politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Further thoughts on Chris Williamson succeeding Jeremy Corbyn
Options
Comments
-
https://twitter.com/JimMFelton/status/1038343133531197442TheScreamingEagles said:We’re the ones that keep on saying no deal is better than a bad deal.
This is the reality of that.0 -
Do you have many of them, or are they just very large ?TheScreamingEagles said:
I sat in a meeting with David Davis where he said it would be alright.williamglenn said:
This is Ivan Rogers' view of No Deal.TheScreamingEagles said:We’re the ones that keep on saying no deal is better than a bad deal.
This is the reality of that.
http://www.britishirishchamber.com/2018/09/07/sir-mark-ivan-rogers-kcmg-speech-at-british-irish-chamber-of-commerce-annual-gala-dinner/
Advocates of “no deal” know this really. They know that a genuine “no deal” would bring several key sectors of the economy to a halt. So they argue that European self-interest will be the deus ex machina which delivers a whole set of legal mini deals ensuring that it’s all alright on the night.
This is, I fear, simply delusional.
I am all for knowing in any negotiation what, in negotiators’ jargon, one’s Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement – one’s BATNA – is. It is particularly important in a negotiation like this one, where the default if there is no deal is not the status quo.
But it is simply not the case that the best alternative here is a set of negotiated mini deals!
Let’s think it through.. The reality, in any breakdown scenario, is that any UK PM who felt obliged to say that the Withdrawal negotiations had reached a dead end, would refuse to pay the exit bills.
And the inevitable response to that from all 27 in the Council the following day would be to say there would be no resumption of normal trading relations with the UK unless and until it had agreed to honour its full debts.
In the meantime, the 27 would no doubt enact, at 27, the emergency provisions, which enabled whatever continuity in whichever sectors it deemed in its interests. That would not mean the complete cessation of all business. Of course not. It just means an entirely unilateral and deliberately asymmetric selection by the EU of where there will be continuity and where there will not.
That is not taking back control. That is giving it up.
The EU would calculate that the UK would be back at the table with its chequebook out within the week.
That there’s be no disruption.
He’s like my boxer shorts, full of bollocks.
(a rhetorical question which I’d rather you didn’t answer.)
@DavidL The ball is doing disappointingly little for the English bowlers.
Well done, sir. You played a blinder while I was away this afternoon.0 -
-
No we could not have any free movement restrictions for the first 3 months under EEA free movement rules, only after 3 months.notme said:
We could do free movement restrictions if we wanted. We have zero restrictions. It’s free movement of labour not people. We impose none of the rules that are allowed. And we have a welfare system that rewards low pay. If after three months they have no work or means to support themselves we are entirely free to deport them. We don’t now. Why would we in future.HYUFD said:
No, it is the only proposal whictable to the DUP and at least does some change on free movement unlike EFTA/EEAnotme said:
arket if we so desire.HYUFD said:
I think the most likely deal now is a Withdrawal Agreement based on Chequers Plus ie we stay aligned with single market rules as well as EU goods rules but with the ability to do our own tradenotme said:
There’s a lot of truth in that a true not economy from the global trading system.TheScreamingEagles said:
I sat in a meeting with David Davis where he said it would be alright.williamglenn said:
This is Ivan Rogers' view of No Deal.TheScreamingEagles said:We’re the ones that keep on saying no deal is better than a bad deal.
This is the reality of that.
But it is simply not the case that the best alternative here is a set of negotiated mini deals!
Let’s think it through.. The reality, in any breakdown scenario, is that any UK PM who felt obliged to say that the Withdrawal negotiations had reached a dead end, would refuse to pay the exit bills.
And the inevitable response to that from all 27 in the Council the following day would be to say there would be no resumption of normal trading relations with the UK unless and until it had agreed to honour its full debts.
In the meantime, the 27ntrol. That is giving it up.
The EU would calculate that the UK would be back at the table with its chequebook out within the week.
That there’s be no disruption.
He’s like my boxer shorts, full of bollocks.
That will get us the transition period but we will basically be in the single market and customs union rules wise for the most part
Complete cock up.
The Chequers Deal proposed work permits or study places on arrival not after 3 months, similar to the transition controls we could have had in 2004 but Blair refused to introduce. It is also a myth to say nobody in the UK without a job offer or study place from the EEA after 3 months is not deported at the moment.
If they are staying longer than 3 months they cannot really claim to still be tourists.0 -
A thought on Boris: might this 'leak' not be from his camp?
He's just announced he's getting divorced, and his mind is bound to be more elsewhere than usual. Might someone have decided that now is a good time to see him off, especially as some would-be supporters might be put off by activities in his personal life?
He can probably only march his men to the top of the hill once before he starts to look like a cowardly-custard, and this story might force him to launch an attempt before he's ready, and at a time he's not looking particularly good.
It'd be a risky strategy...0 -
For some reason the words emperor and clothes slipped into my mind.Scott_P said:
https://twitter.com/JimMFelton/status/1038343133531197442TheScreamingEagles said:We’re the ones that keep on saying no deal is better than a bad deal.
This is the reality of that.0 -
There are other alternatives. For instance, TSE's boxer shorts might be *very* small. Or they might be a bikini-style thong to hold his bollocks, leaving everything else to hang free.Nigelb said:
Do you have many of them, or are they just very large ?TheScreamingEagles said:I sat in a meeting with David Davis where he said it would be alright.
That there’s be no disruption.
He’s like my boxer shorts, full of bollocks.
(a rhetorical question which I’d rather you didn’t answer.)
(Snip)
But if they're 'full' of bollocks, there is no room for any of the usual things kept in boxer shorts. Therefore they must be elsewhere in his body. So next time someone accused him of talking out of his arse, it'll be because his tiny boxer shorts are full of bollocks and his arse has migrated to where his mouth should be...
I'll leave where the meat went to the imagination of others ...
0 -
He is quite simply the dumbest f*cker ever to hold the office of President*.CarlottaVance said:0 -
And history and fptp shows that’s the end of them. A suitable end for New Labour - flushing themselves down the pan of history.HYUFD said:If Corbyn goes and is succeeded by Williamson it is difficult to see how the Labour Party does not split as Williamson has been pushing the deselection of Labour moderates. A Williamson leadership would likely see Umunna and other moderates defect en masse to a new centrist party formed with the LDs and maybe a few pro EU Tories
Free from baggage and division of New Labour, You will, You WILL then have a United Labour Party as the party of first opposition and then government. So all the Tories enjoying this moment... the last laughs on you
Watch. I’ll now demonstrate what I mean by calling out New Labour in terms they can’t answer.
“Call off your dogs” is extremely insulting language to use on colleagues. About as diplomatic as Trump on a “being nice, being very very nice” day.
Why the word dogs Chuck? Why not the word vermin? Animals? Scum? All those words interchangeable in your schoolboy rant with it’s ridiculous “we have unquestionable divine right to be here” stink about it.
Fact. The people (note I say people, the word you should have used instead of dogs) who will be deselected in the coming weeks and months, actually have no unquestionable divine right to be Labour candidates to be honest with you. Two thirds of the PLP are born in blood New Labour, who bankrupted Britain and killed millions whilst destabilising Middle East with unnecessary wars, they do not represent the Labour Party membership or broader Labour movement one iota. Why are they even hanging around in politics, the country will never allow New Labour to form a government again, quite rightly.
Fact. What is actually wrong with Democratic reelection of candidates, so constituency members actually have candidate who represents their views?
Is there New Labour anywhere capable of addressing these facts with intelligent answer, without merely being as unconvincing undiplomatic and insulting as Chuck your spokesman has been today?0 -
an undertaking of great advantage but no-one to know what it is!!Scott_P said:
https://twitter.com/JimMFelton/status/1038343133531197442TheScreamingEagles said:We’re the ones that keep on saying no deal is better than a bad deal.
This is the reality of that.0 -
Genuinely don't know.JohnRussell said:
What's the split of that coalition?viewcode said:
If I may politely disagree for a moment. Goodwin is clear on the coalition that carried Leave over the line: Left Behind Leavers (middle-aged working-class, struggling financially),YBarddCwsc said:
“It’s very easy for people in the affluent South to be Remainers. It’s a purely selfish vote, no matter how much they talk about brotherhood of man and internationalism. It’s purely because their lives are going just fine for them. I reverted to my old self which was a very poor working class girl from the West Country, where my people have been treated like dumb pawns in the European game for many generations. I reverted to my class type and voted for Brexit as a protest, because their vote is all they have and Brexiteers are the true democrats. Their vote is all they have and they used it.”williamglenn said:Good to see Julie Burchill doing her bit for the Remain campaign.
https://twitter.com/BBCNewsnight/status/1038185017103400960
The old gifts never die. Julie can still use language like a rapier, when the mood takes her.
You could hardly find a better skewering of the monied Toppings and Meeks and WilliamGlenns.
And the desolation of “Their vote is all they have and they used it” still tugs the heart.
Blue-Collar Pensioners (retired not struggling financially) and Affluent Eurosceptics (wealthy social conservatives). Burchill is in the third category, hasn't been working-class for decades and is famously careless in her relationships. @TheScreamingEagles is more qualified to be working-class.
Parenthetically, it might be worth finding out. @CarlottaVance has been nagging me to understand why Leavers voted Leave. I shied away at this on the grounds that comprehension doesn't lead to agreement (there's a PJ O'Rourke quote about "the more you understand, the less you forgive") and since the vote's done ("war's over. We lost") there's no profit in it. However as an academic exercise it might be worth looking into it. There are four approaches
* The Ashcroft polls: why did individuals vote Leave?
* The Goodwin groups: why did categories vote Leave
* The Dennison[1] countries: why did the UK Leave, as opposed to Ireland, Sweden, Greece, etc
* The British Election Study subcategories: why did races, classes, ages vote Leave
Give me a couple of weeks, see what I can throw together.
[1] https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/conference/fac-socsci/epop-2017/documents/epop-2017-programme-final.pdf0 -
Trump is truly a fool.CarlottaVance said:0 -
And higher prices with the books, which suggests someone is backing Boris on Betfair to create the story rather than to maximise winnings.rottenborough said:Boris at 4.1 on BF.
That's the lowest for a long time iirc.0 -
Though his policy of demanding plants and jobs be brought back to the USA is popular with his baseglw said:
He is quite simply the dumbest f*cker ever to hold the office of President*.CarlottaVance said:
0 -
You will also see a number of centrist anti Brexit Labour voters move to this new party and if some anti Brexit Tory MPs move to it the Tories will be more united as wellLordOfReason said:
And history and fptp shows that’s the end of them. A suitable end for New Labour - flushing themselves down the pan of history.HYUFD said:If Corbyn goes and is succeeded by Williamson it is difficult to see how the Labour Party does not split as Williamson has been pushing the deselection of Labour moderates. A Williamson leadership would likely see Umunna and other moderates defect en masse to a new centrist party formed with the LDs and maybe a few pro EU Tories
Free from baggage and division of New Labour, You will, You WILL then have a United Labour Party as the party of first opposition and then government. So all the Tories enjoying this moment... the last laughs on you
Watch. I’ll now demonstrate what I mean by calling out New Labour in terms they can’t answer.
