politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » LDs now down ten seats on the Commons spread markets since the

@jonwalker121: #newsnight explaining why single market access is crucial to manufacturing- not just to avoid tariffs, but to get parts quickly and reliably

https://twitter.com/bbcnewsnight/status/861704791789096960

isam said:

Oh my word!!

https://youtu.be/HeKDcazGa1A

Thanks a bunch. Mrs scrap wondering what I've put on..

It appears the media companies who are worried by Fox / Sky deal are setting their stall out for the fight again...the new angle is Fox can't buy Sky because of wrong doing at Fox News.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-39852404

Charles said:

It's not my period but I tend to take the view that trade links were more extensive than previously known. There have been interesting artefacts uncovered in Cornwall that came from Phoenica, for example. It's not proof of movement, but with ships it's possible.

I suspect that Abbott was simply wrong - as you say. But she could have been right by luck..,

That there were trade links between the British Isles and the Med hundreds of years before Christ is undisputable. That there were Roman Centurions, of whatever skin colour, here hundreds of years before Christ is complete garbage. The wretched woman could not have been right by luck, she is simply as thick as pig-shit and talks off the top of her head.

KLAXON!!

CON gain Glasgow East!

RobD said:

SCON are secretly confident of gaining all 59 seats.

They are certainly putting the wind up the Nats. And they don't like it up 'em...

nunu said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

RobD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

*Surge KLAXON*

twitter.com/MsHelicat/status/861698888532668417

Hm, what's louder and more dramatic than a KLAXON?

Thunderclap!

What happened to management expectations?

I think 'management expectations' and 'expectations management' could be two very different things

Ave_it said:

KLAXON!!

CON gain Glasgow East!

That sure is a nice atomic-powered KLAXON you have there

Philip_Thompson said:

nunu said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

RobD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

*Surge KLAXON*

twitter.com/MsHelicat/status/861698888532668417

Hm, what's louder and more dramatic than a KLAXON?

Thunderclap!

What happened to management expectations?

I think 'management expectations' and 'expectations management' could be two very different things

...right...

Macron's presidential honeymoon period ends before he actually takes office: 24 hours in and already the screw is being turned...


"We have a real problem with France," Juncker said in Berlin one day after Macron's resounding electoral win.

"The French spend too much money and spend it on the wrong things."

He said between 53 and 57 percent of France's gross domestic product went toward public spending.

"That can't go well in the long run with relatively high debt," Juncker warned, indicating that Macron could not rely on the good will of his key European partners for too long.


https://au.news.yahoo.com/world/a/35363771/juncker-warns-macron-french-spend-too-much-money/#page1


In truth, our old friend Mr Juncker has a good point here. But I'm not sure that wielding the stick before Macron makes it through the door of the Elysee is terribly helpful.

The AFP report, which is worth reading in its entirety, reports that Juncker also went on to play down Macron's suggestions for Eurozone integration, which - given that the Commission is normally very keen on centralisation, and that frankly the Eurozone actually needs more pooling of sovereignty and of hard cash to work properly - seems very strange. Until you realise that he is speaking from Berlin...

Jason said:

IanB2 said:

RobD said:

IanB2 said:

RepublicanTory said:

IanB2 said:

RepublicanTory said:

RoyalBlue said:

Thinking back to the CPS, it will be far more damaging if the charges come out in dribs and drabs, rather than in one go.

The CPS know that the Tories will win the election -are they really going to make a decision before June the 8th ?

Legally they have no choice; they have already been granted one extension and the deadlines are days away. I have no idea whether a minister could grant a further extension or not, but the political costs of doing so probably rule this out even if it could be done.

People keep talking about deadlines but -where have these dates come from?

But I wont put any money down on this election until i know what the DPS timescale is.

The normal one year period to charge someone, which applied to all crimes AIUI, has been extended to two years. The date of the offence is the date the expenses returns were submitted for each constituency, and the time is almost up.

Some will have submitted very soon, others would have waited until the last moment (June 7th).

I believe the dates in the 15 seats are mostly late May. It's unusual to wait to the last minute, partly because it is a job most candidates and agents are eager to get out of the way, and also because most EROs are friendly enough to cast an eye over submissions and give someone a ring if they have made an obvious cockup like forgetting to sign them or putting the wrong year as the date.

With my conspiracy theory hat on, won't it seem a little planned to release the information a week or two before the election? Or is it just a coincidence - after all, the CPS didn't know the Tories were going to call an early election? It does seem a little suspicious that it's taken exactly the length of time of the extensions allowed, and a timely coincidence with the election campaign.

Hhhmmmm.

That's the trouble with deadlines....

Danny565 said:

By the way, I feel we haven't talked about Andy Burnham's performance in the Gtr Manchester Mayoral election enough.

