politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Hillary moves much closer to the nomination following Joe B
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Hillary moves much closer to the nomination following Joe Biden’s announcement that he won’t be running
Next year’s White House race looks a lot clearer this evening following Joe Biden’s announcement within the past hour that he will not run for the Democratic nomination.
Comments
-
First past the post0
-
I've ditched all my Clinton red on Betfair. She now sits at a pretty -£0.00 on the exchange for me.0
-
I would love for the States to have a woman Pres...just not this one..0
-
"Government defeat in Lords over on shore wind subsidies
Peers have voted 242 to 190, majority 52, to scrap government plans to end onshore wind subsidies early despite claims it was a breach of the Salisbury Convention."
The HoL is going to be a massive nuisance for the a few months isn't it...0 -
I too, pretty much covered myself (with the help of bwin).Pulpstar said:I've ditched all my Clinton red on Betfair. She now sits at a pretty -£0.00 on the exchange for me.
However I am still exposed on New Hampshire, not sure if I need to cover off.
Do you think Clinton's chances are much strengthened there?
Edit: decided to cover it off. Her polling position has improved there already (post debate).0 -
Junior Docs need to get a sense of reality..If you don't want the job then move on.. next..
Richard
Some will, where do you think the replacements will magically appear from.
Ones willing to take on A&E are already rarer than Rocking Horse Sh*t
The NHS cannot afford to lose anymore right now.0 -
Today WindPauly said:"Government defeat in Lords over on shore wind subsidies
Peers have voted 242 to 190, majority 52, to scrap government plans to end onshore wind subsidies early despite claims it was a breach of the Salisbury Convention."
The HoL is going to be a massive nuisance for the a few months isn't it...
Next Week Tax Credits
Oh dear I see a big reaction from Dave.
More Lords more cost Methinks.0 -
BJO A vacuum will always be filled.. if they don't want to work for the NHS and the Tand C then they have to move on...in other words get out of the effin way..It is their career..their choice..do the job or move..0
-
Who will replace them?richardDodd said:BJO A vacuum will always be filled.. if they don't want to work for the NHS and the Tand C then they have to move on...in other words get out of the effin way..
0 -
So it is Clinton vs: somebody (assuming, for the moment, that the Democratic party are slightly more sensible than the Labour party and are not going to choose a geriatric socialist who has never had an original idea or done anything energetic or useful in his life).
Clinton v. Bush Mark II? Not inspiring.
Clinton v. Trump? Terrifying.
Clinton v. Rubio? Could be interesting.
What odds are available for this being the lowest ever turnout at a presidential election? 49% in 1996 is the record to beat. I would say that if Jeb Bush is the Republican candidate there would be value in that bet if it is longer than 2-1.0 -
Has anyone bothered to check the Lords conflict of interest... I bet that a lot of them have a vested interest in the subsidies continuing..0
-
Remember that 63.1% did not vote CON on May 7thPauly said:"Government defeat in Lords over on shore wind subsidies
Peers have voted 242 to 190, majority 52, to scrap government plans to end onshore wind subsidies early despite claims it was a breach of the Salisbury Convention."
The HoL is going to be a massive nuisance for the a few months isn't it...
0 -
OT "Suffragettes" is a very watchable film. it's strange looking back that there was so much opposition to women voting.
........Driving I could understand0 -
More Lords more cost Methinks.
There seem to be a rather stubborn caucus of people who think the tories' win at the last election was some sort of aberration, and they have the right to defy a democratically elected government.
Presumably on the basis the electorate had no idea what they were doing.0 -
Isn't it more like 75%?MikeSmithson said:
Remember that 63.1% did not vote CON on May 7thPauly said:"Government defeat in Lords over on shore wind subsidies
Peers have voted 242 to 190, majority 52, to scrap government plans to end onshore wind subsidies early despite claims it was a breach of the Salisbury Convention."
The HoL is going to be a massive nuisance for the a few months isn't it...0 -
Roger said:
OT "Suffragettes" is a very watchable film. it's strange looking back that there was so much opposition to women voting.
