politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Macron’s first big decision – choosing his Prime Minister. Chr
Comments
-
Are there any parties in Britain left that support market economics or do the LibDems support the price cap too?FrancisUrquhart said:I see Tories big thing today is price capping, f##king stupid when Ed came out with it, f##king stupid when Kim Jong May came out with it.
0 -
I thought IBAS were supposed to be quicker than that? If I were Ladbrokes management I'd have seen this guy in court though - he made a very specific allegation which he should be asked to prove.isam said:
Can't believe they've refunded him! I had a winning 4/1 bet w Betfred in November which they tried to pay at 3/1. I refused to accept it, sent it to IBAS, and six months later.... nothing!!Sandpit said:
I'd say this is rather like Chris Huhne's wife's speeding ticket. They can probably prove that the bet came from his phone and could conceivably claim that his subsequent complaint was fraudulent. Whether they do or not is up to @Shadsy and his team, but given the publicity the guy has milked, including selling his story to the Daily Mail, I wouldn't be surprised if they wanted to make an example out of him.Pulpstar said:
Does anyone seriously believe his kid actually placed the bet ?FF43 said:
Do you think they want his custom? In any business you have customers that are more bother than they are worth. In any case protecting children from gambling is a sensitive issue that this man is trading on.Pulpstar said:
Ladbrokes don't want to lose his custom. Losing long term account.Theuniondivvie said:Breaking Wollygogg news.
https://twitter.com/GeoffShadbold/status/8618356477614284800 -
The Tories benefit most from postal votes, of course.Ishmael_Z said:
And anyone who takes an interest in politics knows it would be a Holy Grail for the left. Cf. ad lib. postal voting - the fact that it was obvious in advance that that was an open invitation to corruption didn't prevent its introduction, did it?Sandpit said:
Anyone who works in IT knows that electronic voting is a really bad idea. Electronic counting of paper ballots is okay, as there is an easy way of auditing them manually afterwards, but relying on machines to register votes is a big no-no.Ishmael_Z said:
How do you "pull out of the UK" when you exist only in cyberspace? Seems a rather tory bit of thinking.glw said:
I don't think WhatsApp would comply, if they gave in in the UK they'd end up being forced into similar compromises elsewhere. They would destroy a major feature of their service. They might well pull out of the UK, officially at least.asjohnstone said:Forcing this on WhatsApp etc would just drive people to open source messaging anyway. Signal is entirely robust at present.
It's the ultimate King Canute scenario.
Apple has forcefully rebuffed the US government, I can't see them backing down in the UK.
Labour should run with a "Tories want to ban WhatsApp and iPhones" it's not far from the truth if you followed the idiotic proposal to its logical conclusion, and it might prompt the young to get off their arses and vote for something they really care about.
Electronic security is the nemesis of the tory party because if you can guarantee it, you can have electronic voting, and if you have electronic voting the young vs old turnout differential will either be yugely diminished or vanish altogether, and then the young vote will keep the tories out of power forever. So it is just possible that there is a conspiracy rather than cockup element in their plans to make the internet insecure.
0 -
I backed BARNEY ROY as well. The horse was only having his third run and it showed. He didn't get the best of rides and if I didn't know better (!), I'd see there was an element of team tactics from the Ballydoyle brigade drawing the other runners out to the centre of the course while leaving CHURCHILL alone on the rail.Peter_the_Punter said:
Tell me about it. I backed Barney. I know he stumbled but I don't think he got the smartest of rides. Newmarket is a difficult course to ride well. You have to be there to appreciate how undaulating it is. The winner got the perfect ride, the rest....well I think you could run the race again and get a very different result.
Winter looked very good. The Derby winner remains unclear, but I bet it is somehere in O'Brien's stables!
RHODODENDRON looks the Oaks winner on Sunday's evidence - it was probably asking a lot to expect her to win at a mile as a 3-y-o as she'd stayed so well as a juvenile. I think TALAAYEB is worth another chance - only her second run. Now you have the Commonwealth Cup at Ascot, the Guineas failures have a big Group 1 to aim at.
0 -
Verhofstadt was also calling for a special status for Northern Ireland in the same piece. It's just a good cop/bad cop routine.Casino_Royale said:
It's very telling, coupled with Verhofstadts "cool heads and common sense" piece in the FT, yesterday, it tells us that:RobD said:According to the Telegraph, everyone's favourite European Commission President has described the leaks of the meeting a few weeks ago as a "serious mistake". Well duh...
(1) The EU are also very worried about the consequences of a "no deal"
(2) They have realised they can't just browbeat May into making concessions, as they did with Cameron, and they're now no longer 100% sure she won't walk away
May has effectively called their bluff.0 -
I hope banning letting agent fees appears in the Tory manifesto and hasn't died a death with Osborne.0
-
Yep, which is a very good thing for us. They can see that May is about to be returned with a massive majority and no longer has to think about keeping both Ken Clarke and Bill Cash happy. She will walk away from a crap deal and the EU have just noticed.Casino_Royale said:
It's very telling, coupled with Verhofstadts "cool heads and common sense" piece in the FT, yesterday, it tells us that:RobD said:According to the Telegraph, everyone's favourite European Commission President has described the leaks of the meeting a few weeks ago as a "serious mistake". Well duh...
(1) The EU are also very worried about the consequences of a "no deal"
(2) They have realised they can't just browbeat May into making concessions, as they did with Cameron, and they're now no longer 100% sure she won't walk away
May has effectively called their bluff.0 -
This is the logical conclusion of the May "big tent".FrancisUrquhart said:I see Tories big thing today is price capping, f##king stupid when Ed came out with it, f##king stupid when Kim Jong May came out with it.
A Conservative Government implementing Labour policies supported by Conservatives.
Surreal.
0 -
Why does "market economics" apparently preclude some basic rules and boundaries?edmundintokyo said:
Are there any parties in Britain left that support market economics or do the LibDems support the price cap too?FrancisUrquhart said:I see Tories big thing today is price capping, f##king stupid when Ed came out with it, f##king stupid when Kim Jong May came out with it.
To use the cliched example, most people would still say we have "free speech" even though you can't yell "fire!" in a theatre.
