politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Another way of looking at how the parties are doing – how succ
Comments
-
opinion polls say differentFF43 said:
Which is why there is a serious risk of the next referendum going for independence. Not that the case for it has improved - the opposite actually - but because there will be very few people arguing for the Union. The Conservatives will, but they only make up a quarter of the electorate even with their recent surge.Bojabob said:
Actually google tells me that she is actually saying that Brexit will lead to Scots Indy rather than she supports that outcome. Might be persuadable though!
As someone who supports both unions for essentially the same reason, it sucks.0 -
I think that's a very fair critique, Alastair. The big question it poses is whether Nandy can ride out her voting for A50. She might be able to put that bit right to some degree with the selectorate by being more awkward in coming EU-related votes.AlastairMeeks said:
Very good in terms of how to look at the problem, I'm less convinced by the conclusions (though Heidi Alexander would be a better than par outcome for me).Tissue_Price said:This is a splendid piece from Atul Hatwal on the Labour leadership, thinking just like a political punter should:
http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2017/03/02/how-labours-potential-leadership-candidates-measure-up-against-member-priorities/#more-21396
What Hatwal is clear – and I assume right – about is the ever-decreasing support for Corbyn. He does appear to be heading toast-ward on those numbers.0 -
Last time I looked, Yorkshire was north of the Humber.OldKingCole said:
Well thought through plan = wall round Yorkshire?Charles said:
Because - at least on here - it end up in a sterile debate with the Nats.williamglenn said:
It's notable that the people who switched to Brexit on the basis that Dave's Deal didn't meet their expectations for reforming the EU are so silent about the pressing need for much deeper constitutional reform of the UK if we want to have any hope of preserving the union. Instead they seem to have brought into the '100% of sovereignty must lie in Westminster' argument wholesale.FF43 said:
Which is why there is a serious risk of the next referendum going for independence. Not that the case for it has improved - the opposite actually - but because there will be very few people arguing for the Union. The Conservatives will, but they only make up a quarter of the electorate even with their recent surge.Bojabob said:
Actually google tells me that she is actually saying that Brexit will lead to Scots Indy rather than she supports that outcome. Might be persuadable though!
As someone who supports both unions for essentially the same reason, it sucks.
But if someone were to come up with a well thought through plan for a federal UK, I'd be supportive (even, probably to @Morris_Dancer 's disgust) supporting the re-creation of Wessex, Mercia, London, East Anglia and Northumbria as states.0 -
Its a bit of a bizarre article because it is all about who would be acceptable to Labour members, and who would be acceptable to current Labour voters, and not a word is spoken about being acceptable to the sort of voters they need to win in marginals to have any attempt at forming a government. I can't see how selecting the ideal candidate to be optimally acceptable to intercity Labour helps them with their current problem, they are going to get those seats anyway.AlastairMeeks said:
Very good in terms of how to look at the problem, I'm less convinced by the conclusions (though Heidi Alexander would be a better than par outcome for me).Tissue_Price said:This is a splendid piece from Atul Hatwal on the Labour leadership, thinking just like a political punter should:
http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2017/03/02/how-labours-potential-leadership-candidates-measure-up-against-member-priorities/#more-213960 -
That's the only way it would be viable, I think.Charles said:But if someone were to come up with a well thought through plan for a federal UK, I'd be supportive (even, probably to @Morris_Dancer 's disgust) supporting the re-creation of Wessex, Mercia, London, East Anglia and Northumbria as states.
0 -
It's a spin off of several divisions of the same entityMorris_Dancer said:Mr. Charles, English Parliament.
Carving England into pieces is not acceptable.0 -
And they're not short of spite either!OldKingCole said:
‘Cut', ‘nose' and ‘face' come to mindTheScreamingEagles said:Sleazy broken Labour, UKIP, and the SNP on the slide.
So UKIP want to kick out their only MP, that'll help with the funding problems.0 -
Fortify the Lincolnshire bank, then!Charles said:
Last time I looked, Yorkshire was north of the Humber.OldKingCole said:
Well thought through plan = wall round Yorkshire?Charles said:
Because - at least on here - it end up in a sterile debate with the Nats.williamglenn said:
It's notable that the people who switched to Brexit on the basis that Dave's Deal didn't meet their expectations for reforming the EU are so silent about the pressing need for much deeper constitutional reform of the UK if we want to have any hope of preserving the union. Instead they seem to have brought into the '100% of sovereignty must lie in Westminster' argument wholesale.FF43 said:
Which is why there is a serious risk of the next referendum going for independence. Not that the case for it has improved - the opposite actually - but because there will be very few people arguing for the Union. The Conservatives will, but they only make up a quarter of the electorate even with their recent surge.Bojabob said:
Actually google tells me that she is actually saying that Brexit will lead to Scots Indy rather than she supports that outcome. Might be persuadable though!
As someone who supports both unions for essentially the same reason, it sucks.
But if someone were to come up with a well thought through plan for a federal UK, I'd be supportive (even, probably to @Morris_Dancer 's disgust) supporting the re-creation of Wessex, Mercia, London, East Anglia and Northumbria as states.0 -
Why England specifically and do you define Wales to be part of England or not?Morris_Dancer said:Carving England into pieces is not acceptable.
0 -
My thoughts too - I still like Nandy best. Though Stephen Bush let slip earlier that "the influential Tribune WhatsApp group of MPs is largely unified around Keir Starmer at the next leadership election, and they think they are well-placed to win it."AlastairMeeks said:
Very good in terms of how to look at the problem, I'm less convinced by the conclusions (though Heidi Alexander would be a better than par outcome for me).Tissue_Price said:This is a splendid piece from Atul Hatwal on the Labour leadership, thinking just like a political punter should:
http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2017/03/02/how-labours-potential-leadership-candidates-measure-up-against-member-priorities/#more-21396
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2017/03/labour-leadership-why-jeremy-corbyn-wont-be-listening-owen-jones
NB members here, notably not including Nandy: http://www.labourtribunemps.org/members0 -
Runners & riders for Labour in Gorton.
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/the-labour-battle-for-gorton-126772450 -
Mr. Glenn, was Northern Ireland carved up? Wales? Scotland?
I wouldn't define England to be part of Wales. If there were a desire for some sort of Anglo-Welsh Parliament, with certain things devolved further to England/Wales, I'd be open to that idea. Can't see it being popular, though.0 -
No, and not Cornwall, either.williamglenn said:
Why England specifically and do you define Wales to be part of England or not?Morris_Dancer said:Carving England into pieces is not acceptable.