“Call off your dogs” is extremely insulting language to use on colleagues. About as diplomatic as Trump on a “being nice, being very very nice” day.
Why the word dogs Chuck? Why not the word vermin? Animals? Scum? All those words interchangeable in your schoolboy rant with it’s ridiculous “we have unquestionable divine right to be here” stink about it.
Fact. The people (note I say people, the word you should have used instead of dogs) who will be deselected in the coming weeks and months, actually have no unquestionable divine right to be Labour candidates to be honest with you. Two thirds of the PLP are born in blood New Labour, who bankrupted Britain and killed millions whilst destabilising Middle East with unnecessary wars, they do not represent the Labour Party membership or broader Labour movement one iota. Why are they even hanging around in politics, the country will never allow New Labour to form a government again, quite rightly.
Fact. What is actually wrong with Democratic reelection of candidates, so constituency members actually have candidate who represents their views?
Is there New Labour anywhere capable of addressing these facts with intelligent answer, without merely being as unconvincing undiplomatic and insulting as Chuck your spokesman has been today?
0 -
Other sources might be poll movements in relation to daily developments and news headlines, and what Cummings has said was shown in the Leave camp's data in response to different messages.viewcode said:Parenthetically, it might be worth finding out. @CarlottaVance has been nagging me to understand why Leavers voted Leave. I shied away at this on the grounds that comprehension doesn't lead to agreement (there's a PJ O'Rourke quote about "the more you understand, the less you forgive") and since the vote's done ("war's over. We lost") there's no profit in it. However as an academic exercise it might be worth looking into it. There are four approaches
* The Ashcroft polls: why did individuals vote Leave?
* The Goodwin groups: why did categories vote Leave
* The Dennison[1] countries: why did the UK Leave, as opposed to Ireland, Sweden, Greece, etc
* The British Election Study subcategories: why did races, classes, ages vote Leave
Give me a couple of weeks, see what I can throw together.
[1] https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/conference/fac-socsci/epop-2017/documents/epop-2017-programme-final.pdf0 -
You may be right but you will need to explain why rather than just make an assertion.Nigelb said:
Trump is truly a fool.CarlottaVance said:0 -
Having said that, Shadsy has just chalked up 3/1.DecrepitJohnL said:
And higher prices with the books, which suggests someone is backing Boris on Betfair to create the story rather than to maximise winnings.rottenborough said:Boris at 4.1 on BF.
That's the lowest for a long time iirc.0 -
Most of what goes into an iPhone is not made by Apple, even the Apple badged bits are mostly manufactured by other companies. Almost all of those companies are not US companies. Apple manufactures their phones where labour costs are low, and where they are close to their suppliers. If Apple manufactured all of their phones in the US, 1. labour costs would be way higher, 2. they'd still pay a lot of tariffs on the components, and 3. they would be far away from their main suppliers.HYUFD said:
Though his policy of demanding plants and jobs be brought back to the USA is popular with his baseglw said:
He is quite simply the dumbest f*cker ever to hold the office of President*.CarlottaVance said:
Trump's understanding of the issues, which I am no way claming to be an expert on, is childish. Trump is really, really f*cking stupid.
0 -
His supporters will approve though. The only area where has begun to have the glimmering of a point is IP theft.glw said:
Most of what goes into an iPhone is not made by Apple, even the Apple badged bits are mostly manufactured by other companies. Almost all of those companies are not US companies. Apple manufactures their phones where labour costs are low, and where they are close to their suppliers. If Apple manufactured all of their phones in the US, 1. labour costs would be way higher, 2. they'd still pay a lot of tariffs on the components, and 3. they would be far away from their main suppliers.HYUFD said:
Though his policy of demanding plants and jobs be brought back to the USA is popular with his baseglw said:
He is quite simply the dumbest f*cker ever to hold the office of President*.CarlottaVance said:
Trump's understanding of the issues, which I am no way claming to be an expert on, is childish. Trump is really, really f*cking stupid.0 -
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45460143
McDonnell isn't really paying attention to what is actually going on within his party. Or he is just pretending that it isn't happening.
And to those parroting his lines about 'dogs' - it is clearly a rhetorical reference to 'attack dogs' or 'the dogs of war' - it is not imputing the the people doing the attacking are actually canine. But then you know that, it is just the best/worst you can come up with to try to deny the reality of the aggression being exhibited by the Hard Left.0 -
I did not necessarily say I agreed with his policy, I just said it would be popular with his rustbelt base, which it will.glw said:
Most of what goes into an iPhone is not made by Apple, even the Apple badged bits are mostly manufactured by other companies. Almost all of those companies are not US companies. Apple manufactures their phones where labour costs are low, and where they are close to their suppliers. If Apple manufactured all of their phones in the US, 1. labour costs would be way higher, 2. they'd still pay a lot of tariffs on the components, and 3. they would be far away from their main suppliers.HYUFD said:
Though his policy of demanding plants and jobs be brought back to the USA is popular with his baseglw said:
He is quite simply the dumbest f*cker ever to hold the office of President*.CarlottaVance said:
Trump's understanding of the issues, which I am no way claming to be an expert on, is childish. Trump is really, really f*cking stupid.
It may make sense for Apple to use manufacturers in the Far East where labour is cheaper and they are closer to their suppliers but for someone in Pennsylvania and Michigan who is working at Walmart or unemployed and used to have a reasonably well paid manufacturing job Trump's message will resonate0 -
If I may disagree impolitely, that is bollocks.viewcode said:
If I may politely disagree for a moment. Goodwin is clear on the coalition that carried Leave over the line: Left Behind Leavers (middle-aged working-class, struggling financially),YBarddCwsc said:
“It’s very easy for people in the affluent South to be Remainers. It’s a purely selfish vote, no matter how much they talk about brotherhood of man and internationalism. It’s purely because their lives are going just fine for them. I reverted to my old self which was a very poor working class girl from the West Country, where my people have been treated like dumb pawns in the European game for many generations. I reverted to my class type and voted for Brexit as a protest, because their vote is all they have and Brexiteers are the true democrats. Their vote is all they have and they used it.”williamglenn said:Good to see Julie Burchill doing her bit for the Remain campaign.
https://twitter.com/BBCNewsnight/status/1038185017103400960
The old gifts never die. Julie can still use language like a rapier, when the mood takes her.
You could hardly find a better skewering of the monied Toppings and Meeks and WilliamGlenns.
And the desolation of “Their vote is all they have and they used it” still tugs the heart.
Blue-Collar Pensioners (retired not struggling financially) and Affluent Eurosceptics (wealthy social conservatives). Burchill is in the third category, hasn't been working-class for decades and is famously careless in her relationships. @TheScreamingEagles is more qualified to be working-class.
TSE went (as I understand it) to a private school and Cambridge University.
Julie Burchill left a comprehensive school at 16 and didn’t go to University.
By what crazy metric do you conclude a privately educated Oxbridge graduate from the most affluent part of Sheffield is more working class than someone who left school at 16 with no A levels and no degree from the shittiest part of Bristol ?
0 -
I agree with all you say from a business perspective. But Trump is playing politics. I remember The Apple CEO saying "We will never manufacture in the US." Trump points are that the Globalist Democrats and their friends in business do not care about American Jobs (even though they create a lot of them). Trump - I do care about American jobs and I am fighting for you and your children's jobs.glw said:
Most of what goes into an iPhone is not made by Apple, even the Apple badged bits are mostly manufactured by other companies. Almost all of those companies are not US companies. Apple manufactures their phones where labour costs are low, and where they are close to their suppliers. If Apple manufactured all of their phones in the US, 1. labour costs would be way higher, 2. they'd still pay a lot of tariffs on the components, and 3. they would be far away from their main suppliers.HYUFD said:
Though his policy of demanding plants and jobs be brought back to the USA is popular with his baseglw said:
He is quite simply the dumbest f*cker ever to hold the office of President*.CarlottaVance said:
Trump's understanding of the issues, which I am no way claming to be an expert on, is childish. Trump is really, really f*cking stupid.
Intel can have factories in USA. Samsung have announced a semi conductor factory in the USA. Trump will keep asking the questions to Apple why do you not?0 -
I was pointing out the ludicrousness of a careless multimillionairess sincerely believing herself to be working class by comparing her to @TSE, who often claims to be working-class for purposes of comedy. Both claims are ludicrous, but at least @TheScreamingEagles is self-aware when he does it.YBarddCwsc said:
If I may disagree impolitely, that is bollocks.viewcode said:
If I may politely disagree for a moment. Goodwin is clear on the coalition that carried Leave over the line: Left Behind Leavers (middle-aged working-class, struggling financially),YBarddCwsc said:
“It’s very easy for people in the affluent South to be Remainers. It’s a purely selfish vote, no matter how much they talk about brotherhood of man and internationalism. It’s purely because their lives are going just fine for them. I reverted to my old self which was a very poor working class girl from the West Country, where my people have been treated like dumb pawns in the European game for many generations. I reverted to my class type and voted for Brexit as a protest, because their vote is all they have and Brexiteers are the true democrats. Their vote is all they have and they used it.”williamglenn said:Good to see Julie Burchill doing her bit for the Remain campaign.
https://twitter.com/BBCNewsnight/status/1038185017103400960
The old gifts never die. Julie can still use language like a rapier, when the mood takes her.
You could hardly find a better skewering of the monied Toppings and Meeks and WilliamGlenns.
And the desolation of “Their vote is all they have and they used it” still tugs the heart.
Blue-Collar Pensioners (retired not struggling financially) and Affluent Eurosceptics (wealthy social conservatives). Burchill is in the third category, hasn't been working-class for decades and is famously careless in her relationships. @TheScreamingEagles is more qualified to be working-class.
TSE went (as I understand it) to a private school and Cambridge University.
Julie Burchill left a comprehensive school at 16 and didn’t go to University.
