politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Betting on when the new Labour leader will be announced
Comments
-
"Led" by a tiny amount, perhaps. "None of the above" beats all of them.HYUFD said:
Burnham also led with yougov, Mori and ORB, it has been consistentThreeQuidder said:
Hmm, this isn't even asking "what would you do" but "what do you think other people will do".HYUFD said:
Yes, Comres last week had Burnham on +5%, Cooper on -3%, Kendall on -6% and Corbyn on -10%eek said:
He may well have once upon a time but do we have any such survey from after Burnham started jumping on that day's bandwagon....HYUFD said:
Well you may not think so, but polls have Burnham the highest rated amongst the public of the 4, anyway that is up to youThomasNashe said:
Up until last week I was going to put Burnham as 3. But frankly, I've come to the conclusion that he wouldn't be any better than Corbyn (who will of course be an utter disaster).HYUFD said:
What happens if the final round is Burnham v Corbyn, which still just about looks most likely if Corbyn does not win in round 1? You have not used your final 2 votes so will have no sayFreggles said:
Nice one.ThomasNashe said:Have just used my £3 affiliate membership to cast my votes thus
Leader: 1) Kendall; 2) Cooper
Deputy: 1) Creasy; 2) Bradshaw; 3) Flint; 4) Eagle
Mayoral candidate: 1) Jowell; 2) Lammy; 3) Wolmer; 4) Thomas; 5) Khan
http://www.itv.com/news/2015-08-16/poll-finds-corbyn-is-labours-best-and-worst-election-hope/0 -
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3194376/No-link-eating-fatty-food-early-death-Findings-raise-doubts-advice-avoid-butter-fat-milk-meat-dairy-products.htmlLuckyguy1983 said:
Very innovative and I hope it tastes nice but imho there's nothing wrong with pigs fat! People weren't dropping dead of heart attacks every five minutes when lard was a national staple.bigjohnowls said:
Arrow Farm Worksop make it.Luckyguy1983 said:
Fat free black pudding?bigjohnowls said:
Popcorn and Fat Free Blackpudding timeThreeQuidder said:
Who is that?malcolmg said:
You really are trying to be seen as dimmer than ScottThreeQuidder said:
Indeed not. Trolls tend not to use facts.malcolmg said:
Dear Dear you are not very good at the trollingThreeQuidder said:
Assuming by "Loyalists" you mean "Unionists", this is risible. The No camp won by 10 percentage points: a decisive margin.Dair said:
The problem for Loyalists is that the decision was not clear and the actual argument was fundamentally lost (perhaps forever) by the Loyalists.ThreeQuidder said:
Agreed, but since the SNP has conceded that they can't call a legitimate referendum and that only HMG can do that, why would HMG permit a second referendum when the SNP has proven that it can't accept Scots' democratic decision?kle4 said:
It's their reason for existence, they cannot accept it if it goes against.
You lost. Accept the democratic verdict of the people of Scotland and move on.
You seem to be struggling to come to terms with the fact that 11 months ago, you lost. Why is that?
Only ingredients are Pigs Blood Salt Pepper and
Instead of Pigs fat they use potato and onion.
So the man on the butchers counter said when i asked if it was a joke.
I did check Worksop hadnt designated 23rd August as April Fools day0 -
You eat some strange stuff up north.bigjohnowls said:
Arrow Farm Worksop make it.Luckyguy1983 said:
Fat free black pudding?bigjohnowls said:
Popcorn and Fat Free Blackpudding timeThreeQuidder said:
Who is that?malcolmg said:
You really are trying to be seen as dimmer than ScottThreeQuidder said:
Indeed not. Trolls tend not to use facts.malcolmg said:
Dear Dear you are not very good at the trollingThreeQuidder said:
Assuming by "Loyalists" you mean "Unionists", this is risible. The No camp won by 10 percentage points: a decisive margin.Dair said:
The problem for Loyalists is that the decision was not clear and the actual argument was fundamentally lost (perhaps forever) by the Loyalists.ThreeQuidder said:
Agreed, but since the SNP has conceded that they can't call a legitimate referendum and that only HMG can do that, why would HMG permit a second referendum when the SNP has proven that it can't accept Scots' democratic decision?kle4 said:
It's their reason for existence, they cannot accept it if it goes against.
You lost. Accept the democratic verdict of the people of Scotland and move on.
You seem to be struggling to come to terms with the fact that 11 months ago, you lost. Why is that?
Only ingredients are Pigs Blood Salt Pepper and
Instead of Pigs fat they use potato and onion.
So the man on the butchers counter said when i asked if it was a joke.
I did check Worksop hadnt designated 23rd August as April Fools day
Now in London we eat real grub - Pie & Mash . . . with liquor.
0 -
'Make things no different' would not include anyone who would potentially switch their vote for or away from a candidate so is really not relevant in terms of the net impact of a candidate on Labour's voteshareThreeQuidder said:
Let's look at the inferred "make no difference/don't know" numbers, shall we?HYUFD said:
Surely the public's views should be the most relevant factor of all, but anyway that is up to LabourThreeQuidder said:
You do seem to be fixated on this factoid, repeating it even when it is irrelevant.HYUFD said:
Well you may not think so, but polls have Burnham the highest rated amongst the public of the 4, anyway that is up to youThomasNashe said:
Up until last week I was going to put Burnham as 3. But frankly, I've come to the conclusion that he wouldn't be any better than Corbyn (who will of course be an utter disaster).HYUFD said:
What happens if the final round is Burnham v Corbyn, which still just about looks most likely if Corbyn does not win in round 1? You have not used your final 2 votes so will have no sayFreggles said:
Nice one.ThomasNashe said:Have just used my £3 affiliate membership to cast my votes thus
Leader: 1) Kendall; 2) Cooper
Deputy: 1) Creasy; 2) Bradshaw; 3) Flint; 4) Eagle
Mayoral candidate: 1) Jowell; 2) Lammy; 3) Wolmer; 4) Thomas; 5) Khan
Corbyn 48
Burnham 67
Cooper 67
Kendall 72
Given the scale of Labour's defeat in May, "make no difference" really isn't any better than "making things worse".0 -
Yes, but 'none of the above' is not a candidate is it. As I said Alan Johnson or David Miliband poll better than all of them but neither of them are running so Labour has to go with what it hasThreeQuidder said:
"Led" by a tiny amount, perhaps. "None of the above" beats all of them.HYUFD said:
Burnham also led with yougov, Mori and ORB, it has been consistentThreeQuidder said:
Hmm, this isn't even asking "what would you do" but "what do you think other people will do".HYUFD said:
Yes, Comres last week had Burnham on +5%, Cooper on -3%, Kendall on -6% and Corbyn on -10%eek said:
He may well have once upon a time but do we have any such survey from after Burnham started jumping on that day's bandwagon....HYUFD said:
Well you may not think so, but polls have Burnham the highest rated amongst the public of the 4, anyway that is up to youThomasNashe said:
Up until last week I was going to put Burnham as 3. But frankly, I've come to the conclusion that he wouldn't be any better than Corbyn (who will of course be an utter disaster).HYUFD said:
What happens if the final round is Burnham v Corbyn, which still just about looks most likely if Corbyn does not win in round 1? You have not used your final 2 votes so will have no sayFreggles said:
Nice one.ThomasNashe said:Have just used my £3 affiliate membership to cast my votes thus
Leader: 1) Kendall; 2) Cooper
Deputy: 1) Creasy; 2) Bradshaw; 3) Flint; 4) Eagle
Mayoral candidate: 1) Jowell; 2) Lammy; 3) Wolmer; 4) Thomas; 5) Khan
http://www.itv.com/news/2015-08-16/poll-finds-corbyn-is-labours-best-and-worst-election-hope/0 -
A bit dry I would think. The fat melts while cooking to both give flavour and lubrication to the black pudding. Missing out the fat is the problem with vege-burgers for a similar reason.bigjohnowls said:Well before today started I would have offered you 1million/1 on me buying fat free Blackpudding in the ensuing 24hrs, but I have.
0 -
And eels, Mr. Disraeli, don't forget the stewed eels. Also the pie has to be served upside down and with vinegar.Disraeli said:
You eat some strange stuff up north.bigjohnowls said:
Arrow Farm Worksop make it.Luckyguy1983 said:
Fat free black pudding?bigjohnowls said:
Popcorn and Fat Free Blackpudding timeThreeQuidder said:
Who is that?malcolmg said:
You really are trying to be seen as dimmer than ScottThreeQuidder said:
Indeed not. Trolls tend not to use facts.malcolmg said:
Dear Dear you are not very good at the trollingThreeQuidder said:
Assuming by "Loyalists" you mean "Unionists", this is risible. The No camp won by 10 percentage points: a decisive margin.Dair said:
The problem for Loyalists is that the decision was not clear and the actual argument was fundamentally lost (perhaps forever) by the Loyalists.ThreeQuidder said:
Agreed, but since the SNP has conceded that they can't call a legitimate referendum and that only HMG can do that, why would HMG permit a second referendum when the SNP has proven that it can't accept Scots' democratic decision?kle4 said:
It's their reason for existence, they cannot accept it if it goes against.
You lost. Accept the democratic verdict of the people of Scotland and move on.
You seem to be struggling to come to terms with the fact that 11 months ago, you lost. Why is that?
Only ingredients are Pigs Blood Salt Pepper and
Instead of Pigs fat they use potato and onion.
So the man on the butchers counter said when i asked if it was a joke.
I did check Worksop hadnt designated 23rd August as April Fools day
Now in London we eat real grub - Pie & Mash . . . with liquor.0 -
Thank You Mr Dancer. You showed admirable restraint when you wrote:Morris_Dancer said:Good evening, comrades.
Don't forget to read my post-race wittering here:
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2015/08/belgium-post-race-analysis.html
"Bottas’ race was compromised by the spectacle of his team managing to fit three soft and one medium tyres to his car (sets must be uniform) and earning him a drive-through penalty."