Mr C, I see. Do you mean Yorkshire will be ruled by the Prince-Bishop of Durham again?0 -
Strange that he thinks that respecting the democratic wishes of the electorate over Brexit is a negative thing in a leadership candidate. Those MPs who campaigned for Remain, then voted to trigger A50 should be applauded.Tissue_Price said:This is a splendid piece from Atul Hatwal on the Labour leadership, thinking just like a political punter should:
http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2017/03/02/how-labours-potential-leadership-candidates-measure-up-against-member-priorities/#more-21396
Meanwhile those who stuck 2 fingers up to the electorate are regarded as best placed for the leadership...0 -
I could see the capital of Northumbria moving to York... Bamburgh is mighty inconvenientOldKingCole said:
No, and not Cornwall, either.williamglenn said:
Why England specifically and do you define Wales to be part of England or not?Morris_Dancer said:Carving England into pieces is not acceptable.
Mr C, I see. Do you mean Yorkshire will be ruled by the Prince-Bishop of Durham again?0 -
Sir Keir looks like the Yvette Cooper candidate next time: all the attributes that make him the obvious winner except two - any form of charisma and any particular message to convey.Tissue_Price said:
My thoughts too - I still like Nandy best. Though Stephen Bush let slip earlier that "the influential Tribune WhatsApp group of MPs is largely unified around Keir Starmer at the next leadership election, and they think they are well-placed to win it."AlastairMeeks said:
Very good in terms of how to look at the problem, I'm less convinced by the conclusions (though Heidi Alexander would be a better than par outcome for me).Tissue_Price said:This is a splendid piece from Atul Hatwal on the Labour leadership, thinking just like a political punter should:
http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2017/03/02/how-labours-potential-leadership-candidates-measure-up-against-member-priorities/#more-21396
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2017/03/labour-leadership-why-jeremy-corbyn-wont-be-listening-owen-jones
NB members here, notably not including Nandy: http://www.labourtribunemps.org/members0 -
It is a negative thing in the eyes of the members. Clear-headedness about the electorate is exactly one of the things I include in "thinking just like a political punter should".SandyRentool said:
Strange that he thinks that respecting the democratic wishes of the electorate over Brexit is a negative thing in a leadership candidate. Those MPs who campaigned for Remain, then voted to trigger A50 should be applauded.Tissue_Price said:This is a splendid piece from Atul Hatwal on the Labour leadership, thinking just like a political punter should:
http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2017/03/02/how-labours-potential-leadership-candidates-measure-up-against-member-priorities/#more-21396
Meanwhile those who stuck 2 fingers up to the electorate are regarded as best placed for the leadership...0 -
The perfect figurehead for the Tribune group, then, looking at most of them.AlastairMeeks said:
Sir Keir looks like the Yvette Cooper candidate next time: all the attributes that make him the obvious winner except two - any form of charisma and any particular message to convey.Tissue_Price said:
My thoughts too - I still like Nandy best. Though Stephen Bush let slip earlier that "the influential Tribune WhatsApp group of MPs is largely unified around Keir Starmer at the next leadership election, and they think they are well-placed to win it."AlastairMeeks said:
Very good in terms of how to look at the problem, I'm less convinced by the conclusions (though Heidi Alexander would be a better than par outcome for me).Tissue_Price said:This is a splendid piece from Atul Hatwal on the Labour leadership, thinking just like a political punter should:
http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2017/03/02/how-labours-potential-leadership-candidates-measure-up-against-member-priorities/#more-21396
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2017/03/labour-leadership-why-jeremy-corbyn-wont-be-listening-owen-jones
NB members here, notably not including Nandy: http://www.labourtribunemps.org/members0 -
Heidi Alexander last matched at 30 on Betfair. Atul Hatwal's article seems to have made an immediate impression.0
-
Great find.AlsoIndigo said:
The interview in question is hereCharles said:FPT
That's clearly linking "being called a surrogate" to "communications with the Russians".TheScreamingEagles said:At his Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing in January, Sessions was asked by Democratic Senator Al Franken what he would do if he learned of any evidence that anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign communicated with the Russian government in the course of the 2016 campaign, the Post reported.
"I’m not aware of any of those activities," Sessions responded, according to the Post.
He added: "I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign and I did not have communications with the Russians."
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/03/attorney-general-jeff-sessions-disclose-russia-contacts-report-170302041900080.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PC_Ea3jgANo
The bit we are all arguing about is from 3:25 onwards on that video.
He is going to to have to paddle pretty damn hard to sell that as a misunderstanding.
And I agree completely. What an idiot.0 -
How many more tails do I need to pin on the Labour donkey?0
-
That’s not the same Mr Rahman who was in London, is it?dr_spyn said:Runners & riders for Labour in Gorton.
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/the-labour-battle-for-gorton-126772450 -
Well I took the 80s and 100s before I retweeted it. That's just common sense.AlastairMeeks said:Heidi Alexander last matched at 30 on Betfair. Atul Hatwal's article seems to have made an immediate impression.
0 -
How about Edinburgh as the capital of Northumbria?Charles said:I could see the capital of Northumbria moving to York... Bamburgh is mighty inconvenient
0 -
It's better to give the blindfold and the tail to someone else and to take charge of the ass.Richard_Nabavi said:How many more tails do I need to pin on the Labour donkey?
0 -
I was thinking, not of the old, but of the New Castle.Charles said:
I could see the capital of Northumbria moving to York... Bamburgh is mighty inconvenientOldKingCole said:
No, and not Cornwall, either.williamglenn said:
Why England specifically and do you define Wales to be part of England or not?Morris_Dancer said:Carving England into pieces is not acceptable.
Mr C, I see. Do you mean Yorkshire will be ruled by the Prince-Bishop of Durham again?0 -
I suppose this is the point that I should mention that I did tip Heidi Alexander almost exactly a year ago:
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/02/28/the-latest-betting-tips-from-alastair-meeks/0 -
Fillon v Sessions resignation match bet?rcs1000 said:Great find.
And I agree completely. What an idiot.0 -
Finally a policy I can support!OldKingCole said:
Do you mean Yorkshire will be ruled by the Prince-Bishop of Durham again?williamglenn said:
Why England specifically and do you define Wales to be part of England or not?Morris_Dancer said:Carving England into pieces is not acceptable.
0 -
I think Atul Hatwal's article is indeed excellent, but it seems to me he needs to add at least one more column to his traffic-light table, namely how close ideologically the MP in question is to the selectorate, leaving aside the Brexit issue. In other words, I'd have thought that Keir Starmer, to take one example, would get a red mark against him even if Brexit wasn't an issue, whereas John McDonnell or Rebecca Long-Bailey would get a green mark in that column.0
-
Yes, that sounds fair. Nandy and Alexander would be amber on that scale, I guess.Richard_Nabavi said:I think Atul Hatwal's article is indeed excellent, but it seems to me he needs to add at least one more column to his traffic-light table, namely how close ideologically the MP in question is to the selectorate, leaving aside the Brexit issue. In other words, I'd have thought that Keir Starmer, to take one example, would get a red mark against him even if Brexit wasn't an issue, whereas John McDonnell or Rebecca Long-Bailey would get a green mark in that column.