By what crazy metric do you conclude a privately educated Oxbridge graduate from the most affluent part of Sheffield is more working class than someone who left school at 16 with no A levels and no degree from the shittiest part of Bristol ?0 -
I've been a bit torn but having just seen Chukka Umuna and John McDonnell it's clear McDonnell is making a big mistake. Ummuna is not a Blair Clone but what most on the centre left hope for from their Labour MPs. Heavyweight throwbacks to the 70's like McDonnell is voter poison. Gone was the avuncular uncle and what we saw was very ugly indeed.0
-
They wouldn't get a "reasonably well paid manufacturing job" in the sort of place that makes the bits that go into an iPhone. That's an issue to do with education, and skills, and has little to do with international trade.HYUFD said:It may make sense for Apple to use manufacturers in the Far East where labour is cheaper and they are closer to their suppliers but for someone in Pennsylvania and Michigan who is working at Walmart or unemployed and used to have a reasonably well paid manufacturing job Trump's message will resonate
Trump spews an endless stream of lies and BS to his base, and is in practice doing nothing to help them, and by loading costs onto all sorts of goods he will likely make most of them worse off. I've read several anecdotes about all sorts of US businesses that use steel being completely screwed by Trump's policies.
0 -
Good honest comment - thank youRoger said:I've been a bit torn but having just seen Chukka Umuna and John McDonnell it's clear McDonnell is making a big mistake. Ummuna is not a Blair Clone but what most on the centre left hope for from their Labour MPs. Heavyweight throwbacks to the 70's like McDonnell is voter poison. Gone was the avuncular uncle and what we saw was very ugly indeed.
0 -
I think you are wrong. Julie’s attitudes, background and instincts are working class.viewcode said:
I was pointing out the ludicrousness of a careless multimillionairess sincerely believing herself to be working class by comparing her to @TSE, who often claims to be working-class for purposes of comedy. Both claims are ludicrous, but at least @TheScreamingEagles is self-aware when he does it.
Oh, for sure, she became famous and she lost her way.
But the passion and fury of Julie’s articles about politics and Thatcherism in the 80s are still heart-wrenching.
Maybe nowadays you have to dig deep for the ore, but Julie Is working-class.
She fought her way up from a shitty life on a shitty council estate, without the help or advantages of a fancy education and a degree.
And she can still craft a heartbreaker of a line like:
"Their vote is all they have and they used it.”
0 -
Sp applying Trump "logic" the dozens if not hundreds of international companies supplying Apple are all supposed to open plants in the US, presumably employing MAGA hat wearing Americans?ralphmalph said:Intel can have factories in USA. Samsung have announced a semi conductor factory in the USA. Trump will keep asking the questions to Apple why do you not?
Honestly Apple might be better off leaving the US. Find a country not run by a bloody lunatic.
No wonder Trump wrote "Trade is bad" on his notes. He actually seems to think that.0 -
I think she left her roots behind a long time ago, and cares little. That ore you refer to was mined out long ago.YBarddCwsc said:
I think you are wrong. Julie’s attitudes, background and instincts are working class.viewcode said:
I was pointing out the ludicrousness of a careless multimillionairess sincerely believing herself to be working class by comparing her to @TSE, who often claims to be working-class for purposes of comedy. Both claims are ludicrous, but at least @TheScreamingEagles is self-aware when he does it.
Oh, for sure, she became famous and she lost her way.
But the passion and fury of Julie’s articles about politics and Thatcherism in the 80s are still heart-wrenching.
Maybe nowadays you have to dig deep for the ore, but Julie Is working-class.
She fought her way up from a shitty life on a shitty council estate, without the help or advantages of a fancy education and a degree.
And she can still craft a heartbreaker of a line like:
"Their vote is all they have and they used it.”0 -
Perhaps I've got the wrong end of the stick and that's what you're referring to, but I thought JB was very much for Thatcher and her politics in the 1980s?YBarddCwsc said:
But the passion and fury of Julie’s articles about politics and Thatcherism in the 80s are still heart-wrenching.
0 -
And then what happens when Apple outsources from China to say India where labour is even cheaper, perhaps China will get its own Trump? (or a Communist Party version)glw said:
Sp applying Trump "logic" the dozens if not hundreds of international companies supplying Apple are all supposed to open plants in the US, presumably employing MAGA hat wearing Americans?ralphmalph said:Intel can have factories in USA. Samsung have announced a semi conductor factory in the USA. Trump will keep asking the questions to Apple why do you not?
Honestly Apple might be better off leaving the US. Find a country not run by a bloody lunatic.
No wonder Trump wrote "Trade is bad" on his notes. He actually seems to think that.0 -
I do ?David_Evershed said:
You may be right but you will need to explain why rather than just make an assertion.Nigelb said:
Trump is truly a fool.CarlottaVance said:
0 -
I agree most of the problem has to do with too few Americans having reached a sufficient level of education and skill and technical training to get the types of reasonably well paid manufacturing jobs available now especially with automation of more routine roles but in political terms Trump goes for the gut of resentment and anger which is still there in the rustbelt Midwest at the jobs people feel entitled to which are no longer theirs as of rightglw said:
They wouldn't get a "reasonably well paid manufacturing job" in the sort of place that makes the bits that go into an iPhone. That's an issue to do with education, and skills, and has little to do with international trade.HYUFD said:It may make sense for Apple to use manufacturers in the Far East where labour is cheaper and they are closer to their suppliers but for someone in Pennsylvania and Michigan who is working at Walmart or unemployed and used to have a reasonably well paid manufacturing job Trump's message will resonate
Trump spews an endless stream of lies and BS to his base, and is in practice doing nothing to help them, and by loading costs onto all sorts of goods he will likely make most of them worse off. I've read several anecdotes about all sorts of US businesses that use steel being completely screwed by Trump's policies.0 -
There are plants making iPhones in India now.HYUFD said:
And then what happens when Apple outsources from China to say India where it is even cheaper, perhaps China will get its own Trump? (or a Communist Party version)glw said:
Sp applying Trump "logic" the dozens if not hundreds of international companies supplying Apple are all supposed to open plants in the US, presumably employing MAGA hat wearing Americans?ralphmalph said:Intel can have factories in USA. Samsung have announced a semi conductor factory in the USA. Trump will keep asking the questions to Apple why do you not?
Honestly Apple might be better off leaving the US. Find a country not run by a bloody lunatic.
No wonder Trump wrote "Trade is bad" on his notes. He actually seems to think that.0 -
My father grew up on a shitty council estate. He died some years ago, a wealthy man.viewcode said:
I think she left her roots behind a long time ago, and cares little. That ore you refer to was mined out long ago.YBarddCwsc said:
I think you are wrong. Julie’s attitudes, background and instincts are working class.viewcode said:
I was pointing out the ludicrousness of a careless multimillionairess sincerely believing herself to be working class by comparing her to @TSE, who often claims to be working-class for purposes of comedy. Both claims are ludicrous, but at least @TheScreamingEagles is self-aware when he does it.
Oh, for sure, she became famous and she lost her way.
But the passion and fury of Julie’s articles about politics and Thatcherism in the 80s are still heart-wrenching.
Maybe nowadays you have to dig deep for the ore, but Julie Is working-class.
She fought her way up from a shitty life on a shitty council estate, without the help or advantages of a fancy education and a degree.
And she can still craft a heartbreaker of a line like:
"Their vote is all they have and they used it.”
But, he remained working class in instinct, outlook, sympathies and politics -- for better or for worse -- till the day he died.
Mentally, emotionally, he never left the grim & hopeless Valleys council estate on which he grew up, though he died in a rich man’s house in the Home Counties.
Burchill is working class.
She is habitually, emotionally working class. It just doesn’t matter what is in her bank account,0 -
0
-
If you needed your irony meters calibrating
https://twitter.com/MrJohnNicolson/status/1038493323416272897
https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/10384956488264499200 -
That is a very neat tweet. Someone in the office is having a good day.TheScreamingEagles said:I love Theresa May.
https://twitter.com/theresa_may/status/10384877648058408970 -
Trump is playing politics. He wants something off China and the EU. With the EU he made a lot of noise and all the business experts said "he would be stupid to apply tariffs." I agree from an economic point of view, but Trump is using them politically. He wants something from the EU and he is applying his leverage and that is, you all have a trade surplus with us so I am going to attack it.glw said:
Sp applying Trump "logic" the dozens if not hundreds of international companies supplying Apple are all supposed to open plants in the US, presumably employing MAGA hat wearing Americans?ralphmalph said:Intel can have factories in USA. Samsung have announced a semi conductor factory in the USA. Trump will keep asking the questions to Apple why do you not?
Honestly Apple might be better off leaving the US. Find a country not run by a bloody lunatic.
No wonder Trump wrote "Trade is bad" on his notes. He actually seems to think that.
Then when he gets what he wants off the EU and it has been reported in the press, that Germany is very concerned about 25% tariffs on cars, he will tweet "Trump winning for America again."0 -
Julie was certainly passionately anti-Thatcherite in the essays in “Love it or Shove it” written in 1985.Theuniondivvie said:
Perhaps I've got the wrong end of the stick and that's what you're referring to, but I thought JB was very much for Thatcher and her politics in the 1980s?YBarddCwsc said:
But the passion and fury of Julie’s articles about politics and Thatcherism in the 80s are still heart-wrenching.
I haven’t followed her politics since, but some of the essays in that book are fine, and strongly critical of the greed and duplicity of the Thatcher years.
Julie was in favour of ‘the Falklands War’, on the grounds that it was a war against fascism.
Of course, cocaine and sex and money may well have warped Julie's vision since.
0 -
Labour didn’t lose to Thatcher in 79 and 83 because it was too left wing and divided, it lost then because it had been in power majority of the previous twenty years. If you can’t see the Tories are about to hand keys to no10 to Labour for a generation then you are blind.HYUFD said:
You will also see a number of centrist anti Brexit Labour voters move to this new party and if some anti Brexit Tory MPs move to it the Tories will be more united as wellLordOfReason said:
And history and fptp shows that’s the end of them. A suitable end for New Labour - flushing themselves down the pan of history.HYUFD said:If Corbyn goes and is succeeded by Williamson it is difficult to see how the Labour Party does not split as Williamson has been pushing the deselection of Labour moderates. A Williamson leadership would likely see Umunna and other moderates defect en masse to a new centrist party formed with the LDs and maybe a few pro EU Tories
Free from baggage and division of New Labour, You will, You WILL then have a United Labour Party as the party of first opposition and then government. So all the Tories enjoying this moment... the last laughs on you
Watch. I’ll now demonstrate what I mean by calling out New Labour in terms they can’t answer.
“Call off your dogs” is extremely insulting language to use on colleagues. About as diplomatic as Trump on a “being nice, being very very nice” day.
Why the word dogs Chuck? Why not the word vermin? Animals? Scum? All those words interchangeable in your schoolboy rant with it’s ridiculous “we have unquestionable divine right to be here” stink about it.
