politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Next Labour Leader matrix – working out who’ll win
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Next Labour Leader matrix – working out who’ll win
Calling the Labour leadership contest is hard, to me at least. Not only do we not yet know who’s going to stand but working out what the key considerations will be with the relevant voters – at both nomination stage and in the election proper – is an exercise in second-guessing on multiple levels. We don’t even know when the election will start for sure: it might be next week but that’s still to be confirmed by Labour’s NEC.
Comments
-
First, I think.0
-
Second! Like Labour at GE2024
Excellent tour d‘horizon Mr Herdson!
1 -
Can we rely on polls taken in the golden age of Corbynism, between its (relative) triumph in 2017 and the car crash of 2019?0
-
Why hasnt Starmer declared he is running?1
-
I think I'm channelling Sunil....
ABOLISHSLAVERY!0 -
Labour has invented a complex set of compromises for its leadership process that appears to make it almost impossible for anyone to come from left field (no double meaning intended). My takeaway from this is that Phillips is another good lay from the current field.
The impending surprise is that Starmer appears to have a clear lead despite not resolving Labour’s duck with women.0 -
Took part in another You Gov poll for Labour members last night. The difference between this and the first one that caused a lot of movement in the market was that they included Lavery this time (he had not announced an interest in running at the time of the last poll)
I would also mention that there seems to be quite a bit of support growing in some of the Facebook groups I am a member of. One was running a poll over the last few days and it put Lavery top in a poll of about 900 group members, although I would estimate that only around half of these will have Labour membership. There seems to be a swing towards support for Lavery from RLB.
Am expecting a strong showing from Lavery when the next YouGov poll comes out, but as ever, DYOR if betting1 -
What are Corbyn and McDonnell (and Milne) doing behind the scenes to protect the hard left legacy of Corbynism? Having the NEC in their pocket means this is not a level playing field...
As for Starmer not yet declaring, that could be he is having his own Chuka moment. Or perhaps, he too believes Labour needs a female leader. He would be a very strong Deputy for say a Lisa Nandy. That would then be a strong ticket. Maybe there is haggling going on in the background. Labour should be eternally grateful if he puts ambition aside and becomes the Stop Burgon candidate.0 -
I think Jess will get the nominations from the PLP, and CLPs. Her Brexit views don't seem to have been too much of a problem. She won 54.8% of the vote in a constituency that voted 60% Leave. She had one of the smallest swings against Labour north of Watford. She is also Harriet Harmans protege. A great launch video, and starting in Grimsby backed by the defeated candidate there. She touches the parts other candidates cannot reach.
Not afraid to make the right stands too. She is the sort of leader who could regain former New Labour voters like myself.
https://twitter.com/jessphillips/status/1130418708910882817?s=191 -
I find myself liking Jess Phillips despite her “ooh aren’t I a woman of the people” shtick.Foxy said:I think Jess will get the nominations from the PLP, and CLPs. Her Brexit views don't seem to have been too much of a problem. She won 54.8% of the vote in a constituency that voted 60% Leave. She had one of the smallest swings against Labour north of Watford. She is also Harriet Harmans protege. A great launch video, and starting in Grimsby backed by the defeated candidate there. She touches the parts other candidates cannot reach.
Not afraid to make the right stands too. She is the sort of leader who could regain former New Labour voters like myself.
https://twitter.com/jessphillips/status/1130418708910882817?s=19
However she does not pass the test that any potential Labour leader I rate (from 2010 onwards) never gets the leadership.0 -
I find it somewhat reassuring that there appears to be a dawning realisation that RLB isn’t up to it (why did it take them so long?)BudG said:Took part in another You Gov poll for Labour members last night. The difference between this and the first one that caused a lot of movement in the market was that they included Lavery this time (he had not announced an interest in running at the time of the last poll)
I would also mention that there seems to be quite a bit of support growing in some of the Facebook groups I am a member of. One was running a poll over the last few days and it put Lavery top in a poll of about 900 group members, although I would estimate that only around half of these will have Labour membership. There seems to be a swing towards support for Lavery from RLB.
Am expecting a strong showing from Lavery when the next YouGov poll comes out, but as ever, DYOR if betting
Less reassuring that that seems to be benefitting Lavery of all people...
2 -
Monica Lennon says Scottish Labour must split from UK party
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-509827232 -
General consensus amongst the RLB doubters on social media (myself included) is that a lot would prefer to give their support to Angela Rayner, if she would run. However, as Angela has said she is not running then Lavery benefits as the most left wing candidatenumbertwelve said:
I find it somewhat reassuring that there appears to be a dawning realisation that RLB isn’t up to it (why did it take them so long?)BudG said:Took part in another You Gov poll for Labour members last night. The difference between this and the first one that caused a lot of movement in the market was that they included Lavery this time (he had not announced an interest in running at the time of the last poll)
I would also mention that there seems to be quite a bit of support growing in some of the Facebook groups I am a member of. One was running a poll over the last few days and it put Lavery top in a poll of about 900 group members, although I would estimate that only around half of these will have Labour membership. There seems to be a swing towards support for Lavery from RLB.
Am expecting a strong showing from Lavery when the next YouGov poll comes out, but as ever, DYOR if betting
Less reassuring that that seems to be benefitting Lavery of all people...0 -
Good morning, everyone.
I see the BBC front page has, as one of the biggest six stories in the world today, Greta Thunberg changing her Twitter name. That's ahead of rising fentanyl use, Nandy's decision to stand, and teen employment declining.
On-topic: I have a knack for screwing up these sorts of things. I think Macron was the only one I got right. Well, that and the previous but one Lib Dem contest when I fluked being online right as almost every relevant bit of news broke. I'd probably be looking at Nandy right now.0 -
Absolutely. I think Rayner should run. It sounds like she’s settled for deputy though, which is a shame, I genuinely think she’d make a good candidate (and I’m far from someone who could call themselves a left winger!)BudG said:
General consensus amongst the RLB doubters on social media (myself included) is that a lot would prefer to give their support to Angela Rayner, if she would run. However, as Angela has said she is not running then Lavery benefits as the most left wing candidatenumbertwelve said:
I find it somewhat reassuring that there appears to be a dawning realisation that RLB isn’t up to it (why did it take them so long?)BudG said:Took part in another You Gov poll for Labour members last night. The difference between this and the first one that caused a lot of movement in the market was that they included Lavery this time (he had not announced an interest in running at the time of the last poll)
I would also mention that there seems to be quite a bit of support growing in some of the Facebook groups I am a member of. One was running a poll over the last few days and it put Lavery top in a poll of about 900 group members, although I would estimate that only around half of these will have Labour membership. There seems to be a swing towards support for Lavery from RLB.
Am expecting a strong showing from Lavery when the next YouGov poll comes out, but as ever, DYOR if betting
Less reassuring that that seems to be benefitting Lavery of all people...0 -
Lavery is the death spiral candidate for Labour. Corbynism sheared of his charisma.numbertwelve said:
I find it somewhat reassuring that there appears to be a dawning realisation that RLB isn’t up to it (why did it take them so long?)BudG said:Took part in another You Gov poll for Labour members last night. The difference between this and the first one that caused a lot of movement in the market was that they included Lavery this time (he had not announced an interest in running at the time of the last poll)
I would also mention that there seems to be quite a bit of support growing in some of the Facebook groups I am a member of. One was running a poll over the last few days and it put Lavery top in a poll of about 900 group members, although I would estimate that only around half of these will have Labour membership. There seems to be a swing towards support for Lavery from RLB.
Am expecting a strong showing from Lavery when the next YouGov poll comes out, but as ever, DYOR if betting
Less reassuring that that seems to be benefitting Lavery of all people...
I don't tend to win on leadership contests either. I tend to favour the best candidates, and they rarely win in an era of killer clown leaders.1 -
The Cult of Greta is fascinating. I do admire her for her conviction and for managing to get people talking about an issue that is important to her, and to stand firm despite the considerable and oft-unjustified flak she gets. But there is an unhealthy personality cult growing around her which sees her every move reported on (can’t be long before Greta Thunberg Eats Sandwich) which I think is somewhat counterproductive.Morris_Dancer said:Good morning, everyone.
I see the BBC front page has, as one of the biggest six stories in the world today, Greta Thunberg changing her Twitter name. That's ahead of rising fentanyl use, Nandy's decision to stand, and teen employment declining.
