politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Prize Competition: How long a standing ovation will TMay get a
Comments
-
Boris knew fully well that the £350 million thing was a crude deception. He mentioned it because he knew it would draw attention to him and his article and bolster his leadership bid and attempts to diminish May. Sir David actually did him a huge favour.tlg86 said:I think Norgrove has been very silly. What Boris said was technically right. It is up to others in politics to call out the net/gross difference - that is to say, others could say "ah, but if we spend it all on the NHS we'll have to cut spending on agriculture, science, etc."
It is not for a civil servant to get involved in a political argument.0 -
My sister-in-laws are both nurses. Both think we should go back to something along the SRN/SEN lines. They say that a lot of nursing is caring, wiping backsides and looking after people. It sounds a bit simplistic to me but they have been nurses since their 20s and they are now just retiring.Benpointer said:
One of the strangest moves made in recent years in this area was surely to make nursing a degree-based profession? Being married to a nurse I appreciate there is a lot of knowledge to acquire and the best nurses are very bright people, as well as caring and dedicated, but it is not primarily an academic profession imho.another_richard said:
Indeed so.Beverley_C said:
I think that would be the case for a LOT of professions. One of my friends has a daughter who is doing her degree via work experience combined with study. She will receive a professional, industry standard qualification and she is in a job earning a wage. In 6 years she will get qualified, be working with a career history and no debt.another_richard said:It might be if that was the plan - I rather suspect it wasn't though.
From what Bev C was saying on the previous thread we would be better off if would be IT students got a job related to it rather than 'studied' at university.
Accountancy, law, IT, etc etc... lots of jobs could do this. It would need a snapppy name though. Something like "Modern Apprenticeship"???????
It really should be encouraged in those careers where membership of a professional body is the result.0 -
It's exactly what he should be doing, and was tasked with doing when the body was set up to stop ministers misusing statistics. The £350 million figure is false and misleading. If I budgeted on my gross pay each month I'd go bankrupt quite quickly. Boris is not now the face of the leave campaign, he's the Foreign Secretary and therefore has a duty not to misuse government figures for his own political ends. It's not like there isn't a precedent, Gordon Brown and David Cameron both received reprimands from the stats watchdog for far less egregious misuses of statistics - Brown for using knife crime figures that hadn't been rubber stamped I believe.tlg86 said:I think Norgrove has been very silly. What Boris said was technically right. It is up to others in politics to call out the net/gross difference - that is to say, others could say "ah, but if we spend it all on the NHS we'll have to cut spending on agriculture, science, etc."
It is not for a civil servant to get involved in a political argument.
It's just because it was such a totemic, and barefaced lie told by the leave campaign, it's still headline news.
0 -
My point exactly. I work with statistics and I'm generally not overly sensitive about their use. Cameron confusing debt and deficit should be called out as that is clearly wrong.Stark_Dawning said:
Boris knew fully well that the £350 million thing was a crude deception. He mentioned it because he knew it would draw attention to him and his article and bolster his leadership bid and attempts to diminish May. Sir David actually did him a huge favour.tlg86 said:I think Norgrove has been very silly. What Boris said was technically right. It is up to others in politics to call out the net/gross difference - that is to say, others could say "ah, but if we spend it all on the NHS we'll have to cut spending on agriculture, science, etc."
It is not for a civil servant to get involved in a political argument.
Without starting the arguments all over again, Leave could have gone with a net figure, but it was very much to their advantage to goad Remain into complaining about the 350m figure.0 -
-
@faisalislam: Johnson makes clear there will not, after all, be £350m/week "available for public spending" and is "amazed" by "complete misrepresentation"
@JohnRentoul: Irrecoverable error by Boris, I think, to repeat £350m figure. Provocative, unnecessary, distracting from popular point: more NHS spending0 -
True nearly every ward based nurse aged 55 is running for the exit to get their pension before it changes.Lots of experience lost as many were trained in the 1980s without a degree.Loosing the SRN/SEN was a mistake As was the political decision to create a modern matron.who is never seen with a patient but is an admin /manager role now.Beverley_C said:
My sister-in-laws are both nurses. Both think we should go back to something along the SRN/SEN lines. They say that a lot of nursing is caring, wiping backsides and looking after people. It sounds a bit simplistic to me but they have been nurses since their 20s and they are now just retiring.Benpointer said:
One of the strangest moves made in recent years in this area was surely to make nursing a degree-based profession? Being married to a nurse I appreciate there is a lot of knowledge to acquire and the best nurses are very bright people, as well as caring and dedicated, but it is not primarily an academic profession imho.another_richard said:
Indeed so.Beverley_C said:
I think that would be the case for a LOT of professions. One of my friends has a daughter who is doing her degree via work experience combined with study. She will receive a professional, industry standard qualification and she is in a job earning a wage. In 6 years she will get qualified, be working with a career history and no debt.another_richard said:It might be if that was the plan - I rather suspect it wasn't though.
