and I still haven't heard!
I went into the Bookies to back Ricardo Quaresma to score first, £100 at 10/1 and £100 anytime at 4/1
The cashier phoned the bet and said the first goal price was now 17/2, but anytime was still 4/1, so I had £25 on first goal and £175 anytime
He scored the 5th goal of the game, but when I went to collect they said it should have been 3/1 and only offered £700 instead of £875.
I said if I had known it was 3/1 I wouldn't have had as much on, but if it had lost I would never have known I was on at the wrong price. Why stop at 3/1? They could have said it was 1/10!!
Hmm .... that rather sounds as if the bookie in question mixed up decimal odds of 4.0 with old money odds of 4/1. No palp there, simply an error on their part and they should pay up. The 100/1 odds originally quoted however was clearly a palp and having subsequently reduced their price to 17/2, that sounds as if the correct original price should probably have been 10/1. Incidentally, as a matter of interest, does one have to pay a fee to get IBAS involved, win or lose? If I were you I'd be concerned by the 3 month delay .... did they at least issue you with an acknowledgement confirming their receipt of your complaint?
Lib Dems has over a 100 volunteers yesterday at Stoke Central. Local BBC TV showing an interest in them and had their candidate on TV this morning. Popped in there HQ this morning plenty of personnel and activity, reckon they've dropped 20,000 odd leaflets this weekend slagging off the other parties over the NHS, highlighting their candidate a Doctor at the local Hospital. Is it moving from they've no chance, to they might do quite well, to they could win, to they will win. They seem to have momentum. People have complained they are getting leaflet after leaflet from the party but what they have done is to insure people know the party is standing and who the candidate is, he has the advantage of being number 1 or 2 on the ballot paper and is completely local. Things are moving in Stoke.
Yes people are complaining they've been getting the same leaflet 10 times!
Yourself and Nick Palmer must live in parallel universes, he was there yesterday saying it was a 2 way go between Labour and UKIP with the others nowhere
If you are really that confident though " Is it moving from they've no chance, to they might do quite well, to they could win, to they will win. They seem to have momentum", then 50/1 w Betfred looks pretty big, get on!!
Pitt did not lead a party as such. Although the factions he brought together ultimately formed the Tory party, that was not until after his time and he regarded himself as an independent Whig ('Tory' still being a toxic term in the 1780s, though not by the 1810s).
Hi all - gambling question: I made a small bet on an obscure football match with Sportingbet where the odds seemed surprisingly favourable. They accepted the bet, but subsequently voided it. I queried this, and they came back to me to tell me that they had priced the match wrong in error and so voided all bets. I know bets aren't binding, but has anyone faced this situation before, and how did they deal with it? It's annoying as I balanced it with other bets in order to make a small profit whatever happened and as a result I ended up out of pocket. It wasn't a massive bet but it's rather annoying nonetheless.
.
I have a dispute that I have sent to IBAS,, it has been nearly 3 months and I still haven't heard!
I went into the Bookies to back Ricardo Quaresma to score first, £100 at 10/1 and £100 anytime at 4/1
The cashier phoned the bet and said the first goal price was now 17/2, but anytime was still 4/1, so I had £25 on first goal and £175 anytime
He scored the 5th goal of the game, but when I went to collect they said it should have been 3/1 and only offered £700 instead of £875.
I said if I had known it was 3/1 I wouldn't have had as much on, but if it had lost I would never have known I was on at the wrong price. Why stop at 3/1? They could have said it was 1/10!!
Hmm .... that rather sounds as if the bookie in question mixed up decimal odds of 4.0 with old money odds of 4/1. No palp there, simply an error on their part and they should pay up. The 100/1 odds originally quoted however was clearly a palp and having subsequently reduced their price to 17/2, that sounds as if the correct original price should probably have been 10/1. Incidentally, as a matter of interest, does one have to pay a fee to get IBAS involved, win or lose? If I were you I'd be concerned by the 3 month delay .... did they at least issue you with an acknowledgement confirming their receipt of your complaint?
Yeah it was 10/1 originally not 100/1. Oddschecker prices were 10/1 and 4/1
I have receipt from IBAS and phoned to confirm they were on the case.. they said it might take a while, I have no idea why it should really. I phoned the bookies customer service, and even they agreed they should pay!
Ah yes I was forgetting that the Punic Wars are still being debated in your house.
I think Morris was distinguishing the modern from the medieval. The date exact date of crossover is disputed, but I've always liked 1649.
1689 is more significant. Power passed irrevocably from monarch to parliament at that point.
I see your point but the Medieval period was over a long way before 1689. Dividing up history into chunks is a convenience for historians but inasmuch as it has value I would put the date as 1536.
That was the year when it was shown that the power of the Papacy could be ignored and ushered in a new style of thinking in which the Church did not predominate and which in due course led to 1689, the enlightenment and the industrial revolution.
The old dividing line of 1485 that I was taught at school was, I think, just a hangover from Tudor propoganda.
