politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » One of the architects of the worst general election campaign i
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » One of the architects of the worst general election campaign in history gives his thoughts on the campaign
Sir Lynton Crosby has spoken about the general election campaign which saw Mrs May squander David Cameron’s majority, The Guardian report that
Comments
-
First!0
-
Second
I am sceptical that the ground game in a GE makes that much difference, except on the margins, however it might feel to the people working hard doing it. Yes, where Labour campaigned hard, they did well, but seats like Canterbury and Kensington were won on big swings with relatively low levels of ground activity.0 -
Who was that guy who used to boast about Labour's ground campaign in 2015? His time has come at last..0
-
-
It's also a rubbish argument.nigel4england said:This is interesting:
A senior EU official authorised to speak about the Brexit bill said that because the bloc is a “legal personality” in its own right member states have given up all claim to its assets even though they paid for them.
The Commission bigwig, who is a top figure in Michel Barnier's negotiating team, stated: "Member states do not have any right to those assets, there’s no shareholding in the EU.
“All of the EU’s assets belong to the EU and that includes buildings and other assets both tangible and intangible, financial and non financial, drinkable and non drinkable.
If that is the case then as tlg86 says then we do not have any responsibilities to the ongoing liabilities.
So go whistle.
Firstly, we are shareholders, in our own right, in the EIB. Now, the Articles of Association state that you need to be an EU member to be a shareholder. But that doesn't mean that - on exit - we get stripped of our stake without compensation. In a "No Deal" Brexit, it would almost certainly end up in Court (it is a Luxembourg domiciled entity, so in a national court there), and we would win as we are shareholders in our own right.
Secondly, countries are legal entities in their own right. And when there is secession from a country, or it breaks up, then liabilities and assets are shared around. Take the USSR, the individual Republics took responsibility for pensions for their citizens (albeit Russia took on the, very small, foreign debts of the USSR).0 -
FPT:
Two years of transition based on continued single market + customs union membership followed by EFTA. That's what we have to go for, isn't it?
We have the figleaf of sovereignty in submitting to the EFTA court rather than the ECJ for Single Market issues, but we will accept ECJ regulation for Euratom, European Aviation Safety Agency and a few other organisations.0 -
IOS, he was ahead of his time...NickPalmer said:Who was that guy who used to boast about Labour's ground campaign in 2015? His time has come at last..
0 -
Where I was (Ealing Central & Acton) there were literally dozens of Lab campaigners running around the constituency on polling day. It was quite a sight, unwelcome as it may have been.NickPalmer said:Who was that guy who used to boast about Labour's ground campaign in 2015? His time has come at last..
0 -
I didn't think it was as straightforward as that quotercs1000 said:
It's also a rubbish argument.nigel4england said:This is interesting:
A senior EU official authorised to speak about the Brexit bill said that because the bloc is a “legal personality” in its own right member states have given up all claim to its assets even though they paid for them.
The Commission bigwig, who is a top figure in Michel Barnier's negotiating team, stated: "Member states do not have any right to those assets, there’s no shareholding in the EU.
“All of the EU’s assets belong to the EU and that includes buildings and other assets both tangible and intangible, financial and non financial, drinkable and non drinkable.
If that is the case then as tlg86 says then we do not have any responsibilities to the ongoing liabilities.
So go whistle.
Firstly, we are shareholders, in our own right, in the EIB. Now, the Articles of Association state that you need to be an EU member to be a shareholder. But that doesn't mean that - on exit - we get stripped of our stake without compensation. In a "No Deal" Brexit, it would almost certainly end up in Court (it is a Luxembourg domiciled entity, so in a national court there), and we would win as we are shareholders in our own right.
Secondly, countries are legal entities in their own right. And when there is secession from a country, or it breaks up, then liabilities and assets are shared around. Take the USSR, the individual Republics took responsibility for pensions for their citizens (albeit Russia took on the, very small, foreign debts of the USSR).0 -
Labour offered higher wages, no payment of university tuition fees, more welfare. The Conservatives offered a strong and stable Theresa May.
Which one would you want?
Edit. Both offers were equally improbable ...0 -
I think the Corbyn campaign of mass rallies like the Gateshead one worked well, creating a buzz generally. May's hidden photo stops just couldn't engage the media.IanB2 said:Second
I am sceptical that the ground game in a GE makes that much difference, except on the margins, however it might feel to the people working hard doing it. Yes, where Labour campaigned hard, they did well, but seats like Canterbury and Kensington were won on big swings with relatively low levels of ground activity.
Not that I am convinced that Crosby knows what he is doing.0 -
It will have to be something like that I agree.RoyalBlue said:FPT:
Two years of transition based on continued single market + customs union membership followed by EFTA. That's what we have to go for, isn't it?
We have the figleaf of sovereignty in submitting to the EFTA court rather than the ECJ for Single Market issues, but we will accept ECJ regulation for Euratom, European Aviation Safety Agency and a few other organisations.
I mean are we really going to crash out on WTO? No can't see it. So this is the least bad next alternative. Will people buy the EFTA Court vs ECJ? Who knows, @Charles has noted that it will be in the presentation (eg. Free Trade Association...) and well it might.
Will the euroloons be happy? They can bring the govt down if not, of course.0 -
For all the hype, all of "Sir" Lynton Crosby's campaigns in Britain have been dismal failures, with the sole exception of a wafer-thin win over Ed Miliband.0
-
FPT
I have the feeling some Leavers would be happy to give up sovereignty if the EU didn't have any of the trappings of democracy like an elected parliament which they feel threaten their identity.TOPPING said:
"EU institutions regulating trade" - or giving up sovereignty, in other words.rkrkrk said:
Completely agree.DavidL said:
Even as a leaver I can see the irony and humour in that.
But at the moment apples are being compared to guava fruit and literally meaningless figures are being thrown around by both sides. It's like the referendum never finished and it gets frankly tedious.
I feel on a kind of common sense level - most can agree we should pay for stuff we said we would pay for, and for pensions to British civil servants working for EU. We should only pay for things agreed after we leave if we want to - and I suspect we won't.
Some kind of fee to get better access/cover our share of the costs of EU institutions regulating trade which I suspect we will still be using in some way seems reasonable - and the debate should hopefully focus on that.
We aren't going to carry on paying into the CAP for 5 years after we've left I hope!0 -
Have a look at the tweets from Caroline Flint vs TP. Hers had loads of activists, his a handful. Ditto in Leicester West for Liz Kendall. Labour had activists everywhere, and indeed target seats were sometimes so overwhelmed with volunteers that they sent them elsewhere. In terms of popular support I had not seen anything like it since 97, the last time Labour gained seats.TOPPING said:
Where I was (Ealing Central & Acton) there were literally dozens of Lab campaigners running around the constituency on polling day. It was quite a sight, unwelcome as it may have been.NickPalmer said:Who was that guy who used to boast about Labour's ground campaign in 2015? His time has come at last..