From what Bev C was saying on the previous thread we would be better off if would be IT students got a job related to it rather than 'studied' at university.
Accountancy, law, IT, etc etc... lots of jobs could do this. It would need a snapppy name though. Something like "Modern Apprenticeship"???????
It really should be encouraged in those careers where membership of a professional body is the result.0 -
-
Boris must have been stung by the talk over the summer of a Rees-Mogg leadership. He's back with a bang. He's successfully reduced Theresa's big Florence speech to a limp follow-up act. I wonder what he's planning next.0
-
Laughing stock. The Tories need to throw him under his wretched bus.Scott_P said:0 -
Will Experts and Remainers Ever learn?
They're just reminding everyone how much we spend to be messed around by federalists...0 -
Who cares about the EU-referendum campaign. That's ancient history. We're now scrutinising the Borisology.Mortimer said:Will Experts and Remainers Ever learn?
They're just reminding everyone how much we spend to be messed around by federalists...0 -
And making the same mistakes that alienated a majority then, it seems.Stark_Dawning said:
Who cares about the EU-referendum campaign. That's ancient history. We're now scrutinising the Borisology.Mortimer said:Will Experts and Remainers Ever learn?
They're just reminding everyone how much we spend to be messed around by federalists...0 -
Sunday Times - voting intentions for Westminster (Panelbase) :
SNP 41% (+4)
Conservatives 27% (-2)
Labour 24% (-3)
Liberal Democrats 6% (-1)
Green 2% (+2)0 -
I think Boris has done very well. He's prolonged the story for another couple of days at least. He now needs to do his shaggy hanged-dog mea culpa in front of lots of cameras. Okay, so he's made his Leave colleagues look like slippery mendacious sh*ts but who cares? Boris is back in the headlines!0
-
MY ENTRY 3 Minutes 09 Seconds0
-
The very straightforward point, heroically missed by the remainariat for 15 months and rising, is that saying the NHS will get more money has the effect on the electorate that Pavlov's dinner bell had on his dogs. "350M A WEEK for NHS" triggers the drooling response, irrespective of context. If you say 'Boris lied when he promised 350M A WEEK for NHS' the words not in caps don't register. It would be like Pavlov saying to his dogs "The next bell-ringing will be a fire drill, please ignore it".
The really significant part of Boris' statement is that he says "And yes - once we have settled our accounts, we will take back control of roughly £350m per week. A coded message that he is rowing back from the "go whistle" position.0 -
MY ENTRY Two minutes and 35 seconds ( approximately 2.32 minutes more than she will deserve).0
-
MY ENTRY 2 minutes 53 seconds0
-
absolutely. That, and the golden rule of Brexit: everything Remainers cheer on turns out to be good for Leave.Ishmael_Z said:The very straightforward point, heroically missed by the remainariat for 15 months and rising, is that saying the NHS will get more money has the effect on the electorate that Pavlov's dinner bell had on his dogs. "350M A WEEK for NHS" triggers the drooling response, irrespective of context. If you say 'Boris lied when he promised 350M A WEEK for NHS' the words not in caps don't register. It would be like Pavlov saying to his dogs "The next bell-ringing will be a fire drill, please ignore it".
The really significant part of Boris' statement is that he says "And yes - once we have settled our accounts, we will take back control of roughly £350m per week. A coded message that he is rowing back from the "go whistle" position.0 -
My entry
3 minutes 45 seconds0 -
MY ENTRY 3 Minutes 45 Seconds0
-
Presumably for Scotlandshire.calum said:Sunday Times - voting intentions for Westminster (Panelbase) :
SNP 41% (+4)
Conservatives 27% (-2)
Labour 24% (-3)
Liberal Democrats 6% (-1)
Green 2% (+2)0 -
SandyRentool said:
I've been out for a couple of hours - is Vince Cable Prime Minister yet?
Clearly the silly season doesn't end until after the LibDem conference.
But Macron is President of France - for now - and where did he come from?
0 -
No standing ovation ... pelted with rotten tomatoes and mouldy cabbages ...