........Driving I could understand
0 -
How many people voted for members of the House of Lords?MikeSmithson said:
Remember that 63.1% did not vote CON on May 7thPauly said:"Government defeat in Lords over on shore wind subsidies
Peers have voted 242 to 190, majority 52, to scrap government plans to end onshore wind subsidies early despite claims it was a breach of the Salisbury Convention."
The HoL is going to be a massive nuisance for the a few months isn't it...0 -
Dear RichardrichardDodd said:BJO A vacuum will always be filled.. if they don't want to work for the NHS and the Tand C then they have to move on...in other words get out of the effin way..
One in 4 Junior Dr posts are already vacant.
The NHS is only keeping afloat due to the goodwill of the Drs that cover extra shifts at NHS rates and is suffering already by having to pay higher Locum Rates for those that cant be filled.
I suggest you spend a few days in a hospital trying to fill the shifts of the vacant posts to see how silly your comments are.
Love
BJO0 -
Remember that 63.1% did not vote CON on May 7th
Number who voted for the lords??? the junior doctors??? the unions??? the commentariat???
zero.0 -
Clinton 1.6 on Betfair for Iowa, where she has the polling lead and has not polled behind in a while.
DYOR0 -
Isn't it more like 75%?
A contemptible position from those who would have been happy with a labour SNP stitch up, with SNP voting on English matters.0 -
That's a very dystopian picture.
Mr. Roger, you are awful. But I like you.0 -
BJO..SUNIL I was at one tIme a very aggressive Union negotiator..so I have experience of how it all works ...I can assure you that the spaces will be filled..in the meantime the Junior Docs should get out of the way...or come to terms with reality..Lotsa docs in the world..0
-
How many voted Lib Dem? Do the LD MP's use Uber these days?MikeSmithson said:
Remember that 63.1% did not vote CON on May 7thPauly said:"Government defeat in Lords over on shore wind subsidies
Peers have voted 242 to 190, majority 52, to scrap government plans to end onshore wind subsidies early despite claims it was a breach of the Salisbury Convention."
The HoL is going to be a massive nuisance for the a few months isn't it...0 -
and of the 25% that did I am pretty sure100% thought Tax Credits were to be frozen not cut.Jonathan said:
Isn't it more like 75%?MikeSmithson said:
Remember that 63.1% did not vote CON on May 7thPauly said:"Government defeat in Lords over on shore wind subsidies
Peers have voted 242 to 190, majority 52, to scrap government plans to end onshore wind subsidies early despite claims it was a breach of the Salisbury Convention."
The HoL is going to be a massive nuisance for the a few months isn't it...
So basically 0% of voters voted for Tax Credit Cuts!!!0 -
The other bet that might be value, looking at the candidates, is on this being the first voluntary one-term presidency (i.e. a president not standing for re-election) since Chester Arthur in 1884.* If, as seems possible (and God help us all if it is) Clinton and Trump are the candidates, given how old they are there must be at least a chance neither would stand in 2024.ydoethur said:So it is Clinton vs: somebody (assuming, for the moment, that the Democratic party are slightly more sensible than the Labour party and are not going to choose a geriatric socialist who has never had an original idea or done anything energetic or useful in his life).
Clinton v. Bush Mark II? Not inspiring.
Clinton v. Trump? Terrifying.
Clinton v. Rubio? Could be interesting.
What odds are available for this being the lowest ever turnout at a presidential election? 49% in 1996 is the record to beat. I would say that if Jeb Bush is the Republican candidate there would be value in that bet if it is longer than 2-1.
Another possible bet - although a very morbid one - might be first president to die in office since 1963, although hopefully not from the same cause.
*I am discounting those who had been vice-president before becoming President on the death of the incumbent, e.g. Coolidge and Johnson, and anyone who lost an election they fought, e.g. Bush and Carter. Arthur made a very half-hearted effort to be the Republican candidate in 1884, so if people want to be really picky the last President who avowedly only served one term from his own choice was Rutherford B. Hayes, 1877-81.0 -
Going to be a lot of grateful Constituency Chairmen when Cameron enobles them all....Pauly said:"Government defeat in Lords over on shore wind subsidies
Peers have voted 242 to 190, majority 52, to scrap government plans to end onshore wind subsidies early despite claims it was a breach of the Salisbury Convention."