0 -
Exactly the same story in Tooting. Packs of 3-4 of them on almost every street. They didn't seem to be particularly well coordinated, but due to the sheer numbers it didn't matter particularly.TOPPING said:
Where I was (Ealing Central & Acton) there were literally dozens of Lab campaigners running around the constituency on polling day. It was quite a sight, unwelcome as it may have been.NickPalmer said:Who was that guy who used to boast about Labour's ground campaign in 2015? His time has come at last..
We essentially gave up at about 7:30. The only plus side was the 4/9 still available on a Labour hold which I piled on.0 -
@jameschappers:
.@vincecable tells #pressgallery @LibDems have huge opportunity now that May has singlehandedly trashed 10 years of Cameron's modernisation
0 -
Ground game can get people signed up for postal votes, registered, proxied. At the margins, it can be vital. It's also a sign that a party is up for it and organised and I find a visible campaign very encouraging.IanB2 said:Second
I am sceptical that the ground game in a GE makes that much difference, except on the margins, however it might feel to the people working hard doing it. Yes, where Labour campaigned hard, they did well, but seats like Canterbury and Kensington were won on big swings with relatively low levels of ground activity.
The one election where I saw no activity at all was the one in which I spoiled my ballot. If nobody gives a sh1t, why should I?0 -
-
Remember though that "relatively low levels of ground activity" was often still high levels in absolute terms, for Labour at this election, because of how huge their activist base was.IanB2 said:Second
I am sceptical that the ground game in a GE makes that much difference, except on the margins, however it might feel to the people working hard doing it. Yes, where Labour campaigned hard, they did well, but seats like Canterbury and Kensington were won on big swings with relatively low levels of ground activity.
Plus, even though Labour's pessimistic "high command" didn't designate some seats as official targets and tried to encourage people not to bother canvassing there, a lot of activists often just ignored them and campaigned where they wanted to anyway.0 -
I suspect the Single Market a la EEA won't be a transition but it might be a destination. The EEA (and EFTA) is a permanent treaty which will take time to setup and there will probably be detailed negotiation even though the basic mechanisms are off the shelf. The EU want a speedy resolution to reduce the period of uncertainty (in spite of our rhetoric we actually want to drag it out). Generally our lot is crappier than the EU lot, but they do need to think about what they are going to do about association with countries that don't want full membershipRoyalBlue said:FPT:
Two years of transition based on continued single market + customs union membership followed by EFTA. That's what we have to go for, isn't it?
We have the figleaf of sovereignty in submitting to the EFTA court rather than the ECJ for Single Market issues, but we will accept ECJ regulation for Euratom, European Aviation Safety Agency and a few other organisations.0 -
I think all who use this site should thank Jeremy Corbyn for keeping them interested these last two summers.I imagine now Theresa May would like a nice quiet summer recess .I am sure many of the conservative supporters on here would like the same.0
-
Unfortunately I suspect Londoners are more likely to side with the sacked Chancellor than Ms Long-Bailey.....wonder what Two Beards thinks?nigel4england said:0 -
I wonder if this will be the first time in years where we actually have a proper summer "dead season".Yorkcity said:I think all who use this site should thank Jeremy Corbyn for keeping them interested these last two summers.I imagine now Theresa May would like a nice quiet summer recess .I am sure many of the conservative supporters on here would like the same.
In 2014 we had the crunch period of the Scottish independence referendum throughout the summer, in 2015 we had the Labour leadership contest and Corbynmania, and then last year we had the Brexit fallout.0 -
TP did well in his target seat and Flint has steered away from FoM/single market after the vote, so I think Aaron certainly forced her to take good note of her constituents.foxinsoxuk said:
Have a look at the tweets from Caroline Flint vs TP. Hers had loads of activists, his a handful. Ditto in Leicester West for Liz Kendall. Labour had activists everywhere, and indeed target seats were sometimes so overwhelmed with volunteers that they sent them elsewhere. In terms of popular support I had not seen anything like it since 97, the last time Labour gained seats.TOPPING said:
Where I was (Ealing Central & Acton) there were literally dozens of Lab campaigners running around the constituency on polling day. It was quite a sight, unwelcome as it may have been.NickPalmer said:Who was that guy who used to boast about Labour's ground campaign in 2015? His time has come at last..
0 -
How many hard Brexiteers in their heart of hearts would rather be a satellite firmly in the EU's sphere of influence rather than a core state at the centre of the EU? If charting a truly independent course - Empire 2.0 and all that - is shown to be a chimera, I'm convinced a significant number of them will think we may as well go all in.FF43 said:I suspect the Single Market a la EEA won't be a transition but it might be a destination.
0 -
@SkyNewsBreak: The British Racing Drivers' Club which owns Silverstone has announced triggering of a break clause in its contract with Formula 1 from 20190
-
Cable is certainly going to provide better copy for the Lib Dems than Tim 'it's a sin' Farron.
https://twitter.com/jameschappers/status/8847675156033331210 -
We don't agree. It's a serious problem!williamglenn said:
How many hard Brexiteers in their heart of hearts would rather be a satellite firmly in the EU's sphere of influence rather than a core state at the centre of the EU? If charting a truly independent course - Empire 2.0 and all that - is shown to be a chimera, I'm convinced a significant number of them will think we may as well go all in.FF43 said:I suspect the Single Market a la EEA won't be a transition but it might be a destination.
0 -
I don't disagree. And, certainly, people expect a certain level of campaigning from a candidate expecting to be taken as a serious contender.Lucian_Fletcher said:
Ground game can get people signed up for postal votes, registered, proxied. At the margins, it can be vital. It's also a sign that a party is up for it and organised and I find a visible campaign very encouraging.IanB2 said:Second
I am sceptical that the ground game in a GE makes that much difference, except on the margins, however it might feel to the people working hard doing it. Yes, where Labour campaigned hard, they did well, but seats like Canterbury and Kensington were won on big swings with relatively low levels of ground activity.
The one election where I saw no activity at all was the one in which I spoiled my ballot. If nobody gives a sh1t, why should I?
I am simply suggesting that the relative importance of ground work is often over-stated, largely because it is hard work and when you work drop-dead hard for a month and get a result at the end of it, natural human nature is to conclude that one has led to the other.
In local elections, by-elections, and for the smaller parties needing to establish credibility, ground campaigns are absolutely key. For a General Election, where most people who are going to vote will do so anyway, and there there is a month long wall-to-wall national air war, not so much.
