politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The latest GOP debate changes nothing – the front runners a

Innocent_Abroad said:

JackW said:

TOPPING said:

JackW said:

blackburn63 said:

foxinsoxuk said:

blackburn63 said:

I see that clown Charles is meddling in politics, as a monarchist I've long been concerned about this plant talking nut job. His mother must be doing all she can to outlive him.

If you are a monarchist then you should accept the heir to the throne being kept in the picture. The genetic lottery and line to the throne is intrinsic to monarchy.

One thing we should copy from Europe is retirement of the monarch, or we are going to always have a gerontocracy.

The reason I'm a monarchist is because our head of state is apolitical, Charles should not interfere or be seen to be interfering.

The monarch is apolitical. The private audience with the PM will be a different matter.

As heir to the throne I want Prince Charles to be fully informed so that on succession he will be fully appraised of the affairs of state so that he may be able to properly undertake his constitutional role to advise, counsel and warn the government of the day.

In time both Prince William and Prince George will have a similar role. Historically both the heir to the throne and the spouse of the Monarch have had similar access to state papers.

For HMQ it was ever thus so most people don't have a problem with it.

For subsequent generations, perhaps including Charles, I'm not so sure.

William - great bloke, it seems, but not unlike millions of other young men and I can see no reason, as heir to the throne (and eventual King), helicopter pilot, occasional boozer, polo player, father, Boujis-frequenter, he should get such access.

Not sure about his counsel or advice, either.

The Queen had access to state papers during her fathers reign as did her mother. In broad terms such regular access began with Prince Albert although there was some initial resistance to such a move.

Whether as monarch Charles's advice and counsel would wise or not is largely irrelevant. As monarch he may give it. The government may also ignore it.

I expect there will be a petition for William to succeed HMQ. The people who dislike Charles dislike him very much indeed.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Plato_Says said:

Mr @DecrepitJohnL's other meme is that it was YouTube and Facebook wot won it for the Tories.

I find that quite incredible.

SimonStClare said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Why doesn't Obama join the Tories?

Tory co-chairman claimed Obama sent pollster to UK to stop Miliband, book says

Lord Feldman made claim about pollster Jim Messina in election night victory speech, say authors Philip Cowley and Dennis Kavanagh

http://bit.ly/1OvDfdh

It was certainly Messina what won it.

Undoubtedly.

Nothing to do with Labour or their leader.....

The personal abuse of the Labour leader has also been used against Blair, Brown and Corbyn, and doubtless would have been much the same under, say, David Miliband, except with bananas in place of bacon sandwiches. The crucial factor was Messina's work in dissecting and micro-targeting which voters to tell "Miliband is a twat" or "Miliband is an SNP puppet" or whatever.

I know this has been your pet meme since the election, but the simple reality is, Labour were still unpopular and Ed was never perceived as a viable alternative to lead the country.

Lynton Crosby agrees Facebook and YouTube was key.

Having a good leader and good narrative also helped.

Casino_Royale said:

Wanderer said:

blackburn63 said:

I hope Trump wins, I don't like him much but my life won't change whoever wins and the reaction of the bedwetters will be hilarious.

If you are serious about your libertarianism you really shouldn't want Trump to win.

But if those on the Left didn't react so hysterically to Trump like a pantomime baddie he probably wouldn't be so outrageous, nor doing so well.

There's something refreshing and satisfying to many that goes with him breaking just about every political taboo there is, coupled with they don't respect those politicians and commentators who are most offended by it.

Plato_Says said:

DWP
Young people in work or full-time education is the highest on record #getbritainworking https://t.co/tSV1MCzepL

That's 85.8%

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Chestnut, to be fair, Corbyn wants everything with 'the People's' in front of it.

"It is time for the People's Free Friday Doughnut!"

"We must have the People's Double Pay Wednesday!"

"It is imperative we have the People's Resignation of Jeremy Corbyn!"

Miss Plato, I think Corbyn's just bloody stupid. Any man who has to think about whether or not killing terrorists about to commit an atrocity is a good idea must have a hollow head.

Plato_Says said:

I really don't know what battle Corbyn & Comrades are fighting - I really don't.

It's not 2008.

chestnut said:

AlastairMeeks said:

@ONS · 1m1 minute ago
#Unemployment rate 5.2% for Aug-Oct 2015, down from 6.0% a year earlier http://ow.ly/VXHkE

@ONS · 20s21 seconds ago
#Employment rate 73.9% for Aug-Oct 2015, highest since records began in 1971 http://ow.ly/VXHyK

And Corbyn is still talking about the need for People's QE to 'kickstart the economy'.

MarqueeMark said:

Plato_Says said:

DWP
Young people in work or full-time education is the highest on record #getbritainworking https://t.co/tSV1MCzepL

That's 85.8%

When you take "unemployment!!!!" from Labour's list of scares to run against the Tories, there isn't much left for them to scream at the voters. They become a single-issue lobby. The NHS.

