politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Macron becomes an even stronger favourite for French President
Comments
-
Well if you can't play Candy Crush, don't blame them...FrancisUrquhart said:Migrants smash up German asylum centre and severely injure a police officer after a riot breaks out due to poor mobile phone reception
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4285316/Migrants-smash-German-asylum-centre-injure-police.html0 -
I watched the first half and it was painful...like a terrible sitcom with forced laughter and zero chemistry. The online "extra" spin off show that the BBC tried last year which was a different type of motoring show was actually quite good, it wasn't Top Gear, it was different and worked ok.SquareRoot said:
i was just about to post that I saw a bit at the end.. dull dull dull and that American guy.. even duller...FrancisUrquhart said:Guardian take on New New Top Gear....big pile of steaming poo.
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2017/mar/05/top-gear-review-matt-leblanc0 -
Does Corbyn have a salary exchange pension that knocks off part of his Oppo leader salary ?FrancisUrquhart said:Genius Jahadi Jez's accountant done a cracking job for his clients silly budget stunt....
Jeremy Corbyn’s team say he was paid just £27,192 in his role as Leader of the Opposition in the year 2015/16. Yet this does not tally with the government’s accounts – dug out by James Tapsfield – which say Corbyn was paid £30,587 in 2016/16. Why is Corbyn’s declaration not the same as this figure? Team Corbyn say the £27,192 figure comes from his P60. They don’t know why the government’s accounts show him being paid £30,587…
What’s more, his earnings as Leader of the Opposition are clearly a salary. As you can see above, the government accounts call it a “salary“. So why does it appear in the pensions section of his tax summary, not the salary section? Have to wonder if this tax stunt was worth it for Jez…
https://order-order.com/2017/03/06/corbyns-numbers-dont-tally-government-accounts/0 -
Morris_Dancer said:
Mr. Jessop, an interesting idea. A potential problem is that Health and Education (and, to a lesser extent, Policing) are vote-winners. Defence tends not to be. There'd be pressure with such an approach to starve an already underfunded MoD because voters are more into other areas.
Also, there's a problem with number bias. Twenty percent sounds a lot more than 19% (hence why books are priced Something-Ninety-Nine, but wages are £8 an hour, rather than £7.99).
Australia is still nurturing a grudge over the destruction of the Tasmanian apple industry and other agricultural declines from when the UK entered the European single market and stopped importing so much Australia produce.stodge said:
I didn't mention Africa though it's an idea the EU neglected and the Chinese, unencumbered by the past, have developed primarily for minerals but the revival of the railways has been a useful by-product.CarlottaVance said:
Funny how China forging trade links with Africa is "strategic vision for the 21st Century" but when we do it it's "empire 2.0".
The line seems to be there are some "quick wins" from Australia, New Zealand, Canada and possibly the US in terms of free trade agreements (interesting to see what they say in terms of migration to and from). My point is the world doesn't end there and quite apart from the EU there are countries such as Brazil, China, Indonesia and others with whom we will need to negotiate trade deals - markets the EU struggled to penetrate but which we will need to obtain access.0 -
Its a genius PR stunt to release your tax return as a sign of transparency, then nobody on your team be able to clarify your own tax return when challenged (especially when your financial situation should be very very straightforward).Pulpstar said:
Does Corbyn have a salary exchange pension that knocks off part of his Oppo leader salary ?FrancisUrquhart said:Genius Jahadi Jez's accountant done a cracking job for his clients silly budget stunt....
Jeremy Corbyn’s team say he was paid just £27,192 in his role as Leader of the Opposition in the year 2015/16. Yet this does not tally with the government’s accounts – dug out by James Tapsfield – which say Corbyn was paid £30,587 in 2016/16. Why is Corbyn’s declaration not the same as this figure? Team Corbyn say the £27,192 figure comes from his P60. They don’t know why the government’s accounts show him being paid £30,587…
What’s more, his earnings as Leader of the Opposition are clearly a salary. As you can see above, the government accounts call it a “salary“. So why does it appear in the pensions section of his tax summary, not the salary section? Have to wonder if this tax stunt was worth it for Jez…
https://order-order.com/2017/03/06/corbyns-numbers-dont-tally-government-accounts/
I highly doubt he has done anything wrong, but it is a case study in PR...how not to do it.0 -
The Empire, its legacy and anything that might remind them of it is nothing but a source of embarrassment for the British establishment.CarlottaVance said:
Funny how China forging trade links with Africa is "strategic vision for the 21st Century" but when we do it it's "empire 2.0".Casino_Royale said:
If you read the Times article it's (guess what?) Whitehall civil servants calling it Empire 2.0, not ministers. The latter are merely calling for closer Commonwealth trading and investment links, particularly in Africa.RobD said:
I think that's overstating it a bit. No one is suggesting imperialism, just free trade. Why not start with the countries that we have closer ties with?stodge said:
On 23/6/16, we took a decisive turn and the consequences of that vote will reverberate for generations. I'm arguing part of that vote was about the future and we now need to think about it and have a part in shaping it. Unfortunately, that has been abdicated to people who think the future is in the past and rebooting the British Empire is a jolly good idea.
I think the likes of Australia, New Zealand, India and Canada have other concerns but are probably just too polite to say No.
Which - in and of itself - is very revealing.
I expect a significant number of UK civil servants to be actively working against the policy objectives of HMG during the Brexit negotiations, which we will find out about in the papers.
0 -
We'll try I'm sure but will we happy to see a glut of their imported products coming to the UK - bit late as far as China is concerned ? No doubt there'll be a lot of gas and air if we get whisky to China tariff-free but that's more symbolic than actual ?RobD said:
Is there any doubt that the UK will try and negotiate free trade agreements with those countries?
0 -
I think the fact he needs to send such simple taxes off to an accountancy firm is a bit embarrassing personally.FrancisUrquhart said:
Its a genius PR stunt to release your tax return as a sign of transparency, then nobody on your team be able to clarify your own tax return when challenged (especially when your financial situation should be very very straightforward).Pulpstar said:
Does Corbyn have a salary exchange pension that knocks off part of his Oppo leader salary ?FrancisUrquhart said:Genius Jahadi Jez's accountant done a cracking job for his clients silly budget stunt....
Jeremy Corbyn’s team say he was paid just £27,192 in his role as Leader of the Opposition in the year 2015/16. Yet this does not tally with the government’s accounts – dug out by James Tapsfield – which say Corbyn was paid £30,587 in 2016/16. Why is Corbyn’s declaration not the same as this figure? Team Corbyn say the £27,192 figure comes from his P60. They don’t know why the government’s accounts show him being paid £30,587…
What’s more, his earnings as Leader of the Opposition are clearly a salary. As you can see above, the government accounts call it a “salary“. So why does it appear in the pensions section of his tax summary, not the salary section? Have to wonder if this tax stunt was worth it for Jez…
https://order-order.com/2017/03/06/corbyns-numbers-dont-tally-government-accounts/
I highly doubt he has done anything wrong, but it is a case study in PR...how not to do it.0 -
You were saying in an earlier post that we should be seeking access to these market?stodge said:
We'll try I'm sure but will we happy to see a glut of their imported products coming to the UK - bit late as far as China is concerned ? No doubt there'll be a lot of gas and air if we get whisky to China tariff-free but that's more symbolic than actual ?RobD said:
Is there any doubt that the UK will try and negotiate free trade agreements with those countries?0 -
Well he is as thick as two short planks. Making jam is about the limit of his abilities...good job he isn't in the running for any sort of important position.Pulpstar said:
I think the fact he needs to send such simple taxes off to an accountancy firm is a bit embarrassing personally.FrancisUrquhart said:
Its a genius PR stunt to release your tax return as a sign of transparency, then nobody on your team be able to clarify your own tax return when challenged (especially when your financial situation should be very very straightforward).Pulpstar said:
Does Corbyn have a salary exchange pension that knocks off part of his Oppo leader salary ?FrancisUrquhart said:Genius Jahadi Jez's accountant done a cracking job for his clients silly budget stunt....