If we were looking for evidence of ground war effectiveness we would look for differences by geography (target campaigns v others) and through time (every day winning the ground war should tilt the balance progressively in your direction). The evidence for the former is patchy, beyond a percent or two, and for the latter very weak; the YouGov model with its 50,000 panel and lowest random MOE, suggests that once the Tory campaign had fallen apart in the third week of May (a dramatic shift, created by the air war) there was relatively little further Tory/Labour swing through to polling day; the opposite of what you would see if a ground war was slowly winning through.0 -
Labour was the only party in Warwick & Leamington to knock on our door and canvass us - they even got my daughter and wife to take posters and put them in our window. Of the Tories there was absolutely no sign at all. I guess they thought they had it in the bag.IanB2 said:Second
I am sceptical that the ground game in a GE makes that much difference, except on the margins, however it might feel to the people working hard doing it. Yes, where Labour campaigned hard, they did well, but seats like Canterbury and Kensington were won on big swings with relatively low levels of ground activity.
I do remember commenting on here about just how many homes had Labour posters in their windows or on boards outside. They were everywhere. I did not think it meant anything at the time, but in retrospect it was a very clear indicator that something was happening.
0 -
I don't know. I am in the uncomfortable situation of being near certain that the Single Market outside the EU will NOT work for the UK, while having come to the firm conclusion that it is the only real option left to us. On the one hand we are not Norway, happy to outsource our relations to third parties and do what we are told. On the other hand we had a vote that legitimately rejected the only arrangement that makes sense, given the political economy and geography of the UK and Europe. I suspect most Leavers will accept the EEA or equivalent if the alternative is full membership of the EU. But I am not one and I don't know.williamglenn said:
How many hard Brexiteers in their heart of hearts would rather be a satellite firmly in the EU's sphere of influence rather than a core state at the centre of the EU? If charting a truly independent course - Empire 2.0 and all that - is shown to be a chimera, I'm convinced a significant number of them will think we may as well go all in.FF43 said:I suspect the Single Market a la EEA won't be a transition but it might be a destination.
Also we are operating on the assumption that the Single Market is actually available to us. The EU would probably agree, but it is not a given, and would depend on our attitude to the EU generally. They don't want a problem child.0 -
Labour had volunteers out in IDS's seat last weekend, and some in Boris's seat this weekend, to sign up more non-voters e.t.c. IDS may be in some bother next time0
-
The other thing about mass rallies is the level of social proof they provide. They're incredibly shareable on social media - the Gateshead rally springs to mind, as did the point when Corbyn came on unannounced at a Libertines concert. Even though I'm a million miles away politically and geographically, both of those events made me think that something big was happening, that a mass movement was taking shape.foxinsoxuk said:
I think the Corbyn campaign of mass rallies like the Gateshead one worked well, creating a buzz generally. May's hidden photo stops just couldn't engage the media.IanB2 said:Second
I am sceptical that the ground game in a GE makes that much difference, except on the margins, however it might feel to the people working hard doing it. Yes, where Labour campaigned hard, they did well, but seats like Canterbury and Kensington were won on big swings with relatively low levels of ground activity.
Not that I am convinced that Crosby knows what he is doing.
I think it was the rallies and the social media that did it for Corbyn, not door knocking. But as GE2017 proved, that will only get you so far - and it wasn't enough to get him to number 10.0 -
Not so extraordinary.Scott_P said:
Johnson is, in the immortal words of Samuel Pepys "a talking, bragging Bufflehead...I observe him to be as very a coxcomb as I could have thought had been".0 -
I think that is a bit of an exaggeration. Mrs May had considerable help from Boris Johnson, Gove, Leadsome, Davies, not to mention Cameron and Osborne as well in the run up to the referendum.TheScreamingEagles said:@jameschappers:
.@vincecable tells #pressgallery @LibDems have huge opportunity now that May has singlehandedly trashed 10 years of Cameron's modernisation
But the Conservative Party is now most certainly a trashed brand.0 -
Does anyone have any reliable information on the current size and age profile of the Tory membership?0
-
The surge in Lib Dem membership did not seem to help their ground operation.
But of course Labour have four or five times as many members plus some union membership.0 -
That is just in line with national position. In terms of ground game, Labour outdid the Tories comfortably in a Tory target seat. We were told by PB Tories that the WWC wouldn't turn out for a Labour Remainer, nor the youthful Momentumites for a hated "Blairite*". Neither turned out to be even close to the truth.Pulpstar said:
TP did well in his target seat and Flint has steered away from FoM/single market after the vote, so I think Aaron certainly forced her to take good note of her constituents.foxinsoxuk said:
Have a look at the tweets from Caroline Flint vs TP. Hers had loads of activists, his a handful. Ditto in Leicester West for Liz Kendall. Labour had activists everywhere, and indeed target seats were sometimes so overwhelmed with volunteers that they sent them elsewhere. In terms of popular support I had not seen anything like it since 97, the last time Labour gained seats.TOPPING said:
Where I was (Ealing Central & Acton) there were literally dozens of Lab campaigners running around the constituency on polling day. It was quite a sight, unwelcome as it may have been.NickPalmer said:Who was that guy who used to boast about Labour's ground campaign in 2015? His time has come at last..
* not an accurate term as Blair left the Commons a decade ago, and is ignored by Centrist Labour.0 -
SirBenjamin said:
Exactly the same story in Tooting. Packs of 3-4 of them on almost every street. They didn't seem to be particularly well coordinated, but due to the sheer numbers it didn't matter particularly.TOPPING said:
Where I was (Ealing Central & Acton) there were literally dozens of Lab campaigners running around the constituency on polling day. It was quite a sight, unwelcome as it may have been.NickPalmer said:Who was that guy who used to boast about Labour's ground campaign in 2015? His time has come at last..
We essentially gave up at about 7:30. The only plus side was the 4/9 still available on a Labour hold which I piled on.
and 
0 -
Johnson probably means they don't plan to have a "no deal" outcome.Scott_P said:
0 -
The best way to prepare for No Deal is to fire Dr Liam Fox and replace him with somebody competent, detail focused and liked.Scott_P said:
Might I suggest Kwasi Kwarteng?0 -
My seat, Chester, was Labour's most marginal, 93 majority (now over 9000, Same story, posters and canvassers everywhere. I thought Labour had no chance of holding the seat but I think the very visible campaign encouraged people to think it wasn't a lost cause. Tories were invisibleSouthamObserver said:
Labour was the only party in Warwick & Leamington to knock on our door and canvass us - they even got my daughter and wife to take posters and put them in our window. Of the Tories there was absolutely no sign at all. I guess they thought they had it in the bag.IanB2 said:Second
I am sceptical that the ground game in a GE makes that much difference, except on the margins, however it might feel to the people working hard doing it. Yes, where Labour campaigned hard, they did well, but seats like Canterbury and Kensington were won on big swings with relatively low levels of ground activity.
