Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Bush gets his mojo back in the most explosive GOP debate ye

2»

Comments

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,171

    malcolmg said:

    Alistair said:

    Indigo said:

    Even in Scotland the debate is rather dull as independence is no longer a serious possibility now that everything the SNP claimed prior to the referendum has been shown to be wrong.

    Saying that should liven things up for you if that are any Nats within earshot ;)

    Its balanced out by everything Better Together said being shown to be wrong as well.
    Exactly, everything they said would happen if we voted YES has come to pass, must be getting very embarrassing for their sockpuppets in Scotland.
    However given it was muppets like Scottp ,they still whinge on about SNPBAD, unbelievable how stupid they are.
    Genuine question - what are those predictions?
    Budget cuts , job losses , pensions cut, services cut for straters
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,171

    notme said:

    John Rentoul
    Net favourability, parties. Con -14 ↑4, Lab -21 ↓5, UKIP -26 ↓1, Lib Dem -27 ↑10 Vs Mar 2015 ComRes @IndyOnSunday https://t.co/MhI3tFuREi

    There are circumstances in which this would be a tipping point... Miliband kept the knives at bay because, though it was fairly obvious he wasnt up to it, he was pulling in consistent polling leads, these proved to be (as Dan Hodges and the ever wise PBTories said) fools gold.

    But Corbyn isnt even getting this. The government is all over the place on many issues, yet its position is improving, and Labour is getting worse.

    Is there a possibility that we will see no sustained (two successive labour party polls leads by a single pollster) labour lead for the whole of this parliament?

    I think even Hague managed that, though it was in the context of the fuel strikes.

    Labour will have no opinion poll leads for as long as Corbyn is leader.

    Politics in the UK is actually pretty tedious currently if you are on the centre left. There's no credible party to support and the EU referendum is a centre right/right issue that does not really engage us. Even in Scotland the debate is rather dull as independence is no longer a serious possibility now that everything the SNP claimed prior to the referendum has been shown to be wrong.

    Yes, if the union had never happened Scotland would now be asking to join up with Engalnd. Now that oil is no longer a viable commodity it's impossible to see how Scotland could survive as an autonomous unit. The SNP should be thanking their lucky stars that their bid for independence failed. Had it succeeded, Scotland would now be thumping on the World Bank's door.
    And the flow of migrants heading south of Hadrian's Wall would make the Syria - Turkey border look like a flag day in Aberdeen....
    You halfwit , we would have invested some of the hundreds of billions that Westminster pissed up the wall and been like Norway.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,171

    malcolmg said:

    Alistair said:

    Indigo said:

    Even in Scotland the debate is rather dull as independence is no longer a serious possibility now that everything the SNP claimed prior to the referendum has been shown to be wrong.

    Saying that should liven things up for you if that are any Nats within earshot ;)

    Its balanced out by everything Better Together said being shown to be wrong as well.
    Exactly, everything they said would happen if we voted YES has come to pass, must be getting very embarrassing for their sockpuppets in Scotland.
    However given it was muppets like Scottp ,they still whinge on about SNPBAD, unbelievable how stupid they are.
    We told you your oil price projections were pish....
    And to think, the SNP claimed that Scotland would become one of the richest countries on earth off the back of that. Their actions actually imperilled a people and a nation.
    another cretinous loony
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,171
    Scott_P said:

    The Yoons on here are getting lazy and repetitive

    You mean like

    TURNIP
    TURNIP
    TURNIP
    TURNIP
    TURNIP

    ?
    Not very bright are you , I have not used that for many months , sad sack. Have you ever had an original thought/
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    edited February 2016
    malcolmg said:

    I have not used that for many months

    So this was a different malcolmg, 4 days ago...

    malcolmg
    malcolmg Posts: 12,432 February 10
    I see that Turnip Cameron whinging that Scottish Government will not accept another £3B budget cut and sign his phony VOW. What an absolute divvy
    Not very bright are you ...
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    better than calling women politicians 'c*nts' I guess.

    True, the Cybernats do seem very fond of doing that for some reason
  • VerulamiusVerulamius Posts: 1,555
    For those interestest in LibDem hereditary by-elections, there have been two in the past.

    The first was on the Death of Earl Russell around 11 years ago. http://www.parliament.uk/documents/lords-information-office/hoflpressnotice130105.pdf provides more information of the 4 voters and 3 candidates. Only hereditary LibDem peers had the vote.

    Since then one of the voters, Lord Methuen has died, but since he was elected by the whole house, the whole house elected his successor, another LibDem peer. http://www.parliament.uk/documents/lords-finance-office/2013-14/Hereditary-Peers-by-election-result-Methuen.pdf

    So by my calculations, which of course may well be wrong, the electorate is likely to be Lord Addington, Viscount Falkland, Earl Glasgow, and the Earl of Oxford and Asquith. However, I see that the Parliament website has Viscount Falkland down as a cross bencher, so he may well be now ineligible to vote as a Lib Dem.

    Of course, any candidates need to be a hereditary peer which the electorate is likely to vote for (ie a lib dem).
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    For those interestest in LibDem hereditary by-elections, there have been two in the past.

    The first was on the Death of Earl Russell around 11 years ago. http://www.parliament.uk/documents/lords-information-office/hoflpressnotice130105.pdf provides more information of the 4 voters and 3 candidates. Only hereditary LibDem peers had the vote.

    Since then one of the voters, Lord Methuen has died, but since he was elected by the whole house, the whole house elected his successor, another LibDem peer. http://www.parliament.uk/documents/lords-finance-office/2013-14/Hereditary-Peers-by-election-result-Methuen.pdf

    So by my calculations, which of course may well be wrong, the electorate is likely to be Lord Addington, Viscount Falkland, Earl Glasgow, and the Earl of Oxford and Asquith. However, I see that the Parliament website has Viscount Falkland down as a cross bencher, so he may well be now ineligible to vote as a Lib Dem.

    Of course, any candidates need to be a hereditary peer which the electorate is likely to vote for (ie a lib dem).

    An electorate of 4?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2w2W9mr3zU0
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    :smiley:

    I see the ammunition those plucky Britons were smuggling through Greece has gone up from 40,000 rounds to 200,000.....


    That's Greek inflation for you.

  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    I see the ammunition those plucky Britons were smuggling through Greece has gone up from 40,000 rounds to 200,000.....


    That's Greek inflation for you.

    It's not inflation - just the difference between the actual amount and the amount that gets reported on the subsidy claim to the EU
This discussion has been closed.