In some seats, he outperformed 1997 Tony Blair, including winning Altrincham & Sale West. (Hat-tip Stephen Bush)

If only....

He's clearly wasted in that tinpot role. I wouldn't overplay his performance though - if you're famous it's relatively easy to do well in an election that most people can't be bothered to vote in. And his fame is regional - it wouldn't convert into a Labour general election victory, though it's hard to believe that Labour would be in quite the mess it's in if he'd won the leadership election.

bobajobPB said:

IanB2 said:

bobajobPB said:

Dadge said:

bobajobPB said:

RepublicanTory said:

bobajobPB said:

If I credited Corbyn with any guile I would say that his ludicrous statement that he will go on and on was designed to spark a mid campaign rebellion from the PLP so the absurd Milne can then blame the inevitable election smashing on them. But that would be too clever by half. As it is, Corbyn will be challenged and if he wins the challenge the party will split. So be it. Five years is long enough to build a party. Just look at Macron!

That is a very fair point-if you were a Labour MP who was not a Corbynista, Macron's victory would be very encouraging.

I know the electoral system is different but it is still encouraging.

Thanks. I now think that a split may not be that bad an outcome. Given that the splitting party will (I assume) have 100+ MPs and five years, that's not too bad a starting point.

Since Macron's victory appears to prove a point I've often made, I'll make it again :-) Macron started his new party just one year before the presidential election. The momentum that's built in that time hasn't had a chance to peter out. Many new-party failures in the UK have been partly caused by launching too far away from a general election. Starting a party, getting a surge and wasting that surge is madness.

True. They could split later on in the parliament. Fair point.

The suggestion the SDP went too early is an interesting one.

Isn't the problem that most splits are more "push" than "pull"? So the timing is often decided for you.

True enough but I guess in the Labour moderates' case they could split at the time of their own choosing.

Very hard to do all that planning and plotting and then keep it secret for a couple of years. Especially for politicians. And if there's a clear push - say McDonnell being elected leader in the autumn - they would surely have to decide whether to stay or go right then?

bobajobPB said:

Dadge said:

bobajobPB said:

RepublicanTory said:

bobajobPB said:

If I credited Corbyn with any guile I would say that his ludicrous statement that he will go on and on was designed to spark a mid campaign rebellion from the PLP so the absurd Milne can then blame the inevitable election smashing on them. But that would be too clever by half. As it is, Corbyn will be challenged and if he wins the challenge the party will split. So be it. Five years is long enough to build a party. Just look at Macron!

That is a very fair point-if you were a Labour MP who was not a Corbynista, Macron's victory would be very encouraging.

I know the electoral system is different but it is still encouraging.

Thanks. I now think that a split may not be that bad an outcome. Given that the splitting party will (I assume) have 100+ MPs and five years, that's not too bad a starting point.

Since Macron's victory appears to prove a point I've often made, I'll make it again :-) Macron started his new party just one year before the presidential election. The momentum that's built in that time hasn't had a chance to peter out. Many new-party failures in the UK have been partly caused by launching too far away from a general election. Starting a party, getting a surge and wasting that surge is madness.

True. They could split later on in the parliament. Fair point.

Could they really? Think through that idea, for a moment. A bunch of MPs are so disgusted with Corbyn that they want to break off and form a new party but, for their own perceived benefit, decide to wait three or four years. You don't see any problems with that scenario?

ThreeQuidder said:

bobajobPB said:

ThreeQuidder said:

bobajobPB said:

Three Quidder

Indeed.

But as your definition of bullying means asking people to make election predictions rather than trolling; and smearing, quoting polls; you might have a problem with crying wolf.

Repeatedly demanding a particular person appears so you can have a go at them is bullying.

Misleadingly partially quoting polls to make a group you disagree with look bad is smearing.

Hope this helps.

I asked Moniker several times to predict the French election result after he - several times - ramped and dog whistled a Le Pen victory. That is a perfectly reasonable response. It is not bullying.

I'm talking about last night after polls closed.

As am I - repeatedly I asked for a prediction despite his endless trolling. I got none. I asked where he was last night, to no avail.

HurstLlama said:

bobajobPB said:

Dadge said:

bobajobPB said:

RepublicanTory said:

bobajobPB said:

If I credited Corbyn with any guile I would say that his ludicrous statement that he will go on and on was designed to spark a mid campaign rebellion from the PLP so the absurd Milne can then blame the inevitable election smashing on them. But that would be too clever by half. As it is, Corbyn will be challenged and if he wins the challenge the party will split. So be it. Five years is long enough to build a party. Just look at Macron!

That is a very fair point-if you were a Labour MP who was not a Corbynista, Macron's victory would be very encouraging.