0 -
'Business for Scotland'AlastairMeeks said:
Or some pressure group that can act as an outrider for that. I'd be looking for campaign groups called things like "Scotland for Scotland".TheScreamingEagles said:
Indyref 2?AlastairMeeks said:
Having thought about this, I came to the conclusion that the money that the SNP would otherwise be collecting is presumably being diverted elsewhere.MarqueeMark said:And the SNP got £4,165 in donations. Really? I wouldn't want to perpetuate the myth of Scotsmen having deep pockets and short arms, but that is an extraordinary number.
http://chokkablog.blogspot.co.id/2014/06/who-do-business-for-scotland-represent.html0 -
I suppose that's my disadvantage being a Labour Leaver - it isn't something that would count as an issue for me in the next leadership election. We're leaving.Tissue_Price said:
It is a negative thing in the eyes of the members. Clear-headedness about the electorate is exactly one of the things I include in "thinking just like a political punter should".SandyRentool said:
Strange that he thinks that respecting the democratic wishes of the electorate over Brexit is a negative thing in a leadership candidate. Those MPs who campaigned for Remain, then voted to trigger A50 should be applauded.Tissue_Price said:This is a splendid piece from Atul Hatwal on the Labour leadership, thinking just like a political punter should:
http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2017/03/02/how-labours-potential-leadership-candidates-measure-up-against-member-priorities/#more-21396
Meanwhile those who stuck 2 fingers up to the electorate are regarded as best placed for the leadership...0 -
That's a fair point, Richard. Perhaps you should write to him and suggest this?Richard_Nabavi said:I think Atul Hatwal's article is indeed excellent, but it seems to me he needs to add at least one more column to his traffic-light table, namely how close ideologically the MP in question is to the selectorate, leaving aside the Brexit issue. In other words, I'd have thought that Keir Starmer, to take one example, would get a red mark against him even if Brexit wasn't an issue, whereas John McDonnell or Rebecca Long-Bailey would get a green mark in that column.
0 -
Indeed. I would have Stella as red or at least ambery-red on that column, did it exist.Tissue_Price said:
Yes, that sounds fair. Nandy and Alexander would be amber on that scale, I guess.Richard_Nabavi said:I think Atul Hatwal's article is indeed excellent, but it seems to me he needs to add at least one more column to his traffic-light table, namely how close ideologically the MP in question is to the selectorate, leaving aside the Brexit issue. In other words, I'd have thought that Keir Starmer, to take one example, would get a red mark against him even if Brexit wasn't an issue, whereas John McDonnell or Rebecca Long-Bailey would get a green mark in that column.
0 -
There was a court case covered by Manchester Evening News. Haven't found the outcome, but given that he is still sitting, it may have ended well for him.OldKingCole said:
That’s not the same Mr Rahman who was in London, is it?dr_spyn said:Runners & riders for Labour in Gorton.
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/the-labour-battle-for-gorton-12677245
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/local-news/councillor-punched-and-kicked-man-in-mosque-8909110 -
From this week's Popbitch:
>> Peer pressure <<
Shami's getting leathered
Shami Chakrabarti has been
getting such a pasting for
her recent amateurish TV
appearances, it makes you
wonder why she bothers putting
herself through it all – but
she really owes Jeremy Corbyn.
Few people know quite how much.
Shami really, really wanted
that peerage. As far as we
can tell, she put herself up
for selection as a People's
Peer at least three times but
never got the call. She made
overtures to the Lib Dems to
be nominated too, but there
was nothing doing there.
Clearly they missed out, as
Corbyn's decision to make her
a lady has obviously earned
him her eternal gratitude.0 -
Not sure Lewis hasn’t got baggage.Bojabob said:
Indeed. I would have Stella as red or at least ambery-red on that column, did it exist.Tissue_Price said:
Yes, that sounds fair. Nandy and Alexander would be amber on that scale, I guess.Richard_Nabavi said:I think Atul Hatwal's article is indeed excellent, but it seems to me he needs to add at least one more column to his traffic-light table, namely how close ideologically the MP in question is to the selectorate, leaving aside the Brexit issue. In other words, I'd have thought that Keir Starmer, to take one example, would get a red mark against him even if Brexit wasn't an issue, whereas John McDonnell or Rebecca Long-Bailey would get a green mark in that column.
0 -
The Manchester Councillor Luthfur Rahman appears to have been bound over.
"http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/councillor-in-the-clear-over-attack-claim-891264
"Judge Robert Atherton instead bound over all five defendants to keep the peace for 12 months in the sum of £500 each. The power is a measure used by courts when they believe there is a risk an individual may breach the peace in future."
Perhaps the legal eagles might know if this is usual for such cases.0 -
Amber is maybe the place to be - get a coalition of the Corbynites and the anti-Corbynites to take you over the line?Tissue_Price said:
Yes, that sounds fair. Nandy and Alexander would be amber on that scale, I guess.Richard_Nabavi said:I think Atul Hatwal's article is indeed excellent, but it seems to me he needs to add at least one more column to his traffic-light table, namely how close ideologically the MP in question is to the selectorate, leaving aside the Brexit issue. In other words, I'd have thought that Keir Starmer, to take one example, would get a red mark against him even if Brexit wasn't an issue, whereas John McDonnell or Rebecca Long-Bailey would get a green mark in that column.
0 -
The Lib Dem figure was helped a lot by a single donation:
A £1m donation meant the Lib Dems reported more funds raised than Labour in the last quarter of 2016.
Gregory Nasmyth's gift pushed Lib Dem donations to £1,972,904, compared with £1,970,055 for the Labour Party.
It is the first time since donations records began in 2001 that Lib Dem quarterly donations have beaten Labour.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-391439760 -
Sorry, but that Labour Uncut article is completely off the mark when it says "supporting Brexit" would be a black mark against any leadership candidates.
In case we've forgotten, Corbyn originally won the leadership in 2015 when he was saying he might well back a Leave vote.
Then he was easily re-elected last year when he said Labour should accept Brexit, against a candidate who made a LibDem-esque "let's have a second referendum" the centre of his pitch.
Most Labour members voted to Remain, but they really don't feel that strongly about it, and would rather the party considers other issues (especially economic ones) as red lines rather than Brexit, in my experience.0 -
For what it's worth, as a Labour member who voted Corbyn last year (though not originally in 2015), my choice would be Yvette Cooper in the next contest.
She's not great, but in terms of political positioning, she's just about tolerable (unlike the ridiculous hardcore Blairite stuff that Kendall/Chuka/Tristram and the like were coming out with in the aftermath of the 2015 election), and although she hardly set the world alight with her media performances as Shadow Home Secretary in the last parliament, she atleast showed she has some basic political and presentational skills.