Jeremy Corbyn’s team say he was paid just £27,192 in his role as Leader of the Opposition in the year 2015/16. Yet this does not tally with the government’s accounts – dug out by James Tapsfield – which say Corbyn was paid £30,587 in 2016/16. Why is Corbyn’s declaration not the same as this figure? Team Corbyn say the £27,192 figure comes from his P60. They don’t know why the government’s accounts show him being paid £30,587…
What’s more, his earnings as Leader of the Opposition are clearly a salary. As you can see above, the government accounts call it a “salary“. So why does it appear in the pensions section of his tax summary, not the salary section? Have to wonder if this tax stunt was worth it for Jez…
https://order-order.com/2017/03/06/corbyns-numbers-dont-tally-government-accounts/
I highly doubt he has done anything wrong, but it is a case study in PR...how not to do it.0 -
If you think it's a deliberate spoiling tactic by civil servants to coin 'Empire 2.0', presumably you must believe being reminded of the Empire and its legacy is embarrassing to more than just the British establishment. Or do you think they've made a fatal error and a grateful, supplicant world will fall upon the concept?Casino_Royale said:
The Empire, its legacy and anything that might remind them of it is nothing but a source of embarrassment for the British establishment.CarlottaVance said:
Funny how China forging trade links with Africa is "strategic vision for the 21st Century" but when we do it it's "empire 2.0".Casino_Royale said:
If you read the Times article it's (guess what?) Whitehall civil servants calling it Empire 2.0, not ministers. The latter are merely calling for closer Commonwealth trading and investment links, particularly in Africa.RobD said:
I think that's overstating it a bit. No one is suggesting imperialism, just free trade. Why not start with the countries that we have closer ties with?stodge said:
On 23/6/16, we took a decisive turn and the consequences of that vote will reverberate for generations. I'm arguing part of that vote was about the future and we now need to think about it and have a part in shaping it. Unfortunately, that has been abdicated to people who think the future is in the past and rebooting the British Empire is a jolly good idea.
I think the likes of Australia, New Zealand, India and Canada have other concerns but are probably just too polite to say No.
Which - in and of itself - is very revealing.
I expect a significant number of UK civil servants to be actively working against the policy objectives of HMG during the Brexit negotiations, which we will find out about in the papers.0 -
Has TSE fainted with excitement at the news that Steps are making a comeback?
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/steps-comeback-single-scared-of-the-dark-abba-new-album-tour-dates_uk_58bd0b4ee4b0b998941866830 -
That's the problem isn't it really - not that he's (very) left wing, but that he is thick as mince.FrancisUrquhart said:
Well he is as thick as two short planks. Making jam is about the limit of his abilities...good job he isn't in the running for any sort of important position.Pulpstar said:
I think the fact he needs to send such simple taxes off to an accountancy firm is a bit embarrassing personally.FrancisUrquhart said:
Its a genius PR stunt to release your tax return as a sign of transparency, then nobody on your team be able to clarify your own tax return when challenged (especially when your financial situation should be very very straightforward).Pulpstar said:
Does Corbyn have a salary exchange pension that knocks off part of his Oppo leader salary ?FrancisUrquhart said:Genius Jahadi Jez's accountant done a cracking job for his clients silly budget stunt....
Jeremy Corbyn’s team say he was paid just £27,192 in his role as Leader of the Opposition in the year 2015/16. Yet this does not tally with the government’s accounts – dug out by James Tapsfield – which say Corbyn was paid £30,587 in 2016/16. Why is Corbyn’s declaration not the same as this figure? Team Corbyn say the £27,192 figure comes from his P60. They don’t know why the government’s accounts show him being paid £30,587…
What’s more, his earnings as Leader of the Opposition are clearly a salary. As you can see above, the government accounts call it a “salary“. So why does it appear in the pensions section of his tax summary, not the salary section? Have to wonder if this tax stunt was worth it for Jez…
https://order-order.com/2017/03/06/corbyns-numbers-dont-tally-government-accounts/
I highly doubt he has done anything wrong, but it is a case study in PR...how not to do it.0 -
I am guessing the full Labour party member survey has been linked to, but in case it has not been, here it is:
https://election-data.co.uk/labour-membership-poll-results-2017
The key finding for me - alongside the significant drop in support for Corbyn and the fact that members think he should stand down before the GE - is the question on who members would consider voting for in an election that Corbyn did not take part in:
John McDonnell - 27%
Yvette Cooper - 27%
Chuka Umunna - 26%
Keir Starmer - 26%
Clive Lewis - 23%
Hillary Benn - 21%
Dan Jarvis - 17%
Angela Rayner - 15%
Emily Thornberry - 14%
Rebecca Long Bailey - 10%
Lisa Nandy - 8%
Rachel Reeves - 5%
Someone else - 13%
Don't know - 17%
Putting to one side both McDonnell and Benn have ruled themselves out (yeah, right), looking at those numbers the chances are that the next leader is going to come from the centre or the soft left. If the McDonnell amendment does not get through conference, there will be no far left candidate at all when the leadership is next contended. If it does, there will be one - and he/she will be up against candidates who are far more vote transfer friendly. So, for example, in a contest featuring McDonnell, Cooper, Umunna and Starmer, McDonnell may just top the poll on a first round, but would get very few transfers from the contenders that then drop out in the following rounds.
Another interesting question is what members think Corbyn should do in the event of losing the support of the unions or the shadow cabinet. In both circumstances, they say he should stand down.
Watch this space.0 -
In all of this the one thing that nobody's commented on that I've seen, but I thought was odd was how little he gave to charity... He earns over £100k and is known to not live extravagantly - but managed to give just £400 to charity in the year? I know that political donations don't get listed - but it seemed low to me. Maybe just me...FrancisUrquhart said:
Its a genius PR stunt to release your tax return as a sign of transparency, then nobody on your team be able to clarify your own tax return when challenged (especially when your financial situation should be very very straightforward).Pulpstar said:
Does Corbyn have a salary exchange pension that knocks off part of his Oppo leader salary ?FrancisUrquhart said:Genius Jahadi Jez's accountant done a cracking job for his clients silly budget stunt....
Jeremy Corbyn’s team say he was paid just £27,192 in his role as Leader of the Opposition in the year 2015/16. Yet this does not tally with the government’s accounts – dug out by James Tapsfield – which say Corbyn was paid £30,587 in 2016/16. Why is Corbyn’s declaration not the same as this figure? Team Corbyn say the £27,192 figure comes from his P60. They don’t know why the government’s accounts show him being paid £30,587…
What’s more, his earnings as Leader of the Opposition are clearly a salary. As you can see above, the government accounts call it a “salary“. So why does it appear in the pensions section of his tax summary, not the salary section? Have to wonder if this tax stunt was worth it for Jez…
https://order-order.com/2017/03/06/corbyns-numbers-dont-tally-government-accounts/
I highly doubt he has done anything wrong, but it is a case study in PR...how not to do it.0 -
Corbyn's support is dropping in the same way Texas is trending Democrat though.SouthamObserver said:I am guessing the full Labour party member survey has been linked to, but in case it has not been, here it is:
https://election-data.co.uk/labour-membership-poll-results-2017
The key finding for me - alongside the significant drop in support for Corbyn and the fact that members think he should stand down before the GE - is the question on who members would consider voting for in an election that Corbyn did not take part in:
John McDonnell - 27%
Yvette Cooper - 27%
Chuka Umunna - 26%
Keir Starmer - 26%
Clive Lewis - 23%
Hillary Benn - 21%
Dan Jarvis - 17%
Angela Rayner - 15%
Emily Thornberry - 14%
Rebecca Long Bailey - 10%
Lisa Nandy - 8%
Rachel Reeves - 5%
Someone else - 13%
Don't know - 17%
Putting to one side both McDonnell and Benn have ruled themselves out (yeah, right), looking at those numbers the chances are that the next leader is going to come from the centre or the soft left. If the McDonnell amendment does not get through conference, there will be no far left candidate at all when the leadership is next contended. If it does, there will be one - and he/she will be up against candidates who are far more vote transfer friendly. So, for example, in a contest featuring McDonnell, Cooper, Umunna and Starmer, McDonnell may just top the poll on a first round, but would get very few transfers from the contenders that then drop out in the following rounds.
Another interesting question is what members think Corbyn should do in the event of losing the support of the unions or the shadow cabinet. In both circumstances, they say he should stand down.
Watch this space.0 -
He earnt £78 in interest last year. If he's getting 0.05% from his bank then that could be on savings of ~ £156k or so.Lennon said:
In all of this the one thing that nobody's commented on that I've seen, but I thought was odd was how little he gave to charity... He earns over £100k and is known to not live extravagantly - but managed to give just £400 to charity in the year? I know that political donations don't get listed - but it seemed low to me. Maybe just me...FrancisUrquhart said:
Its a genius PR stunt to release your tax return as a sign of transparency, then nobody on your team be able to clarify your own tax return when challenged (especially when your financial situation should be very very straightforward).Pulpstar said:
Does Corbyn have a salary exchange pension that knocks off part of his Oppo leader salary ?FrancisUrquhart said:Genius Jahadi Jez's accountant done a cracking job for his clients silly budget stunt....