I know the electoral system is different but it is still encouraging.

Thanks. I now think that a split may not be that bad an outcome. Given that the splitting party will (I assume) have 100+ MPs and five years, that's not too bad a starting point.

Since Macron's victory appears to prove a point I've often made, I'll make it again :-) Macron started his new party just one year before the presidential election. The momentum that's built in that time hasn't had a chance to peter out. Many new-party failures in the UK have been partly caused by launching too far away from a general election. Starting a party, getting a surge and wasting that surge is madness.

True. They could split later on in the parliament. Fair point.

Could they really? Think through that idea, for a moment. A bunch of MPs are so disgusted with Corbyn that they want to break off and form a new party but, for their own perceived benefit, decide to wait three or four years. You don't see any problems with that scenario?

It worked for Macron!

Pulpstar said:

bobajobPB said:

Tykejohnno said:

I see the con's going big on Theresa in the political broadcast tonight.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b08qfvr5/party-election-broadcasts-conservative-party-general-election

This bowing and scraping over May is almost monarchist in its sycophancy. I blame Corbyn - against him she does look almost regal, admittedly.

The Tory campaign has an almost hypnotic quality.

Strong, stable, stable, strong, May, May, strong, stable, May strong and stable.

Pulpstar said:

bobajobPB said:

Tykejohnno said:

I see the con's going big on Theresa in the political broadcast tonight.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b08qfvr5/party-election-broadcasts-conservative-party-general-election

This bowing and scraping over May is almost monarchist in its sycophancy. I blame Corbyn - against him she does look almost regal, admittedly.

The Tory campaign has an almost hypnotic quality.

Strong, stable, stable, strong, May, May, strong, stable, May strong and stable.

Strong, stable, strong, stable. May strong. May stable. Where do I vote? Tell me where to vote. May, May, May, may I vote for you? Strong. Stable.

HurstLlama said:

bobajobPB said:

Dadge said:

bobajobPB said:

RepublicanTory said:

bobajobPB said:

If I credited Corbyn with any guile I would say that his ludicrous statement that he will go on and on was designed to spark a mid campaign rebellion from the PLP so the absurd Milne can then blame the inevitable election smashing on them. But that would be too clever by half. As it is, Corbyn will be challenged and if he wins the challenge the party will split. So be it. Five years is long enough to build a party. Just look at Macron!

That is a very fair point-if you were a Labour MP who was not a Corbynista, Macron's victory would be very encouraging.

I know the electoral system is different but it is still encouraging.

Thanks. I now think that a split may not be that bad an outcome. Given that the splitting party will (I assume) have 100+ MPs and five years, that's not too bad a starting point.

Since Macron's victory appears to prove a point I've often made, I'll make it again :-) Macron started his new party just one year before the presidential election. The momentum that's built in that time hasn't had a chance to peter out. Many new-party failures in the UK have been partly caused by launching too far away from a general election. Starting a party, getting a surge and wasting that surge is madness.

True. They could split later on in the parliament. Fair point.

Could they really? Think through that idea, for a moment. A bunch of MPs are so disgusted with Corbyn that they want to break off and form a new party but, for their own perceived benefit, decide to wait three or four years. You don't see any problems with that scenario?

Doing things for your own benefit has to be one of the best reasons for doing them. And I say that even though I'm not a Tory.

nunu said:

bobajobPB said:

HYUFD

It has a lot of potential. One of the most productive countries in Europe I understand, per hour worked. Much more productive than the meeting-obsessed UK.

yeah, if we cut our meetings in half it would probably double productivity.

Most meetings are a 50-60% waste of time, at great cost to the company. For example, decision-makers are very often not in the meetings which are there to decide on strategy. Therefore, many strategy meetings have no outcome. It can take literally weeks to execute a policy that was 'decided upon' weeks before. And it can often ultimately be rejected by the absent decision-maker, thus rendering the original meeting pointless, wasting several thousands of pounds of company time.

Staring now on BBC 4 looks interesting.

"Norway, the early 1980s. Deep-sea diver Petter is part of the Norwegian North Sea dive project, pushing new boundaries in human endurance as, with the help of the United States, Norway tries to reach its new oilfields. But when tragedy strikes Petter is absolutely determined to get to the cause and soon finds himself alienated from the ground-breaking project and mistrustful of his colleagues. "

MrsB said:

IanB2 said:

Dadge said:

Danny565 said:

By the way, I feel we haven't talked about Andy Burnham's performance in the Gtr Manchester Mayoral election enough.

In some seats, he outperformed 1997 Tony Blair, including winning Altrincham & Sale West. (Hat-tip Stephen Bush)

If only....

