politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » For a party with less than one MP UKIP sure knows how to hog t
Comments
-
What's the procedure for expelling him though? I thought it required a vote of the Parliamentary UKIP Party - ie he'd have to vote for himself to be expelled.Richard_Tyndall said:
His best bet would be to be expelled. No need for a by election and he must realise UKIP will never be the party he might have hopedJonathan said:
He's in a difficult spot for someone who lives and breathes politics and the Commons in particular.Richard_Nabavi said:
Sure, but the EU issue is over now: the referendum has happened. So he'd be standing on his own merits as an independent. Would that be enough? Maybe, but it's always difficult in our system. As you imply also, there's the boundary changes complication.Richard_Tyndall said:I doubt it. He has engendered a huge amount of personal loyalty. He easily took the key members of his local party with him when he left the Tories and it was the EU which was the overwhelming factor in that activist support. He has stuck to his guns as an independent minded MP throughout and as Mike says he retains very high levels of support in the constituency and also crucially in areas surrounding the constituency which bodes well for post boundary change elections.
It would make a great betting market. Anyone care to price up these options for the winner of his seat (or successor seat), on the basis of the bet being void if he doesn't stand:
- Carswell standing as a Kipper
- Carswell standing as a Tory
- Carswell as Speaker
- Carswell as an independent or for any other party
- Someone other than Carswell
He probably ought to sit tight at least a week. UKIP could go through several iterations and leaders by then.0 -
Good question. Article 50.4 states we don't vote as part of the Council but it doesn't specify the Parliament.rcs1000 said:
Do our own MEPs get to vote as part of the European Parliament?Philip_Thompson said:
Quite a simple reason really! Especially when MEPs need to vote on our exit.Stark_Dawning said:
'We haven't left yet.'logical_song said:
How do UKIP MEPs justify their existence since the referendum? Shouldn't they leave en masse and stop claiming expenses.TheScreamingEagles said:
2. A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its
intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall
negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its
withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union. That
agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the
Functioning of the European Union. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the
Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament.
3. The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of
the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in
paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned,
unanimously decides to extend this period.
4. For the purposes of paragraphs 2 and 3, the member of the European Council or of the
Council representing the withdrawing Member State shall not participate in the discussions of
the European Council or Council or in decisions concerning it.
A qualified majority shall be defined in accordance with Article 238(3)(b) of the Treaty on the
Functioning of the European Union.0 -
Russian Embassy UK
Russia welcomes #Oscars award for “White Helmets” film. Indeed, they are actors serving an agenda, not rescuers. #OscarMistake https://t.co/RsQesgZ4Te0 -
The launch of the Euro made Brexit inevitable... "like being trapped in a burning building with no exits": W. Hague.SeanT said:
If I was a citizen of a eurozone state, I too would support euro membership, because essentially there is no Exit Door from the euro-penthouse, just a lift door with no lift behind, meaning you step out, plunge to the bottom and break your back, or simply die.TwistedFireStopper said:
I guess the people of the Eurozone nations (is it ok to call them nations, or does that offend the federalist in you?) don't really have any other choice after 18 years do they?williamglenn said:
Look how difficult Brexit is proving, and we're only on the fourth floor of the EU skyscraper (not in the euro, not in Schengen). Basically we're having to climb out the window, shimmy down a drainpipe, and just hope we don't slip, and snap an ankle.
Once you're in the euro room, you're in forever. So you have to support membership. The alternative is a catastrophic fall.
And this, of course, is no coincidence. The EU was always meant to be an irreversible political project of ever-closer union, it's written in the founding Treaties, FFS, it's part of the architectural design.
Indeed the man who wrote Article 50 said it was deliberately phrased to make it so hard to Leave that would it would never be used.
http://www.lifestuff.xyz/blog/euro-to-blame-for-brexit
0 -
Though if we had joined the Euro, the resulting boom and subsequent bust in 2008 might have blown the whole thing up.Baskerville said:
The launch of the Euro made Brexit inevitable... "like being trapped in a burning building with no exits": W. Hague.SeanT said:
If I was a citizen of a eurozone state, I too would support euro membership, because essentially there is no Exit Door from the euro-penthouse, just a lift door with no lift behind, meaning you step out, plunge to the bottom and break your back, or simply die.TwistedFireStopper said:
I guess the people of the Eurozone nations (is it ok to call them nations, or does that offend the federalist in you?) don't really have any other choice after 18 years do they?williamglenn said:
Look how difficult Brexit is proving, and we're only on the fourth floor of the EU skyscraper (not in the euro, not in Schengen). Basically we're having to climb out the window, shimmy down a drainpipe, and just hope we don't slip, and snap an ankle.
Once you're in the euro room, you're in forever. So you have to support membership. The alternative is a catastrophic fall.
And this, of course, is no coincidence. The EU was always meant to be an irreversible political project of ever-closer union, it's written in the founding Treaties, FFS, it's part of the architectural design.
Indeed the man who wrote Article 50 said it was deliberately phrased to make it so hard to Leave that would it would never be used.
http://www.lifestuff.xyz/blog/euro-to-blame-for-brexit0 -
I rather like Carswell, although as you say Richard Ukip is no longer the place for him. He is a throughly decent, intelligent, open, libertarian free marketeer. He'd be better off out of a party that is heading headlong towards the nasty, protectionist, Red Facist principles of the Trumpite nationalistic right.Richard_Tyndall said:
His best bet would be to be expelled. No need for a by election and he must realise UKIP will never be the party he might have hopedJonathan said:
He's in a difficult spot for someone who lives and breathes politics and the Commons in particular.Richard_Nabavi said:
Sure, but the EU issue is over now: the referendum has happened. So he'd be standing on his own merits as an independent. Would that be enough? Maybe, but it's always difficult in our system. As you imply also, there's the boundary changes complication.Richard_Tyndall said:I doubt it. He has engendered a huge amount of personal loyalty. He easily took the key members of his local party with him when he left the Tories and it was the EU which was the overwhelming factor in that activist support. He has stuck to his guns as an independent minded MP throughout and as Mike says he retains very high levels of support in the constituency and also crucially in areas surrounding the constituency which bodes well for post boundary change elections.
It would make a great betting market. Anyone care to price up these options for the winner of his seat (or successor seat), on the basis of the bet being void if he doesn't stand:
- Carswell standing as a Kipper
- Carswell standing as a Tory
- Carswell as Speaker
- Carswell as an independent or for any other party
- Someone other than Carswell
He probably ought to sit tight at least a week. UKIP could go through several iterations and leaders by then.0 -
Carswell must be one of the overrated politicians in the country. He might be relatively well-regarded in Clacton (although, him getting 44% there in GE2015 is not *that* impressive, when you consider the Leave vote there was about 70%), but the idea that the average UKIP voter in the North or the Midlands is craving for his "libertarian internationalist" rubbish is for the birds.0
-
True for Coventry North East and Eastbourne but not generally.Philip_Thompson said:
In the vast majority of constituencies up and down the country the UKIP vote rise was almost exactly the Lib Dem vote fall.
100 England and Wales constituencies within +/- 2% of this metric.0 -
TwistedFireStopper said:
As iSam so eloquently put it to me on the last thread, UKIP are fecked, and Carswell is in the wrong party. Not sure there is much more to add.
Correct. Ukip is doomed to its preferred fate of becoming a nasty, immigrant-hating English nationalist protectionist racket, a sort of Red BNP for the illiberal natives. Carswell is better off out.0 -
Also, even if a big chunk of the UKIP vote did once come from the Lib Dems, I'm not sure it would go back now that the LDs are casting themselves as more pro-EU than they ever did before.Pulpstar said:
True for Coventry North East and Eastbourne but not generally.Philip_Thompson said:
In the vast majority of constituencies up and down the country the UKIP vote rise was almost exactly the Lib Dem vote fall.0 -
ExactlyDanny565 said:Carswell must be one of the overrated politicians in the country. He might be relatively well-regarded in Clacton (although, him getting 44% there in GE2015 is not *that* impressive, when you consider the Leave vote there was about 70%), but the idea that the average UKIP voter in the North or the Midlands is craving for his "libertarian internationalist" rubbish is for the birds.