On-topic: I have a knack for screwing up these sorts of things. I think Macron was the only one I got right. Well, that and the previous but one Lib Dem contest when I fluked being online right as almost every relevant bit of news broke. I'd probably be looking at Nandy right now.
1 -
Facebook poll.. voodoo nonsenseBudG said:Took part in another You Gov poll for Labour members last night. The difference between this and the first one that caused a lot of movement in the market was that they included Lavery this time (he had not announced an interest in running at the time of the last poll)
I would also mention that there seems to be quite a bit of support growing in some of the Facebook groups I am a member of. One was running a poll over the last few days and it put Lavery top in a poll of about 900 group members, although I would estimate that only around half of these will have Labour membership. There seems to be a swing towards support for Lavery from RLB.
Am expecting a strong showing from Lavery when the next YouGov poll comes out, but as ever, DYOR if betting0 -
To be fair, the 'most watched' is about the looming crisis in mental health as family carers age. We know three families where 'carers' are at or approaching retirement age, and I can't think we're alone.Morris_Dancer said:Good morning, everyone.
I see the BBC front page has, as one of the biggest six stories in the world today, Greta Thunberg changing her Twitter name. That's ahead of rising fentanyl use, Nandy's decision to stand, and teen employment declining.
On-topic: I have a knack for screwing up these sorts of things. I think Macron was the only one I got right. Well, that and the previous but one Lib Dem contest when I fluked being online right as almost every relevant bit of news broke. I'd probably be looking at Nandy right now.0 -
Angela Rayner and Rebecca Long-Bailey are friends. If Rayner says she will not run against RLB, we can take her at her word.numbertwelve said:
Absolutely. I think Rayner should run. It sounds like she’s settled for deputy though, which is a shame, I genuinely think she’d make a good candidate (and I’m far from someone who could call themselves a left winger!)BudG said:
General consensus amongst the RLB doubters on social media (myself included) is that a lot would prefer to give their support to Angela Rayner, if she would run. However, as Angela has said she is not running then Lavery benefits as the most left wing candidatenumbertwelve said:
I find it somewhat reassuring that there appears to be a dawning realisation that RLB isn’t up to it (why did it take them so long?)BudG said:Took part in another You Gov poll for Labour members last night. The difference between this and the first one that caused a lot of movement in the market was that they included Lavery this time (he had not announced an interest in running at the time of the last poll)
I would also mention that there seems to be quite a bit of support growing in some of the Facebook groups I am a member of. One was running a poll over the last few days and it put Lavery top in a poll of about 900 group members, although I would estimate that only around half of these will have Labour membership. There seems to be a swing towards support for Lavery from RLB.
Am expecting a strong showing from Lavery when the next YouGov poll comes out, but as ever, DYOR if betting
Less reassuring that that seems to be benefitting Lavery of all people...
However, we should not entirely rule out RLB herself deciding she cannot win and encouraging Rayner to stand, effectively flipping the ticket, even while recognising it is unlikely.0 -
Yeah maybe, but it is a closed group and as far as i could see, it did not allow you to vote twice for the same person and it was backed up by the stream of positive comments from from individuals. And if I recall, the same voodoo nonsense remarks were said about the Corbyn surge which first registered on facebook groups.squareroot2 said:
Facebook poll.. voodoo nonsenseBudG said:Took part in another You Gov poll for Labour members last night. The difference between this and the first one that caused a lot of movement in the market was that they included Lavery this time (he had not announced an interest in running at the time of the last poll)
I would also mention that there seems to be quite a bit of support growing in some of the Facebook groups I am a member of. One was running a poll over the last few days and it put Lavery top in a poll of about 900 group members, although I would estimate that only around half of these will have Labour membership. There seems to be a swing towards support for Lavery from RLB.
Am expecting a strong showing from Lavery when the next YouGov poll comes out, but as ever, DYOR if betting0 -
That is the beauty of these markets. Punters approach them as if the aim is to identify the best potential leader (for some value of "best") which means prices can be wrong for extended periods; bookies only pay out on the leader actually elected. Who should win is not the same as who will win.Foxy said:
Lavery is the death spiral candidate for Labour. Corbynism sheared of his charisma.numbertwelve said:
I find it somewhat reassuring that there appears to be a dawning realisation that RLB isn’t up to it (why did it take them so long?)BudG said:Took part in another You Gov poll for Labour members last night. The difference between this and the first one that caused a lot of movement in the market was that they included Lavery this time (he had not announced an interest in running at the time of the last poll)
I would also mention that there seems to be quite a bit of support growing in some of the Facebook groups I am a member of. One was running a poll over the last few days and it put Lavery top in a poll of about 900 group members, although I would estimate that only around half of these will have Labour membership. There seems to be a swing towards support for Lavery from RLB.
Am expecting a strong showing from Lavery when the next YouGov poll comes out, but as ever, DYOR if betting
Less reassuring that that seems to be benefitting Lavery of all people...
I don't tend to win on leadership contests either. I tend to favour the best candidates, and they rarely win in an era of killer clown leaders.0 -
Greta has a genius for publicity that is truly remarkable. Surely one of the global figures of our time.Morris_Dancer said:Good morning, everyone.
I see the BBC front page has, as one of the biggest six stories in the world today, Greta Thunberg changing her Twitter name. That's ahead of rising fentanyl use, Nandy's decision to stand, and teen employment declining.
On-topic: I have a knack for screwing up these sorts of things. I think Macron was the only one I got right. Well, that and the previous but one Lib Dem contest when I fluked being online right as almost every relevant bit of news broke. I'd probably be looking at Nandy right now.
Meanwhile Canberra has just set an all-time high temperature record, 18C hotter than usual for early Jan.0 -
StuartDickson said:
Monica Lennon says Scottish Labour must split from UK party
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-50982723
Imagine.0 -
Surely - surely - surely Johnson could not be so lucky as to have Ian Lavery as his next opponent?
Electing a man who has been investigated for tax evasion and stands accused of some distinctly dodgy financial dealings by his own union would be the equivalent of the Tories electing Rees Mogg.1 -
Twitter, Facebook and the Death of the Left as an Electoral Force will be a popular topic in about a decade.squareroot2 said:
Facebook poll.. voodoo nonsenseBudG said:Took part in another You Gov poll for Labour members last night. The difference between this and the first one that caused a lot of movement in the market was that they included Lavery this time (he had not announced an interest in running at the time of the last poll)
I would also mention that there seems to be quite a bit of support growing in some of the Facebook groups I am a member of. One was running a poll over the last few days and it put Lavery top in a poll of about 900 group members, although I would estimate that only around half of these will have Labour membership. There seems to be a swing towards support for Lavery from RLB.
Am expecting a strong showing from Lavery when the next YouGov poll comes out, but as ever, DYOR if betting
It is fascinating how the Left have taken to these platforms to reinforoce each other, whereas the Right by and large do not share their views. Even in totally apolitical groups, those on the Left will find a reason to rail at Johnson/Tories. Yet from those 14m who voted Tory, not a peep. Certainly, nobody on Facebook would have a clue about my politics.0 -
The BBC news website is more like Hello Magazine's everyday . I used to be a supporter of the BBC for its quality but nowadays not so sure why it is special and hence deserving of special status. Still like to see it but it surely must look at itself and sort itself out quickly.IanB2 said:
Greta has a genius for publicity that is truly remarkable. Surely one of the global figures of our time.Morris_Dancer said:Good morning, everyone.
I see the BBC front page has, as one of the biggest six stories in the world today, Greta Thunberg changing her Twitter name. That's ahead of rising fentanyl use, Nandy's decision to stand, and teen employment declining.
On-topic: I have a knack for screwing up these sorts of things. I think Macron was the only one I got right. Well, that and the previous but one Lib Dem contest when I fluked being online right as almost every relevant bit of news broke. I'd probably be looking at Nandy right now.
Meanwhile Canberra has just set an all-time high temperature record, 18C hotter than usual for early Jan.
Even sport (and I get that it cannot outbid or should the likes of Sky and BT) that they used to present so well is being broadcast in a very shallow way now - The Sports Personality of the year was a irritating mixture of extreme shallowness (jumping from shot to shot in nanoseconds with constant banal music ) and extreme wokeness. It used to be a good in depth look at the sporting year that was ideal for its audience .BTW BBCthe natural audience for this is not people with the attention span of a wasp but people who watch sport (ie can concentrate on things for hours) .2 -
Yeah that fuckwit Cummings and CCHQ's gurus from down under totally wasted all their time and the party's money on Facebook.MarqueeMark said:
Twitter, Facebook and the Death of the Left as an Electoral Force will be a popular topic in about a decade.squareroot2 said:
Facebook poll.. voodoo nonsenseBudG said:Took part in another You Gov poll for Labour members last night. The difference between this and the first one that caused a lot of movement in the market was that they included Lavery this time (he had not announced an interest in running at the time of the last poll)
I would also mention that there seems to be quite a bit of support growing in some of the Facebook groups I am a member of. One was running a poll over the last few days and it put Lavery top in a poll of about 900 group members, although I would estimate that only around half of these will have Labour membership. There seems to be a swing towards support for Lavery from RLB.