That said, I'll believe May will actually implement a good policy like this when I see it.0 -
They're not! Seems a bit strange, they told me two months ago the decision had been made and I should hear soon, today I called them and they said they can't send the letter until the MD signs it off.Sandpit said:
I thought IBAS were supposed to be quicker than that? If I were Ladbrokes management I'd have seen this guy in court though - he made a very specific allegation which he should be asked to prove.isam said:
Can't believe they've refunded him! I had a winning 4/1 bet w Betfred in November which they tried to pay at 3/1. I refused to accept it, sent it to IBAS, and six months later.... nothing!!Sandpit said:
I'd say this is rather like Chris Huhne's wife's speeding ticket. They can probably prove that the bet came from his phone and could conceivably claim that his subsequent complaint was fraudulent. Whether they do or not is up to @Shadsy and his team, but given the publicity the guy has milked, including selling his story to the Daily Mail, I wouldn't be surprised if they wanted to make an example out of him.Pulpstar said:
Does anyone seriously believe his kid actually placed the bet ?FF43 said:
Do you think they want his custom? In any business you have customers that are more bother than they are worth. In any case protecting children from gambling is a sensitive issue that this man is trading on.Pulpstar said:
Ladbrokes don't want to lose his custom. Losing long term account.Theuniondivvie said:Breaking Wollygogg news.
https://twitter.com/GeoffShadbold/status/8618356477614284800 -
" My view is that Macron is young and will go for someone from his generation. "
There are grounds for doubting that Macron goes for those from his generation.0 -
Lol!MonikerDiCanio said:" My view is that Macron is young and will go for someone from his generation. "
There are grounds for doubting that Macron goes for those from his generation.0 -
Interesting on Labour's deep problems, an impending LD catastrophe and why Andy Burnham is well worth watching:
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/june2017/2017/05/five-lessons-mayoral-elections0 -
With, now, rather fewer bad cops.williamglenn said:
Verhofstadt was also calling for a special status for Northern Ireland in the same piece. It's just a good cop/bad cop routine.Casino_Royale said:
It's very telling, coupled with Verhofstadts "cool heads and common sense" piece in the FT, yesterday, it tells us that:RobD said:According to the Telegraph, everyone's favourite European Commission President has described the leaks of the meeting a few weeks ago as a "serious mistake". Well duh...
(1) The EU are also very worried about the consequences of a "no deal"
(2) They have realised they can't just browbeat May into making concessions, as they did with Cameron, and they're now no longer 100% sure she won't walk away
May has effectively called their bluff.0 -
Agreed, Stodge.stodge said:
I backed BARNEY ROY as well. The horse was only having his third run and it showed. He didn't get the best of rides and if I didn't know better (!), I'd see there was an element of team tactics from the Ballydoyle brigade drawing the other runners out to the centre of the course while leaving CHURCHILL alone on the rail.Peter_the_Punter said:
Tell me about it. I backed Barney. I know he stumbled but I don't think he got the smartest of rides. Newmarket is a difficult course to ride well. You have to be there to appreciate how undaulating it is. The winner got the perfect ride, the rest....well I think you could run the race again and get a very different result.
Winter looked very good. The Derby winner remains unclear, but I bet it is somehere in O'Brien's stables!
RHODODENDRON looks the Oaks winner on Sunday's evidence - it was probably asking a lot to expect her to win at a mile as a 3-y-o as she'd stayed so well as a juvenile. I think TALAAYEB is worth another chance - only her second run. Now you have the Commonwealth Cup at Ascot, the Guineas failures have a big Group 1 to aim at.
Flat racing, eh? As the Monk said to the Abbot, 'Ok, but not as good as the real thing.'0 -
Do we need to mince our words? If it was him who placed the bet, then he's surely guilty of fraud by false representation, contrary to section 2 of the Fraud Act 2006.Carolus_Rex said:
Careful, because *if* his kid didn't place the bet, then he's just obtained a refund by being somewhat less than entirely candid (I'm mincing my words as much as I can here) which can have, um, consequences.Pulpstar said:
Does anyone seriously believe his kid actually placed the bet ?FF43 said:
Do you think they want his custom? In any business you have customers that are more bother than they are worth. In any case protecting children from gambling is a sensitive issue that this man is trading on.Pulpstar said:
Ladbrokes don't want to lose his custom. Losing long term account.Theuniondivvie said:Breaking Wollygogg news.
https://twitter.com/GeoffShadbold/status/8618356477614284800 -
May's political weakness was fighting on multiple fronts: Scottish nationalism, a weak parliamentary majority, Lords obstructionism, Northern Ireland, and negotiating with the EU.Sandpit said:
Yep, which is a very good thing for us. They can see that May is about to be returned with a massive majority and no longer has to think about keeping both Ken Clarke and Bill Cash happy. She will walk away from a crap deal and the EU have just noticed.Casino_Royale said:
It's very telling, coupled with Verhofstadts "cool heads and common sense" piece in the FT, yesterday, it tells us that:RobD said:According to the Telegraph, everyone's favourite European Commission President has described the leaks of the meeting a few weeks ago as a "serious mistake". Well duh...
(1) The EU are also very worried about the consequences of a "no deal"
(2) They have realised they can't just browbeat May into making concessions, as they did with Cameron, and they're now no longer 100% sure she won't walk away
May has effectively called their bluff.
She should manage to significantly mitigate (for the time being, at least) a few of those with this general election, allowing her to credibly play firm with the EU.0 -
Sorry.isam said:
Oh right ha there goes £4!Casino_Royale said:
"Royal 21 : hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha "isam said:
What was the tip on Royal? I backed 75 for £4 next pm is that it? Or have I wasted £4??Casino_Royale said:Thanks to Chris from Paris for this. Great tip on Royal.
I'm on.
I was joking.0 -
Ah, yes. Putting up rent. Great policy.Gallowgate said:I hope banning letting agent fees appears in the Tory manifesto and hasn't died a death with Osborne.
0 -
Pax Russia?Danny565 said:0 -
More to the point - the EU27 continue to know that the UK walking away does a lot more harm to the UK than anyone else. There really is no getting round this.williamglenn said:
Verhofstadt was also calling for a special status for Northern Ireland in the same piece. It's just a good cop/bad cop routine.Casino_Royale said:
It's very telling, coupled with Verhofstadts "cool heads and common sense" piece in the FT, yesterday, it tells us that:RobD said:According to the Telegraph, everyone's favourite European Commission President has described the leaks of the meeting a few weeks ago as a "serious mistake". Well duh...
(1) The EU are also very worried about the consequences of a "no deal"
(2) They have realised they can't just browbeat May into making concessions, as they did with Cameron, and they're now no longer 100% sure she won't walk away
May has effectively called their bluff.
Having decided without evidence that Juncker and co were seeking to destabilise the UK election, it seems that some have decided that they have been taught an important lesson. However, it could just be that absolutely nothing has changed, because Juncker and co were never seeking to destabilise the UK election in the first place.
0 -
She can walk away from the only deal on offer if she wants to crash the UK economy and see her career go with it.Sandpit said:
Yep, which is a very good thing for us. They can see that May is about to be returned with a massive majority and no longer has to think about keeping both Ken Clarke and Bill Cash happy. She will walk away from a crap deal and the EU have just noticed.Casino_Royale said:
It's very telling, coupled with Verhofstadts "cool heads and common sense" piece in the FT, yesterday, it tells us that:RobD said:According to the Telegraph, everyone's favourite European Commission President has described the leaks of the meeting a few weeks ago as a "serious mistake". Well duh...
(1) The EU are also very worried about the consequences of a "no deal"
(2) They have realised they can't just browbeat May into making concessions, as they did with Cameron, and they're now no longer 100% sure she won't walk away
May has effectively called their bluff.0 -
Nope its removing a barrier to movement by ensure fees are spread across the entire rental period....ThreeQuidder said:
Ah, yes. Putting up rent. Great policy.Gallowgate said:I hope banning letting agent fees appears in the Tory manifesto and hasn't died a death with Osborne.