Jeremy Corbyn’s team say he was paid just £27,192 in his role as Leader of the Opposition in the year 2015/16. Yet this does not tally with the government’s accounts – dug out by James Tapsfield – which say Corbyn was paid £30,587 in 2016/16. Why is Corbyn’s declaration not the same as this figure? Team Corbyn say the £27,192 figure comes from his P60. They don’t know why the government’s accounts show him being paid £30,587…
What’s more, his earnings as Leader of the Opposition are clearly a salary. As you can see above, the government accounts call it a “salary“. So why does it appear in the pensions section of his tax summary, not the salary section? Have to wonder if this tax stunt was worth it for Jez…
https://order-order.com/2017/03/06/corbyns-numbers-dont-tally-government-accounts/
I highly doubt he has done anything wrong, but it is a case study in PR...how not to do it.0 -
If we had a sufficiently ruthless government, they would make continued employment at the FCO dependent on signing a declaration that you are supportive of getting the best possible outcome from the Brexit process and will not attempt to obstruct it in any way.Casino_Royale said:
If you read the Times article it's (guess what?) Whitehall civil servants calling it Empire 2.0, not ministers. The latter are merely calling for closer Commonwealth trading and investment links, particularly in Africa.RobD said:
I think that's overstating it a bit. No one is suggesting imperialism, just free trade. Why not start with the countries that we have closer ties with?stodge said:
On 23/6/16, we took a decisive turn and the consequences of that vote will reverberate for generations. I'm arguing part of that vote was about the future and we now need to think about it and have a part in shaping it. Unfortunately, that has been abdicated to people who think the future is in the past and rebooting the British Empire is a jolly good idea.
I think the likes of Australia, New Zealand, India and Canada have other concerns but are probably just too polite to say No.
Which - in and of itself - is very revealing.
I expect a significant number of UK civil servants to be actively working against the policy objectives of HMG during the Brexit negotiations, which we will find out about in the papers.
It won't happen. We must all bow before our 'impartial' and 'Rolls Royce' civil servants.
0 -
Corbyn had 72% support in February 2016.NickPalmer said:Plenty of material for all of us to quote from selectively:
https://election-data.co.uk/labour-membership-poll-results-2017
Broad summary - Corbyn's position among members is weaker than last year but would still win if an election was forced at once; however, most members think he should resign if certain adverse effects occur, but not others. If he did resign, McDonnell and Cooper lead, but it's a pretty wide open field. Members trust Corbyn to be truthful, others not so much, the media hardly at all. A tenth often brood on whether to stay members or not, though most never consider lapsing. All quite nuanced.
He got 61% support in the leadership election in September 2016.
He is now down to 54% support.
The trend is going one way.
He'll be gone by the end of 2018 and a soft-left or centre-left leader will replace him.
0 -
F1: gossip, Haas reckon Ferrari have made amazing progress with their engine. Will have implications for Haas as well, of course, who use the Ferrari engine.0
-
It's not what I think, it's what the Times article says. Read it.Theuniondivvie said:
If you think it's a deliberate spoiling tactic by civil servants to coin 'Empire 2.0', presumably you must believe being reminded of the Empire and its legacy is embarrassing to more than just the British establishment. Or do you think they've made a fatal error and a grateful, supplicant world will fall upon the concept?Casino_Royale said:
The Empire, its legacy and anything that might remind them of it is nothing but a source of embarrassment for the British establishment.CarlottaVance said:
Funny how China forging trade links with Africa is "strategic vision for the 21st Century" but when we do it it's "empire 2.0".Casino_Royale said:
If you read the Times article it's (guess what?) Whitehall civil servants calling it Empire 2.0, not ministers. The latter are merely calling for closer Commonwealth trading and investment links, particularly in Africa.RobD said:
I think that's overstating it a bit. No one is suggesting imperialism, just free trade. Why not start with the countries that we have closer ties with?stodge said:
On 23/6/16, we took a decisive turn and the consequences of that vote will reverberate for generations. I'm arguing part of that vote was about the future and we now need to think about it and have a part in shaping it. Unfortunately, that has been abdicated to people who think the future is in the past and rebooting the British Empire is a jolly good idea.
I think the likes of Australia, New Zealand, India and Canada have other concerns but are probably just too polite to say No.
Which - in and of itself - is very revealing.
I expect a significant number of UK civil servants to be actively working against the policy objectives of HMG during the Brexit negotiations, which we will find out about in the papers.
I don't agree that it is about Empire 2.0, but, nor am I embarrassed by it.0 -
If you missed the controversy about this - the Left’s determination to shut down free speech continues apace
"And so I’m pessimistic. I say that realizing that I am probably the most unqualified person to analyze the larger meanings of last week’s events at Middlebury. It will take some time for me to be dispassionate. If you promise to bear that in mind, I will say what I’m thinking and rely on you to discount it appropriately: What happened last Thursday has the potential to be a disaster for American liberal education.
http://www.aei.org/publication/reflections-on-the-revolution-in-middlebury/0 -
FPulpstar said:
Corbyn's support is dropping in the same way Texas is trending Democrat though.SouthamObserver said:I am guessing the full Labour party member survey has been linked to, but in case it has not been, here it is:
https://election-data.co.uk/labour-membership-poll-results-2017
The key finding for me - alongside the significant drop in support for Corbyn and the fact that members think he should stand down before the GE - is the question on who members would consider voting for in an election that Corbyn did not take part in:
John McDonnell - 27%
Yvette Cooper - 27%
Chuka Umunna - 26%
Keir Starmer - 26%
Clive Lewis - 23%
Hillary Benn - 21%
Dan Jarvis - 17%
Angela Rayner - 15%
Emily Thornberry - 14%
Rebecca Long Bailey - 10%
Lisa Nandy - 8%
Rachel Reeves - 5%
Someone else - 13%
Don't know - 17%
Putting rounds.
Another interesting question is what members think Corbyn should do in the event of losing the support of the unions or the shadow cabinet. In both circumstances, they say he should stand down.
Watch this space.
From 72% to 54% in one year.Pulpstar said:
Corbyn's support is dropping in the same way Texas is trending Democrat though.SouthamObserver said:I am guessing the full Labour party member survey has been linked to, but in case it has not been, here it is:
https://election-data.co.uk/labour-membership-poll-results-2017
The key finding for me - alongside the significant drop in support for Corbyn and the fact that members think he should stand down before the GE - is the question on who members would consider voting for in an election that Corbyn did not take part in:
John McDonnell - 27%
Yvette Cooper - 27%
Chuka Umunna - 26%
Keir Starmer - 26%
Clive Lewis - 23%
Hillary Benn - 21%
Dan Jarvis - 17%
Angela Rayner - 15%
Emily Thornberry - 14%
Rebecca Long Bailey - 10%
Lisa Nandy - 8%
Rachel Reeves - 5%
Someone else - 13%
Don't know - 17%
Putting get very few transfers from the contenders that then drop out in the following rounds.
Another interesting question is what members think Corbyn should do in the event of losing the support of the unions or the shadow cabinet. In both circumstances, they say he should stand down.
Watch this space.
If the unions or the shadow cabinet call for him to stand down, most members believe he should.
Most encouragingly, the far left will not win again.0 -
It's not embarrassing at all. However, its time is past. "Empire 2.0" is designed to suggest that the proponents of increased trade with Africa, India, et al are simply harking back to a nostalgic vision rather than dealing with the world as it is.Theuniondivvie said:
If you think it's a deliberate spoiling tactic by civil servants to coin 'Empire 2.0', presumably you must believe being reminded of the Empire and its legacy is embarrassing to more than just the British establishment. Or do you think they've made a fatal error and a grateful, supplicant world will fall upon the concept?Casino_Royale said:
The Empire, its legacy and anything that might remind them of it is nothing but a source of embarrassment for the British establishment.CarlottaVance said:
Funny how China forging trade links with Africa is "strategic vision for the 21st Century" but when we do it it's "empire 2.0".Casino_Royale said:
If you read the Times article it's (guess what?) Whitehall civil servants calling it Empire 2.0, not ministers. The latter are merely calling for closer Commonwealth trading and investment links, particularly in Africa.RobD said:
I think that's overstating it a bit. No one is suggesting imperialism, just free trade. Why not start with the countries that we have closer ties with?stodge said:
On 23/6/16, we took a decisive turn and the consequences of that vote will reverberate for generations. I'm arguing part of that vote was about the future and we now need to think about it and have a part in shaping it. Unfortunately, that has been abdicated to people who think the future is in the past and rebooting the British Empire is a jolly good idea.
I think the likes of Australia, New Zealand, India and Canada have other concerns but are probably just too polite to say No.
Which - in and of itself - is very revealing.