0 -
Leave treating the British public like drooling dogs tempted by treats - like it! Of course, that's okay for a referendum campaign because the result is irreversible, and those who made the outlandish promises simply vanish afterwards. But politicians, who have to seek re-election, tend to be more circumspect. In fact politicians of every stamp have subsequently avoided the £350 million thing like the plague. Except Boris. He obviously feels that when he is PM he has the chutzpah to wave it away.Ishmael_Z said:The very straightforward point, heroically missed by the remainariat for 15 months and rising, is that saying the NHS will get more money has the effect on the electorate that Pavlov's dinner bell had on his dogs. "350M A WEEK for NHS" triggers the drooling response, irrespective of context. If you say 'Boris lied when he promised 350M A WEEK for NHS' the words not in caps don't register. It would be like Pavlov saying to his dogs "The next bell-ringing will be a fire drill, please ignore it".
The really significant part of Boris' statement is that he says "And yes - once we have settled our accounts, we will take back control of roughly £350m per week. A coded message that he is rowing back from the "go whistle" position.0 -
It'll be relatively short. 2m 2s.0
-
I'll be there, lobbing rotten fruit and veg at the women that lost the Tory majority against the IRA condoning Trot.No_Offence_Alan said:No standing ovation ... pelted with rotten tomatoes and mouldy cabbages ...
0 -
another_richard said:
The George Osborne guide to how things should increase:
State pension, +2.9% (guaranteed minimum rise of 2.5%)
Public sector pay, +1.0%
Interest on student tuition fees debt, +6.9%
Earnings level at which student tuition fees debt becomes repayable, no increase
What was that about "we're all in this together" ?
The interest rate on student debt surely increased by more than 6.9% ?
0 -
Of course you will.... not!TheScreamingEagles said:
I'll be there, lobbing rotten fruit and veg at the women that lost the Tory majority against the IRA condoning Trot.No_Offence_Alan said:No standing ovation ... pelted with rotten tomatoes and mouldy cabbages ...
0 -
Feck, Baroness Jowell battling brain cancer.
Top women, without her, we wouldn't have London 2012.0 -
MY ENTRY 2 minutes 05 seconds0
-
15 minutes.
Then a party member shouts "Glory to Theresa May". Followed by another 15 minute ovation.0 -
If you look at what he said, he is careful not to commit to a figure - he wants the NHS to get "a lot of money" this time round.Stark_Dawning said:
Leave treating the British public like drooling dogs tempted by treats - like it! Of course, that's okay for a referendum campaign because the result is irreversible, and those who made the outlandish promises simply vanish afterwards. But politicians, who have to seek re-election, tend to be more circumspect. In fact politicians of every stamp have subsequently avoided the £350 million thing like the plague. Except Boris. He obviously feels that when he is PM he has the chutzpah to wave it away.Ishmael_Z said:The very straightforward point, heroically missed by the remainariat for 15 months and rising, is that saying the NHS will get more money has the effect on the electorate that Pavlov's dinner bell had on his dogs. "350M A WEEK for NHS" triggers the drooling response, irrespective of context. If you say 'Boris lied when he promised 350M A WEEK for NHS' the words not in caps don't register. It would be like Pavlov saying to his dogs "The next bell-ringing will be a fire drill, please ignore it".
The really significant part of Boris' statement is that he says "And yes - once we have settled our accounts, we will take back control of roughly £350m per week. A coded message that he is rowing back from the "go whistle" position.
It occurs to me that johnson is the only figure in government I can imagine having unofficial allies across the channel - the rest don't trust johnny foreigner and don't speak the lingo. It is possible to envisage a scenario under which it is understood that DD and by extension TMay will be particularly humiliated by the negotiators in the days before Conference, in exchange for assurances about how much more smoothly things would go under Boris as PM.0 -
Sorry to hear that - hope she wins her battleTheScreamingEagles said:Feck, Baroness Jowell battling brain cancer.
Top women, without her, we wouldn't have London 2012.0 -
@Mortimer, @Ishmael_Z
I take your points about the political efficacy of the £350 mill figure, but that's not how the UKSA works. Its remit is oversight of official statistics, and official statistics is quite loosely defined - if it's produced by an office/officer of the Crown, then I think it's an official stat. Regardless of the £350m's popularity or otherwise, it's a bad stat and he's right (arguably obliged) to point it out
Parenthetically, the definition of national statistics is quite tightly defined, if you're interested...
0 -
I do not know much about German politics but the Guardian is reporting the the right wing AFD are likely to be leading the official opposition.