The newbies like Lisa Nandy, Dan Jarvis, Clive Lewis, Angela Rayner et al are nowhere close to being ready for the big time. And I barely noticed this Heidi Alexander in all the time that she was (allegedly) Labour's health spokesperson.0 -
That could be smart thinking.SandyRentool said:
Amber is maybe the place to be - get a coalition of the Corbynites and the anti-Corbynites to take you over the line?Tissue_Price said:
Yes, that sounds fair. Nandy and Alexander would be amber on that scale, I guess.Richard_Nabavi said:I think Atul Hatwal's article is indeed excellent, but it seems to me he needs to add at least one more column to his traffic-light table, namely how close ideologically the MP in question is to the selectorate, leaving aside the Brexit issue. In other words, I'd have thought that Keir Starmer, to take one example, would get a red mark against him even if Brexit wasn't an issue, whereas John McDonnell or Rebecca Long-Bailey would get a green mark in that column.
0 -
Yes MD, I would support that.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Charles, English Parliament.
Carving England into pieces is not acceptable.
0 -
There are eight current Labour MPs who have been Health Secretary or shadow Health Secretary. I wonder how many could name the current shadow Health Secretary without looking.Danny565 said:For what it's worth, as a Labour member who voted Corbyn last year (though not originally in 2015), my choice would be Yvette Cooper in the next contest.
She's not great, but in terms of political positioning, she's just about tolerable (unlike the ridiculous hardcore Blairite stuff that Kendall/Chuka/Tristram and the like were coming out with in the aftermath of the 2015 election), and although she hardly set the world alight with her media performances as Shadow Home Secretary in the last parliament, she atleast showed she has some basic political and presentational skills.
The newbies like Lisa Nandy, Dan Jarvis, Clive Lewis, Angela Rayner et al are nowhere close to being ready for the big time. And I barely noticed this Heidi Alexander in all the time that she was (allegedly) Labour's health spokesperson.0 -
Keir will win hands down. We need someone with gravitas. He has that in spades.AlastairMeeks said:
Sir Keir looks like the Yvette Cooper candidate next time: all the attributes that make him the obvious winner except two - any form of charisma and any particular message to convey.Tissue_Price said:
My thoughts too - I still like Nandy best. Though Stephen Bush let slip earlier that "the influential Tribune WhatsApp group of MPs is largely unified around Keir Starmer at the next leadership election, and they think they are well-placed to win it."AlastairMeeks said:
Very good in terms of how to look at the problem, I'm less convinced by the conclusions (though Heidi Alexander would be a better than par outcome for me).Tissue_Price said:This is a splendid piece from Atul Hatwal on the Labour leadership, thinking just like a political punter should:
http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2017/03/02/how-labours-potential-leadership-candidates-measure-up-against-member-priorities/#more-21396
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2017/03/labour-leadership-why-jeremy-corbyn-wont-be-listening-owen-jones
NB members here, notably not including Nandy: http://www.labourtribunemps.org/members0 -
That sounds wise. If Labour goes through the pain of manhandling Corbyn out the exit, then invests in a shiny new leader only to find they have been painfully over-promoted, it really will start to look like the end for Labour.Danny565 said:For what it's worth, as a Labour member who voted Corbyn last year (though not originally in 2015), my choice would be Yvette Cooper in the next contest.
She's not great, but in terms of political positioning, she's just about tolerable (unlike the ridiculous hardcore Blairite stuff that Kendall/Chuka/Tristram and the like were coming out with in the aftermath of the 2015 election), and although she hardly set the world alight with her media performances as Shadow Home Secretary in the last parliament, she at least showed she has some basic political and presentational skills.
The newbies like Lisa Nandy, Dan Jarvis, Clive Lewis, Angela Rayner et al are nowhere close to being ready for the big time.
But Yvette? What if Ed Balls were back in Parliament - would you take him over his wife?0 -
Merkel & May:
http://www.politico.eu/article/theresa-may-angela-merkel-splitting-differences-similarities-uk-germany/
Interesting comment on cultural differences:
Germans, her aide told her, “think like Lego bricks.”
“You make decision A, B and C,” the aide explained.
“The Brits are very happy to suddenly go back and throw it all up in the air.
But the Germans would say, ‘no, no, we’ve made decision A, we’ve made decision B, so decision C can only be this, because we can’t revisit what we’ve done before.’”
Gells with my experience....'No, no, you can't do that because we've agreed X - what if we change X? Looks of horror....
0 -
I have failed at that test and I am a political anorak.AlastairMeeks said:
There are eight current Labour MPs who have been Health Secretary or shadow Health Secretary. I wonder how many could name the current shadow Health Secretary without looking.Danny565 said:For what it's worth, as a Labour member who voted Corbyn last year (though not originally in 2015), my choice would be Yvette Cooper in the next contest.
She's not great, but in terms of political positioning, she's just about tolerable (unlike the ridiculous hardcore Blairite stuff that Kendall/Chuka/Tristram and the like were coming out with in the aftermath of the 2015 election), and although she hardly set the world alight with her media performances as Shadow Home Secretary in the last parliament, she atleast showed she has some basic political and presentational skills.
The newbies like Lisa Nandy, Dan Jarvis, Clive Lewis, Angela Rayner et al are nowhere close to being ready for the big time. And I barely noticed this Heidi Alexander in all the time that she was (allegedly) Labour's health spokesperson.0 -
He's one of my big greens!AlastairMeeks said:
There are eight current Labour MPs who have been Health Secretary or shadow Health Secretary. I wonder how many could name the current shadow Health Secretary without looking.Danny565 said:For what it's worth, as a Labour member who voted Corbyn last year (though not originally in 2015), my choice would be Yvette Cooper in the next contest.
She's not great, but in terms of political positioning, she's just about tolerable (unlike the ridiculous hardcore Blairite stuff that Kendall/Chuka/Tristram and the like were coming out with in the aftermath of the 2015 election), and although she hardly set the world alight with her media performances as Shadow Home Secretary in the last parliament, she atleast showed she has some basic political and presentational skills.
The newbies like Lisa Nandy, Dan Jarvis, Clive Lewis, Angela Rayner et al are nowhere close to being ready for the big time. And I barely noticed this Heidi Alexander in all the time that she was (allegedly) Labour's health spokesperson.0 -
Yvette is a serious candidate. While it is true that she is far from the most colourful of politicians, as the PM is entirely devoid of charisma she would look positively gregarious across the despatch box.Danny565 said:For what it's worth, as a Labour member who voted Corbyn last year (though not originally in 2015), my choice would be Yvette Cooper in the next contest.
She's not great, but in terms of political positioning, she's just about tolerable (unlike the ridiculous hardcore Blairite stuff that Kendall/Chuka/Tristram and the like were coming out with in the aftermath of the 2015 election), and although she hardly set the world alight with her media performances as Shadow Home Secretary in the last parliament, she atleast showed she has some basic political and presentational skills.