I expect a significant number of UK civil servants to be actively working against the policy objectives of HMG during the Brexit negotiations, which we will find out about in the papers.0 -
Partly, but setting aside one's opinion of socialism, Corbyn hasn't even worked out a consistent, logical expression of his own left wing views - no doubt a consequence of decades of not expecting to have to put them into practice (and I accept, a dollop of thick mince).Pulpstar said:
That's the problem isn't it really - not that he's (very) left wing, but that he is thick as mince.FrancisUrquhart said:
Well he is as thick as two short planks. Making jam is about the limit of his abilities...good job he isn't in the running for any sort of important position.Pulpstar said:
I think the fact he needs to send such simple taxes off to an accountancy firm is a bit embarrassing personally.FrancisUrquhart said:
Its a genius PR stunt to release your tax return as a sign of transparency, then nobody on your team be able to clarify your own tax return when challenged (especially when your financial situation should be very very straightforward).Pulpstar said:
Does Corbyn have a salary exchange pension that knocks off part of his Oppo leader salary ?FrancisUrquhart said:Genius Jahadi Jez's accountant done a cracking job for his clients silly budget stunt....
Jeremy Corbyn’s team say he was paid just £27,192 in his role as Leader of the Opposition in the year 2015/16. Yet this does not tally with the government’s accounts – dug out by James Tapsfield – which say Corbyn was paid £30,587 in 2016/16. Why is Corbyn’s declaration not the same as this figure? Team Corbyn say the £27,192 figure comes from his P60. They don’t know why the government’s accounts show him being paid £30,587…
What’s more, his earnings as Leader of the Opposition are clearly a salary. As you can see above, the government accounts call it a “salary“. So why does it appear in the pensions section of his tax summary, not the salary section? Have to wonder if this tax stunt was worth it for Jez…
https://order-order.com/2017/03/06/corbyns-numbers-dont-tally-government-accounts/
I highly doubt he has done anything wrong, but it is a case study in PR...how not to do it.0 -
In the real leadership election last year, Corbyn got 61% against an opponent who most agreed was nowhere near credible (and who does not feature in the members' list of contenders for the next time). Since then, Corbyn has lost more support among members.0
-
Can't begin to work this out. Leak by the government to discredit the civil service who they think are anti brexit and want to move out of the way ?Theuniondivvie said:
If you think it's a deliberate spoiling tactic by civil servants to coin 'Empire 2.0', presumably you must believe being reminded of the Empire and its legacy is embarrassing to more than just the British establishment. Or do you think they've made a fatal error and a grateful, supplicant world will fall upon the concept?Casino_Royale said:
The Empire, its legacy and anything that might remind them of it is nothing but a source of embarrassment for the British establishment.CarlottaVance said:
Funny how China forging trade links with Africa is "strategic vision for the 21st Century" but when we do it it's "empire 2.0".Casino_Royale said:
If you read the Times article it's (guess what?) Whitehall civil servants calling it Empire 2.0, not ministers. The latter are merely calling for closer Commonwealth trading and investment links, particularly in Africa.RobD said:
I think that's overstating it a bit. No one is suggesting imperialism, just free trade. Why not start with the countries that we have closer ties with?stodge said:
On 23/6/16, we took a decisive turn and the consequences of that vote will reverberate for generations. I'm arguing part of that vote was about the future and we now need to think about it and have a part in shaping it. Unfortunately, that has been abdicated to people who think the future is in the past and rebooting the British Empire is a jolly good idea.
I think the likes of Australia, New Zealand, India and Canada have other concerns but are probably just too polite to say No.
Which - in and of itself - is very revealing.
I expect a significant number of UK civil servants to be actively working against the policy objectives of HMG during the Brexit negotiations, which we will find out about in the papers.
0 -
Time and transparency. My daughter used to make a reasonable income doing the tax for individuals and small businesses.Pulpstar said:
I think the fact he needs to send such simple taxes off to an accountancy firm is a bit embarrassing personally.FrancisUrquhart said:
Its a genius PR stunt to release your tax return as a sign of transparency, then nobody on your team be able to clarify your own tax return when challenged (especially when your financial situation should be very very straightforward).Pulpstar said:
Does Corbyn have a salary exchange pension that knocks off part of his Oppo leader salary ?FrancisUrquhart said:Genius Jahadi Jez's accountant done a cracking job for his clients silly budget stunt....
Jeremy Corbyn’s team say he was paid just £27,192 in his role as Leader of the Opposition in the year 2015/16. Yet this does not tally with the government’s accounts – dug out by James Tapsfield – which say Corbyn was paid £30,587 in 2016/16. Why is Corbyn’s declaration not the same as this figure? Team Corbyn say the £27,192 figure comes from his P60. They don’t know why the government’s accounts show him being paid £30,587…
What’s more, his earnings as Leader of the Opposition are clearly a salary. As you can see above, the government accounts call it a “salary“. So why does it appear in the pensions section of his tax summary, not the salary section? Have to wonder if this tax stunt was worth it for Jez…
https://order-order.com/2017/03/06/corbyns-numbers-dont-tally-government-accounts/
I highly doubt he has done anything wrong, but it is a case study in PR...how not to do it.
Mind, if he used someone like PWC (I know, I know) I’d regard that in itself as cause for suspicion.0 -
The question is "consider" voting for. So people can put down several candidates and not be forced to choose.SouthamObserver said:I am guessing the full Labour party member survey has been linked to, but in case it has not been, here it is:
https://election-data.co.uk/labour-membership-poll-results-2017
The key finding for me - alongside the significant drop in support for Corbyn and the fact that members think he should stand down before the GE - is the question on who members would consider voting for in an election that Corbyn did not take part in:
John McDonnell - 27%
Yvette Cooper - 27%
Chuka Umunna - 26%
Keir Starmer - 26%
Clive Lewis - 23%
Hillary Benn - 21%
Dan Jarvis - 17%
Angela Rayner - 15%
Emily Thornberry - 14%
Rebecca Long Bailey - 10%
Lisa Nandy - 8%
Rachel Reeves - 5%
Someone else - 13%
Don't know - 17%
Putting to one side both McDonnell and Benn have ruled themselves out (yeah, right), looking at those numbers the chances are that the next leader is going to come from the centre or the soft left. If the McDonnell amendment does not get through conference, there will be no far left candidate at all when the leadership is next contended. If it does, there will be one - and he/she will be up against candidates who are far more vote transfer friendly. So, for example, in a contest featuring McDonnell, Cooper, Umunna and Starmer, McDonnell may just top the poll on a first round, but would get very few transfers from the contenders that then drop out in the following rounds.
Another interesting question is what members think Corbyn should do in the event of losing the support of the unions or the shadow cabinet. In both circumstances, they say he should stand down.
Watch this space.
A better survey would ask which single person you would vote for from a list of candidates.
0 -
Yes, this poll looks like very bad news for Corbyn and – as such – very good news for the party. I doubt his net approval rate will last beyond this spring at this rate. Reflects exactly what Atul Hatwal was saying in his excellent leadership analysis last week.SouthamObserver said:
Corbyn had 72% support in February 2016.NickPalmer said:Plenty of material for all of us to quote from selectively:
https://election-data.co.uk/labour-membership-poll-results-2017
Broad summary - Corbyn's position among members is weaker than last year but would still win if an election was forced at once; however, most members think he should resign if certain adverse effects occur, but not others. If he did resign, McDonnell and Cooper lead, but it's a pretty wide open field. Members trust Corbyn to be truthful, others not so much, the media hardly at all. A tenth often brood on whether to stay members or not, though most never consider lapsing. All quite nuanced.
He got 61% support in the leadership election in September 2016.
He is now down to 54% support.
The trend is going one way.
He'll be gone by the end of 2018 and a soft-left or centre-left leader will replace him.
I'd be interested to hear from @NickPalmer regarding his support for Corbyn. Is it ebbing away along with that of the membership?0 -
I wasn't for a second suggesting you (or Charles) are embarrassed by the British Empire. Heaven forfend!Casino_Royale said:
It's not what I think, it's what the Times article says. Read it.Theuniondivvie said:
If you think it's a deliberate spoiling tactic by civil servants to coin 'Empire 2.0', presumably you must believe being reminded of the Empire and its legacy is embarrassing to more than just the British establishment. Or do you think they've made a fatal error and a grateful, supplicant world will fall upon the concept?Casino_Royale said:
The Empire, its legacy and anything that might remind them of it is nothing but a source of embarrassment for the British establishment.CarlottaVance said:
Funny how China forging trade links with Africa is "strategic vision for the 21st Century" but when we do it it's "empire 2.0".Casino_Royale said:
If you read the Times article it's (guess what?) Whitehall civil servants calling it Empire 2.0, not ministers. The latter are merely calling for closer Commonwealth trading and investment links, particularly in Africa.RobD said:
I think that's overstating it a bit. No one is suggesting imperialism, just free trade. Why not start with the countries that we have closer ties with?stodge said:
On 23/6/16, we took a decisive turn and the consequences of that vote will reverberate for generations. I'm arguing part of that vote was about the future and we now need to think about it and have a part in shaping it. Unfortunately, that has been abdicated to people who think the future is in the past and rebooting the British Empire is a jolly good idea.