Fact. The people (note I say people, the word you should have used instead of dogs) who will be deselected in the coming weeks and months, actually have no unquestionable divine right to be Labour candidates to be honest with you. Two thirds of the PLP are born in blood New Labour, who bankrupted Britain and killed millions whilst destabilising Middle East with unnecessary wars, they do not represent the Labour Party membership or broader Labour movement one iota. Why are they even hanging around in politics, the country will never allow New Labour to form a government again, quite rightly.
Fact. What is actually wrong with Democratic reelection of candidates, so constituency members actually have candidate who represents their views?
Is there New Labour anywhere capable of addressing these facts with intelligent answer, without merely being as unconvincing undiplomatic and insulting as Chuck your spokesman has been today?0 -
Yes that's quite a good bit of self deprecation.oxfordsimon said:That is a very neat tweet. Someone in the office is having a good day.
0 -
Excellent! I’m glad you’ve made yourself available to answer the question. Now answer the question.Roger said:I've been a bit torn but having just seen Chukka Umuna and John McDonnell it's clear McDonnell is making a big mistake. Ummuna is not a Blair Clone but what most on the centre left hope for from their Labour MPs. Heavyweight throwbacks to the 70's like McDonnell is voter poison. Gone was the avuncular uncle and what we saw was very ugly indeed.
Q) What is actually wrong with Democratic reelection of candidates, so constituency members actually have candidate who represents their views?0 -
Could well be a good line for them to follow. It works wellglw said:
Yes that's quite a good bit of self deprecation.oxfordsimon said:That is a very neat tweet. Someone in the office is having a good day.
0 -
This is quite good on the economy and Brexit, though damning on British policy of the last 25 years. Supposed to be from right leaning Policy Exchange, but certainly reads left leaning.
Somewhere in here is the future. Not that I see anyone from Lab, Con, or LD with such a clear eyed perspective.
https://twitter.com/hanskundnani/status/1024388932186918914?s=210 -
MPs are there to represent their constituents - not the tiny number of party activists.LordOfReason said:
Excellent! I’m glad you’ve made yourself available to answer the question. Now answer the question.Roger said:I've been a bit torn but having just seen Chukka Umuna and John McDonnell it's clear McDonnell is making a big mistake. Ummuna is not a Blair Clone but what most on the centre left hope for from their Labour MPs. Heavyweight throwbacks to the 70's like McDonnell is voter poison. Gone was the avuncular uncle and what we saw was very ugly indeed.
Q) What is actually wrong with Democratic reelection of candidates, so constituency members actually have candidate who represents their views?0 -
Which just reinforces the pointglw said:
There are plants making iPhones in India now.HYUFD said:
And then what happens when Apple outsources from China to say India where it is even cheaper, perhaps China will get its own Trump? (or a Communist Party version)glw said:
Sp applying Trump "logic" the dozens if not hundreds of international companies supplying Apple are all supposed to open plants in the US, presumably employing MAGA hat wearing Americans?ralphmalph said:Intel can have factories in USA. Samsung have announced a semi conductor factory in the USA. Trump will keep asking the questions to Apple why do you not?
Honestly Apple might be better off leaving the US. Find a country not run by a bloody lunatic.
No wonder Trump wrote "Trade is bad" on his notes. He actually seems to think that.0 -
We will have to disagree. I do not concur that wealthy people still have a hold to a status they left behind decades before.YBarddCwsc said:
My father grew up on a shitty council estate. He died some years ago, a wealthy man.viewcode said:
I think she left her roots behind a long time ago, and cares little. That ore you refer to was mined out long ago.YBarddCwsc said:
I think you are wrong. Julie’s attitudes, background and instincts are working class.viewcode said:
I was pointing out the ludicrousness of a careless multimillionairess sincerely believing herself to be working class by comparing her to @TSE, who often claims to be working-class for purposes of comedy. Both claims are ludicrous, but at least @TheScreamingEagles is self-aware when he does it.
Oh, for sure, she became famous and she lost her way.
But the passion and fury of Julie’s articles about politics and Thatcherism in the 80s are still heart-wrenching.
Maybe nowadays you have to dig deep for the ore, but Julie Is working-class.
She fought her way up from a shitty life on a shitty council estate, without the help or advantages of a fancy education and a degree.
And she can still craft a heartbreaker of a line like:
"Their vote is all they have and they used it.”
But, he remained working class in instinct, outlook, sympathies and politics -- for better or for worse -- till the day he died.
Mentally, emotionally, he never left the grim & hopeless Valleys council estate on which he grew up, though he died in a rich man’s house in the Home Counties.
Burchill is working class.
She is habitually, emotionally working class. It just doesn’t matter what is in her bank account,0 -
This may explain your previous quotes. She's been passionately pro-Thatcher and pro-Thatcherism for decades now.YBarddCwsc said:Julie was certainly passionately anti-Thatcherite in the essays in “Love it or Shove it” written in 1985.
I haven’t followed her politics since,
0 -
An answer so lame, it’s almost LibDem policy!oxfordsimon said:
MPs are there to represent their constituents - not the tiny number of party activists.LordOfReason said:
Excellent! I’m glad you’ve made yourself available to answer the question. Now answer the question.Roger said:I've been a bit torn but having just seen Chukka Umuna and John McDonnell it's clear McDonnell is making a big mistake. Ummuna is not a Blair Clone but what most on the centre left hope for from their Labour MPs. Heavyweight throwbacks to the 70's like McDonnell is voter poison. Gone was the avuncular uncle and what we saw was very ugly indeed.
Q) What is actually wrong with Democratic reelection of candidates, so constituency members actually have candidate who represents their views? 0 -
I think Warren Harding is usually assigned that accolade.glw said:
He is quite simply the dumbest f*cker ever to hold the office of President*.CarlottaVance said:0 -
The disco number was quite entertaining, but despite its retro feel. I don’t think it owed anything to Theresa ....TheScreamingEagles said:I love Theresa May.
https://twitter.com/theresa_may/status/1038487764805840897
0 -
Labour lost in 1979 as we had high inflation, one of the lowest GDP per capitas in western Europe and frequent strikes. Labour lost in 1983 because it was too leftwing and a new centrist party took many of its votes.LordOfReason said:
Labour didn’t lose to Thatcher in 79 and 83 because it was too left wing and divided, it lost then because it had been in power majority of the previous twenty years. If you can’t see the Tories are about to hand keys to no10 to Labour for a generation then you are blind.HYUFD said:
You will also see a numbemove to it the Tories will be more united as wellLordOfReason said:
And history and fptp shows not represent the Labour Party membership or broader Labour movement one iota. Why are they even hanging around in politics, the country will never allow New Labour to form a government again, quite rightly.HYUFD said:If Corbyn goes and is succeeded by Williamson it is difficult to see how the Labour Party does not split as Williamson has been pushing the deselection of Labour moderates. A Williamson leadership would likely see Umunna and other moderates defect en masse to a new centrist party formed with the LDs and maybe a few pro EU Tories
Fact. What is actually wrong with Democlomatic and insulting as Chuck your spokesman has been today?
If Labour loses the next general election it will be because Corbynism led to a repeat of the latter, if Labour win the next general election we will likely see a repeat of the former. As long as Labour remains in the grip of the hard left and no centrist party is capable of challenging for power the Tories will always be in contention. See France where Hollande and the Socialists won on a leftwing platform in 2012 after being out of power in the legislature for a decade and the Elysee for 17 years and soon the centre right had huge leads in the polls and it was only the centrist Macron and his new En Marche party which ensured the centre right did not return to power in 2017
0 -
Have to agree with thatYBarddCwsc said:
My father grew up on a shitty council estate. He died some years ago, a wealthy man.viewcode said:
I think she left her roots behind a long time ago, and cares little. That ore you refer to was mined out long ago.YBarddCwsc said:
I think you are wrong. Julie’s attitudes, background and instincts are working class.viewcode said:
I was pointing out the ludicrousness of a careless multimillionairess sincerely believing herself to be working class by comparing her to @TSE, who often claims to be working-class for purposes of comedy. Both claims are ludicrous, but at least @TheScreamingEagles is self-aware when he does it.
Oh, for sure, she became famous and she lost her way.
But the passion and fury of Julie’s articles about politics and Thatcherism in the 80s are still heart-wrenching.
Maybe nowadays you have to dig deep for the ore, but Julie Is working-class.
And she can still craft a heartbreaker of a line like:
"Their vote is all they have and they used it.”
But, he remained working class in instinct, outlook, sympathies and politics -- for better or for worse -- till the day he died.
Mentally, emotionally, he never left the grim & hopeless Valleys council estate on which he grew up, though he died in a rich man’s house in the Home Counties.
Burchill is working class.
She is habitually, emotionally working class. It just doesn’t matter what is in her bank account,0 -
Is Boris about to pounce?
If so, he will lose. But perhaps he is simply laying down a marker for the future: “Brexit would have been amazing if I had been PM”.0 -
Julie Birchall has become one of those former lefties who has become a reliable cantankerous righty of the most reactionary kind.
She’s a washed up old drunk and should be ignored.0 -
I daresay part of the reason she was nice about Thatcher was to annoy luvvies; I tend to find permanent contrarians almost as untrustworthy as the greasy men for all seasons, their positions can be as shallow and ephemeral. I certainly remember Burchill being a fanatical (to the point of being sentimentally saccharine) worshipper of Stalin. How the antisemitic old brute fits in with her current Judeophillia I don't know.YBarddCwsc said:
Julie was certainly passionately anti-Thatcherite in the essays in “Love it or Shove it” written in 1985.Theuniondivvie said:
Perhaps I've got the wrong end of the stick and that's what you're referring to, but I thought JB was very much for Thatcher and her politics in the 1980s?YBarddCwsc said:
But the passion and fury of Julie’s articles about politics and Thatcherism in the 80s are still heart-wrenching.
I haven’t followed her politics since, but some of the essays in that book are fine, and strongly critical of the greed and duplicity of the Thatcher years.
Julie was in favour of ‘the Falklands War’, on the grounds that it was a war against fascism.
Of course, cocaine and sex and money may well have warped Julie's vision since.0 -
The bulk of the costs accrue in the plants making components, final assembly is a relatively low cost and simple process. Yes Apple could technically open US plants, but most of the work and costs that goes into an iPhone would still be done in plants overseas at Samsung, SK Hynix, TSMC, and many more.HYUFD said:
Which just reinforces the pointglw said:
There are plants making iPhones in India now.HYUFD said:
And then what happens when Apple outsources from China to say India where it is even cheaper, perhaps China will get its own Trump? (or a Communist Party version)glw said:
Sp applying Trump "logic" the dozens if not hundreds of international companies supplying Apple are all supposed to open plants in the US, presumably employing MAGA hat wearing Americans?ralphmalph said:Intel can have factories in USA. Samsung have announced a semi conductor factory in the USA. Trump will keep asking the questions to Apple why do you not?