I do remember commenting on here about just how many homes had Labour posters in their windows or on boards outside. They were everywhere. I did not think it meant anything at the time, but in retrospect it was a very clear indicator that something was happening.
There has also been large tent etc in the market square on both Saturday's I've been in town since the election signing up voters etc. It is quite impressive and I am genuinely surprised. I misread it completely.0 -
Boris is bone idle and does not do detail. Just because he is foreign secretary do not expect him to realise that there is a No Deal contingency plan.David_Evershed said:
0 -
Who co-authored a book accusing Britons of being 'idlers [...] obsessed with the idea of the gentleman amateur'. Perhaps Brexit is proving his point.rcs1000 said:
The best way to prepare for No Deal is to fire Dr Liam Fox and replace him with somebody competent, detail focused and liked.Scott_P said:
Might I suggest Kwasi Kwarteng?0 -
Scott_P said:
@SkyNewsBreak: The British Racing Drivers' Club which owns Silverstone has announced triggering of a break clause in its contract with Formula 1 from 2019
Yes, but what do they mean by that?
0 -
It's strange because at the local level I think "like for like" support was unchanged. We, for example, were perfectly well aware of the strength of Lab's ground game. It was the "visitors" who came and provided that visibility. We had a few visitors here and there, the odd Cons councillor from further afield. But nothing replicating the youth and activity of Lab.OllyT said:
My seat, Chester, was Labour's most marginal, 93 majority (now over 9000, Same story, posters and canvassers everywhere. I thought Labour had no chance of holding the seat but I think the very visible campaign encouraged people to think it wasn't a lost cause. Tories were invisibleSouthamObserver said:
Labour was the only party in Warwick & Leamington to knock on our door and canvass us - they even got my daughter and wife to take posters and put them in our window. Of the Tories there was absolutely no sign at all. I guess they thought they had it in the bag.IanB2 said:Second
I am sceptical that the ground game in a GE makes that much difference, except on the margins, however it might feel to the people working hard doing it. Yes, where Labour campaigned hard, they did well, but seats like Canterbury and Kensington were won on big swings with relatively low levels of ground activity.
I do remember commenting on here about just how many homes had Labour posters in their windows or on boards outside. They were everywhere. I did not think it meant anything at the time, but in retrospect it was a very clear indicator that something was happening.
There has also been large tent etc in the market square on both Saturday's I've been in town since the election signing up voters etc. It is quite impressive and I am genuinely surprised. I misread it completely.
I simply don't think that at that age (18-23) there are that many Cons would-be activists. Apart from the hunting lot and, to come full circle, hence the Cons early pledge for a free vote on hunting, to get them out (and they came). But it was not enough.0 -
Theresa May and Boris Johnson should do a job swap. Boris Johnson would be good at the nimble setting of mood and direction is required of a Prime Minister. Theresa May would be good at exhaustively analysing the detail that is required of a Foreign Secretary going through Brexit. Both are currently woefully miscast.SouthamObserver said:
Boris is bone idle and does not do detail. Just because he is foreign secretary do not expect him to realise that there is a No Deal contingency plan.David_Evershed said:0 -
"assets...drinkable and non drinkable."rcs1000 said:
It's also a rubbish argument.nigel4england said:This is interesting:
A senior EU official authorised to speak about the Brexit bill said that because the bloc is a “legal personality” in its own right member states have given up all claim to its assets even though they paid for them.
The Commission bigwig, who is a top figure in Michel Barnier's negotiating team, stated: "Member states do not have any right to those assets, there’s no shareholding in the EU.
“All of the EU’s assets belong to the EU and that includes buildings and other assets both tangible and intangible, financial and non financial, drinkable and non drinkable.
If that is the case then as tlg86 says then we do not have any responsibilities to the ongoing liabilities.
So go whistle.
Firstly, we are shareholders, in our own right, in the EIB. Now, the Articles of Association state that you need to be an EU member to be a shareholder. But that doesn't mean that - on exit - we get stripped of our stake without compensation. In a "No Deal" Brexit, it would almost certainly end up in Court (it is a Luxembourg domiciled entity, so in a national court there), and we would win as we are shareholders in our own right.
Secondly, countries are legal entities in their own right. And when there is secession from a country, or it breaks up, then liabilities and assets are shared around. Take the USSR, the individual Republics took responsibility for pensions for their citizens (albeit Russia took on the, very small, foreign debts of the USSR).
Wonder which 'Commission bigwig' thought that qualification important ??
0 -
"The BRDC initially signed their existing deal with Bernie Ecclestone in 2010, when the cost of hosting the race started at £12million.David_Evershed said:
Yes, but what do they mean by that?Scott_P said:@SkyNewsBreak: The British Racing Drivers' Club which owns Silverstone has announced triggering of a break clause in its contract with Formula 1 from 2019
However, a a 5% year-on-year increase in hosting fees would see costs rise up to an unsustainable £26million by 2027.
...
The BRDC will now open fresh talks with new owners Liberty Media in the hope that a more cost-effective deal can be negotiated for future races."
http://www.planetf1.com/news/brdc-activate-silverstone-break-clause/
IMO the first big test for the new owners of F1.0 -
williamglenn said:
Who co-authored a book accusing Britons of being 'idlers [...] obsessed with the idea of the gentleman amateur'. Perhaps Brexit is proving his point.rcs1000 said:
The best way to prepare for No Deal is to fire Dr Liam Fox and replace him with somebody competent, detail focused and liked.Scott_P said:
Might I suggest Kwasi Kwarteng?
Do you know the result of the Brexit war already?
0 -
That the annual escalator clause has become financially insupportable, presumably.David_Evershed said:Scott_P said:@SkyNewsBreak: The British Racing Drivers' Club which owns Silverstone has announced triggering of a break clause in its contract with Formula 1 from 2019
Yes, but what do they mean by that?0 -
The end of the British Grand Prix at Silverstone, unless there is a new dealDavid_Evershed said:Yes, but what do they mean by that?
0 -
Funnily enough the same in Edinburgh South, which has gone from Labour/SNP marginal to apparent Labour safe seat. There were LOADS of Labour posters - usually something of an SNP speciality.SouthamObserver said:
Labour was the only party in Warwick & Leamington to knock on our door and canvass us - they even got my daughter and wife to take posters and put them in our window. Of the Tories there was absolutely no sign at all. I guess they thought they had it in the bag.IanB2 said:Second
I am sceptical that the ground game in a GE makes that much difference, except on the margins, however it might feel to the people working hard doing it. Yes, where Labour campaigned hard, they did well, but seats like Canterbury and Kensington were won on big swings with relatively low levels of ground activity.