Am expecting a strong showing from Lavery when the next YouGov poll comes out, but as ever, DYOR if betting
It is fascinating how the Left have taken to these platforms to reinforoce each other, whereas the Right by and large do not share their views. Even in totally apolitical groups, those on the Left will find a reason to rail at Johnson/Tories. Yet from those 14m who voted Tory, not a peep. Certainly, nobody on Facebook would have a clue about my politics.
Or was it wasted? One thing is for sure, if you think the right ignores social media, you ought to stay in more.0 -
You'd have to go back quite a way to find a comparably dodgy prominent Tory. His candidature is risible. If ever there was a back-room operator who should stay hidden under his stone, it is Lavery.ydoethur said:Surely - surely - surely Johnson could not be so lucky as to have Ian Lavery as his next opponent?
Electing a man who has been investigated for tax evasion and stands accused of some distinctly dodgy financial dealings by his own union would be the equivalent of the Tories electing Rees Mogg.
Pushing him forward betrays a slavish adherence to political purity that Donald Trump could only dream about. Alt Right, meet Dolt Left.0 -
its dumbed down to 10 yr old level.state_go_away said:
The BBC news website is more like Hello Magazine's everyday . I used to be a supporter of the BBC for its quality but nowadays not so sure why it is special and hence deserving of special status. Still like to see it but it surely must look at itself and sort itself out quicklyIanB2 said:
Greta has a genius for publicity that is truly remarkable. Surely one of the global figures of our time.Morris_Dancer said:Good morning, everyone.
I see the BBC front page has, as one of the biggest six stories in the world today, Greta Thunberg changing her Twitter name. That's ahead of rising fentanyl use, Nandy's decision to stand, and teen employment declining.
On-topic: I have a knack for screwing up these sorts of things. I think Macron was the only one I got right. Well, that and the previous but one Lib Dem contest when I fluked being online right as almost every relevant bit of news broke. I'd probably be looking at Nandy right now.
Meanwhile Canberra has just set an all-time high temperature record, 18C hotter than usual for early Jan.0 -
Nobody I know would be seen dead sharing any of CCHQ's ouput on Facebook. It's almost as if it is a defining element of what makes you a Tory.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Yeah that fuckwit Cummings and CCHQ's gurus from down under totally wasted all their time and the party's money on Facebook.MarqueeMark said:
Twitter, Facebook and the Death of the Left as an Electoral Force will be a popular topic in about a decade.squareroot2 said:
Facebook poll.. voodoo nonsenseBudG said:Took part in another You Gov poll for Labour members last night. The difference between this and the first one that caused a lot of movement in the market was that they included Lavery this time (he had not announced an interest in running at the time of the last poll)
I would also mention that there seems to be quite a bit of support growing in some of the Facebook groups I am a member of. One was running a poll over the last few days and it put Lavery top in a poll of about 900 group members, although I would estimate that only around half of these will have Labour membership. There seems to be a swing towards support for Lavery from RLB.
Am expecting a strong showing from Lavery when the next YouGov poll comes out, but as ever, DYOR if betting
It is fascinating how the Left have taken to these platforms to reinforoce each other, whereas the Right by and large do not share their views. Even in totally apolitical groups, those on the Left will find a reason to rail at Johnson/Tories. Yet from those 14m who voted Tory, not a peep. Certainly, nobody on Facebook would have a clue about my politics.
Or was it wasted? One thing is for sure, if you think the right ignores social media, you ought to stay in more.
Maybe the far right/fanatical Leavers do use facebook to push their own political views out to others. But not the great bulk of the 13m who just voted Tory.0 -
JRM is stonkingly rich through running his own hedge fund. Surely he embodies Conservative entrepreneurialism a sight more than Boris does. David Cameron, with his family's very peripheral involvement in the Panama Papers is probably closer but he was already leader by then.ydoethur said:Surely - surely - surely Johnson could not be so lucky as to have Ian Lavery as his next opponent?
Electing a man who has been investigated for tax evasion and stands accused of some distinctly dodgy financial dealings by his own union would be the equivalent of the Tories electing Rees Mogg.
The case for Lavery, at risk of damning with faint praise, is that at least he has run something, which puts him a step up on most (all?) of his rivals.0 -
As a Starmer layer before he declares you get:MarqueeMark said:What are Corbyn and McDonnell (and Milne) doing behind the scenes to protect the hard left legacy of Corbynism? Having the NEC in their pocket means this is not a level playing field...
As for Starmer not yet declaring, that could be he is having his own Chuka moment. Or perhaps, he too believes Labour needs a female leader. He would be a very strong Deputy for say a Lisa Nandy. That would then be a strong ticket. Maybe there is haggling going on in the background. Labour should be eternally grateful if he puts ambition aside and becomes the Stop Burgon candidate.
Starmer agrees it should be a female leader this time
Starmer doesnt want the job for personal or historical reasons unknown
Starmer doesnt want to be leader as its a really tough job with low chance of success
At odds of 5/1+ those might not be very significant concerns but at odds on they are valuable to have onside.0 -
The issue is not that Lavery has run something. It is HOW he has run it.DecrepiterJohnL said:
JRM is stonkingly rich through running his own hedge fund. Surely he embodies Conservative entrepreneurialism a sight more than Boris does. David Cameron, with his family's very peripheral involvement in the Panama Papers is probably closer but he was already leader by then.ydoethur said:Surely - surely - surely Johnson could not be so lucky as to have Ian Lavery as his next opponent?
Electing a man who has been investigated for tax evasion and stands accused of some distinctly dodgy financial dealings by his own union would be the equivalent of the Tories electing Rees Mogg.
The case for Lavery, at risk of damning with faint praise, is that at least he has run something, which puts him a step up on most (all?) of his rivals.
Mafia bosses have "run something". Doesn't mean you'd make them PM.0 -
I doubt if Corbyn is doing much - even as leader with two commanding wins under his belt, he was very committed to the idea that the membership should do what it wants, and declined to organise to get favoured people as candidates or to deselect anyone. McDonnell and certainly McCluskey will be taking a more active interest in getting a single strong left candidate.MarqueeMark said:What are Corbyn and McDonnell (and Milne) doing behind the scenes to protect the hard left legacy of Corbynism? Having the NEC in their pocket means this is not a level playing field...
As for Starmer not yet declaring, that could be he is having his own Chuka moment. Or perhaps, he too believes Labour needs a female leader. He would be a very strong Deputy for say a Lisa Nandy. That would then be a strong ticket. Maybe there is haggling going on in the background. Labour should be eternally grateful if he puts ambition aside and becomes the Stop Burgon candidate.
David's artcle is a good read as always, but rather boils down to "Dunno, really", doesn't it? A point not yet mentioned here is that Phillips will be viewed with reservations by members who didn't like vocal critics of Corbyn, especially as she's been enthusiastically endorsed by arch-critic Wes Streeting. Also, subtle point about hHer otherwise excellent video is that it seemed to have a subtext that caring about people in difficulty was a progressive programme, impicitly without the need for more, and that doesn't tick the left of centre box.
I do agree that neither RLB nor Lavery look likely to win unless they blow a TV debate away with a brilliant performance. Lavery in particular would be a reversion to the "let's have a candidate who puts up a feisty show" attitude which the left used to have before Corbyn proved they could actually win. I think that McDonnell will want a winner. If RLB doesn't stand and the left feels Rayner is left-wing (not entirely clear to me) she's their obvious shot, but I wouldn't totally rule out Clive Lewis. Starmer is currently too short in the betting - he's favourite, but some of that is simply name recgonition, and that will change.1 -
It is the weekend. The BBC's news coverage always suffers at the weekend, probably because anyone with more than six weeks' experience works Monday to Friday. It has long had the problem of slavishly following the American satellite news channels, so we often are lumbered with domestic American stories. To this is now added whatever is trending on social media overnight.squareroot2 said:
its dumbed down to 10 yr old level.state_go_away said:
The BBC news website is more like Hello Magazine's everyday . I used to be a supporter of the BBC for its quality but nowadays not so sure why it is special and hence deserving of special status. Still like to see it but it surely must look at itself and sort itself out quicklyIanB2 said:
Greta has a genius for publicity that is truly remarkable. Surely one of the global figures of our time.Morris_Dancer said:Good morning, everyone.