Ironically where this has been implemented (Scotland rents did not rise) so I'm not sure how well your argument holds...
0 -
That's an interesting perspective.Sandpit said:Yep, which is a very good thing for us. They can see that May is about to be returned with a massive majority and no longer has to think about keeping both Ken Clarke and Bill Cash happy. She will walk away from a crap deal and the EU have just noticed.
Given it's impossible to satisfy all of the people all of the time, there will be people who won't like the final deal thrashed out by May and the EU.
What will they do and how will they react ?
As we've seen in the past, Conservative tribal loyalty on matters Europe doesn't run as deep as you might think - one could argue it has undone at least three Conservative Prime Ministers in the past 30 years or so.
If Brexit is deemed to be "too soft", the Cash/Hollobone/Bone tendency will be up in arms but as a vociferous minority. If it is deemed to be "too hard", there will be a revolt from the Soubry end of the Party. It's not as though Labour doesn't have similar problems but there aren't as many of them (and likely to be fewer post 8/6).
Presumably we also have the "mainstream" which will support any deal May comes back with and that ballast will get even a bad deal through the Commons but selling a bad deal to a disgruntled electorate will be harder than selling no deal when May can go all Britannia and wheel out the traditional anti-European stereotypes.
0 -
Hopefully will be at Kempton next Monday for my final jump racing before the autumn. My friend who is a Fontwell and Plumpton member refuses to go flat racing and decamps to France to watch the strange cross country jump fare on offer at the provincial tracks for a few weeks.Peter_the_Punter said:
Agreed, Stodge.
Flat racing, eh? As the Monk said to the Abbot, 'Ok, but not as good as the real thing.'
0 -
Left wing economic policy, right wing social policy.stodge said:
This is the logical conclusion of the May "big tent".FrancisUrquhart said:I see Tories big thing today is price capping, f##king stupid when Ed came out with it, f##king stupid when Kim Jong May came out with it.
A Conservative Government implementing Labour policies supported by Conservatives.
Surreal.
It's inverse Blairism.0 -
The current situation is a barrier to workers moving around the country to where the jobs are. Who can afford over £1,000 every year or so just to move? Renting is supposed to be flexible.ThreeQuidder said:
Ah, yes. Putting up rent. Great policy.Gallowgate said:I hope banning letting agent fees appears in the Tory manifesto and hasn't died a death with Osborne.
I'd rather rent increase slightly than have to pay these disgustingly high fees.
0 -
He sounds a very sensible fellow.stodge said:
Hopefully will be at Kempton next Monday for my final jump racing before the autumn. My friend who is a Fontwell and Plumpton member refuses to go flat racing and decamps to France to watch the strange cross country jump fare on offer at the provincial tracks for a few weeks.Peter_the_Punter said:
Agreed, Stodge.
Flat racing, eh? As the Monk said to the Abbot, 'Ok, but not as good as the real thing.'
Plumpton and Fontwell are delightful tracks.0 -
I agree with your first two points, but not your third. Walking away simply guarantees no deal. We need a deal, and will realise that sooner or later. The EU wants a deal, essentially on their terms, and has structured their position accordingly.Casino_Royale said:
It's very telling, coupled with Verhofstadts "cool heads and common sense" piece in the FT, yesterday, it tells us that:
(1) The EU are also very worried about the consequences of a "no deal"
(2) They have realised they can't just browbeat May into making concessions, as they did with Cameron, and they're now no longer 100% sure she won't walk away
May has effectively called their bluff.
I think the leak was counterproductive from the EU point of view, although quite interesting from mine. When you are in the stronger position, it pays to be polite.
0 -
Thanks Chris, love the Ségolène Royal tip, I think I'll sit this market out.
I only ever feel confident laying Front national when it comes to French politics, though I made an allowance for François Fillon.0 -
It'll be fascinating to see what the Mail makes of it when the penny drops.Bromptonaut said:
Left wing economic policy, right wing social policy.stodge said:This is the logical conclusion of the May "big tent".
A Conservative Government implementing Labour policies supported by Conservatives.
Surreal.
It's inverse Blairism.
I've always said May is less Thatcher and more Heseltine in some key areas. She's an interventionist and sees a clear role for the State. No laissez-faire let the markets do it all nonsense from her.
The "social policy" angle will be fascinating. How do you see her implementing a right-wing social policy ? What does that look like ? Will we see, for example, a tightening on licensing laws to curb all-day drinking ?
0 -
I assume this has been discussed? Seems brave considering Hunt got nearly 60% of the vote last time.
https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/8618451670615654410 -
Ironically, Scotland might be the only bright spot for Labour come election night.
They notionally "won" atleast 5 constituencies last week: East Lothian, Rutherglen, Coatbridge, Lanark and Kirkcaldy. Though NOT Edinburgh South.0 -
I don't think thats as true as it used to be, in the days when few people had them and they were mainly elderly or ill.SouthamObserver said:
The Tories benefit most from postal votes, of course.Ishmael_Z said:
And anyone who takes an interest in politics knows it would be a Holy Grail for the left. Cf. ad lib. postal voting - the fact that it was obvious in advance that that was an open invitation to corruption didn't prevent its introduction, did it?Sandpit said:
Anyone who works in IT knows that electronic voting is a really bad idea. Electronic counting of paper ballots is okay, as there is an easy way of auditing them manually afterwards, but relying on machines to register votes is a big no-no.Ishmael_Z said:
How do you "pull out of the UK" when you exist only in cyberspace? Seems a rather tory bit of thinking.glw said:
I don't think WhatsApp would comply, if they gave in in the UK they'd end up being forced into similar compromises elsewhere. They would destroy a major feature of their service. They might well pull out of the UK, officially at least.asjohnstone said:Forcing this on WhatsApp etc would just drive people to open source messaging anyway. Signal is entirely robust at present.
It's the ultimate King Canute scenario.
Apple has forcefully rebuffed the US government, I can't see them backing down in the UK.
Labour should run with a "Tories want to ban WhatsApp and iPhones" it's not far from the truth if you followed the idiotic proposal to its logical conclusion, and it might prompt the young to get off their arses and vote for something they really care about.
Electronic security is the nemesis of the tory party because if you can guarantee it, you can have electronic voting, and if you have electronic voting the young vs old turnout differential will either be yugely diminished or vanish altogether, and then the young vote will keep the tories out of power forever. So it is just possible that there is a conspiracy rather than cockup element in their plans to make the internet insecure.
Now they are much easier to get, the political parties try to sign up their supporters for perpetual PVs (since propensity to return a PV is over 75% even in local elections), and with the biggest ground army Labour will have been doing more of this than anyone else. And PVs are also popular with ethnic minority voters, particularly those whose English isn't fully fluent. And with younger people who are studying away, travel a lot, or work late or on shift work.0 -
Lol! Charles Kennedy started his 2005 GE campaign at my sixth form college. I remember walking behind Jenny Scott when she was doing a piece to camera and hoping I'd be on the Six O'clock news. I wasn't.TheScreamingEagles said:I assume this has been discussed? Seems brave considering Hunt got nearly 60% of the vote last time.
https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/861845167061565441
0 -
"It isn't snobbery, Ishmael.