JackW said:

TOPPING said:

JackW said:

TOPPING said:

JackW said:

blackburn63 said:

foxinsoxuk said:

blackburn63 said:

I see that clown Charles is meddling in politics, as a monarchist I've long been concerned about this plant talking nut job. His mother must be doing all she can to outlive him.

If you are a monarchist then you should accept the heir to the throne being kept in the picture. The genetic lottery and line to the throne is intrinsic to monarchy.

One thing we should copy from Europe is retirement of the monarch, or we are going to always have a gerontocracy.

The reason I'm a monarchist is because our head of state is apolitical, Charles should not interfere or be seen to be interfering.

Tte papers.

For HMQ it was ever thus so most people don't have a problem with it.

For subsequent generations, perhaps including Charles, I'm not so sure.

Not sure about his counsel or advice, either.

The.

Times move on, Jack.

In my mind is a picture, shown in all the media, of William being manhandled into a car after a night out because he is so drunk he can't stand up on his own.

Some years ago the decision was made to demystify, demythify the Royal Family. They can't have their cake and eat it. Either they are a distant presence opining on events within their kingdom, or they are one of us (as they are trying to be now) in which case what's with the private audience with the PM?

Young man enjoys night out shocker !!

Look at how George III sons behaved and were reported to behave. Up market London brothels, courtesans and mistresses were the order of the day and titled bastard children were a plenty. "Times move on" is certainly true and the nature of monarchy has been a successful story of evolution.

However the monarch's direct involvement with the Prime Minister of the day remains the same, as indeed it should. It is a typically British compromise and works well. The Queen reigns and her Prime Minister governs.

Morris_Dancer said:

Miss Plato, quite. I wouldn't judge someone based on their academic/educational background, but one need only consider the idiotic content that dribbles from Corbyn's mouth to see he's a damned fool.

Let's negotiate with Daesh! Let's abolish the nuclear deterrent! Let's disband the army! WHat's that, Mao? Yes, good idea, let's disarm the police and disband MI5!

Casino_Royale said:

logical_song said:

Casino_Royale said:

Wanderer said:

blackburn63 said:

I hope Trump wins, I don't like him much but my life won't change whoever wins and the reaction of the bedwetters will be hilarious.

If you are serious about your libertarianism you really shouldn't want Trump to win.

But if those on the Left didn't react so hysterically to Trump like a pantomime baddie he probably wouldn't be so outrageous, nor doing so well.

There's something refreshing and satisfying to many that goes with him breaking just about every political taboo there is, coupled with they don't respect those politicians and commentators who are most offended by it.

It seems odd that anybody would warm to someone aspiring for the most powerful job on the planet just because it pisses off some people you don't like.

Why? That's certainly not uncommon amongst the Left and "the rich".

Casino_Royale said:

Patrick said:

Is there any chance whatever that Dave will complete his rounds of Euro persuasion efforts, come up empty, and decide that he will actually then join the Out camp? If he had a public epiphany and said 'I was in favour of remaining but have become persuaded that there is no political flexibility to move away from 'Ever Closer' so on balance I think it is better to leave and control our own destiny. I have always said I would take this view if my renegotiation efforts were frustrated and I intend to keep my word'.

He'd be a hero in his own party and would then win the referendum.

Or am I just fantasising?

You are fantasising.

AlastairMeeks said:

On the other hand, earnings don't look so good:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CWVyfgbW4AAkWUK.jpg

TOPPING said:

JackW said:

TOPPING said:

JackW said:

TOPPING said:

JackW said:

blackburn63 said:

foxinsoxuk said:

blackburn63 said:

I see that clown Charles is meddling in politics, as a monarchist I've long been concerned about this plant talking nut job. His mother must be doing all she can to outlive him.

If you are a monarchist then you should accept the heir to the throne being kept in the picture. The genetic lottery and line to the throne is intrinsic to monarchy.

One thing we should copy from Europe is retirement of the monarch, or we are going to always have a gerontocracy.

The reason I'm a monarchist is because our head of state is apolitical, Charles should not interfere or be seen to be interfering.

Tte papers.

For HMQ .

The.

Times move on, Jack.

Young man enjoys night out shocker !!

You make my point for me, Jack.

George III and George IV and William for that matter were involved in the governing of the country to a far greater extent than Charles or William are today.

The monarchy today are titular heads and we swear allegiance to them and long may it last.

If The Queen, or Charles after her, were to mimic a hundredth of the political activity of George III we would be in strange territory indeed. But of course they would never dream of it and hence the audience with the PM has likewise become an anachronism.

Morris_Dancer said:

Miss Plato, I think Corbyn's just bloody stupid. Any man who has to think about whether or not killing terrorists about to commit an atrocity is a good idea must have a hollow head.

MarqueeMark said:

I'm not sure most Corbynistas even know where the edge of the battlefield is, Jack. Is it down the pub?

Richard_Nabavi said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

...
Tory co-chairman claimed Obama sent pollster to UK to stop Miliband, book says

Lord Feldman made claim about pollster Jim Messina in election night victory speech, say authors Philip Cowley and Dennis Kavanagh

http://bit.ly/1OvDfdh

Not really a surprise. Obama clearly admires Cameron, and Miliband's breach of faith on the 2013 Syria vote will have convinced the US administration that he was not someone to be trusted - a point I and others made at the time.