He's clearly wasted in that tinpot role. I wouldn't overplay his performance though - if you're famous it's relatively easy to do well in an election that most people can't be bothered to vote in. And his fame is regional - it wouldn't convert into a Labour general election victory, though it's hard to believe that Labour would be in quite the mess it's in if he'd won the leadership election.

Turnout not much over 20%? And people do prefer a mayor they have heard of.

I have a bet with Pulpstar (I think it's you anyway) that Andy Burnham will never be leader of the Labour party. I reckon my money's safe.

Especially as Corbyn looks like he is going to hang on like limpet maclimpet face.. Almost reached the point at which one might ask whether Labour will survive long enough to have another leader.

For the Tories, it's the stuff that dreams are made of. Labour PLP shoots itself in the face by nominating Corbyn. Burnham (and Cooper) lose leadership. Tories create faux mayoralties; Burnham stands for one of them and wins, thereby counting himself out of the next leadership election.

Black_Rook said:

Macron's presidential honeymoon period ends before he actually takes office: 24 hours in and already the screw is being turned...


"We have a real problem with France," Juncker said in Berlin one day after Macron's resounding electoral win.

"The French spend too much money and spend it on the wrong things."

He said between 53 and 57 percent of France's gross domestic product went toward public spending.

"That can't go well in the long run with relatively high debt," Juncker warned, indicating that Macron could not rely on the good will of his key European partners for too long.


https://au.news.yahoo.com/world/a/35363771/juncker-warns-macron-french-spend-too-much-money/#page1


In truth, our old friend Mr Juncker has a good point here. But I'm not sure that wielding the stick before Macron makes it through the door of the Elysee is terribly helpful.

The AFP report, which is worth reading in its entirety, reports that Juncker also went on to play down Macron's suggestions for Eurozone integration, which - given that the Commission is normally very keen on centralisation, and that frankly the Eurozone actually needs more pooling of sovereignty and of hard cash to work properly - seems very strange. Until you realise that he is speaking from Berlin...

Whilst I agree with the proposition that France is frankly bonkers, I loath the EU telling countries what to do.

HurstLlama said:

bobajobPB said:

It worked for Macron!

No, Mr. Job It didn't. The circumstances are very different - one man running for the presidency and forming a new party as opposed to a conspiracy of MPs deciding to defect from their existing party and start a new one. If you think about it I am sure you will appreciate the problems in Labour MPs deciding to split but not for a few years.

And remembering back to the early 1980s, all the negotiations between the Liberals and SDP, sharing out of seats, and the number of people to be brought on board, was immensely complex; even in small parties there are egos and self interest everywhere. In many cases the process was completed only a few weeks before the 1983 GE and in three seats wasn't completed and they ended up with both Liberal and SDP candidates. I was young and only on the fringes of it all, but I can still remember it being a total nightmare.

Of course any breakaway might follow a different path - but even with one new party there will still be a lot to sort out, and it is hard to believe they won't at least want to consider some sort of accommodation with the LibDems and/or Greens. Another competitor for the centre-left vote is the last thing British politics needs.

Interesting Word of Mouth this week on Radio 4, on political language:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b08nq5x5

bobajobPB said:

Pulpstar said:

bobajobPB said:

Tykejohnno said:

I see the con's going big on Theresa in the political broadcast tonight.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b08qfvr5/party-election-broadcasts-conservative-party-general-election

This bowing and scraping over May is almost monarchist in its sycophancy. I blame Corbyn - against him she does look almost regal, admittedly.

The Tory campaign has an almost hypnotic quality.

Strong, stable, stable, strong, May, May, strong, stable, May strong and stable.

Pulpstar said:

bobajobPB said:

Tykejohnno said:

I see the con's going big on Theresa in the political broadcast tonight.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b08qfvr5/party-election-broadcasts-conservative-party-general-election

This bowing and scraping over May is almost monarchist in its sycophancy. I blame Corbyn - against him she does look almost regal, admittedly.

The Tory campaign has an almost hypnotic quality.

Strong, stable, stable, strong, May, May, strong, stable, May strong and stable.

Strong, stable, strong, stable. May strong. May stable. Where do I vote? Tell me where to vote. May, May, May, may I vote for you? Strong. Stable.

Corbyn = weak and feeble, weak and feeble, weak and feeble...

freetochoose said:

BenedictWhite said:

Black_Rook said:

Macron's presidential honeymoon period ends before he actually takes office: 24 hours in and already the screw is being turned...


"We have a real problem with France," Juncker said in Berlin one day after Macron's resounding electoral win.

"The French spend too much money and spend it on the wrong things."

He said between 53 and 57 percent of France's gross domestic product went toward public spending.