Read on here previously that they are not important, this seems to contradict that - it is the Guardian who are commenting on it0 -
Yes, getting a stat designated as a national statistic is quite tough.viewcode said:@Mortimer, @Ishmael_Z
I take your points about the political efficacy of the £350 mill figure, but that's not how the UKSA works. Its remit is oversight of official statistics, and official statistics is quite loosely defined - if it's produced by an office/officer of the Crown, then I think it's an official stat. Regardless of the £350m's popularity or otherwise, it's a bad stat and he's right (arguably obliged) to point it out
Parenthetically, the definition of national statistics is quite tightly defined, if you're interested...
My problem with this intervention is that the UKSA really should have clamped down on anyone suggesting that funding for science etc. could be cut after Brexit. Clearly, they don't think it will...0 -
Hi - how is your keyboard today !!!viewcode said:@Mortimer, @Ishmael_Z
I take your points about the political efficacy of the £350 mill figure, but that's not how the UKSA works. Its remit is oversight of official statistics, and official statistics is quite loosely defined - if it's produced by an office/officer of the Crown, then I think it's an official stat. Regardless of the £350m's popularity or otherwise, it's a bad stat and he's right (arguably obliged) to point it out
Parenthetically, the definition of national statistics is quite tightly defined, if you're interested...0 -
Yes, sure - I wasn't trying to justify BoJo's machinations, just explain them.viewcode said:@Mortimer, @Ishmael_Z
I take your points about the political efficacy of the £350 mill figure, but that's not how the UKSA works. Its remit is oversight of official statistics, and official statistics is quite loosely defined - if it's produced by an office/officer of the Crown, then I think it's an official stat. Regardless of the £350m's popularity or otherwise, it's a bad stat and he's right (arguably obliged) to point it out
Parenthetically, the definition of national statistics is quite tightly defined, if you're interested...0 -
It really makes little sense to compare the election results from 1950 and 1964 with what happened last June for the simple reason that there were far fewer alternaive options available to voters in those days. In 1950 even the Liberals only fought 450 seats and in 1964 they contested 365. Whilst there were a number of Communist candidates, there was no UKIP or Green party and back in 1950 SNP and Plaid candidates were few and far between. Hundreds of constituencies were straight fights between the Tories and Labour - which meant supporters of other parties voting for their second preferences or staying at home. Inevitably it had the effect of making the vote shares polled by both major parties artificially high - and to use the data from that period is simply not comparing like with like.HYUFD said:
No. Wilson got 44% in 1964 and Attlee 46% even in 1950 on pretty left-wing manifestos and Corbyn got nowhere near that, he even got less than Blair got in 2001. May by contrast with 42.3% got the highest Tory voteshare since Thatcher's 42.4% in 1983.The_Apocalypse said:@HYUFD
Being anti-Tory makes one a Corbyn sympathiser? LOL, that's a joke.
'Even today Corbyn can only tie the Tories?' Corbyn was supposed to lead Labour to sub 200 seats a few months ago and poll in the low twenties. The fact that someone as to left as he is is polling above 40% in of itself is unbelievable and should alarm Conservatives who thought that Britain was a solid small c Conservative country which would never entertain Corbyn's ideas. We don't live in a politics as usual world anymore where we can look at ties/small leads and assume something positive for the Tories about it. Only months ago the Tories had a double-digit lead over Labour with a leader with very high approval ratings, and in a position where it seemed implausible that they wouldn't win a majority. They managed to mess that one up in a matter of months, and they've got years of a Brexit fall out to deal with.
The Conservatives also lost their first majority in more than twenty years in June. Votes need to be places where it actually matters.
Anyway, I'm off for a late lunch.
The Tories did not get a majority because of the dementia tax etc which will be dropped next time and as Corbyn neutralised the Brexit issue which he can't do next time. Next time the Tories will be more realistic focusing on holding seats and a few targets not unrealistic targets and getting a majority however small, my seat for example last time targeted Ilford North and Enfield North to send workers which even Ed Miliband won next time Tory workers will be sent to Thurrock and Chingford and indeed local Tories have already attended an action day in the latter0 -
So the Guardian thinks grand coalition? Well it is a possibility.Big_G_NorthWales said:I do not know much about German politics but the Guardian is reporting the the right wing AFD are likely to be leading the official opposition.
Read on here previously that they are not important, this seems to contradict that - it is the Guardian who are commenting on it0 -
If they come third and if CDU and SPD continue in coalition, then yes...the current opposition are Die Linke.Big_G_NorthWales said:I do not know much about German politics but the Guardian is reporting the the right wing AFD are likely to be leading the official opposition.
