Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Conservative party sweepstake

135

Comments

  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,263
    > @williamglenn said:
    > It would be Absolutely Awesome if absolutely all of them ran. A long protracted blood letting where a series of indicative votes slowly whittles down the list from massive to merely absurd is absolutely in the interests of the Conservative Party
    >
    > It would be funny if the indicative votes all failed and May had to carry on. We could all be here in 2025, still looking for someone to take the job of PM off her hands.

    I shocked a friend by saying wistfully that I wished I was in Parliament at the moment, as it combines genuine importance with drama and fun. She couldn't imagine anyone finding things at the moment fun.

    Sad, yes. Worrying, absolutely. But...fun too.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    On the mechanics of the contest, and at the risk of conjuring up demons from the deeps, it's important to note that the initial selection process by MPs is not done by AV, but by something allowing a much more Machiavellian approach. The key point is that Tory MPs don't need to say in advance who their second choice would be if their first choice gets eliminated; instead, they can wait and see which way the wind is blowing. That's crucial, because it makes a big difference.



    Suppose you are one of the minority of sane Tory MPs, and it's down to the penultimate stage. There are three candidates remaining; the favourite is, say, 'B', who portrays himself as a Leaver, and you absolutely detest him. The second - the one of the three you would want to win and whom you've voted for in previous rounds, let's call her 'A' - has no chance if it comes to a vote of members, because she's sensible. The third, let's call her 'L', isn't a great choice, but now you know who the last three are, you realise she's got a better chance of beating B than A has. So you switch your vote to L, as the best Anyone But B candidate, despite preferring A. And since the Anyone But B vote amongst members is strong - voila!

    Of that list, A is arrogant and tone deaf; B an unprincipled charlatan and L out of her depth.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    > @kle4 said:
    > > @AndyJS said:
    > > This is the most interesting discussion that's been on Newsnight for a long time, about reality TV. One person pointed out that documentaries used to be fly on the wall, and didn't try to "make things happen" like reality shows do.
    >
    > I feel like there's information missing there? They're not documentaries and are not trying to be, of course they do things differently, they are trying to do different things. Just because it has the word reality in front of the genre doesn't mean there is or ever was a committment to reflection of reality. Not all movies which say 'based on a true story' are very accurate either.
    >
    > But then I've always been a snob when it comes to reality tv. I did watch an episode of Bake Off once, but that is literally it.
    >
    > Good night all.

    I actually don't think it's snobbish to be against reality TV.
  • KentRisingKentRising Posts: 2,850
    > @The_Taxman said:
    > > @Cyclefree said:
    > > I don’t get the praise for Andrea Leadsom. Neither particularly bright nor particularly honest and with a tendency to petulance.
    >
    > She is a baby eating Tory, even if the picture is just jelly babies!
    >
    > To my mind she would be completely out of her depth as leader or PM. Maybe that is what the people who advocate her as leader want, someone who is malleable. They can then hold her hostage and force their extreme agenda on the country....
    >
    >

    Where is this 'Leadsom isn't particularly bright' stuff coming from? It's been oft-repeated since 2016 when she ran for the leadership but is there any evidence she is any less intelligent than your average politician?
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    edited May 2019
    Oh dear, how not to report things if you're trying to run a serious newspaper:

    "Drinkers in the UK get drunk more than any other nation in the world, findings from a global survey suggest.

    Britons reported getting drunk an average of 51.1 times in a 12-month period – almost once a week – the report featuring 36 countries found.

    On average, respondents said they got drunk 33 times in the last year.
    ...
    In England, 74% of participants reported having used cocaine at some point in their lives, compared with 43% globally. Use of the drug in the past year among people from England who responded went up from 43% in 2018’s survey to 64% this year."

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/may/15/britons-get-drunk-more-often-than-35-other-nations-survey-finds

    Eh? 64% of people in England took cocaine in the last year? And an average Briton got drunk once a week???

    Utter garbage of course. This turns out to be a survey of 'substance-users'. Dunno how they were selected.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    > @Charles said:
    >
    > Of that list, A is arrogant and tone deaf; B an unprincipled charlatan and L out of her depth.

    That may be. But if we're betting, we need to understand how the mechanics of the process interacts with the politics.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074

    > @The_Taxman said:

    > > @Cyclefree said:

    > > I don’t get the praise for Andrea Leadsom. Neither particularly bright nor particularly honest and with a tendency to petulance.

    >

    > She is a baby eating Tory, even if the picture is just jelly babies!

    >

    > To my mind she would be completely out of her depth as leader or PM. Maybe that is what the people who advocate her as leader want, someone who is malleable. They can then hold her hostage and force their extreme agenda on the country....

    >

    >



    Where is this 'Leadsom isn't particularly bright' stuff coming from? It's been oft-repeated since 2016 when she ran for the leadership but is there any evidence she is any less intelligent than your average politician?

    It comes from (a) a lack of evidence of much intelligence - as seen either in her Parliamentary career or in her time before she became an MP; and (b) the things she has said over the years on Brexit which show a lack of understanding.

    Mind you when you’re up against brainboxes like Raab, she is not that dumb. But our PM has to be able to deal with people like Barnier, who - frankly - is head and shoulders above pretty much all of the people on this list.

  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    > @Charles said:

    >

    > Of that list, A is arrogant and tone deaf; B an unprincipled charlatan and L out of her depth.



    That may be. But if we're betting, we need to understand how the mechanics of the process interacts with the politics.

    Yes, but I was just pointing out you biases
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    > @Charles said:
    > > @Charles said:
    >
    > >
    >
    > > Of that list, A is arrogant and tone deaf; B an unprincipled charlatan and L out of her depth.
    >
    >
    >
    > That may be. But if we're betting, we need to understand how the mechanics of the process interacts with the politics.
    >
    > Yes, but I was just pointing out you biases

    My biases? They were just three hypothetical and anonymous candidates! In any case my biases are shared by approximately two-thirds of the electorate in the MPs' round.
  • Harris_TweedHarris_Tweed Posts: 1,300
    (With apols for forgetting who mentioned earlier about a lack of recent accurate predictions on Brexit)

    I suspect that’s because any newspaper columnist or lobby corr who wrote “I guess she’ll just hang on day by day, can-dribbling until the road runs out, but I am only guessing” wouldn’t remain in a job for long! Human nature expects progress towards a deadline (and at a more basic level enjoys drama and values people who make it look like some is around the corner), so the soothsayers grab hold of any old passing driftwood which will make a splash.

    Hence why Mathouse Compromises and Paterson Unicorns and Corbyn Tests all get an airing, however impractical.
  • KentRisingKentRising Posts: 2,850
    > @Cyclefree said:
    > > @The_Taxman said:
    >
    > > > @Cyclefree said:
    >
    > > > I don’t get the praise for Andrea Leadsom. Neither particularly bright nor particularly honest and with a tendency to petulance.
    >
    > >
    >
    > > She is a baby eating Tory, even if the picture is just jelly babies!
    >
    > >
    >
    > > To my mind she would be completely out of her depth as leader or PM. Maybe that is what the people who advocate her as leader want, someone who is malleable. They can then hold her hostage and force their extreme agenda on the country....
    >
    > >
    >
    > >
    >
    >
    >
    > Where is this 'Leadsom isn't particularly bright' stuff coming from? It's been oft-repeated since 2016 when she ran for the leadership but is there any evidence she is any less intelligent than your average politician?
    >
    > It comes from (a) a lack of evidence of much intelligence - as seen either in her Parliamentary career or in her time before she became an MP; and (b) the things she has said over the years on Brexit which show a lack of understanding.
    >
    > Mind you when you’re up against brainboxes like Raab, she is not that dumb. But our PM has to be able to deal with people like Barnier, who - frankly - is head and shoulders above pretty much all of the people on this list.