I would have let fly with rather more colourful language!0 -
The point is that the differences between the candidates are too small to be a reliable test of what will happen in 5 years time and thus certainly too small to be worth using as a reason to vote for one candidate over another.HYUFD said:
Yes, but 'none of the above' is not a candidate is it. As I said Alan Johnson or David Miliband poll better than all of them but neither of them are running so Labour has to go with what it hasThreeQuidder said:
"Led" by a tiny amount, perhaps. "None of the above" beats all of them.HYUFD said:
Burnham also led with yougov, Mori and ORB, it has been consistentThreeQuidder said:
Hmm, this isn't even asking "what would you do" but "what do you think other people will do".HYUFD said:
Yes, Comres last week had Burnham on +5%, Cooper on -3%, Kendall on -6% and Corbyn on -10%eek said:
He may well have once upon a time but do we have any such survey from after Burnham started jumping on that day's bandwagon....HYUFD said:
Well you may not think so, but polls have Burnham the highest rated amongst the public of the 4, anyway that is up to youThomasNashe said:
Up until last week I was going to put Burnham as 3. But frankly, I've come to the conclusion that he wouldn't be any better than Corbyn (who will of course be an utter disaster).HYUFD said:
What happens if the final round is Burnham v Corbyn, which still just about looks most likely if Corbyn does not win in round 1? You have not used your final 2 votes so will have no sayFreggles said:
Nice one.ThomasNashe said:Have just used my £3 affiliate membership to cast my votes thus
Leader: 1) Kendall; 2) Cooper
Deputy: 1) Creasy; 2) Bradshaw; 3) Flint; 4) Eagle
Mayoral candidate: 1) Jowell; 2) Lammy; 3) Wolmer; 4) Thomas; 5) Khan
http://www.itv.com/news/2015-08-16/poll-finds-corbyn-is-labours-best-and-worst-election-hope/
I've got lots of things I will consider before I vote in a couple of weeks. Polling ain't going to be one of them.0 -
GRAVY!!!Disraeli said:
You eat some strange stuff up north.bigjohnowls said:
Arrow Farm Worksop make it.Luckyguy1983 said:
Fat free black pudding?bigjohnowls said:
Popcorn and Fat Free Blackpudding timeThreeQuidder said:
Who is that?malcolmg said:
You really are trying to be seen as dimmer than ScottThreeQuidder said:
Indeed not. Trolls tend not to use facts.malcolmg said:
Dear Dear you are not very good at the trollingThreeQuidder said:
Assuming by "Loyalists" you mean "Unionists", this is risible. The No camp won by 10 percentage points: a decisive margin.Dair said:
The problem for Loyalists is that the decision was not clear and the actual argument was fundamentally lost (perhaps forever) by the Loyalists.ThreeQuidder said:
Agreed, but since the SNP has conceded that they can't call a legitimate referendum and that only HMG can do that, why would HMG permit a second referendum when the SNP has proven that it can't accept Scots' democratic decision?kle4 said:
It's their reason for existence, they cannot accept it if it goes against.
You lost. Accept the democratic verdict of the people of Scotland and move on.
You seem to be struggling to come to terms with the fact that 11 months ago, you lost. Why is that?
Only ingredients are Pigs Blood Salt Pepper and
Instead of Pigs fat they use potato and onion.
So the man on the butchers counter said when i asked if it was a joke.
I did check Worksop hadnt designated 23rd August as April Fools day
Now in London we eat real grub - Pie & Mash . . . with liquor.
0 -
Mr. Disraeli, np.
I'm a model of self-restraint. [I also try to be neutral when it comes to F1 so I don't bet based on my own preferences].
It was a very odd mistake to make. One suspects someone's getting a demotion.0 -
There's no serious renegotiation. It's a decision between the EU as it is now, plus ever-closer union, or against it.JEO said:
That the Sunday Times is reporting Downing Street feels they can't run a referendum campaign on what is 'actually' being renegotiated, and they will have to heavily spin it.Richard_Nabavi said:
I have high hopes for a substantial renegotiation, but if we get nothing and the party leadership tries to lie to the public to get a vote won, I will be furious.
If you like the EU, you vote Yes. If you don't, you vote No.0 -
They didn't make him change to a uniform set?Disraeli said:
Thank You Mr Dancer. You showed admirable restraint when you wrote:Morris_Dancer said:Good evening, comrades.
Don't forget to read my post-race wittering here:
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2015/08/belgium-post-race-analysis.html
"Bottas’ race was compromised by the spectacle of his team managing to fit three soft and one medium tyres to his car (sets must be uniform) and earning him a drive-through penalty."
I would have let fly with rather more colourful language!0 -
Ministers back use of force to get migrant fingerprints: Home Office agrees 'coercion' can be used by border officials
Growing numbers of migrants have been refusing in Greece and Italy
It means migrants could be sent back to home countries if they refuse
Coercion should not be used against pregnant women or children
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3207490/Ministers-use-force-migrant-fingerprints-Home-Office-agrees-coercion-used-border-officials.html#ixzz3jfQuPQ00
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook0 -
They would have under Max Moseley!!!ThreeQuidder said:
They didn't make him change to a uniform set?Disraeli said:
Thank You Mr Dancer. You showed admirable restraint when you wrote:Morris_Dancer said:Good evening, comrades.
Don't forget to read my post-race wittering here:
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2015/08/belgium-post-race-analysis.html
"Bottas’ race was compromised by the spectacle of his team managing to fit three soft and one medium tyres to his car (sets must be uniform) and earning him a drive-through penalty."
I would have let fly with rather more colourful language!0 -
Mr. Quidder, oddly, no. He did later, but that was voluntary.
Strange mistake, it seems like one you'd have to go to a lot of effort to make (not unlike brutally stabbing yourself in the stomach whilst shaving).
Edited extra bit: sehr gut, Herr Eulen
0 -
I fear that might have been me. Sorry ...Plato said:I can't recall who used the One Direction analogy, but it was very good. If you were asked to name the band member you liked the most, you'd probably name the only one who's most well known - Kayne? Zayne?
I've no idea - but that's about the level of this polling.
We should give @HYUFD a break - it's a bromance
ThomasNashe said:
Yes, so you keep saying ... But I don't really think when it comes to it that there will be a groundswell of enthusiasm for a flip-flopping continuity Ed Miliband with a Northern accent in 2020.HYUFD said:
Well you may not think so, but polls have Burnham the highest rated amongst the public of the 4, anyway that is up to youThomasNashe said:
Up until last week I was going to put Burnham as 3. But frankly, I've come to the conclusion that he wouldn't be any better than Corbyn (who will of course be an utter disaster).HYUFD said:
What happens if the final round is Burnham v Corbyn, which still just about looks most likely if Corbyn does not win in round 1? You have not used your final 2 votes so will have no sayFreggles said:
Nice one.ThomasNashe said:Have just used my £3 affiliate membership to cast my votes thus
Leader: 1) Kendall; 2) Cooper
Deputy: 1) Creasy; 2) Bradshaw; 3) Flint; 4) Eagle
Mayoral candidate: 1) Jowell; 2) Lammy; 3) Wolmer; 4) Thomas; 5) Khan
0 -
Murphy is a goop. For the last 8 years I have had a right to publish correspondence about my blog on the about page as a condition "unless privacy agreed first" as a trap should any lawyers send me nasty letters. It works, even though it might not ultimately stand up. What he wants is easy, but he didn't bother.Richard_Nabavi said:
LOL, that's a hilarious sequence of retreats which he (unsuccessfully) tries to cover up by bluster!MattW said:It's only a fortnight since he published an email and defended himself on the basis that it was like a blog comment so he had a right to publish it under copyright law.
http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2015/08/05/putting-the-record-straight-on-peoples-qe/comment-page-1/#comment-730870
ISTM that not having a mental map of your own areas of ignorance is quite dangerous to credibility.
Earlier I compared RM to a Punch and Judy show, but perhaps this is better. Had forgotten Roobarb and Custard and the mad inventions in the shed. Skip to 2:29.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3BnN8zjK90&t=2m29s
0 -
The 'differences between the candidates are too small'?? There is a Pacific Ocean sized difference between Kendall on one side and Corbyn on the other. If Labour refuse to listen to polling of the public as they did in 2010 when they ignored the polling showing David Miliband preferred to Ed then do not be surprised if the voters refuse to listen back!ThreeQuidder said:
The point is that the differences between the candidates are too small to be a reliable test of what will happen in 5 years time and thus certainly too small to be worth using as a reason to vote for one candidate over another.HYUFD said:
Yes, but 'none of the above' is not a candidate is it. As I said Alan Johnson or David Miliband poll better than all of them but neither of them are running so Labour has to go with what it hasThreeQuidder said:
"Led" by a tiny amount, perhaps. "None of the above" beats all of them.HYUFD said:
Burnham also led with yougov, Mori and ORB, it has been consistentThreeQuidder said:
Hmm, this isn't even asking "what would you do" but "what do you think other people will do".HYUFD said:
Yes, Comres last week had Burnham on +5%, Cooper on -3%, Kendall on -6% and Corbyn on -10%eek said:
He may well have once upon a time but do we have any such survey from after Burnham started jumping on that day's bandwagon....HYUFD said:
Well you may not think so, but polls have Burnham the highest rated amongst the public of the 4, anyway that is up to youThomasNashe said:
Up until last week I was going to put Burnham as 3. But frankly, I've come to the conclusion that he wouldn't be any better than Corbyn (who will of course be an utter disaster).HYUFD said:
What happens if the final round is Burnham v Corbyn, which still just about looks most likely if Corbyn does not win in round 1? You have not used your final 2 votes so will have no sayFreggles said:
Nice one.ThomasNashe said:Have just used my £3 affiliate membership to cast my votes thus
Leader: 1) Kendall; 2) Cooper
Deputy: 1) Creasy; 2) Bradshaw; 3) Flint; 4) Eagle
Mayoral candidate: 1) Jowell; 2) Lammy; 3) Wolmer; 4) Thomas; 5) Khan
http://www.itv.com/news/2015-08-16/poll-finds-corbyn-is-labours-best-and-worst-election-hope/
I've got lots of things I will consider before I vote in a couple of weeks. Polling ain't going to be one of them.0 -
I like the sort of black pudding that has cubes of pork fat in itfoxinsoxuk said:
A bit dry I would think. The fat melts while cooking to both give flavour and lubrication to the black pudding. Missing out the fat is the problem with vege-burgers for a similar reason.bigjohnowls said:Well before today started I would have offered you 1million/1 on me buying fat free Blackpudding in the ensuing 24hrs, but I have.
0 -
-
I don't agree - Kinnock for example never won a GE, but he was a great Labour leader in the sense that he saved the party from the hard left. He also paved the way for New Labour to exist in the first place. Brown despite losing in 2010, lost with 258 seats in a system where seat share matters far more than vote share - it was Miliband who saw make practically no progress on 2010. It doesn't really matter if he improved Labour's vote share by a measley 1% or 2% if it isn't in the right places in order to increase seat share. Brown may have led the move away from Blairism but Labour's biggest issue today is not that they aren't Blairite enough - after all the main Blairite candidate Kendall, is well a bit rubbish tbqf. Brown did also bring back Campbell and Mandelson, and at least knew the importance of having a strong team, and a successful party machine - Miliband brought in Lucy Powell FFS.HYUFD said:Well at the end of the day you can only judge a party leader on their election record, Foot may have been a great orator but he also led Labour to its worst result since 1918 and the defection of prominent figures to the SDP. Brown led the move away from Blairism which led Labour to its present difficulties and did even worse in 2010 than Miliband did in 2015.