Read on here previously that they are not important, this seems to contradict that - it is the Guardian who are commenting on it0 -
Less sticky, thank you...Big_G_NorthWales said:
Hi - how is your keyboard today !!!viewcode said:@Mortimer, @Ishmael_Z
I take your points about the political efficacy of the £350 mill figure, but that's not how the UKSA works. Its remit is oversight of official statistics, and official statistics is quite loosely defined - if it's produced by an office/officer of the Crown, then I think it's an official stat. Regardless of the £350m's popularity or otherwise, it's a bad stat and he's right (arguably obliged) to point it out
Parenthetically, the definition of national statistics is quite tightly defined, if you're interested... 0 -
The Guardian says that they will get additional benefits as the official oppositiondixiedean said:
If they come third and if CDU and SPD continue in coalition, then yes...the current opposition are Die Linke.Big_G_NorthWales said:I do not know much about German politics but the Guardian is reporting the the right wing AFD are likely to be leading the official opposition.
Read on here previously that they are not important, this seems to contradict that - it is the Guardian who are commenting on it0 -
I desperately need to rephrase that...viewcode said:
Less sticky, thank you...Big_G_NorthWales said:
Hi - how is your keyboard today !!!viewcode said:@Mortimer, @Ishmael_Z
I take your points about the political efficacy of the £350 mill figure, but that's not how the UKSA works. Its remit is oversight of official statistics, and official statistics is quite loosely defined - if it's produced by an office/officer of the Crown, then I think it's an official stat. Regardless of the £350m's popularity or otherwise, it's a bad stat and he's right (arguably obliged) to point it out
Parenthetically, the definition of national statistics is quite tightly defined, if you're interested...0 -
MY ENTRY 6 Minutes 16 Seconds0
-
And sorry about today - I did say 3-0 would put you in the relegation zone but apart from the first and last 20 minutes of the game you more than held your own. Rooney has lost his pace but he still passes a good ballBig_G_NorthWales said:
The Guardian says that they will get additional benefits as the official oppositiondixiedean said:
If they come third and if CDU and SPD continue in coalition, then yes...the current opposition are Die Linke.Big_G_NorthWales said:I do not know much about German politics but the Guardian is reporting the the right wing AFD are likely to be leading the official opposition.
Read on here previously that they are not important, this seems to contradict that - it is the Guardian who are commenting on it
2 -0 would have been fairer0 -
You must have found the comment funny thenviewcode said:
Less sticky, thank you...Big_G_NorthWales said:
Hi - how is your keyboard today !!!viewcode said:@Mortimer, @Ishmael_Z
I take your points about the political efficacy of the £350 mill figure, but that's not how the UKSA works. Its remit is oversight of official statistics, and official statistics is quite loosely defined - if it's produced by an office/officer of the Crown, then I think it's an official stat. Regardless of the £350m's popularity or otherwise, it's a bad stat and he's right (arguably obliged) to point it out
Parenthetically, the definition of national statistics is quite tightly defined, if you're interested...0 -
No, it makes little sense to compare them because they were many decades ago.justin124 said:
It really makes little sense to compare the election results from 1950 and 1964 with what happened last June for the simple reason that there were far fewer alternaive options available to voters in those days. In 1950 even the Liberals only fought 450 seats and in 1964 they contested 365. Whilst there were a number of Communist candidates, there was no UKIP or Green party and back in 1950 SNP and Plaid candidates were few and far between. Hundreds of constituencies were straight fights between the Tories and Labour - which meant supporters of other parties voting for their second preferences or staying at home. Inevitably it had the effect of making the vote shares polled by both major parties artificially high - and to use the data from that period is simply not comparing like with like.HYUFD said:
No. Wilson got 44% in 1964 and Attlee 46% even in 1950 on pretty left-wing manifestos and Corbyn got nowhere near that, he even got less than Blair got in 2001. May by contrast with 42.3% got the highest Tory voteshare since Thatcher's 42.4% in 1983.The_Apocalypse said:@HYUFD
Being anti-Tory makes one a Corbyn sympathiser? LOL, that's a joke.
'Even today Corbyn can only tie the Tories?' Corbyn was supposed to lead Labour to sub 200 seats a few months ago and poll in the low twenties. The fact that someone as to left as he is is polling above 40% in of itself is unbelievable and should alarm Conservatives who thought that Britain was a solid small c Conservative country which would never entertain Corbyn's ideas. We don't live in a politics as usual world anymore where we can look at ties/small leads and assume something positive for the Tories about it. Only months ago the Tories had a double-digit lead over Labour with a leader with very high approval ratings, and in a position where it seemed implausible that they wouldn't win a majority. They managed to mess that one up in a matter of months, and they've got years of a Brexit fall out to deal with.
The Conservatives also lost their first majority in more than twenty years in June. Votes need to be places where it actually matters.
Anyway, I'm off for a late lunch.