    Where you say 'pretty much all', who are the exceptions? Gove maybe? Slippery but intelligent.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    edited May 2019
    LOL, I've just noticed that OGH gets an honourable mention in Wikipedia's piece on Andrea Leadsom:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrea_Leadsom#Parliamentary_career
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    > @Charles said:

    > > @Charles said:

    >

    > >

    >

    > > Of that list, A is arrogant and tone deaf; B an unprincipled charlatan and L out of her depth.

    >

    >

    >

    > That may be. But if we're betting, we need to understand how the mechanics of the process interacts with the politics.

    >

    > Yes, but I was just pointing out you biases



    My biases? They were just three hypothetical and anonymous candidates! In any case my biases are shared by approximately two-thirds of the electorate in the MPs' round.

    Describing A as “sensible” for instance when she has demonstrated poor personal judgement in the past
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited May 2019
    I can't understand why anyone thinks Boris Johnson would make a good prime minister, but apparently a lot of Tory party members believe that he would for unknown reasons.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074

    > @Cyclefree said:

    > > @The_Taxman said:

    >

    > > > @Cyclefree said:

    >

    > > > I don’t get the praise for Andrea Leadsom. Neither particularly bright nor particularly honest and with a tendency to petulance.

    >

    > >

    >

    > > She is a baby eating Tory, even if the picture is just jelly babies!

    >

    > >

    >

    > > To my mind she would be completely out of her depth as leader or PM. Maybe that is what the people who advocate her as leader want, someone who is malleable. They can then hold her hostage and force their extreme agenda on the country....

    >

    > >

    >

    > >

    >

    >

    >

    > Where is this 'Leadsom isn't particularly bright' stuff coming from? It's been oft-repeated since 2016 when she ran for the leadership but is there any evidence she is any less intelligent than your average politician?

    >

    > It comes from (a) a lack of evidence of much intelligence - as seen either in her Parliamentary career or in her time before she became an MP; and (b) the things she has said over the years on Brexit which show a lack of understanding.

    >

    > Mind you when you’re up against brainboxes like Raab, she is not that dumb. But our PM has to be able to deal with people like Barnier, who - frankly - is head and shoulders above pretty much all of the people on this list.



    Where you say 'pretty much all', who are the exceptions? Gove maybe? Slippery but intelligent.

    Gove, Gauke, Gibb and Stewart strike me as intelligent and thoughtful. Gove has failings, as you note. The other three have made good speeches or given thoughtful interviews. Doesn’t mean they will be good PMs mind. I like Rudd.

    The others range from the so-so-ish to the arrogant, the liars and the unspeakable. Very few of them have really been tested in senior positions. They strike me as junior Ministers prematurely elevated to Cabinet level

    Ken Clarke would wipe the floor, even at his age, with all of them.
  • DadgeDadge Posts: 2,038
    edited May 2019
    Who will be acting PM when TM steps down, or does she stay put till the replacement is decided? Either way, it's a bad time for a PM to be resigning. I suppose that there are plenty in her party who are concerned that if the June WA vote fails, she'll pivot towards a referendum on the deal. But if she's ousted and replaced by a leader who's happy with No Deal, the sparks will really start to fly. Won't that leader (eg. Boris) immediately lose a VoNC?

    I do wonder if this is another false alarm, and May will soldier on to October 31st, or beyond...
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    Charles said:

    Describing A as “sensible” for instance when she has demonstrated poor personal judgement in the past

    She famously said she wouldn't trust B to drive her home after a party, which seems eminently sensible to me!
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074

    Charles said:

    Describing A as “sensible” for instance when she has demonstrated poor personal judgement in the past

    She famously said she wouldn't trust B to drive her home after a party, which seems eminently sensible to me!
    B is the sort of person my mother would have described as Not Safe in Taxis. (Or anywhere else for that matter.)
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    edited May 2019
    > @AndyJS said:
    > I can't understand why anyone thinks Boris Johnson would make a good prime minister, but apparently a lot of Tory party members believe that he would for unknown reasons.

    Much of the public too, Comres at the weekend had a Boris led Tory Party slashing Labour's lead to just 1% from the Tories' current position of 8% behind with the Brexit Party also falling from 20% to just 10%

    https://www.comresglobal.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Brexit-Express-Tables-120519.pdf
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,766
    > @Richard_Nabavi said:
    > Oh dear, how not to report things if you're trying to run a serious newspaper:
    >
    > "Drinkers in the UK get drunk more than any other nation in the world, findings from a global survey suggest.
    >
    > Britons reported getting drunk an average of 51.1 times in a 12-month period – almost once a week – the report featuring 36 countries found.
    >
    > On average, respondents said they got drunk 33 times in the last year.
    > ...
    > In England, 74% of participants reported having used cocaine at some point in their lives, compared with 43% globally. Use of the drug in the past year among people from England who responded went up from 43% in 2018’s survey to 64% this year."
    >
    > https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/may/15/britons-get-drunk-more-often-than-35-other-nations-survey-finds
    >
    > Eh? 64% of people in England took cocaine in the last year? And an average Briton got drunk once a week???
    >
    > Utter garbage of course. This turns out to be a survey of 'substance-users'. Dunno how they were selected.
    >
    >

    Point of order:

    In the 2018 survey 43% of Brits surveyed said that had taken cocaine at some point in their lives.
    In the 2019 survey, the number was 74%. Therefore, assuming that the survey is completely representative (it isn't), then at least 31% of Brits used cocaine in the last year.

    Which, once we eliminate, the elderly, the very young, the incarcerated, and those who are regularly drug tested as part of their jobs, means that more than half of Brits of young or middle age are SeanT.
  • Y0kelY0kel Posts: 2,307
    Democratic Primary; Looks like NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio will officially throw his hat in the ring in the next day because, well why not.

    On topic, Hunt strikes me as good value. .
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    > @TheScreamingEagles said:
    > > @TheScreamingEagles said:
    >
    > > Article of the year. Worthy of a national newspaper.
    >
    > >
    >
    > >
    >
    > >
    >
    > > "As a general rule the able candidates are ruled out by their views on Brexit while the candidates with appropriate views on Brexit are ruled out by their ability."
    >
    > >
    >
    > >
    >
    > >
    >
    > > Priceless.
    >
    > >
    >
    > > PB is very lucky to have Alastair, Cyclefree, and David Herdson regularly writing pieces that are worthy of national newspaper comment and analysis sections. <
    >
    >
    >
    > ++++++
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > You are.
    >
    >
    >
    > Are you paying them yet?
    >
    > No, they do it for the honour of being published on PB.