The newbies like Lisa Nandy, Dan Jarvis, Clive Lewis, Angela Rayner et al are nowhere close to being ready for the big time. And I barely noticed this Heidi Alexander in all the time that she was (allegedly) Labour's health spokesperson.0 -
Have you told Kezia Dugdale? it would save her a lot of wasted effort.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Charles, English Parliament.
Carving England into pieces is not acceptable.
On second thoughts, don't bother.....
0 -
I know plenty of my Labour chums invest a lot of hope in Keir. To my mind, he walks a tightrope between gravitas and terminally dull. And falls off.surbiton said:
Keir will win hands down. We need someone with gravitas. He has that in spades.AlastairMeeks said:
Sir Keir looks like the Yvette Cooper candidate next time: all the attributes that make him the obvious winner except two - any form of charisma and any particular message to convey.Tissue_Price said:
My thoughts too - I still like Nandy best. Though Stephen Bush let slip earlier that "the influential Tribune WhatsApp group of MPs is largely unified around Keir Starmer at the next leadership election, and they think they are well-placed to win it."AlastairMeeks said:
Very good in terms of how to look at the problem, I'm less convinced by the conclusions (though Heidi Alexander would be a better than par outcome for me).Tissue_Price said:This is a splendid piece from Atul Hatwal on the Labour leadership, thinking just like a political punter should:
http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2017/03/02/how-labours-potential-leadership-candidates-measure-up-against-member-priorities/#more-21396
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2017/03/labour-leadership-why-jeremy-corbyn-wont-be-listening-owen-jones
NB members here, notably not including Nandy: http://www.labourtribunemps.org/members0 -
So not Diane Abbott as I guessed!Tissue_Price said:
He's one of my big greens!AlastairMeeks said:
There are eight current Labour MPs who have been Health Secretary or shadow Health Secretary. I wonder how many could name the current shadow Health Secretary without looking.Danny565 said:For what it's worth, as a Labour member who voted Corbyn last year (though not originally in 2015), my choice would be Yvette Cooper in the next contest.
She's not great, but in terms of political positioning, she's just about tolerable (unlike the ridiculous hardcore Blairite stuff that Kendall/Chuka/Tristram and the like were coming out with in the aftermath of the 2015 election), and although she hardly set the world alight with her media performances as Shadow Home Secretary in the last parliament, she atleast showed she has some basic political and presentational skills.
The newbies like Lisa Nandy, Dan Jarvis, Clive Lewis, Angela Rayner et al are nowhere close to being ready for the big time. And I barely noticed this Heidi Alexander in all the time that she was (allegedly) Labour's health spokesperson.0 -
He's one of my above-par results. I usually try to make sure I have the Labour health spokesperson onside. It's a role in which it's relatively easy to sparkle with the right audience.Tissue_Price said:
He's one of my big greens!AlastairMeeks said:
There are eight current Labour MPs who have been Health Secretary or shadow Health Secretary. I wonder how many could name the current shadow Health Secretary without looking.Danny565 said:For what it's worth, as a Labour member who voted Corbyn last year (though not originally in 2015), my choice would be Yvette Cooper in the next contest.
She's not great, but in terms of political positioning, she's just about tolerable (unlike the ridiculous hardcore Blairite stuff that Kendall/Chuka/Tristram and the like were coming out with in the aftermath of the 2015 election), and although she hardly set the world alight with her media performances as Shadow Home Secretary in the last parliament, she atleast showed she has some basic political and presentational skills.
The newbies like Lisa Nandy, Dan Jarvis, Clive Lewis, Angela Rayner et al are nowhere close to being ready for the big time. And I barely noticed this Heidi Alexander in all the time that she was (allegedly) Labour's health spokesperson.
0 -
Miss Sarissa, can't see your image.
Does Dugdale have some cunning policy of which I'm blissfully unaware?0 -
If Labour are to do well at the next election (and by well I mean not having yet another net loss of seats) they really need Ed Balls to stand in Gorton and then find a way for him to replace Corbyn before 2019. It is not a complete solution to their problems but it is so much a better solution than anything else on the table to barely need thinking about.0
-
Quite so. And he was famously "loyal" to Corbyn when everyone else resigned. This was of course because he held the NEC position, but such trivial details needn't concern him when making his pitch.AlastairMeeks said:
He's one of my above-par results. I usually try to make sure I have the Labour health spokesperson onside. It's a role in which it's relatively easy to sparkle with the right audience.Tissue_Price said:
He's one of my big greens!AlastairMeeks said:
There are eight current Labour MPs who have been Health Secretary or shadow Health Secretary. I wonder how many could name the current shadow Health Secretary without looking.Danny565 said:For what it's worth, as a Labour member who voted Corbyn last year (though not originally in 2015), my choice would be Yvette Cooper in the next contest.
She's not great, but in terms of political positioning, she's just about tolerable (unlike the ridiculous hardcore Blairite stuff that Kendall/Chuka/Tristram and the like were coming out with in the aftermath of the 2015 election), and although she hardly set the world alight with her media performances as Shadow Home Secretary in the last parliament, she atleast showed she has some basic political and presentational skills.
The newbies like Lisa Nandy, Dan Jarvis, Clive Lewis, Angela Rayner et al are nowhere close to being ready for the big time. And I barely noticed this Heidi Alexander in all the time that she was (allegedly) Labour's health spokesperson.0 -
What is it about the last two Labour leaders that they were prepared to put personal ambition before their party? A blind camel could see they were repellent to most voters so why didn't they just do something else?0
-
Ed Miliband traded significantly odds-on to be Next Prime Minister. It's a good job blind camels don't have Betfair accounts.Roger said:What is it about the last two Labour leaders that they were prepared to put personal ambition before their party? A blind camel could see they were repellent to most voters so why didn't they just do something else?
0 -
Sorry, just come on to the thread. How come Labour is getting so much public money? Is this from the public purse and if so who authorised it?0
-
Congratulations. Though I get paid a fraction of a million every week.SeanT said:Vulgar boasting alert: just got offer for a new book deal which involved the word "million".
To be fair, a fraction thereof, but a hefty fraction.
I LOVE offers that include the word "million"0 -
DavidL said:
If Labour are to do well at the next election (and by well I mean not having yet another net loss of seats) they really need Ed Balls to stand in Gorton and then find a way for him to replace Corbyn before 2019. It is not a complete solution to their problems but it is so much a better solution than anything else on the table to barely need thinking about.
However, seems the selection process has been going on ten years:
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/the-labour-battle-for-gorton-126772450 -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short_MoneyBlue_rog said:Sorry, just come on to the thread. How come Labour is getting so much public money? Is this from the public purse and if so who authorised it?
0 -
O/T This will surely bring in tens of thousands to Tory Party coffers. This afternoon's e-mail/spam from party HQ:
Dear John,
It has now been a week since Trudy Harrison was elected in Copeland: THE FIRST VICTORY OF ITS KIND SINCE 1878
We have created a new, limited edition mug to commemorate the people of Copeland having their first Conservative MP since 1935.