Honestly Apple might be better off leaving the US. Find a country not run by a bloody lunatic.
No wonder Trump wrote "Trade is bad" on his notes. He actually seems to think that.
There are a huge number of companies involved in making an iPhone. Donald "Trade is bad" Trump has no more understanding of what Apple does than a small child.0 -
The next GE when it comes will be about affordable homes, NHS, education, and the all the pain Brexit has inflicted. I have already worked out the result of such an election, you are still to work it out.HYUFD said:
Labour lost in 1979 as we had high inflation, one of the lowest GDP per capitas in western Europe and frequent strikes. Labour lost in 1983 because it was too leftwing and a new centrist party took many of its votes.LordOfReason said:
Labour didn’t lose to Thatcher in 79 and 83 because it was too left wing and divided, it lost then because it had been in power majority of the previous twenty years. If you can’t see the Tories are about to hand keys to no10 to Labour for a generation then you are blind.HYUFD said:
You will also see a numbemove to it the Tories will be more united as wellLordOfReason said:
And history and fptp shows not represent the Labour Party membership or broader Labour movement one iota. Why are they even hanging around in politics, the country will never allow New Labour to form a government again, quite rightly.HYUFD said:If Corbyn goes and is succeeded by Williamson it is difficult to see how the Labour Party does not split as Williamson has been pushing the deselection of Labour moderates. A Williamson leadership would likely see Umunna and other moderates defect en masse to a new centrist party formed with the LDs and maybe a few pro EU Tories
Fact. What is actually wrong with Democlomatic and insulting as Chuck your spokesman has been today?
If Labour loses the next general election it will be because Corbynism led to a repeat of the latter, if Labour win the next general election we will likely see a repeat of the former. As long as Labour remains in the grip of the hard left and no centrist party is capable of challenging for power the Tories will always be in contention. See France where Hollande and the Socialists won on a leftwing platform in 2012 after being out of power in the legislature for a decade and the Elysee for 17 years and soon the centre right had huge leads in the polls and it was only the centrist Macron and his new En Marche party which ensured the centre right did not return to power in 20170 -
I know he was considered to be corrupt, but as dumb as Trump?AndyJS said:
I think Warren Harding is usually assigned that accolade.glw said:
He is quite simply the dumbest f*cker ever to hold the office of President*.CarlottaVance said:0 -
On topic: in my opinion, no. Chris is much liked by serious activists (not least animal welfare people like me) but I think most members will be looking for a reassuring left-winger to carry on after JC, and I wouldn't say he fits what they'll be looking for.
Wildly off-topic: a friend doing British Council work in Erbil (Kurdish Iraq) recollects a big novel written quite a while back on the area: "It was about a city, built on a tell or mound which itself was built on all the mud of houses built and disintegrated over centuries, and about Jews living there, and how their fate rose and fell with the city through sieges and good times over centuries of different invasions and rules and regimes." She'd love to read it again with her fresh experience of the area. Can anyone help?0 -
There is a beautiful essay in “Love it or Shove it” on her sorrow on 1983 General Election Night.viewcode said:
This may explain your previous quotes. She's been passionately pro-Thatcher and pro-Thatcherism for decades now.YBarddCwsc said:Julie was certainly passionately anti-Thatcherite in the essays in “Love it or Shove it” written in 1985.
I haven’t followed her politics since,
I think is easy for people who went to University to underestimate what Julie did.
It is so, so hard to come from a council estate without any real qualifications, without a degree, and even get a half-way decent job, let alone rise to the very top of the UK media world. Those jobs are normally reserved for the Oxbridge editor of Varsity or President of Footlights.
My cousins and their families are all still stuck on the council estate that my father left.
So, I still swoon for Julie, though probably the Julie of 1985.0 -
Wow. You can see four years ahead into the future?LordOfReason said:
The next GE when it comes will be about affordable homes, NHS, education, and the all the pain Brexit has inflicted. I have already worked out the result of such an election, you are still to work it out.HYUFD said:
Labour lost in 1979 as we had high inflation, one of the lowest GDP per capitas in western Europe and frequent strikes. Labour lost in 1983 because it was too leftwing and a new centrist party took many of its votes.LordOfReason said:
Labour didn’t lose to Thatcher in 79 and 83 because it was too left wing and divided, it lost then because it had been in power majority of the previous twenty years. If you can’t see the Tories are about to hand keys to no10 to Labour for a generation then you are blind.HYUFD said:
You will also see a numbemove to it the Tories will be more united as wellLordOfReason said:
And history and fptp shows not represent the Labour Party membership or broader Labour movement one iota. Why are they even hanging around in politics, the country will never allow New Labour to form a government again, quite rightly.HYUFD said:If Corbyn goes and is succeeded by Williamson it is difficult to see how the Labour Party does not split as Williamson has been pushing the deselection of Labour moderates. A Williamson leadership would likely see Umunna and other moderates defect en masse to a new centrist party formed with the LDs and maybe a few pro EU Tories
Fact. What is actually wrong with Democlomatic and insulting as Chuck your spokesman has been today?
If Labour loses the next general election it will be because Corbynism led to a repeat of the latter, if Labour win the next general election we will likely see a repeat of the former. As long as Labour remains in the grip of the hard left and no centrist party is capable of challenging for power the Tories will always be in contention. See France where Hollande and the Socialists won on a leftwing platform in 2012 after being out of power in the legislature for a decade and the Elysee for 17 years and soon the centre right had huge leads in the polls and it was only the centrist Macron and his new En Marche party which ensured the centre right did not return to power in 2017
Tell us, how have you managed to acquire this amazing skill?0 -
Well it isn't by the application of reason - his postings make that perfectly clearCasino_Royale said:
Wow. You can see four years ahead into the future?LordOfReason said:
The next GE when it comes will be about affordable homes, NHS, education, and the all the pain Brexit has inflicted. I have already worked out the result of such an election, you are still to work it out.HYUFD said:
Labour lost in 1979 as we had high inflation, one of the lowest GDP per capitas in western Europe and frequent strikes. Labour lost in 1983 because it was too leftwing and a new centrist party took many of its votes.LordOfReason said:
Labour didn’t lose to Thatcher in 79 and 83 because it was too left wing and divided, it lost then because it had been in power majority of the previous twenty years. If you can’t see the Tories are about to hand keys to no10 to Labour for a generation then you are blind.HYUFD said:
You will also see a numbemove to it the Tories will be more united as wellLordOfReason said:
And history and fptp shows not represent the Labour Party membership or broader Labour movement one iota. Why are they even hanging around in politics, the country will never allow New Labour to form a government again, quite rightly.HYUFD said:If Corbyn goes and is succeeded by Williamson it is difficult to see how the Labour Party does not split as Williamson has been pushing the deselection of Labour moderates. A Williamson leadership would likely see Umunna and other moderates defect en masse to a new centrist party formed with the LDs and maybe a few pro EU Tories
Fact. What is actually wrong with Democlomatic and insulting as Chuck your spokesman has been today?
If Labour loses the next general election it will be because Corbynism led to a repeat of the latter, if Labour win the next general election we will likely see a repeat of the former. As long as Labour remains in the grip of the hard left and no centrist party is capable of challenging for power the Tories will always be in contention. See France where Hollande and the Socialists won on a leftwing platform in 2012 after being out of power in the legislature for a decade and the Elysee for 17 years and soon the centre right had huge leads in the polls and it was only the centrist Macron and his new En Marche party which ensured the centre right did not return to power in 2017
Tell us, how have you managed to acquire this amazing skill?0 -
The Source by James A. Michener?NickPalmer said:Wildly off-topic: a friend doing British Council work in Erbil (Kurdish Iraq) recollects a big novel written quite a while back on the area: "It was about a city, built on a tell or mound which itself was built on all the mud of houses built and disintegrated over centuries, and about Jews living there, and how their fate rose and fell with the city through sieges and good times over centuries of different invasions and rules and regimes." She'd love to read it again with her fresh experience of the area. Can anyone help?
0 -
You don’t build apple plants...HYUFD said:
Though his policy of demanding plants and jobs be brought back to the USA is popular with his baseglw said:
He is quite simply the dumbest f*cker ever to hold the office of President*.CarlottaVance said:0 -
With the greatest respect no one can possibly have any idea about who wins the next election. We do not know from day to day what is happening and certainly Brexit will play out but possibly to an unrecognisable labour party.LordOfReason said:
The next GE when it comes will be about affordable homes, NHS, education, and the all the pain Brexit has inflicted. I have already worked out the result of such an election, you are still to work it out.HYUFD said:
Labour lost in 1979 as we had high inflation, one of the lowest GDP per capitas in western Europe and frequent strikes. Labour lost in 1983 because it was too leftwing and a new centrist party took many of its votes.LordOfReason said:
Labour didn’t lose to Thatcher in 79 and 83 because it was too left wing and divided, it lost then because it had been in power majority of the previous twenty years. If you can’t see the Tories are about to hand keys to no10 to Labour for a generation then you are blind.HYUFD said:
You will also see a numbemove to it the Tories will be more united as wellLordOfReason said:
And history and fptp shows not represent the Labour Party membership or broader Labour movement one iota. Why are they even hanging around in politics, the country will never allow New Labour to form a government again, quite rightly.HYUFD said:If Corbyn goes and is succeeded by Williamson it is difficult to see how the Labour Party does not split as Williamson has been pushing the deselection of Labour moderates. A Williamson leadership would likely see Umunna and other moderates defect en masse to a new centrist party formed with the LDs and maybe a few pro EU Tories
Fact. What is actually wrong with Democlomatic and insulting as Chuck your spokesman has been today?
If Labour loses the next general election it will be because Corbynism led to a repeat of the latter, if Labour win the next general election we will likely see a repeat of the former. As long as Labour remains in the grip of the hard left and no centrist party is capable of challenging for power the Tories will always be in contention. See France where Hollande and the Socialists won on a leftwing platform in 2012 after being out of power in the legislature for a decade and the Elysee for 17 years and soon the centre right had huge leads in the polls and it was only the centrist Macron and his new En Marche party which ensured the centre right did not return to power in 2017
Chuka's antics today were pathetic but he would not have done this without a reasonable amount of support from his fellow mps. Labour has torn themselves apart throughout the summer when they had an open goal to attack the government.0 -
Thats a bit unkindGardenwalker said:Julie Birchall has become one of those former lefties who has become a reliable cantankerous righty of the most reactionary kind.