MP for 12 years and people have only heard of the area because Channel 5 make documentaries on how shit it is to live there. What has he done for the people of Jaywick who live in portacabins, whose roads are dirt tracks and whose shops are all closed? Ignored them
The usual mugs are impressed though0 -
Presumably he doesn't have the cash or inclination to set out his own manifesto, change the name (and logo) to something more relevant, and then set about recruiting members. UKIP, or whatever it will be, will be his and his alone to mould.Richard_Tyndall said:
His best bet would be to be expelled. No need for a by election and he must realise UKIP will never be the party he might have hopedJonathan said:
He's in a difficult spot for someone who lives and breathes politics and the Commons in particular.Richard_Nabavi said:
Sure, but the EU issue is over now: the referendum has happened. So he'd be standing on his own merits as an independent. Would that be enough? Maybe, but it's always difficult in our system. As you imply also, there's the boundary changes complication.Richard_Tyndall said:I doubt it. He has engendered a huge amount of personal loyalty. He easily took the key members of his local party with him when he left the Tories and it was the EU which was the overwhelming factor in that activist support. He has stuck to his guns as an independent minded MP throughout and as Mike says he retains very high levels of support in the constituency and also crucially in areas surrounding the constituency which bodes well for post boundary change elections.
It would make a great betting market. Anyone care to price up these options for the winner of his seat (or successor seat), on the basis of the bet being void if he doesn't stand:
- Carswell standing as a Kipper
- Carswell standing as a Tory
- Carswell as Speaker
- Carswell as an independent or for any other party
- Someone other than Carswell
He probably ought to sit tight at least a week. UKIP could go through several iterations and leaders by then.
He has leap-frogged all the difficult bits of starting a new party, will keep at least some residual support, and might pick up support from elsewhere.
He might be the luckiest man in British politics.0 -
Un ouef est un ouef.Jonathan said:
I didn't know about the EU egg thing. Well that changes everything. £350M buys you a lot of eggs.Roger said:
I thought it was quite poetic! I heard a lady from Blackpool (in an intro to a TV prog) say the reason she wanted us out of the EU was 'because they were trying to stop us eating eggs and said that we had to have straight cucumbers'. Her friend piped in 'it's ridiculous that foreigners can stop us eating eggs.AlsoIndigo said:
And the fatuous hypobole prize 2017 goes to Roger! Your wife and kids spontaneously combust ? Did your house suddenly vanish ? Did your car collapse into the dust ? will you continue to live in a beautiful part of the world making loads of money doing a job you love ? are you hyperventilating sneery elitist who despises the plebs daring to express their views unless they happen to agree with yours ?Roger said:
It's a highway robbery by people we don't know because they were masked but they're smelly and their leaders are nasty opportunists who used them for their own purposes because they're ignorant and don't trust foreigners.FF43 said:
But it's not going to be like that. We didn't vote for a cataclysm, nor for a new order, but for a huge mess that will consume all our political energies for the next decade or more. Even Acacia Avenue will have an opinion, even if it's just "A plague on the lot of them!"AlsoIndigo said:
Meanwhile Mr & Mrs Smith at 29 Acacia Avenue think that they gave their vote, saw the result, shrugged, and left the politicians to get on with carrying it out. They will probably not notice the vast majority of this posturing on either side. If it isn't carried out, they will probably notice, and the consequence for political careers at the next election may well be unfortunate, or even regrettable.
They've taken everything we value but we should accept it with good grace because there are more of them than us.
Eurosceptics were in a similar position in 1976, and have campaigned doggedly for the last 40 years to get to where we are now. You can do the same, of course you might be getting on a bit by then, but you cant have everything, and you will still have more than 99% of the world does, even after BrExit.
Well not half as ridiculous as those two being entrusted with whether or not we change the way we are governed0 -
Obviously there are some structural (e.g. 1997) reasons for this, but it's still very striking:
https://twitter.com/AmIRightSir/status/8363202665863249930 -
I reckon the Tories are best placed to get the UKIP vote if it crumbles, more than the share that left them !0
-
Good afternoon, everyone.0
-
I pretty much agree, Sean. The worst possible consequences of leaving are less bad (and, in my view, less likely, though that is more difficult to quantify) than the worst possible consequences of remaining.SeanT said:FPT
As a Leaver, I'm perfectly happy with Blair, Major, Osborne et al, campaigning for some kind of Soft Brexit. I've always preferred the softer variety, I'd happily stay in the EEA if the EU could come up with some fudge over Free Movement (and I think it is quite possible).
Then over time we could slowly inch our way ever further from the clutches of Brussels.
But if given the choice between Remaining, or Hard Brexit, I will reluctantly choose the latter.
It's GOOD that the Remoaners are recovering from their ludicrous spaz-out, and are now joining us Liberal Leavers.
Or, more succinctly:
Hard Brexit > Hard Bremain.
It would be nice to think that the likes of Blair and Major are considering, even to themselves, the extent to which their utter determination to press ahead with integration, despite the wishes of the electorate, might in some way be responsible for where we now find ourselves; and to consider that they had the power to get us painlessly to the destination that they're now desperately campaigning for - i.e. a halfway house.0 -
No idea what he has done for Jaywick... But he keeps getting elected... And got elected as a UKIP MP. Given how hard UKIP have tried elsewhere for such a poor return that's fairly impressive I would say.isam said:
ExactlyDanny565 said:Carswell must be one of the overrated politicians in the country. He might be relatively well-regarded in Clacton (although, him getting 44% there in GE2015 is not *that* impressive, when you consider the Leave vote there was about 70%), but the idea that the average UKIP voter in the North or the Midlands is craving for his "libertarian internationalist" rubbish is for the birds.
MP for 12 years and people have only heard of the area because Channel 5 make documentaries on how shit it is to live there. What has he done for the people of Jaywick who live in portacabins, whose roads are dirt tracks and whose shops are all closed? Ignored them
The usual mugs are impressed though0 -
The truth is that Ukip needed Carswell in 2014 and Carswell needed Ukip. The obvious 'musical differences' were set aside in order to win freedom from the EU. Now that has been achieved its best they go their separate ways.
At my candidate interview for UKIP I cautiously said 'I know he's our new poster boy and all that, but what has Carswell actually done for Clacton in the last 9 years?'... the interviewer said 'precisely'
A marriage of convenience that has run its course0 -
Rather like FN in France you mean ? I notice they are withering away at the moment. Let us hope that the main reasons they are doing well don't start to apply more seriously in the UK...Bojabob said:TwistedFireStopper said:As iSam so eloquently put it to me on the last thread, UKIP are fecked, and Carswell is in the wrong party. Not sure there is much more to add.
Correct. Ukip is doomed to its preferred fate of becoming a nasty, immigrant-hating English nationalist protectionist racket, a sort of Red BNP for the illiberal natives. Carswell is better off out.0 -
Looks like DD is sending some not-very-subtle signals to our EU friends:
14:26 Davis tells cabinet to prepare for 'unlikely' possibility of UK failing to reach deal on Brexit
...
Davis’s comments suggest the government is making contingency plans for no deal of any kind being reached. That would result in the UK crashing out without any agreement as to a future agreement, and presumably both sides heading for an international court in the hope of settling any disputes about money.
Translation: "If you guys play hardball on the trade deal, we ain't paying a bean on exit and we'll drag it out in the courts for decades. Stuff that in your pipe, M. Barnier."
Seems a very sensible approach by DD.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2017/feb/28/brexit-labour-criticised-for-voting-with-tories-in-lords-against-single-market-amendment-politics-live
0 -
http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/Analysis_votermigration.html
Those two Lib Dem voters that went to UKIP aren't coming back.
But the seven that left Labour to head to the Lib Dems may well come back with change.0 -
Conspiracy theories start now....Tissue_Price said:Obviously there are some structural (e.g. 1997) reasons for this, but it's still very striking:
https://twitter.com/AmIRightSir/status/8363202665863249930 -
Is Sir Keir on manoeuvres? Or just stating the bleedin' obvious?
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/8365870934427484160 -
Cohorts...rkrkrk said:
Conspiracy theories start now....Tissue_Price said:Obviously there are some structural (e.g. 1997) reasons for this, but it's still very striking:
https://twitter.com/AmIRightSir/status/8363202665863249930 -
Ukip pissed up in the euros there while he was a Tory, it was their No1 target. An incumbent MP that switched to the main challenger - perfect for him.rkrkrk said:
No idea what he has done for Jaywick... But he keeps getting elected... And got elected as a UKIP MP. Given how hard UKIP have tried elsewhere for such a poor return that's fairly impressive I would say.isam said:
ExactlyDanny565 said:Carswell must be one of the overrated politicians in the country. He might be relatively well-regarded in Clacton (although, him getting 44% there in GE2015 is not *that* impressive, when you consider the Leave vote there was about 70%), but the idea that the average UKIP voter in the North or the Midlands is craving for his "libertarian internationalist" rubbish is for the birds.