Please don't put Clive Lewis out of his misery just yet! Former BBC East colleagues have saved-up so many juicy stories that would keep us entertained for months.
There's an old adage - 'be nice to people on the way up so they can be kind on the way down.'
Sadly for him, it's not a lesson Lewis learned when he was taken off local news front-of-camera reporting when he declared for Labour - it just wasn't compatible with the BBC's 'impartial' status.
When he was transferred to the geeky back office whilst retaining his presenter salary, he didn't endear himself to local colleagues by working to rule and thinking that making the tea every now and then was beneath him.... whilst trousering double wages.
These jouralistic types have long memories. Oh yes.
Bunnco - Your Man on the Spot reporting live from Norwich!
Strong defense of Bercow from Salmond on Sunday Politics Scotland. He says the Speaker carries overwhelming support across the chamber compared to a mere handful who would like to see him gone.
Comments
These findings offer three lessons. Firstly, the electorate is both economically radical and fiscally conservative. But fiscal responsibility trumps economic reform. If people do not trust Labour with their taxes they will not support it however much they might agree with its economic policies. Second, identity and belonging drive politics. Culture and values have increasing salience. In Scotland Labour has been marginalised as the party of Westminster. In England UKIP appeals to Labour voters with its conservative values.
The third lesson is that Labour is becoming an exclusive cultural brand. It is now largely a party of progressive, social liberals who value abstract, universalist principles such as equality, sustainability and social justice. It is losing connection with the majority of voters who are either pragmatists in their voting habits or who hold socially conservative values of family, work, security, and fairness.
so they elected Corbyn...
And secondly, they opened membership to the additional £3 people, who who it seems were also all "progressive, social liberals".
Labour's flight to the big urban centres and uni towns continues apace.
I have a hefty book on this now, mostly green, except for black swan characters emerging via a new primary. Getting nervous...
She is a self-made working class woman from a poor background who believes in making the best of herself. I'm not a fan of her as a leadership candidate but I can see why the prospect of a hardworking, well presented grafter as Labour leader would irritate some Tories.
"There is a wave of disappointment with Jeremy Corbyn among the 313,000 who voted for him just five months ago. The social media citadels of Corbynism have fallen silent. In local parties a lot of the new members have melted away. It is dawning on them not just that Corbyn is a hopeless leader but that he asked Labour MPs to vote with the Conservatives to let Theresa May get on with leaving the European Union. "
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/could-clive-lewis-be-the-next-labour-leader-the-one-who-starts-the-long-march-back-to-government-a7574911.html
New members have "melted away". What a surprise. Widely predicted by many of us on PB.
http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2017/02/labour-will-win-in-stoke-libdems-could-come-second-file-this-prediction-away-for-use-on-the-night.html
All to play for in a 3 way contest during the next 11days?
Well. Some relatives think WWII counts as history *sighs*.
Oh yes, I agree. But I don't much like the brassy barmaid insinuations. Sexist English class system doing its nasty work.
If that were the case Labour would be in far worse trouble than the murmourings from their canvassers suggest, so I would take with a mountain of salt.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/jean-claude-juncker-brexit-negotiations-reelection-a7575466.html
I covered several who were touted as possiblities in news articles at long odds, just in case. Baroin, Bertrand, Wauquiez and Larcher mainly, but even then I may come unstuck and a previously unmentioned candidate from left field eventually gets the gig, if Fillon est fini.
I'm not really clear on the delineation, if any, between early, high and late middle age.
http://tinyurl.com/zwcubpn
https://youtu.be/kyAgy2CngfY
What is more important to me is a politician's beliefs, ability and skill set. Is a youngish person who has only been an MP for a short while, who has no experience of operating the levers of power and who has no track record of political leadership at any level likely to make a good Prime Minister?
I think one of the problems we currently have in this country is that far too many of our politicians get to the top of the tree too quickly and as soon as they suffer a reverse in electoral fortunes they scuttle off to make money. The result is that senior positions are increasingly going to people without the knowledge or skills to handle them.
She now needs to be freed from that corner. When the Prime Minister says: ‘I’m not a crazed Brexiteer’, she is telling the truth. Behind the negotiating stance she does not crave a hard Brexit, so much as a fair Brexit. When she said in her New Year message that she would seek the ‘right deal, not just for those who voted to leave, but for every single person in this country’, she meant it. And she now needs to be given the space to deliver it.
Those who opposed Brexit have had their moment. They have had their day in court, and they have had their day in Parliament. They have tried – and failed – to save the country from a hard Brexit.
Now they need to step back and leave it to the only person who can. Theresa May.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216118/DAN-HODGES-Theresa-s-way.html#ixzz4YTVa1QCG
in the neutral refined tones of a southerner.sense, not badly thought out, unsupported and vacuous nonsense.I did wonder if UBI would become more politically palatable in the UK post-Brexit - the "economically correct" level of UBI ought to sustain an austere but acceptably comfortable, non-poverty-stricken standard of living And in the UK such a standard of living would be beyond what e.g. many rural Romanians and Bulgarians can sustain through hard toil. With free movement, and given that restriction to citizens only would be unacceptable, the implications are obvious, and this alone would be a clincher of an argument against. Post-Brexit though, the terms of the debate are different.