"That can't go well in the long run with relatively high debt," Juncker warned, indicating that Macron could not rely on the good will of his key European partners for too long.


https://au.news.yahoo.com/world/a/35363771/juncker-warns-macron-french-spend-too-much-money/#page1


In truth, our old friend Mr Juncker has a good point here. But I'm not sure that wielding the stick before Macron makes it through the door of the Elysee is terribly helpful.

The AFP report, which is worth reading in its entirety, reports that Juncker also went on to play down Macron's suggestions for Eurozone integration, which - given that the Commission is normally very keen on centralisation, and that frankly the Eurozone actually needs more pooling of sovereignty and of hard cash to work properly - seems very strange. Until you realise that he is speaking from Berlin...

Whilst I agree with the proposition that France is frankly bonkers, I loath the EU telling countries what to do.

In which case I trust you voted Leave

Voted? I also campaigned for leave.

JonnyJimmy said:

I'm guessing you need to be a bit anti-Islam, and pro-Israel, to be a real fascist these days too?

Still waiting for some clarity from the fascism experts..

Google it and you will find

"(in general use) extreme right-wing, authoritarian, or intolerant views or practices"

You are looking for a technical definition about exact characteristics of governments and whoever it is you are having a go at is using the word more loosely. That's allowed. Not great use of a word that has a lot of associations, but not actually wrong or worth you purusing in this vaguely aggressive manner.

bobajobPB said:

HYUFD

It has a lot of potential. One of the most productive countries in Europe I understand, per hour worked. Much more productive than the meeting-obsessed UK.

If they work a few more hours it would certainly help

freetochoose said:

BenedictWhite said:

freetochoose said:

BenedictWhite said:

Black_Rook said:

Macron's presidential honeymoon period ends before he actually takes office: 24 hours in and already the screw is being turned...


"We have a real problem with France," Juncker said in Berlin one day after Macron's resounding electoral win.

"The French spend too much money and spend it on the wrong things."

He said between 53 and 57 percent of France's gross domestic product went toward public spending.

"That can't go well in the long run with relatively high debt," Juncker warned, indicating that Macron could not rely on the good will of his key European partners for too long.


https://au.news.yahoo.com/world/a/35363771/juncker-warns-macron-french-spend-too-much-money/#page1


In truth, our old friend Mr Juncker has a good point here. But I'm not sure that wielding the stick before Macron makes it through the door of the Elysee is terribly helpful.

The AFP report, which is worth reading in its entirety, reports that Juncker also went on to play down Macron's suggestions for Eurozone integration, which - given that the Commission is normally very keen on centralisation, and that frankly the Eurozone actually needs more pooling of sovereignty and of hard cash to work properly - seems very strange. Until you realise that he is speaking from Berlin...

Whilst I agree with the proposition that France is frankly bonkers, I loath the EU telling countries what to do.

In which case I trust you voted Leave

Voted? I also campaigned for leave.

Good man me too :-)

Both of you need to watch tonight's Newsnight.

BenedictWhite said:

Whilst I agree with the proposition that France is frankly bonkers, I loath the EU telling countries what to do.

What this really all boils down to is, as ever, the lack of consensus amongst Eurozone members about how to resolve the flawed structure of their currency. Macron has effectively proposed taking steps towards federalism, which is what is ultimately needed to make it sustainable: common government, common treasury, common debt, fiscal transfers.

Merkel, on the other hand, thinks she's already done more than enough by leading the bailout of the debtors, doesn't want to turn Germany into a gigantic ATM for the rest of the Eurozone, and is therefore pushing an alternative approach: the imbalances within the Eurozone are to be solved by every member state becoming just like Germany. Fiscal discipline must be enforced within the straight jacket of the common currency, regardless of how much that requires in the way of "reform" - code for spending cuts and tax rises, and quite possibly wage deflation as well.

In the case of Greece, which was bailed out, it was loaned so much money and forced to undertake such a huge reform programme that its debts have grown too massive ever to be paid back, and it is being made to run such a large budget surplus that the austerity needed to get there is suppressing economic activity, and may be regarded as ultimately self-defeating. France, of course, isn't in that kind of a hole, but I would nonetheless imagine that the amount of hacking away at regulation, workers' rights and France's enormous state sector which Macron will be obliged to do (either by his own inclination, or after a bit of arm twisting by the Commission) will result in a very considerable amount of civil disobedience. Along with rather a lot of parliamentary disobedience too, if En Marche can't muster a majority in the National Assembly.

I suspect we shan't have very long to wait to find out whether President Macron has both the will and the resources to become a successful reformer, or if he turns into Hollande Mk2.

philiph said:

RoyalBlue said:

Thinking back to the CPS, it will be far more damaging if the charges come out in dribs and drabs, rather than in one go.

As a non legal expert, is the CPS expected to bring charges in cases that it thinks they will win, or where they think the potential defendant is guilty?