I see the BBC front page has, as one of the biggest six stories in the world today, Greta Thunberg changing her Twitter name. That's ahead of rising fentanyl use, Nandy's decision to stand, and teen employment declining.
On-topic: I have a knack for screwing up these sorts of things. I think Macron was the only one I got right. Well, that and the previous but one Lib Dem contest when I fluked being online right as almost every relevant bit of news broke. I'd probably be looking at Nandy right now.
Meanwhile Canberra has just set an all-time high temperature record, 18C hotter than usual for early Jan.0 -
Deeply disturbing that a regressive, corrupt theocracy is running amok in the middle east. And Iran isn't any better.
https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1213250469365272576?s=205 -
I was wondering whether he might be preparing to do the ultimate sacrifice/ virtue signal and hold a press conference to announce he isn't standing because he thinks Labour should have a female leadernoneoftheabove said:Why hasnt Starmer declared he is running?
0 -
Mr. Isam, maybe the Darwin Awards would have to start a political category...0
-
Being a remainer in the past shouldn't hurt any candidate really, the only way it would be is if they are seen to to be still unable to accept the result or sneering in their attitude towards Leave votersFoxy said:I think Jess will get the nominations from the PLP, and CLPs. Her Brexit views don't seem to have been too much of a problem. She won 54.8% of the vote in a constituency that voted 60% Leave. She had one of the smallest swings against Labour north of Watford. She is also Harriet Harmans protege. A great launch video, and starting in Grimsby backed by the defeated candidate there. She touches the parts other candidates cannot reach.
Not afraid to make the right stands too. She is the sort of leader who could regain former New Labour voters like myself.
https://twitter.com/jessphillips/status/1130418708910882817?s=190 -
It's about closed groups - the Left actively "purifies" their circle of acquaintances. This is a phenomenon that has been going on for a long time. Hence the anecdote of the woman who was disbelieving when Reagan crushed Mondale in 1984 - she'd never met anyone who was going to vote for Reagan. The same process has been carried across into social media.MarqueeMark said:
Twitter, Facebook and the Death of the Left as an Electoral Force will be a popular topic in about a decade.squareroot2 said:
Facebook poll.. voodoo nonsenseBudG said:Took part in another You Gov poll for Labour members last night. The difference between this and the first one that caused a lot of movement in the market was that they included Lavery this time (he had not announced an interest in running at the time of the last poll)
I would also mention that there seems to be quite a bit of support growing in some of the Facebook groups I am a member of. One was running a poll over the last few days and it put Lavery top in a poll of about 900 group members, although I would estimate that only around half of these will have Labour membership. There seems to be a swing towards support for Lavery from RLB.
Am expecting a strong showing from Lavery when the next YouGov poll comes out, but as ever, DYOR if betting
It is fascinating how the Left have taken to these platforms to reinforoce each other, whereas the Right by and large do not share their views. Even in totally apolitical groups, those on the Left will find a reason to rail at Johnson/Tories. Yet from those 14m who voted Tory, not a peep. Certainly, nobody on Facebook would have a clue about my politics.
1 -
IanB2 said:
Greta has a genius for publicity that is truly remarkable. Surely one of the global figures of our time.Morris_Dancer said:Good morning, everyone.
I see the BBC front page has, as one of the biggest six stories in the world today, Greta Thunberg changing her Twitter name. That's ahead of rising fentanyl use, Nandy's decision to stand, and teen employment declining.
On-topic: I have a knack for screwing up these sorts of things. I think Macron was the only one I got right. Well, that and the previous but one Lib Dem contest when I fluked being online right as almost every relevant bit of news broke. I'd probably be looking at Nandy right now.
Meanwhile Canberra has just set an all-time high temperature record, 18C hotter than usual for early Jan.
0 -
This is a great piece David.
My conclusion from it is that - improbable as it sounds, Ian Lavery is value. If there is one and only one candidate from the far left, then while RLB must still be favourite, backing for her seems more equivocal than I'd expected. So what chance does he have of being the candidate from the left? I have nothing more than sound and noise to go on, but I'd say somewhere between 25% and 50%. And once you're the candidate from the far left, in a sense it doesn't matter how many opponents you have: the candidate from the left will get down to the last two, at which point it's 50/50. (Massive oversimplification, but you get the drift).
In my view, Ian Lavery should be no worse than 15-1 from here.
I'd also previously given some weight to Len McCluskey's insistence that the next leader be someone from the north who can talk to leave voters. I'd thought this through and come up with Lisa Nandy. But what if this was just code for 'the next leader should be Ian Lavery'? Lavery is, of course, much more a politician in Len's mold than Lisa Nandy is. And while Len doesn't talk for the whole selectorate, his is one of the single most important voices.0 -
For sucking your own cock, aren’t I clever lines, your last line is a prize winner.Foxy said:
Lavery is the death spiral candidate for Labour. Corbynism sheared of his charisma.numbertwelve said:
I find it somewhat reassuring that there appears to be a dawning realisation that RLB isn’t up to it (why did it take them so long?)BudG said:Took part in another You Gov poll for Labour members last night. The difference between this and the first one that caused a lot of movement in the market was that they included Lavery this time (he had not announced an interest in running at the time of the last poll)
I would also mention that there seems to be quite a bit of support growing in some of the Facebook groups I am a member of. One was running a poll over the last few days and it put Lavery top in a poll of about 900 group members, although I would estimate that only around half of these will have Labour membership. There seems to be a swing towards support for Lavery from RLB.
Am expecting a strong showing from Lavery when the next YouGov poll comes out, but as ever, DYOR if betting
Less reassuring that that seems to be benefitting Lavery of all people...
I don't tend to win on leadership contests either. I tend to favour the best candidates, and they rarely win in an era of killer clown leaders.0 -
I look at the BBC’s frankly adulatory and uncritical promotion of women’s football. I get why, at a high level, they promote it in that way but anyone who thinks it’s nothing to do with the BBCs ability to purchase top level men’s football rights is fooling themselves. If they really wanted to reach an audience unserved by BBC tv, they’d be heading to lower league men’s football.state_go_away said:
The BBC news website is more like Hello Magazine's everyday . I used to be a supporter of the BBC for its quality but nowadays not so sure why it is special and hence deserving of special status. Still like to see it but it surely must look at itself and sort itself out quickly.IanB2 said:
Greta has a genius for publicity that is truly remarkable. Surely one of the global figures of our time.Morris_Dancer said:Good morning, everyone.
I see the BBC front page has, as one of the biggest six stories in the world today, Greta Thunberg changing her Twitter name. That's ahead of rising fentanyl use, Nandy's decision to stand, and teen employment declining.
On-topic: I have a knack for screwing up these sorts of things. I think Macron was the only one I got right. Well, that and the previous but one Lib Dem contest when I fluked being online right as almost every relevant bit of news broke. I'd probably be looking at Nandy right now.
Meanwhile Canberra has just set an all-time high temperature record, 18C hotter than usual for early Jan.
Even sport (and I get that it cannot outbid or should the likes of Sky and BT) that they used to present so well is being broadcast in a very shallow way now - The Sports Personality of the year was a irritating mixture of extreme shallowness (jumping from shot to shot in nanoseconds with constant banal music ) and extreme wokeness. It used to be a good in depth look at the sporting year that was ideal for its audience .BTW BBCthe natural audience for this is not people with the attention span of a wasp but people who watch sport (ie can concentrate on things for hours) .
1 -
Hasn't he also been charged in the past with football hooligansim offences? Though to be hinest to me that's far more forgivable than Corbyn's association with the IRA etc. At least football hooligans tend not to plant bombs.ydoethur said:Surely - surely - surely Johnson could not be so lucky as to have Ian Lavery as his next opponent?
Electing a man who has been investigated for tax evasion and stands accused of some distinctly dodgy financial dealings by his own union would be the equivalent of the Tories electing Rees Mogg.0 -
Good point but early days.noneoftheabove said:Why hasnt Starmer declared he is running?