I do remember commenting on here about just how many homes had Labour posters in their windows or on boards outside. They were everywhere. I did not think it meant anything at the time, but in retrospect it was a very clear indicator that something was happening.0 -
AlastairMeeks said:
Theresa May and Boris Johnson should do a job swap. Boris Johnson would be good at the nimble setting of mood and direction is required of a Prime Minister. Theresa May would be good at exhaustively analysing the detail that is required of a Foreign Secretary going through Brexit. Both are currently woefully miscast.SouthamObserver said:
Boris is bone idle and does not do detail. Just because he is foreign secretary do not expect him to realise that there is a No Deal contingency plan.David_Evershed said:
I agree, but there are those on here who would hate the idea of PM Boris.
Personally I think it's Boris very Marmiticity that would make him good for PM.
0 -
I'm not a huge fan but I'm coming to the conclusion that for all his flaws he's the best of a bad bunch. His amorality is probably an advantage.MarkHopkins said:AlastairMeeks said:
Theresa May and Boris Johnson should do a job swap. Boris Johnson would be good at the nimble setting of mood and direction is required of a Prime Minister. Theresa May would be good at exhaustively analysing the detail that is required of a Foreign Secretary going through Brexit. Both are currently woefully miscast.SouthamObserver said:
Boris is bone idle and does not do detail. Just because he is foreign secretary do not expect him to realise that there is a No Deal contingency plan.David_Evershed said:
I agree, but there are those on here who would hate the idea of PM Boris.
Personally I think it's Boris very Marmiticity that would make him good for PM.0 -
Och aye tha noo, my fellow North Britons.0
-
Perhaps we need the return of PB posterwatch.FF43 said:
Funnily enough the same in Edinburgh South, which has gone from Labour/SNP marginal to apparent Labour safe seat. There were LOADS of Labour posters - usually something of an SNP speciality.SouthamObserver said:
Labour was the only party in Warwick & Leamington to knock on our door and canvass us - they even got my daughter and wife to take posters and put them in our window. Of the Tories there was absolutely no sign at all. I guess they thought they had it in the bag.IanB2 said:Second
I am sceptical that the ground game in a GE makes that much difference, except on the margins, however it might feel to the people working hard doing it. Yes, where Labour campaigned hard, they did well, but seats like Canterbury and Kensington were won on big swings with relatively low levels of ground activity.
I do remember commenting on here about just how many homes had Labour posters in their windows or on boards outside. They were everywhere. I did not think it meant anything at the time, but in retrospect it was a very clear indicator that something was happening.
Even the cows in the fields were not supporting the Tories in Leics.0 -
I have, perhaps, an inside track. If anything useful comes to my notice ....JosiasJessop said:
"The BRDC initially signed their existing deal with Bernie Ecclestone in 2010, when the cost of hosting the race started at £12million.David_Evershed said:
Yes, but what do they mean by that?Scott_P said:@SkyNewsBreak: The British Racing Drivers' Club which owns Silverstone has announced triggering of a break clause in its contract with Formula 1 from 2019
However, a a 5% year-on-year increase in hosting fees would see costs rise up to an unsustainable £26million by 2027.
...
The BRDC will now open fresh talks with new owners Liberty Media in the hope that a more cost-effective deal can be negotiated for future races."
http://www.planetf1.com/news/brdc-activate-silverstone-break-clause/
IMO the first big test for the new owners of F1.
0 -
Given the amount of volatility in Scotland in recent years, is there really any such thing as a truly "safe seat" there?FF43 said:
Funnily enough the same in Edinburgh South, which has gone from Labour/SNP marginal to apparent Labour safe seat. There were LOADS of Labour posters - usually something of an SNP speciality.SouthamObserver said:
Labour was the only party in Warwick & Leamington to knock on our door and canvass us - they even got my daughter and wife to take posters and put them in our window. Of the Tories there was absolutely no sign at all. I guess they thought they had it in the bag.IanB2 said:Second
I am sceptical that the ground game in a GE makes that much difference, except on the margins, however it might feel to the people working hard doing it. Yes, where Labour campaigned hard, they did well, but seats like Canterbury and Kensington were won on big swings with relatively low levels of ground activity.
I do remember commenting on here about just how many homes had Labour posters in their windows or on boards outside. They were everywhere. I did not think it meant anything at the time, but in retrospect it was a very clear indicator that something was happening.0 -
How did the Czech Rebublic and Slovakia manage it?Nigelb said:
"assets...drinkable and non drinkable."rcs1000 said:
It's also a rubbish argument.nigel4england said:This is interesting:
A senior EU official authorised to speak about the Brexit bill said that because the bloc is a “legal personality” in its own right member states have given up all claim to its assets even though they paid for them.
The Commission bigwig, who is a top figure in Michel Barnier's negotiating team, stated: "Member states do not have any right to those assets, there’s no shareholding in the EU.
“All of the EU’s assets belong to the EU and that includes buildings and other assets both tangible and intangible, financial and non financial, drinkable and non drinkable.
If that is the case then as tlg86 says then we do not have any responsibilities to the ongoing liabilities.
So go whistle.
Firstly, we are shareholders, in our own right, in the EIB. Now, the Articles of Association state that you need to be an EU member to be a shareholder. But that doesn't mean that - on exit - we get stripped of our stake without compensation. In a "No Deal" Brexit, it would almost certainly end up in Court (it is a Luxembourg domiciled entity, so in a national court there), and we would win as we are shareholders in our own right.
Secondly, countries are legal entities in their own right. And when there is secession from a country, or it breaks up, then liabilities and assets are shared around. Take the USSR, the individual Republics took responsibility for pensions for their citizens (albeit Russia took on the, very small, foreign debts of the USSR).
Wonder which 'Commission bigwig' thought that qualification important ??0 -
In my Preseli seat there was just the loosest of control from the local campaign committe and we had no support of any kind from Labour HQ. A hard core of activists, many of them new to campaign just got on with knocking on doors. To get within 300 was remarkable and bodes well for next time.Danny565 said:
Remember though that "relatively low levels of ground activity" was often still high levels in absolute terms, for Labour at this election, because of how huge their activist base was.IanB2 said:Second
I am sceptical that the ground game in a GE makes that much difference, except on the margins, however it might feel to the people working hard doing it. Yes, where Labour campaigned hard, they did well, but seats like Canterbury and Kensington were won on big swings with relatively low levels of ground activity.
Plus, even though Labour's pessimistic "high command" didn't designate some seats as official targets and tried to encourage people not to bother canvassing there, a lot of activists often just ignored them and campaigned where they wanted to anyway.
We are also excitedly looking forward to a visit from JC over the next few weeks. I know he is in Machynlleth at the end of the month, so hopefully he will make a detour down here.0 -
That's racist greetings-discrimination to those of us who are south of the Watford Gap.Morris_Dancer said:Och aye tha noo, my fellow North Britons.