She’s a washed up old drunk and should be ignored.0 -
All of which is true. But the only thing Trump cares about is that companies like Apple create American jobs in manufacturing (and construction). Preferably in the States where he just squeaked home at the last election.glw said:
The bulk of the costs accrue in the plants making components, final assembly is a relatively low cost and simple process. Yes Apple could technically open US plants, but most of the work and costs that goes into an iPhone would still be done in plants overseas at Samsung, SK Hynix, TSMC, and many more.HYUFD said:
Which just reinforces the pointglw said:
There are plants making iPhones in India now.HYUFD said:
And then what happens when Apple outsources from China to say India where it is even cheaper, perhaps China will get its own Trump? (or a Communist Party version)glw said:
Sp applying Trump "logic" the dozens if not hundreds of international companies supplying Apple are all supposed to open plants in the US, presumably employing MAGA hat wearing Americans?ralphmalph said:Intel can have factories in USA. Samsung have announced a semi conductor factory in the USA. Trump will keep asking the questions to Apple why do you not?
Honestly Apple might be better off leaving the US. Find a country not run by a bloody lunatic.
No wonder Trump wrote "Trade is bad" on his notes. He actually seems to think that.
There are a huge number of companies involved in making an iPhone. Donald "Trade is bad" Trump has no more understanding of what Apple does than a small child.0 -
Because those who turn up are not representative of activists let alone members or votersLordOfReason said:
Excellent! I’m glad you’ve made yourself available to answer the question. Now answer the question.Roger said:I've been a bit torn but having just seen Chukka Umuna and John McDonnell it's clear McDonnell is making a big mistake. Ummuna is not a Blair Clone but what most on the centre left hope for from their Labour MPs. Heavyweight throwbacks to the 70's like McDonnell is voter poison. Gone was the avuncular uncle and what we saw was very ugly indeed.
Q) What is actually wrong with Democratic reelection of candidates, so constituency members actually have candidate who represents their views?0 -
We all change over time. We are not now what we were, and not what we will be. My father used to say "Every 80yr old was 18 once". People change, and eventually they change into dead people. A rather sad truth, I fear.YBarddCwsc said:
There is a beautiful essay in “Love it or Shove it” on her sorrow on 1983 General Election Night.viewcode said:
This may explain your previous quotes. She's been passionately pro-Thatcher and pro-Thatcherism for decades now.YBarddCwsc said:Julie was certainly passionately anti-Thatcherite in the essays in “Love it or Shove it” written in 1985.
I haven’t followed her politics since,
I think is easy for people who went to University to underestimate what Julie did.
It is so, so hard to come from a council estate without any real qualifications, without a degree, and even get a half-way decent job, let alone rise to the very top of the UK media world. Those jobs are normally reserved for the Oxbridge editor of Varsity or President of Footlights.
My cousins and their families are all still stuck on the council estate that my father left.
So, I still swoon for Julie, though probably the Julie of 1985.0 -
Because the democracy is limited to party members.LordOfReason said:
Excellent! I’m glad you’ve made yourself available to answer the question. Now answer the question.Roger said:I've been a bit torn but having just seen Chukka Umuna and John McDonnell it's clear McDonnell is making a big mistake. Ummuna is not a Blair Clone but what most on the centre left hope for from their Labour MPs. Heavyweight throwbacks to the 70's like McDonnell is voter poison. Gone was the avuncular uncle and what we saw was very ugly indeed.
Q) What is actually wrong with Democratic reelection of candidates, so constituency members actually have candidate who represents their views?0 -
And the problem with that is?MikeSmithson said:
Because the democracy is limited to party members.LordOfReason said:
Excellent! I’m glad you’ve made yourself available to answer the question. Now answer the question.Roger said:I've been a bit torn but having just seen Chukka Umuna and John McDonnell it's clear McDonnell is making a big mistake. Ummuna is not a Blair Clone but what most on the centre left hope for from their Labour MPs. Heavyweight throwbacks to the 70's like McDonnell is voter poison. Gone was the avuncular uncle and what we saw was very ugly indeed.
Q) What is actually wrong with Democratic reelection of candidates, so constituency members actually have candidate who represents their views?
The number one reason to have political parties is to educate the voters on issues. You are crazy to even consider circumventing that.0 -
Greens almost get second place in a German poll for the first time:
"Europe Elects
@EuropeElects
2h2 hours ago
Germany, Forsa poll:
CDU/CSU-EPP: 31% (+1)
SPD-S&D: 16% (-1)
GRÜNE-G/EFA: 15% (-1)
AfD-EFDD: 14% (-2)
LINKE-LEFT: 10% (+2)
FDP-ALDE: 9% (+1)"0 -
Ah, perhaps that's it. Thanks - I'll pass it on!williamglenn said:
The Source by James A. Michener?NickPalmer said:Wildly off-topic: a friend doing British Council work in Erbil (Kurdish Iraq) recollects a big novel written quite a while back on the area: "It was about a city, built on a tell or mound which itself was built on all the mud of houses built and disintegrated over centuries, and about Jews living there, and how their fate rose and fell with the city through sieges and good times over centuries of different invasions and rules and regimes." She'd love to read it again with her fresh experience of the area. Can anyone help?
0 -
Apple has plants and factories which supply it, just mainly in China not the USACharles said:
You don’t build apple plants...HYUFD said:
Though his policy of demanding plants and jobs be brought back to the USA is popular with his baseglw said:
He is quite simply the dumbest f*cker ever to hold the office of President*.CarlottaVance said:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2016-04-24/inside-one-of-the-world-s-most-secretive-iphone-factories0 -
It’s actually really easy for me. Just read and understand history.oxfordsimon said:
Well it isn't by the application of reason - his postings make that perfectly clearCasino_Royale said:
Wow. You can see four years ahead into the future?LordOfReason said:HYUFD said:
Labour lost in 1979 as we had high inflation, one of the lowest GDP per capitas in western Europe and frequent strikes. Labour lost in 1983 because it was too leftwing and a new centrist party took many of its votes.LordOfReason said:
Labour didn’t lose to Thatcher in 79 and 83 because it was too left wing and divided, it lost then because it had been in power majority of the previous twenty years. If you can’t see the Tories are about to hand keys to no10 to Labour for a generation then you are blind.HYUFD said:
You will also see a numbemove to it the Tories will be more united as wellLordOfReason said:HYUFD said:If Corbyn goes and is succeeded by Williamson it is difficult to see how the Labour Party does not split as Williamson has been pushing the deselection of Labour moderates. A Williamson leadership would likely see Umunna and other moderates defect en masse to a new centrist party formed with the LDs and maybe a few pro EU Tories
If Labour loses the next general election it will be because Corbynism led to a repeat of the latter, if Labour win the next general election we will likely see a repeat of the former. As long as Labour remains in the grip of the hard left and no centrist party is capable of challenging for power the Tories will always be in contention. See France where Hollande and the Socialists won on a leftwing platform in 2012 after being out of power in the legislature for a decade and the Elysee for 17 years and soon the centre right had huge leads in the polls and it was only the centrist Macron and his new En Marche party which ensured the centre right did not return to power in 2017
Tell us, how have you managed to acquire this amazing skill?
Let’s start with 83. When it came to 83 election result, voters, polling and byelections had shown alliance had taken from Tories, voted Tory, yet alliance boosted in vote share, though obviously not seats, in votes from Labour, but this outcome was because of exactly the reason I just gave you, after just 4 years of fresh conservative government too soon to dump it and go back to what had dominated previous twenty years.
Let me put it another way so hopefully the penny drop for you.
Labour lost in 79 for the same reason Churchill lost in 45.
45, 79, 97 and the next one are part of a set.0 -
I just do the UK rail networkSandyRentool said:
Most men having a midlife crisis buy a motorbike or a sports car, this buffoon thinks he should run the country.rottenborough said:https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/1038461703451824128
Actually it started weeks ago. 0 -
Corbyn campaigned on all those issues at the last general election and lost plus he backed Brexit and in any case we are heading for a BINO Brexit transition period under May anyway.LordOfReason said:
The next GE when it comes will be about affordable homes, NHS, education, and the all the pain Brexit has inflicted. I have already worked out the result of such an election, you are still to work it out.HYUFD said:
Labour lost in 1979 as we had high inflation, one of the lowest GDP per capitas in western Europe and frequent strikes. Labour lost in 1983 because it was too leftwing and a new centrist party took many of its votes.LordOfReason said:
Labour didn’t lose to Thatcher in 79 and 83 because it was too left wing and divided, it lost then because it had been in power majority of the previous twenty years. If you can’t see the Tories are about to hand keys to no10 to Labour for a generation then you are blind.HYUFD said:
You will also see a numbemove to it the Tories will be more united as wellLordOfReason said:
And history and fptp shows not represent the Labour Party membership or broader Labour movement one iota. Why are they even hanging around in politics, the country will never allow New Labour to form a government again, quite rightly.HYUFD said:If Corbyn goes and is succeeded by Williamson it is difficult to see how the Labour Party does not split as Williamson has been pushing the deselection of Labour moderates. A Williamson leadership would likely see Umunna and other moderates defect en masse to a new centrist party formed with the LDs and maybe a few pro EU Tories
Fact. What is actually wrong with Democlomatic and insulting as Chuck your spokesman has been today?
If Labour loses the next general election it will be because Corbynism led to a repeat of the latter, if Labour win the next general election we will likely see a repeat of the former. As long as Labour remains in the grip of the hard left and no centrist party is capable of challenging for power the Tories will always be in contention. See France where Hollande and the Socialists won on a leftwing platform in 2012 after being out of power in the legislature for a decade and the Elysee for 17 years and soon the centre right had huge leads in the polls and it was only the centrist Macron and his new En Marche party which ensured the centre right did not return to power in 2017
The Tories have also promised more money for the NHS and are pushing councils to build more affordable homes since then too
0 -
When Labour left office in 1979 inflation was significantly lower than the level inherited from the Tories in March 1974. Throughout 1978 RPI inflation had hovered around 8% - though it had ticked up to 10% in May 1979 .HYUFD said:
Labour lost in 1979 as we had high inflation, one of the lowest GDP per capitas in western Europe and frequent strikes. Labour lost in 1983 because it was too leftwing and a new centrist party took many of its votes.LordOfReason said:
Labour didn’t lose to Thatcher in 79 and 83 because it was too left wing and divided, it lost then because it had been in power majority of the previous twenty years. If you can’t see the Tories are about to hand keys to no10 to Labour for a generation then you are blind.HYUFD said:
You will also see a numbemove to it the Tories will be more united as wellLordOfReason said:
And history and fptp shows not represent the Labour Party membership or broader Labour movement one iota. Why are they even hanging around in politics, the country will never allow New Labour to form a government again, quite rightly.HYUFD said:If Corbyn goes and is succeeded by Williamson it is difficult to see how the Labour Party does not split as Williamson has been pushing the deselection of Labour moderates. A Williamson leadership would likely see Umunna and other moderates defect en masse to a new centrist party formed with the LDs and maybe a few pro EU Tories
Fact. What is actually wrong with Democlomatic and insulting as Chuck your spokesman has been today?