Guilt can be exceedingly difficult to prove and the two are very different.

Where they think it's in the public interest and the chance of conviction is at least 51%. They do not have to have an opinion on guilt themselves - the test is whether they think the evidence would probably lead to conviction.

IanB2 said:

freetochoose said:

BenedictWhite said:

freetochoose said:

BenedictWhite said:

Black_Rook said:

Macron's presidential honeymoon period ends before he actually takes office: 24 hours in and already the screw is being turned...


"We have a real problem with France," Juncker said in Berlin one day after Macron's resounding electoral win.

"The French spend too much money and spend it on the wrong things."

He said between 53 and 57 percent of France's gross domestic product went toward public spending.

"That can't go well in the long run with relatively high debt," Juncker warned, indicating that Macron could not rely on the good will of his key European partners for too long.


https://au.news.yahoo.com/world/a/35363771/juncker-warns-macron-french-spend-too-much-money/#page1


In truth, our old friend Mr Juncker has a good point here. But I'm not sure that wielding the stick before Macron makes it through the door of the Elysee is terribly helpful.

The AFP report, which is worth reading in its entirety, reports that Juncker also went on to play down Macron's suggestions for Eurozone integration, which - given that the Commission is normally very keen on centralisation, and that frankly the Eurozone actually needs more pooling of sovereignty and of hard cash to work properly - seems very strange. Until you realise that he is speaking from Berlin...

Whilst I agree with the proposition that France is frankly bonkers, I loath the EU telling countries what to do.

In which case I trust you voted Leave

Voted? I also campaigned for leave.

Good man me too :-)

Both of you need to watch tonight's Newsnight.

I did. And?

JonnyJimmy said:

freetochoose said:

JonnyJimmy said:

.

bobajobPB said:

Blah blah blah

Come on, tell us precisely what you mean by fascist. Surely you know?

You're wasting your time mate, I asked the same the other day.

Fascist has replaced racist as the throw away insult, its meaning is irrelevant, its all about how you say it, with a snarl and a curled up lip.

I'm sure it is a waste of time. But Meeks ought to be able to do it. He shouldn't throw around terms like that without being able to precisely define them. Which he and the rest have completely failed to do. It's a clearly defined term, and quite offensive to suggest that 'Leavers' are supportive of it, without clarifying what he means by fascist ('supporting Le Pen' just really won't do).

I agree. But I do think it's appropriate to point out when certain opinions are fascistic, or when fascistic techniques are being used. e.g. Although May is far from being a fascist, her "strong and stable" personality-cultish shtick is shockingly fascistic.

Black_Rook said:

BenedictWhite said:

Whilst I agree with the proposition that France is frankly bonkers, I loath the EU telling countries what to do.

What this really all boils down to is, as ever, the lack of consensus amongst Eurozone members about how to resolve the flawed structure of their currency. Macron has effectively proposed taking steps towards federalism, which is what is ultimately needed to make it sustainable: common government, common treasury, common debt, fiscal transfers.

Merkel, on the other hand, thinks she's already done more than enough by leading the bailout of the debtors, doesn't want to turn Germany into a gigantic ATM for the rest of the Eurozone, and is therefore pushing an alternative approach: the imbalances within the Eurozone are to be solved by every member state becoming just like Germany. Fiscal discipline must be enforced within the straight jacket of the common currency, regardless of how much that requires in the way of "reform" - code for spending cuts and tax rises, and quite possibly wage deflation as well.

In the case of Greece, which was bailed out, it was loaned so much money and forced to undertake such a huge reform programme that its debts have grown too massive ever to be paid back, and it is being made to run such a large budget surplus that the austerity needed to get there is suppressing economic activity, and may be regarded as ultimately self-defeating. France, of course, isn't in that kind of a hole, but I would nonetheless imagine that the amount of hacking away at regulation, workers' rights and France's enormous state sector which Macron will be obliged to do (either by his own inclination, or after a bit of arm twisting by the Commission) will result in a very considerable amount of civil disobedience. Along with rather a lot of parliamentary disobedience too, if En Marche can't muster a majority in the National Assembly.

I suspect we shan't have very long to wait to find out whether President Macron has both the will and the resources to become a successful reformer, or if he turns into Hollande Mk2.

He was Hollande Mk1, why wouldn't he be Hollande Mk2?

HYUFD said:

MrsB said:

IanB2 said:

Dadge said:

Danny565 said:

By the way, I feel we haven't talked about Andy Burnham's performance in the Gtr Manchester Mayoral election enough.

In some seats, he outperformed 1997 Tony Blair, including winning Altrincham & Sale West. (Hat-tip Stephen Bush)

If only....