    We are well blessed to have them.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,880

    > @williamglenn said:

    > It would be Absolutely Awesome if absolutely all of them ran. A long protracted blood letting where a series of indicative votes slowly whittles down the list from massive to merely absurd is absolutely in the interests of the Conservative Party

    >

    > It would be funny if the indicative votes all failed and May had to carry on. We could all be here in 2025, still looking for someone to take the job of PM off her hands.



    Layla Moran and Jo Swinson have their hands in the air, waving frantically.

    But Moran's doing CQC.
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,960
    > @Charles said:
    > Boris the boss, Cox as Deputy, Andrea as Chancellor, Penny as Home Sec, Hunt as For, Gove as Dept of Trade & Ind, Gavin back at defence, Javid as Chief Sec of Treasury. Dream Team
    >
    > Struggling to work out which of those suggestions is the stupidest...
    >
    > Williamson back at Defence, probably.
    >
    > Closely followed by Boris as boss and Andrea as Chancellor.
    >
    > He’s either a troll or an idiot. Or both.

    To be fair to him, it's just about the best possible Cabinet if you restrict yourself entirely to Leaverrs (plus those he thinks are legitimate Leave converts).
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840
    https://twitter.com/YvetteHenson/status/1128763013220245507

    Sums up the CUK project, top down with no real ground support.
  • DadgeDadge Posts: 2,038
    > @TheJezziah said:
    > https://twitter.com/YvetteHenson/status/1128763013220245507
    >
    >
    >
    > Sums up the CUK project, top down with no real ground support.

    tbf the grass is as new as the roots.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,880
    S/Lt (Acting) Mordaunt, RNR is definitely on maneuvers. In her RUSI speech yesterday she indulged in some mild nationalist frottage over the FSS ship build and announced, to general bafflement, a new 'National Carrier Strategy' which apparently consists of, er, having two carriers with one available for use.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840
    https://twitter.com/Angry_Voice/status/1128690763733372928

    Some people are so cynical about our media, I'm sure we'll see just as passionate a campaign as we saw against the Labour party on this issue....
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517
    > @TheJezziah said:
    > https://twitter.com/Angry_Voice/status/1128690763733372928
    >
    >
    >
    > Some people are so cynical about our media, I'm sure we'll see just as passionate a campaign as we saw against the Labour party on this issue....

    Hmmm. So you're finally admitting that Labour were wrong to reject the IHRA (which they essentially did by leaving out parts of it) ?

    Well, that's progress. Perhaps you're a step nearer admitting that the party has deep problems with anti-Semitism in its ranks - starting with its dear leader.

    Because without doing that, you're really not in a position to throw stones.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840
    edited May 2019
    `..
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517
    edited May 2019
    > @TheJezziah said:
    > I'm not sure what it is about being a troll and reading things that people didn't actually say...
    >
    > My main assumption is they usually want to distract from the topic at hand so turn to lies, very Trumpian, he has a problem with Muslims too funnily enough.

    ------

    I assume you're referring to me. In which case you are dead wrong, as ever. And as for Trumpian ... no. Just no. :)

    Here are my views on this 0- and I think you'll agree they're nothing to do with 'having a problem with Muslims'.

    Firstly, the IHRA is an internationally-recognised definition that has been developed over many years. This definition has been defined by a small interest group. Are you saying it's correct enough on the first try to become law?

    Secondly, I might suggest you look at the suggested wording. " "Islamophobia is rooted in racism and is a type of racism that targets expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness."

    I'd generally agree with the first clause: Islamaphobia is rooted in racism - though I know others disagree with such a definition.

    The second clause is more problematic. What is 'Muslimness'? What is 'perceived Muslimness.' ? The IHRA definition has examples for a reason, and it is vital that any similar anti-Muslim definition also has examples.

    For instance, is saying that you cannot wear a Burqa in court fair comment, or an attack on perceived Muslimness?

    Is criticising the political forces of the Muslim Brotherhood or ISIS fair comment, or is that attacking the adherents' Muslimness? After all, such political forces are expressions of Muslimness.

    I'd be a lot happier if there were examples to guide us through such a morass: and such examples would help the definition and the fight against Islamaphobia, not hinder it.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,164
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48284105

    It suggested lowering the speed of HS2 or placing its terminal in west London rather than Euston would save money.

    No, just no. If we are going to have this railway line it needs to go into central London. Terminating it at OOC would be utterly stupid.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,741
    TGOHF said:

    Gove upset the vested interests in Education - teachers and civil servants. Parents and pupils benefitted though.

    Seems like the same is required to progress Brexit.

    Pupils benefited from exams whose grades became no better than guesses thanks to basic errors in creating the curriculum and marking criteria?

    It's a view. Please forgive me if it's one that being intelligent, well-informed and determined to give children the best possible education (unlike those lying retards Gove and Cummings) that I don't share.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840
    https://twitter.com/jewdas/status/1128751173023031296

    The good thing about being a massive cynic about many of Corbyn's critics is this is absolutely no surprise...
  • NorthCadbollNorthCadboll Posts: 329
    Morning all and not often I admit this but I really enjoyed reading this thread by Alastair and for what it is worth, I agree with most of his analysis.

    A couple of thoughts on the runners and riders.

    Boris, almost as universally loathed beyond the M25 as he is loved by the darlings among the party membership would be an unmitigated disaster. The Scottish Party might even split from London with him as leader. I would pray for Nigel Farage to stand in Uxbridge so that he loses his seat and role as PM at the GE he would surely call to secure his own mandate.

    My preferred choice would be either Hunt as PM and Gove as DPM or vice versa. Both formidable media performers which is what any successful PM will have to be in future given the determination of SKY and others to force debates on candidates.

    If Andrea Leadsom reached the last 2, she would be hard to beat. Many of the headbangers however might not forgive her for remaining in the May cabinet.

    Esther the new "Liver bird" (for those who remember British comedy when it was funny in the 1970s and 80s) would be almost as unpopular as Boris but could just morph into Iron Lady Mark II.

    Amber Rudd is clever, an excellent speaker with fabulous grammar ( a side effect from years as Mrs AA Gill perhaps) but as a staunch Remainer she hasn't a chance and of course she holds an ultra marginal seat.

    I do remember the last time the LibDems thought they would "decapitate" Tories in marginal seats and they ended up losing more than they won. Now of course they have almost none to lose and if Jo Swinson becomes leader, she will be a difficult opponent for both main party leaders at the next GE.

    Finally as we are only a week from EU2019 I can reveal that this life-long Scots Tory has gone to the dark side and voted for the Brexit party. The No 1 choice in Scotland is a successful businessman who also happens to be black and gay. The Tory No 1 choice is Baroness "I've never heard of" who was imposed ahead of the 2nd list choice when Ian Duncan was knocked upstairs after GE2017.

    It is looking like Scotland could vote 3 SNP, 1 Brexit, 1 LibDem or Green and possibly only 1 Tory or Labour but I wouldn't put any money on either or both failing to win a seat because when it comes to Europe, Ruth Davidson whilst a May loyalist, like Amber Rudd is an unreconstructed remainer.

    I shall now return to lurking and enjoy the fur flying as things get frantic on the betting front over the next week.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,741
    tlg86 said:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48284105

    It suggested lowering the speed of HS2 or placing its terminal in west London rather than Euston would save money.