MP for 12 years and people have only heard of the area because Channel 5 make documentaries on how shit it is to live there. What has he done for the people of Jaywick who live in portacabins, whose roads are dirt tracks and whose shops are all closed? Ignored them
The usual mugs are impressed though
He won't win vs Banks and Cons0 -
Wasn't there some convoluted diagram after the last election to show that the LDs bled votes to Tory and Labour, who in turn bled votes to UKIP? Though I'm not sure how this was proven - possibly with polls.Danny565 said:
Also, even if a big chunk of the UKIP vote did once come from the Lib Dems, I'm not sure it would go back now that the LDs are casting themselves as more pro-EU than they ever did before.Pulpstar said:
True for Coventry North East and Eastbourne but not generally.Philip_Thompson said:
In the vast majority of constituencies up and down the country the UKIP vote rise was almost exactly the Lib Dem vote fall.
OTOH, I do agree that for a long time the attraction of the LDs was as a NOTA party, and that role has now been taken by UKIP.0 -
Yet to be proven. Even though most Labour voters voted Remain (including virtually all of the Lib-Lab swingers, I'm guessing), I'm still really not convinced that they care THAT much about it.Pulpstar said:http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/Analysis_votermigration.html
Those two Lib Dem voters that went to UKIP aren't coming back.
But the seven that left Labour to head to the Lib Dems may well come back with change.0 -
Time for a spoof of the leaflets in Copeland. "If you vote Labour, MPs will die!"Tissue_Price said:Obviously there are some structural (e.g. 1997) reasons for this, but it's still very striking:
https://twitter.com/AmIRightSir/status/8363202665863249930 -
http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/Analysis_votermigration.html is the diagram.Cookie said:
Wasn't there some convoluted diagram after the last election to show that the LDs bled votes to Tory and Labour, who in turn bled votes to UKIP? Though I'm not sure how this was proven - possibly with polls.Danny565 said:
Also, even if a big chunk of the UKIP vote did once come from the Lib Dems, I'm not sure it would go back now that the LDs are casting themselves as more pro-EU than they ever did before.Pulpstar said:
True for Coventry North East and Eastbourne but not generally.Philip_Thompson said:
In the vast majority of constituencies up and down the country the UKIP vote rise was almost exactly the Lib Dem vote fall.
OTOH, I do agree that for a long time the attraction of the LDs was as a NOTA party, and that role has now been taken by UKIP.0 -
That sounds like the one thing that could cause a landslide Labour victory.MarqueeMark said:
Time for a spoof of the leaflets in Copeland. "If you vote Labour, MPs will die!"Tissue_Price said:Obviously there are some structural (e.g. 1997) reasons for this, but it's still very striking:
https://twitter.com/AmIRightSir/status/8363202665863249930 -
Can UKIP actually run as UKIP on the ballot against Carswell next GE if Carswell does nothing ?0
-
I know you were a big fan of DC, but would you accept that this is one of the major flaws of DC's "renegotiation" - that there was no credible threat that he would aim to lead the UK out of the EU if the EU did not "reform" in the manner that he sought?Richard_Nabavi said:Looks like DD is sending some not-very-subtle signals to our EU friends:
14:26 Davis tells cabinet to prepare for 'unlikely' possibility of UK failing to reach deal on Brexit
...
Davis’s comments suggest the government is making contingency plans for no deal of any kind being reached. That would result in the UK crashing out without any agreement as to a future agreement, and presumably both sides heading for an international court in the hope of settling any disputes about money.
Translation: "If you guys play hardball on the trade deal, we ain't paying a bean on exit and we'll drag it out in the courts for decades. Stuff that in your pipe, M. Barnier."
Seems a very sensible approach by DD.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2017/feb/28/brexit-labour-criticised-for-voting-with-tories-in-lords-against-single-market-amendment-politics-live0 -
Starmer the Stormer !TheScreamingEagles said:Is Sir Keir on manoeuvres? Or just stating the bleedin' obvious?
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/8365870934427484160 -
For which read, "some of my colleagues think we lost Copeland because Storm Doris meant that voters couldn't vote in the rural areas. You know, that part of the constituency that voted heavily Tory. Some of my colleagues don't half talk shite...."TheScreamingEagles said:Is Sir Keir on manoeuvres? Or just stating the bleedin' obvious?
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/8365870934427484160 -
Actually the one thing that could keep a Banks/Farage style ukip alive is the party of the undead that is being mooted0
-
Yes, they can remove the 'whip' an prevent him from standing as the UKIP candidate.Pulpstar said:Can UKIP actually run as UKIP on the ballot against Carswell next GE if Carswell does nothing ?
0 -
Peace breaks out between The Pensions Regulator and Sir Philip Green, thanks to £363 million.0
-
Well done to the whoever was leading the pension regulator side of the negotiations. AIUI the legal ground wasn't particularly thick for them to challenge Sir Philip when push came to shove.AlastairMeeks said:Peace breaks out between The Pensions Regulator and Sir Philip Green, thanks to £363 million.
And well done to Sir Philip for reaching into his pocket.0 -
But the thickness of the people of Cornwall, who voted Leave en masse and thus denied themselves squillions in EU funding, is greater than most.CornishBlue said:
Exactly. Plenty of thick people who voted either way.Essexit said:
At a street stall I met a woman who said she was voting Remain because her husband said that's what they were doing. My mum was telling on the day and told me that one woman asked her infant daughter 'in or out?' as they entered the polling station (the daughter said 'In!').Roger said:
I thought it was quite poetic! I heard a lady from Blackpool say the reason she wanted us out of the EU was because they were trying to stop us eating eggs and said that we had to have straight cucumbers. Her friend said 'it's ridiculous that foreigners can stop us eating eggs.AlsoIndigo said:
And the fatuous hypobole prize 2017 goes to Roger! Your wife and kids spontaneously combust ? Did your house suddenly vanish ?Roger said:
It's a highway robbery by people we don't know because they were masked but they're smelly and their leaders are nasty opportunists who used them for their own purposes because they're ignorant and don't trust foreigners.FF43 said:
But it's not going to be like that. We didn't vote for a cataclysm, nor for a new order, but for a huge mess that will consume all our political energies for the next decade or more. Even Acacia Avenue will have an opinion, even if it's just "A plague on the lot of them!"AlsoIndigo said:
Meanwhile Mr & Mrs Smith at 29 Acacia Avenue think that they gave their vote, saw the result, shrugged, and left the politicians to get on with carrying it out. They will probably not notice the vast majority of this posturing on either side. If it isn't carried out, they will probably notice, and the consequence for political careers at the next election may well be unfortunate, or even regrettable.
They've taken everything we value but we should accept it with good grace because there are more of them than us.
Eurosceptics were in a similar position in 1976, and have campaigned doggedly for the last 40 years to get to where we are now. You can do the same, of course you might be getting on a bit by then, but you cant have everything, and you will still have more than 99% of the world does, even after BrExit.
Well not half as ridiculous as those two being entrusted with whether or not we change the way we are governed
We can go back and forth with anecdotes like this all day.
0 -
This is bizarrely funny
NYP.ST
http://nypost.com/2017/02/27/union-gets-larger-inflatable-rat-to-outsize-building-owners-cat/0 -
.
If the Leave chunk of the WWC left Labour for the kippers, its hardly revolutionary that the rest of the party swung pro-Remain.Danny565 said:
Yet to be proven. Even though most Labour voters voted Remain (including virtually all of the Lib-Lab swingers, I'm guessing), I'm still really not convinced that they care THAT much about it.Pulpstar said:http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/Analysis_votermigration.html
Those two Lib Dem voters that went to UKIP aren't coming back.
But the seven that left Labour to head to the Lib Dems may well come back with change.0 -
It's a result of the shrinking PLP. When the Parliamentary Conservative Part was shrinking in the 1983-1997 period, you saw the same effect. A growing parliamentary party implies, generally, a younger average age as new MPs tend not to be ancient; a shrinking party implies the reverse.Pulpstar said:
Cohorts...rkrkrk said:
Conspiracy theories start now....Tissue_Price said:Obviously there are some structural (e.g. 1997) reasons for this, but it's still very striking:
https://twitter.com/AmIRightSir/status/8363202665863249930 -
That story the other day did amuse me about Cornwall. What were the Cornish expecting when they voted to Leave?Bromptonaut said:
But the thickness of the people of Cornwall, who voted Leave en masse and thus denied themselves squillions of EU funding, is greater than most.
https://inews.co.uk/essentials/news/uk/councillor-tim-dwelly-cornwall-will-go-off-cliff-due-lack-eu-government-funding/0 -
thanks! That's the one.Pulpstar said:
http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/Analysis_votermigration.html is the diagram.Cookie said:
Wasn't there some convoluted diagram after the last election to show that the LDs bled votes to Tory and Labour, who in turn bled votes to UKIP? Though I'm not sure how this was proven - possibly with polls.Danny565 said:
Also, even if a big chunk of the UKIP vote did once come from the Lib Dems, I'm not sure it would go back now that the LDs are casting themselves as more pro-EU than they ever did before.Pulpstar said:
True for Coventry North East and Eastbourne but not generally.Philip_Thompson said:
In the vast majority of constituencies up and down the country the UKIP vote rise was almost exactly the Lib Dem vote fall.