The HoL is going to be a massive nuisance for the a few months isn't it...0 -
And 92.1% didn't vote Lib Dem. I didn't vote Tory - but I'm perfectly happy with them having a majority in the Commons.MikeSmithson said:
Remember that 63.1% did not vote CON on May 7thPauly said:"Government defeat in Lords over on shore wind subsidies
Peers have voted 242 to 190, majority 52, to scrap government plans to end onshore wind subsidies early despite claims it was a breach of the Salisbury Convention."
The HoL is going to be a massive nuisance for the a few months isn't it...0 -
So basically 0% of voters voted for Tax Credit Cuts!!!
Untrue.
One thing is certain. The voters decisively rejected economic stewardship by the party that is blocking the measures of a democratically elected government.
So stand aside.0 -
Not allowed in though due to immigration rules.richardDodd said:BJO..SUNIL I was at one tIme a very aggressive Union negotiator..so I have experience of how it all works ...I can assure you that the spaces will be filled..in the meantime the Junior Docs should get out of the way...or come to terms with reality..Lotsa docs in the world..
Vacuums are very expensive to fill and the NHS is already in its worst ever financial state.0 -
The liberals and Labour think the country will be grateful to them for hindering the government in this way.
They are wrong.0 -
A dangerous argument taffys. This one is coming from the cross-benches, although I know it is the late Michael Meacher's ex-wife who is pushing it. It's hardly a Labour measure even if a large chunk of the Labour benches are (unsurprisingly) supporting it.taffys said:So basically 0% of voters voted for Tax Credit Cuts!!!
Untrue.
One thing is certain. The voters decisively rejected economic stewardship by the party that is blocking the measures of a democratically elected government.
So stand aside.0 -
BJO Not silly at all ..If the Government want to fill Those posts it can..It would be a visa thing..If the junior Docs think they are being harshly treated then go away... it is their choice.. The rest of us will not all suddenly curl up and die..0
-
Cut the number of elected politicians and flood Parliament with unelected ones.MarqueeMark said:
Going to be a lot of grateful Constituency Chairmen when Cameron enobles them all....Pauly said:"Government defeat in Lords over on shore wind subsidies
Peers have voted 242 to 190, majority 52, to scrap government plans to end onshore wind subsidies early despite claims it was a breach of the Salisbury Convention."
The HoL is going to be a massive nuisance for the a few months isn't it...
I am sure that will go down well.0 -
How do you know?taffys said:The liberals and Labour think the country will be grateful to them for hindering the government in this way.
They are wrong.
0 -
What with... immigrants?richardDodd said:BJO Not silly at all ..If the Government want to fill Those posts it can..It would be a visa thing..If the junior Docs think they are being harshly treated then go away... it is their choice.. The rest of us will not all suddenly curl up and die..
0 -
Famous last words!!richardDodd said:BJO Not silly at all ..If the Government want to fill Those posts it can..It would be a visa thing..If the junior Docs think they are being harshly treated then go away... it is their choice.. The rest of us will not all suddenly curl up and die..
0 -
Hillary Clinton is as fit for the US Presidency as Victoria Beckham is for Manchester United's right wing.
The Republicans would love to face this frightful woman.0 -
''This one is coming from the cross-benches, although I know it is the late Michael Meacher's ex-wife who is pushing it. It's hardly a Labour measure even if a large chunk of the Labour benches are (unsurprisingly) supporting it. ''
What is dangerous is defying a new government with a fresh mandate by adhering to policies that were decisively rejected in a free and fair election.
As their Lordships will soon discover.0 -
Tories should really govern with a bit more humility if they know what's good for them. They are in danger of believing their own hype.taffys said:So basically 0% of voters voted for Tax Credit Cuts!!!
Untrue.
One thing is certain. The voters decisively rejected economic stewardship by the party that is blocking the measures of a democratically elected government.
So stand aside.
They are missing the LDs.
0 -
I think that it is Clinton versus Rubio or Trump. If the Republicans choose the former they will win.
EDITED0 -
''Tories should really govern with a bit more humility if they know what's good for them. They are in danger of believing their own hype.''
Like many labourites, you simply can't accept May 2015 can you. The electorate were just stupid right? they can't want tory policies, surely, because their betters such as you have already decided they are the wrong policies.