If Labour loses the next general election it will be because Corbynism led to a repeat of the latter, if Labour win the next general election we will likely see a repeat of the former. As long as Labour remains in the grip of the hard left and no centrist party is capable of challenging for power the Tories will always be in contention. See France where Hollande and the Socialists won on a leftwing platform in 2012 after being out of power in the legislature for a decade and the Elysee for 17 years and soon the centre right had huge leads in the polls and it was only the centrist Macron and his new En Marche party which ensured the centre right did not return to power in 20170 -
Because that's what we all want... MPs who are representative of the tiny minority of the public who not only belong to a party but are also have sufficient time on their hands to go mob handed to a church hall in Dunstable on a Wednesday evening.LordOfReason said:
Excellent! I’m glad you’ve made yourself available to answer the question. Now answer the question.Roger said:I've been a bit torn but having just seen Chukka Umuna and John McDonnell it's clear McDonnell is making a big mistake. Ummuna is not a Blair Clone but what most on the centre left hope for from their Labour MPs. Heavyweight throwbacks to the 70's like McDonnell is voter poison. Gone was the avuncular uncle and what we saw was very ugly indeed.
Q) What is actually wrong with Democratic reelection of candidates, so constituency members actually have candidate who represents their views?
Often, the role of MPs (and councillors) is to say to party members, "hold on, I'm elected to represent the whole area, including non-members and including non-supporters, so I'll listen to you but not bend to your every whim".0 -
'Yes Apple could technically open US plants', point made and until they do Trump will keep hitting themglw said:
The bulk of the costs accrue in the plants making components, final assembly is a relatively low cost and simple process. Yes Apple could technically open US plants, but most of the work and costs that goes into an iPhone would still be done in plants overseas at Samsung, SK Hynix, TSMC, and many more.HYUFD said:
Which just reinforces the pointglw said:
There are plants making iPhones in India now.HYUFD said:
And then what happens when Apple outsources from China to say India where it is even cheaper, perhaps China will get its own Trump? (or a Communist Party version)glw said:
Sp applying Trump "logic" the dozens if not hundreds of international companies supplying Apple are all supposed to open plants in the US, presumably employing MAGA hat wearing Americans?ralphmalph said:Intel can have factories in USA. Samsung have announced a semi conductor factory in the USA. Trump will keep asking the questions to Apple why do you not?
Honestly Apple might be better off leaving the US. Find a country not run by a bloody lunatic.
No wonder Trump wrote "Trade is bad" on his notes. He actually seems to think that.
There are a huge number of companies involved in making an iPhone. Donald "Trade is bad" Trump has no more understanding of what Apple does than a small child.0 -
+1SirNorfolkPassmore said:
Because that's what we all want... MPs who are representative of the tiny minority of the public who not only belong to a party but are also have sufficient time on their hands to go mob handed to a church hall in Dunstable on a Wednesday evening.LordOfReason said:
Excellent! I’m glad you’ve made yourself available to answer the question. Now answer the question.Roger said:I've been a bit torn but having just seen Chukka Umuna and John McDonnell it's clear McDonnell is making a big mistake. Ummuna is not a Blair Clone but what most on the centre left hope for from their Labour MPs. Heavyweight throwbacks to the 70's like McDonnell is voter poison. Gone was the avuncular uncle and what we saw was very ugly indeed.
Q) What is actually wrong with Democratic reelection of candidates, so constituency members actually have candidate who represents their views?
Often, the role of MPs (and councillors) is to say to party members, "hold on, I'm elected to represent the whole area, including non-members and including non-supporters, so I'll listen to you but not bend to your every whim".0 -
After 1945 the Tories were back in power after 6 years under Churchill again who beat the leftwing Attlee, after 1979 Labour were out of power for 18 years and only got back with a centrist leader in 1997, after 1997 the Tories were out of power for 13 years and only got back in when Labour replaced their centrist PM with the more leftwing BrownLordOfReason said:
It’s actually really easy for me. Just read and understand history.oxfordsimon said:
Well it isn't by the application of reason - his postings make that perfectly clearCasino_Royale said:
Wow. You can see four years ahead into the future?LordOfReason said:HYUFD said:
Labour lost in 1979 as we had high inflation, one of the lowest GDP per capitas in western Europe and frequent strikes. Labour lost in 1983 because it was too leftwing and a new centrist party took many of its votes.LordOfReason said:
Labour didn’t lose to Thatcher in 79 and 83 because it was too left wing and divided, it lost then because it had been in power majority of the previous twenty years. If you can’t see the Tories are about to hand keys to no10 to Labour for a generation then you are blind.HYUFD said:
You will also see a numbemove to it the Tories will be more united as wellLordOfReason said:HYUFD said:If Corbyn goes and is succeeded by Williamson it is difficult to see how the Labour Party does not split as Williamson has been pushing the deselection of Labour moderates. A Williamson leadership would likely see Umunna and other moderates defect en masse to a new centrist party formed with the LDs and maybe a few pro EU Tories
If Labour loses the next general election it will be because Corbynism led to a repeat of the latter, if Labour win the ne
Tell us, how have you managed to acquire this amazing skill?
Let’s start with 83. When it came to 83 election result, voters, polling and byelections had shown alliance had taken from Tories, voted Tory, yet alliance boosted in vote share, though obviously not seats, in votes from Labour, but this outcome was because of exactly the reason I just gave you, after just 4 years of fresh conservative government too soon to dump it and go back to what had dominated previous twenty years.
Let me put it another way so hopefully the penny drop for you.
Labour lost in 79 for the same reason Churchill lost in 45.
45, 79, 97 and the next one are part of a set.0 -
Thatcher and Major reversed both the economic failures of Heathism as well as Labour that is truejustin124 said:
When Labour left office in 1979 inflation was significantly lower than the level inherited from the Tories in March 1974. Throughout 1978 RPI inflation had hovered around 8% - though it had ticked up to 10% in May 1979 .HYUFD said:
Labour lost in 1979 as we had high inflation, one of the lowest GDP per capitas in western Europe and frequent strikes. Labour lost in 1983 because it was too leftwing and a new centrist party took many of its votes.LordOfReason said:
Labour didn’t lose to Thatcher in 79 and 83 because it was too left wing and divided, it lost then because it had been in power majority of the previous twenty years. If you can’t see the Tories are about to hand keys to no10 to Labour for a generation then you are blind.HYUFD said:
You will also see a numbemove to it the Tories will be more united as wellLordOfReason said:
And history and fptp shows not represent the Labour Party membership or broader Labour movement one iota. Why are they even hanging around in politics, the country will never allow New Labour to form a government again, quite rightly.HYUFD said:If Corbyn goes and is succeeded by Williamson it is difficult to see how the Labour Party does not split as Williamson has been pushing the deselection of Labour moderates. A Williamson leadership would likely see Umunna and other moderates defect en masse to a new centrist party formed with the LDs and maybe a few pro EU Tories
Fact. What is actually wrong with Democlomatic and insulting as Chuck your spokesman has been today?
If Labour loses the next general election it will be because Corbynism led to a repeat of the latter, if Labour win the next general election we will likely see a repeat of the former. As long as Labour remains in the grip of the hard left and no centrist party is capable of challenging for power the Tories will always be in contention. See France where Hollande and the Socialists won on a leftwing platform in 2012 after being out of power in the legislature for a decade and the Elysee for 17 years and soon the centre right had huge leads in the polls and it was only the centrist Macron and his new En Marche party which ensured the centre right did not return to power in 2017
0 -
Churchill did not win the popular vote in 1951 and only returned to office courtesy of the Ulster Unionists who then took the Tory Whip.HYUFD said:
After 1945 the Tories were back in power after 6 years under Churchill again who beat the leftwing Attlee, after 1979 Labour were out of power for 18 years and only got back with a centrist leader in 1997, after 1997 the Tories were out of power for 13 years and only got back in when Labour replaced their centrist PM with the more leftwing BrownLordOfReason said:
It’s actually really easy for me. Just read and understand history.oxfordsimon said:
Well it isn't by the application of reason - his postings make that perfectly clearCasino_Royale said:
Wow. You can see four years ahead into the future?LordOfReason said:HYUFD said:
Labour lost in 1979 as we had high inflation, one of the lowest GDP per capitas in western Europe and frequent strikes. Labour lost in 1983 because it was too leftwing and a new centrist party took many of its votes.LordOfReason said:
Labour didn’t lose to Thatcher in 79 and 83 because it was too left wing and divided, it lost then because it had been in power majority of the previous twenty years. If you can’t see the Tories are about to hand keys to no10 to Labour for a generation then you are blind.HYUFD said:
You will also see a numbemove to it the Tories will be more united as wellLordOfReason said:HYUFD said:If Corbyn goes and is succeeded by Williamson it is difficult to see how the Labour Party does not split as Williamson has been pushing the deselection of Labour moderates. A Williamson leadership would likely see Umunna and other moderates defect en masse to a new centrist party formed with the LDs and maybe a few pro EU Tories
If Labour loses the next general election it will be because Corbynism led to a repeat of the latter, if Labour win the ne
Tell us, how have you managed to acquire this amazing skill?
Let’s start with 83. When it came to 83 election result, voters, polling and byelections had shown alliance had taken from Tories, voted Tory, yet alliance boosted in vote share, though obviously not seats, in votes from Labour, but this outcome was because of exactly the reason I just gave you, after just 4 years of fresh conservative government too soon to dump it and go back to what had dominated previous twenty years.
Let me put it another way so hopefully the penny drop for you.
Labour lost in 79 for the same reason Churchill lost in 45.
45, 79, 97 and the next one are part of a set.0 -
It wouldn't do what Trump thinks it would do, unless most of Apple's major suppliers shift production to the US as well. Trump doesn't grasp quite why Apple manufactures iPhones overseas. Trump is reducing the complexities of a hugely complicated manufacturing pipeline to a soundbite.HYUFD said:'Yes Apple could technically open US plants', point made and until they do Trump will keep hitting them
0 -
I've been an active member of a party for 25 years, and I'd defend our campaigns, leaflet contents and so on. But I'm not going to pretend for one second that they are educative.LordOfReason said:
And the problem with that is?MikeSmithson said:
Because the democracy is limited to party members.LordOfReason said:
Excellent! I’m glad you’ve made yourself available to answer the question. Now answer the question.Roger said:I've been a bit torn but having just seen Chukka Umuna and John McDonnell it's clear McDonnell is making a big mistake. Ummuna is not a Blair Clone but what most on the centre left hope for from their Labour MPs. Heavyweight throwbacks to the 70's like McDonnell is voter poison. Gone was the avuncular uncle and what we saw was very ugly indeed.