I think the likes of Australia, New Zealand, India and Canada have other concerns but are probably just too polite to say No.
Which - in and of itself - is very revealing.
I expect a significant number of UK civil servants to be actively working against the policy objectives of HMG during the Brexit negotiations, which we will find out about in the papers.
I don't agree that it is about Empire 2.0, but, nor am I embarrassed by it.0 -
I really don't understand the takes on Twitter that this polling is good for Corbyn. The membership is supposed to be solid for him.SouthamObserver said:In the real leadership election last year, Corbyn got 61% against an opponent who most agreed was nowhere near credible (and who does not feature in the members' list of contenders for the next time). Since then, Corbyn has lost more support among members.
0 -
They are reportedly trying some fancy stuff for the pistons:Morris_Dancer said:F1: gossip, Haas reckon Ferrari have made amazing progress with their engine. Will have implications for Haas as well, of course, who use the Ferrari engine.
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/ferrari-eyes-innovative-piston-solution-thanks-to-3d-printing-870008/
Just as interesting (for those of us incorrigible F1 obsessives) are their novel sidepod aerodynamics, which none seems quite to understand.
Worth a punt for the championship ?0 -
I think that's harsh but broadly fair. His lack of intellect and political acumen is a greater drag on his leadership than his politics (which are also a drag but not anywhere near as great).Pulpstar said:
That's the problem isn't it really - not that he's (very) left wing, but that he is thick as mince.FrancisUrquhart said:
Well he is as thick as two short planks. Making jam is about the limit of his abilities...good job he isn't in the running for any sort of important position.Pulpstar said:
I think the fact he needs to send such simple taxes off to an accountancy firm is a bit embarrassing personally.FrancisUrquhart said:
Its a genius PR stunt to release your tax return as a sign of transparency, then nobody on your team be able to clarify your own tax return when challenged (especially when your financial situation should be very very straightforward).Pulpstar said:
Does Corbyn have a salary exchange pension that knocks off part of his Oppo leader salary ?FrancisUrquhart said:Genius Jahadi Jez's accountant done a cracking job for his clients silly budget stunt....
Jeremy Corbyn’s team say he was paid just £27,192 in his role as Leader of the Opposition in the year 2015/16. Yet this does not tally with the government’s accounts – dug out by James Tapsfield – which say Corbyn was paid £30,587 in 2016/16. Why is Corbyn’s declaration not the same as this figure? Team Corbyn say the £27,192 figure comes from his P60. They don’t know why the government’s accounts show him being paid £30,587…
What’s more, his earnings as Leader of the Opposition are clearly a salary. As you can see above, the government accounts call it a “salary“. So why does it appear in the pensions section of his tax summary, not the salary section? Have to wonder if this tax stunt was worth it for Jez…
https://order-order.com/2017/03/06/corbyns-numbers-dont-tally-government-accounts/
I highly doubt he has done anything wrong, but it is a case study in PR...how not to do it.0 -
Once Corbyn gets over 50% he stops counting.Pulpstar said:
I think the fact he needs to send such simple taxes off to an accountancy firm is a bit embarrassing personally.FrancisUrquhart said:
Its a genius PR stunt to release your tax return as a sign of transparency, then nobody on your team be able to clarify your own tax return when challenged (especially when your financial situation should be very very straightforward).Pulpstar said:
Does Corbyn have a salary exchange pension that knocks off part of his Oppo leader salary ?FrancisUrquhart said:Genius Jahadi Jez's accountant done a cracking job for his clients silly budget stunt....
Jeremy Corbyn’s team say he was paid just £27,192 in his role as Leader of the Opposition in the year 2015/16. Yet this does not tally with the government’s accounts – dug out by James Tapsfield – which say Corbyn was paid £30,587 in 2016/16. Why is Corbyn’s declaration not the same as this figure? Team Corbyn say the £27,192 figure comes from his P60. They don’t know why the government’s accounts show him being paid £30,587…
What’s more, his earnings as Leader of the Opposition are clearly a salary. As you can see above, the government accounts call it a “salary“. So why does it appear in the pensions section of his tax summary, not the salary section? Have to wonder if this tax stunt was worth it for Jez…
https://order-order.com/2017/03/06/corbyns-numbers-dont-tally-government-accounts/
I highly doubt he has done anything wrong, but it is a case study in PR...how not to do it.0 -
Mr. B, too early to say. Their testing reliability was impressive, but headline times aren't much use. The mood music is good. But I'd be loath to back Vettel/Raikkonen/Ferrari at anything but silly bugger odds. They've a very large gap to make up.
I'd be more interested in a Constructor rather than Driver bet, were I so inclined.0 -
Damn! I didn't have the courage to increase my investment in Le Pen when she was at 4.2. You lot who were backing Juppé made me doubt my own judgement.
Fillon is likely to haemorrhage support both before and after the close of nominations now.
How will the support he loses be distributed among Le Pen, Macron, and Dupont-Aignan?
Then there is François Asselineau, leader of the UPR, who advocates French withdrawal from the EU and NATO as well as the eurozone. He is claiming that some of his nominations that should have been validated and published in the batch released on Friday weren't. Nobody seems to know what the Constitutional Council's publication policy actually is.
Francois Hollande, during a visit to a museum of freemasonry (!), said that his "ultimate duty" is to prevent a Le Pen victory.
So basically he's saying if anyone is fed up with him and his government, as most of the population are, they should vote for Le Pen. I wonder whether he considered the option of keeping his mouth shut?
0 -
Once you understand that most of the Corbynite Twitterati are innumerate you will understand this.Tissue_Price said:
I really don't understand the takes on Twitter that this polling is good for Corbyn. The membership is supposed to be solid for him.SouthamObserver said:In the real leadership election last year, Corbyn got 61% against an opponent who most agreed was nowhere near credible (and who does not feature in the members' list of contenders for the next time). Since then, Corbyn has lost more support among members.
0 -
The polling is bad for Corbyn, terrible for the far left.Tissue_Price said:
I really don't understand the takes on Twitter that this polling is good for Corbyn. The membership is supposed to be solid for him.SouthamObserver said:In the real leadership election last year, Corbyn got 61% against an opponent who most agreed was nowhere near credible (and who does not feature in the members' list of contenders for the next time). Since then, Corbyn has lost more support among members.
0 -
Doubt it was just over phone reception, was probably the straw that broke the back. but this is what happens when you take in more dependent migrants then a country can handle.FrancisUrquhart said:Migrants smash up German asylum centre and severely injure a police officer after a riot breaks out due to poor mobile phone reception
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4285316/Migrants-smash-German-asylum-centre-injure-police.html0 -
Fillon' s odds appear to be shortening, compared to when I last looked anyhow.0
-
Juppe is the new Rubio.
Discuss.0 -
I'm inclined to agree Mr D. If Merc really do have a couple of seconds in their pocket -Morris_Dancer said:Mr. B, too early to say. Their testing reliability was impressive, but headline times aren't much use. The mood music is good. But I'd be loath to back Vettel/Raikkonen/Ferrari at anything but silly bugger odds. They've a very large gap to make up.
I'd be more interested in a Constructor rather than Driver bet, were I so inclined.
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/128377/mercedes-planning-big-update-push-in-test-two
- best of the rest is probably the target.
0 -
Macron is already the only plausible non-Le Pen candidate left. I've bet accordingly.NickPalmer said:They can all compare notes about the various allegations made against each of them.
Dangerous betting market until the candidates are finalised, I think. I've laid Le Pen heavily and bet on Macron with a saver on Juppe, but am now staying out of it till the situation clarifies. It's possibly worth a saver on Hamon at 60-1 - if the anointed Republican were to stumble after nominations close (e.g. literally fall under a bus), Macron would be the only plausible non-Le Pen candidate left.0 -
I have a degree in Applied Statistics!!Bojabob said:
Once you understand that most of the Corbynite Twitterati are innumerate you will understand this.Tissue_Price said:
I really don't understand the takes on Twitter that this polling is good for Corbyn. The membership is supposed to be solid for him.SouthamObserver said:In the real leadership election last year, Corbyn got 61% against an opponent who most agreed was nowhere near credible (and who does not feature in the members' list of contenders for the next time). Since then, Corbyn has lost more support among members.