A PB lefty will be along shortly to report you to the authorities.0 -
Who got the 'o'?OldKingCole said:
How did the Czech Rebublic and Slovakia manage it?Nigelb said:
"assets...drinkable and non drinkable."rcs1000 said:
It's also a rubbish argument.nigel4england said:This is interesting:
A senior EU official authorised to speak about the Brexit bill said that because the bloc is a “legal personality” in its own right member states have given up all claim to its assets even though they paid for them.
The Commission bigwig, who is a top figure in Michel Barnier's negotiating team, stated: "Member states do not have any right to those assets, there’s no shareholding in the EU.
“All of the EU’s assets belong to the EU and that includes buildings and other assets both tangible and intangible, financial and non financial, drinkable and non drinkable.
If that is the case then as tlg86 says then we do not have any responsibilities to the ongoing liabilities.
So go whistle.
Firstly, we are shareholders, in our own right, in the EIB. Now, the Articles of Association state that you need to be an EU member to be a shareholder. But that doesn't mean that - on exit - we get stripped of our stake without compensation. In a "No Deal" Brexit, it would almost certainly end up in Court (it is a Luxembourg domiciled entity, so in a national court there), and we would win as we are shareholders in our own right.
Secondly, countries are legal entities in their own right. And when there is secession from a country, or it breaks up, then liabilities and assets are shared around. Take the USSR, the individual Republics took responsibility for pensions for their citizens (albeit Russia took on the, very small, foreign debts of the USSR).
Wonder which 'Commission bigwig' thought that qualification important ??0 -
As well as the large number of Labour activists/posters visible in my area, the opposite was significant, too.
It was particularly galling to see gleeful tweets of local Tory MP and activists campaigning in Bishop Auckland, Blyth, Stockton, etc. (All lost). Everywhere other than their own constituency.
No wonder there were no posters. Why should anyone bother? The MP didn't appear in his own seat till the Tuesday before the vote.0 -
It's time for Theresa May to give way to Boris Johnson - Discuss:0
-
Someone on here dismissed him by saying his only talent was being able to change his position and get away with it. That's exactly the skill we need at the moment.AlastairMeeks said:
I'm not a huge fan but I'm coming to the conclusion that for all his flaws he's the best of a bad bunch. His amorality is probably an advantage.MarkHopkins said:AlastairMeeks said:
Theresa May and Boris Johnson should do a job swap. Boris Johnson would be good at the nimble setting of mood and direction is required of a Prime Minister. Theresa May would be good at exhaustively analysing the detail that is required of a Foreign Secretary going through Brexit. Both are currently woefully miscast.SouthamObserver said:
Boris is bone idle and does not do detail. Just because he is foreign secretary do not expect him to realise that there is a No Deal contingency plan.David_Evershed said:
I agree, but there are those on here who would hate the idea of PM Boris.
Personally I think it's Boris very Marmiticity that would make him good for PM.0 -
But that sort of proves my point about the GE.619 said:Labour had volunteers out in IDS's seat last weekend, and some in Boris's seat this weekend, to sign up more non-voters e.t.c. IDS may be in some bother next time
Ilford North was the Labour target seat in the GE, to which activists were sent from all over, and is surely a candidate for having fought the most active 2017 campaign of all. Labour's vote rose by about 14%. Yet next door Chingford & Woodford, demographically very similar, chalked up a Labour vote rise of 15%, when the level of campaigning was hugely less (most activists working in Ilford N) - the true extent of the Tory/Labour swing came as a complete surprise when ballot boxes were actually opened. Nearby "safe" Labour seats (even against the predicted Tory tsunami) of Ilford South, Leyton & Wanstead and Walthamstow all chalked up vote rises of 11-12% despite campaigns less active than Ilford North and in areas where there were fewer non-Labour votes to gain in the first place.
The huge level of activity of Streeting's GE campaign was very obvious to voters in the seat, but didn't appear actually to produce a result out of line with neighbouring seats; indeed Chingford gained more votes by doing next to nothing in comparison.0 -
Jeremy Corbyn.tlg86 said:
Who got the 'o'?OldKingCole said:
How did the Czech Rebublic and Slovakia manage it?Nigelb said:
"assets...drinkable and non drinkable."rcs1000 said:
It's also a rubbish argument.nigel4england said:This is interesting:
A senior EU official authorised to speak about the Brexit bill said that because the bloc is a “legal personality” in its own right member states have given up all claim to its assets even though they paid for them.
The Commission bigwig, who is a top figure in Michel Barnier's negotiating team, stated: "Member states do not have any right to those assets, there’s no shareholding in the EU.
“All of the EU’s assets belong to the EU and that includes buildings and other assets both tangible and intangible, financial and non financial, drinkable and non drinkable.
If that is the case then as tlg86 says then we do not have any responsibilities to the ongoing liabilities.
So go whistle.
Firstly, we are shareholders, in our own right, in the EIB. Now, the Articles of Association state that you need to be an EU member to be a shareholder. But that doesn't mean that - on exit - we get stripped of our stake without compensation. In a "No Deal" Brexit, it would almost certainly end up in Court (it is a Luxembourg domiciled entity, so in a national court there), and we would win as we are shareholders in our own right.
Secondly, countries are legal entities in their own right. And when there is secession from a country, or it breaks up, then liabilities and assets are shared around. Take the USSR, the individual Republics took responsibility for pensions for their citizens (albeit Russia took on the, very small, foreign debts of the USSR).
Wonder which 'Commission bigwig' thought that qualification important ??0 -
It means now Bernie's gone (never Silverstone's biggest fan) they are going to try and come to a new deal with the new owners of F1...David_Evershed said:Scott_P said:@SkyNewsBreak: The British Racing Drivers' Club which owns Silverstone has announced triggering of a break clause in its contract with Formula 1 from 2019
Yes, but what do they mean by that?0 -
Mr. M, it's fine. I'm a follicly-challenged multi-ethnic (Celt, Saxon, Viking) member of a minority (Yorkshireman).
King Cole, look forward to hearing news.
It's a significant test for the new owners, who have been making all the right noises on the importance of classic (mostly European) tracks.0 -
When negotiating and deciding between Deal or No Deal the Conservative Party could do worse than looking for some practical experience:rcs1000 said:
The best way to prepare for No Deal is to fire Dr Liam Fox and replace him with somebody competent, detail focused and liked.Scott_P said:
Might I suggest Kwasi Kwarteng?
http://www.shoutingatco.ws/2012/02/02/interview-the-deal-or-no-deal-contestant/0 -
Perhaps Boris doesn't know what is happening in government. I'm pretty sure I read at the weekend that May can only function with Davis as her key advisor, and the civil service have decided the only way to get a decision is to have May, Davis and Hammond in the same room.williamglenn said:
Someone on here dismissed him by saying his only talent was being able to change his position and get away with it. That's exactly the skill we need at the moment.AlastairMeeks said:
I'm not a huge fan but I'm coming to the conclusion that for all his flaws he's the best of a bad bunch. His amorality is probably an advantage.MarkHopkins said:AlastairMeeks said:
Theresa May and Boris Johnson should do a job swap. Boris Johnson would be good at the nimble setting of mood and direction is required of a Prime Minister. Theresa May would be good at exhaustively analysing the detail that is required of a Foreign Secretary going through Brexit. Both are currently woefully miscast.SouthamObserver said:
Boris is bone idle and does not do detail. Just because he is foreign secretary do not expect him to realise that there is a No Deal contingency plan.David_Evershed said:
I agree, but there are those on here who would hate the idea of PM Boris.