OTOH, I do agree that for a long time the attraction of the LDs was as a NOTA party, and that role has now been taken by UKIP.0 -
"...but what has Carswell actually done for Clacton in the last 9 years?'"isam said:The truth is that Ukip needed Carswell in 2014 and Carswell needed Ukip. The obvious 'musical differences' were set aside in order to win freedom from the EU. Now that has been achieved its best they go their separate ways.
At my candidate interview for UKIP I cautiously said 'I know he's our new poster boy and all that, but what has Carswell actually done for Clacton in the last 9 years?'... the interviewer said 'precisely'
A marriage of convenience that has run its course
The same could be said for most MPs. They generally don't have the power to (say) bring a major new employer into their constituency or keep a hospital open; their powers are limited. They can act as enablers at best.
However a good MP can be brilliant at sorting out issues for individual constituents, or highlighting issues that matter not just in their constituency, but nationwide. They can campaign within their party or government.
In fact, one of the best things an MP can be is high-profile, and Carswell was certainly not unknown even before he joined UKIP. A high-profile can be used to gain prominence for issues the MP believes is important for their constituents (or alternatively used for the MPs own gain, which I would not accuse Carswell of).
The problems that face a place like Jaywick are deep and multifaceted. What's more, similar issues face deprived pockets in many constituents. What would you have had Carswell do that he has not?0 -
Anagram of Sir Keir Starmer - remarks stir ireMarqueeMark said:
For which read, "some of my colleagues think we lost Copeland because Storm Doris meant that voters couldn't vote in the rural areas. You know, that part of the constituency that voted heavily Tory. Some of my colleagues don't half talk shite...."TheScreamingEagles said:Is Sir Keir on manoeuvres? Or just stating the bleedin' obvious?
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/8365870934427484160 -
https://twitter.com/AmIRightSir/status/831216014574624768
I selfishly find this rather depressing - there have been goodness knows how many lords (no doubt Sunil will race to fill us in on this one
) and they are drawn from some of the wealthiest, best educated, and most privileged sections of society.
Yet almost none of them reach 100, principally (I suspect) since they are mostly lords rather than ladies.
The very brief list of centenarian Olympians shows that even being supremely physically fit only very rarely gets you over the line. And if you do make it to 100 or 101, you're very unlikely to get any further...
0 -
Regarding the comment about Labour MPs dying more than those of other parties this may be because they seem to be more likely to go on and on well past retirement age. If we look at the oldest MPs now:
Skinner b1932 - Lab
Winnick b 1933 - Lab
Flynn b1935 - Lab
Clwyd b1937 - Lab
Haselhurst b1937 - Con
Robinson b1938 - Lab
Cash b1940 - Con
Clarke b1940 - Con
Sheerman b1940 - Lab
Cunningham b1941 - Lab
Hopkins b1941 - Lab
Field b1942 - Lab
Of these Clarke is the only one currently planning to stand down in 2020.
Part of this may be that Cameron used the expenses scandal to clear out a lot of the older MPs. It may also reflect that a lot of Tory MPs of this age group lost their seats in 97.
0 -
Well quite. Very succinctly put.MarqueeMark said:
For which read, "some of my colleagues think we lost Copeland because Storm Doris meant that voters couldn't vote in the rural areas. You know, that part of the constituency that voted heavily Tory. Some of my colleagues don't half talk shite...."TheScreamingEagles said:Is Sir Keir on manoeuvres? Or just stating the bleedin' obvious?
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/8365870934427484160 -
Or maybe it's because Labour MPs are unemployable in the real world?GarethoftheVale2 said:Regarding the comment about Labour MPs dying more than those of other parties this may be because they seem to be more likely to go on and on well past retirement age. If we look at the oldest MPs now:
Skinner b1932 - Lab
Winnick b 1933 - Lab
Flynn b1935 - Lab
Clwyd b1937 - Lab
Haselhurst b1937 - Con
Robinson b1938 - Lab
Cash b1940 - Con
Clarke b1940 - Con
Sheerman b1940 - Lab
Cunningham b1941 - Lab
Hopkins b1941 - Lab
Field b1942 - Lab
Of these Clarke is the only one currently planning to stand down in 2020.
Part of this may be that Cameron used the expenses scandal to clear out a lot of the older MPs. It may also reflect that a lot of Tory MPs of this age group lost their seats in 97.0 -
This came up a few weeks ago. Nowadays, your chances of getting to 90 are remarkably good. But your chances of getting from 90 to 100 are still poor. Even by the time you get to 99, your chances of getting to 100 aren't much more than 50/50.MyBurningEars said:https://twitter.com/AmIRightSir/status/831216014574624768
I selfishly find this rather depressing - there have been goodness knows how many lords (no doubt Sunil will race to fill us in on this one ) and they are drawn from some of the wealthiest, best educated, and most privileged sections of society.
Yet almost none of them reach 100, principally (I suspect) since they are mostly lords rather than ladies.
The very brief list of centenarian Olympians shows that even being supremely physically fit only very rarely gets you over the line. And if you do make it to 100 or 101, you're very unlikely to get any further...
Demographics are fascinating.0 -
He will walk it. Banks will get nowhere just like Farage. These people are psychologically incapable of running a winning FPTP campaign. They simply do not understand their toxicity with a large section of the population. Carswell is not seen in the same light at all which is why he could win where Farage and Banks never will.isam said:
Ukip pissed up in the euros there while he was a Tory, it was their No1 target. An incumbent MP that switched to the main challenger - perfect for him.rkrkrk said:
No idea what he has done for Jaywick... But he keeps getting elected... And got elected as a UKIP MP. Given how hard UKIP have tried elsewhere for such a poor return that's fairly impressive I would say.isam said:
ExactlyDanny565 said:Carswell must be one of the overrated politicians in the country. He might be relatively well-regarded in Clacton (although, him getting 44% there in GE2015 is not *that* impressive, when you consider the Leave vote there was about 70%), but the idea that the average UKIP voter in the North or the Midlands is craving for his "libertarian internationalist" rubbish is for the birds.
MP for 12 years and people have only heard of the area because Channel 5 make documentaries on how shit it is to live there. What has he done for the people of Jaywick who live in portacabins, whose roads are dirt tracks and whose shops are all closed? Ignored them
The usual mugs are impressed though
He won't win vs Banks and Cons0 -
Well when I went to Jaywick no one had heard of him. 12 years an an MP and part of the constituency is the worst place in the country to live is something to be ashamed of.JosiasJessop said:
"...but what has Carswell actually done for Clacton in the last 9 years?'"isam said:The truth is that Ukip needed Carswell in 2014 and Carswell needed Ukip. The obvious 'musical differences' were set aside in order to win freedom from the EU. Now that has been achieved its best they go their separate ways.
At my candidate interview for UKIP I cautiously said 'I know he's our new poster boy and all that, but what has Carswell actually done for Clacton in the last 9 years?'... the interviewer said 'precisely'
A marriage of convenience that has run its course
The same could be said for most MPs. They generally don't have the power to (say) bring a major new employer into their constituency or keep a hospital open; their powers are limited. They can act as enablers at best.
However a good MP can be brilliant at sorting out issues for individual constituents, or highlighting issues that matter not just in their constituency, but nationwide. They can campaign within their party or government.
In fact, one of the best things an MP can be is high-profile, and Carswell was certainly not unknown even before he joined UKIP. A high-profile can be used to gain prominence for issues the MP believes is important for their constituents (or alternatively used for the MPs own gain, which I would not accuse Carswell of).
The problems that face a place like Jaywick are deep and multifaceted. What's more, similar issues face deprived pockets in many constituents. What would you have had Carswell do that he has not?