I never said anything about Callaghan, although he was defeated in 1979 he still led Labour to a respectable 36% of the vote
@Omnium Well I agree: Ed Miliband should have an academic rather than a politician.
0 -
Bury's gluten free black pudding is fat free and excellent.bigjohnowls said:
Arrow Farm Worksop make it.Luckyguy1983 said:
Fat free black pudding?bigjohnowls said:
Popcorn and Fat Free Blackpudding timeThreeQuidder said:
Who is that?malcolmg said:
You really are trying to be seen as dimmer than ScottThreeQuidder said:
Indeed not. Trolls tend not to use facts.malcolmg said:
Dear Dear you are not very good at the trollingThreeQuidder said:
Assuming by "Loyalists" you mean "Unionists", this is risible. The No camp won by 10 percentage points: a decisive margin.Dair said:
The problem for Loyalists is that the decision was not clear and the actual argument was fundamentally lost (perhaps forever) by the Loyalists.ThreeQuidder said:
Agreed, but since the SNP has conceded that they can't call a legitimate referendum and that only HMG can do that, why would HMG permit a second referendum when the SNP has proven that it can't accept Scots' democratic decision?kle4 said:
It's their reason for existence, they cannot accept it if it goes against.
You lost. Accept the democratic verdict of the people of Scotland and move on.
You seem to be struggling to come to terms with the fact that 11 months ago, you lost. Why is that?
Only ingredients are Pigs Blood Salt Pepper and
Instead of Pigs fat they use potato and onion.
So the man on the butchers counter said when i asked if it was a joke.
I did check Worksop hadnt designated 23rd August as April Fools day
http://www.buryblackpuddings.co.uk/catalogue.php?cat=80 -
I must say I like this piece about a Corbyn rally from the other day - even though I'm the sort of person who enjoys politics, I think it's right to say 'Ordinary voters don’t want to hear angry songs about ‘bastards’ and magic tricks about QE'. What a strange bunch.
Though I did like the gag about the SW and Tories being like rats as you are never more than 10ft from one.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2015/08/evening-cult-corbyn-islington/0 -
We agree. It's an odd report, though. Who in Downing Street has a conceivable interest in saying that their renegotiation is hopeless and they are going to have to deploy lots of spin? I'm no fan of Cameron's, but it does sound like an enemy in the camp.Sean_F said:
There's no serious renegotiation. It's a decision between the EU as it is now, plus ever-closer union, or against it.JEO said:
That the Sunday Times is reporting Downing Street feels they can't run a referendum campaign on what is 'actually' being renegotiated, and they will have to heavily spin it.Richard_Nabavi said:
I have high hopes for a substantial renegotiation, but if we get nothing and the party leadership tries to lie to the public to get a vote won, I will be furious.
If you like the EU, you vote Yes. If you don't, you vote No.0 -
Pretty much agree with this. Germany/France/almost anyone else in the EU do not want to dismantle integration that has already been done, to make life easier for the awkwardest member of the bunch.Sean_F said:
There's no serious renegotiation. It's a decision between the EU as it is now, plus ever-closer union, or against it.JEO said:
That the Sunday Times is reporting Downing Street feels they can't run a referendum campaign on what is 'actually' being renegotiated, and they will have to heavily spin it.Richard_Nabavi said:
I have high hopes for a substantial renegotiation, but if we get nothing and the party leadership tries to lie to the public to get a vote won, I will be furious.
If you like the EU, you vote Yes. If you don't, you vote No.0 -
Is there polling evidence that Liz Kendall is preferred by the public ? Do they know her ?HYUFD said:
The 'differences between the candidates are too small'?? There is a Pacific Ocean sized difference between Kendall on one side and Corbyn on the other. If Labour refuse to listen to polling of the public as they did in 2010 when they ignored the polling showing David Miliband preferred to Ed then do not be surprised if the voters refuse to listen back!ThreeQuidder said:
The point is that the differences between the candidates are too small to be a reliable test of what will happen in 5 years time and thus certainly too small to be worth using as a reason to vote for one candidate over another.HYUFD said:
Yes, but 'none of the above' is not a candidate is it. As I said Alan Johnson or David Miliband poll better than all of them but neither of them are running so Labour has to go with what it hasThreeQuidder said:
"Led" by a tiny amount, perhaps. "None of the above" beats all of them.HYUFD said:
Burnham also led with yougov, Mori and ORB, it has been consistentThreeQuidder said:
Hmm, this isn't even asking "what would you do" but "what do you think other people will do".HYUFD said:
Yes, Comres last week had Burnham on +5%, Cooper on -3%, Kendall on -6% and Corbyn on -10%eek said:
He may well have once upon a time but do we have any such survey from after Burnham started jumping on that day's bandwagon....HYUFD said:
Well you may not think so, but polls have Burnham the highest rated amongst the public of the 4, anyway that is up to youThomasNashe said:
Up until last week I was going to put Burnham as 3. But frankly, I've come to the conclusion that he wouldn't be any better than Corbyn (who will of course be an utter disaster).HYUFD said:
What happens if the final round is Burnham v Corbyn, which still just about looks most likely if Corbyn does not win in round 1? You have not used your final 2 votes so will have no sayFreggles said:
Nice one.ThomasNashe said:Have just used my £3 affiliate membership to cast my votes thus
Leader: 1) Kendall; 2) Cooper
Deputy: 1) Creasy; 2) Bradshaw; 3) Flint; 4) Eagle
Mayoral candidate: 1) Jowell; 2) Lammy; 3) Wolmer; 4) Thomas; 5) Khan
http://www.itv.com/news/2015-08-16/poll-finds-corbyn-is-labours-best-and-worst-election-hope/
I've got lots of things I will consider before I vote in a couple of weeks. Polling ain't going to be one of them.0 -
I actually said earlier that Kinnock was a better leader than Miliband having increased Labour's share of the vote from 27% in 1983 to 34% in his final election in 1992.The_Apocalypse said:
I don't agree - Kinnock for example never won a GE, but he was a great Labour leader in the sense that he saved the party from the hard left. He also paved the way for New Labour to exist in the first place. Brown despite losing in 2010, lost with 258 seats in a system where seat share matters far more than vote share - it was Miliband who saw make practically no progress on 2010. It doesn't really matter if he improved Labour's vote share by a measley 1% or 2% if it isn't in the right places in order to increase seat share. Brown may have led the move away from Blairism but Labour's biggest issue today is not that they aren't Blairite enough - after all the main Blairite candidate Kendall, is well a bit rubbish tbqf. Brown did also bring back Campbell and Mandelson, and at least knew the importance of having a strong team, and a successful party machine - Miliband brought in Lucy Powell FFS.HYUFD said:Well at the end of the day you can only judge a party leader on their election record, Foot may have been a great orator but he also led Labour to its worst result since 1918 and the defection of prominent figures to the SDP. Brown led the move away from Blairism which led Labour to its present difficulties and did even worse in 2010 than Miliband did in 2015.
I never said anything about Callaghan, although he was defeated in 1979 he still led Labour to a respectable 36% of the vote
@Omnium Well I agree: Ed Miliband should have an academic rather than a politician.
It was Brown who ultimately left Labour in its dire state in terms of both seat losses and loss of voteshare, Miliband simply failed to make much improvement on it.0 -
I wonder what Karen Danczuk'll come out with next?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3206844/Karen-Danczuk-reveals-bisexual.html
Karen Danczuk: I'm Margaret Thatcher's secret love-child with Shergar and Uncle Bulgaria0 -
What renegotiation ? OK, we can still call a pint, a pint !Sean_F said:
There's no serious renegotiation. It's a decision between the EU as it is now, plus ever-closer union, or against it.JEO said:
That the Sunday Times is reporting Downing Street feels they can't run a referendum campaign on what is 'actually' being renegotiated, and they will have to heavily spin it.Richard_Nabavi said:
I have high hopes for a substantial renegotiation, but if we get nothing and the party leadership tries to lie to the public to get a vote won, I will be furious.
If you like the EU, you vote Yes. If you don't, you vote No.
No one is leaving the EU.0 -
The next act was Ian Salville, the so-called ‘socialist magician’. His act consisted of two main tricks/jokes, one about quantitative easing and money disappearing (it was not particularly amusing). The other was about press smears: he ripped up a copy of the Guardian and reassembled it to read ‘vote Corbyn’ — probably the high point of his set.
kle4 said:I must say I like this piece about a Corbyn rally from the other day - even though I'm the sort of person who enjoys politics, I think it's right to say 'Ordinary voters don’t want to hear angry songs about ‘bastards’ and magic tricks about QE'. What a strange bunch.
Though I did like the gag about the SW and Tories being like rats as you are never more than 10ft from one.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2015/08/evening-cult-corbyn-islington/0 -
Has to be liquor. Mr Owls.bigjohnowls said:GRAVY!!!
A generation ago I'd visit good pie & mash shop round the corner from the Old Vic.
Bright green liquor and served on a plate with so many cracks that it looked like a road atlas of Great Britain.
0 -
If they refuse the finger print, and they automatically a 'chancer'?Plato said:Ministers back use of force to get migrant fingerprints: Home Office agrees 'coercion' can be used by border officials
Growing numbers of migrants have been refusing in Greece and Italy
It means migrants could be sent back to home countries if they refuse
Coercion should not be used against pregnant women or children
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3207490/Ministers-use-force-migrant-fingerprints-Home-Office-agrees-coercion-used-border-officials.html#ixzz3jfQuPQ00
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook0 -
There are currently 5 LibDem MSPs, what are the odds that they will lose 4?calum said:Having just effectively deselected their only female MSP, Alison McIness, by LibDem members in her region placing her 2nd on the list, Willie Rennie has announced a review of how to ensure a better gender balance.
http://www.libdemvoice.org/willie-rennie-backs-all-women-shortlists-47231.html#utm_source=tweet&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=twitter
The Scottish LibDems along with Scottish Labour seem to have determined that banging on about a better gender balance in Holyrood etc, is somehow going to transform their fortunes in Scotland. This says it all about the state of these parties as Scotland has many problems, but with a female FM + 3 out of 5 female party leaders + gender balanced cabinets and opposition front bench - gender balance seems one area where these parties are wasting their time.0 -
Jeremy Corbyn has been interviewed by the FT:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a7aecc40-4976-11e5-9b5d-89a026fda5c9.html#axzz3jf3yQKMH
It's a great interview:
"He says “my doors are always open” to big businesses but adds: “They’ve none of them been in touch yet.” "
"As for the migrant crisis in Calais and the rest of Europe, Mr Corbyn downplays the idea that Britain is struggling with uncontrollable immigration. “An awful lot of British people also go and live elsewhere and there is huge migration out of as well as into this country. It is time we recognised the huge contribution that migration has made to the economic growth of this country.”