Suck it up0 -
I would have thought they would stand a better chance with Rubio. But maybe I'm biased because I don't like or rate Trump. I mean, how difficult can it be to throw away vast sums of money you inherit from your father so that you end up as only a billionaire?MikeSmithson said:I think that it is Clinton versus Rubio or Trump. If the Republicans choose the latter they will win.
0 -
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/637020695478824960Charles said:
How many people voted for members of the House of Lords?MikeSmithson said:
Remember that 63.1% did not vote CON on May 7thPauly said:"Government defeat in Lords over on shore wind subsidies
Peers have voted 242 to 190, majority 52, to scrap government plans to end onshore wind subsidies early despite claims it was a breach of the Salisbury Convention."
The HoL is going to be a massive nuisance for the a few months isn't it...0 -
Surely that should read. If the Republicans choose the latter they will "win".MikeSmithson said:I think that it is Clinton versus Rubio or Trump. If the Republicans choose the latter they will win.
Technically they will "In office, but not in power" (C) John Major.
Trump will be a law unto himself.0 -
Calling @JohnOMarqueeMark said:
Going to be a lot of grateful Constituency Chairmen when Cameron enobles them all....Pauly said:"Government defeat in Lords over on shore wind subsidies
Peers have voted 242 to 190, majority 52, to scrap government plans to end onshore wind subsidies early despite claims it was a breach of the Salisbury Convention."
The HoL is going to be a massive nuisance for the a few months isn't it...
Time to stand and be counted0 -
Sunil The right sort of immigrants..lots of them out there . the Junior Docs need to take a couple of steps back on this or some of them will not be employed at all..and all their probs will be over..no satisfying career with a good salary ..job for life..good pension..opportunity for advancement..or the dole..0
-
Richard clearly in favour of more immigration.Sunil_Prasannan said:
What with... immigrants?richardDodd said:BJO Not silly at all ..If the Government want to fill Those posts it can..It would be a visa thing..If the junior Docs think they are being harshly treated then go away... it is their choice.. The rest of us will not all suddenly curl up and die..
Currently can only recruit from EU.
Pakistani Doctors were much better IMO but not allowed currently0 -
I made a mistake. I think Rubio would do much better than Trump.ydoethur said:
I would have thought they would stand a better chance with Rubio. But maybe I'm biased because I don't like or rate Trump. I mean, how difficult can it be to throw away vast sums of money you inherit from your father so that you end up as only a billionaire?MikeSmithson said:I think that it is Clinton versus Rubio or Trump. If the Republicans choose the latter they will win.
0 -
Not any more - she's withdrawn and the LibDems are putting it forwardydoethur said:
A dangerous argument taffys. This one is coming from the cross-benches, although I know it is the late Michael Meacher's ex-wife who is pushing it. It's hardly a Labour measure even if a large chunk of the Labour benches are (unsurprisingly) supporting it.taffys said:So basically 0% of voters voted for Tax Credit Cuts!!!
Untrue.
One thing is certain. The voters decisively rejected economic stewardship by the party that is blocking the measures of a democratically elected government.
So stand aside.0 -
It did seem a strange thing for you to write! However, all is forgiven.MikeSmithson said:
I made a mistake. I think Rubio would do much better than Trump.ydoethur said:
I would have thought they would stand a better chance with Rubio. But maybe I'm biased because I don't like or rate Trump. I mean, how difficult can it be to throw away vast sums of money you inherit from your father so that you end up as only a billionaire?MikeSmithson said:I think that it is Clinton versus Rubio or Trump. If the Republicans choose the latter they will win.
And I agree entirely. If Clinton faces off against Rubio, this election is the Republicans' to lose.0 -
Nope. Quite the reverse. I saw what governing with a majority on such a low mandate did to Labour 2005-10. If the Tories know what's good for them they will realise that they are NOT popular despite winning under FPTP.taffys said:''Tories should really govern with a bit more humility if they know what's good for them. They are in danger of believing their own hype.''
Like many labourites, you simply can't accept May 2015 can you. The electorate were just stupid right? they can't want tory policies, surely, because their betters such as you have already decided they are the wrong policies.
Suck it up0 -
How do you know?
Fair enough, I can;t know. But I think many people will see that a government that has won an election has a perfect right to implement a programme in the first instance, whether you agree with that programme or not.