    No, just no. If we are going to have this railway line it needs to go into central London. Terminating it at OOC would be utterly stupid.

    If you cut the speed of a high speed rail link, is it still high speed?

    A better question is, do we need a high speed rail link? Or would a modified restoration of the GCML from Aylesbury to Sheffield have worked better?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517
    > @ydoethur said:
    > https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48284105
    >
    > It suggested lowering the speed of HS2 or placing its terminal in west London rather than Euston would save money.
    >
    > No, just no. If we are going to have this railway line it needs to go into central London. Terminating it at OOC would be utterly stupid.
    >
    > If you cut the speed of a high speed rail link, is it still high speed?
    >
    > A better question is, do we need a high speed rail link? Or would a modified restoration of the GCML from Aylesbury to Sheffield have worked better?

    I believe the definition of 'high speed' is anything over 120 MPH for existing lines and 160MPH for new lines - which means we already have a fair few high speed lines.

    Reopening the old GCML has been looked into many times. The line has been built over in Leicester and Nottingham with somewhat undue haste, but for the price of HS2 you could tunnel under both these cities to get a line through to the centre. But even with improvements to alignments, it would not be a new high-speed line.

    But the real killer is that the GCML is still open in part. The southern section from Aylesbury south is still in use with regular train services, and Marylebone is open (and I believe nearly at capacity). You don't have enough paths for trains on the very section of the country where there are capacity constraints.

    A new route is required into London, and that's the pricey bit.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,741
    edited May 2019


    Reopening the old GCML has been looked into many times. The line has been built over in Leicester and Nottingham with somewhat undue haste, but for the price of HS2 you could tunnel under both these cities to get a line through to the centre. But even with improvements to alignments, it would not be a new high-speed line.

    But the real killer is that the GCML is still open in part. The southern section from Aylesbury south is still in use with regular train services, and Marylebone is open (and I believe nearly at capacity). You don't have enough paths for trains on the very section of the country where there are capacity constraints.

    A new route is required into London, and that's the pricey bit.

    Marylebone is actually beyond capacity, but there are routes to other terminals. So I don't see that as an objection.

    The question to my mind is whether high speed lines are worth the additional cost in a country as small as this.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517
    > @TheJezziah said:
    > https://twitter.com/jewdas/status/1128751173023031296
    >
    >
    >
    > The good thing about being a massive cynic about many of Corbyn's critics is this is absolutely no surprise...

    I'll criticise Pollard for that: but the article he links to makes some (IMO) bad points and some good ones. Perhaps you should read it?

    The good thing about being a massive cynic about those who have turned Corbyn into a cult is that their reaction is absolutely no surprise ...
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,958
    > @Dadge said:
    > > @TheJezziah said:
    > > https://twitter.com/YvetteHenson/status/1128763013220245507
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > Sums up the CUK project, top down with no real ground support.
    >
    > tbf the grass is as new as the roots.

    It's also greener elsewhere.

    Or should that be orange?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,958
    Saw my first Brexit Party poster yesterday. On a barn.

    If the Tories have lost the cows.......
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517
    > @ydoethur said:
    > Reopening the old GCML has been looked into many times. The line has been built over in Leicester and Nottingham with somewhat undue haste, but for the price of HS2 you could tunnel under both these cities to get a line through to the centre. But even with improvements to alignments, it would not be a new high-speed line.
    >
    > But the real killer is that the GCML is still open in part. The southern section from Aylesbury south is still in use with regular train services, and Marylebone is open (and I believe nearly at capacity). You don't have enough paths for trains on the very section of the country where there are capacity constraints.
    >
    > A new route is required into London, and that's the pricey bit.
    >
    > Marylebone is actually beyond capacity, but there are routes to other terminals. So I don't see that as an objection.
    >
    > The question to my mind is whether high speed lines are worth the additional cost in a country as small as this.

    Which terminals have enough capacity? A significant part of the cost of HS2 is Euston (and I've said passim that, if anything, that is what will kill the project). That's being done because there are not enough paths to allow the required extra services.

    So you still need a new route into London from the southern Midlands (say Banbury), and either a new terminus or one of the existing termini expanded. That's a massive chunk of HS2's costs right there.

    As for the requirement for HSR - there are regular flights around the country. IMO if a country is big enough to support 'local' flights, it is big enough ti support high-speed rail.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,762
    > @NorthCadboll said:
    > (snip)
    >
    > Finally as we are only a week from EU2019 I can reveal that this life-long Scots Tory has gone to the dark side and voted for the Brexit party. The No 1 choice in Scotland is a successful businessman who also happens to be black and gay. The Tory No 1 choice is Baroness "I've never heard of" who was imposed ahead of the 2nd list choice when Ian Duncan was knocked upstairs after GE2017.
    >
    > It is looking like Scotland could vote 3 SNP, 1 Brexit, 1 LibDem or Green and possibly only 1 Tory or Labour but I wouldn't put any money on either or both failing to win a seat because when it comes to Europe, Ruth Davidson whilst a May loyalist, like Amber Rudd is an unreconstructed remainer.
    >
    > I shall now return to lurking and enjoy the fur flying as things get frantic on the betting front over the next week.
    >

    The Ruth dominated leaflet we got from the Tories this week was unequivocal that we are leaving but leaving on May's deal. It's got my wife, who was also tempted by the dark side, swithering again. The recent by election was very satisfactory for the Scottish Tories whose vote went up despite the travails of the party in the locals in England. My guess is SNP 3, BP 1, Tory 1 and Lib Dem 1 with the Greens and Labour coming close to taking 1 off the SNP but not quite making it. Not good for Corbyn if that is what happens.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    edited May 2019
    > @TheJezziah said:
    > https://twitter.com/jewdas/status/1128751173023031296
    >
    >
    >
    > The good thing about being a massive cynic about many of Corbyn's critics is this is absolutely no surprise...

    What is the inconsistency there?

    We prioritise problems on various bases, because if we didn't we wouldn't get anything done. The Jeremy Kyle show is a good example of this: it has just escalated itself from bad thing which we need to keep an eye on to bad thing we must obliterate and sow its field with salt. There are no doubt islamophobes, no doubt some of them in the Tory party (though i must confess i only really hear about it on here, from you) , but it's still a problem we just need to keep an eye on, while firmly enforcing the existing quite extensive legislation against it. Corbyn has jumped the racist shark where other parties are still assessing their chance of hopping over the racist goldfish.

    ETA you would get on better if you produced the odd bit of primary evidence, rather than retweeting tweets which say look what another tweeter says yet another person said.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,008
    Someone’s going to have to talk me through why Andrea Leadsom is hero of the hour.

    She holed herself beneath the waterline three years ago in the last contest, IMHO, and I can’t see why she’d have a strong swansong just because she made it to the final two with May and it’d be poetic justice for her to win now.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    edited May 2019
    > @JosiasJessop said:
    > > @TheJezziah said:
    > > https://twitter.com/jewdas/status/1128751173023031296
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > The good thing about being a massive cynic about many of Corbyn's critics is this is absolutely no surprise...
    >
    > I'll criticise Pollard for that: but the article he links to makes some (IMO) bad points and some good ones. Perhaps you should read it?
    >
    > The good thing about being a massive cynic about those who have turned Corbyn into a cult is that their reaction is absolutely no surprise ...