0 -
Then you will grasp the statistical implications of the word 'most'.bigjohnowls said:
I have a degree in Applied Statistics!!Bojabob said:
Once you understand that most of the Corbynite Twitterati are innumerate you will understand this.Tissue_Price said:
I really don't understand the takes on Twitter that this polling is good for Corbyn. The membership is supposed to be solid for him.SouthamObserver said:In the real leadership election last year, Corbyn got 61% against an opponent who most agreed was nowhere near credible (and who does not feature in the members' list of contenders for the next time). Since then, Corbyn has lost more support among members.
0 -
Now laid off Baroin to go all green.
Thank you to @TSE for the heads up on that bet the other day.0 -
If it went to a 2nd round of Macron-Le Pen, as of right now I'd basically have £610 on Macron at 1.88.Richard_Nabavi said:
Macron is already the only plausible non-Le Pen candidate left. I've bet accordingly.NickPalmer said:They can all compare notes about the various allegations made against each of them.
Dangerous betting market until the candidates are finalised, I think. I've laid Le Pen heavily and bet on Macron with a saver on Juppe, but am now staying out of it till the situation clarifies. It's possibly worth a saver on Hamon at 60-1 - if the anointed Republican were to stumble after nominations close (e.g. literally fall under a bus), Macron would be the only plausible non-Le Pen candidate left.
I assume it'll be 5-2 Le Pen, 2-5 Macron (And ought to be shorter for Macron) if it goes that way.0 -
My pleasure.Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:Now laid off Baroin to go all green.
Thank you to @TSE for the heads up on that bet the other day.0 -
Is there somewhere I can find a list of French polling? Cheers0
-
Yes, that is what it shows.SouthamObserver said:
The polling is bad for Corbyn, terrible for the far left.Tissue_Price said:
I really don't understand the takes on Twitter that this polling is good for Corbyn. The membership is supposed to be solid for him.SouthamObserver said:In the real leadership election last year, Corbyn got 61% against an opponent who most agreed was nowhere near credible (and who does not feature in the members' list of contenders for the next time). Since then, Corbyn has lost more support among members.
However the far left are easily energised, motivated and brought to a frenzy of righteous outrage to bring them together as a cause to support an acceptable (to them) candidate.
The numbers and reality may have variance.0 -
I see daine abbott is taking Trumpian line on jezzas self inflicted PR mess. Apparently it is media bias and journos unable to understand tax returns.0
-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_French_presidential_election,_2017Bojabob said:Is there somewhere I can find a list of French polling? Cheers
0 -
Until Putin et al work their magic on him.Richard_Nabavi said:
Macron is already the only plausible non-Le Pen candidate left. I've bet accordingly.NickPalmer said:They can all compare notes about the various allegations made against each of them.
Dangerous betting market until the candidates are finalised, I think. I've laid Le Pen heavily and bet on Macron with a saver on Juppe, but am now staying out of it till the situation clarifies. It's possibly worth a saver on Hamon at 60-1 - if the anointed Republican were to stumble after nominations close (e.g. literally fall under a bus), Macron would be the only plausible non-Le Pen candidate left.
He will also come very heavily under the spotlight for exactly the same reason.0 -
Thank you, Nick.NickPalmer said:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_French_presidential_election,_2017Bojabob said:Is there somewhere I can find a list of French polling? Cheers
0 -
Mr. B, that said, Ferrari to top score in Australia may be something I look at. Solid pace and reliability, two good drivers, and a Mercedes that sometimes (last year) started poorly and may suffer more in traffic are things to consider.0
-
This is a bit unfair, but very revealing re rhetoric vs action
"(Bizpac Review) – Conservative political commentator and comedian Steven Crowder is famous for his efforts at exposing the hypocrisy on the left and he recently pulled off one of his epic pranks, this time involving Syrian refugees.
Seizing on local progressive churches who advocate for the opening of the floodgates to allow these refugees into the U.S., proper vetting notwithstanding, Crowder asked a simple question: Will you take in any refugees?
Turns out, he encountered a little hesitancy when it comes to putting action to words.
“Of course, you’re not surprised by the collective reaction,” Crowder stated on his website. “Leftists are all about that care… until you ask them to put that care into meaningful action.”
https://youtu.be/j9zIzIePjpo0 -
Thanks, so broadly speaking Macron has a decisive advantage over the UMP candidate and hammers Le Pen in the second round. Still a fairly long way to go until the election, however.NickPalmer said:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_French_presidential_election,_2017Bojabob said:Is there somewhere I can find a list of French polling? Cheers
0 -
No, it's personal for me (I've known and liked him for 50 years) and I will support him regardless. But I agree the poll is good for the centre-left, and in m opinion they should accept the McDonnell amendment, as it's the only way they'll get Corbyn to stand down bfore 2020.Bojabob said:
Yes, this poll looks like very bad news for Corbyn and – as such – very good news for the party. I doubt his net approval rate will last beyond this spring at this rate. Reflects exactly what Atul Hatwal was saying in his excellent leadership analysis last week.SouthamObserver said:
Corbyn had 72% support in February 2016.NickPalmer said:Plenty of material for all of us to quote from selectively:
https://election-data.co.uk/labour-membership-poll-results-2017
Broad summary - Corbyn's position among members is weaker than last year but would still win if an election was forced at once; however, most members think he should resign if certain adverse effects occur, but not others. If he did resign, McDonnell and Cooper lead, but it's a pretty wide open field. Members trust Corbyn to be truthful, others not so much, the media hardly at all. A tenth often brood on whether to stay members or not, though most never consider lapsing. All quite nuanced.
He got 61% support in the leadership election in September 2016.
He is now down to 54% support.
The trend is going one way.
He'll be gone by the end of 2018 and a soft-left or centre-left leader will replace him.
I'd be interested to hear from @NickPalmer regarding his support for Corbyn. Is it ebbing away along with that of the membership?0 -
Oh dear
Alex Wickham
LibDems’ new million pound donor posted material from notorious site which expresses sympathy with suicide bombers: https://t.co/rARDAFO30t
Post by new top LibDem donor called for boycott of McDonalds, Starbucks, Coca Cola for "supporting Apartheid Israel" https://t.co/rARDAFO30t0 -
Indeed. Despite knowing very very little about French politics I'm all green and likely up about £35 thanks to some great tips on this website.Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:Now laid off Baroin to go all green.
Thank you to @TSE for the heads up on that bet the other day.
Laying Fillon when a heavy favourite ages ago, put a little on Macron (could have been bolder there) and a bet on Hamon before he came in significantly. I'm holding onto Baroin for now... Really just greed and optimism but always nice to have a long shot for big money.0 -
I note there was considerable excitement regarding the
Kantar Sofres 23–24 Feb 2017 1,005 N/A 58% 42%
Datapoint for Macron-Le Pen
Subsequent to that we have:
OpinionWay 24–26 Feb 2017 1,631 N/A 62% 38%
Ifop-Fiducial 23–27 Feb 2017 1,404 N/A 62% 38%
OpinionWay 25–27 Feb 2017 1,624 N/A 61% 39%
Ifop-Fiducial 24–28 Feb 2017 1,398 N/A 62% 38%
OpinionWay 26–28 Feb 2017 1,629 N/A 63% 37%
Ifop-Fiducial 26 Feb–1 Mar 2017 1,392 N/A 62% 38%
OpinionWay 27 Feb–1 Mar 2017 1,639 N/A 63% 37%
Ifop-Fiducial 27 Feb–2 Mar 2017 1,394 N/A 61% 39%
Elabe 28 Feb–2 Mar 2017 1,507 N/A 62% 38%
OpinionWay 28 Feb–2 Mar 2017 1,654 N/A 62% 38%
BVA 28 Feb–2 Mar 2017 1,413 N/A 62% 38%
Ifop-Fiducial 28 Feb–3 Mar 2017 1,383 N/A 61% 39%0 -
Completely off topic
I think the USA would be entirely justified in a first strike against North Korea now.0 -
I would wait for the odds for Le Pen to drift to 5 again. They probably will at some point over the next month as it is a massively volatile situation and the odds go up and down.
I don't see any value in backing the other candidates at the current odds because there is no certainty which one will emerge as the challenger and they all have flaws.