Q) What is actually wrong with Democratic reelection of candidates, so constituency members actually have candidate who represents their views?
The number one reason to have political parties is to educate the voters on issues. You are crazy to even consider circumventing that.
You might as well say washing powder ads are designed to inform rather than sell - they do have to be technically accurate, but they aren't meant to be a public information campaign.0 -
That is so arrogantLordOfReason said:
And the problem with that is?MikeSmithson said:
Because the democracy is limited to party members.LordOfReason said:
Excellent! I’m glad you’ve made yourself available to answer the question. Now answer the question.Roger said:I've been a bit torn but having just seen Chukka Umuna and John McDonnell it's clear McDonnell is making a big mistake. Ummuna is not a Blair Clone but what most on the centre left hope for from their Labour MPs. Heavyweight throwbacks to the 70's like McDonnell is voter poison. Gone was the avuncular uncle and what we saw was very ugly indeed.
Q) What is actually wrong with Democratic reelection of candidates, so constituency members actually have candidate who represents their views?
The number one reason to have political parties is to educate the voters on issues. You are crazy to even consider circumventing that.0 -
The economy was in better shape in May 1979 when compared with March 1974. Likewise when Labour left office in June 1970 it bequeathed a Budget Surplus and a Balance of Payments Surplus to the incoming Tory Government. No Tory Government has managed to do either - and Heath frittered away his inheritance.HYUFD said:
Thatcher and Major reversed both the economic failures of Heathism as well as Labour that is truejustin124 said:
When Labour left office in 1979 inflation was significantly lower than the level inherited from the Tories in March 1974. Throughout 1978 RPI inflation had hovered around 8% - though it had ticked up to 10% in May 1979 .HYUFD said:
Labour lost in 1979 as we had high inflation, one of the lowest GDP per capitas in western Europe and frequent strikes. Labour lost in 1983 because it was too leftwing and a new centrist party took many of its votes.LordOfReason said:
Labour didn’t lose to Thatcher in 79 and 83 because it was too left wing and divided, it lost then because it had been in power majority of the previous twenty years. If you can’t see the Tories are about to hand keys to no10 to Labour for a generation then you are blind.HYUFD said:
You will also see a numbemove to it the Tories will be more united as wellLordOfReason said:
And history and fptp shows not represent the Labour Party membership or broader Labour movement one iota. Why are they even hanging around in politics, the country will never allow New Labour to form a government again, quite rightly.HYUFD said:If Corbyn goes and is succeeded by Williamson it is difficult to see how the Labour Party does not split as Williamson has been pushing the deselection of Labour moderates. A Williamson leadership would likely see Umunna and other moderates defect en masse to a new centrist party formed with the LDs and maybe a few pro EU Tories
Fact. What is actually wrong with Democlomatic and insulting as Chuck your spokesman has been today?
If Labour loses the next general election it will be because Corbynism led to a repeat of the latter, if Labour win the next general election we will likely see a repeat of the former. As long as Labour remains in the grip of the hard left and no centrist party is capable of challenging for power the Tories will always be in contention. See France where Hollande and the Socialists won on a leftwing platform in 2012 after being out of power in the legislature for a decade and the Elysee for 17 years and soon the centre right had huge leads in the polls and it was only the centrist Macron and his new En Marche party which ensured the centre right did not return to power in 20170 -
Not now he has an MI5 file......JohnRussell said:
I bet he doesntrottenborough said:This is some thread.
https://twitter.com/J_amesp/status/10370639870688419840 -
I agree. I'd go further: I think that a challenge by Boris would increase May's margin of victory, compared to 48 letters going in without a "plot".HYUFD said:
May will win any no confidence vote at the moment, the question will only be her margin of victoryrottenborough said:"Word has reached me from the Commons' tea room that Boris Johnson is about to go public with a full-frontal leadership bid to topple Theresa May and install himself in Downing Street.
Johnson, enabled by Tory election mastermind and new sidekick Lynton Crosby, has mapped out a timeline to power which will torpedo the PM's Chequers plan for Brexit.
Having scanned the Trump playbook for inspiration (see letterbox attack on Muslim women), Johnson cleared the decks on his personal life after his marriage break-up story appeared in The Sun on Friday.
I am told that Johnson's MP backers are now compiling the requisite 48 names required to send to the backbench 1922 Committee to trigger a no confidence vote in Mrs May. One source even says this will happen on Monday.
Look out for Johnson's Monday column in the Telegraph (invoice £5,000 a time) in which many of his colleagues expect him to fire the gun."0 -
Did you watch my video on the US-China Trade deficit?glw said:
The bulk of the costs accrue in the plants making components, final assembly is a relatively low cost and simple process. Yes Apple could technically open US plants, but most of the work and costs that goes into an iPhone would still be done in plants overseas at Samsung, SK Hynix, TSMC, and many more.HYUFD said:
Which just reinforces the pointglw said:
There are plants making iPhones in India now.HYUFD said:
And then what happens when Apple outsources from China to say India where it is even cheaper, perhaps China will get its own Trump? (or a Communist Party version)glw said:
Sp applying Trump "logic" the dozens if not hundreds of international companies supplying Apple are all supposed to open plants in the US, presumably employing MAGA hat wearing Americans?ralphmalph said:Intel can have factories in USA. Samsung have announced a semi conductor factory in the USA. Trump will keep asking the questions to Apple why do you not?
Honestly Apple might be better off leaving the US. Find a country not run by a bloody lunatic.
No wonder Trump wrote "Trade is bad" on his notes. He actually seems to think that.
There are a huge number of companies involved in making an iPhone. Donald "Trade is bad" Trump has no more understanding of what Apple does than a small child.0 -
There were only 9 UUP seats, so the Tories on 312 would still have beaten Labour on seats. And don't forget the National Liberals on 17.justin124 said:
Churchill did not win the popular vote in 1951 and only returned to office courtesy of the Ulster Unionists who then took the Tory Whip.HYUFD said:
After 1945 the Tories were back in power after 6 years under Churchill again who beat the leftwing Attlee, after 1979 Labour were out of power for 18 years and only got back with a centrist leader in 1997, after 1997 the Tories were out of power for 13 years and only got back in when Labour replaced their centrist PM with the more leftwing BrownLordOfReason said:
It’s actually really easy for me. Just read and understand history.oxfordsimon said:
Well it isn't by the application of reason - his postings make that perfectly clearCasino_Royale said:
Wow. You can see four years ahead into the future?LordOfReason said:HYUFD said:
Labour lost in 1979 as we had high inflation, one of the lowest GDP per capitas in western Europe and frequent strikes. Labour lost in 1983 because it was too leftwing and a new centrist party took many of its votes.LordOfReason said:
Labour didn’t lose to Thatcher in 79 and 83 because it was too left wing and divided, it lost then because it had been in power majority of the previous twenty years. If you can’t see the Tories are about to hand keys to no10 to Labour for a generation then you are blind.HYUFD said:
You will also see a numbemove to it the Tories will be more united as wellLordOfReason said:HYUFD said:If Corbyn goes and is succeeded by Williamson it is difficult to see how the Labour Party does not split as Williamson has been pushing the deselection of Labour moderates. A Williamson leadership would likely see Umunna and other moderates defect en masse to a new centrist party formed with the LDs and maybe a few pro EU Tories
If Labour loses the next general election it will be because Corbynism led to a repeat of the latter, if Labour win the ne
Tell us, how have you managed to acquire this amazing skill?
Let’s start with 83. When it came to 83 election result, voters, polling and byelections had shown alliance had taken from Tories, votrvative government too soon to dump it and go back to what had dominated previous twenty years.
Let me put it another way so hopefully the penny drop for you.
Labour lost in 79 for the same reason Churchill lost in 45.
45, 79, 97 and the next one are part of a set.0 -
So what, Wilson did not win the popular vote in February 1974 but still returned to power as in the UK we have a parliamentary system where whoever wins the largest number of MPs in the Commons forms a government.justin124 said:
Churchill did not win the popular vote in 1951 and only returned to office courtesy of the Ulster Unionists who then took the Tory Whip.HYUFD said:
After 1945 the Tories were back in power after 6 years under Churchill again who beat the leftwing Attlee, after 1979 Labour were out of power for 18 years and only got back with a centrist leader in 1997, after 1997 the Tories were out of power for 13 years and only got back in when Labour replaced their centrist PM with the more leftwing BrownLordOfReason said:
It’s actually really easy for me. Just read and understand history.oxfordsimon said:
Well it isn't by the application of reason - his postings make that perfectly clearCasino_Royale said:
Wow. You can see four years ahead into the future?LordOfReason said:HYUFD said:
Labour lost in 1979 as we had high inflation, one of the lowest GDP per capitas in western Europe and frequent strikes. Labour lost in 1983 because it was too leftwing and a new centrist party took many of its votes.LordOfReason said:
Labour didn’t lose to Thatcher in 79 and 83 because it was too left wing and divided, it lost then because it had been in power majority of the previous twenty years. If you can’t see the Tories are about to hand keys to no10 to Labour for a generation then you are blind.HYUFD said:
You will also see a numbemove to it the Tories will be more united as wellLordOfReason said:HYUFD said:If Corbyn goes and is succeeded by Williamson it is difficult to see how the Labour Party does not split as Williamson has been pushing the deselection of Labour moderates. A Williamson leadership would likely see Umunna and other moderates defect en masse to a new centrist party formed with the LDs and maybe a few pro EU Tories
If Labour loses the next general election it will be because Corbynism led to a repeat of the latter, if Labour win the ne
Tell us, how have you managed to acquire this amazing skill?
Let’s start with 83. When it came to 83 enny drop for you.
Labour lost in 79 for the same reason Churchill lost in 45.
45, 79, 97 and the next one are part of a set.
Support from the Ulster Unionists then for Churchill is no different to support from the DUP for May now0 -
Trump wants to get re elected, for that he needs the rustbelt who want more jobs brought back from overseas, so he will keep blasting the likes of Apple as a resultglw said:
It wouldn't do what Trump thinks it would do, unless most of Apple's major suppliers shift production to the US as well. Trump doesn't grasp quite why Apple manufactures iPhones overseas. Trump is reducing the complexities of a hugely complicated manufacturing pipeline to a soundbite.HYUFD said:'Yes Apple could technically open US plants', point made and until they do Trump will keep hitting them
0
This discussion has been closed.