0 -
Every time the Medical Profession scream more ..more ..more money..the Gov of the day caves in and yet here on PB we hear the NHS is in dire financial straits..again...I wonder why.
0 -
posted for the four-hundredth-and-umpeenth time.Sunil_Prasannan said:
[snip]Charles said:
How many people voted for members of the House of Lords?MikeSmithson said:
Remember that 63.1% did not vote CON on May 7thPauly said:"Government defeat in Lords over on shore wind subsidies
Peers have voted 242 to 190, majority 52, to scrap government plans to end onshore wind subsidies early despite claims it was a breach of the Salisbury Convention."
The HoL is going to be a massive nuisance for the a few months isn't it...
Yes, Sunil, we know.0 -
''Nope. Quite the reverse. I saw what governing with a majority on such a low mandate did to Labour 2005-10. If the Tories know what's good for them they will realise that they are NOT popular despite winning under FPTP.''
Not for the first time, you are sounding more like the worried tory chairman in a marginal than a labour supporter.
This concern for the tories to do well in 2020 intrigues me...0 -
It will be higher than the 49% for Clinton v Dole. ABC poll today has Trump increasing his lead for GOP nomination followed by Carson. Crucially most Republicans polled thought Trump was their best general election candidate. The nomination is Trump's to loseydoethur said:So it is Clinton vs: somebody (assuming, for the moment, that the Democratic party are slightly more sensible than the Labour party and are not going to choose a geriatric socialist who has never had an original idea or done anything energetic or useful in his life).
Clinton v. Bush Mark II? Not inspiring.
Clinton v. Trump? Terrifying.
Clinton v. Rubio? Could be interesting.
What odds are available for this being the lowest ever turnout at a presidential election? 49% in 1996 is the record to beat. I would say that if Jeb Bush is the Republican candidate there would be value in that bet if it is longer than 2-1.0 -
Because we havent trained enough, have pulled up the borders to non EU Drs, have a system designed by Lansley that makes life in A&E a permanent place of hell where nobody wants to work?richardDodd said:Every time the Medical Profession scream more ..more ..more money..the Gov of the day caves in and yet here on PB we hear the NHS is in dire financial straits..again...I wonder why.
0 -
400th?Charles said:
posted for the four-hundredth-and-umpeenth time.Sunil_Prasannan said:
[snip]Charles said:
How many people voted for members of the House of Lords?MikeSmithson said:
Remember that 63.1% did not vote CON on May 7thPauly said:"Government defeat in Lords over on shore wind subsidies
Peers have voted 242 to 190, majority 52, to scrap government plans to end onshore wind subsidies early despite claims it was a breach of the Salisbury Convention."
The HoL is going to be a massive nuisance for the a few months isn't it...
Yes, Sunil, we know.
Sunil you approach my EICIPM repetition record.
Pack it in0 -
Even if they implement measures they specifically ruled out in the campaign?taffys said:How do you know?
Fair enough, I can;t know. But I think many people will see that a government that has won an election has a perfect right to implement a programme in the first instance, whether you agree with that programme or not.0 -
BJO When I talk about the Gov filling the vacuum then they will.. It only takes a visa change..I have always been in favour of immigrants..the right ones..that will benefit the country and not the ones who come here for the benefits...0
-
Yes. You vote for representatives not delegates.bigjohnowls said:
Even if they implement measures they specifically ruled out in the campaign?taffys said:How do you know?
Fair enough, I can;t know. But I think many people will see that a government that has won an election has a perfect right to implement a programme in the first instance, whether you agree with that programme or not.
If you don't like what they do you vote against them at the next election0 -
Good spot.TheWhiteRabbit said:Clinton 1.6 on Betfair for Iowa, where she has the polling lead and has not polled behind in a while.
DYOR0 -
if we're filling the lords up, surely the time is right for Lord Ave-it0
-
All governments do BJO. Remember Labour's cast iron guarantee not to raise tuition fees in 2001? That got them the support of the NUS (well - it was the official reason anyway) but to anyone with half a brain who was at university it was obvious that it was a pledge they would break at some point.bigjohnowls said:
Even if they implement measures they specifically ruled out in the campaign?taffys said:How do you know?