On the other hand Le Pen absolutely can win, but from my perspective it is literally the end of the world as we know it if she does, so no amount of betting winnings can comphensate for that.0 -
Farron on the NHS in today's Guardian. It's the comments that show true feelings. 50/50 love/hate
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/mar/06/tim-farron-liberal-democrats-cash-injection-nhs-care-services0 -
Interesting response. The thing is, on these numbers, the centre-left would win a challenge well before 2020 (there are no transfer friendly candidates from the Far Left) so why would they accept the McDonnell amendment? I don't see the incentive.NickPalmer said:
No, it's personal for me (I've known and liked him for 50 years) and I will support him regardless. But I agree the poll is good for the centre-left, and in my opinion they should accept the McDonnell amendment, as it's the only way they'll get Corbyn to stand down bfore 2020.Bojabob said:
Yes, this poll looks like very bad news for Corbyn and – as such – very good news for the party. I doubt his net approval rate will last beyond this spring at this rate. Reflects exactly what Atul Hatwal was saying in his excellent leadership analysis last week.SouthamObserver said:
Corbyn had 72% support in February 2016.NickPalmer said:Plenty of material for all of us to quote from selectively:
https://election-data.co.uk/labour-membership-poll-results-2017
Broad summary - Corbyn's position among members is weaker than last year but would still win if an election was forced at once; however, most members think he should resign if certain adverse effects occur, but not others. If he did resign, McDonnell and Cooper lead, but it's a pretty wide open field. Members trust Corbyn to be truthful, others not so much, the media hardly at all. A tenth often brood on whether to stay members or not, though most never consider lapsing. All quite nuanced.
He got 61% support in the leadership election in September 2016.
He is now down to 54% support.
The trend is going one way.
He'll be gone by the end of 2018 and a soft-left or centre-left leader will replace him.
I'd be interested to hear from @NickPalmer regarding his support for Corbyn. Is it ebbing away along with that of the membership?0 -
Yes, that looks pretty good for Macron. His enemy is time – he would rather the election were today I should think.Pulpstar said:I note there was considerable excitement regarding the
Kantar Sofres 23–24 Feb 2017 1,005 N/A 58% 42%
Datapoint for Macron-Le Pen
Subsequent to that we have:
OpinionWay 24–26 Feb 2017 1,631 N/A 62% 38%
Ifop-Fiducial 23–27 Feb 2017 1,404 N/A 62% 38%
OpinionWay 25–27 Feb 2017 1,624 N/A 61% 39%
Ifop-Fiducial 24–28 Feb 2017 1,398 N/A 62% 38%
OpinionWay 26–28 Feb 2017 1,629 N/A 63% 37%
Ifop-Fiducial 26 Feb–1 Mar 2017 1,392 N/A 62% 38%
OpinionWay 27 Feb–1 Mar 2017 1,639 N/A 63% 37%
Ifop-Fiducial 27 Feb–2 Mar 2017 1,394 N/A 61% 39%
Elabe 28 Feb–2 Mar 2017 1,507 N/A 62% 38%
OpinionWay 28 Feb–2 Mar 2017 1,654 N/A 62% 38%
BVA 28 Feb–2 Mar 2017 1,413 N/A 62% 38%
Ifop-Fiducial 28 Feb–3 Mar 2017 1,383 N/A 61% 39%0 -
Mr. Pulpstar, I've scanned the story on the BBC. What makes you say that?
North Korea have always behaved dickishly. A first strike would need to cause immense damage otherwise there'd be an artillery barrage that would cause massive harm to Seoul, even assuming there's no chance of a nuke being ready to go.
Mr. rkrkrk, I'm in a roughly similar position. Cheers for the many tips here, particularly on Macon when he was about 13.0 -
Putin didn't force Fillon to be creative with his employment arrangements, run on a Mr Clean platform, and lash out at the French justice system in the most intemperate terms. Reading the comments by the various centre-right politicians who have withdrawn their support for him, it's the last point which has really damaged him.Casino_Royale said:Until Putin et al work their magic on him.
He will also come very heavily under the spotlight for exactly the same reason.
The only remaining doubt I have is: what is Sarkozy up to? But even if somehow he and other party grandees manage to cobble something together and force Fillon to stand down, it's hard to see Les Républicans managing to put together a credible and united front, starting from here, so I still think Macron would win.0 -
Mr. Nabavi, we live in strange political times.0
-
They say 'Macon' knows his wine ;-)Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Pulpstar, I've scanned the story on the BBC. What makes you say that?
North Korea have always behaved dickishly. A first strike would need to cause immense damage otherwise there'd be an artillery barrage that would cause massive harm to Seoul, even assuming there's no chance of a nuke being ready to go.
Mr. rkrkrk, I'm in a roughly similar position. Cheers for the many tips here, particularly on Macon when he was about 13.0 -
True.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Nabavi, we live in strange political times.
Still, one mystery has been cleared up. The revelation that Jeremy Corbyn thinks that LOTO is a pension arrangment for retired politicians explains a lot.0 -
I'm slightly protective of my Baroin position as well.Richard_Nabavi said:
Putin didn't force Fillon to be creative with his employment arrangements, run on a Mr Clean platform, and lash out at the French justice system in the most intemperate terms. Reading the comments by the various centre-right politicians who have withdrawn their support for him, it's the last point which has really damaged him.Casino_Royale said:Until Putin et al work their magic on him.
He will also come very heavily under the spotlight for exactly the same reason.
The only remaining doubt I have is: what is Sarkozy up to? But even if somehow he and other party grandees manage to cobble something together and force Fillon to stand down, it's hard to see Les Républicans managing to put together a credible and united front, starting from here, so I still think Macron would win.
Fillon could still have further to fall.0 -
Pulpstar said:
Well that is just crazy. Could trigger a nuclear war in the Pacific.0 -
The odd thing about this Empire 2.0 stuff is just how historically ignorant it is. They clearly see the nineteenth century as the first empire. That ignores the local difficulty with the initial possessions in America and subsequently the chartered companies in east, west and southern africa.
Even ignoring that, it goes to the whole Robinson and Gallagher informal empire argument which was, if you really need to define it this way, the real empire 2.0.0 -
Ha! Bravo!Richard_Nabavi said:
True.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Nabavi, we live in strange political times.
Still, one mystery has been cleared up. The revelation that Jeremy Corbyn thinks that LOTO is a pension arrangment for retired politicians explains a lot.0 -
I guess that the idea would be to get Corbyn out asap so the PLP would essentially agree to a contest that would be won by someone on the centre left. But I agree with you. Better to leave it a year, allow Corbyn's support to drop even more and get a contest triggered by the unions under the current rules. That locks the far left out forever.Bojabob said:
Interesting response. The thing is, on these numbers, the centre-left would win a challenge well before 2020 (there are no transfer friendly candidates from the Far Left) so why would they accept the McDonnell amendment? I don't see the incentive.NickPalmer said:
No, it's personal for me (I've known and liked him for 50 years) and I will support him regardless. But I agree the poll is good for the centre-left, and in my opinion they should accept the McDonnell amendment, as it's the only way they'll get Corbyn to stand down bfore 2020.Bojabob said:
Yes, this poll looks like very bad news for Corbyn and – as such – very good news for the party. I doubt his net approval rate will last beyond this spring at this rate. Reflects exactly what Atul Hatwal was saying in his excellent leadership analysis last week.SouthamObserver said:
Corbyn had 72% support in February 2016.NickPalmer said:Plenty of material for all of us to quote from selectively:
https://election-data.co.uk/labour-membership-poll-results-2017
Broad summary - Corbyn's position among members is weaker than last year but would still win if an election was forced at once; however, most members think he should resign if certain adverse effects occur, but not others. If he did resign, McDonnell and Cooper lead, but it's a pretty wide open field. Members trust Corbyn to be truthful, others not so much, the media hardly at all. A tenth often brood on whether to stay members or not, though most never consider lapsing. All quite nuanced.
He got 61% support in the leadership election in September 2016.
He is now down to 54% support.
The trend is going one way.
He'll be gone by the end of 2018 and a soft-left or centre-left leader will replace him.
I'd be interested to hear from @NickPalmer regarding his support for Corbyn. Is it ebbing away along with that of the membership?
0 -
Woah. Hang about.Pulpstar said:
You can't just launch a nuclear attack cold. Even on North Korea.
That would only be justified if there was incontrovertible evidence of an imminent nuclear attack on South Korea or Japan, and even then the targeting would need to be strictly military only and very low yield.
As soon as it was done, absolutely all hell would be let loose, so it would have been to be an overwhelming effective first strike, and you'd need China's blessing too.0 -
North Korea's war with the sea is brave.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Pulpstar, I've scanned the story on the BBC. What makes you say that?
North Korea have always behaved dickishly. A first strike would need to cause immense damage otherwise there'd be an artillery barrage that would cause massive harm to Seoul, even assuming there's no chance of a nuke being ready to go.
Mr. rkrkrk, I'm in a roughly similar position. Cheers for the many tips here, particularly on Macon when he was about 13.0 -
Ok then, we'll just have to wait for a Taepodong 1 or 2 to head to Seoul or Tokyo.0
-
Miss Plato, Xerxes had the sea lashed about 300 times when his bridge of boats at the Hellespont came apart. Caligula marched troops to northern Gaul to invade Britain, but then changed his mind and had them collect sea shells instead, which he presented as trophies of his victory against Neptune.