    Ignoring the whataboutery on both sides, this surely is another nail in Boris's leadership coffin, since he is the man most obviously at risk of (and making the party vulnerable to) the sort of campaign, mutatis mutandis, that has been waged against Corbyn and Labour, as no doubt every other leadership rival will be reminding the backbench electorate.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,008
    edited May 2019
    My main play on this market is to lay Boris. I think he’s ludicrously short based on name recognition, and appeal that’s now years of date. The odds also don’t reflect how he’s viewed within the Tory MP selectorate, where he has to get to the final two first.

    He’d only be someone I’d be betting on were the Tories still in opposition and were desperate to be heard.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,056
    > @Richard_Nabavi said:
    > Describing A as “sensible” for instance when she has demonstrated poor personal judgement in the past
    >
    > She famously said she wouldn't trust B to drive her home after a party, which seems eminently sensible to me!

    I thought that the issue was being in thr back with Boris. Its probably safe while his hands are on the wheel!

    I see a curious omission in AlastairMeeks list. No mention of Chris Grayling. Why choose amongst the minor numpties, while the master is still availible.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,008
    Dura_Ace said:

    S/Lt (Acting) Mordaunt, RNR is definitely on maneuvers. In her RUSI speech yesterday she indulged in some mild nationalist frottage over the FSS ship build and announced, to general bafflement, a new 'National Carrier Strategy' which apparently consists of, er, having two carriers with one available for use.

    And what were you?

    Rear Admiral?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,008
    I’m not convinced by Matt Hancock or Amber Rudd either, I’m afraid.

    They jointly wrote a confused article in the Sunday Times last weekend. About three quarters of it was about mental health - fair enough, you might say - and pivoted in the last quarter to a cringeworthy pitch to Da Yoof, explaining that they understand that (you) shouldn’t be called snowflakes and that issues like bodyshaming on Instagram and climate change are important to you.

    I don’t know who’s advising them but if they’re going to pump out stuff that patronising then they’ll be going nowhere fast, even if one of them wins.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,715
    > @Foxy said:
    > > @Richard_Nabavi said:
    > > Describing A as “sensible” for instance when she has demonstrated poor personal judgement in the past
    > >
    > > She famously said she wouldn't trust B to drive her home after a party, which seems eminently sensible to me!
    >
    > I thought that the issue was being in thr back with Boris. Its probably safe while his hands are on the wheel!
    >
    > I see a curious omission in AlastairMeeks list. No mention of Chris Grayling. Why choose amongst the minor numpties, while the master is still availible.

    Surely no-one, nobody, could possibly think Grayling was leadership/PM material?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,008
    Ishmael_Z said:

    > @TheJezziah said:

    >



    >

    >

    >

    > The good thing about being a massive cynic about many of Corbyn's critics is this is absolutely no surprise...



    What is the inconsistency there?



    We prioritise problems on various bases, because if we didn't we wouldn't get anything done. The Jeremy Kyle show is a good example of this: it has just escalated itself from bad thing which we need to keep an eye on to bad thing we must obliterate and sow its field with salt. There are no doubt islamophobes, no doubt some of them in the Tory party (though i must confess i only really hear about it on here, from you) , but it's still a problem we just need to keep an eye on, while firmly enforcing the existing quite extensive legislation against it. Corbyn has jumped the racist shark where other parties are still assessing their chance of hopping over the racist goldfish.



    ETA you would get on better if you produced the odd bit of primary evidence, rather than retweeting tweets which say look what another tweeter says yet another person said.
    A number of people keep asking, “where do you draw the line?”

    We now know the answer to that: when you kick-up a sufficiently large stink about something on social media.

    It’s a terribly unjust way to make policy and employment decisions, and effectively amounts to virtual mob rule by whoever can shout the loudest, but that’s the world we now live in.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    > @Dura_Ace said:
    > S/Lt (Acting) Mordaunt, RNR is definitely on maneuvers. In her RUSI speech yesterday she indulged in some mild nationalist frottage over the FSS ship build and announced, to general bafflement, a new 'National Carrier Strategy' which apparently consists of, er, having two carriers with one available for use.

    Is Mordaunt on manoeuvres or merely driving Jeremy Hunt's tanks off her lawn, after Hunt suggested we need more things that go bang after a decade of defence cuts?
    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9067906/jeremy-hunt-increase-britain-defence-budget/
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    President Trump has pardoned Conrad Black, the former Telegraph owner who purely coincidentally published his hagiography of Trump last year.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-48290529
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,080
    > @Casino_Royale said:
    > Someone’s going to have to talk me through why Andrea Leadsom is hero of the hour.
    >
    > She holed herself beneath the waterline three years ago in the last contest, IMHO, and I can’t see why she’d have a strong swansong just because she made it to the final two with May and it’d be poetic justice for her to win now.

    There’s a view she’s been relatively grown up and sensible as leader of the house, and as the losing finalist inevitably people wonder ‘what if?’. I agree that I don’t see she has much to bring to the table, but the bar for being considered a contender in this contest is appallingly low.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,008

    > @Dura_Ace said:

    > S/Lt (Acting) Mordaunt, RNR is definitely on maneuvers. In her RUSI speech yesterday she indulged in some mild nationalist frottage over the FSS ship build and announced, to general bafflement, a new 'National Carrier Strategy' which apparently consists of, er, having two carriers with one available for use.



    Is Mordaunt on manoeuvres or merely driving Jeremy Hunt's tanks off her lawn, after Hunt suggested we need more things that go bang after a decade of defence cuts?

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9067906/jeremy-hunt-increase-britain-defence-budget/

    I think Hunt is right.

    However, I doubt finding an extra £20bn for Defence pa is politically sustainable unless a rise is done over a number of years in parallel with a growing economy and additional funds for other sectors like health, education, policing and justice at the same time.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,958
    > @Casino_Royale said:
    > S/Lt (Acting) Mordaunt, RNR is definitely on maneuvers. In her RUSI speech yesterday she indulged in some mild nationalist frottage over the FSS ship build and announced, to general bafflement, a new 'National Carrier Strategy' which apparently consists of, er, having two carriers with one available for use.
    >
    > And what were you?
    >
    > Rear Admiral?

    How dare you question Maverick. Don't you know he is notorious - for buzzing the tower?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,008

    > @Casino_Royale said:

    > S/Lt (Acting) Mordaunt, RNR is definitely on maneuvers. In her RUSI speech yesterday she indulged in some mild nationalist frottage over the FSS ship build and announced, to general bafflement, a new 'National Carrier Strategy' which apparently consists of, er, having two carriers with one available for use.

    >

    > And what were you?

    >

    > Rear Admiral?



    How dare you question Maverick. Don't you know he is notorious - for buzzing the tower?

    Penny Benjamin?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,958
    Hopefully that is the last we'll see of Leeds United heading for the premiership any decade soon......
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Good morning, everyone.

    It's quite a long list...
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    > @Morris_Dancer said:
    > Good morning, everyone.
    >
    > It's quite a long list...

    And still there might be some sulking that I hadn’t included them.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,669
    The Tory Leadership Contest
    The one thing that could save Change UK
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,741

    Surely no-one, nobody, could possibly think Grayling was leadership/PM material?