Migration, he adds, is a “global phenomenon”, while non-EU immigration into the UK “is mainly family reunion issues”, he claims. He calls the rules on minimum salaries for people who want to come into the country “arbitrary” and “extremely unfair”."
"Mr Corbyn said he had been holding discussions about whether Britain should quit Nato. “I think Nato is a cold war product; it historically should have shut up shop in 1990 along with the Warsaw Pact,” he says. “It seems to have given itself in 2006 a global role and now is very busy expanding eastward.”
He calls for the UK to improve its relationship with the Russian government of Vladimir Putin, so that the countries can work together to try to demilitarise both sides of the border with Ukraine. “The onus is on both sides to make that happen,” he says. “I do feel nervous about this [Nato] expansion eastward and the consequent militarisation of Russia.” "
There's lots more.0 -
Mr. Surbiton, the EU is like the Macedonian Empire of Perdiccas.
Well, it's doomed to disintegrate. It's not crammed full of heroic, ingenious Diadochi, obviously.0 -
Ok, he's useless. Let's give him a job teaching our kids.The_Apocalypse said:
I don't agree - Kinnock for example never won a GE, but he was a great Labour leader in the sense that he saved the party from the hard left. He also paved the way for New Labour to exist in the first place. Brown despite losing in 2010, lost with 258 seats in a system where seat share matters far more than vote share - it was Miliband who saw make practically no progress on 2010. It doesn't really matter if he improved Labour's vote share by a measley 1% or 2% if it isn't in the right places in order to increase seat share. Brown may have led the move away from Blairism but Labour's biggest issue today is not that they aren't Blairite enough - after all the main Blairite candidate Kendall, is well a bit rubbish tbqf. Brown did also bring back Campbell and Mandelson, and at least knew the importance of having a strong team, and a successful party machine - Miliband brought in Lucy Powell FFS.HYUFD said:Well at the end of the day you can only judge a party leader on their election record, Foot may have been a great orator but he also led Labour to its worst result since 1918 and the defection of prominent figures to the SDP. Brown led the move away from Blairism which led Labour to its present difficulties and did even worse in 2010 than Miliband did in 2015.
I never said anything about Callaghan, although he was defeated in 1979 he still led Labour to a respectable 36% of the vote
@Omnium Well I agree: Ed Miliband should have an academic rather than a politician.
That is unkind to pupils and increases the chances that the perception of the teaching profession sinks.0 -
Actually, for a losing party 258 seat share isn't that bad. Brown also left Labour with Scotland - which meant, given that Cameron's Tories didn't actually have a majority, Labour were in a far better position to bounce back than the Tories in 1997. That Miliband actually made Labour's position much, much worse - makes him far worse than Brown IMHO.HYUFD said:
I actually said earlier that Kinnock was a better leader than Miliband having increased Labour's share of the vote from 27% in 1983 to 34% in his final election in 1992.The_Apocalypse said:
I don't agree - Kinnock for example never won a GE, but he was a great Labour leader in the sense that he saved the party from the hard left. He also paved the way for New Labour to exist in the first place. Brown despite losing in 2010, lost with 258 seats in a system where seat share matters far more than vote share - it was Miliband who saw make practically no progress on 2010. It doesn't really matter if he improved Labour's vote share by a measley 1% or 2% if it isn't in the right places in order to increase seat share. Brown may have led the move away from Blairism but Labour's biggest issue today is not that they aren't Blairite enough - after all the main Blairite candidate Kendall, is well a bit rubbish tbqf. Brown did also bring back Campbell and Mandelson, and at least knew the importance of having a strong team, and a successful party machine - Miliband brought in Lucy Powell FFS.HYUFD said:Well at the end of the day you can only judge a party leader on their election record, Foot may have been a great orator but he also led Labour to its worst result since 1918 and the defection of prominent figures to the SDP. Brown led the move away from Blairism which led Labour to its present difficulties and did even worse in 2010 than Miliband did in 2015.
I never said anything about Callaghan, although he was defeated in 1979 he still led Labour to a respectable 36% of the vote
@Omnium Well I agree: Ed Miliband should have an academic rather than a politician.
It was Brown who ultimately left Labour in its dire state in terms of both seat losses and loss of voteshare, Miliband simply failed to make much improvement on it.0 -
She is separated/divorced and has a new boyfriend.JosiasJessop said:
A hopeless presenter though. She just constantly looks at the camera in that clip, and shows no interest in what she's presenting.Tykejohnno said:
She gorgeous ;-) makes you wait until the end of look north for the weather.bigjohnowls said:Please tell me Keely is employed by the BBC not the Met Office
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9h0a_zzl9Yc
As an aside, my mother's mentioned to both Mrs J and an ex that she saw Carol Kirkwood as the 'perfect' daughter-in-law material. I'm not quite sure what they were meant to make of that admission, or the delightful's lady's husband, for that matter.0 -
I don't think anyone was suggesting Ed take a class of rowdy 14 year olds in a typical comp, but I believe he has previously lectured at Harvard and his father was an academic at the LSE not quite the same contextphiliph said:
Ok, he's useless. Let's give him a job teaching our kids.The_Apocalypse said:
I don't agree - Kinnock for example never won a GE, but he was a great Labour leader in the sense that he saved the party from the hard left. He also paved the way for New Labour to exist in the first place. Brown despite losing in 2010, lost with 258 seats in a system where seat share matters far more than vote share - it was Miliband who saw make practically no progress on 2010. It doesn't really matter if he improved Labour's vote share by a measley 1% or 2% if it isn't in the right places in order to increase seat share. Brown may have led the move away from Blairism but Labour's biggest issue today is not that they aren't Blairite enough - after all the main Blairite candidate Kendall, is well a bit rubbish tbqf. Brown did also bring back Campbell and Mandelson, and at least knew the importance of having a strong team, and a successful party machine - Miliband brought in Lucy Powell FFS.HYUFD said:Well at the end of the day you can only judge a party leader on their election record, Foot may have been a great orator but he also led Labour to its worst result since 1918 and the defection of prominent figures to the SDP. Brown led the move away from Blairism which led Labour to its present difficulties and did even worse in 2010 than Miliband did in 2015.
I never said anything about Callaghan, although he was defeated in 1979 he still led Labour to a respectable 36% of the vote
@Omnium Well I agree: Ed Miliband should have an academic rather than a politician.
That is unkind to pupils and increases the chances that the perception of the teaching profession sinks.0 -
There is no polling evidence Kendall is especially popular, certainly compared to Alan Johnson, I was looking more at the philosophical differencessurbiton said:
Is there polling evidence that Liz Kendall is preferred by the public ? Do they know her ?HYUFD said:
The 'differences between the candidates are too small'??ThreeQuidder said:
The point is that the differences between the candidates are too small to be a reliable test of what will happen in 5 years time and thus certainly too small to be worth using as a reason to vote for one candidate over another.HYUFD said:
Yes, but 'none of the above' is not a candidate is it. As I said Alan Johnson or David Miliband poll better than all of them but neither of them are running so Labour has to go with what it hasThreeQuidder said:
"Led" by a tiny amount, perhaps. "None of the above" beats all of them.HYUFD said:
Burnham also led with yougov, Mori and ORB, it has been consistentThreeQuidder said:
Hmm, this isn't even asking "what would you do" but "what do you think other people will do".HYUFD said:
Yes, Comres last week had Burnham on +5%, Cooper on -3%, Kendall on -6% and Corbyn on -10%eek said:
He may well have once upon a time but do we have any such survey from after Burnham started jumping on that day's bandwagon....HYUFD said:
Well you may not think so, but polls have Burnham the highest rated amongst the public of the 4, anyway that is up to youThomasNashe said:
Up until last week I was going to put Burnham as 3. But frankly, I've come to the conclusion that he wouldn't be any better than Corbyn (who will of course be an utter disaster).HYUFD said:
What happens if the final round is Burnham v Corbyn, which still just about looks most likely if Corbyn does not win in round 1? You have not used your final 2 votes so will have no sayFreggles said:
Nice one.ThomasNashe said:Have just used my £3 affiliate membership to cast my votes thus
Leader: 1) Kendall; 2) Cooper
Deputy: 1) Creasy; 2) Bradshaw; 3) Flint; 4) Eagle
Mayoral candidate: 1) Jowell; 2) Lammy; 3) Wolmer; 4) Thomas; 5) Khan
http://www.itv.com/news/2015-08-16/poll-finds-corbyn-is-labours-best-and-worst-election-hope/
I've got lots of things I will consider before I vote in a couple of weeks. Polling ain't going to be one of them.0 -
I hope the person who was raising the flag had been properly tested !bigjohnowls said:
And in the BirdsNest it was raised upside down for Mo Farahs gold medal ceremony,LadyBucket said:Whilst Burnham, Kendall and Cooper-Balls have been absolutely useless at challenging Corbyn, then the MSM have hardly covered themselves in glory. I can well believe they want Corbyn to win because of all the endless headlines.
Personally, I'm beyond bored with the whole Labour leadership contest. It's a complete and utter shambles.
On another note, whoever raised the Union Jack at the Iranian embassy, should have practised more, as it was a pretty tawdry effort!0 -
I know, but she wasn't when the conversations took place. Not even my mum's crass enough to say something like that to my wife. Before we were married: yes. After: no.surbiton said:
She is separated/divorced and has a new boyfriend.JosiasJessop said:
A hopeless presenter though. She just constantly looks at the camera in that clip, and shows no interest in what she's presenting.Tykejohnno said:
She gorgeous ;-) makes you wait until the end of look north for the weather.bigjohnowls said:Please tell me Keely is employed by the BBC not the Met Office
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9h0a_zzl9Yc
As an aside, my mother's mentioned to both Mrs J and an ex that she saw Carol Kirkwood as the 'perfect' daughter-in-law material. I'm not quite sure what they were meant to make of that admission, or the delightful's lady's husband, for that matter. 0 -
Keely is married but her wedding ring has now disappeared
https://www.facebook.com/KeeleyDonovanishot
Doesnt this facebook account amount to stalking though?0 -
Well I am a university student, tbf.philiph said:
Ok, he's useless. Let's give him a job teaching our kids.The_Apocalypse said:
I don't agree - Kinnock for example never won a GE, but he was a great Labour leader in the sense that he saved the party from the hard left. He also paved the way for New Labour to exist in the first place. Brown despite losing in 2010, lost with 258 seats in a system where seat share matters far more than vote share - it was Miliband who saw make practically no progress on 2010. It doesn't really matter if he improved Labour's vote share by a measley 1% or 2% if it isn't in the right places in order to increase seat share. Brown may have led the move away from Blairism but Labour's biggest issue today is not that they aren't Blairite enough - after all the main Blairite candidate Kendall, is well a bit rubbish tbqf. Brown did also bring back Campbell and Mandelson, and at least knew the importance of having a strong team, and a successful party machine - Miliband brought in Lucy Powell FFS.HYUFD said:Well at the end of the day you can only judge a party leader on their election record, Foot may have been a great orator but he also led Labour to its worst result since 1918 and the defection of prominent figures to the SDP. Brown led the move away from Blairism which led Labour to its present difficulties and did even worse in 2010 than Miliband did in 2015.