He's clearly wasted in that tinpot role. I wouldn't overplay his performance though - if you're famous it's relatively easy to do well in an election that most people can't be bothered to vote in. And his fame is regional - it wouldn't convert into a Labour general election victory, though it's hard to believe that Labour would be in quite the mess it's in if he'd won the leadership election.

Turnout not much over 20%? And people do prefer a mayor they have heard of.

I have a bet with Pulpstar (I think it's you anyway) that Andy Burnham will never be leader of the Labour party. I reckon my money's safe.

Especially as Corbyn looks like he is going to hang on like limpet maclimpet face.. Almost reached the point at which one might ask whether Labour will survive long enough to have another leader.

Burnham has far more power as Mayor of Manchester than he would as Labour leader so why would he bother? Labour are probably still a decade from power and that assumes that moderates are not eventually forced to do a Macron and start their own party

The GM mayor job doesn't convey much power - you can hardly compare it with London - and how much power it does have is strictly under the control of the government. Still, Burnham's position will help Labour to hold seats, wards and councils in Greater Manchester.

MTimT said:

Black_Rook said:

BenedictWhite said:

Whilst I agree with the proposition that France is frankly bonkers, I loath the EU telling countries what to do.

What this really all boils down to is, as ever, the lack of consensus amongst Eurozone members about how to resolve the flawed structure of their currency. Macron has effectively proposed taking steps towards federalism, which is what is ultimately needed to make it sustainable: common government, common treasury, common debt, fiscal transfers.

Merkel, on the other hand, thinks she's already done more than enough by leading the bailout of the debtors, doesn't want to turn Germany into a gigantic ATM for the rest of the Eurozone, and is therefore pushing an alternative approach: the imbalances within the Eurozone are to be solved by every member state becoming just like Germany. Fiscal discipline must be enforced within the straight jacket of the common currency, regardless of how much that requires in the way of "reform" - code for spending cuts and tax rises, and quite possibly wage deflation as well.

In the case of Greece, which was bailed out, it was loaned so much money and forced to undertake such a huge reform programme that its debts have grown too massive ever to be paid back, and it is being made to run such a large budget surplus that the austerity needed to get there is suppressing economic activity, and may be regarded as ultimately self-defeating. France, of course, isn't in that kind of a hole, but I would nonetheless imagine that the amount of hacking away at regulation, workers' rights and France's enormous state sector which Macron will be obliged to do (either by his own inclination, or after a bit of arm twisting by the Commission) will result in a very considerable amount of civil disobedience. Along with rather a lot of parliamentary disobedience too, if En Marche can't muster a majority in the National Assembly.

I suspect we shan't have very long to wait to find out whether President Macron has both the will and the resources to become a successful reformer, or if he turns into Hollande Mk2.

He was Hollande Mk1, why wouldn't he be Hollande Mk2?

Macron stood as a liberal not a socialist and will likely have a majority for reform in the Assembly when you add En Marche and Les Republicains

HYUFD said:

MTimT said:

Black_Rook said:

BenedictWhite said:

Whilst I agree with the proposition that France is frankly bonkers, I loath the EU telling countries what to do.

What this really all boils down to is, as ever, the lack of consensus amongst Eurozone members about how to resolve the flawed structure of their currency. Macron has effectively proposed taking steps towards federalism, which is what is ultimately needed to make it sustainable: common government, common treasury, common debt, fiscal transfers.

Merkel, on the other hand, thinks she's already done more than enough by leading the bailout of the debtors, doesn't want to turn Germany into a gigantic ATM for the rest of the Eurozone, and is therefore pushing an alternative approach: the imbalances within the Eurozone are to be solved by every member state becoming just like Germany. Fiscal discipline must be enforced within the straight jacket of the common currency, regardless of how much that requires in the way of "reform" - code for spending cuts and tax rises, and quite possibly wage deflation as well.

In the case of Greece, which was bailed out, it was loaned so much money and forced to undertake such a huge reform programme that its debts have grown too massive ever to be paid back, and it is being made to run such a large budget surplus that the austerity needed to get there is suppressing economic activity, and may be regarded as ultimately self-defeating. France, of course, isn't in that kind of a hole, but I would nonetheless imagine that the amount of hacking away at regulation, workers' rights and France's enormous state sector which Macron will be obliged to do (either by his own inclination, or after a bit of arm twisting by the Commission) will result in a very considerable amount of civil disobedience. Along with rather a lot of parliamentary disobedience too, if En Marche can't muster a majority in the National Assembly.

I suspect we shan't have very long to wait to find out whether President Macron has both the will and the resources to become a successful reformer, or if he turns into Hollande Mk2.

He was Hollande Mk1, why wouldn't he be Hollande Mk2?