Here's a fun fact for fans of alternative history. Although the Beveridge Committee in the end opted for a social insurance system, UBI was also considered and one of its members, Juliet Rhys-Williams (a Liberal politician who later became a Tory and member of the Monday Club!), strongly dissented with the final proposal, preferring a negative income tax.
That was the year when it was shown that the power of the Papacy could be ignored and ushered in a new style of thinking in which the Church did not predominate and which in due course led to 1689, the enlightenment and the industrial revolution.
The old dividing line of 1485 that I was taught at school was, I think, just a hangover from Tudor propoganda.
edit:vanilla doesn't do tags.
They'll call it a palpable error, and admitting you hedged it elsewhere is like asking to be banned!
Also 1681 was the expiry of the Exclusion Bill to prevent James, Duke of York (a converted catholic) from becoming king.
This man should have done the same:
http://swns.com/news/boycott-coral-bookmakers-face-protest-refusing-pay-football-fans-4851-bet-29955/
I agree, best not to admit you had an arb.
I went into the Bookies to back Ricardo Quaresma to score first, £100 at 10/1 and £100 anytime at 4/1
The cashier phoned the bet and said the first goal price was now 17/2, but anytime was still 4/1, so I had £25 on first goal and £175 anytime
He scored the 5th goal of the game, but when I went to collect they said it should have been 3/1 and only offered £700 instead of £875.
I said if I had known it was 3/1 I wouldn't have had as much on, but if it had lost I would never have known I was on at the wrong price. Why stop at 3/1? They could have said it was 1/10!!
Pew Research
Today is the 208th anniversary of Charles Darwin’s birth. Here are 6 facts about the public’s views on evolution https://t.co/sDY2hTgscA https://t.co/u570uQMrjo
Swedish city Gothenburg is building a camel park which it hopes will create jobs for migrants, bu the plans have been slammed as racist and “absurd” by a charity boss.
The city hopes the camel centre being built in the migrant-dominated suburb of Angered will be able to provide jobs for foreign residents who are otherwise struggling to find a place in the country’s labour market.
“The largest source of income will be from tourism. There is a huge interest in camels both in Sweden and abroad. We expect tourists from around the world, including from Japan and China.
“We think that Volvo or other companies can photograph their products with camels. We can also have fashion shows and sell various camel products”, he told Göteborgs-Posten.
Nagy said there are migrants from the Middle East and Somalia who have “extensive knowledge” of camels, adding that staff will receive training on how to breed and care for camels in the Nordic region. http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/02/12/sweden-camel-park-integrate-migrants/
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/278956599786213376
Donald Trump is such a tit even on rare occasions he might make a decent point I have an inclination to disregard it. And I voted Leave, so I cannot be a metropolitan liberal.
But maybe get to the second one.
However, the use of number theory to decide the changeover date from Medieval to Modern periods looks a bit too much numerology to me.
There is nothing theoretical (in the common meaning of the word) about Evolution. It has been proven many, many times and examples exist even within one human lifetime. It happens, no doubt about it.
More seriously, I have never heard of that description for North Koreans....I am going to guess it probably belongs in the same bucket as some similar racist terms to describe the likes of the Japanese.
Incidentally, as a matter of interest, does one have to pay a fee to get IBAS involved, win or lose? If I were you I'd be concerned by the 3 month delay .... did they at least issue you with an acknowledgement confirming their receipt of your complaint?
Yourself and Nick Palmer must live in parallel universes, he was there yesterday saying it was a 2 way go between Labour and UKIP with the others nowhere
If you are really that confident though " Is it moving from they've no chance, to they might do quite well, to they could win, to they will win. They seem to have momentum", then 50/1 w Betfred looks pretty big, get on!!
Though you might not get paid...
http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/stoke-on-trent-central-by-election/winning-party
I have receipt from IBAS and phoned to confirm they were on the case.. they said it might take a while, I have no idea why it should really. I phoned the bookies customer service, and even they agreed they should pay!
IBAS is free
https://twitter.com/MomentumSBham/status/830758458253246464
There's an old adage - 'be nice to people on the way up so they can be kind on the way down.'
Sadly for him, it's not a lesson Lewis learned when he was taken off local news front-of-camera reporting when he declared for Labour - it just wasn't compatible with the BBC's 'impartial' status.
When he was transferred to the geeky back office whilst retaining his presenter salary, he didn't endear himself to local colleagues by working to rule and thinking that making the tea every now and then was beneath him.... whilst trousering double wages.
These jouralistic types have long memories. Oh yes.
Bunnco - Your Man on the Spot reporting live from Norwich!
I honestly think these people have no self awareness at all