I never said anything about Callaghan, although he was defeated in 1979 he still led Labour to a respectable 36% of the vote
@Omnium Well I agree: Ed Miliband should have an academic rather than a politician.
That is unkind to pupils and increases the chances that the perception of the teaching profession sinks.
I think Miliband is useless at politics - that doesn't mean he's useless at everything!0 -
Not bad? Brown lost 91 seats and over 6% of the vote since 2005, he took Labour from its most electorally successful period in its history to its second lowest share of the vote since 1918. Post indyref even Brown would probably have lost Scotland, he was lucky he left office before it occurredThe_Apocalypse said:
Actually, for a losing party 258 seat share isn't that bad. Brown also left Labour with Scotland - which meant, given that Cameron's Tories didn't actually have a majority, Labour were in a far better position to bounce back than the Tories in 1997. That Miliband actually made Labour's position much, much worse - makes him far worse than Brown IMHO.HYUFD said:
I actually said earlier that Kinnock was a better leader than Miliband having increased Labour's share of the vote from 27% in 1983 to 34% in his final election in 1992.The_Apocalypse said:
I don't agree - Kinnock for example never won a GE, but he was a great Labour leader in the sense that he saved the party from the hard left. He also paved the way for New Labour to exist in the first place. Brown despite losing in 2010, lost with 258 seats in a system where seat share matters far more than vote share - it was Miliband who saw make practically no progress on 2010. It doesn't really matter if he improved Labour's vote share by a measley 1% or 2% if it isn't in the right places in order to increase seat share. Brown may have led the move away from Blairism but Labour's biggest issue today is not that they aren't Blairite enough - after all the main Blairite candidate Kendall, is well a bit rubbish tbqf. Brown did also bring back Campbell and Mandelson, and at least knew the importance of having a strong team, and a successful party machine - Miliband brought in Lucy Powell FFS.HYUFD said:Well at the end of the day you can only judge a party leader on their election record, Foot may have been a great orator but he also led Labour to its worst result since 1918 and the defection of prominent figures to the SDP. Brown led the move away from Blairism which led Labour to its present difficulties and did even worse in 2010 than Miliband did in 2015.
I never said anything about Callaghan, although he was defeated in 1979 he still led Labour to a respectable 36% of the vote
@Omnium Well I agree: Ed Miliband should have an academic rather than a politician.
It was Brown who ultimately left Labour in its dire state in terms of both seat losses and loss of voteshare, Miliband simply failed to make much improvement on it.0 -
Miliband did not lose Scotland. Events did. As for the Lib Dem losing 27 seats to the Tories, you would have to go back many years when a Clegg joined the Liberal party. There could have been no better Tory destroying a great party from within.The_Apocalypse said:
Actually, for a losing party 258 seat share isn't that bad. Brown also left Labour with Scotland - which meant, given that Cameron's Tories didn't actually have a majority, Labour were in a far better position to bounce back than the Tories in 1997. That Miliband actually made Labour's position much, much worse - makes him far worse than Brown IMHO.HYUFD said:
I actually said earlier that Kinnock was a better leader than Miliband having increased Labour's share of the vote from 27% in 1983 to 34% in his final election in 1992.The_Apocalypse said:
I don't agree - Kinnock for example never won a GE, but he was a great Labour leader in the sense that he saved the party from the hard left. He also paved the way for New Labour to exist in the first place. Brown despite losing in 2010, lost with 258 seats in a system where seat share matters far more than vote share - it was Miliband who saw make practically no progress on 2010. It doesn't really matter if he improved Labour's vote share by a measley 1% or 2% if it isn't in the right places in order to increase seat share. Brown may have led the move away from Blairism but Labour's biggest issue today is not that they aren't Blairite enough - after all the main Blairite candidate Kendall, is well a bit rubbish tbqf. Brown did also bring back Campbell and Mandelson, and at least knew the importance of having a strong team, and a successful party machine - Miliband brought in Lucy Powell FFS.HYUFD said:Well at the end of the day you can only judge a party leader on their election record, Foot may have been a great orator but he also led Labour to its worst result since 1918 and the defection of prominent figures to the SDP. Brown led the move away from Blairism which led Labour to its present difficulties and did even worse in 2010 than Miliband did in 2015.
I never said anything about Callaghan, although he was defeated in 1979 he still led Labour to a respectable 36% of the vote
@Omnium Well I agree: Ed Miliband should have an academic rather than a politician.
It was Brown who ultimately left Labour in its dire state in terms of both seat losses and loss of voteshare, Miliband simply failed to make much improvement on it.0 -
I see no evidence that he is suited to that role either.HYUFD said:
I don't think anyone was suggesting Ed take a class of rowdy 14 year olds in a typical comp, but I believe he has previously lectured at Harvard and his father was an academic at the LSE not quite the same contextphiliph said:
Ok, he's useless. Let's give him a job teaching our kids.The_Apocalypse said:
I don't agree - Kinnock for example never won a GE, but he was a great Labour leader in the sense that he saved the party from the hard left. He also paved the way for New Labour to exist in the first place. Brown despite losing in 2010, lost with 258 seats in a system where seat share matters far more than vote share - it was Miliband who saw make practically no progress on 2010. It doesn't really matter if he improved Labour's vote share by a measley 1% or 2% if it isn't in the right places in order to increase seat share. Brown may have led the move away from Blairism but Labour's biggest issue today is not that they aren't Blairite enough - after all the main Blairite candidate Kendall, is well a bit rubbish tbqf. Brown did also bring back Campbell and Mandelson, and at least knew the importance of having a strong team, and a successful party machine - Miliband brought in Lucy Powell FFS.HYUFD said:Well at the end of the day you can only judge a party leader on their election record, Foot may have been a great orator but he also led Labour to its worst result since 1918 and the defection of prominent figures to the SDP. Brown led the move away from Blairism which led Labour to its present difficulties and did even worse in 2010 than Miliband did in 2015.
I never said anything about Callaghan, although he was defeated in 1979 he still led Labour to a respectable 36% of the vote
@Omnium Well I agree: Ed Miliband should have an academic rather than a politician.
That is unkind to pupils and increases the chances that the perception of the teaching profession sinks.0 -
Ms. Apocalypse, I think he'd make a killing as a dungeon master [or player] for celebrity/charity Dungeons & Dragons matches. [Other tabletop RPGs are available].0
-
Naught but PB Tory Propaganda from Miss Apocalypse!The_Apocalypse said:Actually, for a losing party 258 seat share isn't that bad. Brown also left Labour with Scotland - which meant, given that Cameron's Tories didn't actually have a majority, Labour were in a far better position to bounce back than the Tories in 1997. That Miliband actually made Labour's position much, much worse - makes him far worse than Brown IMHO.
Ed's vote share went UP to 30.4% versus only 29.0% for Gordon!0 -
Well I suppose his best role would be Wallace in a live action show of 'Wallace and Gromit' but he may need to wait for that to arrive on the West End!philiph said:
I see no evidence that he is suited to that role either.HYUFD said:
I don't think anyone was suggesting Ed take a class of rowdy 14 year olds in a typical comp, but I believe he has previously lectured at Harvard and his father was an academic at the LSE not quite the same contextphiliph said:
Ok, he's useless. Let's give him a job teaching our kids.The_Apocalypse said:
I don't agree - Kinnock for example never won a GE, but he was a great Labour leader in the sense that he saved the party from the hard left. He also paved the way for New Labour to exist in the first place. Brown despite losing in 2010, lost with 258 seats in a system where seat share matters far more than vote share - it was Miliband who saw make practically no progress on 2010. It doesn't really matter if he improved Labour's vote share by a measley 1% or 2% if it isn't in the right places in order to increase seat share. Brown may have led the move away from Blairism but Labour's biggest issue today is not that they aren't Blairite enough - after all the main Blairite candidate Kendall, is well a bit rubbish tbqf. Brown did also bring back Campbell and Mandelson, and at least knew the importance of having a strong team, and a successful party machine - Miliband brought in Lucy Powell FFS.HYUFD said:Well at the end of the day you can only judge a party leader on their election record, Foot may have been a great orator but he also led Labour to its worst result since 1918 and the defection of prominent figures to the SDP. Brown led the move away from Blairism which led Labour to its present difficulties and did even worse in 2010 than Miliband did in 2015.
I never said anything about Callaghan, although he was defeated in 1979 he still led Labour to a respectable 36% of the vote
@Omnium Well I agree: Ed Miliband should have an academic rather than a politician.
That is unkind to pupils and increases the chances that the perception of the teaching profession sinks.0 -
I think there must be a statutory requirement for minor female celebrities to be bisexualJosiasJessop said:I wonder what Karen Danczuk'll come out with next?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3206844/Karen-Danczuk-reveals-bisexual.html
Karen Danczuk: I'm Margaret Thatcher's secret love-child with Shergar and Uncle Bulgaria0 -
Sunil_Prasannan said:
Naught but PB Tory Propaganda from Miss Apocalypse!The_Apocalypse said:Actually, for a losing party 258 seat share isn't that bad. Brown also left Labour with Scotland - which meant, given that Cameron's Tories didn't actually have a majority, Labour were in a far better position to bounce back than the Tories in 1997. That Miliband actually made Labour's position much, much worse - makes him far worse than Brown IMHO.
Ed's vote share went UP to 30.4% versus only 29.0% for Gordon!
But he lost the votes:seats ratio advantage.
0 -
Bourgeois Hearsay from Monkeys!Monkeys said:Sunil_Prasannan said:
Naught but PB Tory Propaganda from Miss Apocalypse!The_Apocalypse said:Actually, for a losing party 258 seat share isn't that bad. Brown also left Labour with Scotland - which meant, given that Cameron's Tories didn't actually have a majority, Labour were in a far better position to bounce back than the Tories in 1997. That Miliband actually made Labour's position much, much worse - makes him far worse than Brown IMHO.