Fair enough, I can;t know. But I think many people will see that a government that has won an election has a perfect right to implement a programme in the first instance, whether you agree with that programme or not.
It was therefore a trifle depressing so many of my fellow students fell for it...it didn't say much for the minimum standards of common sense among my peers!0 -
BJO No one in their right mind would want to work in A and E..unfortunately it is one of the rungs in the ladder.. every professional career has them and they are just part of the process..get in there do a bloody good job and then move on.. Everybody who chases a career has to do that..Why not Junior Docs or do they all think they are Consultants already..0
-
Why do you think that is BJO?bigjohnowls said:
Not allowed in though due to immigration rules.richardDodd said:BJO..SUNIL I was at one tIme a very aggressive Union negotiator..so I have experience of how it all works ...I can assure you that the spaces will be filled..in the meantime the Junior Docs should get out of the way...or come to terms with reality..Lotsa docs in the world..
Vacuums are very expensive to fill and the NHS is already in its worst ever financial state.
Mismanagement, too many layers of managers on big salaries, huge pension liabilities particularly those that choose to retire at a ludicrously young age? Those same people then rehired on huge daily contracts? PFI? How about mass immigration and the fact they now have to cope with much bigger numbers?
Are any of those factors or is it just Lansley?0 -
I doubt it.Jonathan said:taffys said:So basically 0% of voters voted for Tax Credit Cuts!!!
Untrue.
One thing is certain. The voters decisively rejected economic stewardship by the party that is blocking the measures of a democratically elected government.
So stand aside.
They are missing the LDs.
0 -
Well, they didn't miss too many back in May...watford30 said:
0 -
Mr. Doethur, or to increase income tax.
Or that we'd get a referendum over Lisbon.0 -
Are you saying, Mr Owls, that the Tories came into office on the basis of a fraudulent prospectus?bigjohnowls said:
and of the 25% that did I am pretty sure100% thought Tax Credits were to be frozen not cut.Jonathan said:Isn't it more like 75%?
So basically 0% of voters voted for Tax Credit Cuts!!!0 -
Ah, but Mr Dancer, you must remember that they only promised us a referendum on the European Constitution. The Lisbon Treaty was a Constitutional Treaty, which is entirely different. There were five vital full stops in different places and it was not translated into Cornish.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Doethur, or to increase income tax.
Or that we'd get a referendum over Lisbon.
EDIT - Actually, rather an aside but over Lisbon I was reminded of the specious arguments used by unions in the 1970s to justify not demanding equal pay for men and women. In one notorious case, men were making shoes in one part of the factory, and women were making shoes in another part of the same factory. According to the law at the time, if men and women did the same work, they were paid the same money. But a union rep said with a straight face that this was not the same work - the men were making men's shoes, the women were making women's shoes, and the work was totally different so the women should be paid less (because we all know women are much less picky about their footwear than men, who demand high heels and decorations and special polishes and so on, so that's really skilled work). In 1980, law was changed to be 'work of equal pay for work of equal value.'0 -
Walsgrave:nigel4england said:
Why do you think that is BJO?bigjohnowls said:
Not allowed in though due to immigration rules.richardDodd said:BJO..SUNIL I was at one tIme a very aggressive Union negotiator..so I have experience of how it all works ...I can assure you that the spaces will be filled..in the meantime the Junior Docs should get out of the way...or come to terms with reality..Lotsa docs in the world..
Vacuums are very expensive to fill and the NHS is already in its worst ever financial state.
Mismanagement, too many layers of managers on big salaries, huge pension liabilities particularly those that choose to retire at a ludicrously young age? Those same people then rehired on huge daily contracts? PFI? How about mass immigration and the fact they now have to cope with much bigger numbers?
Are any of those factors or is it just Lansley?
'The hospital cost £440 million to build, but Projectco is guaranteed an income of £3.3 billion over 30 years, including facilities contracts.'0 -
''Are you saying, Mr Owls, that the Tories came into office on the basis of a fraudulent prospectus?''
What you and Mr Owls think about that is completely irrelevant. As is the opinion of the undemocratic Lords. That will be for the electorate to judge and decide between now and 2020.
What is certain is that the manifestos of many of those voting the government down were decisively rejected.