0 -
Interesting.StuartDickson said:Monica Lennon says Scottish Labour must split from UK party
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-509827230 -
While we're on about this sort of thing, the BBC's presentation of ivents like the Olympics has, in recent years, become inane beyond belief.matt said:
I look at the BBC’s frankly adulatory and uncritical promotion of women’s football. I get why, at a high level, they promote it in that way but anyone who thinks it’s nothing to do with the BBCs ability to purchase top level men’s football rights is fooling themselves. If they really wanted to reach an audience unserved by BBC tv, they’d be heading to lower league men’s football.state_go_away said:
The BBC news website is more like Hello Magazine's everyday . I used to be a supporter of the BBC for its quality but nowadays not so sure why it is special and hence deserving of special status. Still like to see it but it surely must look at itself and sort itself out quickly.IanB2 said:
Greta has a genius for publicity that is truly remarkable. Surely one of the global figures of our time.Morris_Dancer said:Good morning, everyone.
I see the BBC front page has, as one of the biggest six stories in the world today, Greta Thunberg changing her Twitter name. That's ahead of rising fentanyl use, Nandy's decision to stand, and teen employment declining.
On-topic: I have a knack for screwing up these sorts of things. I think Macron was the only one I got right. Well, that and the previous but one Lib Dem contest when I fluked being online right as almost every relevant bit of news broke. I'd probably be looking at Nandy right now.
Meanwhile Canberra has just set an all-time high temperature record, 18C hotter than usual for early Jan.
Even sport (and I get that it cannot outbid or should the likes of Sky and BT) that they used to present so well is being broadcast in a very shallow way now - The Sports Personality of the year was a irritating mixture of extreme shallowness (jumping from shot to shot in nanoseconds with constant banal music ) and extreme wokeness. It used to be a good in depth look at the sporting year that was ideal for its audience .BTW BBCthe natural audience for this is not people with the attention span of a wasp but people who watch sport (ie can concentrate on things for hours) .0 -
Very good from David. Starmer is now clearly the front-runner. Rayner is definitely very good value. Nandy is strong, if she can make the run-off. Long-Bailey is giving every impression of not wanting to stand but being strong-armed into doing so. The far-left is currently giving everyone else a clear run. It’s a real puzzle. I think, though, that Jess Phillips has a decent chance of making the final ballot.0
-
Mr. Cookie, the F1 coverage was very good. And then they threw it away when they still had a full year (at least) of rights.
For various reasons, I hardly watch TV news now (used to when I have my sarnies but now I tend to watch history on Youtube). Not sure what the last BBC programme I watched was, other than the news.0 -
Can anyone tell me what proportion of the Labour membership is in London. I know it is substantial but is it jaw-dropping?0
-
Corbyn must be close to a Darwin award, politically speaking as must Jo Swinsonisam said:
I was wondering whether he might be preparing to do the ultimate sacrifice/ virtue signal and hold a press conference to announce he isn't standing because he thinks Labour should have a female leadernoneoftheabove said:Why hasnt Starmer declared he is running?
0 -
My understanding is that he was convicted of a breach of the peace and fined £200 in 1985.Cookie said:
Hasn't he also been charged in the past with football hooligansim offences? Though to be hinest to me that's far more forgivable than Corbyn's association with the IRA etc. At least football hooligans tend not to plant bombs.ydoethur said:Surely - surely - surely Johnson could not be so lucky as to have Ian Lavery as his next opponent?
Electing a man who has been investigated for tax evasion and stands accused of some distinctly dodgy financial dealings by his own union would be the equivalent of the Tories electing Rees Mogg.
His version is that the police took advantage of him being in the neighbourhood of a fight to kick, punch, spit on him, arrest him and then stitch him up through perjured evidence due to his role in the Miners’ Strike.
The police version is that they intervened when he ran at ManU supporters shouting and screaming threats and had to restrain him when he attacked them instead.
The magistrates believed the latter version and fined him £200, which he inflates a few hundred more every time he tells the tale.
The NUM believed the former version and paid his fine.
Which was true? Who knows. Both sides involved are pathological liars and I would hesitate to trust either of them if they said rain was wet.
What does it show? Nothing, except that he was always somebody who took money from other people if it suited him.2 -
You're right that there is a push to elevate Women's team sports above what is atm the genuine level of interest in them. However, there is a good reason for this. Team sports are an extremely healthy thing for young people to get into. It is therefore important that it does not become an area that is effectively boys only. So the irritation that you and others (including myself if I'm honest) feel about Women's team sports sometimes being rather more "in your face" than you would like is IMO a price worth paying for the benefits being sought.matt said:I look at the BBC’s frankly adulatory and uncritical promotion of women’s football. I get why, at a high level, they promote it in that way but anyone who thinks it’s nothing to do with the BBCs ability to purchase top level men’s football rights is fooling themselves. If they really wanted to reach an audience unserved by BBC tv, they’d be heading to lower league men’s football.
0 -
They should merge with the ConservativesStuartDickson said:Monica Lennon says Scottish Labour must split from UK party
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-50982723
0 -
The arrogance is breathtaking .. but fun. I like it.Foxy said:
Lavery is the death spiral candidate for Labour. Corbynism sheared of his charisma.numbertwelve said:
I find it somewhat reassuring that there appears to be a dawning realisation that RLB isn’t up to it (why did it take them so long?)BudG said:Took part in another You Gov poll for Labour members last night. The difference between this and the first one that caused a lot of movement in the market was that they included Lavery this time (he had not announced an interest in running at the time of the last poll)
I would also mention that there seems to be quite a bit of support growing in some of the Facebook groups I am a member of. One was running a poll over the last few days and it put Lavery top in a poll of about 900 group members, although I would estimate that only around half of these will have Labour membership. There seems to be a swing towards support for Lavery from RLB.
Am expecting a strong showing from Lavery when the next YouGov poll comes out, but as ever, DYOR if betting
Less reassuring that that seems to be benefitting Lavery of all people...
I don't tend to win on leadership contests either. I tend to favour the best candidates, and they rarely win in an era of killer clown leaders.0 -
The crowds in women’s football are going up. There were nearly 40,000 at Spurs to see the North London derby.kinabalu said:
You're right that there is a push to elevate Women's team sports above what is atm the genuine level of interest in them. However, there is a good reason for this. Team sports are an extremely healthy thing for young people to get into. It is therefore important that it does not become an area that is effectively boys only. So the irritation that you and others (including myself if I'm honest) feel about Women's team sports sometimes being rather more "in your face" than you would like is IMO a price worth paying for the benefits being sought.matt said:I look at the BBC’s frankly adulatory and uncritical promotion of women’s football. I get why, at a high level, they promote it in that way but anyone who thinks it’s nothing to do with the BBCs ability to purchase top level men’s football rights is fooling themselves. If they really wanted to reach an audience unserved by BBC tv, they’d be heading to lower league men’s football.
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2019/nov/17/arsenal-tottenham-womens-super-league-wsl-match-report
0 -
Mr. kinabalu, it's an agenda driving editorial decisions. Women's sport is sometimes the equal or better (in popularity terms) of men's (tennis springs to mind) but women's football is orders of magnitude behind men's. You wouldn't guess that from the coverage.
F1 languishes far behind on the BBC now, after they threw away the coverage to pay TV.0 -
Honourable mention to Jacob Rees-Mogg.squareroot2 said:
Corbyn must be close to a Darwin award, politically speaking as must Jo Swinsonisam said:
I was wondering whether he might be preparing to do the ultimate sacrifice/ virtue signal and hold a press conference to announce he isn't standing because he thinks Labour should have a female leadernoneoftheabove said:Why hasnt Starmer declared he is running?
0 -
Absurdity wherever you look. "Strangelove" can safely be mothballed.Theuniondivvie said:Deeply disturbing that a regressive, corrupt theocracy is running amok in the middle east. And Iran isn't any better.
So can "1984" -
"This was not an act of war. It was an act to prevent war."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublespeak0 -
I agree with this -- talk of "stabbing Corbyn in the front" is unacceptable.NickPalmer said:
A point not yet mentioned here is that Phillips will be viewed with reservations by members who didn't like vocal critics of Corbyn, especially as she's been enthusiastically endorsed by arch-critic Wes Streeting. Also, subtle point about hHer otherwise excellent video is that it seemed to have a subtext that caring about people in difficulty was a progressive programme, impicitly without the need for more, and that doesn't tick the left of centre box.
Imagine if a male politician had said this about a female one.
