politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Developments this afternoon show that Yvette Cooper is stil

This afternoon it’s been announced that a further six MPs have come out and said they are backing Yvette Cooper – a move that reminds me of Henry H Manson’s words on the site ten days ago about her having the best organised campaign.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
15-2 is an amazing price.
One might argue that any system that is unfair is illegitimate, but that I think is a more abstract point which, while not irrelevant, does not directly impact the actual illegitimacy of the system as it is, as much as I believe it should be changed. If the people have not elected in representatives to change that system, they have implicitly accepted the outcomes made possible by that system as legitimate.
Maybe we are close the point where enough people will vote for representatives who do want to change the system that the legitimacy can be challenged, but at present as unfair as it appears to me, I cannot question the legitimacy of this government or the past Blair government to govern as they did onthe vote they received.
Simon Burns, giving a fine speech.
It's actually getting some coverage on the US sports networks.
Ooops forgot to include the NI Unionists in my Right-wing seats tally.
So right-wing popular vote = 50.5% (Con, UKIP, DUP, UUP and TUV)
Right-wing seats at Westminster = 341 (52.5% of 650)
Of course, to benefit from second-preferences in an AV system you need to ensure you're not eliminated on first preferences, which makes it rather a lottery. Nonetheless, you can envisage a possible route for Yvette to win this contest, even if things don't change very much, whereby Liz Kendall is eliminated first and Yvette picks up the bulk of her supporters' 2nd prefs.
At the moment, it seems to me that punters are giving insufficient weight to the organisational advantage of Yvette over Liz (and to a lesser extent over Andy), and also to the fact that the electorate in this contest are largely much more left-wing than Liz. There's also the union aspect, which remains key to the contest: the unions may prefer Andy to Yvette, but even more so they'll prefer Yvette to Liz.
Even ESPN is covering the DOJ press conference at 10.30 ET
For a different perspective, The Economist:
"The prime minister is in a delightfully strong position. And if, despite the efforts of his party’s cantankerous wing, he succeeds, he could open up to his party new segments of the electorate beyond its southern, middle-class strongholds. Labour is downtrodden, faces months of internal debate and may tilt left. The Lib Dems have been reduced to a tiny, traumatised rump. The centre ground is there for the taking. A decade after he first set his sights on it, Mr Cameron has a chance to seize it."
http://www.economist.com/news/britain/21651201-emboldened-and-strengthened-his-electoral-triumph-prime-minister-sets-out-finish-what
But that's almost beside the point. The point is that anyone claiming the Tories have a legitimate claim to impose their manifesto on the UK because it was voted for fall at this simple test. After all 45% of Scotland voted for Independence, a significantly higher level of support than the current UK government has."
In 2007 the SNP formed the entire Scottish govt with just 32%/31% of the votes. So Dair must have protested about the illegitamacy of that bunch who came in with less than the current UK govt.
I had assumed on Economic stance. But now you add in the very left wing socialist DUP. Not being very consistent now, are you.
http://www.politicsresources.net/area/uk/percentvote.htm
He apparently copped a plea a couple of years back on corruption charges.
By all means oppose it, but don't get morally insane in the process.
Dave's been such a disappointment so far on that front.
[Edit: Have I (well, we) been trolled? Good effort if so. If not, send for a private-sector nurse immediately.]
However, I do think it is still perfectly acceptable to challenge the government on the implementation of its manifesto commitments, and the response of "We've won a majority, thus you can't complain about us implementing our manifesto" doesn't wash. If critics of a particular policy can put together a coherent argument, which motivates public opposition to that policy, then I think there comes a point where the government has to give way, regardless of its legitimacy.
One of the challenges of Opposition is identifying those areas of policy on which to try to fight to win a climbdown, where to fight only for amendments, and where not, all the time while trying to create a coherent narrative of what your alternative government would look like.
No Opposition can simply turn round and say that the electorate has voted for the government's manifesto and they won't be opposing any of it.
Well Labour will be needing a leader that can get them elected.
When I say free...for a few millions.
Harriet Harman's response to the #QueensSpeech is better than every speech Ed Miliband gave over five years, put together.
Why so coy?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Unionist_Party
"Ideology: National conservatism[1], Social conservatism[2], British unionism, Euroscepticism[3]
"Political position: Right-wing[4][5]"
Perhaps that's why Blair's resigned from peacemaking, to free himself up for duties to football?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CONCACAF
Of those who died, to make this Country great,
Join in our song, and are always with us in spirit,
As we march on, to build the Tory State."
What is fascinating is they intend to proceed with electing Blatter to a 5th term on Friday. It'll be interesting to see if they do go ahead with it.
[...]
Considering the role played by the Auschwitz prisons during the Holocaust as well as the individual prisoner's knowledge that once they entered the camp freedom was not likely to be obtained by any means other than death, the cruel comedy of the slogan becomes strikingly clear. The psychological impact it wrought on those who passed through the gates of each of the camps where it was seen was incredibly powerful.[10]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arbeit_macht_frei
I don't the UK has the space for all these Arbeit Macht Frei camps.
They've had it for 18 months....Chuck Blazer
Clearly Chuck doesn't have enough to get Blatter. Hopefully one of the others do....
Is US law so flexible they can arrest anyone anywhere, or has Blatter actually (allegedly) done something in the USA that they believe they can prosecute?
Clearly Chuck doesn't have enough to get Blatter. Hopefully one of the others do....
Is US law so flexible they can arrest anyone anywhere, or has Blatter actually (allegedly) done something in the USA that they believe they can prosecute?
Firstly, no it isn't, and secondly so far this is nothing to do with Blatter, even though so far there are apparently 47 indictments.
Clearly Chuck doesn't have enough to get Blatter. Hopefully one of the others do....
Is US law so flexible they can arrest anyone anywhere, or has Blatter actually (allegedly) done something in the USA that they believe they can prosecute?
Uncle Sam gets a bit twitchy when large scale corruption is undertaken using Dollars as the favoured currency.
See Assange, O'Dwyer, Natwest three and so forth