Macron stood as a liberal not a socialist and will likely have a majority for reform in the Assembly when you add En Marche and Les Republicains

The Republicans intend on winning (or at least that's what they say) and out right majority and will then field there own cabinet. I get the impression from BBC4's PM that they are miffed with Macron.

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/861724567152316416

Wow have they changed their methodology?

Nemtynakht said:

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/861724567152316416

Wow have they changed their methodology?

Looks a possibility but now in line with other pollsters, goodnight

BenedictWhite said:

HYUFD said:

MTimT said:

Black_Rook said:

BenedictWhite said:

Whilst I agree with the proposition that France is frankly bonkers, I loath the EU telling countries what to do.

What this really all boils down to is, as ever, the lack of consensus amongst Eurozone members about how to resolve the flawed structure of their currency. Macron has effectively proposed taking steps towards federalism, which is what is ultimately needed to make it sustainable: common government, common treasury, common debt, fiscal transfers.

Merkel, on the other hand, thinks she's already done more than enough by leading the bailout of the debtors, doesn't want to turn Germany into a gigantic ATM for the rest of the Eurozone, and is therefore pushing an alternative approach: the imbalances within the Eurozone are to be solved by every member state becoming just like Germany. Fiscal discipline must be enforced within the straight jacket of the common currency, regardless of how much that requires in the way of "reform" - code for spending cuts and tax rises, and quite possibly wage deflation as well.

In the case of Greece, which was bailed out, it was loaned so much money and forced to undertake such a huge reform programme that its debts have grown too massive ever to be paid back, and it is being made to run such a large budget surplus that the austerity needed to get there is suppressing economic activity, and may be regarded as ultimately self-defeating. France, of course, isn't in that kind of a hole, but I would nonetheless imagine that the amount of hacking away at regulation, workers' rights and France's enormous state sector which Macron will be obliged to do (either by his own inclination, or after a bit of arm twisting by the Commission) will result in a very considerable amount of civil disobedience. Along with rather a lot of parliamentary disobedience too, if En Marche can't muster a majority in the National Assembly.

I suspect we shan't have very long to wait to find out whether President Macron has both the will and the resources to become a successful reformer, or if he turns into Hollande Mk2.

He was Hollande Mk1, why wouldn't he be Hollande Mk2?

Macron stood as a liberal not a socialist and will likely have a majority for reform in the Assembly when you add En Marche and Les Republicains

The Republicans intend on winning (or at least that's what they say) and out right majority and will then field there own cabinet. I get the impression from BBC4's PM that they are miffed with Macron.

They may try but early polls for the parliamentary election have En Marche leading but short of a majority
http://fr.kantar.com/elections/legislatives/2017/les-francais-et-les-elections-legislatives-2017/

Front National regrets opposing the Euro, plans name change:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/may/08/front-national-plans-overhaul-after-defeat-but-faces-internal-resistance

Instead of Lib Dems trying to win converts from the biggest pool of voters, the Conservatives, they are trying to acquire Green voters.

Is there a better way to discourage Conservative voters switching to Lib Dem than the Lib Dems aligning with a party to the left of Corbyn?

Who is responsible for this failing strategy at HQ?

HYUFD said:

BenedictWhite said:

HYUFD said:

MTimT said:

He was Hollande Mk1, why wouldn't he be Hollande Mk2?

Macron stood as a liberal not a socialist and will likely have a majority for reform in the Assembly when you add En Marche and Les Republicains

The Republicans intend on winning (or at least that's what they say) and out right majority and will then field there own cabinet. I get the impression from BBC4's PM that they are miffed with Macron.

They may try but early polls for the parliamentary election have En Marche leading but short of a majority
http://fr.kantar.com/elections/legislatives/2017/les-francais-et-les-elections-legislatives-2017/

Quite. It's going to get messy. There are already protests about Macron because, whisper it quietly "He is a liberal!" (as in economically liberal rather than the usual French fair, an idiot)

RobD said:

HYUFD said:

Nemtynakht said:

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/861724567152316416

Wow have they changed their methodology?

Looks a possibility, goodnight

No, it's a crappy tweet that reports changes relative to the previous GE.

As its Survation's first poll of the GE that's why they report vs the GE result:

http://survation.com/con-lead-lab-17-points-amid-ukip-decline-new-polling-series-good-morning-britain/

CarlottaVance said:

RobD said:

HYUFD said:

Nemtynakht said:

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/861724567152316416

Wow have they changed their methodology?

Looks a possibility, goodnight

No, it's a crappy tweet that reports changes relative to the previous GE.

As its Survation's first poll of the GE that's why they report vs the GE result:

http://survation.com/con-lead-lab-17-points-amid-ukip-decline-new-polling-series-good-morning-britain/

Cheeky buggers