0 -
This article from 2017 puts it at half of members live in London and the south:JonWC said:Can anyone tell me what proportion of the Labour membership is in London. I know it is substantial but is it jaw-dropping?
https://labourlist.org/2017/10/tim-bale-inside-labours-massive-membership-base/
It seems reasonable to suppose more than half of that half is in London, so 25-30% is not a ridiculous figure.
To put it in context, on a rough estimate London contains around 14% of the UK’s population, although a higher than usual proportion of that will not have the franchise.0 -
Yes, it is the same with the age-old controversy over women's tennis. If the aim of women's football is to play in men's teams, clearly it is not good enough.SouthamObserver said:
The crowds in women’s football are going up. There were over 30,000 at Spurs to see the North London derby, I think.kinabalu said:
You're right that there is a push to elevate Women's team sports above what is atm the genuine level of interest in them. However, there is a good reason for this. Team sports are an extremely healthy thing for young people to get into. It is therefore important that it does not become an area that is effectively boys only. So the irritation that you and others (including myself if I'm honest) feel about Women's team sports sometimes being rather more "in your face" than you would like is IMO a price worth paying for the benefits being sought.matt said:I look at the BBC’s frankly adulatory and uncritical promotion of women’s football. I get why, at a high level, they promote it in that way but anyone who thinks it’s nothing to do with the BBCs ability to purchase top level men’s football rights is fooling themselves. If they really wanted to reach an audience unserved by BBC tv, they’d be heading to lower league men’s football.
But if the measure of success is bums on seats, then women's football is up there and keep an eye on women's cricket as well.0 -
Not if he has run it dodgily! And at the very least the way he did looks dodgy at first glance and he will spend plenty of time explaining why it is not.DecrepiterJohnL said:
JRM is stonkingly rich through running his own hedge fund. Surely he embodies Conservative entrepreneurialism a sight more than Boris does. David Cameron, with his family's very peripheral involvement in the Panama Papers is probably closer but he was already leader by then.ydoethur said:Surely - surely - surely Johnson could not be so lucky as to have Ian Lavery as his next opponent?
Electing a man who has been investigated for tax evasion and stands accused of some distinctly dodgy financial dealings by his own union would be the equivalent of the Tories electing Rees Mogg.
The case for Lavery, at risk of damning with faint praise, is that at least he has run something, which puts him a step up on most (all?) of his rivals.0 -
There was that Guardian piece on the Albanian mafia which made them seem like hugely innovative and efficient operators, increasing quality whilst passing on savings to the consumer and building cooperative contacts with others, perhaps they could take over.MarqueeMark said:
The issue is not that Lavery has run something. It is HOW he has run it.DecrepiterJohnL said:
JRM is stonkingly rich through running his own hedge fund. Surely he embodies Conservative entrepreneurialism a sight more than Boris does. David Cameron, with his family's very peripheral involvement in the Panama Papers is probably closer but he was already leader by then.ydoethur said:Surely - surely - surely Johnson could not be so lucky as to have Ian Lavery as his next opponent?
Electing a man who has been investigated for tax evasion and stands accused of some distinctly dodgy financial dealings by his own union would be the equivalent of the Tories electing Rees Mogg.
The case for Lavery, at risk of damning with faint praise, is that at least he has run something, which puts him a step up on most (all?) of his rivals.
Mafia bosses have "run something". Doesn't mean you'd make them PM.0 -
I guess then they might be able to scrape up a not-entirely-crap leader between them.felix said:
They should merge with the ConservativesStuartDickson said:Monica Lennon says Scottish Labour must split from UK party
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-50982723
Actually, scrub that.
https://twitter.com/Mike_Blackley/status/1213375414544084992?s=200 -
You prefer Boris’s ... ?matt said:
For sucking your own cock, aren’t I clever lines, your last line is a prize winner.Foxy said:
Lavery is the death spiral candidate for Labour. Corbynism sheared of his charisma.numbertwelve said:
I find it somewhat reassuring that there appears to be a dawning realisation that RLB isn’t up to it (why did it take them so long?)BudG said:Took part in another You Gov poll for Labour members last night. The difference between this and the first one that caused a lot of movement in the market was that they included Lavery this time (he had not announced an interest in running at the time of the last poll)
I would also mention that there seems to be quite a bit of support growing in some of the Facebook groups I am a member of. One was running a poll over the last few days and it put Lavery top in a poll of about 900 group members, although I would estimate that only around half of these will have Labour membership. There seems to be a swing towards support for Lavery from RLB.
Am expecting a strong showing from Lavery when the next YouGov poll comes out, but as ever, DYOR if betting
Less reassuring that that seems to be benefitting Lavery of all people...
I don't tend to win on leadership contests either. I tend to favour the best candidates, and they rarely win in an era of killer clown leaders.0 -
Same here. I dont have any complaints about them and get most of my news from their website, but other than sport I get most of my tv online.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Cookie, the F1 coverage was very good. And then they threw it away when they still had a full year (at least) of rights.
For various reasons, I hardly watch TV news now (used to when I have my sarnies but now I tend to watch history on Youtube). Not sure what the last BBC programme I watched was, other than the news.0 -
Certainly if Long Baily does want it it's been a strangely anaemic way of going about it.SouthamObserver said:Very good from David. Starmer is now clearly the front-runner. Rayner is definitely very good value. Nandy is strong, if she can make the run-off. Long-Bailey is giving every impression of not wanting to stand but being strong-armed into doing so. The far-left is currently giving everyone else a clear run. It’s a real puzzle. I think, though, that Jess Phillips has a decent chance of making the final ballot.
0 -
What did John McDonnell say about Esther McVeigh?YBarddCwsc said:
I agree with this -- talk of "stabbing Corbyn in the front" is unacceptable.NickPalmer said:
A point not yet mentioned here is that Phillips will be viewed with reservations by members who didn't like vocal critics of Corbyn, especially as she's been enthusiastically endorsed by arch-critic Wes Streeting. Also, subtle point about hHer otherwise excellent video is that it seemed to have a subtext that caring about people in difficulty was a progressive programme, impicitly without the need for more, and that doesn't tick the left of centre box.
Imagine if a male politician had said this about a female one.
3 -
See also:kinabalu said:
Absurdity wherever you look. "Strangelove" can safely be mothballed.Theuniondivvie said:Deeply disturbing that a regressive, corrupt theocracy is running amok in the middle east. And Iran isn't any better.
So can "1984" -
"This was not an act of war. It was an act to prevent war."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublespeak
https://twitter.com/PeterArnottGlas/status/1213389690730098688?s=200 -
That’s not what he was saying.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Yeah that fuckwit Cummings and CCHQ's gurus from down under totally wasted all their time and the party's money on Facebook.MarqueeMark said:
Twitter, Facebook and the Death of the Left as an Electoral Force will be a popular topic in about a decade.squareroot2 said:
Facebook poll.. voodoo nonsenseBudG said:Took part in another You Gov poll for Labour members last night. The difference between this and the first one that caused a lot of movement in the market was that they included Lavery this time (he had not announced an interest in running at the time of the last poll)
I would also mention that there seems to be quite a bit of support growing in some of the Facebook groups I am a member of. One was running a poll over the last few days and it put Lavery top in a poll of about 900 group members, although I would estimate that only around half of these will have Labour membership. There seems to be a swing towards support for Lavery from RLB.
Am expecting a strong showing from Lavery when the next YouGov poll comes out, but as ever, DYOR if betting
It is fascinating how the Left have taken to these platforms to reinforoce each other, whereas the Right by and large do not share their views. Even in totally apolitical groups, those on the Left will find a reason to rail at Johnson/Tories. Yet from those 14m who voted Tory, not a peep. Certainly, nobody on Facebook would have a clue about my politics.
Or was it wasted? One thing is for sure, if you think the right ignores social media, you ought to stay in more.
The left are much noisier and public about their views on social media than the right. Doesn’t mean the right isn’t there.0 -
I tried The Trial of Christine Keeler.kle4 said:
Same here. I dont have any complaints about them and get most of my news from their website, but other than sport I get most of my tv online.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Cookie, the F1 coverage was very good. And then they threw it away when they still had a full year (at least) of rights.
For various reasons, I hardly watch TV news now (used to when I have my sarnies but now I tend to watch history on Youtube). Not sure what the last BBC programme I watched was, other than the news.