The Tories did not get a majority because of the dementia tax etc which will be dropped next time and as Corbyn neutralised the Brexit issue which he can't do next time. Next time the Tories will be more realistic focusing on holding seats and a few targets not unrealistic targets and getting a majority however small, my seat for example last time targeted Ilford North and Enfield North to send workers which even Ed Miliband won next time Tory workers will be sent to Thurrock and Chingford and indeed local Tories have already attended an action day in the latter0 -
“MY ENTRY 2 Minutes 13 Seconds.”0
-
MY ENTRY: 5 minutes.0
-
"MY ENTRY 3 Minutes 28 Seconds."0
-
They will I believe get to chair the budget committee.Big_G_NorthWales said:
And sorry about today - I did say 3-0 would put you in the relegation zone but apart from the first and last 20 minutes of the game you more than held your own. Rooney has lost his pace but he still passes a good ballBig_G_NorthWales said:
The Guardian says that they will get additional benefits as the official oppositiondixiedean said:
If they come third and if CDU and SPD continue in coalition, then yes...the current opposition are Die Linke.Big_G_NorthWales said:I do not know much about German politics but the Guardian is reporting the the right wing AFD are likely to be leading the official opposition.
Read on here previously that they are not important, this seems to contradict that - it is the Guardian who are commenting on it
2 -0 would have been fairer
And thanks. For a while I was hoping for a point. We were infinitely better than either of our previous 3 nil losses ironically. Believe we had 51% possession.
United look a cut above this season, compared to the preceding 3. The title is headed for Manchester, though I am not sure which half.0 -
Trump Tweets Doctored GIF of His Golf Ball Hitting Hillary Clinton https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/17/us/politics/hillary-golfball-trump-tweets.html0
-
IndeedBig_G_NorthWales said:
You must have found the comment funny thenviewcode said:
Less sticky, thank you...Big_G_NorthWales said:
Hi - how is your keyboard today !!!viewcode said:@Mortimer, @Ishmael_Z
I take your points about the political efficacy of the £350 mill figure, but that's not how the UKSA works. Its remit is oversight of official statistics, and official statistics is quite loosely defined - if it's produced by an office/officer of the Crown, then I think it's an official stat. Regardless of the £350m's popularity or otherwise, it's a bad stat and he's right (arguably obliged) to point it out
Parenthetically, the definition of national statistics is quite tightly defined, if you're interested...0 -
Boris is setting up a position where he can claim that giving any money to the EU is at the expense of the NHS, who would otherwise have got the money.
Puts pressure on the Remainers to give very little money to the EU post exit.0 -
Amazing they both have identical stats and City are above United only on alphabetic order.dixiedean said:
They will I believe get to chair the budget committee.Big_G_NorthWales said:
And sorry about today - I did say 3-0 would put you in the relegation zone but apart from the first and last 20 minutes of the game you more than held your own. Rooney has lost his pace but he still passes a good ballBig_G_NorthWales said:
The Guardian says that they will get additional benefits as the official oppositiondixiedean said:
If they come third and if CDU and SPD continue in coalition, then yes...the current opposition are Die Linke.Big_G_NorthWales said:I do not know much about German politics but the Guardian is reporting the the right wing AFD are likely to be leading the official opposition.
Read on here previously that they are not important, this seems to contradict that - it is the Guardian who are commenting on it
2 -0 would have been fairer
And thanks. For a while I was hoping for a point. We were infinitely better than either of our previous 3 nil losses ironically. Believe we had 51% possession.
United look a cut above this season, compared to the preceding 3. The title is headed for Manchester, though I am not sure which half.
And re Everton there was enough there today to suggest they should climb up the table now they have a few easier fixtures ahead0 -
MY ENTRY 1 minute 50 seconds0
-
Arguable,I suppose, - though 1964 is still well within the memory of many of us and felt like the modern political age as it were.Mortimer said:
No, it makes little sense to compare them because they were many decades ago.justin124 said:
It really makes little sense to compare the election results from 1950 and 1964 with what happened last June for the simple reason that there were far fewer alternaive options available to voters in those days. In 1950 even the Liberals only fought 450 seats and in 1964 they contested 365. Whilst there were a number of Communist candidates, there was no UKIP or Green party and back in 1950 SNP and Plaid candidates were few and far between. Hundreds of constituencies were straight fights between the Tories and Labour - which meant supporters of other parties voting for their second preferences or staying at home. Inevitably it had the effect of making the vote shares polled by both major parties artificially high - and to use the data from that period is simply not comparing like with like.HYUFD said:
No. Wilson got 44% in 1964 and Attlee 46% even in 1950 on pretty left-wing manifestos and Corbyn got nowhere near that, he even got less than Blair got in 2001. May by contrast with 42.3% got the highest Tory voteshare since Thatcher's 42.4% in 1983.The_Apocalypse said:@HYUFD
Being anti-Tory makes one a Corbyn sympathiser? LOL, that's a joke.