Maybe it will emerge the government is being held up by liberal democrat lords whose party was atomised at the last election, and who have no business adhering to policies that were extremely unpopular, and remain so.0 -
Worth a thread I think!Charles said:
posted for the four-hundredth-and-umpeenth time.Sunil_Prasannan said:
[snip]Charles said:
How many people voted for members of the House of Lords?MikeSmithson said:
Remember that 63.1% did not vote CON on May 7thPauly said:"Government defeat in Lords over on shore wind subsidies
Peers have voted 242 to 190, majority 52, to scrap government plans to end onshore wind subsidies early despite claims it was a breach of the Salisbury Convention."
The HoL is going to be a massive nuisance for the a few months isn't it...
Yes, Sunil, we know.
twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/637020695478824960
BTW: Far less than four hundred and umpteenth time, actually! :P
0 -
BJO..One thing the Junior Docs..and some others ..never seem to learn..you can never conduct a winning or successful campaign when you are standing outside the gate....and someone else is now doing your old job...0
-
Naught but Tory hyperbole from posho Charles!!!bigjohnowls said:
400th?Charles said:
posted for the four-hundredth-and-umpeenth time.Sunil_Prasannan said:
[snip]Charles said:
How many people voted for members of the House of Lords?MikeSmithson said:
Remember that 63.1% did not vote CON on May 7thPauly said:"Government defeat in Lords over on shore wind subsidies
Peers have voted 242 to 190, majority 52, to scrap government plans to end onshore wind subsidies early despite claims it was a breach of the Salisbury Convention."
The HoL is going to be a massive nuisance for the a few months isn't it...
Yes, Sunil, we know.
Sunil you approach my EICIPM repetition record.
Pack it in0 -
Hillary Clinton Will Be The 45th President Of The United StatesMikeSmithson said:I think that it is Clinton versus Rubio or Trump. If the Republicans choose the former they will win.
EDITED
0 -
Yep. But they have the support of both Consultants and GPs if they do walk out.richardDodd said:BJO..One thing the Junior Docs..and some others ..never seem to learn..you can never conduct a winning or successful campaign when you are standing outside the gate....and someone else is now doing your old job...
In similar strikes there is emergency cover. It will hit mostly planned work. The aim will be to crash political (waiting times) and financial targets. No patient harmed but maximum difficulty for the government.-1 -
"No patient harmed."foxinsoxuk said:
Yep. But they have the support of both Consultants and GPs if they do walk out.richardDodd said:BJO..One thing the Junior Docs..and some others ..never seem to learn..you can never conduct a winning or successful campaign when you are standing outside the gate....and someone else is now doing your old job...
In similar strikes there is emergency cover. It will hit mostly planned work. The aim will be to crash political (waiting times) and financial targets. No patient harmed but maximum difficulty for the government.
Do you really believe that?0 -
You must be over-joyed Jack by the Canadian result. This'll mean that Canada signs up to Kyoto once again - an issue I know that you are concerned about.JackW said:
Hillary Clinton Will Be The 45th President Of The United StatesMikeSmithson said:I think that it is Clinton versus Rubio or Trump. If the Republicans choose the former they will win.
EDITED
0 -
We shall see. Many will be inconvenienced.JosiasJessop said:
"No patient harmed."foxinsoxuk said:
Yep. But they have the support of both Consultants and GPs if they do walk out.richardDodd said:BJO..One thing the Junior Docs..and some others ..never seem to learn..you can never conduct a winning or successful campaign when you are standing outside the gate....and someone else is now doing your old job...
In similar strikes there is emergency cover. It will hit mostly planned work. The aim will be to crash political (waiting times) and financial targets. No patient harmed but maximum difficulty for the government.
Do you really believe that?
I really do think the vote will go for a strike, even the usually apathetic ones are apoplectic.
0 -
Charles - Did I see you in the TV pictures of last night's banquet?Charles said:
posted for the four-hundredth-and-umpeenth time.Sunil_Prasannan said:
[snip]Charles said:
How many people voted for members of the House of Lords?MikeSmithson said:
Remember that 63.1% did not vote CON on May 7thPauly said:"Government defeat in Lords over on shore wind subsidies
Peers have voted 242 to 190, majority 52, to scrap government plans to end onshore wind subsidies early despite claims it was a breach of the Salisbury Convention."