I found it guilty. It’s the first thing I’ve ever come across where the plot structure is more confused than Huxley’s Eyeless in Gaza.0 -
I've often thought there shoudnt be a reason some female cricketers could not be as good as men - as you dont need to be the fastest or the strongest which at a top level the men would be in order to be really really good in cricket. Plenty of great bowlers who cannot get in high 90s, plenty of great batsmen who are not muscled meat machines.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Yes, it is the same with the age-old controversy over women's tennis. If the aim of women's football is to play in men's teams, clearly it is not good enough.SouthamObserver said:
The crowds in women’s football are going up. There were over 30,000 at Spurs to see the North London derby, I think.kinabalu said:
You're right that there is a push to elevate Women's team sports above what is atm the genuine level of interest in them. However, there is a good reason for this. Team sports are an extremely healthy thing for young people to get into. It is therefore important that it does not become an area that is effectively boys only. So the irritation that you and others (including myself if I'm honest) feel about Women's team sports sometimes being rather more "in your face" than you would like is IMO a price worth paying for the benefits being sought.matt said:I look at the BBC’s frankly adulatory and uncritical promotion of women’s football. I get why, at a high level, they promote it in that way but anyone who thinks it’s nothing to do with the BBCs ability to purchase top level men’s football rights is fooling themselves. If they really wanted to reach an audience unserved by BBC tv, they’d be heading to lower league men’s football.
But if the measure of success is bums on seats, then women's football is up there and keep an eye on women's cricket as well.0 -
And Pence resuscitating the Iran/911 nonsense:Theuniondivvie said:Deeply disturbing that a regressive, corrupt theocracy is running amok in the middle east. And Iran isn't any better.
https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1213250469365272576?s=20
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jan/03/mike-pence-iran-911-suleimani
What is the administration up to ?
Was this just an impulse assassination, or are they planning a full scale war ?
(There are legal arguments that the US has already initiated a state of war, but that’s not the same thing.)
0 -
Yes. And apparently in olden times it was massive. The standard (to my eye) is not bad. Main exception to that - the goalkeeping. Oh dear.SouthamObserver said:The crowds in women’s football are going up. There were nearly 40,000 at Spurs to see the North London derby.
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2019/nov/17/arsenal-tottenham-womens-super-league-wsl-match-report0 -
Not a guilty pleasure, then.ydoethur said:
I tried The Trial of Christine Keeler.kle4 said:
Same here. I dont have any complaints about them and get most of my news from their website, but other than sport I get most of my tv online.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Cookie, the F1 coverage was very good. And then they threw it away when they still had a full year (at least) of rights.
For various reasons, I hardly watch TV news now (used to when I have my sarnies but now I tend to watch history on Youtube). Not sure what the last BBC programme I watched was, other than the news.
I found it guilty. It’s the first thing I’ve ever come across where the plot structure is more confused than Huxley’s Eyeless in Gaza.
0 -
Never mind hypothetical daughters, families of very real sons and daughters serving in the US armed forces are probably higher amongst Trump's followers. It will be interesting to see how they react. This might be yet another Darwin nominee.Theuniondivvie said:
See also:kinabalu said:
Absurdity wherever you look. "Strangelove" can safely be mothballed.Theuniondivvie said:Deeply disturbing that a regressive, corrupt theocracy is running amok in the middle east. And Iran isn't any better.
So can "1984" -
"This was not an act of war. It was an act to prevent war."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublespeak
https://twitter.com/PeterArnottGlas/status/1213389690730098688?s=200 -
Many of us thought Corbyn obviously has no chance running for leader as he would be awful. While that was right and the mps who knew him thought so and never stopped believing that, members loved him as we know, so can Lavery really tap into that? He just doesnt seem to have that gentle old grandad vibe that Corbyn had.0
-
There are few genuine polymaths in the world yet all of them post here. It’s a remarkable coincidence.Nigelb said:
You prefer Boris’s ... ?matt said:
For sucking your own cock, aren’t I clever lines, your last line is a prize winner.Foxy said:
Lavery is the death spiral candidate for Labour. Corbynism sheared of his charisma.numbertwelve said:
I find it somewhat reassuring that there appears to be a dawning realisation that RLB isn’t up to it (why did it take them so long?)BudG said:Took part in another You Gov poll for Labour members last night. The difference between this and the first one that caused a lot of movement in the market was that they included Lavery this time (he had not announced an interest in running at the time of the last poll)
I would also mention that there seems to be quite a bit of support growing in some of the Facebook groups I am a member of. One was running a poll over the last few days and it put Lavery top in a poll of about 900 group members, although I would estimate that only around half of these will have Labour membership. There seems to be a swing towards support for Lavery from RLB.
Am expecting a strong showing from Lavery when the next YouGov poll comes out, but as ever, DYOR if betting
Less reassuring that that seems to be benefitting Lavery of all people...
I don't tend to win on leadership contests either. I tend to favour the best candidates, and they rarely win in an era of killer clown leaders.1 -
You would have thought that if there was a sport (OK, I know there are arguments about whether it is one, but still) where women and men could compete on level terms it would be snooker. After all, the trick there is eyesight and straight cueing.kle4 said:
I've often thought there shoudnt be a reason some female cricketers could not be as good as men - as you dont need to be the fastest or the strongest which at a top level the men would be in order to be really really good in cricket. Plenty of great bowlers who cannot get in high 90s, plenty of great batsmen who are not muscled meat machines.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Yes, it is the same with the age-old controversy over women's tennis. If the aim of women's football is to play in men's teams, clearly it is not good enough.SouthamObserver said:
The crowds in women’s football are going up. There were over 30,000 at Spurs to see the North London derby, I think.kinabalu said:
You're right that there is a push to elevate Women's team sports above what is atm the genuine level of interest in them. However, there is a good reason for this. Team sports are an extremely healthy thing for young people to get into. It is therefore important that it does not become an area that is effectively boys only. So the irritation that you and others (including myself if I'm honest) feel about Women's team sports sometimes being rather more "in your face" than you would like is IMO a price worth paying for the benefits being sought.matt said:I look at the BBC’s frankly adulatory and uncritical promotion of women’s football. I get why, at a high level, they promote it in that way but anyone who thinks it’s nothing to do with the BBCs ability to purchase top level men’s football rights is fooling themselves. If they really wanted to reach an audience unserved by BBC tv, they’d be heading to lower league men’s football.
But if the measure of success is bums on seats, then women's football is up there and keep an eye on women's cricket as well.
Yet even Reanne Evans and Kelly Fisher, when playing against men, lost and lost badly. This despite being so dominant in the women’s game that Evans won the world championship when eight months pregnant.0 -
The change in football spectating in my lifetime has been amazing. As teenagers we used to get the tube to Upton Park to watch West Ham and stand in the South Bank for the atmosphere, the undercurrent of violence, the what would now be regarded as offensive chanting and the ridiculously dangerous terrace surges as much as the game (especially those of us who weren't West Ham fans). Now it is a family day out for both sexes and all ages, which is an improvement, but where do the lads go that like that kind of thing? I guess it was the hoodies and gangs on bikes of its dayDecrepiterJohnL said:
Yes, it is the same with the age-old controversy over women's tennis. If the aim of women's football is to play in men's teams, clearly it is not good enough.SouthamObserver said:
The crowds in women’s football are going up. There were over 30,000 at Spurs to see the North London derby, I think.kinabalu said:
You're right that there is a push to elevate Women's team sports above what is atm the genuine level of interest in them. However, there is a good reason for this. Team sports are an extremely healthy thing for young people to get into. It is therefore important that it does not become an area that is effectively boys only. So the irritation that you and others (including myself if I'm honest) feel about Women's team sports sometimes being rather more "in your face" than you would like is IMO a price worth paying for the benefits being sought.matt said:I look at the BBC’s frankly adulatory and uncritical promotion of women’s football. I get why, at a high level, they promote it in that way but anyone who thinks it’s nothing to do with the BBCs ability to purchase top level men’s football rights is fooling themselves. If they really wanted to reach an audience unserved by BBC tv, they’d be heading to lower league men’s football.
But if the measure of success is bums on seats, then women's football is up there and keep an eye on women's cricket as well.0 -
With this administration, I would suggest avoid looking for conspiracy where stupidity will explain things.Nigelb said:
And Pence resuscitating the Iran/911 nonsense:Theuniondivvie said:Deeply disturbing that a regressive, corrupt theocracy is running amok in the middle east. And Iran isn't any better.
https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1213250469365272576?s=20
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jan/03/mike-pence-iran-911-suleimani
What is the administration up to ?
Was this just an impulse assassination, or are they planning a full scale war ?