    Two words: Jeremy Corbyn.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517

    Ishmael_Z said:

    > @TheJezziah said:

    >



    >

    >

    >

    > The good thing about being a massive cynic about many of Corbyn's critics is this is absolutely no surprise...



    What is the inconsistency there?



    We prioritise problems on various bases, because if we didn't we wouldn't get anything done. The Jeremy Kyle show is a good example of this: it has just escalated itself from bad thing which we need to keep an eye on to bad thing we must obliterate and sow its field with salt. There are no doubt islamophobes, no doubt some of them in the Tory party (though i must confess i only really hear about it on here, from you) , but it's still a problem we just need to keep an eye on, while firmly enforcing the existing quite extensive legislation against it. Corbyn has jumped the racist shark where other parties are still assessing their chance of hopping over the racist goldfish.



    ETA you would get on better if you produced the odd bit of primary evidence, rather than retweeting tweets which say look what another tweeter says yet another person said.
    A number of people keep asking, “where do you draw the line?”

    We now know the answer to that: when you kick-up a sufficiently large stink about something on social media.

    It’s a terribly unjust way to make policy and employment decisions, and effectively amounts to virtual mob rule by whoever can shout the loudest, but that’s the world we now live in.
    I'm not on Twitter and haven't been closely following it, but is that what happened in the case of the Jeremy Kyle show? I got the impression that ITV pulled the show without much external pressure. Was there a Twitter campaign against it?

    It does make me wonder exactly what happened in this sad case. The JK has always prided itself on its aftercare (whether rightly or not) - I wonder if that system failed badly?

    I daresay the inquest will tell us more.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    > @AlastairMeeks said:
    > https://twitter.com/roger_scully/status/1128909420858155009?s=21

    Fieldwork before Nigel Farage's Welsh tour?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,571
    ydoethur said:

    Surely no-one, nobody, could possibly think Grayling was leadership/PM material?

    Two words: Jeremy Corbyn.
    I’m sure Corbyn would like to face a Tory party lead by Grayling, but I doubt even he thinks Grayling leadership material....
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,571

    > @Morris_Dancer said:

    > Good morning, everyone.

    >

    > It's quite a long list...



    And still there might be some sulking that I hadn’t included them.

    In which case the article is yet more brilliant than we thought.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,008

    Ishmael_Z said:

    > @TheJezziah said:

    >



    >

    >

    >

    > The good thing about being a massive cynic about many of Corbyn's critics is this is absolutely no surprise...



    What is the inconsistency there?



    We prioritise problems on various bases, because if we didn't we wouldn't get anything done. The Jeremy Kyle show is a good example of this: it has just escalated itself from bad thing which we need to keep an eye on to bad thing we must obliterate and sow its field with salt. There are no doubt islamophobes, no doubt some of them in the Tory party (though i must confess i only really hear about it on here, from you) , but it's still a problem we just need to keep an eye on, while firmly enforcing the existing quite extensive legislation against it. Corbyn has jumped the racist shark where other parties are still assessing their chance of hopping over the racist goldfish.



    ETA you would get on better if you produced the odd bit of primary evidence, rather than retweeting tweets which say look what another tweeter says yet another person said.
    A number of people keep asking, “where do you draw the line?”

    We now know the answer to that: when you kick-up a sufficiently large stink about something on social media.

    It’s a terribly unjust way to make policy and employment decisions, and effectively amounts to virtual mob rule by whoever can shout the loudest, but that’s the world we now live in.
    I'm not on Twitter and haven't been closely following it, but is that what happened in the case of the Jeremy Kyle show? I got the impression that ITV pulled the show without much external pressure. Was there a Twitter campaign against it?

    It does make me wonder exactly what happened in this sad case. The JK has always prided itself on its aftercare (whether rightly or not) - I wonder if that system failed badly?

    I daresay the inquest will tell us more.
    Yes, it was media, though, rather than social media in the case. However, the two have a symbiotic relationship. BBC news reported that the ITV Board were desperate to get it out the headlines.

    They’ve now sowed the fields with salt by pulling all and any repeats off ITV2 and removing it from their online player. Which seems ridiculous to me.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,008

    > @Morris_Dancer said:

    > Good morning, everyone.

    >

    > It's quite a long list...



    And still there might be some sulking that I hadn’t included them.

    Such are the egos of our MPs there will be one or two Tories annoyed at you this morning that you didn’t make a joke about them.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614

    > @Morris_Dancer said:

    > Good morning, everyone.

    >

    > It's quite a long list...



    And still there might be some sulking that I hadn’t included them.

    This is a very well written piece Alastair, as well as an informative rundown of the many runners and riders. One of your best.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,880

    > @Dura_Ace said:

    > S/Lt (Acting) Mordaunt, RNR is definitely on maneuvers. In her RUSI speech yesterday she indulged in some mild nationalist frottage over the FSS ship build and announced, to general bafflement, a new 'National Carrier Strategy' which apparently consists of, er, having two carriers with one available for use.



    Is Mordaunt on manoeuvres or merely driving Jeremy Hunt's tanks off her lawn, after Hunt suggested we need more things that go bang after a decade of defence cuts?

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9067906/jeremy-hunt-increase-britain-defence-budget/

    I think Hunt is right.

    However, I doubt finding an extra £20bn for Defence pa is politically sustainable unless a rise is done over a number of years in parallel with a growing economy and additional funds for other sectors like health, education, policing and justice at the same time.
    She does seem to be wasting her predecessor blame window. She should be making some tough choices now (Type 31e, RAFAT, Black Knight) and then blaming it all on the mismanagement of The Once and Future Fireplace Salesman.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Antisemitism as a result of Soviet-era anti-Zionism? That thesis is explored here
    http://fathomjournal.org/soviet-anti-zionism-and-contemporary-left-antisemitism/

    (hat-tip: Jewish Chronicle, which further points out Corbyn's tankies Murray and Milne grew up politically absorbing this).
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517


    Yes, it was media, though, rather than social media in the case. However, the two have a symbiotic relationship. BBC news reported that the ITV Board were desperate to get it out the headlines.

    They’ve now sowed the fields with salt by pulling all and any repeats off ITV2 and removing it from their online player. Which seems ridiculous to me.

    Thanks. However the extreme reaction from ITV just cements my suspicion that there is more detail in this story that plays very badly for the JK show.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614

    Ishmael_Z said:

    .

    A number of people keep asking, “where do you draw the line?”

    We now know the answer to that: when you kick-up a sufficiently large stink about something on social media.

    It’s a terribly unjust way to make policy and employment decisions, and effectively amounts to virtual mob rule by whoever can shout the loudest, but that’s the world we now live in.
    I'm not on Twitter and haven't been closely following it, but is that what happened in the case of the Jeremy Kyle show? I got the impression that ITV pulled the show without much external pressure. Was there a Twitter campaign against it?

    It does make me wonder exactly what happened in this sad case. The JK has always prided itself on its aftercare (whether rightly or not) - I wonder if that system failed badly?

    I daresay the inquest will tell us more.
    It’s quite amazing that this sort of incident hasn’t happened before, so they must have had a reasonable amount of counselling in place for those who had appeared. One hopes that this support continues as the show gets cancelled, for those who have been involved in previous episodes.