It may become a collector's edition in 2187 though.0 -
My dad's bigger than your dad!Tissue_Price said:
Congratulations. Though I get paid a fraction of a million every week.SeanT said:Vulgar boasting alert: just got offer for a new book deal which involved the word "million".
To be fair, a fraction thereof, but a hefty fraction.
I LOVE offers that include the word "million"
0 -
Why do people have this idiotic need to create these artificial entities. If they can't shove disparate separate countries together to form federations they are trying to break up countries, and divide people all in the name of forming federations in reverse. It is lunacy.williamglenn said:
That's the only way it would be viable, I think.Charles said:But if someone were to come up with a well thought through plan for a federal UK, I'd be supportive (even, probably to @Morris_Dancer 's disgust) supporting the re-creation of Wessex, Mercia, London, East Anglia and Northumbria as states.
0 -
At the cost of what fraction of your soul?SeanT said:Vulgar boasting alert: just got offer for a new book deal which involved the word "million".
To be fair, a fraction thereof, but a hefty fraction.
I LOVE offers that include the word "million"0 -
But she and some other Blairites stood opposite Corbyn in the original leadership election post Miliband and she had precisely nothing to say. None of the others did apart from Corbyn. (Sure what he said was to most people abhorrent - but he clearly has a belief and is prepared to articulate it.). Cooper comes across as a shiny quacking robot of a politician.Bojabob said:
Yvette is a serious candidate. While it is true that she is far from the most colourful of politicians, as the PM is entirely devoid of charisma she would look positively gregarious across the despatch box.Danny565 said:For what it's worth, as a Labour member who voted Corbyn last year (though not originally in 2015), my choice would be Yvette Cooper in the next contest.
She's not great, but in terms of political positioning, she's just about tolerable (unlike the ridiculous hardcore Blairite stuff that Kendall/Chuka/Tristram and the like were coming out with in the aftermath of the 2015 election), and although she hardly set the world alight with her media performances as Shadow Home Secretary in the last parliament, she atleast showed she has some basic political and presentational skills.
The newbies like Lisa Nandy, Dan Jarvis, Clive Lewis, Angela Rayner et al are nowhere close to being ready for the big time. And I barely noticed this Heidi Alexander in all the time that she was (allegedly) Labour's health spokesperson.
0 -
Sounds like a lot of gin!!!SeanT said:Vulgar boasting alert: just got offer for a new book deal which involved the word "million".
To be fair, a fraction thereof, but a hefty fraction.
I LOVE offers that include the word "million"0 -
You being coy about which currency?SeanT said:Vulgar boasting alert: just got offer for a new book deal which involved the word "million".
To be fair, a fraction thereof, but a hefty fraction.
I LOVE offers that include the word "million"
0 -
If it says "Trudy Can't Fail" on it, I might be tempted.JohnO said:O/T This will surely bring in tens of thousands to Tory Party coffers. This afternoon's e-mail/spam from party HQ:
Dear John,
It has now been a week since Trudy Harrison was elected in Copeland: THE FIRST VICTORY OF ITS KIND SINCE 1878
We have created a new, limited edition mug to commemorate the people of Copeland having their first Conservative MP since 1935.
It may become a collector's edition in 2187 though.0 -
In all seriousness, since the early Eighties they've had Foot, Kinnock, Smith, Blair, Brown, Miliband and Corbyn. Only two of those would not fit the "voter repellent" category (at the time, obviously). That's starting to look like a feature, not a bug.Roger said:What is it about the last two Labour leaders that they were prepared to put personal ambition before their party? A blind camel could see they were repellent to most voters so why didn't they just do something else?
0 -
Brexit is the economy. For the next ten years or so.Danny565 said:Sorry, but that Labour Uncut article is completely off the mark when it says "supporting Brexit" would be a black mark against any leadership candidates.
In case we've forgotten, Corbyn originally won the leadership in 2015 when he was saying he might well back a Leave vote.
Then he was easily re-elected last year when he said Labour should accept Brexit, against a candidate who made a LibDem-esque "let's have a second referendum" the centre of his pitch.
Most Labour members voted to Remain, but they really don't feel that strongly about it, and would rather the party considers other issues (especially economic ones) as red lines rather than Brexit, in my experience.0 -
That is absolutely true and however hard you try to fathom 'why' you can't.CarlottaVance said:Merkel & May:
http://www.politico.eu/article/theresa-may-angela-merkel-splitting-differences-similarities-uk-germany/
Interesting comment on cultural differences:
Germans, her aide told her, “think like Lego bricks.”
“You make decision A, B and C,” the aide explained.
“The Brits are very happy to suddenly go back and throw it all up in the air.
But the Germans would say, ‘no, no, we’ve made decision A, we’ve made decision B, so decision C can only be this, because we can’t revisit what we’ve done before.’”
Gells with my experience....'No, no, you can't do that because we've agreed X - what if we change X? Looks of horror....
Their favourite line is 'but It's not logical' ....it makes shooting ads for them extremely difficult because despite being super sophisticated in all sorts of ways they can't understand that to tell the story logic can go out of the window. It causes a terrible inner struggle. One of the worlds mysteries0 -
If we are going to use labels like Blairite, then to be accurate Yvette was/is a Brownite.Patrick said:
But she and some other Blairites stood opposite Corbyn in the original leadership election post Miliband and she had precisely nothing to say. None of the others did apart from Corbyn. (Sure what he said was to most people abhorrent - but he clearly has a belief and is prepared to articulate it.). Cooper comes across as a shiny quacking robot of a politician.Bojabob said:
Yvette is a serious candidate. While it is true that she is far from the most colourful of politicians, as the PM is entirely devoid of charisma she would look positively gregarious across the despatch box.Danny565 said:For what it's worth, as a Labour member who voted Corbyn last year (though not originally in 2015), my choice would be Yvette Cooper in the next contest.
She's not great, but in terms of political positioning, she's just about tolerable (unlike the ridiculous hardcore Blairite stuff that Kendall/Chuka/Tristram and the like were coming out with in the aftermath of the 2015 election), and although she hardly set the world alight with her media performances as Shadow Home Secretary in the last parliament, she atleast showed she has some basic political and presentational skills.
The newbies like Lisa Nandy, Dan Jarvis, Clive Lewis, Angela Rayner et al are nowhere close to being ready for the big time. And I barely noticed this Heidi Alexander in all the time that she was (allegedly) Labour's health spokesperson.0 -
Just as well, you’d never have been shortlisted for the Booker prize. - #ThatsaComplimentSeanT said:
Zero. I have no soul left. I sold out to Mammon years ago. It's very liberating. I used to worry about prizes and reviews and all that posterity shit. Now I don't give a picayune fucklet.MarqueeMark said:
At the cost of what fraction of your soul?SeanT said:Vulgar boasting alert: just got offer for a new book deal which involved the word "million".