Most Remainers would be aware that those who voted Leave tended to come from the segments of the population that would be most severely affected by Brexit, and viewed the irony with sympathy as well as sadness".
Condescension, then.0 -
If rent goes up the deposit goes up, and you have to pay the new deposit before you get the old one back.Gallowgate said:
The current situation is a barrier to workers moving around the country to where the jobs are. Who can afford over £1,000 every year or so just to move? Renting is supposed to be flexible.ThreeQuidder said:
Ah, yes. Putting up rent. Great policy.Gallowgate said:I hope banning letting agent fees appears in the Tory manifesto and hasn't died a death with Osborne.
I'd rather rent increase slightly than have to pay these disgustingly high fees.0 -
As the bloke said this morning on the radio (energy guy) - people could save more money by switching than with any price control.Sandpit said:
Wasn't Ed's plan price freezing rather than capping?FrancisUrquhart said:I see Tories big thing today is price capping, f##king stupid when Ed came out with it, f##king stupid when Kim Jong May came out with it.
Still a silly idea though, much better is a free market in supply with a regulated company owning the infrastructure.
Go out on the streets and I would bet that three out of five people you meet are on standard tariff rates.0 -
What better man than Hunt to lead the forces of the Evil Empire against the pathetic Progressive Alliance.TheScreamingEagles said:I assume this has been discussed? Seems brave considering Hunt got nearly 60% of the vote last time.
https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/861845167061565441
0 -
Interesting. The Nats will have to tack right to stem the mass Tartan Tory exodus and that could give SLab space on the left.Danny565 said:Ironically, Scotland might be the only bright spot for Labour come election night.
They notionally "won" atleast 5 constituencies last week: East Lothian, Rutherglen, Coatbridge, Lanark and Kirkcaldy. Though NOT Edinburgh South.0 -
Bet365 were 10-1 in East Lothian yesterday. It's the only Labour gain I've backed the whole GE.Danny565 said:Ironically, Scotland might be the only bright spot for Labour come election night.
They notionally "won" atleast 5 constituencies last week: East Lothian, Rutherglen, Coatbridge, Lanark and Kirkcaldy. Though NOT Edinburgh South.0 -
They are most popular, by far, with the elderly.IanB2 said:
I don't think thats as true as it used to be, in the days when few people had them and they were mainly elderly or ill.SouthamObserver said:
The Tories benefit most from postal votes, of course.Ishmael_Z said:
And anyone who takes an interest in politics knows it would be a Holy Grail for the left. Cf. ad lib. postal voting - the fact that it was obvious in advance that that was an open invitation to corruption didn't prevent its introduction, did it?Sandpit said:
Anyone who works in IT knows that electronic voting is a really bad idea. Electronic counting of paper ballots is okay, as there is an easy way of auditing them manually afterwards, but relying on machines to register votes is a big no-no.Ishmael_Z said:
How do you "pull out of the UK" when you exist only in cyberspace? Seems a rather tory bit of thinking.glw said:
I don't think WhatsApp would comply, if they gave in in the UK they'd end up being forced into similar compromises elsewhere. They would destroy a major feature of their service. They might well pull out of the UK, officially at least.asjohnstone said:Forcing this on WhatsApp etc would just drive people to open source messaging anyway. Signal is entirely robust at present.
It's the ultimate King Canute scenario.
Apple has forcefully rebuffed the US government, I can't see them backing down in the UK.
Labour should run with a "Tories want to ban WhatsApp and iPhones" it's not far from the truth if you followed the idiotic proposal to its logical conclusion, and it might prompt the young to get off their arses and vote for something they really care about.
Electronic security is the nemesis of the tory party because if you can guarantee it, you can have electronic voting, and if you have electronic voting the young vs old turnout differential will either be yugely diminished or vanish altogether, and then the young vote will keep the tories out of power forever. So it is just possible that there is a conspiracy rather than cockup element in their plans to make the internet insecure.
Now they are much easier to get, the political parties try to sign up their supporters for perpetual PVs (since propensity to return a PV is over 75% even in local elections), and with the biggest ground army Labour will have been doing more of this than anyone else. And PVs are also popular with ethnic minority voters, particularly those whose English isn't fully fluent.
0 -
Indeed. It must be one of the safest seats in the country (I should know I used to live in it). I guess nothing to lose either way (in this case), but things like this would be very tricky to do in actual competitive seats.TheScreamingEagles said:I assume this has been discussed? Seems brave considering Hunt got nearly 60% of the vote last time.
0 -
Yes, but not to the same extent (proportionately) as ten years agoSouthamObserver said:
They are most popular, by far, with the elderly.IanB2 said:
I don't think thats as true as it used to be, in the days when few people had them and they were mainly elderly or ill.SouthamObserver said:
The Tories benefit most from postal votes, of course.Ishmael_Z said:
And anyone who takes an interest in politics knows it would be a Holy Grail for the left. Cf. ad lib. postal voting - the fact that it was obvious in advance that that was an open invitation to corruption didn't prevent its introduction, did it?Sandpit said:
Anyone who works in IT knows that electronic voting is a really bad idea. Electronic counting of paper ballots is okay, as there is an easy way of auditing them manually afterwards, but relying on machines to register votes is a big no-no.Ishmael_Z said:
How do you "pull out of the UK" when you exist only in cyberspace? Seems a rather tory bit of thinking.glw said:
I don't think WhatsApp would comply, if they gave in in the UK they'd end up being forced into similar compromises elsewhere. They would destroy a major feature of their service. They might well pull out of the UK, officially at least.asjohnstone said:Forcing this on WhatsApp etc would just drive people to open source messaging anyway. Signal is entirely robust at present.
It's the ultimate King Canute scenario.
Apple has forcefully rebuffed the US government, I can't see them backing down in the UK.
Labour should run with a "Tories want to ban WhatsApp and iPhones" it's not far from the truth if you followed the idiotic proposal to its logical conclusion, and it might prompt the young to get off their arses and vote for something they really care about.
Electronic security is the nemesis of the tory party because if you can guarantee it, you can have electronic voting, and if you have electronic voting the young vs old turnout differential will either be yugely diminished or vanish altogether, and then the young vote will keep the tories out of power forever. So it is just possible that there is a conspiracy rather than cockup element in their plans to make the internet insecure.
Now they are much easier to get, the political parties try to sign up their supporters for perpetual PVs (since propensity to return a PV is over 75% even in local elections), and with the biggest ground army Labour will have been doing more of this than anyone else. And PVs are also popular with ethnic minority voters, particularly those whose English isn't fully fluent.0 -
Free market theory strikes me as like Lamarckian evolution: elegant, easily understood, superficially attractive and simply wrong. The *minimum* charge for a 118118 directory enquiries call is £8.98. I am not joking: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39842723Danny565 said:
Why does "market economics" apparently preclude some basic rules and boundaries?edmundintokyo said:
Are there any parties in Britain left that support market economics or do the LibDems support the price cap too?FrancisUrquhart said:I see Tories big thing today is price capping, f##king stupid when Ed came out with it, f##king stupid when Kim Jong May came out with it.