    The last time I remember something like this occurring on a TV show was way back in 1986, when Noel Edmonds’ The Late, Late, Breakfast Show was binned after a stunt went wrong and a member of the public involved in the stunt was killed.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,038
    Morning all,

    On topic:

    "The Tories’ next leader must stop taking Brexit Party voters for granted, and beg them, on bended knees, to return."

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/05/15/tories-deluded-think-brexit-party-cant-supplant/
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,038
    Next GE main message from Tories: "Vote for Boris, or Corbyn wins".
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    edited May 2019
    Dura_Ace said:

    > @Dura_Ace said:

    > S/Lt (Acting) Mordaunt, RNR is definitely on maneuvers. In her RUSI speech yesterday she indulged in some mild nationalist frottage over the FSS ship build and announced, to general bafflement, a new 'National Carrier Strategy' which apparently consists of, er, having two carriers with one available for use.



    Is Mordaunt on manoeuvres or merely driving Jeremy Hunt's tanks off her lawn, after Hunt suggested we need more things that go bang after a decade of defence cuts?

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9067906/jeremy-hunt-increase-britain-defence-budget/

    I think Hunt is right.

    However, I doubt finding an extra £20bn for Defence pa is politically sustainable unless a rise is done over a number of years in parallel with a growing economy and additional funds for other sectors like health, education, policing and justice at the same time.
    She does seem to be wasting her predecessor blame window. She should be making some tough choices now (Type 31e, RAFAT, Black Knight) and then blaming it all on the mismanagement of The Once and Future Fireplace Salesman.
    Don’t the brass hats always offer up RAFAT towards the top of the list for cuts? It’s as if they’re daring the minister to be the one who takes the flak for killing the most visible thing the RAF do to most of the public - The Red Arrows.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,056

    Ishmael_Z said:

    > @TheJezziah said:

    >



    >

    >

    >

    > The good thing about being a massive cynic about many of Corbyn's critics is this is absolutely no surprise...



    What is the inconsistency there?



    .



    ETA you would get on better if you produced the odd bit of primary evidence, rather than retweeting tweets which say look what another tweeter says yet another person said.
    A number of people keep asking, “where do you draw the line?”

    We now know the answer to that: when you kick-up a sufficiently large stink about something on social media.

    It’s a terribly unjust way to make policy and employment decisions, and effectively amounts to virtual mob rule by whoever can shout the loudest, but that’s the world we now live in.
    I'm not on Twitter and haven't been closely following it, but is that what happened in the case of the Jeremy Kyle show? I got the impression that ITV pulled the show without much external pressure. Was there a Twitter campaign against it?

    It does make me wonder exactly what happened in this sad case. The JK has always prided itself on its aftercare (whether rightly or not) - I wonder if that system failed badly?

    I daresay the inquest will tell us more.
    This sad suicide* does show the perils of a culture where the availability of 15 minutes of fame has increased massively. Love Island has hada couple of suicides too, and I suspect that for every one of these there are hundreds with less extreme consequences of fall out from appearances on social media and TV.

    We can laugh at the monkeys being taunted and set up on a variety of shows, from X factor to JK, but the after effects are not trivial. We have the same cruel streak as those Romans watching Gladiators butchering slaves.

    *(aren't they all? and it sounds from what was in The Sun yesterday as if his appearance on JK was a symptom of his decining mental health as much as the final blow)
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Dr. Foxy, that's an exaggeration. Most gladiators didn't volunteer, and they usually ended up dead. The suicide in the news is very sad, but it's far from normal (the first in 14 years of broadcasting the show, it seems).

    It's fair enough to have a discussion about this sort of thing but the gladiator comparison is one that is only tenuously useful.

    One thing I'd emphasise is that the so-called lie-detector is a work of fiction. I have linked this before but it's relevant now, so here's something I wrote about why the polygraph is effectively worthless:
    http://thaddeusthesixth.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-polygraph-work-of-science-fiction.html
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559
    > @Foxy said:
    > > @TheJezziah said:
    >
    > > https://twitter.com/jewdas/status/1128751173023031296
    >
    >
    >
    > >
    >
    > >
    >
    > >
    >
    > > The good thing about being a massive cynic about many of Corbyn's critics is this is absolutely no surprise...
    >
    >
    >
    > What is the inconsistency there?
    >
    >
    >
    > .
    >
    >
    >
    > ETA you would get on better if you produced the odd bit of primary evidence, rather than retweeting tweets which say look what another tweeter says yet another person said.
    >
    > A number of people keep asking, “where do you draw the line?”
    >
    > We now know the answer to that: when you kick-up a sufficiently large stink about something on social media.
    >
    > It’s a terribly unjust way to make policy and employment decisions, and effectively amounts to virtual mob rule by whoever can shout the loudest, but that’s the world we now live in.
    >
    > I'm not on Twitter and haven't been closely following it, but is that what happened in the case of the Jeremy Kyle show? I got the impression that ITV pulled the show without much external pressure. Was there a Twitter campaign against it?
    >
    > It does make me wonder exactly what happened in this sad case. The JK has always prided itself on its aftercare (whether rightly or not) - I wonder if that system failed badly?
    >
    > I daresay the inquest will tell us more.
    >
    > This sad suicide* does show the perils of a culture where the availability of 15 minutes of fame has increased massively. Love Island has hada couple of suicides too, and I suspect that for every one of these there are hundreds with less extreme consequences of fall out from appearances on social media and TV.
    >
    > We can laugh at the monkeys being taunted and set up on a variety of shows, from X factor to JK, but the after effects are not trivial. We have the same cruel streak as those Romans watching Gladiators butchering slaves.
    >
    > *(aren't they all? and it sounds from what was in The Sun yesterday as if his appearance on JK was a symptom of his decining mental health as much as the final blow)

    personally I cant see how theyre that different from The Apprentice

    its the modern version of Bedlam where you pay your penny and laugh at the Loonies
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517
    Sandpit said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    .

    A number of people keep asking, “where do you draw the line?”

    We now know the answer to that: when you kick-up a sufficiently large stink about something on social media.

    It’s a terribly unjust way to make policy and employment decisions, and effectively amounts to virtual mob rule by whoever can shout the loudest, but that’s the world we now live in.
    I'm not on Twitter and haven't been closely following it, but is that what happened in the case of the Jeremy Kyle show? I got the impression that ITV pulled the show without much external pressure. Was there a Twitter campaign against it?

    It does make me wonder exactly what happened in this sad case. The JK has always prided itself on its aftercare (whether rightly or not) - I wonder if that system failed badly?

    I daresay the inquest will tell us more.
    It’s quite amazing that this sort of incident hasn’t happened before, so they must have had a reasonable amount of counselling in place for those who had appeared. One hopes that this support continues as the show gets cancelled, for those who have been involved in previous episodes.

    The last time I remember something like this occurring on a TV show was way back in 1986, when Noel Edmonds’ The Late, Late, Breakfast Show was binned after a stunt went wrong and a member of the public involved in the stunt was killed.
    I vaguely STR a murder by a guest on the show shortly after an appearance, although not directly linked to the show. And then there's the whole Mick Philpott depravity - again not directly linked to the show.

    I sense there's something different in this case - after all, it was one of ITV's most popular shows. We'll see something similar back in short ordure.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    edited May 2019

    How dare you question Maverick. Don't you know he is notorious - for buzzing the tower?