The HoL is going to be a massive nuisance for the a few months isn't it...
Yes, Sunil, we know.
0 -
be nice, MikeMikeSmithson said:
You must be over-joyed Jack by the Canadian result. This'll mean that Canada signs up to Kyoto once again - an issue I know that you are concerned about.JackW said:
Hillary Clinton Will Be The 45th President Of The United StatesMikeSmithson said:I think that it is Clinton versus Rubio or Trump. If the Republicans choose the former they will win.
EDITED0 -
Touche.MikeSmithson said:
You must be over-joyed Jack by the Canadian result. This'll mean that Canada signs up to Kyoto once again - an issue I know that you are concerned about.JackW said:
Hillary Clinton Will Be The 45th President Of The United StatesMikeSmithson said:I think that it is Clinton versus Rubio or Trump. If the Republicans choose the former they will win.
EDITED0 -
I think it'll be close whoever the GOP chooses because voters are fed up with getting either a Clinton or a Bush.0
-
Can anyone point me to any mention of preserving tax credits in the Tory manifesto?0
-
Well done to the House of Lords for supporting onshore windfarms which the majority of people support.0
-
Corrected it for youJonnyJimmy said:Can anyone point me to any mention of ABOLISHING tax credits in the Tory manifesto?
0 -
Meanwhile in Turkey, a suggestion from the Turkish that IS open a Consulate in Istanbul:
https://barnabasfund.org/news/Editorial-Turkey-exposed?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=facebook0 -
To The Junior Docs..you will not win this one..as the little Labour lad said..there aint no money..and watch out for the sudden influx of qualified docs from the rest of the world.0
-
My dear Mike I'm always overjoyed at the ability of the great unwashed to topple their putative masters.MikeSmithson said:
You must be over-joyed Jack by the Canadian result. This'll mean that Canada signs up to Kyoto once again - an issue I know that you are concerned about.JackW said:
Hillary Clinton Will Be The 45th President Of The United StatesMikeSmithson said:I think that it is Clinton versus Rubio or Trump. If the Republicans choose the former they will win.
EDITED
More specifically the huge uplift in Liberal voters across the pond has engaged the hierarchy of Auchentennach Fine Pies to consider opportunities in Canada - Maple syrup moose pies .... and extras !!
0 -
They promised to bring the welfare bill under control. I, rather sensibily as it turns out, assumed that that meant getting rid of the ridiculous tax credit system. Didn't you?Sunil_Prasannan said:
Corrected it for youJonnyJimmy said:Can anyone point me to any mention of ABOLISHING tax credits in the Tory manifesto?
0 -
Says who?AndyJS said:Well done to the House of Lords for supporting onshore windfarms which the majority of people support.
0 -
Most opinion polls IIRC.nigel4england said:
Says who?AndyJS said:Well done to the House of Lords for supporting onshore windfarms which the majority of people support.
0 -
"Assumption is the mother of all f*ckups"JonnyJimmy said:
They promised to bring the welfare bill under control. I, rather sensibily as it turns out, assumed that that meant getting rid of the ridiculous tax credit system. Didn't you?Sunil_Prasannan said:
Corrected it for youJonnyJimmy said:Can anyone point me to any mention of ABOLISHING tax credits in the Tory manifesto?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7rr88Szc5q00 -
Off topic, I'm not seeing an easy way back for the Canadian Conservatives:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-election-2015-numbers-1.3281210
http://www.cbc.ca/news2/interactives/results-2015/
Everything we thought would happen in May 2015 in this country this year happened there: record turnout, centre-left voters uniting behind the challenger, new voters voting overwhelmingly for the Left, and the Tories defeated even though they held their base vote steady.
Oh, and the polls were almost bang-on - just slightly underticking the Tory vote share.
I haven't done a marginals analysis - is this available anywhere? - but count only six ultra-marginal near misses for the Conservatives. And it could have been even worse - the Liberals came close in a further 13 seats.
They will probably need a good 5% swing, and to knock a good 50 seats off the Liberals to have a chance to regain power next time.
It's not a 1997 style wipe-out, but a pretty clear defeat. They must expand their voter base.0