Jaywick could probably do with some political intervention, council buying the roads off the residents maybe? Something drastic needs to be done, perhaps DCs free market principles won't let him interfere0 -
The conservatives would winRichard_Tyndall said:
He will walk it. Banks will get nowhere just like Farage. These people are psychologically incapable of running a winning FPTP campaign. They simply do not understand their toxicity with a large section of the population. Carswell is not seen in the same light at all which is why he could win where Farage and Banks never will.isam said:
Ukip pissed up in the euros there while he was a Tory, it was their No1 target. An incumbent MP that switched to the main challenger - perfect for him.rkrkrk said:
No idea what he has done for Jaywick... But he keeps getting elected... And got elected as a UKIP MP. Given how hard UKIP have tried elsewhere for such a poor return that's fairly impressive I would say.isam said:
ExactlyDanny565 said:Carswell must be one of the overrated politicians in the country. He might be relatively well-regarded in Clacton (although, him getting 44% there in GE2015 is not *that* impressive, when you consider the Leave vote there was about 70%), but the idea that the average UKIP voter in the North or the Midlands is craving for his "libertarian internationalist" rubbish is for the birds.
MP for 12 years and people have only heard of the area because Channel 5 make documentaries on how shit it is to live there. What has he done for the people of Jaywick who live in portacabins, whose roads are dirt tracks and whose shops are all closed? Ignored them
The usual mugs are impressed though
He won't win vs Banks and Cons0 -
Fundamentally the Tories have been better at persuading older MPs to retire for the overall benefit of the party, both in terms of its ongoing renewal and also re avoiding by-elections.GarethoftheVale2 said:Regarding the comment about Labour MPs dying more than those of other parties this may be because they seem to be more likely to go on and on well past retirement age.
It is truly puzzling that our socialist counterparts seem to be markedly less keen to make personal sacrifices for the good of the group.0 -
Maybe they thought thee was more to the future than EU money? Maybe they thought that as we are a net contributor, EU funding would be replaced by UK funding? Maybe they thought that regaining control over fisheries was more valuable? Are they right? Who knows? But - as with a GE - there's surely a bit more to the decision than a simple question of 'who will give me the most cake?'TheScreamingEagles said:
That story the other day did amuse me about Cornwall. What were the Cornish expecting when they voted to Leave?Bromptonaut said:
But the thickness of the people of Cornwall, who voted Leave en masse and thus denied themselves squillions of EU funding, is greater than most.
https://inews.co.uk/essentials/news/uk/councillor-tim-dwelly-cornwall-will-go-off-cliff-due-lack-eu-government-funding/0 -
Italy, Cyprus and Slovenia foresee a better future from leaving the EU.
27% of the Irish perceive a better future out.
https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2017/0227/855886-little-public-support-for-irexit/0 -
Glad to see you problem-solving in your decision-making vis-a-vis co-operation on ending the over-use of hyphens.AlastairMeeks said:
Hyphens should be used to identify nouns constructed out of verbs (wind-up), to avoid ambiguity (superfluous-hair remover), to avoid the possibility of misreading (mini-series), and to avoid mispronunciation (co-operation). Otherwise, they are an abomination unto the Lord.TheScreamingEagles said:
I'm leading the lone battle.MyBurningEars said:
Nah. The fewer/less "rule" is one guy's personal stylistic taste that has somehow been misremembered and ossified into some kind of Pedants' Commandment.TheScreamingEagles said:FEWER not less.
http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/myl/languagelog/archives/003775.html
Proper English, as what woz written by Alfred the Great no less back as early as the 10th century, was quite happy to use "less" with countable nouns.
Swa mid læs worda swa mid ma, swæðer we hit yereccan mayon.
It is electronic mail
https://twitter.com/lisafleisher/status/8365718042316840960 -
Jason said:
Anagram of Sir Keir Starmer - remarks stir ireMarqueeMark said:
For which read, "some of my colleagues think we lost Copeland because Storm Doris meant that voters couldn't vote in the rural areas. You know, that part of the constituency that voted heavily Tory. Some of my colleagues don't half talk shite...."TheScreamingEagles said:Is Sir Keir on manoeuvres? Or just stating the bleedin' obvious?
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/836587093442748416
One for the memory bank!0 -
But they knew that £350m was already promised to the NHS.Cookie said:
Maybe they thought thee was more to the future than EU money? Maybe they thought that as we are a net contributor, EU funding would be replaced by UK funding? Maybe they thought that regaining control over fisheries was more valuable? Are they right? Who knows? But - as with a GE - there's surely a bit more to the decision than a simple question of 'who will give me the most cake?'TheScreamingEagles said:
That story the other day did amuse me about Cornwall. What were the Cornish expecting when they voted to Leave?Bromptonaut said:
But the thickness of the people of Cornwall, who voted Leave en masse and thus denied themselves squillions of EU funding, is greater than most.
https://inews.co.uk/essentials/news/uk/councillor-tim-dwelly-cornwall-will-go-off-cliff-due-lack-eu-government-funding/0 -
Which is a nice way of saying that the EU bribed us with our own money to stay inTheScreamingEagles said:
That story the other day did amuse me about Cornwall. What were the Cornish expecting when they voted to Leave?Bromptonaut said:
But the thickness of the people of Cornwall, who voted Leave en masse and thus denied themselves squillions of EU funding, is greater than most.
https://inews.co.uk/essentials/news/uk/councillor-tim-dwelly-cornwall-will-go-off-cliff-due-lack-eu-government-funding/
0 -
He did the best he could (and a very good job, all things considered - the deal was actually rather good) within the constraint that, like John Major and William Hague, he was fully aware of the problems of the EU but believed that, on balance, we were not Better Off Out, given all the variou sopt-outs. His critics simultaneously accuse him of having no principles and say he shouldn't have stuck to his beliefs but should have been willing to switch to becoming a BOOer to save his career. Clearly, he has more integrity than that.MyBurningEars said:I know you were a big fan of DC, but would you accept that this is one of the major flaws of DC's "renegotiation" - that there was no credible threat that he would aim to lead the UK out of the EU if the EU did not "reform" in the manner that he sought?
In any case the rengotiation wasn't the end of the reform of the EU which he was proposing. It was a step on the way, it was never just about the UK. Even now, our EU friends would be very well advised to study his Bloomberg speech and see what they can learn from it as they take the EU forward. Unfortunately, the chances of that are a big fat zero!0 -
surbiton said:
Starmer the Stormer !TheScreamingEagles said:Is Sir Keir on manoeuvres? Or just stating the bleedin' obvious?
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/836587093442748416
What are his achievements which so impress you?surbiton said:
Starmer the Stormer !TheScreamingEagles said:Is Sir Keir on manoeuvres? Or just stating the bleedin' obvious?
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/8365870934427484160 -
If part of a constituency is very poor, it's not usually the fault of the local MP.isam said:
Well when I went to Jaywick no one had heard of him. 12 years an an MP and part of the constituency is the worst place in the country to live is something to be ashamed of.JosiasJessop said:
"...but what has Carswell actually done for Clacton in the last 9 years?'"isam said:The truth is that Ukip needed Carswell in 2014 and Carswell needed Ukip. The obvious 'musical differences' were set aside in order to win freedom from the EU. Now that has been achieved its best they go their separate ways.
At my candidate interview for UKIP I cautiously said 'I know he's our new poster boy and all that, but what has Carswell actually done for Clacton in the last 9 years?'... the interviewer said 'precisely'
A marriage of convenience that has run its course
The same could be said for most MPs. They generally don't have the power to (say) bring a major new employer into their constituency or keep a hospital open; their powers are limited. They can act as enablers at best.
However a good MP can be brilliant at sorting out issues for individual constituents, or highlighting issues that matter not just in their constituency, but nationwide. They can campaign within their party or government.
In fact, one of the best things an MP can be is high-profile, and Carswell was certainly not unknown even before he joined UKIP. A high-profile can be used to gain prominence for issues the MP believes is important for their constituents (or alternatively used for the MPs own gain, which I would not accuse Carswell of).
The problems that face a place like Jaywick are deep and multifaceted. What's more, similar issues face deprived pockets in many constituents. What would you have had Carswell do that he has not?
Jaywick could probably do with some political intervention, council buying the roads off the residents maybe? Something drastic needs to be done, perhaps DCs free market principles won't let him interfere0 -
This only makes them "thick" if they were of the opinion that money is the most important priority in life for Cornish people, that this trumped any other social and political concerns they had because MONEY MONEY MONEY CORNWALL MUST HAVE THE LOVELY MONEY and any issues of sovereignty or identity or whether Britain is a long-term fit for the long-term evolution of the EU go out of the window because CASH IS THE CORNISH KING OH MY GOD GIVE US ALL THE MONEY GIVE US ALL YOUR F***KING EU MONEY and whether it's been democratic for the British public to have been pushed so far along a route of European integration that has never had strong popular support really doesn't matter because GIMME GIMME GIMME oh look it's eu referendum date let's vote leave that sounds fun.Bromptonaut said:
But the thickness of the people of Cornwall, who voted Leave en masse and thus denied themselves squillions in EU funding, is greater than most.CornishBlue said:
Exactly. Plenty of thick people who voted either way.