Ed's vote share went UP to 30.4% versus only 29.0% for Gordon!
But he lost the votes:seats ratio advantage.0 -
Comrade Sunil, Labours failure to have a credible leader in the last election meant that they were unable to provide sensible Labour policies that the glorious proletariat need, such as:Sunil_Prasannan said:
Bourgeois Hearsay from Monkeys!Monkeys said:Sunil_Prasannan said:
Naught but PB Tory Propaganda from Miss Apocalypse!The_Apocalypse said:Actually, for a losing party 258 seat share isn't that bad. Brown also left Labour with Scotland - which meant, given that Cameron's Tories didn't actually have a majority, Labour were in a far better position to bounce back than the Tories in 1997. That Miliband actually made Labour's position much, much worse - makes him far worse than Brown IMHO.
Ed's vote share went UP to 30.4% versus only 29.0% for Gordon!
But he lost the votes:seats ratio advantage.
A Banker's bonus tax
Controls on Immigration
and a tax on sugar to tackle obesity.
You must accept realpolitik so that Labour can lead us towards this glorious future in 2020.
0 -
Everything bad thats happened to the UK and Labour is down to Brown. Its the no1 rule of post 1983 politics.surbiton said:
Miliband did not lose Scotland. Events did. As for the Lib Dem losing 27 seats to the Tories, you would have to go back many years when a Clegg joined the Liberal party. There could have been no better Tory destroying a great party from within.The_Apocalypse said:
Actually, for a losing party 258 seat share isn't that bad. Brown also left Labour with Scotland - which meant, given that Cameron's Tories didn't actually have a majority, Labour were in a far better position to bounce back than the Tories in 1997. That Miliband actually made Labour's position much, much worse - makes him far worse than Brown IMHO.HYUFD said:
I actually said earlier that Kinnock was a better leader than Miliband having increased Labour's share of the vote from 27% in 1983 to 34% in his final election in 1992.The_Apocalypse said:
...HYUFD said:Well at the end of the day you can only judge a party leader on their election record, Foot may have been a great orator but he also led Labour to its worst result since 1918 and the defection of prominent figures to the SDP. Brown led the move away from Blairism which led Labour to its present difficulties and did even worse in 2010 than Miliband did in 2015.
I never said anything about Callaghan, although he was defeated in 1979 he still led Labour to a respectable 36% of the vote
It was Brown who ultimately left Labour in its dire state in terms of both seat losses and loss of voteshare, Miliband simply failed to make much improvement on it.
Under Brown labour lost 97 seats. When did they last lose more at a single election. In particular Scotland is entirely Browns fault - even allowing for the inevitable rise of the SNP following botched devolution. Brown did nothing about Scottish Labour.
Since 1997 Labour have lost seats consistently. 186 of them.0 -
Based on current polling the LibDems would hold 2 out of 5 seats, that said their support levels are nearing potential extinction and they'll be scrabbling for list seats with the Greens and possibly Solidarity. The top article on LibDem Voice this week was on how to beat the SNP:logical_song said:
There are currently 5 LibDem MSPs, what are the odds that they will lose 4?calum said:Having just effectively deselected their only female MSP, Alison McIness, by LibDem members in her region placing her 2nd on the list, Willie Rennie has announced a review of how to ensure a better gender balance.
http://www.libdemvoice.org/willie-rennie-backs-all-women-shortlists-47231.html#utm_source=tweet&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=twitter
The Scottish LibDems along with Scottish Labour seem to have determined that banging on about a better gender balance in Holyrood etc, is somehow going to transform their fortunes in Scotland. This says it all about the state of these parties as Scotland has many problems, but with a female FM + 3 out of 5 female party leaders + gender balanced cabinets and opposition front bench - gender balance seems one area where these parties are wasting their time.
http://www.libdemvoice.org/how-to-beat-the-snp-47177.html
By referring to the SNP and it's 60% support base as the "Borg" isn't going to get them very far. The Scottish LibDems are now officially "Klingons on the Starboard Bow" .0 -
F1: just watching Ted's Notebook on the Sky F1 site, and Nasr had brake problems from lap 3 onwards. Good to get 11th, given that.0
-
Just been watching an episode of Portillo's State Secrets and he's got a copy of the draft Queen's speech should WW3 break out - dated 1983.
That really puts into perspective how hot the subject was back then!0 -
I'd read elsewhere that Pirelli gave a 40 lap wear guide for the medium to Ferrari, Ted Kravitz appears to confirm that.
Given it failed after about 29 laps, annoyance/anger is understandable.0 -
I'm watching Portillo do the railway lines between Snowdon and HolyheadPlato said:Just been watching an episode of Portillo's State Secrets and he's got a copy of the draft Queen's speech should WW3 break out - dated 1983.
That really puts into perspective how hot the subject was back then! 0 -
@ Sunil and other pb railway enthusiasts
2100 tommorow on bbc2 "the worlds busiest railway" exploring the commuters of Mumbai.
Sounds good!0 -
Blimey and then some
BT Sport grab 2017-18 Ashes TV rights from rivals Sky Sports in £350m coup
BT Sport secure rights to Australia home matches for next five years
Contract is believed to be costing BT Sport around £70m a year
http://dailym.ai/1EOYjHL0 -
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11819074/Alex-Salmond-Nick-Robinson-referendum-coverage-was-a-disgrace.html
The Yes supporter with a sticker on his forehead... unspoofable (thankfully)0 -
The threat of a nutter on a train with an AK47 is nothing compared to nuclear oblivion at the flick of a swich. It was a great achievement bringing down the iron curtain and joining the former sattelite states into the EU and NATO.Plato said:Just been watching an episode of Portillo's State Secrets and he's got a copy of the draft Queen's speech should WW3 break out - dated 1983.
That really puts into perspective how hot the subject was back then!0 -
Really enjoying Agatha Christie's Partners In Crime on BBC1 starring David Walliams and Jessica Raine, even though Jessica Raine isn't quite believable as a 1950s woman.0
-
I said 'not bad' for a losing party!HYUFD said:Not bad? Brown lost 91 seats and over 6% of the vote since 2005, he took Labour from its most electorally successful period in its history to its second lowest share of the vote since 1918. Post indyref even Brown would probably have lost Scotland, he was lucky he left office before it occurred
On vote-share - as I said before vote share doesn't really matter; it's seat share which matters in FPTP.
On losing Scotland - would Brown have been dumb enough to share a 'Better Together Platform' with the Tories? I think not.
@surbiton So Ed Miliband was a completely powerless leader? The fact is, is that the loss of Scotland happened under his leadership, and therefore he has to assume some responsibility for it.
0 -
Now I'm watching Portillo's travels in Newcastle
(The "Yesterday" channel)0 -
foxinsoxuk said:
@ Sunil and other pb railway enthusiasts
2100 tommorow on bbc2 "the worlds busiest railway" exploring the commuters of Mumbai.
Sounds good!
"Super Maximum Crush Density!"
0 -
My god, reading some of that may cause a few people to revise their view on how low the Labour vote could fall! He might be lucky to get 15%! UKIP will have a field day!antifrank said:Jeremy Corbyn has been interviewed by the FT:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a7aecc40-4976-11e5-9b5d-89a026fda5c9.html#axzz3jf3yQKMH
It's a great interview:
"He says “my doors are always open” to big businesses but adds: “They’ve none of them been in touch yet.” "
"As for the migrant crisis in Calais and the rest of Europe, Mr Corbyn downplays the idea that Britain is struggling with uncontrollable immigration. “An awful lot of British people also go and live elsewhere and there is huge migration out of as well as into this country. It is time we recognised the huge contribution that migration has made to the economic growth of this country.”
Migration, he adds, is a “global phenomenon”, while non-EU immigration into the UK “is mainly family reunion issues”, he claims. He calls the rules on minimum salaries for people who want to come into the country “arbitrary” and “extremely unfair”."
"Mr Corbyn said he had been holding discussions about whether Britain should quit Nato. “I think Nato is a cold war product; it historically should have shut up shop in 1990 along with the Warsaw Pact,” he says. “It seems to have given itself in 2006 a global role and now is very busy expanding eastward.”
He calls for the UK to improve its relationship with the Russian government of Vladimir Putin, so that the countries can work together to try to demilitarise both sides of the border with Ukraine. “The onus is on both sides to make that happen,” he says. “I do feel nervous about this [Nato] expansion eastward and the consequent militarisation of Russia.” "
There's lots more.
More generally, the whole thing just sounds like a set of random musings based on about 5 minutes thought. He'll fall apart under any basic questioning of detail, and i doubt that many Labour MPs will be prepared to go around TV studios defending any of it!
0 -
None of it is believable, but that does not stop it being enjoyable.AndyJS said:Really enjoying Agatha Christie's Partners In Crime on BBC1 starring David Walliams and Jessica Raine, even though Jessica Raine isn't quite believable as a 1950s woman.
I suppose apart from having fun (or making judgements?) with the social manners and mores of the time, the 50's avoids the problems of interweb and mobile phones and other impediments to crime solving.0 -
I'd always assumed that the one golden rule of democratic politics is that regardless of one's opinion of the opposition parties, always wind your neck in when it comes to the people that vote for them; they might have voted for you in the past and they might again one day. The Unionist parties, egged on by their media buddies, seem to prefer to indulge in slagging off voters as mad, out of their senses, cultists or the Borg.calum said:
Based on current polling the LibDems would hold 2 out of 5 seats, that said their support levels are nearing potential extinction and they'll be scrabbling for list seats with the Greens and possibly Solidarity. The top article on LibDem Voice this week was on how to beat the SNP:logical_song said:
There are currently 5 LibDem MSPs, what are the odds that they will lose 4?calum said:Having just effectively deselected their only female MSP, Alison McIness, by LibDem members in her region placing her 2nd on the list, Willie Rennie has announced a review of how to ensure a better gender balance.
http://www.libdemvoice.org/willie-rennie-backs-all-women-shortlists-47231.html#utm_source=tweet&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=twitter
The Scottish LibDems along with Scottish Labour seem to have determined that banging on about a better gender balance in Holyrood etc, is somehow going to transform their fortunes in Scotland. This says it all about the state of these parties as Scotland has many problems, but with a female FM + 3 out of 5 female party leaders + gender balanced cabinets and opposition front bench - gender balance seems one area where these parties are wasting their time.
http://www.libdemvoice.org/how-to-beat-the-snp-47177.html
By referring to the SNP and it's 60% support base as the "Borg" isn't going to get them very far. The Scottish LibDems are now officially "Klingons on the Starboard Bow" .
Long may it continue..0 -
Noooooo!!