Mr. Bojabob, you wouldn't catch me correcting a tyop.0 -
Lock him up!
CNN/ORC poll: Most back special prosecutor for Russia investigation
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/03/06/politics/trump-approval-rating-russia-poll/index.html0 -
This shows a pretty impressive partisan divide:TheScreamingEagles said:Lock him up!
CNN/ORC poll: Most back special prosecutor for Russia investigation
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/03/06/politics/trump-approval-rating-russia-poll/index.html
"Last spring, Republicans were about twice as likely as Democrats to consider Russia a deep threat (30% among Republicans, 15% among Democrats). Now, that's reversed, with Democrats about twice as likely to consider Russia a very serious threat (51% among Democrats, 24% among Republicans)."0 -
Meeting tomorrow between Juppé, Fillon and Sarkozy confirmed, according to Le Figaro.0
-
Harman was the oppo leader from "May to September"
Sums her up !0 -
US foreign policy towards North Korea should be geared towards agreeing joint Chinese/American sanctions and, if necessary, military action against its nuclear programme.rkrkrk said:
Why would we need a nuclear strike though?Pulpstar said:Ok then, we'll just have to wait for a Taepodong 1 or 2 to head to Seoul or Tokyo.
What couldn't we destroy with conventional weapons that nuclear could destroy?
I expect China agrees North Korea is a total nutcase of a country, but all they want is the buffer between China proper and South Korea - both because they don't want US forces anywhere near their border, nor to haemorrhage their own citizens into a liberal democracy.0 -
Morris_Dancer said:
Miss Plato, Xerxes had the sea lashed about 300 times when his bridge of boats at the Hellespont came apart. Caligula marched troops to northern Gaul to invade Britain, but then changed his mind and had them collect sea shells instead, which he presented as trophies of his victory against Neptune.
Mr. Bojabob, you wouldn't catch me correcting a tyop.
0 -
Intriging.Richard_Nabavi said:Meeting tomorrow between Juppé, Fillon and Sarkozy confirmed, according to Le Figaro.
Juppe is definitely out, we know that much. But will someone else replace Fillon, and if so who ?0 -
More detail in the latest post here (11.48 UK time):Pulpstar said:
Intriging.Richard_Nabavi said:Meeting tomorrow between Juppé, Fillon and Sarkozy confirmed, according to Le Figaro.
Juppe is definitely out, we know that much. But will someone else replace Fillon, and if so who ?
http://www.lefigaro.fr/elections/presidentielles/2017/03/06/35003-20170306LIVWWW00068-fillon-juppe-sarkozy-nouvelle-journee-tendue-pour-la-droite.php
Looks like Sarkozy and his associates are trying to put pressure on Fillon to withdraw but name his successor, on the basis that they support his programme but he can't be the person to present it to voters. It's a way of getting round the objection that he won the primary and therefore should be the candidate.
Worth covering Baroin as a trading bet, perhaps.0 -
I've seen some chatter that Baroin is planning to make a statement tomorrow morning.Pulpstar said:
Intriging.Richard_Nabavi said:Meeting tomorrow between Juppé, Fillon and Sarkozy confirmed, according to Le Figaro.
Juppe is definitely out, we know that much. But will someone else replace Fillon, and if so who ?0 -
The short-term pain, long-term gain approach. Agreed.SouthamObserver said:
I guess that the idea would be to get Corbyn out asap so the PLP would essentially agree to a contest that would be won by someone on the centre left. But I agree with you. Better to leave it a year, allow Corbyn's support to drop even more and get a contest triggered by the unions under the current rules. That locks the far left out forever.Bojabob said:
Interesting response. The thing is, on these numbers, the centre-left would win a challenge well before 2020 (there are no transfer friendly candidates from the Far Left) so why would they accept the McDonnell amendment? I don't see the incentive.NickPalmer said:
No, it's personal for me (I've known and liked him for 50 years) and I will support him regardless. But I agree the poll is good for the centre-left, and in my opinion they should accept the McDonnell amendment, as it's the only way they'll get Corbyn to stand down bfore 2020.Bojabob said:
Yes, this poll looks like very bad news for Corbyn and – as such – very good news for the party. I doubt his net approval rate will last beyond this spring at this rate. Reflects exactly what Atul Hatwal was saying in his excellent leadership analysis last week.SouthamObserver said:
Corbyn had 72% support in February 2016.NickPalmer said:Plenty of material for all of us to quote from selectively:
https://election-data.co.uk/labour-membership-poll-results-2017
Broad summary - Corbyn's position among members is weaker than last year but would still win if an election was forced at once; however, most members think he should resign if certain adverse effects occur, but not others. If he did resign, McDonnell and Cooper lead, but it's a pretty wide open field. Members trust Corbyn to be truthful, others not so much, the media hardly at all. A tenth often brood on whether to stay members or not, though most never consider lapsing. All quite nuanced.
He got 61% support in the leadership election in September 2016.
He is now down to 54% support.
The trend is going one way.
He'll be gone by the end of 2018 and a soft-left or centre-left leader will replace him.
I'd be interested to hear from @NickPalmer regarding his support for Corbyn. Is it ebbing away along with that of the membership?0 -
Richard_Nabavi said:
More detail in the latest post here (11.48 UK time):Pulpstar said:
Intriging.Richard_Nabavi said:Meeting tomorrow between Juppé, Fillon and Sarkozy confirmed, according to Le Figaro.
Juppe is definitely out, we know that much. But will someone else replace Fillon, and if so who ?
http://www.lefigaro.fr/elections/presidentielles/2017/03/06/35003-20170306LIVWWW00068-fillon-juppe-sarkozy-nouvelle-journee-tendue-pour-la-droite.php
Looks like Sarkozy and his associates are trying to put pressure on Fillon to withdraw but name his successor, on the basis that they support his programme but he can't be the person to present it to voters. It's a way of getting round the objection that he won the primary and therefore should be the candidate.
Worth covering Baroin as a trading bet, perhaps.
I've levelled off Baroin and Macron by backing Baroin at 23s for my difference.williamglenn said:
I've seen some chatter that Baroin is planning to make a statement tomorrow morning.Pulpstar said:
Intriging.Richard_Nabavi said:Meeting tomorrow between Juppé, Fillon and Sarkozy confirmed, according to Le Figaro.
Juppe is definitely out, we know that much. But will someone else replace Fillon, and if so who ?0 -
An argument for PR, that. FPTP suppresses certain views because they aren't enough to be critically attractive in a 2.5 party system.Patrick said:
Yes. Dave offered a Tweedledum vs Tweedledee choice on EU/Immigration/Identity whilst, IMHO, offering a much more sensible economic plan than Miliband. Eurosceptics had no party to vote for. I think the political lesson to be learned is the danger of not offering voters a real choice, or seeking to repress honestly and decently held views. 'Rubbing their noses in it' backfired spectacularly.Sean_F said:
I think that there was much more public unhappiness with the political settlement of 1990-2016 than many politicians realised. I agree that 23/6 was a turning point.stodge said:
No we don't. There are rarely two wildly discordant programmes on offer and no Party, other than UKIP, has advocated taking us out of the EU since Labour in 1983. Indeed, one could argue that with the possible exception of Brown, we were governed from 1990 to 2016 by a remarkably similar form of social democracy whether it was led by Major or Blair.Patrick said:We are beyond rational debate - nobody wants to talk about it apart from confirming their own position and this is the real tragedy. We have a real opportunity to shape our own cultural economic and political identity but most people have abdicated involvement and are tired of the big questions.
We have endless and constant arguments about what sort of country we want and we get to vote on it every 5 years or so.
On 23/6/16, we took a decisive turn and the consequences of that vote will reverberate for generations. I'm arguing part of that vote was about the future and we now need to think about it and have a part in shaping it. Unfortunately, that has been abdicated to people who think the future is in the past and rebooting the British Empire is a jolly good idea.
I think the likes of Australia, New Zealand, India and Canada have other concerns but are probably just too polite to say No.0 -
Mere details...Casino_Royale said:
Woah. Hang about.Pulpstar said:
You can't just launch a nuclear attack cold. Even on North Korea.
That would only be justified if there was incontrovertible evidence of an imminent nuclear attack on South Korea or Japan, and even then the targeting would need to be strictly military only and very low yield.
As soon as it was done, absolutely all hell would be let loose, so it would have been to be an overwhelming effective first strike, and you'd need China's blessing too.0 -
I hope everyone else has covering bets on Sarkozy reluctantly accepting the nomination.Richard_Nabavi said:Meeting tomorrow between Juppé, Fillon and Sarkozy confirmed, according to Le Figaro.
0