Otherwise, they're not "thick". They're just people with different opinions and priorities to you.0 -
Of course it isn't his fault it was poor when he got there, but a great MP would surely have overseen some improvement from a low base? I've never even heard him mention the place, & having personally contacted him with feedback and suggestions and been ignored I get the impression he doesn't really careSean_F said:
If part of a constituency is very poor, it's not usually the fault of the local MP.isam said:
Well when I went to Jaywick no one had heard of him. 12 years an an MP and part of the constituency is the worst place in the country to live is something to be ashamed of.JosiasJessop said:
"...but what has Carswell actually done for Clacton in the last 9 years?'"isam said:The truth is that Ukip needed Carswell in 2014 and Carswell needed Ukip. The obvious 'musical differences' were set aside in order to win freedom from the EU. Now that has been achieved its best they go their separate ways.
At my candidate interview for UKIP I cautiously said 'I know he's our new poster boy and all that, but what has Carswell actually done for Clacton in the last 9 years?'... the interviewer said 'precisely'
A marriage of convenience that has run its course
The same could be said for most MPs. They generally don't have the power to (say) bring a major new employer into their constituency or keep a hospital open; their powers are limited. They can act as enablers at best.
However a good MP can be brilliant at sorting out issues for individual constituents, or highlighting issues that matter not just in their constituency, but nationwide. They can campaign within their party or government.
In fact, one of the best things an MP can be is high-profile, and Carswell was certainly not unknown even before he joined UKIP. A high-profile can be used to gain prominence for issues the MP believes is important for their constituents (or alternatively used for the MPs own gain, which I would not accuse Carswell of).
The problems that face a place like Jaywick are deep and multifaceted. What's more, similar issues face deprived pockets in many constituents. What would you have had Carswell do that he has not?
Jaywick could probably do with some political intervention, council buying the roads off the residents maybe? Something drastic needs to be done, perhaps DCs free market principles won't let him interfere0 -
Mr. Nabavi, point of order: Cameron himself said he'd be willing to campaign to leave if he didn't get a good enough deal.0
-
Point of order! @Jonathan as a loyal Labour supporter was also promising this for egg purchase down thread. Don't we have to spend it another half a dozen or so times to even approach the example set by POGWAS ?TheScreamingEagles said:
But they knew that £350m was already promised to the NHS.Cookie said:
Maybe they thought thee was more to the future than EU money? Maybe they thought that as we are a net contributor, EU funding would be replaced by UK funding? Maybe they thought that regaining control over fisheries was more valuable? Are they right? Who knows? But - as with a GE - there's surely a bit more to the decision than a simple question of 'who will give me the most cake?'TheScreamingEagles said:
That story the other day did amuse me about Cornwall. What were the Cornish expecting when they voted to Leave?Bromptonaut said:
But the thickness of the people of Cornwall, who voted Leave en masse and thus denied themselves squillions of EU funding, is greater than most.
https://inews.co.uk/essentials/news/uk/councillor-tim-dwelly-cornwall-will-go-off-cliff-due-lack-eu-government-funding/0 -
Apropos of nothing in particular.Cookie said:
This came up a few weeks ago. Nowadays, your chances of getting to 90 are remarkably good. But your chances of getting from 90 to 100 are still poor. Even by the time you get to 99, your chances of getting to 100 aren't much more than 50/50.MyBurningEars said:https://twitter.com/AmIRightSir/status/831216014574624768
I selfishly find this rather depressing - there have been goodness knows how many lords (no doubt Sunil will race to fill us in on this one ) and they are drawn from some of the wealthiest, best educated, and most privileged sections of society.
Yet almost none of them reach 100, principally (I suspect) since they are mostly lords rather than ladies.
The very brief list of centenarian Olympians shows that even being supremely physically fit only very rarely gets you over the line. And if you do make it to 100 or 101, you're very unlikely to get any further...
Demographics are fascinating.
There have been 19 different 'oldest people in Britain' in the 17yrs2months since 1/1/2000, all female, with Florrie Baldwin holding the honour for 3 years and 3 months.
http://oldestinbritain.nfshost.com/chronology.php0 -
Point of order! @Jonathan as a loyal Labour supporter was also promising this for egg purchase down thread. Don't we have to spend it another half a dozen or so times to even approach the example set by POGWAS ?TheScreamingEagles said:
But they knew that £350m was already promised to the NHS.Cookie said:
Maybe they thought thee was more to the future than EU money? Maybe they thought that as we are a net contributor, EU funding would be replaced by UK funding? Maybe they thought that regaining control over fisheries was more valuable? Are they right? Who knows? But - as with a GE - there's surely a bit more to the decision than a simple question of 'who will give me the most cake?'TheScreamingEagles said:
That story the other day did amuse me about Cornwall. What were the Cornish expecting when they voted to Leave?Bromptonaut said:
But the thickness of the people of Cornwall, who voted Leave en masse and thus denied themselves squillions of EU funding, is greater than most.
https://inews.co.uk/essentials/news/uk/councillor-tim-dwelly-cornwall-will-go-off-cliff-due-lack-eu-government-funding/0 -
Interesting blog from the Centre for Cities think-tank (is that hyphenated?) which compares inequality (via the Gini coefficient) to economic performance.
http://www.centreforcities.org/blog/focusing-inequality-best-way-tackle-poverty-uk-cities/
In general the less inequality the worse the economic performance.0 -
Would that be the same Cameron who said he wouldn't resign if we voted Leave?Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Nabavi, point of order: Cameron himself said he'd be willing to campaign to leave if he didn't get a good enough deal.
0 -
The money is not parcelled out in cash to the population at so much per head, it tends to be spent on stuff like "Innovation Centres" whatever the feck they are.Bromptonaut said:
But the thickness of the people of Cornwall, who voted Leave en masse and thus denied themselves squillions in EU funding, is greater than most.
I think you are the mouth-breather who deduced that I must be a "Mussolini fanboy" because I said that it was admirable of him to modify the definition of Jewishness in a way which saved the lives of tens of thousands of Jews, at no obvious gain to himself. You should be cautious about denouncing thickness in other people.0 -
A thousand times yes!MyBurningEars said:
Nah. The fewer/less "rule" is one guy's personal stylistic taste that has somehow been misremembered and ossified into some kind of Pedants' Commandment.TheScreamingEagles said:FEWER not less.
http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/myl/languagelog/archives/003775.html
Proper English, as what woz written by Alfred the Great no less back as early as the 10th century, was quite happy to use "less" with countable nouns.
Swa mid læs worda swa mid ma, swæðer we hit yereccan mayon.
There are occasions when it will make a difference in understanding, much like there are times the Oxford comma will make a big difference. But that does not happen anywhere near as often as people pretend, when they act like it is some gross, unforgivable mistake even when there has been no loss in understanding.
And screw it, I'll split an infinitive whenever I feel like it.0 -
If they are Owl eggs, this is a re-announcement of the same spending, not a re-promising of the same money.AlsoIndigo said:
Point of order! @Jonathan as a loyal Labour supporter was also promising this for egg purchase down thread. Don't we have to spend it another half a dozen or so times to even approach the example set by POGWAS ?TheScreamingEagles said:
But they knew that £350m was already promised to the NHS.Cookie said:
Maybe they thought thee was more to the future than EU money? Maybe they thought that as we are a net contributor, EU funding would be replaced by UK funding? Maybe they thought that regaining control over fisheries was more valuable? Are they right? Who knows? But - as with a GE - there's surely a bit more to the decision than a simple question of 'who will give me the most cake?'TheScreamingEagles said:
That story the other day did amuse me about Cornwall. What were the Cornish expecting when they voted to Leave?Bromptonaut said:
But the thickness of the people of Cornwall, who voted Leave en masse and thus denied themselves squillions of EU funding, is greater than most.
https://inews.co.uk/essentials/news/uk/councillor-tim-dwelly-cornwall-will-go-off-cliff-due-lack-eu-government-funding/0 -
Some sensible words really. Although I recognise the right of people to try to prevent leaving altogether, that is even less achievable than modulating Brexit as much as is possible, and if they do the latter, the more ardent leavers pretending everyone making the sorts of comments we've seen is some democrat denier will seem unreasonable.SeanT said:FPT
As a Leaver, I'm perfectly happy with Blair, Major, Osborne et al, campaigning for some kind of Soft Brexit. I've always preferred the softer variety, I'd happily stay in the EEA if the EU could come up with some fudge over Free Movement (and I think it is quite possible).