To be fair, a fraction thereof, but a hefty fraction.
I LOVE offers that include the word "million"
All that matters is lots of readers and LOTS of lovely moolah.0 -
What Labour "needs" and what the ragtag army of £3 carpet-baggers and Trot-lovers will actually vote for are rather different.surbiton said:
Keir will win hands down. We need someone with gravitas. He has that in spades.AlastairMeeks said:
Sir Keir looks like the Yvette Cooper candidate next time: all the attributes that make him the obvious winner except two - any form of charisma and any particular message to convey.Tissue_Price said:
My thoughts too - I still like Nandy best. Though Stephen Bush let slip earlier that "the influential Tribune WhatsApp group of MPs is largely unified around Keir Starmer at the next leadership election, and they think they are well-placed to win it."AlastairMeeks said:
Very good in terms of how to look at the problem, I'm less convinced by the conclusions (though Heidi Alexander would be a better than par outcome for me).Tissue_Price said:This is a splendid piece from Atul Hatwal on the Labour leadership, thinking just like a political punter should:
http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2017/03/02/how-labours-potential-leadership-candidates-measure-up-against-member-priorities/#more-21396
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2017/03/labour-leadership-why-jeremy-corbyn-wont-be-listening-owen-jones
NB members here, notably not including Nandy: http://www.labourtribunemps.org/members0 -
Sorry. You are quite correct. I was using it in the sense of non-Corbynoie. But at the time Brownite was the right label. How swiftly things change. Brown has gone from unleashing the forces of hell to a historical bad joke in the blink of an eye.rottenborough said:
If we are going to use labels like Blairite, then to be accurate Yvette was/is a Brownite.Patrick said:
But she and some other Blairites stood opposite Corbyn in the original leadership election post Miliband and she had precisely nothing to say. None of the others did apart from Corbyn. (Sure what he said was to most people abhorrent - but he clearly has a belief and is prepared to articulate it.). Cooper comes across as a shiny quacking robot of a politician.Bojabob said:
Yvette is a serious candidate. While it is true that she is far from the most colourful of politicians, as the PM is entirely devoid of charisma she would look positively gregarious across the despatch box.Danny565 said:For what it's worth, as a Labour member who voted Corbyn last year (though not originally in 2015), my choice would be Yvette Cooper in the next contest.
She's not great, but in terms of political positioning, she's just about tolerable (unlike the ridiculous hardcore Blairite stuff that Kendall/Chuka/Tristram and the like were coming out with in the aftermath of the 2015 election), and although she hardly set the world alight with her media performances as Shadow Home Secretary in the last parliament, she atleast showed she has some basic political and presentational skills.
The newbies like Lisa Nandy, Dan Jarvis, Clive Lewis, Angela Rayner et al are nowhere close to being ready for the big time. And I barely noticed this Heidi Alexander in all the time that she was (allegedly) Labour's health spokesperson.0 -
The difficulty for Kier is he is not a woman. I detect a definite feeling that next time it must be a woman.0
-
It would probably impress the members if he were to sacrifice his.rottenborough said:The difficulty for Kier is he is not a woman. I detect a definite feeling that next time it must be a woman.
0 -
Not what I'd call it.surbiton said:
Keir will win hands down. We need someone with gravitas. He has that in spades.AlastairMeeks said:
Sir Keir looks like the Yvette Cooper candidate next time: all the attributes that make him the obvious winner except two - any form of charisma and any particular message to convey.Tissue_Price said:
My thoughts too - I still like Nandy best. Though Stephen Bush let slip earlier that "the influential Tribune WhatsApp group of MPs is largely unified around Keir Starmer at the next leadership election, and they think they are well-placed to win it."AlastairMeeks said:
Very good in terms of how to look at the problem, I'm less convinced by the conclusions (though Heidi Alexander would be a better than par outcome for me).Tissue_Price said:This is a splendid piece from Atul Hatwal on the Labour leadership, thinking just like a political punter should:
http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2017/03/02/how-labours-potential-leadership-candidates-measure-up-against-member-priorities/#more-21396
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2017/03/labour-leadership-why-jeremy-corbyn-wont-be-listening-owen-jones
NB members here, notably not including Nandy: http://www.labourtribunemps.org/members
He sounds - more or less - OK on the radio, but there is something a bit weird about his face (total lack of expression ?).
He looks as though someone drew a bad cartoon (a la Scott Adams) and it just about came alive.0 -
Make sure they don't give you it in 500 euro notes.SeanT said:0 -
The could go for a particularly divisive leader next time, surname Marm.rottenborough said:
If we are going to use labels like Blairite, then to be accurate Yvette was/is a Brownite.Patrick said:
But she and some other Blairites stood opposite Corbyn in the original leadership election post Miliband and she had precisely nothing to say. None of the others did apart from Corbyn. (Sure what he said was to most people abhorrent - but he clearly has a belief and is prepared to articulate it.). Cooper comes across as a shiny quacking robot of a politician.Bojabob said:
Yvette is a serious candidate. While it is true that she is far from the most colourful of politicians, as the PM is entirely devoid of charisma she would look positively gregarious across the despatch box.Danny565 said:For what it's worth, as a Labour member who voted Corbyn last year (though not originally in 2015), my choice would be Yvette Cooper in the next contest.
She's not great, but in terms of political positioning, she's just about tolerable (unlike the ridiculous hardcore Blairite stuff that Kendall/Chuka/Tristram and the like were coming out with in the aftermath of the 2015 election), and although she hardly set the world alight with her media performances as Shadow Home Secretary in the last parliament, she atleast showed she has some basic political and presentational skills.
The newbies like Lisa Nandy, Dan Jarvis, Clive Lewis, Angela Rayner et al are nowhere close to being ready for the big time. And I barely noticed this Heidi Alexander in all the time that she was (allegedly) Labour's health spokesperson.0 -
SeanT said:
Talking of decades, it is now possible, indeed very probable (barring terror attack, terminal cirrhosis, weird end of western civilisation), that I will do ten years in a row where I earn more than the prime minister in every one of those years. Just from writing.TOPPING said:
Brexit is the economy. For the next ten years or so.Danny565 said:Sorry, but that Labour Uncut article is completely off the mark when it says "supporting Brexit" would be a black mark against any leadership candidates.
In case we've forgotten, Corbyn originally won the leadership in 2015 when he was saying he might well back a Leave vote.
Then he was easily re-elected last year when he said Labour should accept Brexit, against a candidate who made a LibDem-esque "let's have a second referendum" the centre of his pitch.
Most Labour members voted to Remain, but they really don't feel that strongly about it, and would rather the party considers other issues (especially economic ones) as red lines rather than Brexit, in my experience.
For a writer that's meant to be impossible apart from the top 0.00000001%. So I must be in that 0.0000001%.
Odd feeling.