One Direction are going on hiatus.0 -
PS - I wonder where the tunnels were filmed?AndyJS said:Really enjoying Agatha Christie's Partners In Crime on BBC1 starring David Walliams and Jessica Raine, even though Jessica Raine isn't quite believable as a 1950s woman.
0 -
Even on seat share Brown lost 91 seats, Miliband lost only 26 and actually gained seats in England.The_Apocalypse said:
I said 'not bad' for a losing party!HYUFD said:Not bad? Brown lost 91 seats and over 6% of the vote since 2005, he took Labour from its most electorally successful period in its history to its second lowest share of the vote since 1918. Post indyref even Brown would probably have lost Scotland, he was lucky he left office before it occurred
On vote-share - as I said before vote share doesn't really matter; it's seat share which matters in FPTP.
On losing Scotland - would Brown have been dumb enough to share a 'Better Together Platform' with the Tories? I think not.
@surbiton So Ed Miliband was a completely powerless leader? The fact is, is that the loss of Scotland happened under his leadership, and therefore he has to assume some responsibility for it.
Brown made major speeches for 'Better Together' and I never once saw Ed Miliband share a platform with the Tories either0 -
Absolute madness, on one level Sky must be laughing their socks off. £70m a year for the right to broadcast cricket in the middle of the night? Who is bankrolling this idiocy?TheScreamingEagles said:Blimey and then some
BT Sport grab 2017-18 Ashes TV rights from rivals Sky Sports in £350m coup
BT Sport secure rights to Australia home matches for next five years
Contract is believed to be costing BT Sport around £70m a year
http://dailym.ai/1EOYjHL
0 -
On a general note - it's great how we have preserved so much that we CAN still film programmes set in the 1950s or earlier and use recognisable landmarks, authentic looking houses, etc.flightpath01 said:
PS - I wonder where the tunnels were filmed?AndyJS said:Really enjoying Agatha Christie's Partners In Crime on BBC1 starring David Walliams and Jessica Raine, even though Jessica Raine isn't quite believable as a 1950s woman.
0 -
It is we BT phone and broadband customers who are bankrolling this.alex. said:
Absolute madness, on one level Sky must be laughing their socks off. £70m a year for the right to broadcast cricket in the middle of the night? Who is bankrolling this idiocy?TheScreamingEagles said:Blimey and then some
BT Sport grab 2017-18 Ashes TV rights from rivals Sky Sports in £350m coup
BT Sport secure rights to Australia home matches for next five years
Contract is believed to be costing BT Sport around £70m a year
http://dailym.ai/1EOYjHL0 -
Prepare for your bills to start going up soon then...TheScreamingEagles said:
It is we BT phone and broadband customers who are bankrolling this.alex. said:
Absolute madness, on one level Sky must be laughing their socks off. £70m a year for the right to broadcast cricket in the middle of the night? Who is bankrolling this idiocy?TheScreamingEagles said:Blimey and then some
BT Sport grab 2017-18 Ashes TV rights from rivals Sky Sports in £350m coup
BT Sport secure rights to Australia home matches for next five years
Contract is believed to be costing BT Sport around £70m a year
http://dailym.ai/1EOYjHL0 -
They already have.alex. said:
Prepare for your bills to start going up soon then...TheScreamingEagles said:
It is we BT phone and broadband customers who are bankrolling this.alex. said:
Absolute madness, on one level Sky must be laughing their socks off. £70m a year for the right to broadcast cricket in the middle of the night? Who is bankrolling this idiocy?TheScreamingEagles said:Blimey and then some
BT Sport grab 2017-18 Ashes TV rights from rivals Sky Sports in £350m coup
BT Sport secure rights to Australia home matches for next five years
Contract is believed to be costing BT Sport around £70m a year
http://dailym.ai/1EOYjHL
That said, a few years ago I was paying £45 a month for 1 meg broadband,
Now for around £65 a month, I'm getting lots of sports channels and 60 meg broadband0 -
NATO?foxinsoxuk said:
The threat of a nutter on a train with an AK47 is nothing compared to nuclear oblivion at the flick of a swich. It was a great achievement bringing down the iron curtain and joining the former sattelite states into the EU and NATO.Plato said:Just been watching an episode of Portillo's State Secrets and he's got a copy of the draft Queen's speech should WW3 break out - dated 1983.
That really puts into perspective how hot the subject was back then!
We do not need nato it is an expansive imperialist prosthetic on the corpulent body america. We need to make peace (surrender to) with arch democrat Putin.
(admittedly I may not have thought like this before falling asleep after finding that funny pod thing in the basement)
0 -
Incidentally, not that i know anything about it, but isn't there a chance that they might start facing challenges about cross-subsidisation across their various platforms? Ultimately what BT sport shows should be paid for by BT sport viewers. There will be plenty of BT phone/broadband users who couldn't give a monkeys what is shown on the sports channel but are paying for it anyway.TheScreamingEagles said:
They already have.alex. said:
Prepare for your bills to start going up soon then...TheScreamingEagles said:
It is we BT phone and broadband customers who are bankrolling this.alex. said:
Absolute madness, on one level Sky must be laughing their socks off. £70m a year for the right to broadcast cricket in the middle of the night? Who is bankrolling this idiocy?TheScreamingEagles said:Blimey and then some
BT Sport grab 2017-18 Ashes TV rights from rivals Sky Sports in £350m coup
BT Sport secure rights to Australia home matches for next five years
Contract is believed to be costing BT Sport around £70m a year
http://dailym.ai/1EOYjHL
That said, a few years ago I was paying £45 a month for 1 meg broadband,
Now for around £65 a month, I'm getting lots of sports channels and 60 meg broadband0 -
TheScreamingEagles said:
Noooooo!!
One Direction are going on hiatus.
"I hate us"? Finally they get it.
0 -
Knowing the telecommunications industry quite well, I know all of BT's rivals want Openreach spun off from BT entirely.alex. said:
Incidentally, not that i know anything about it, but isn't there a chance that they might start facing challenges about cross-subsidisation across their various platforms? Ultimately what BT sport shows should be paid for by BT sport viewers. There will be plenty of BT phone/broadband users who couldn't give a monkeys what is shown on the sports channel but are paying for it anyway.TheScreamingEagles said:
They already have.alex. said:
Prepare for your bills to start going up soon then...TheScreamingEagles said:
It is we BT phone and broadband customers who are bankrolling this.alex. said:
Absolute madness, on one level Sky must be laughing their socks off. £70m a year for the right to broadcast cricket in the middle of the night? Who is bankrolling this idiocy?TheScreamingEagles said:Blimey and then some
BT Sport grab 2017-18 Ashes TV rights from rivals Sky Sports in £350m coup
BT Sport secure rights to Australia home matches for next five years
Contract is believed to be costing BT Sport around £70m a year
http://dailym.ai/1EOYjHL
That said, a few years ago I was paying £45 a month for 1 meg broadband,
Now for around £65 a month, I'm getting lots of sports channels and 60 meg broadband
Quadplay is what is the ultimate aim, their £12 billion purchase of EE is another concern in the industry.0 -
Ofcom's rules on cross-sub for BT are very very tight. There's none going on with this. It's about investing to change your business model into content delivery rather than just lines and others making the money from the delivered items
I used to work with Regulatory Affairs for BT. If it's caught out = it's a 10% fine on its turnover... And I worked for BT's wholesale division that sells services to other network operators and ISPsalex. said:
Incidentally, not that i know anything about it, but isn't there a chance that they might start facing challenges about cross-subsidisation across their various platforms? Ultimately what BT sport shows should be paid for by BT sport viewers. There will be plenty of BT phone/broadband users who couldn't give a monkeys what is shown on the sports channel but are paying for it anyway.TheScreamingEagles said:
They already have.alex. said:
Prepare for your bills to start going up soon then...TheScreamingEagles said:
It is we BT phone and broadband customers who are bankrolling this.alex. said:
Absolute madness, on one level Sky must be laughing their socks off. £70m a year for the right to broadcast cricket in the middle of the night? Who is bankrolling this idiocy?TheScreamingEagles said:Blimey and then some
BT Sport grab 2017-18 Ashes TV rights from rivals Sky Sports in £350m coup
BT Sport secure rights to Australia home matches for next five years
Contract is believed to be costing BT Sport around £70m a year
http://dailym.ai/1EOYjHL
That said, a few years ago I was paying £45 a month for 1 meg broadband,
Now for around £65 a month, I'm getting lots of sports channels and 60 meg broadband0 -
I suppose one other point about BT sport and the Ashes. This is not money going into English cricket. This is money going into Australian cricket. So BT sport are chucking stupid money to bankroll our main cricketing adversary.0
-
The main socialist policy is to burn every copy of Animal Farm.Monkeys said:
Comrade Sunil, Labours failure to have a credible leader in the last election meant that they were unable to provide sensible Labour policies that the glorious proletariat need, such as:Sunil_Prasannan said:
Bourgeois Hearsay from Monkeys!Monkeys said:Sunil_Prasannan said:
Naught but PB Tory Propaganda from Miss Apocalypse!The_Apocalypse said:Actually, for a losing party 258 seat share isn't that bad. Brown also left Labour with Scotland - which meant, given that Cameron's Tories didn't actually have a majority, Labour were in a far better position to bounce back than the Tories in 1997. That Miliband actually made Labour's position much, much worse - makes him far worse than Brown IMHO.
Ed's vote share went UP to 30.4% versus only 29.0% for Gordon!
But he lost the votes:seats ratio advantage.
A Banker's bonus tax
Controls on Immigration
and a tax on sugar to tackle obesity.
You must accept realpolitik so that Labour can lead us towards this glorious future in 2020.
0 -
Seeing as @TheScreamingEagles fancies the 1/20 for a 5% return he might lay you bigger than 8/1? Maybe you and he could meet in the middle...antifrank said:
The 8/1 on a delay looks quite attractive actually. The Electoral Reform Society wanted the vote to be delayed to allow for the processing of new voters to be carried out:isam said:Is the 1/20 tip in the thread header the shortest ever advised in a PB article?
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/labour-leadership-election-should-delayed-6249001
The timetable for reviewing new voters looks very tight. I'm not betting on this but if forced at gunpoint that's the way I'd go.0 -
There is much comment on the quality, or lack of it, of all of the candidates for Labour leader. I cannot recall anyone saying voters (even those who have paid for the privilege) are spoilt for choice in terms of quality. There is quality within PLP (not a lot I grant you) but none want to have a go this time and all have convenient non political reasons for their shyness. All politicians will tell you (some with fingers crossed) that they came into politics to change things. To change things you need power i.e. ambition. The ultimate in that game is to be PM and first you need to lead your party, ergo all of those "quality" Labour leadership contenders with any chance of making PM, see this election as a step away from rather than towards power, leaving the field open to the bunch of chancers now on view.0
-
The dream string of events since May finally come to an end?TheScreamingEagles said:Noooooo!!