'Even today Corbyn can only tie the Tories?' Corbyn was supposed to lead Labour to sub 200 seats a few months ago and poll in the low twenties. The fact that someone as to left as he is is polling above 40% in of itself is unbelievable and should alarm Conservatives who thought that Britain was a solid small c Conservative country which would never entertain Corbyn's ideas. We don't live in a politics as usual world anymore where we can look at ties/small leads and assume something positive for the Tories about it. Only months ago the Tories had a double-digit lead over Labour with a leader with very high approval ratings, and in a position where it seemed implausible that they wouldn't win a majority. They managed to mess that one up in a matter of months, and they've got years of a Brexit fall out to deal with.
The Conservatives also lost their first majority in more than twenty years in June. Votes need to be places where it actually matters.
Anyway, I'm off for a late lunch.0 -
He must be onto something when he has a wall of critism hitting him from the broadcast media, remainer's and even the head of the NSA.David_Evershed said:Boris is setting up a position where he can claim that giving any money to the EU is at the expense of the NHS, who would otherwise have got the money.
Puts pressure on the Remainers to give very little money to the EU post exit.
Not sure the NSA has done anything other than confirm that experts are not to be trusted and continue the story, probably to Boris's benefit
He certainly has put down a marker but as a member I am not yet convinced that he should be PM - we will see0 -
My entry - 6 minutes 33 seconds!0
-
Memory for me but not for politics - it was the year I married my beloved - bless herjustin124 said:
Arguable,I suppose, - though 1964 is still well within the memory of many of us and felt like the modern political age as it were.Mortimer said:
No, it makes little sense to compare them because they were many decades ago.justin124 said:
It really makes little sense to compare the election results from 1950 and 1964 with what happened last June for the simple reason that there were far fewer alternaive options available to voters in those days. In 1950 even the Liberals only fought 450 seats and in 1964 they contested 365. Whilst there were a number of Communist candidates, there was no UKIP or Green party and back in 1950 SNP and Plaid candidates were few and far between. Hundreds of constituencies were straight fights between the Tories and Labour - which meant supporters of other parties voting for their second preferences or staying at home. Inevitably it had the effect of making the vote shares polled by both major parties artificially high - and to use the data from that period is simply not comparing like with like.HYUFD said:
No. Wilson got 44% in 1964 and Attlee 46% even in 1950 on pretty left-wing manifestos and Corbyn got nowhere near that, he even got less than Blair got in 2001. May by contrast with 42.3% got the highest Tory voteshare since Thatcher's 42.4% in 1983.The_Apocalypse said:@HYUFD
Being anti-Tory makes one a Corbyn sympathiser? LOL, that's a joke.
'Even today Corbyn can only tie the Tories?' Corbyn was supposed to lead Labour to sub 200 seats a few months ago and poll in the low twenties. The fact that someone as to left as he is is polling above 40% in of itself is unbelievable and should alarm Conservatives who thought that Britain was a solid small c Conservative country which would never entertain Corbyn's ideas. We don't live in a politics as usual world anymore where we can look at ties/small leads and assume something positive for the Tories about it. Only months ago the Tories had a double-digit lead over Labour with a leader with very high approval ratings, and in a position where it seemed implausible that they wouldn't win a majority. They managed to mess that one up in a matter of months, and they've got years of a Brexit fall out to deal with.
The Conservatives also lost their first majority in more than twenty years in June. Votes need to be places where it actually matters.
Anyway, I'm off for a late lunch.0 -
Now I am no fan of Trump and you would hope the POTUS would have better things to do than retweet crap of the t'interweb...but all the stuff about promoting violent imaginary...I mean come off it.YellowSubmarine said:Trump Tweets Doctored GIF of His Golf Ball Hitting Hillary Clinton https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/17/us/politics/hillary-golfball-trump-tweets.html
The media and left in the US getting worked up about this stuff harms them rather than hurts Trump, given the kind of memes and gifs retwattered everyday, lots of people find this stuff mildly amusing.0 -
MY ENTRY 3 Minutes 1 Seconds0
-
Since my last post, the discussion on this thread re the Tories and the under 40s has been a very interesting read.