Then over time we could slowly inch our way ever further from the clutches of Brussels.
But if given the choice between Remaining, or Hard Brexit, I will reluctantly choose the latter.
It's GOOD that the Remoaners are recovering from their ludicrous spaz-out, and are now joining us Liberal Leavers.0 -
33,000 Uber Drivers likely to lose licences due to poor language skills.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-uber-britain-idUKKBN1671GR
0 -
Mr. Ears, sounds like you're a fan of Donaeld the Unready's approach to language
Mr. Rentool, indeed.0 -
An MP has no power to change any of that. He can have a quiet word with the council, but they don't have to listen to him.isam said:
Well when I went to Jaywick no one had heard of him. 12 years an an MP and part of the constituency is the worst place in the country to live is something to be ashamed of.
Jaywick could probably do with some political intervention, council buying the roads off the residents maybe? Something drastic needs to be done, perhaps DCs free market principles won't let him interfere
A quick inspection of Hansard shows that Carswell has asked questions of ministers on behalf of his constituents 11 times since 2010, which seems a pretty respectable record given the vagaries of catching the speaker's eye, particularly as a right winger. For example:
https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2014-01-16/debates/14011656000023/TopicalQuestions
A number of homes in Clacton and Jaywick have been insulated under the “Insulating Jaywick” scheme using ECO funding, but I am told that the funding is no longer available, work has stopped and many local people who thought they had signed up to the scheme have been left rather disappointed. Will the Minister please meet me to discuss whether any funding may be available and from what source?
This strikes me as exactly what a constituency MP should be doing, especially as he subsequently met the minister and had the discussion.
0 -
ThVerulamius said:Interesting blog from the Centre for Cities think-tank (is that hyphenated?) which compares inequality (via the Gini coefficient) to economic performance.
http://www.centreforcities.org/blog/focusing-inequality-best-way-tackle-poverty-uk-cities/
In general the less inequality the worse the economic performance.
That's interesting. Is there a cause-and-effect thing here? Is inequality an effect of economic success - because the town becomes attractive to the super-rich, thus driving down the Gini coefficient? That's really the only explanation I can think of, though it doesn't cound particularly convincing. Or does inequality cause economic success - or, perhaps, inequality cause economic malaise?Verulamius said:Interesting blog from the Centre for Cities think-tank (is that hyphenated?) which compares inequality (via the Gini coefficient) to economic performance.
http://www.centreforcities.org/blog/focusing-inequality-best-way-tackle-poverty-uk-cities/
In general the less inequality the worse the economic performance.
I'm surprised Barnsley is so equal - Barnsley west of the M1 is very nice, although admittedly the population of that sector of the borough is pretty small - and I'm surprised Basildon is so unequal - would have thought new towns to be amongst the most equal places.0 -
F1: McLaren has changed the engine. Again.
If they can't sort this, it's looking ominous.
Note to self: remember to check the Not To Be Classified odds on Alonso/Vandoorne.0 -
Split infinitives are awesome.kle4 said:
A thousand times yes!MyBurningEars said:
Nah. The fewer/less "rule" is one guy's personal stylistic taste that has somehow been misremembered and ossified into some kind of Pedants' Commandment.TheScreamingEagles said:FEWER not less.
http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/myl/languagelog/archives/003775.html
Proper English, as what woz written by Alfred the Great no less back as early as the 10th century, was quite happy to use "less" with countable nouns.
Swa mid læs worda swa mid ma, swæðer we hit yereccan mayon.
There are occasions when it will make a difference in understanding, much like there are times the Oxford comma will make a big difference. But that does not happen anywhere near as often as people pretend, when they act like it is some gross, unforgivable mistake even when there has been no loss in understanding.
And screw it, I'll split an infinitive whenever I feel like it.
Capitalisation, and lack therein, is what really boils my piss.
It is the difference between helping your Uncle Jack off a horse, and helping your uncle jack off a horse.0 -
If the roads were resurfaced, foliage cut back and the place given a bit of a general tidy up it might look a bit better.isam said:
Of course it isn't his fault it was poor when he got there, but a great MP would surely have overseen some improvement from a low base? I've never even heard him mention the place, & having personally contacted him with feedback and suggestions and been ignored I get the impression he doesn't really careSean_F said:
If part of a constituency is very poor, it's not usually the fault of the local MP.isam said:
Well when I went to Jaywick no one had heard of him. 12 years an an MP and part of the constituency is the worst place in the country to live is something to be ashamed of.JosiasJessop said:
"...but what has Carswell actually done for Clacton in the last 9 years?'"isam said:The truth is that Ukip needed Carswell in 2014 and Carswell needed Ukip. The obvious 'musical differences' were set aside in order to win freedom from the EU. Now that has been achieved its best they go their separate ways.
At my candidate interview for UKIP I cautiously said 'I know he's our new poster boy and all that, but what has Carswell actually done for Clacton in the last 9 years?'... the interviewer said 'precisely'
A marriage of convenience that has run its course
The same could be said for most MPs. They generally don't have the power to (say) bring a major new employer into their constituency or keep a hospital open; their powers are limited. They can act as enablers at best.
However a good MP can be brilliant at sorting out issues for individual constituents, or highlighting issues that matter not just in their constituency, but nationwide. They can campaign within their party or government.
In fact, one of the best things an MP can be is high-profile, and Carswell was certainly not unknown even before he joined UKIP. A high-profile can be used to gain prominence for issues the MP believes is important for their constituents (or alternatively used for the MPs own gain, which I would not accuse Carswell of).
The problems that face a place like Jaywick are deep and multifaceted. What's more, similar issues face deprived pockets in many constituents. What would you have had Carswell do that he has not?
Jaywick could probably do with some political intervention, council buying the roads off the residents maybe? Something drastic needs to be done, perhaps DCs free market principles won't let him interfere0 -
(Please accept my apologies for the occasional duplicate post, one of our two mobile masts on the island is being serviced at the moment as the one that is left cant handle the load so we are having severe connectivity problems)0
-
A fair point!Pro_Rata said:
If they are Owl eggs, this is a re-announcement of the same spending, not a re-promising of the same money.AlsoIndigo said:
Point of order! @Jonathan as a loyal Labour supporter was also promising this for egg purchase down thread. Don't we have to spend it another half a dozen or so times to even approach the example set by POGWAS ?TheScreamingEagles said:
But they knew that £350m was already promised to the NHS.Cookie said:
Maybe they thought thee was more to the future than EU money? Maybe they thought that as we are a net contributor, EU funding would be replaced by UK funding? Maybe they thought that regaining control over fisheries was more valuable? Are they right? Who knows? But - as with a GE - there's surely a bit more to the decision than a simple question of 'who will give me the most cake?'TheScreamingEagles said:
That story the other day did amuse me about Cornwall. What were the Cornish expecting when they voted to Leave?Bromptonaut said:
But the thickness of the people of Cornwall, who voted Leave en masse and thus denied themselves squillions of EU funding, is greater than most.
https://inews.co.uk/essentials/news/uk/councillor-tim-dwelly-cornwall-will-go-off-cliff-due-lack-eu-government-funding/0 -
I once had a work colleague who hailed from a pit village and did claim the latter to be one of his childhood duties.TheScreamingEagles said:
Split infinitives are awesome.kle4 said:
A thousand times yes!MyBurningEars said:
Nah. The fewer/less "rule" is one guy's personal stylistic taste that has somehow been misremembered and ossified into some kind of Pedants' Commandment.TheScreamingEagles said:FEWER not less.
http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/myl/languagelog/archives/003775.html
Proper English, as what woz written by Alfred the Great no less back as early as the 10th century, was quite happy to use "less" with countable nouns.
Swa mid læs worda swa mid ma, swæðer we hit yereccan mayon.
There are occasions when it will make a difference in understanding, much like there are times the Oxford comma will make a big difference. But that does not happen anywhere near as often as people pretend, when they act like it is some gross, unforgivable mistake even when there has been no loss in understanding.
And screw it, I'll split an infinitive whenever I feel like it.
Capitalisation, and lack therein, is what really boils my piss.
It is the difference between helping your Uncle Jack off a horse, and helping your uncle jack off a horse.0 -
Only if Carswell had rejoined or stood down.isam said:
The conservatives would winRichard_Tyndall said:
He will walk it. Banks will get nowhere just like Farage. These people are psychologically incapable of running a winning FPTP campaign. They simply do not understand their toxicity with a large section of the population. Carswell is not seen in the same light at all which is why he could win where Farage and Banks never will.isam said:
Ukip pissed up in the euros there while he was a Tory, it was their No1 target. An incumbent MP that switched to the main challenger - perfect for him.rkrkrk said:
No idea what he has done for Jaywick... But he keeps getting elected... And got elected as a UKIP MP. Given how hard UKIP have tried elsewhere for such a poor return that's fairly impressive I would say.isam said:
ExactlyDanny565 said:Carswell must be one of the overrated politicians in the country. He might be relatively well-regarded in Clacton (although, him getting 44% there in GE2015 is not *that* impressive, when you consider the Leave vote there was about 70%), but the idea that the average UKIP voter in the North or the Midlands is craving for his "libertarian internationalist" rubbish is for the birds.