Personally I think it's Boris very Marmiticity that would make him good for PM.
All from "a source" - so could be rubbish, but if true then Boris might not know what the hell is going on.0 -
You're very kind, though to be fair Caroline had already started cutting her cloth well in advance of my arrival.Pulpstar said:
TP did well in his target seat and Flint has steered away from FoM/single market after the vote, so I think Aaron certainly forced her to take good note of her constituents.foxinsoxuk said:
Have a look at the tweets from Caroline Flint vs TP. Hers had loads of activists, his a handful. Ditto in Leicester West for Liz Kendall. Labour had activists everywhere, and indeed target seats were sometimes so overwhelmed with volunteers that they sent them elsewhere. In terms of popular support I had not seen anything like it since 97, the last time Labour gained seats.TOPPING said:
Where I was (Ealing Central & Acton) there were literally dozens of Lab campaigners running around the constituency on polling day. It was quite a sight, unwelcome as it may have been.NickPalmer said:Who was that guy who used to boast about Labour's ground campaign in 2015? His time has come at last..
0 -
Well done on the government for bringing a inquiry into the contaminated blood scandal.0
-
So on the day Theresa is on her hands and knees begging Corbyn to get her out of the mess she's landed herself in, Boris is in the Commons telling the EU to "go whistle"
Looks like Boris is officially on maneuvers now...0 -
Agree.Tykejohnno said:Well done on the government for bringing a inquiry into the contaminated blood scandal.
0 -
I think the posters and campaign visibility mattered this time because the media narrative was that Corbyn was beyond the pale but when people started seeing posters and so on they started to think, hang on a minute, lots of people are voting Labour, he can't be that bad then.foxinsoxuk said:
Perhaps we need the return of PB posterwatch.FF43 said:
Funnily enough the same in Edinburgh South, which has gone from Labour/SNP marginal to apparent Labour safe seat. There were LOADS of Labour posters - usually something of an SNP speciality.SouthamObserver said:
Labour was the only party in Warwick & Leamington to knock on our door and canvass us - they even got my daughter and wife to take posters and put them in our window. Of the Tories there was absolutely no sign at all. I guess they thought they had it in the bag.IanB2 said:Second
I am sceptical that the ground game in a GE makes that much difference, except on the margins, however it might feel to the people working hard doing it. Yes, where Labour campaigned hard, they did well, but seats like Canterbury and Kensington were won on big swings with relatively low levels of ground activity.
I do remember commenting on here about just how many homes had Labour posters in their windows or on boards outside. They were everywhere. I did not think it meant anything at the time, but in retrospect it was a very clear indicator that something was happening.
Even the cows in the fields were not supporting the Tories in Leics.0 -
Mr. Gin, manoeuvres*.
He's an oaf. The sentiment is fine, indeed, correct, but the Foreign Secretary is acting like candidate Boris. He's playing to the gallery when he should be doing his job.0 -
When talking about the 'minorities' of Yorkshire, and especially Yorkshire women, I'm tempted to the quote the great Neville Shute:Morris_Dancer said:Mr. M, it's fine. I'm a follicly-challenged multi-ethnic (Celt, Saxon, Viking) member of a minority (Yorkshireman).
(Snip)
"The lads were what one would expect, straight from the plough, but the girls were an eye-opener. They were brutish and uncouth, filthy in appearance and in habits. Things may have changed since then – I hope they have. Perhaps the girls in very isolated districts such as that had less opportunity than their brothers for getting into the market and making contact with civilisation; I can only record the fact that these girls straight off the farms were the lowest types that I have ever seen in England, and incredibly foul-mouthed." 0 -
#dontblamemeblamegoogleMorris_Dancer said:Mr. Gin, manoeuvres*.
0 -
Good points.IanB2 said:Second
I am sceptical that the ground game in a GE makes that much difference, except on the margins, however it might feel to the people working hard doing it. Yes, where Labour campaigned hard, they did well, but seats like Canterbury and Kensington were won on big swings with relatively low levels of ground activity.
An enthusiasm gap is my latest explanation (if this gets shot down I have other...) for unexpectedly good Labour performance.
Increased campaigning by Labour is therefore to an extent a symptom rather than a cause.0 -
Mr. Gin, you can't always rely on the interweb. Wikipedia's article thinks Alexander was a Greek.
Mr. Jessop, Yorkshire folk are the pinnacle of civilisation. We're the ones who made Constantine the Great.0 -
-
Which book was that from?JosiasJessop said:
When talking about the 'minorities' of Yorkshire, and especially Yorkshire women, I'm tempted to the quote the great Neville Shute:Morris_Dancer said:Mr. M, it's fine. I'm a follicly-challenged multi-ethnic (Celt, Saxon, Viking) member of a minority (Yorkshireman).
(Snip)
"The lads were what one would expect, straight from the plough, but the girls were an eye-opener. They were brutish and uncouth, filthy in appearance and in habits. Things may have changed since then – I hope they have. Perhaps the girls in very isolated districts such as that had less opportunity than their brothers for getting into the market and making contact with civilisation; I can only record the fact that these girls straight off the farms were the lowest types that I have ever seen in England, and incredibly foul-mouthed."
My aunts were ‘straight off the farm’ but Hertfordshire. They were all very well spoken until, in the case of the three I saw near their death, they somewhat reverted. My uncles on the other hand sounded as though they came from rural Hertfordshire throughout their lives.0 -
Yes are we.TOPPING said:I mean are we really going to crash out on WTO?
No can't see it.
The govt is going to carry on twaddling away in fantasy mode about the various Brexit types and arguing about the divorce bill and EU citizens until it runs out of time and we WTO out.
Then they can moan about the Europeans setting unreasonable timetables and holding things up ("Not our fault Gov'nor"), the EU / UK citizens' standing will still need sorting, no divorce money will have been paid and we will be out.0 -
He is doing his job - securing his own position. What did you think his job was?Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Gin, manoeuvres*.
He's an oaf. The sentiment is fine, indeed, correct, but the Foreign Secretary is acting like candidate Boris. He's playing to the gallery when he should be doing his job.