To use the cliched example, most people would still say we have "free speech" even though you can't yell "fire!" in a theatre.
That said, I'll believe May will actually implement a good policy like this when I see it.
The flat rate for a 118 call to Verizon UK is 35 p. I repeat: £8.98 vs 35p for an identical product. Free market theory: people vote with their feet, 118118 reduces its prices or goes out of business. Reality: 118118 is staggeringly profitable. The people who use it must be unsophisticated, not well off and heavily influenced by TV advertising, and they need protection from this kind of shit.
Gas and electric are already capped at the wholesale level I believe, btw.0 -
Imperfect information.Ishmael_Z said:
Free market theory strikes me as like Lamarckian evolution: elegant, easily understood, superficially attractive and simply wrong. The *minimum* charge for a 118118 directory enquiries call is £8.98. I am not joking: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39842723Danny565 said:
Why does "market economics" apparently preclude some basic rules and boundaries?edmundintokyo said:
Are there any parties in Britain left that support market economics or do the LibDems support the price cap too?FrancisUrquhart said:I see Tories big thing today is price capping, f##king stupid when Ed came out with it, f##king stupid when Kim Jong May came out with it.
To use the cliched example, most people would still say we have "free speech" even though you can't yell "fire!" in a theatre.
That said, I'll believe May will actually implement a good policy like this when I see it.
The flat rate for a 118 call to Verizon UK is 35 p. I repeat: £8.98 vs 35p for an identical product. Free market theory: people vote with their feet, 118118 reduces its prices or goes out of business. Reality: 118118 is staggeringly profitable. The people who use it must be unsophisticated, not well off and heavily influenced by TV advertising, and they need protection from this kind of shit.
Gas and electric are already capped at the wholesale level I believe, btw.0 -
From the 2015 Labour manifesto. How is the Tory policy on price caps different to this (years excepting):
Labour will freeze energy bills until 2017, ensuring that bills can fall but not
rise, and we will give the regulator the power to cut bills this winter. During
the freeze, we will reform the energy market so that it delivers fairer prices
and a better deal for working families. The generation and supply businesses
of the ‘Big Six’ energy companies will be separated. They will be required to
open up their books, and they will have to sell their electricity through an
open exchange. We will simplify energy tariffs and make it easier for people to
compare prices to get the best deal. We will protect small businesses by ending
unfair contracts and automatic rollovers to more expensive tariffs. A tough
new energy watchdog will enforce our reforms, with powers to strip energy
companies of their licences if they repeatedly harm the interests of consumers,
and protect off-grid households.
http://www.labour.org.uk/page/-/BritainCanBeBetter-TheLabourPartyManifesto2015.pdf0 -
I wonder if they have been focus grouped with the soft Tory voters that represent the majority in that area?TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
I think that with the small majority she had, and others in the Commons and Lords determined to oppose whatever she came up with, Mrs May was right to ask the people for a mandate to negotiate.stodge said:
That's an interesting perspective.Sandpit said:Yep, which is a very good thing for us. They can see that May is about to be returned with a massive majority and no longer has to think about keeping both Ken Clarke and Bill Cash happy. She will walk away from a crap deal and the EU have just noticed.
Given it's impossible to satisfy all of the people all of the time, there will be people who won't like the final deal thrashed out by May and the EU.
What will they do and how will they react ?
As we've seen in the past, Conservative tribal loyalty on matters Europe doesn't run as deep as you might think - one could argue it has undone at least three Conservative Prime Ministers in the past 30 years or so.
If Brexit is deemed to be "too soft", the Cash/Hollobone/Bone tendency will be up in arms but as a vociferous minority. If it is deemed to be "too hard", there will be a revolt from the Soubry end of the Party. It's not as though Labour doesn't have similar problems but there aren't as many of them (and likely to be fewer post 8/6).
Presumably we also have the "mainstream" which will support any deal May comes back with and that ballast will get even a bad deal through the Commons but selling a bad deal to a disgruntled electorate will be harder than selling no deal when May can go all Britannia and wheel out the traditional anti-European stereotypes.
As it was, half a dozen malcontents on either side could have derailed the negotiations, it's now clear that she'll have the majority of the country behind her whatever her position in the EU negotiations.
More importantly, those on the other side now understand that 'no deal' is a genuine possibility, and will soften their stance accordingly. David Cameron learned to his cost that going in to a negotiation saying that he'll support the outcome is a recipe for getting nothing of substance in return.0 -
Walking away is in neither side's interest.SouthamObserver said:
More to the point - the EU27 continue to know that the UK walking away does a lot more harm to the UK than anyone else. There really is no getting round this.williamglenn said:
Verhofstadt was also calling for a special status for Northern Ireland in the same piece. It's just a good cop/bad cop routine.Casino_Royale said:
It's very telling, coupled with Verhofstadts "cool heads and common sense" piece in the FT, yesterday, it tells us that:RobD said:According to the Telegraph, everyone's favourite European Commission President has described the leaks of the meeting a few weeks ago as a "serious mistake". Well duh...
(1) The EU are also very worried about the consequences of a "no deal"
(2) They have realised they can't just browbeat May into making concessions, as they did with Cameron, and they're now no longer 100% sure she won't walk away
May has effectively called their bluff.
Having decided without evidence that Juncker and co were seeking to destabilise the UK election, it seems that some have decided that they have been taught an important lesson. However, it could just be that absolutely nothing has changed, because Juncker and co were never seeking to destabilise the UK election in the first place.
The EU can re-establish pan-continental political (and, therefore, economic) stability most effectively by reaching a *reasonable* arrangement between the UK and the EU.
And, yes, the EU and UK will disagree on what is "reasonable".
The EU will want the UK to be seen to pay a price, and look worse-off and marginalised, from leaving the EU. However, and I think this is the crucial bit: the political risk of the EU breaking-up has diminished (at least in the short term) and the bigger risk for the EU now is pushing the UK too hard, such that talks totally break down, and May walks away.
If that did occur that could be introducing a new political/economic destabilising factor in Europe (think: a chastened diamond-Brexit UK imposing very tough immigration quotas on Eastern Europe, giving unemployed youth there nowhere to go, plus the economic ripples of a slump in trade between the UK and EU resulting from formal tariff barriers, and possibly EIRE kicking up an awful fuss, and perhaps even threatening to Leave themselves)
So: a very hard negotiation to come, certainly. But the EU will seek a deal: not because it's in our interests, but because it's in theirs.0 -
Yes people are reluctant to switch utilities in particular. If you could eliminate the perceived risk of switching a lot more people would switch, but this is a general issue that applies to things like insurance and banking too. A lot of people won't even switch mobile operators even though that is now a very fast and almost fool-proof process.TOPPING said:
As the bloke said this morning on the radio (energy guy) - people could save more money by switching than with any price control.Sandpit said:
Wasn't Ed's plan price freezing rather than capping?FrancisUrquhart said:I see Tories big thing today is price capping, f##king stupid when Ed came out with it, f##king stupid when Kim Jong May came out with it.
Still a silly idea though, much better is a free market in supply with a regulated company owning the infrastructure.