(There are legal arguments that the US has already initiated a state of war, but that’s not the same thing.)1 -
I am briefly breaking my self-imposed exile to declsre:
#Sandy4Nandy
5 -
Yes, it's an agenda. That's what I said. The agenda is to promote Women's team sports so that team sports (e.g. football rather than tennis) do not become a boys only activity.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. kinabalu, it's an agenda driving editorial decisions. Women's sport is sometimes the equal or better (in popularity terms) of men's (tennis springs to mind) but women's football is orders of magnitude behind men's. You wouldn't guess that from the coverage.
0 -
I particularly liked David's "her Guardian article last week was a masterpiece of meaninglessness".kle4 said:
Certainly if Long Baily does want it it's been a strangely anaemic way of going about it.SouthamObserver said:Very good from David. Starmer is now clearly the front-runner. Rayner is definitely very good value. Nandy is strong, if she can make the run-off. Long-Bailey is giving every impression of not wanting to stand but being strong-armed into doing so. The far-left is currently giving everyone else a clear run. It’s a real puzzle. I think, though, that Jess Phillips has a decent chance of making the final ballot.
The reason why most of us are astonished she got pushed onto the stage as Corbyn's Annointed One has nothing to do with how she looks or how she sounds. It's just that There's Nothing There.....0 -
I agree entirely.ydoethur said:
With this administration, I would suggest avoid looking for conspiracy where stupidity will explain things.Nigelb said:
And Pence resuscitating the Iran/911 nonsense:Theuniondivvie said:Deeply disturbing that a regressive, corrupt theocracy is running amok in the middle east. And Iran isn't any better.
https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1213250469365272576?s=20
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jan/03/mike-pence-iran-911-suleimani
What is the administration up to ?
Was this just an impulse assassination, or are they planning a full scale war ?
(There are legal arguments that the US has already initiated a state of war, but that’s not the same thing.)
But who knows where that stupidity might lead them ?0 -
Dunno which is more quease making, the thought that it's part of a larger strategic evangelical 'rapture' or the standard lurching into crises by corrupt incompetents. The former I suppose.Nigelb said:
And Pence resuscitating the Iran/911 nonsense:Theuniondivvie said:Deeply disturbing that a regressive, corrupt theocracy is running amok in the middle east. And Iran isn't any better.
https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1213250469365272576?s=20
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jan/03/mike-pence-iran-911-suleimani
What is the administration up to ?
Was this just an impulse assassination, or are they planning a full scale war ?
(There are legal arguments that the US has already initiated a state of war, but that’s not the same thing.)
On point.
https://twitter.com/StallaSimon/status/1213350400000249856?s=201 -
Pretty goodTheuniondivvie said:
Dunno which is more quease making, the thought that it's part of a larger strategic evangelical 'rapture' or the standard lurching into crises by corrupt incompetents. The former I suppose.Nigelb said:
And Pence resuscitating the Iran/911 nonsense:Theuniondivvie said:Deeply disturbing that a regressive, corrupt theocracy is running amok in the middle east. And Iran isn't any better.
https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1213250469365272576?s=20
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jan/03/mike-pence-iran-911-suleimani
What is the administration up to ?
Was this just an impulse assassination, or are they planning a full scale war ?
(There are legal arguments that the US has already initiated a state of war, but that’s not the same thing.)
On point.
https://twitter.com/StallaSimon/status/1213350400000249856?s=200 -
Oh FFS. I give up. That cannot be topped.Theuniondivvie said:0 -
I'd say it's a pretty good example of what the BBC should be for, rather than competing with private companies by paying exorbitant salaries to established stars/fees for the rights to blockbuster eventskinabalu said:
Yes, it's an agenda. That's what I said. The agenda is to promote Women's team sports so that team sports (e.g. football rather than tennis) do not become a boys only activity.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. kinabalu, it's an agenda driving editorial decisions. Women's sport is sometimes the equal or better (in popularity terms) of men's (tennis springs to mind) but women's football is orders of magnitude behind men's. You wouldn't guess that from the coverage.
0 -
We agree. I’d add that sports tend to improve quickly after they get significant TV exposure, which would render the ‘they’re not good enough’ argument invalid.isam said:
I'd say it's a pretty good example of what the BBC should be for, rather than competing with private companies by paying exorbitant salaries to established stars/fees for the rights to blockbuster eventskinabalu said:
Yes, it's an agenda. That's what I said. The agenda is to promote Women's team sports so that team sports (e.g. football rather than tennis) do not become a boys only activity.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. kinabalu, it's an agenda driving editorial decisions. Women's sport is sometimes the equal or better (in popularity terms) of men's (tennis springs to mind) but women's football is orders of magnitude behind men's. You wouldn't guess that from the coverage.
0 -
Then the more exposure the England cricket team get, the better.Nigelb said:
We agree. I’d add that sports tend to improve quickly after they get significant TV exposure, which would render the ‘they’re not good enough’ argument invalid.isam said:
I'd say it's a pretty good example of what the BBC should be for, rather than competing with private companies by paying exorbitant salaries to established stars/fees for the rights to blockbuster eventskinabalu said:
Yes, it's an agenda. That's what I said. The agenda is to promote Women's team sports so that team sports (e.g. football rather than tennis) do not become a boys only activity.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. kinabalu, it's an agenda driving editorial decisions. Women's sport is sometimes the equal or better (in popularity terms) of men's (tennis springs to mind) but women's football is orders of magnitude behind men's. You wouldn't guess that from the coverage.
0 -
Aside from the odd flashback or two, the plot is quite straightforward and the only mystery is how on earth they can spin it out for another four episodes. Radio Times says they will, so there must be more complications planned.ydoethur said:
I tried The Trial of Christine Keeler.kle4 said:
Same here. I dont have any complaints about them and get most of my news from their website, but other than sport I get most of my tv online.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Cookie, the F1 coverage was very good. And then they threw it away when they still had a full year (at least) of rights.
For various reasons, I hardly watch TV news now (used to when I have my sarnies but now I tend to watch history on Youtube). Not sure what the last BBC programme I watched was, other than the news.
I found it guilty. It’s the first thing I’ve ever come across where the plot structure is more confused than Huxley’s Eyeless in Gaza.
I'm no expert but because I know someone who knew Profumo back in the day, I've read a few books on the subject and the trouble for any drama and especially this one is that Christine Keeler is paradoxically both central to and peripheral to events. Keeler and the people around her are blundering about like bulls in someone else's china shop. And that explains the flashbacks -- to get Keeler's former lovers into the story. Frankly, a documentary would be better (and one is scheduled to follow the series).
0 -
No, they’ve already found their level. As a 90s tribute act....ydoethur said:
Then the more exposure the England cricket team get, the better.Nigelb said:
We agree. I’d add that sports tend to improve quickly after they get significant TV exposure, which would render the ‘they’re not good enough’ argument invalid.isam said:
I'd say it's a pretty good example of what the BBC should be for, rather than competing with private companies by paying exorbitant salaries to established stars/fees for the rights to blockbuster eventskinabalu said:
Yes, it's an agenda. That's what I said. The agenda is to promote Women's team sports so that team sports (e.g. football rather than tennis) do not become a boys only activity.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. kinabalu, it's an agenda driving editorial decisions. Women's sport is sometimes the equal or better (in popularity terms) of men's (tennis springs to mind) but women's football is orders of magnitude behind men's. You wouldn't guess that from the coverage.
0 -
Here comes some new challengers-
Phillips
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/jess-phillips-need-strong-leader-21209233
Nandy
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jan/03/labour-power-activism-leader0 -
From Trump's point of view, it is probably more about avoiding impeachment than campaigning for reelection.Theuniondivvie said:
Dunno which is more quease making, the thought that it's part of a larger strategic evangelical 'rapture' or the standard lurching into crises by corrupt incompetents. The former I suppose.Nigelb said:
And Pence resuscitating the Iran/911 nonsense:Theuniondivvie said:Deeply disturbing that a regressive, corrupt theocracy is running amok in the middle east. And Iran isn't any better.
https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1213250469365272576?s=20
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jan/03/mike-pence-iran-911-suleimani
What is the administration up to ?
Was this just an impulse assassination, or are they planning a full scale war ?
(There are legal arguments that the US has already initiated a state of war, but that’s not the same thing.)
On point.
https://twitter.com/StallaSimon/status/1213350400000249856?s=20
As mooted earlier, this might hurt him with his base who are likely to have family in the services. This could be behind the sudden urgency to show Trump surrounded by evangelicals.0