I can only bang on in this revolting boastful way because almost none of you know me so it doesn't matter if you hate me. I also realise that I might, nonetheless, be trying your patience just a tad, so I will now shut the F up and go and order some more ludicrously overpriced wine that I don't need.
Chin Chin.0 -
To be fair, you are slightly more interesting than May.SeanT said:
Talking of decades, it is now possible, indeed very probable (barring terror attack, terminal cirrhosis, weird end of western civilisation), that I will do ten years in a row where I earn more than the prime minister in every one of those years. Just from writing.TOPPING said:
Brexit is the economy. For the next ten years or so.Danny565 said:Sorry, but that Labour Uncut article is completely off the mark when it says "supporting Brexit" would be a black mark against any leadership candidates.
In case we've forgotten, Corbyn originally won the leadership in 2015 when he was saying he might well back a Leave vote.
Then he was easily re-elected last year when he said Labour should accept Brexit, against a candidate who made a LibDem-esque "let's have a second referendum" the centre of his pitch.
Most Labour members voted to Remain, but they really don't feel that strongly about it, and would rather the party considers other issues (especially economic ones) as red lines rather than Brexit, in my experience.
For a writer that's meant to be impossible apart from the top 0.00000001%. So I must be in that 0.0000001%.
Odd feeling.
I can only bang on in this revolting boastful way because almost none of you know me so it doesn't matter if you hate me. I also realise that I might, nonetheless, be trying your patience just a tad, so I will now shut the F up and go and order some more ludicrously overpriced wine that I don't need.
Chin Chin.
Although the unkind might accuse you of being a purulent pimple of self-satisfaction.0 -
Mr. T, if it makes you feel better, you banging on about your obnoxious level of success does make me feel less bad banging on when my (rather less successful) books come out.
Congrats on your success0 -
Not really artificial - archaic I'd acceptRichard_Tyndall said:
Why do people have this idiotic need to create these artificial entities. If they can't shove disparate separate countries together to form federations they are trying to break up countries, and divide people all in the name of forming federations in reverse. It is lunacy.williamglenn said:
That's the only way it would be viable, I think.Charles said:But if someone were to come up with a well thought through plan for a federal UK, I'd be supportive (even, probably to @Morris_Dancer 's disgust) supporting the re-creation of Wessex, Mercia, London, East Anglia and Northumbria as states.
But basically it is saying London, the Home Counties and the North are different. And then there's the bit in the middle that's not the north or the south. And Norfolk. Norfolk's different.0 -
F1: final day of first test over. Next test is 7-10 March.
I'll probably write a post-test article with early musings.0 -
What do S K Tremayne and J K Rowling have in common?
The same middle initial.
Congratulations @SeanT on your continued literary success.0 -
Heh. Some of us remember when you started posting on PB as a struggling writer, years ago. I think we tend rather to look at you with affection, one of our own made good.SeanT said:
Talking of decades, it is now possible, indeed very probable (barring terror attack, terminal cirrhosis, weird end of western civilisation), that I will do ten years in a row where I earn more than the prime minister in every one of those years. Just from writing.TOPPING said:
Brexit is the economy. For the next ten years or so.Danny565 said:Sorry, but that Labour Uncut article is completely off the mark when it says "supporting Brexit" would be a black mark against any leadership candidates.
In case we've forgotten, Corbyn originally won the leadership in 2015 when he was saying he might well back a Leave vote.
Then he was easily re-elected last year when he said Labour should accept Brexit, against a candidate who made a LibDem-esque "let's have a second referendum" the centre of his pitch.
Most Labour members voted to Remain, but they really don't feel that strongly about it, and would rather the party considers other issues (especially economic ones) as red lines rather than Brexit, in my experience.
For a writer that's meant to be impossible apart from the top 0.00000001%. So I must be in that 0.0000001%.
Odd feeling.
I can only bang on in this revolting boastful way because almost none of you know me so it doesn't matter if you hate me. I also realise that I might, nonetheless, be trying your patience just a tad, so I will now shut the F up and go and order some more ludicrously overpriced wine that I don't need.
Chin Chin.
Good luck to you; hope the next decade goes as well as this one.0 -
Good for you. It is a great achievement. I remember seeing Oryx and Crake, a big literary event at the time, jump into the ST top ten list at number one. Having sold 5,000 copies. Not much cash there.SeanT said:
Talking of decades, it is now possible, indeed very probable (barring terror attack, terminal cirrhosis, weird end of western civilisation), that I will do ten years in a row where I earn more than the prime minister in every one of those years. Just from writing.TOPPING said:
Brexit is the economy. For the next ten years or so.Danny565 said:Sorry, but that Labour Uncut article is completely off the mark when it says "supporting Brexit" would be a black mark against any leadership candidates.
In case we've forgotten, Corbyn originally won the leadership in 2015 when he was saying he might well back a Leave vote.
Then he was easily re-elected last year when he said Labour should accept Brexit, against a candidate who made a LibDem-esque "let's have a second referendum" the centre of his pitch.
Most Labour members voted to Remain, but they really don't feel that strongly about it, and would rather the party considers other issues (especially economic ones) as red lines rather than Brexit, in my experience.
For a writer that's meant to be impossible apart from the top 0.00000001%. So I must be in that 0.0000001%.
Odd feeling.
I can only bang on in this revolting boastful way because almost none of you know me so it doesn't matter if you hate me. I also realise that I might, nonetheless, be trying your patience just a tad, so I will now shut the F up and go and order some more ludicrously overpriced wine that I don't need.
Chin Chin.0 -
London is different. The rest is mostly quite similar.Charles said:
Not really artificial - archaic I'd acceptRichard_Tyndall said:
Why do people have this idiotic need to create these artificial entities. If they can't shove disparate separate countries together to form federations they are trying to break up countries, and divide people all in the name of forming federations in reverse. It is lunacy.williamglenn said:
That's the only way it would be viable, I think.Charles said:But if someone were to come up with a well thought through plan for a federal UK, I'd be supportive (even, probably to @Morris_Dancer 's disgust) supporting the re-creation of Wessex, Mercia, London, East Anglia and Northumbria as states.
But basically it is saying London, the Home Counties and the North are different. And then there's the bit in the middle that's not the north or the south. And Norfolk. Norfolk's different.
Except Norfolk. Norfolk is special.
0 -
Mike Ashley buys lingerie firm Agent Provocateur
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39140771
Insert gag here...0 -
Federalism works. That's why most of the Anglosphere does it.Richard_Tyndall said:
Why do people have this idiotic need to create these artificial entities. If they can't shove disparate separate countries together to form federations they are trying to break up countries, and divide people all in the name of forming federations in reverse. It is lunacy.williamglenn said:
That's the only way it would be viable, I think.Charles said:But if someone were to come up with a well thought through plan for a federal UK, I'd be supportive (even, probably to @Morris_Dancer 's disgust) supporting the re-creation of Wessex, Mercia, London, East Anglia and Northumbria as states.
0