Go out on the streets and I would bet that three out of five people you meet are on standard tariff rates.0 -
ELBOW for week ending 7th May updated for Survation (end date 6th May) and ICM Guardian (end date 7th May):
Con Lab LD UKIP Tory Lead
23-Apr-17 45.50 26.10 10.40 8.60 19.40
30-Apr-17 46.33 28.11 10.22 6.67 18.22
07-May-17 47.10 28.50 9.40 6.40 18.600 -
It'll go down like cold sick. I reckon Zac will win to be honest.IanB2 said:
I wonder if they have been focus grouped with the soft Tory voters that represent the majority in that area?TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
The Tory one has a chance of being implemented?SouthamObserver said:From the 2015 Labour manifesto. How is the Tory policy on price caps different to this (years excepting):
Labour will freeze energy bills until 2017, ensuring that bills can fall but not
rise, and we will give the regulator the power to cut bills this winter. During
the freeze, we will reform the energy market so that it delivers fairer prices
and a better deal for working families. The generation and supply businesses
of the ‘Big Six’ energy companies will be separated. They will be required to
open up their books, and they will have to sell their electricity through an
open exchange. We will simplify energy tariffs and make it easier for people to
compare prices to get the best deal. We will protect small businesses by ending
unfair contracts and automatic rollovers to more expensive tariffs. A tough
new energy watchdog will enforce our reforms, with powers to strip energy
companies of their licences if they repeatedly harm the interests of consumers,
and protect off-grid households.
http://www.labour.org.uk/page/-/BritainCanBeBetter-TheLabourPartyManifesto2015.pdf
0 -
Yes if I was a soft Tory who didn't like Zac (one out of two for me - not personally, mind, but anyway), that would motivate me to vote for him to stick it in the eye to those smug, "progressive" gits.IanB2 said:
I wonder if they have been focus grouped with the soft Tory voters that represent the majority in that area?TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
One man's Progressive Alliance is another's Coalition of Chaos.TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
Lol. And Mrs Robinson issues aside, it's not uncommon for young upstarts to pick an experienced greybeard as number 2. Obama picking Biden is the obvious recent one.MonikerDiCanio said:" My view is that Macron is young and will go for someone from his generation. "
There are grounds for doubting that Macron goes for those from his generation.0 -
Don't worry, my faultCasino_Royale said:
Sorry.isam said:
Oh right ha there goes £4!Casino_Royale said:
"Royal 21 : hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha "isam said:
What was the tip on Royal? I backed 75 for £4 next pm is that it? Or have I wasted £4??Casino_Royale said:Thanks to Chris from Paris for this. Great tip on Royal.
I'm on.
I was joking.0 -
To hold onto Richmond and win Twickers, the Lib Dems need to win over Tory remainers.IanB2 said:
I wonder if they have been focus grouped with the soft Tory voters that represent the majority in that area?TheScreamingEagles said:
Yesterday, Sir Vince and Sarah Olney ensured Tory Remainers stick with Mrs May's Blues.0 -
The EU is seeking a deal. That much is not in doubt. The question is on whose terms?Casino_Royale said:So: a very hard negotiation to come, certainly. But the EU will seek a deal: not because it's in our interests, but because it's in theirs.
The EU has laid out a fairly detailed roadmap for a slow and orderly process. How hard or soft our Brexit ends up being depends to a large extent on how long we are prepared to wait.0 -
Death sentence for crimes against typography. I think there are three different san serifs in that lot.TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
Yes, the current system discriminates massively against those who don't switch every year - mainly the old and poor. Is there still a massive surcharge on prepayment meters?TOPPING said:
As the bloke said this morning on the radio (energy guy) - people could save more money by switching than with any price control.Sandpit said:
Wasn't Ed's plan price freezing rather than capping?FrancisUrquhart said:I see Tories big thing today is price capping, f##king stupid when Ed came out with it, f##king stupid when Kim Jong May came out with it.
Still a silly idea though, much better is a free market in supply with a regulated company owning the infrastructure.
Go out on the streets and I would bet that three out of five people you meet are on standard tariff rates.0 -
That table gave me a scare, before I think you must have fixed it.Sunil_Prasannan said:ELBOW for week ending 7th May updated for Survation (end date 6th May) and ICM Guardian (end date 7th May):
Con Lab LD UKIP Tory Lead
23-Apr-17 45.50 26.10 10.40 8.60 19.40
30-Apr-17 46.33 28.11 10.22 6.67 18.22
07-May-17 47.10 28.50 9.40 6.40 18.600 -
I might proof to be very wrong about this, but, personally, I think the vast majority of that boil will be lanced by us formally leaving the European Project for good.stodge said:
That's an interesting perspective.Sandpit said:Yep, which is a very good thing for us. They can see that May is about to be returned with a massive majority and no longer has to think about keeping both Ken Clarke and Bill Cash happy. She will walk away from a crap deal and the EU have just noticed.
Given it's impossible to satisfy all of the people all of the time, there will be people who won't like the final deal thrashed out by May and the EU.
What will they do and how will they react ?
As we've seen in the past, Conservative tribal loyalty on matters Europe doesn't run as deep as you might think - one could argue it has undone at least three Conservative Prime Ministers in the past 30 years or so.
If Brexit is deemed to be "too soft", the Cash/Hollobone/Bone tendency will be up in arms but as a vociferous minority. If it is deemed to be "too hard", there will be a revolt from the Soubry end of the Party. It's not as though Labour doesn't have similar problems but there aren't as many of them (and likely to be fewer post 8/6).
Presumably we also have the "mainstream" which will support any deal May comes back with and that ballast will get even a bad deal through the Commons but selling a bad deal to a disgruntled electorate will be harder than selling no deal when May can go all Britannia and wheel out the traditional anti-European stereotypes.0 -
Greybeard. Le mot juste.edmundintokyo said:
Lol. And Mrs Robinson issues aside, it's not uncommon for young upstarts to pick an experienced greybeard as number 2. Obama picking Biden is the obvious recent one.MonikerDiCanio said:" My view is that Macron is young and will go for someone from his generation. "
There are grounds for doubting that Macron goes for those from his generation.0 -
I'd have voted LD to give Zac the message in Richmond, but with this I'd now support him. How many others like me will be massively turned off by the idea that voting LD helps Corbyn?TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
The third point follows from the second.FF43 said:
I agree with your first two points, but not your third. Walking away simply guarantees no deal. We need a deal, and will realise that sooner or later. The EU wants a deal, essentially on their terms, and has structured their position accordingly.Casino_Royale said:
It's very telling, coupled with Verhofstadts "cool heads and common sense" piece in the FT, yesterday, it tells us that:
(1) The EU are also very worried about the consequences of a "no deal"
(2) They have realised they can't just browbeat May into making concessions, as they did with Cameron, and they're now no longer 100% sure she won't walk away
May has effectively called their bluff.
I think the leak was counterproductive from the EU point of view, although quite interesting from mine. When you are in the stronger position, it pays to be polite.
She is willing to call them out in public on underhand tactics to give herself political cover in case the worst happens.