0 -
Slide Rule.OldKingCole said:
Which book was that from?JosiasJessop said:
When talking about the 'minorities' of Yorkshire, and especially Yorkshire women, I'm tempted to the quote the great Neville Shute:Morris_Dancer said:Mr. M, it's fine. I'm a follicly-challenged multi-ethnic (Celt, Saxon, Viking) member of a minority (Yorkshireman).
(Snip)
"The lads were what one would expect, straight from the plough, but the girls were an eye-opener. They were brutish and uncouth, filthy in appearance and in habits. Things may have changed since then – I hope they have. Perhaps the girls in very isolated districts such as that had less opportunity than their brothers for getting into the market and making contact with civilisation; I can only record the fact that these girls straight off the farms were the lowest types that I have ever seen in England, and incredibly foul-mouthed."
My aunts were ‘straight off the farm’ but Hertfordshire. They were all very well spoken until, in the case of the three I saw near their death, they somewhat reverted. My uncles on the other hand sounded as though they came from rural Hertfordshire throughout their lives.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slide_Rule:_Autobiography_of_an_Engineer0 -
There'll be no formal "No Deal" contingency plan as it would end up being leaked !Scott_P said:0 -
A detailed non-plan perhaps? 100% of nothing is 0% so they could both be right.David_Evershed said:0 -
The ground campaign made some difference, but not much.
I think that younger people were simply better motivated to both get on the register and to vote. Big swings in university cities can signal nothing else. Plus the new registration system was better bedded in following GE2015 and the EU referendum in 2016 and there was a further wake up call on registration in the form of the local/mayoral elections a month earlier.0 -
I think he is right about certain things. The youth vote for example -while important in university towns like Canterbury and Sheffield -often simply had the effect of piling up votes in seats Labour already held. How else do you explain why on 40% of the vote, Labour won a similar number of seats that Gordon Brown won on 29% in 2010?
The disenchantment with May among older voters especially after the dementia tax, the terrible Tory campaign, the failure to take Labour on regarding the economy all played their role and bubbling under the surface was the assumption that the Tories with a landslide would go for hard brexit.
Corbyn will get a similar youth vote next time -no doubt still piling up votes in existing seats -but it is unlikely that the Tories will have the same leader, or that any of the other above mentioned conditions will be repeated.0 -
Just this morning he gave Johnny Foreigner a spanking he won't forget in a hurry. Or are you suggesting he is merely grandstanding?Beverley_C said:
He is doing his job - securing his own position. What did you think his job was?Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Gin, manoeuvres*.
He's an oaf. The sentiment is fine, indeed, correct, but the Foreign Secretary is acting like candidate Boris. He's playing to the gallery when he should be doing his job.
Either way it seems to have worked, unless he is converting the previously converted?0 -
I’m obliged.JosiasJessop said:
Slide Rule.OldKingCole said:
Which book was that from?JosiasJessop said:
When talking about the 'minorities' of Yorkshire, and especially Yorkshire women, I'm tempted to the quote the great Neville Shute:Morris_Dancer said:Mr. M, it's fine. I'm a follicly-challenged multi-ethnic (Celt, Saxon, Viking) member of a minority (Yorkshireman).
(Snip)
"The lads were what one would expect, straight from the plough, but the girls were an eye-opener. They were brutish and uncouth, filthy in appearance and in habits. Things may have changed since then – I hope they have. Perhaps the girls in very isolated districts such as that had less opportunity than their brothers for getting into the market and making contact with civilisation; I can only record the fact that these girls straight off the farms were the lowest types that I have ever seen in England, and incredibly foul-mouthed."
My aunts were ‘straight off the farm’ but Hertfordshire. They were all very well spoken until, in the case of the three I saw near their death, they somewhat reverted. My uncles on the other hand sounded as though they came from rural Hertfordshire throughout their lives.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slide_Rule:_Autobiography_of_an_Engineer
0 -
Sometimes you can kill two birds with one stoneMexicanpete said:
Just this morning he gave Johnny Foreigner a spanking he won't forget in a hurry. Or are you suggesting he is merely grandstanding?Beverley_C said:
He is doing his job - securing his own position. What did you think his job was?Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Gin, manoeuvres*.
He's an oaf. The sentiment is fine, indeed, correct, but the Foreign Secretary is acting like candidate Boris. He's playing to the gallery when he should be doing his job.
Either way it seems to have worked, unless he is converting the previously converted?
0 -
Afternoon all
In the Labour stronghold of East Ham, political activity was pretty minimal. Labour had street tables and people walking up and down the various High Streets but none of the other parties bothered.
I remain unconvinced about canvassing - some people swear by it, others swear at it. At a local level, it is important but in a GE more indicative.
Not since 1970 (arguably) had there been since a polarisation between the two major parties so trying to compare the 2017 result with 2005 or 2010 is fatuous. The presence of a 20% or so third party vote made it much easier to win much more with much less. Compare Blair's vote share in 2001 with May in 2017 and you'll see what I mean.
I don't know what or indeed if any of this has significance for 2022 or beyond. If you had tried to explain to someone in 2014 everything that would happen from then till 2017 they would be phoning for the men with the strait jackets.
I do think it's going to be tough to be in Government in the next two or three years and it's possible the "mid term" will come happy, be savage and last a long time. As an example, what do people think of Conservative prospects in London next year ?0 -
I would like to add I am not in the 'converted' category although part of me thinks he personally owns the Brexit 'train wreck' and I wouldn't be averse to the ticking time bomb being handed to him!Beverley_C said:
Sometimes you can kill two birds with one stoneMexicanpete said:
Just this morning he gave Johnny Foreigner a spanking he won't forget in a hurry. Or are you suggesting he is merely grandstanding?Beverley_C said:
He is doing his job - securing his own position. What did you think his job was?Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Gin, manoeuvres*.
He's an oaf. The sentiment is fine, indeed, correct, but the Foreign Secretary is acting like candidate Boris. He's playing to the gallery when he should be doing his job.
Either way it seems to have worked, unless he is converting the previously converted?0 -
If they have a plan B which is credible and thorough, leaking it might be a good idea!calum said:
There'll be no formal "No Deal" contingency plan as it would end up being leaked !Scott_P said:
David Davis is giving evidence to a House of Lords select committee later today, so no doubt someone will ask him about Boris' comments.0 -
Beautiful result.Beverley_C said:
Yes are we.TOPPING said:I mean are we really going to crash out on WTO?
No can't see it.
The govt is going to carry on twaddling away in fantasy mode about the various Brexit types and arguing about the divorce bill and EU citizens until it runs out of time and we WTO out.
Then they can moan about the Europeans setting unreasonable timetables and holding things up ("Not our fault Gov'nor"), the EU / UK citizens' standing will still need sorting, no divorce money will have been paid and we will be out.0