    We know that when anything khaki happens you have an uncanny skill to be simultaneously both first into your armchair and under the table.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,092


    ... snip ...
    Eh? 64% of people in England took cocaine in the last year? And an average Briton got drunk once a week???

    Utter garbage of course. This turns out to be a survey of 'substance-users'. Dunno how they were selected.

    Dutifully repeated on the BBC this morning.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,263
    > @Cyclefree said:

    > Gove, Gauke, Gibb and Stewart strike me as intelligent and thoughtful. Gove has failings, as you note. The other three have made good speeches or given thoughtful interviews. Doesn’t mean they will be good PMs mind. I like Rudd.
    >
    > The others range from the so-so-ish to the arrogant, the liars and the unspeakable. Very few of them have really been tested in senior positions. They strike me as junior Ministers prematurely elevated to Cabinet level
    >
    > Ken Clarke would wipe the floor, even at his age, with all of them.

    I agree abnout Ken. In general, even as an opponent, I think people somewhat underestimate the personal qualities of many of the Tories. The one I know best from my day job is Gove, who is definitely intelligent and thoughtful, and also rarely says anything without weighing up whether he actually means it, which on the whole is a good thing (compare with Boris, say).

    But it's a great article, and worthy of updating for a national paper when the contest officially starts. Which on May's record so far will probably be in about two years' time.
  • IcarusIcarus Posts: 885
    edited May 2019
    To all pbers thinking of laying Boris. “ How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?” Sherlock Holmes All the others look pretty close to impossible.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392

    Morning all,



    On topic:



    "The Tories’ next leader must stop taking Brexit Party voters for granted, and beg them, on bended knees, to return."



    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/05/15/tories-deluded-think-brexit-party-cant-supplant/

    Or they could deliver Brexit and see if all BP supporters think the same as Farage or not. Some will, but all?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392

    Next GE main message from Tories: "Vote for Boris, or Corbyn wins".

    I dont find that message very effective. I know Boris does indeed still hold appeal for many, but Corbyn is not that scary a prospect when Boris is the alternative.
  • not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 4,340
    ydoethur said:


    Reopening the old GCML has been looked into many times. The line has been built over in Leicester and Nottingham with somewhat undue haste, but for the price of HS2 you could tunnel under both these cities to get a line through to the centre. But even with improvements to alignments, it would not be a new high-speed line.

    But the real killer is that the GCML is still open in part. The southern section from Aylesbury south is still in use with regular train services, and Marylebone is open (and I believe nearly at capacity). You don't have enough paths for trains on the very section of the country where there are capacity constraints.

    A new route is required into London, and that's the pricey bit.

    Marylebone is actually beyond capacity, but there are routes to other terminals. So I don't see that as an objection.

    The question to my mind is whether high speed lines are worth the additional cost in a country as small as this.
    It’s about capacity,not just speed.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    edited May 2019

    > @TheJezziah said:

    > ...



    I'll criticise Pollard for that: but the article he links to makes some (IMO) bad points and some good ones. Perhaps you should read it?



    The good thing about being a massive cynic about those who have turned Corbyn into a cult is that their reaction is absolutely no surprise ...

    A real cynic might suggest that this whole definition thing has been concocted by Labour Muslim groups, purely to counter the criticism of Labour and antisemitism, in an attempt to try and turn it around to criticise the government.

    It’s not an internationally discussed nor approved definition, doesn’t contain examples and could be interpreted as a blasphemy law against any criticism of Islam.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967
    > @tlg86 said:
    > https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48284105
    >
    > It suggested lowering the speed of HS2 or placing its terminal in west London rather than Euston would save money.
    >
    > No, just no. If we are going to have this railway line it needs to go into central London. Terminating it at OOC would be utterly stupid.

    The importance of the report is that it gives the next PM justification for cancelling HS2 in order to spend money on transport in the North and Midlands. Where there by coincidence happen to be many marginal constituencies.

    ' It said the first phase of the project offered "little benefit" to northern cities, despite them being in most need of better rail infrastructure.

    And it said the second phase, which would improve journey times between Leeds and Sheffield, risked never going ahead because of spending overruns. '

    HS2 supporters should have demanded that construction start in the North and work southwards.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392

    > @williamglenn said:

    > It would be Absolutely Awesome if absolutely all of them ran. A long protracted blood letting where a series of indicative votes slowly whittles down the list from massive to merely absurd is absolutely in the interests of the Conservative Party

    >

    > It would be funny if the indicative votes all failed and May had to carry on. We could all be here in 2025, still looking for someone to take the job of PM off her hands.



    I shocked a friend by saying wistfully that I wished I was in Parliament at the moment, as it combines genuine importance with drama and fun. She couldn't imagine anyone finding things at the moment fun.



    Sad, yes. Worrying, absolutely. But...fun too.

    Borough councils can be fun too!
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,787
    > @Icarus said:
    > To all pbers thinking of laying Boris. “ How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?” Sherlock Holmes All the others look pretty close to impossible.

    That’s also a reason not to bet against Theresa May.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. Richard, quite a lot of reporting, back when it was higher on the agenda, of HS2 up here was about people annoyed it wouldn't be going to their town/city.

    I do wonder if HS2 will end up going London to Birmingham and then they'll stop.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Icarus said:

    To all pbers thinking of laying Boris. “ How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?” Sherlock Holmes All the others look pretty close to impossible.

    The sheer number of Leavers looking to enter the field tells you how unpopular Boris Johnson is even among MPs who you would think would be supportive. I think he's going to have a huge battle to get to the last two.
  • ah009ah009 Posts: 436
    > @JosiasJessop said:
    > Because without doing that, you're really not in a position to throw stones.

    I am in a position to throw stones, having never voted either for Labour or the Conservatives (well, I did once put Labour 5th out of 6 in an STV vote, but you'll forgive me that).

    The Conservative Party has just as much of a problem with islamophobia as Labour has with antisemitism, and they won't get a fraction of the negative coverage. This whole affair is soaked in hypocrisy. Hypocrisy of the Conservatives, hypocrisy of Labour, and hypocrisy of those who report and comment on one and not the other.
    Frankly, anybody who responds to either case by redirecting to the other is engaged in tribalist whataboutery and is more interested in scoring points than righting a wrong.

    Sorry to say that for folk like me who have no tribal loyalty to either side, the spectacle of people saying "but the other guys..." causes nausea.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Radio audiences are up, especially news stations as we approach (or not) Brexit.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-48279612

    Those who questioned Chris Evans' pay packet should note he has more than doubled Virgin Radio's audience. Otoh, Radio 2 is only slightly down.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517


    HS2 supporters should have demanded that construction start in the North and work southwards.

    That would just have been another way of killing the project, given the rationale and need behind it.

    "What, you're spending billions avoiding the area with the biggest problems the project is designed to fix? It's a white elephant!"
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,673

    Radio audiences are up, especially news stations as we approach (or not) Brexit.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-48279612



    Those who questioned Chris Evans' pay packet should note he has more than doubled Virgin Radio's audience. Otoh, Radio 2 is only slightly down.

    Is it up from 5 to 10 as his mum and pals listen.
This discussion has been closed.