Therefore, I think there now will be a genuine negotiation (although still the EU has the stronger hand) rather than an absolute "take it or leave it".0 -
Top headline in the guardian
Jeremy Corbyn says he will not quit as leader if Labour loses election –
All those Polly nose peg labour voters will be thrilled.0 -
It follows from my remarks about Godalming North from Saturday and this morning.TheScreamingEagles said:I assume this has been discussed? Seems brave considering Hunt got nearly 60% of the vote last time.
https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/861845167061565441
The "Progressive Alliance" is happening in the more pro-REMAIN areas where there is a greater chance of voter transfer.
Worth noting that in Farnham the Residents won North and Central and ran the Conservatives close in South.
Do I think it will oust Hunt ? Probably not.
0 -
Because they make little sense.TOPPING said:
As the bloke said this morning on the radio (energy guy) - people could save more money by switching than with any price control.Sandpit said:
Wasn't Ed's plan price freezing rather than capping?FrancisUrquhart said:I see Tories big thing today is price capping, f##king stupid when Ed came out with it, f##king stupid when Kim Jong May came out with it.
Still a silly idea though, much better is a free market in supply with a regulated company owning the infrastructure.
Go out on the streets and I would bet that three out of five people you meet are on standard tariff rates.
How many people know what an on-peak/off-peak kilowatt hour is? Or surcharge pricing? Or how many "units" they use a month, differentiated by gas and electricity?
Most just know how big their house is, how many people live in it, and what their monthly bills come to.0 -
How many houses in Richmond and Barnes are worth more than £ 500,000 ?Sandpit said:
I'd have voted LD to give Zac the message in Richmond, but with this I'd now support him. How many others like me will be massively turned off by the idea that voting LD helps Corbyn?TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
Kim is his surname!FrancisUrquhart said:I see Tories big thing today is price capping, f##king stupid when Ed came out with it, f##king stupid when Kim Jong May came out with it.
So if you want to spoof Mrs. May, it would be "May Jong Un".
Got it? Good!0 -
Seems a rather odd constituency for the ‘Progressive Alliance’ to target, must be personal.RobD said:
What better man than Hunt to lead the forces of the Evil Empire against the pathetic Progressive Alliance.TheScreamingEagles said:I assume this has been discussed? Seems brave considering Hunt got nearly 60% of the vote last time.
ttps://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/861845167061565441
GE2015 vote; - Jeremy Hunt 34,199. - Lab+LD+Green combined 12,106. No doubt Hunt will also benefit from a slice of the UKiP 5.643 vote.0 -
"Best PM" in all the polls is hilarious.FrancisUrquhart said:Top headline in the guardian
Jeremy Corbyn says he will not quit as leader if Labour loses election –
All those Polly nose peg labour voters will be thrilled.
There are two things Labour doesn't want
1) A referendum on Corbyn
2) UKIP not showing up on the ballot.0 -
So we can safely assume that the Lib Dems are essentially Watermelons and Corbynistas?TheScreamingEagles said:I assume this has been discussed? Seems brave considering Hunt got nearly 60% of the vote last time.
https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/861845167061565441
Sounds like a bright idea.0 -
I know that, just doesn't work as well...Random fact did you know in Korean language there are two number systems.Sunil_Prasannan said:
Kim is his surname!FrancisUrquhart said:I see Tories big thing today is price capping, f##king stupid when Ed came out with it, f##king stupid when Kim Jong May came out with it.
So if you want to spoof Mrs. May, it would be "May Jong Un".
Got it? Good!0 -
Only probably not? It would be sensational if he lost his seat.stodge said:
It follows from my remarks about Godalming North from Saturday and this morning.TheScreamingEagles said:I assume this has been discussed? Seems brave considering Hunt got nearly 60% of the vote last time.
twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/861845167061565441
The "Progressive Alliance" is happening in the more pro-REMAIN areas where there is a greater chance of voter transfer.
Worth noting that in Farnham the Residents won North and Central and ran the Conservatives close in South.
Do I think it will oust Hunt ? Probably not.0 -
But he would say that wouldn't be? They don't want supporters abstaining just this once, thinking it might get rid of him.FrancisUrquhart said:Top headline in the guardian
Jeremy Corbyn says he will not quit as leader if Labour loses election –
All those Polly nose peg labour voters will be thrilled.0 -
-
Tv actress articulating labour pitch "we give a toss about other people". You can see why she is a soap actress.0
-
Yes. Scottish Nationalism is not a busted flush, but it's becoming clear that Brexit has not given Nationalists the boost they were hoping for. The "Anti-Brexit Alliance" (aka Sinn Fein taking over all non-Unionist parties) hasn't materialised in Northern Ireland. May looks like she's heading for a big majority.Casino_Royale said:
May's political weakness was fighting on multiple fronts: Scottish nationalism, a weak parliamentary majority, Lords obstructionism, Northern Ireland, and negotiating with the EU.Sandpit said:
Yep, which is a very good thing for us. They can see that May is about to be returned with a massive majority and no longer has to think about keeping both Ken Clarke and Bill Cash happy. She will walk away from a crap deal and the EU have just noticed.Casino_Royale said:
It's very telling, coupled with Verhofstadts "cool heads and common sense" piece in the FT, yesterday, it tells us that:RobD said:According to the Telegraph, everyone's favourite European Commission President has described the leaks of the meeting a few weeks ago as a "serious mistake". Well duh...
(1) The EU are also very worried about the consequences of a "no deal"
(2) They have realised they can't just browbeat May into making concessions, as they did with Cameron, and they're now no longer 100% sure she won't walk away
May has effectively called their bluff.
She should manage to significantly mitigate (for the time being, at least) a few of those with this general election, allowing her to credibly play firm with the EU.
That leaves negotiating with the EU.0 -
I believe there was a scandal involving the LD last time (something about falsifying papers). IN 2010 it was 60% Con, 30% LD.SimonStClare said:
Seems a rather odd constituency for the ‘Progressive Alliance’ to target, must be personal.RobD said:
What better man than Hunt to lead the forces of the Evil Empire against the pathetic Progressive Alliance.TheScreamingEagles said:I assume this has been discussed? Seems brave considering Hunt got nearly 60% of the vote last time.