One Direction are going on hiatus.0 -
Well as suspected the Tory majority has gone up to 36.
Jeremy Corbyn is still ready to give up Ulster to Ireland if he ever becomes Prime Minister, The Sun can reveal.
The leftwing MP – odds on to be crowned new Labour boss in 19 days time – confirmed in a recent TV interview that he still believes in a united Ireland.
Unionists labelled his views as “dangerous” at a time of new instability in Northern Irish politics as it gives Sinn Fein and IRA separatists’ legitimacy
http://bit.ly/1U8szEH0 -
As a lawyer, I must say I'm intrigued. Why do we stop BT from cross-subsidising? Is it because we give it state support of one description or another in the telecoms field?Plato said:Ofcom's rules on cross-sub for BT are very very tight. There's none going on with this. It's about investing to change your business model into content delivery rather than just lines and others making the money from the delivered items
I used to work with Regulatory Affairs for BT. If it's caught out = it's a 10% fine on its turnover... And I worked for BT's wholesale division that sells services to other network operators and ISPsalex. said:
Incidentally, not that i know anything about it, but isn't there a chance that they might start facing challenges about cross-subsidisation across their various platforms? Ultimately what BT sport shows should be paid for by BT sport viewers. There will be plenty of BT phone/broadband users who couldn't give a monkeys what is shown on the sports channel but are paying for it anyway.TheScreamingEagles said:
They already have.alex. said:
Prepare for your bills to start going up soon then...TheScreamingEagles said:
It is we BT phone and broadband customers who are bankrolling this.alex. said:
Absolute madness, on one level Sky must be laughing their socks off. £70m a year for the right to broadcast cricket in the middle of the night? Who is bankrolling this idiocy?TheScreamingEagles said:Blimey and then some
BT Sport grab 2017-18 Ashes TV rights from rivals Sky Sports in £350m coup
BT Sport secure rights to Australia home matches for next five years
Contract is believed to be costing BT Sport around £70m a year
http://dailym.ai/1EOYjHL
That said, a few years ago I was paying £45 a month for 1 meg broadband,
Now for around £65 a month, I'm getting lots of sports channels and 60 meg broadband
0 -
A mature one if I may say so.The_Apocalypse said:
Well I am a university student, tbf.philiph said:
Ok, he's useless. Let's give him a job teaching our kids.The_Apocalypse said:
I don't agree - Kinnock for example never won a GE, but he was a great Labour leader in the sense that he saved the party from the hard left. He also paved the way for New Labour to exist in the first place. Brown despite losing in 2010, lost with 258 seats in a system where seat share matters far more than vote share - it was Miliband who saw make practically no progress on 2010. It doesn't really matter if he improved Labour's vote share by a measley 1% or 2% if it isn't in the right places in order to increase seat share. Brown may have led the move away from Blairism but Labour's biggest issue today is not that they aren't Blairite enough - after all the main Blairite candidate Kendall, is well a bit rubbish tbqf. Brown did also bring back Campbell and Mandelson, and at least knew the importance of having a strong team, and a successful party machine - Miliband brought in Lucy Powell FFS.HYUFD said:Well at the end of the day you can only judge a party leader on their election record, Foot may have been a great orator but he also led Labour to its worst result since 1918 and the defection of prominent figures to the SDP. Brown led the move away from Blairism which led Labour to its present difficulties and did even worse in 2010 than Miliband did in 2015.
I never said anything about Callaghan, although he was defeated in 1979 he still led Labour to a respectable 36% of the vote
@Omnium Well I agree: Ed Miliband should have an academic rather than a politician.
That is unkind to pupils and increases the chances that the perception of the teaching profession sinks.
I think Miliband is useless at politics - that doesn't mean he's useless at everything!0 -
We will all have to learn how to spell bourgeois soon. But the proletariat will also have to learn about the differences between facts and hearsay.Sunil_Prasannan said:
Bourgeois Hearsay from Monkeys!Monkeys said:Sunil_Prasannan said:
Naught but PB Tory Propaganda from Miss Apocalypse!The_Apocalypse said:Actually, for a losing party 258 seat share isn't that bad. Brown also left Labour with Scotland - which meant, given that Cameron's Tories didn't actually have a majority, Labour were in a far better position to bounce back than the Tories in 1997. That Miliband actually made Labour's position much, much worse - makes him far worse than Brown IMHO.
Ed's vote share went UP to 30.4% versus only 29.0% for Gordon!
But he lost the votes:seats ratio advantage.0 -
Good postReggieCide said:There is much comment on the quality, or lack of it, of all of the candidates for Labour leader. I cannot recall anyone saying voters (even those who have paid for the privilege) are spoilt for choice in terms of quality. There is quality within PLP (not a lot I grant you) but none want to have a go this time and all have convenient non political reasons for their shyness. All politicians will tell you (some with fingers crossed) that they came into politics to change things. To change things you need power i.e. ambition. The ultimate in that game is to be PM and first you need to lead your party, ergo all of those "quality" Labour leadership contenders with any chance of making PM, see this election as a step away from rather than towards power, leaving the field open to the bunch of chancers now on view.
0 -
TheWhiteRabbit said:
As a lawyer, I must say I'm intrigued. Why do we stop BT from cross-subsidising? Is it because we give it state support of one description or another in the telecoms field?Plato said:Ofcom's rules on cross-sub for BT are very very tight. There's none going on with this. It's about investing to change your business model into content delivery rather than just lines and others making the money from the delivered items
I used to work with Regulatory Affairs for BT. If it's caught out = it's a 10% fine on its turnover... And I worked for BT's wholesale division that sells services to other network operators and ISPsalex. said:
Incidentally, not that i know anything about it, but isn't there a chance that they might start facing challenges about cross-subsidisation across their various platforms? Ultimately what BT sport shows should be paid for by BT sport viewers. There will be plenty of BT phone/broadband users who couldn't give a monkeys what is shown on the sports channel but are paying for it anyway.TheScreamingEagles said:
They already have.alex. said:
Prepare for your bills to start going up soon then...TheScreamingEagles said:
It is we BT phone and broadband customers who are bankrolling this.alex. said:
Absolute madness, on one level Sky must be laughing their socks off. £70m a year for the right to broadcast cricket in the middle of the night? Who is bankrolling this idiocy?TheScreamingEagles said:Blimey and then some
BT Sport grab 2017-18 Ashes TV rights from rivals Sky Sports in £350m coup
BT Sport secure rights to Australia home matches for next five years
Contract is believed to be costing BT Sport around £70m a year
http://dailym.ai/1EOYjHL
That said, a few years ago I was paying £45 a month for 1 meg broadband,
Now for around £65 a month, I'm getting lots of sports channels and 60 meg broadband
Perhaps because BT is a monopoly.
0 -
The dark lord has arisen.......
Peter Mandelson advising EU on stopping British exit
Exclusive: The former Labour minister is advising Jean-Claude Juncker and his team on their communications strategy
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/11817263/Peter-Mandelson-advising-EU-on-stopping-British-exit.html0 -
I see the caption on the photo in that story describes 'former IRA bosses Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness'. Does not Adams still deny ever having been in the IRA and if so, do papers just ignore the denials now (it's not as though it will hurt or help him for such an allegation to be made)?TheScreamingEagles said:Well as suspected the Tory majority has gone up to 36.
Jeremy Corbyn is still ready to give up Ulster to Ireland if he ever becomes Prime Minister, The Sun can reveal.
The leftwing MP – odds on to be crowned new Labour boss in 19 days time – confirmed in a recent TV interview that he still believes in a united Ireland.
Unionists labelled his views as “dangerous” at a time of new instability in Northern Irish politics as it gives Sinn Fein and IRA separatists’ legitimacy
http://bit.ly/1U8szEH
My view has always been it makes no real difference either way, given his elevated position (unlike rank and file SF members who can, possibly, conceivably and believably claim not to have been involved in IRA dealings), but some still insist on making the distinction.
0 -
I assumed Umunna was waiting for next time, as the most likely attack he would have faced would have been youth and inexperience, which would be nullified by a few more year perhaps, although that wouldn't explain why he announced and then pulled out so I guess his reasons for pulling out this time were genuineReggieCide said:There is much comment on the quality, or lack of it, of all of the candidates for Labour leader. I cannot recall anyone saying voters (even those who have paid for the privilege) are spoilt for choice in terms of quality. There is quality within PLP (not a lot I grant you) but none want to have a go this time and all have convenient non political reasons for their shyness. All politicians will tell you (some with fingers crossed) that they came into politics to change things. To change things you need power i.e. ambition. The ultimate in that game is to be PM and first you need to lead your party, ergo all of those "quality" Labour leadership contenders with any chance of making PM, see this election as a step away from rather than towards power, leaving the field open to the bunch of chancers now on view.
0 -
Nah. Ms Apocalypse is quite young. Anyone old enough to remember Kinnock rather than read about him would not make a case for him as a successful leader. Even me and I voted Labour in 92!ReggieCide said:
A mature one if I may say so.The_Apocalypse said:
Well I am a university student, tbf.philiph said:
Ok, he's useless. Let's give him a job teaching our kids.The_Apocalypse said:
I don't agree - Kinnock for example never won a GE, but he was a great Labour leader in the sense that he saved the party from the hard left. He also paved the way for New Labour to exist in the first place. Brown despite losing in 2010, lost with 258 seats in a system where seat share matters far more than vote share - it was Miliband who saw make practically no progress on 2010. It doesn't really matter if he improved Labour's vote share by a measley 1% or 2% if it isn't in the right places in order to increase seat share. Brown may have led the move away from Blairism but Labour's biggest issue today is not that they aren't Blairite enough - after all the main Blairite candidate Kendall, is well a bit rubbish tbqf. Brown did also bring back Campbell and Mandelson, and at least knew the importance of having a strong team, and a successful party machine - Miliband brought in Lucy Powell FFS.HYUFD said:Well at the end of the day you can only judge a party leader on their election record, Foot may have been a great orator but he also led Labour to its worst result since 1918 and the defection of prominent figures to the SDP. Brown led the move away from Blairism which led Labour to its present difficulties and did even worse in 2010 than Miliband did in 2015.
I never said anything about Callaghan, although he was defeated in 1979 he still led Labour to a respectable 36% of the vote
@Omnium Well I agree: Ed Miliband should have an academic rather than a politician.
That is unkind to pupils and increases the chances that the perception of the teaching profession sinks.
I think Miliband is useless at politics - that doesn't mean he's useless at everything!0