One thing I'd say that also hasn't helped the Tories is the impression older (Baby Boomers especially) Tory, Brexit voters really dislike young people. The whole millennials are terrible message from right-leaning publications like the Mail, is unlikely to endear many young people to conservatism. Articles like this aren't helpful: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-4499044/How-millennial-s-INFURIATING-seniors.html
Why would any young person want to join the Conservative party, if its members/voters don't exactly have a positive attitude towards them? At least many of the older lefties (with the exception of some of those on the American Left, like Bill Maher from example) don't see all young people as 'snowflakes', 'whiners', 'entitled', and all the other negative terminology used to describe us. I have always found it bizarre that a few idiots at universities have led some to decide to negatively judge all/most young people.
0 -
For me Harold Wilson - and Ted Heath- are figures from 'just a few years ago' , though when I sit back and reflect I am forced to accept that circa 60% of people now living are unlikely to have memories of them in office. That makes me feel old - despite only having been 10 in 1964!Big_G_NorthWales said:
Memory for me but not for politics - it was the year I married my beloved - bless herjustin124 said:
Arguable,I suppose, - though 1964 is still well within the memory of many of us and felt like the modern political age as it were.Mortimer said:
No, it makes little sense to compare them because they were many decades ago.justin124 said:
It really makes little sense to compare the election results from 1950 and 1964 with what happened last June for the simple reason that there were far fewer alternaive options available to voters in those days. In 1950 even the Liberals only fought 450 seats and in 1964 they contested 365. Whilst there were a number of Communist candidates, there was no UKIP or Green party and back in 1950 SNP and Plaid candidates were few and far between. Hundreds of constituencies were straight fights between the Tories and Labour - which meant supporters of other parties voting for their second preferences or staying at home. Inevitably it had the effect of making the vote shares polled by both major parties artificially high - and to use the data from that period is simply not comparing like with like.HYUFD said:
No. Wilson got 44% in 1964 and Attlee 46% even in 1950 on pretty left-wing manifestos and Corbyn got nowhere near that, he even got less than Blair got in 2001. May by contrast with 42.3% got the highest Tory voteshare since Thatcher's 42.4% in 1983.The_Apocalypse said:@HYUFD
Being anti-Tory makes one a Corbyn sympathiser? LOL, that's a joke.
'.
Anyway, I'm off for a late lunch.
I discovered yesterday that Harold Wilson's second son - Giles - married very late and became a father at 65!0 -
Has Trump mused on the possibility of cutting Hillary up and putting her in his freezer?FrancisUrquhart said:
Now I am no fan of Trump and you would hope the POTUS would have better things to do than retweet crap of the t'interweb...but all the stuff about promoting violent imaginary...I mean come off it.YellowSubmarine said:Trump Tweets Doctored GIF of His Golf Ball Hitting Hillary Clinton https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/17/us/politics/hillary-golfball-trump-tweets.html
The media and left in the US getting worked up about this stuff harms them rather than hurts Trump, given the kind of memes and gifs retwattered everyday, lots of people find this stuff mildly amusing.0 -
An 18-year-old, believed to be an Iraqi refugee, was arrested in the Port of Dover after being tracked to its departures hall, but it emerged he had slipped through the police's fingers after being arrested at Parsons Green a fortnight before the blast.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4893172/Is-Parsons-Green-suspect-way-attack.html
Why am I not going to be shocked if we find out that he is actually signficantly older than 18, after claiming to be 15 when he arrived?0 -
0
-
Does George Osborne have an alibi ? < A woman was found dead in a hotel freezer. Video shows her last-known moments.
http://wapo.st/2wxod4U0 -
NEW THREAD
0 -
Why is there a CCTV camera on a residential street like that? Bit odd isn't it?FrancisUrquhart said:An 18-year-old, believed to be an Iraqi refugee, was arrested in the Port of Dover after being tracked to its departures hall, but it emerged he had slipped through the police's fingers after being arrested at Parsons Green a fortnight before the blast.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4893172/Is-Parsons-Green-suspect-way-attack.html
Why am I not going to be shocked if we find out that he is actually signficantly older than 18, after claiming to be 15 when he arrived?0 -
Ha ha haaaaScott_P said:0 -
MY ENTRY 3 Minutes 23 seconds0
-
MY ENTRY 4 minutes 45 seconds0
-
MY ENTRY: 2 minutes 37 seconds0
-
MY ENTRY: 5 minutes 04 seconds0
-
MY ENTRY: 10 minutes 2 seconds0
-
MY ENTRY: 4m 33s0
-
3m58sc
0 -
MY ENTRY 6 Minutes 0 Seconds0
-
MY ENTRY 3 minutes 06 seconds0
-
MY ENTRY 3 minutes 52 seconds0