ttps://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/861845167061565441
GE2015 vote; - Jeremy Hunt 34,199. - Lab+LD+Green combined 12,106. No doubt Hunt will also benefit from a slice of the UKiP 5.643 vote.0 -
LOL, yeah, I had to adjust the top line with a couple of spacesglw said:
That table gave me a scare, before I think you must have fixed it.Sunil_Prasannan said:ELBOW for week ending 7th May updated for Survation (end date 6th May) and ICM Guardian (end date 7th May):
Con Lab LD UKIP Tory Lead
23-Apr-17 45.50 26.10 10.40 8.60 19.40
30-Apr-17 46.33 28.11 10.22 6.67 18.22
07-May-17 47.10 28.50 9.40 6.40 18.60 0 -
The private polling has suggested that a good number of people are only willing to vote labour with the expectation it will reduce Tory majority but corbyn will go. Instead team corbyn keep repeating we ain't going nowhere.IanB2 said:
But he would say that wouldn't be? They don't want supporters abstaining just this once, thinking it might get rid of him.FrancisUrquhart said:Top headline in the guardian
Jeremy Corbyn says he will not quit as leader if Labour loses election –
All those Polly nose peg labour voters will be thrilled.0 -
It was only in the few weeks before the general election was called that the nature of the choice we had made in Brexit started to become clear to the wider public. Jingoistic rallying of the people is not sustainable for the duration of the negotiations without people asking very searching questions about where May is taking us.Sean_F said:
Yes. Scottish Nationalism is not a busted flush, but it's becoming clear that Brexit has not given Nationalists the boost they were hoping for. The "Anti-Brexit Alliance" (aka Sinn Fein taking over all non-Unionist parties) hasn't materialised in Northern Ireland. May looks like she's heading for a big majority.Casino_Royale said:
May's political weakness was fighting on multiple fronts: Scottish nationalism, a weak parliamentary majority, Lords obstructionism, Northern Ireland, and negotiating with the EU.Sandpit said:
Yep, which is a very good thing for us. They can see that May is about to be returned with a massive majority and no longer has to think about keeping both Ken Clarke and Bill Cash happy. She will walk away from a crap deal and the EU have just noticed.Casino_Royale said:
It's very telling, coupled with Verhofstadts "cool heads and common sense" piece in the FT, yesterday, it tells us that:RobD said:According to the Telegraph, everyone's favourite European Commission President has described the leaks of the meeting a few weeks ago as a "serious mistake". Well duh...
(1) The EU are also very worried about the consequences of a "no deal"
(2) They have realised they can't just browbeat May into making concessions, as they did with Cameron, and they're now no longer 100% sure she won't walk away
May has effectively called their bluff.
She should manage to significantly mitigate (for the time being, at least) a few of those with this general election, allowing her to credibly play firm with the EU.
That leaves negotiating with the EU.0 -
Has Jeremy been spending too much time watch the Go Compare adverts? He must have said fantastic about 10 times!0
-
Other people don't give a toss about the opinions of actresses.FrancisUrquhart said:Tv actress articulating labour pitch "we give a toss about other people". You can see why she is a soap actress.
0 -
They can join the LibDems - who are much more relaxed about allowing people to make their own decisions - and get in ahead of the rush.RobD said:0 -
Labour seem to like the idea of keeping Mr Huntchestnut said:
So we can safely assume that the Lib Dems are essentially Watermelons and Corbynistas?TheScreamingEagles said:I assume this has been discussed? Seems brave considering Hunt got nearly 60% of the vote last time.
https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/861845167061565441
Sounds like a bright idea.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/may/09/labour-expels-south-west-surrey-members-attempt-unseat-jeremy-hunt0 -
Rigged rigged rigged rigged evil rich rich rich rich Murdoch Murdoch rigged rigged rigged...0
-
As Richard N often points out - the EU cannot start a negotiation with the Irish border top of the 'to-do' list without discussing trade.
They either throw the Irish under a bus, or negotiate simultaneously.0 -
RobD - *snap!*
0 -
I agree with both your points (and it always was going to be a genuine negotiation, albeit skewed towards the EU position). For this to work the only people that need to be impressed by Theresa May's Blazing Saddles gambit are the British public who won't notice a deal that is a bit worse that it would be without it.Casino_Royale said:
The third point follows from the second.FF43 said:
I agree with your first two points, but not your third. Walking away simply guarantees no deal. We need a deal, and will realise that sooner or later. The EU wants a deal, essentially on their terms, and has structured their position accordingly.Casino_Royale said:
It's very telling, coupled with Verhofstadts "cool heads and common sense" piece in the FT, yesterday, it tells us that:
(1) The EU are also very worried about the consequences of a "no deal"
(2) They have realised they can't just browbeat May into making concessions, as they did with Cameron, and they're now no longer 100% sure she won't walk away
May has effectively called their bluff.
I think the leak was counterproductive from the EU point of view, although quite interesting from mine. When you are in the stronger position, it pays to be polite.
She is willing to call them out in public on underhand tactics to give herself political cover in case the worst happens.
Therefore, I think there now will be a genuine negotiation (although still the EU has the stronger hand) rather than an absolute "take it or leave it".
It's Kabuki, but the risk is that Mrs May actually believes her own rhetoric and walking away becomes the objective rather than an act.0 -
The EU will dictate the deal. The UK will get some say in the details of how it is implemented. Or the UK will walk away and inflict significant harm on itself. That was true on 24th June 2016, it was true last month, it is true today and it will continue to be true in the future. May has promised that she will negotiate a deal that will leave the UK stronger, more united and more prosperous. We shall see.williamglenn said:
The EU is seeking a deal. That much is not in doubt. The question is on whose terms?Casino_Royale said:So: a very hard negotiation to come, certainly. But the EU will seek a deal: not because it's in our interests, but because it's in theirs.
The EU has laid out a fairly detailed roadmap for a slow and orderly process. How hard or soft our Brexit ends up being depends to a large extent on how long we are prepared to wait.
0 -
I cheated by not describing what the link was aboutBeverley_C said:RobD - *snap!*
0 -
No, not at all.frpenkridge said:"It isn't snobbery, Ishmael.
Most Remainers would be aware that those who voted Leave tended to come from the segments of the population that would be most severely affected by Brexit, and viewed the irony with sympathy as well as sadness".
Condescension, then.
I'm really sorry that it happened, and am sure that those who suffer most will be those least able to cope with the consequences. I'm not one of those, but why shouldn't I sympathise with them? Sympathy isn't condescension.
And I hope I'm wrong. I'd be delighted to admit it, but so far I see no reason to think my original judgement was incorrect.0 -
It is interesting that jezzas left wing pitch never mentions immigration....One of the biggest concerns of those most affected by large class sizes and high rents.0
-
Apparently there are now 30 whole days to save the NHS. Things are looking up... 0
-
It's completely different. The policy just announced is not a price cap "ensuring that bills can fall but not rise", which is just as well because that was an absolutely bonkers idea in a market where input costs are set by world markets. The policy announced today gives powers to the regulator to limit the differential between the standard variable tariffs (where the CMA found that competition wasn't working) and the market-rate tariffs where competition does work, which seems fair enough in a regulated semi-free market.SouthamObserver said:From the 2015 Labour manifesto. How is the Tory policy on price caps different to this (years excepting):
Labour will freeze energy bills until 2017, ensuring that bills can fall but not
rise, and we will give the regulator the power to cut bills this winter. During
the freeze, we will reform the energy market so that it delivers fairer prices
and a better deal for working families. The generation and supply businesses
of the ‘Big Six’ energy companies will be separated. They will be required to
open up their books, and they will have to sell their electricity through an
open exchange. We will simplify energy tariffs and make it easier for people to
compare prices to get the best deal. We will protect small businesses by ending
unfair contracts and automatic rollovers to more expensive tariffs. A tough
new energy watchdog will enforce our reforms, with powers to strip energy
companies of their licences if they repeatedly harm the interests of consumers,
and protect off-grid households.
Still, it's bad politics, because either for political point scoring, or out of ignorance, people will say that there's no difference.0