MP for 12 years and people have only heard of the area because Channel 5 make documentaries on how shit it is to live there. What has he done for the people of Jaywick who live in portacabins, whose roads are dirt tracks and whose shops are all closed? Ignored them
The usual mugs are impressed though
He won't win vs Banks and Cons0 -
Democracy is a process not an event. While I voted Leave, I find many of my fellow Brexiteers excruciatingly embarrassing. I've made no secret of my shock at the paucity of vision and intellectual heft in the A50 paper.kle4 said:
Some sensible words really. Although I recognise the right of people to try to prevent leaving altogether, that is even less achievable than modulating Brexit as much as is possible, and if they do the latter, the more ardent leavers pretending everyone making the sorts of comments we've seen is some democrat denier will seem unreasonable.SeanT said:FPT
As a Leaver, I'm perfectly happy with Blair, Major, Osborne et al, campaigning for some kind of Soft Brexit. I've always preferred the softer variety, I'd happily stay in the EEA if the EU could come up with some fudge over Free Movement (and I think it is quite possible).
Then over time we could slowly inch our way ever further from the clutches of Brussels.
But if given the choice between Remaining, or Hard Brexit, I will reluctantly choose the latter.
It's GOOD that the Remoaners are recovering from their ludicrous spaz-out, and are now joining us Liberal Leavers.
I don't regret my vote, mind. I do find the tenor of the post-EUref debate distasteful on both sides, much as I did the campaigns themselves. Hence I've been mostly absent from the boards.
I would have preferred a soft Brexit. But them's the breaks. In the meantime, my personal life means I'm all Basil Fotherington-Thomas, so I cannot summon up much ire regarding Mrs May's strategy.0 -
BBC - Sir Philip Green has agreed a £363m cash settlement with the Pensions Regulator to plug the gap in the BHS pension scheme.
Workers will get the same starting pension that they were originally promised.0 -
If he rejoined yeah, if it were a 3 way I think he'd loseRichard_Tyndall said:
Only if Carswell had rejoined or stood down.isam said:
The conservatives would winRichard_Tyndall said:
He will walk it. Banks will get nowhere just like Farage. These people are psychologically incapable of running a winning FPTP campaign. They simply do not understand their toxicity with a large section of the population. Carswell is not seen in the same light at all which is why he could win where Farage and Banks never will.isam said:
Ukip pissed up in the euros there while he was a Tory, it was their No1 target. An incumbent MP that switched to the main challenger - perfect for him.rkrkrk said:
No idea what he has done for Jaywick... But he keeps getting elected... And got elected as a UKIP MP. Given how hard UKIP have tried elsewhere for such a poor return that's fairly impressive I would say.isam said:
ExactlyDanny565 said:Carswell must be one of the overrated politicians in the country. He might be relatively well-regarded in Clacton (although, him getting 44% there in GE2015 is not *that* impressive, when you consider the Leave vote there was about 70%), but the idea that the average UKIP voter in the North or the Midlands is craving for his "libertarian internationalist" rubbish is for the birds.
MP for 12 years and people have only heard of the area because Channel 5 make documentaries on how shit it is to live there. What has he done for the people of Jaywick who live in portacabins, whose roads are dirt tracks and whose shops are all closed? Ignored them
The usual mugs are impressed though
He won't win vs Banks and Cons0 -
The residents own the roads! That's the problem I think.Pulpstar said:
If the roads were resurfaced, foliage cut back and the place given a bit of a general tidy up it might look a bit better.isam said:
Of course it isn't his fault it was poor when he got there, but a great MP would surely have overseen some improvement from a low base? I've never even heard him mention the place, & having personally contacted him with feedback and suggestions and been ignored I get the impression he doesn't really careSean_F said:
If part of a constituency is very poor, it's not usually the fault of the local MP.isam said:
Well when I went to Jaywick no one had heard of him. 12 years an an MP and part of the constituency is the worst place in the country to live is something to be ashamed of.JosiasJessop said:
"...but what has Carswell actually done for Clacton in the last 9 years?'"isam said:The truth is that Ukip needed Carswell in 2014 and Carswell needed Ukip. The obvious 'musical differences' were set aside in order to win freedom from the EU. Now that has been achieved its best they go their separate ways.
At my candidate interview for UKIP I cautiously said 'I know he's our new poster boy and all that, but what has Carswell actually done for Clacton in the last 9 years?'... the interviewer said 'precisely'
A marriage of convenience that has run its course
The same could be said for most MPs. They generally don't have the power to (say) bring a major new employer into their constituency or keep a hospital open; their powers are limited. They can act as enablers at best.
However a good MP can be brilliant at sorting out issues for individual constituents, or highlighting issues that matter not just in their constituency, but nationwide. They can campaign within their party or government.
In fact, one of the best things an MP can be is high-profile, and Carswell was certainly not unknown even before he joined UKIP. A high-profile can be used to gain prominence for issues the MP believes is important for their constituents (or alternatively used for the MPs own gain, which I would not accuse Carswell of).
The problems that face a place like Jaywick are deep and multifaceted. What's more, similar issues face deprived pockets in many constituents. What would you have had Carswell do that he has not?
Jaywick could probably do with some political intervention, council buying the roads off the residents maybe? Something drastic needs to be done, perhaps DCs free market principles won't let him interfere0 -
Careful, you'll be unleashing anarchy & chaos upon the world before you know it.kle4 said:
And screw it, I'll split an infinitive whenever I feel like it.0 -
Sounds like Honda have prioritised performance increases over reliability of the power unit. Maybe we will see Alonso either challenge for a podium or start at the back, in alternate races?Morris_Dancer said:F1: McLaren has changed the engine. Again.
If they can't sort this, it's looking ominous.
Note to self: remember to check the Not To Be Classified odds on Alonso/Vandoorne.0 -
0
-
It is not necessarily his fault if they didn't know who their MP is. Too many people are disconnected from politics (which is something that perhaps helped leave).isam said:
Well when I went to Jaywick no one had heard of him. 12 years an an MP and part of the constituency is the worst place in the country to live is something to be ashamed of.
Jaywick could probably do with some political intervention, council buying the roads off the residents maybe? Something drastic needs to be done, perhaps DCs free market principles won't let him interfere
I'm fairly interested in ideas that can help areas such as Jaywick, and there are too many of them in the country. Improving the roads, drains and infrastructure is certainly a good idea, as are improved public transport links and employment opportunities. However that's in the council's purview, not the MPs, and is massively costly. He does not control the purse.
I understand you don't like Carswell. However I think you're being a little unfair. If you were the MP for Clacton you might soon find yourself getting very frustrated.
As an example: assume the government gave £1 million to spend on deprived areas in their constituencies. Leaving aside the political issues with this, how would you spend it? Assuming 70,000 constituents, it's about £14 per person. Split around Jaywick's ~5000 population, it would be ~£200 per person. It wouldn't buy a manhole.
What Jaywick needs is a local plan (the council's job), the money to implement the plan, and support from the locals. An MP can act as an enabler for this; he cannot do it himself.0 -
Mr. Sandpit, hard to gauge performance, but it could be a yo-yo season.
Of course, it's possible these are teething problems.0 -
I'm not sure about his graph. Why hasn't he presented the correlation coefficient at the very least ?Cookie said:
That's interesting. Is there a cause-and-effect thing here? Is inequality an effect of economic success - because the town becomes attractive to the super-rich, thus driving down the Gini coefficient? That's really the only explanation I can think of, though it doesn't cound particularly convincing. Or does inequality cause economic success - or, perhaps, inequality cause economic malaise?Verulamius said:Interesting blog from the Centre for Cities think-tank (is that hyphenated?) which compares inequality (via the Gini coefficient) to economic performance.
http://www.centreforcities.org/blog/focusing-inequality-best-way-tackle-poverty-uk-cities/
In general the less inequality the worse the economic performance.
I'm surprised Barnsley is so equal - Barnsley west of the M1 is very nice, although admittedly the population of that sector of the borough is pretty small - and I'm surprised Basildon is so unequal - would have thought new towns to be amongst the most equal places.0 -
0