AlastairMeeks said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

AlastairMeeks said:

On the other hand, earnings don't look so good:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CWVyfgbW4AAkWUK.jpg

3% was never going to last. If it falls <2% i.e. further still, then that would be cause for concern.</p>

It's astonishing that as the labour market tightens, wages should be so subdued. Of all the aspects of Britain's economic recovery from the great recession, the employment market is the most mysterious.

DecrepitJohnL said:

Isn't (or wasn't) David Cameron's erstwhile guru Steve Hilton also tied up with the Democrats?

watford30 said:

How are things looking in Northern Britain, under the SNP? Maybe Sturgeon could employ those out of work in an emergency bridge rebuilding programme.

AlastairMeeks said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

AlastairMeeks said:

On the other hand, earnings don't look so good:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CWVyfgbW4AAkWUK.jpg

3% was never going to last. If it falls <2% i.e. further still, then that would be cause for concern.</p>

It's astonishing that as the labour market tightens, wages should be so subdued. Of all the aspects of Britain's economic recovery from the great recession, the employment market is the most mysterious.

NickPalmer said:

TOPPING said:

Do you think the Guardian is an example of our "gloriously unfree media", Nick?

Serious reply FWIW: I wouldn't say unfree, but yes, it shares in the general crapness of our media compared with e.g. the German and even the US media. It is very difficult to get a serious discussion in the UK media - they always focus on a sensational trivial remark from an otherwise interesting interview (the "stab him from the front" example that he gives is a good one) or they start from the position "I'm going to try to persuade readers of a point of view" (Ambrose Evans and Polly Toynbee are examples). The sort of "I'm going to explain the situation and set out the pros and cons" piece that you get in the Frankfurter Allgemeine, the Neue Zuercher Zeitung or even the Washington Post almost doesn't happen in Britain. We think it's boring and deride it.

The effect is that politicians become extremely defensive - the main priority in an interview is to get one line across and not screw up with some comment that can be taken out of context. The victim is the level of public debate, which is seriously awful.

TOPPING said:

We mentioned times change and how the monarchy is seeking to become more "normal". One small example will suffice. The Prince of Wales presides over a successful-ish business (Duchy Originals, profitable since a tie up with Waitrose). He runs this business for all the best reasons, but he is a businessman.

Do we really think a businessman with, by definition, a vested interest in policy, should be giving counsel to the PM on anything and do we think that Charles' thinking is as independent as The Queen's is today?

watford30 said:

Plato_Says said:

Oliver Cooper
Another 90,000 jobs were created in the last month in the UK: 94% of them full-time.

How are things looking in Northern Britain, under the SNP? Maybe Sturgeon could employ those out of work in an emergency bridge rebuilding programme.

TheScreamingEagles said:

ThreeQuidder said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

@Kevin_Maguire: Ever wonder why Michael Gove looks so glum? Headline on wife Sarah Vine's Mail column: "Sorry chaps but women love sleep FAR more than sex!"

So do men.

But I see that she's been scheduling sex. This is called "doing it wrong".

The older I've got, the more I view sleep now as I did sex in my youth.

You should have seen me last night, I was at it for six straight hours.

Scott_P said:

watford30 said:

How are things looking in Northern Britain, under the SNP? Maybe Sturgeon could employ those out of work in an emergency bridge rebuilding programme.

@ABritView: Interesting letter from Tam Dayell in The Scotsman today regarding the SNP farce over the #FRB https://t.co/ySfFQfjMin

TheScreamingEagles said:

Opinion is split over whether to let 16 and 17-year-olds vote in the referendum, an idea fought over in the House of Lords.

People’s answers appeared to depend on how the question was asked. When asked if the voting age should be reduced to 16, some 56 per cent opposed and 37 per cent supported.

But asking the question in terms of “giving 16 and 17-year-olds the right to vote”, the results flipped to 52 per cent in favour and 41 per cent opposed.

Richard_Nabavi said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Opinion is split over whether to let 16 and 17-year-olds vote in the referendum, an idea fought over in the House of Lords.

People’s answers appeared to depend on how the question was asked. When asked if the voting age should be reduced to 16, some 56 per cent opposed and 37 per cent supported.

But asking the question in terms of “giving 16 and 17-year-olds the right to vote”, the results flipped to 52 per cent in favour and 41 per cent opposed.

Perhaps we should deny the vote to people who think there's a difference between the two questions.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

dr_spyn said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

dr_spyn said:

Will this shift the figures for staying in?

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-15-6346_en.htm

A para military force for the EU to cross member states' borders. Will this be one of Dave's cast iron opt outs?

Err, you do realise we're not in Schengen?

Even if we are not, I'm not comfortable with a supranational EU border force, are you?

Believe David Cameron has offered UK forces to it. Maybe trying to be conciliatory to help in the negotiations