If there is to be a split, the magic number is 57 MPs. At that point, they will be securely bigger than the SNP (who are I think 54 plus two on suspension).
Can't see it myself. Will be a terrible blow to Labour organisationally and a huge boost to Corbyn personally if it does happen though. A double whammy that could kill the whole party stone dead.
I wonder what Satan charged Theresa for the sale of her soul?
Surely the magic number is 117 - half plus one if the Labour MPs?
That makes them the Official Opposition and relegates Corbyn's party to the back benches with the SNP.
That only happens if they're taking the party name and organisation with them.
Let's be clear. The majority of pre-2015 members feel like the party has been stolen from us and been replaced by this democratic hate mob of chanting ideologues. To up and leave - to abandon this 116 year old movement to the kind of scum handing out anti-semitic leaflets at a merting discussing anti-semitism would be screaming cowardice. We can't leave. They will have to leave.
Some of us who grew up in Lambeth in the 80s saw said hate mob 1.0 turn itself into New Labour in the biggest act of deception since the arrival of a large wooden horse in Troy and have long wondered how any decent person could remain in Labour.
If there is to be a split, the magic number is 57 MPs. At that point, they will be securely bigger than the SNP (who are I think 54 plus two on suspension).
Can't see it myself. Will be a terrible blow to Labour organisationally and a huge boost to Corbyn personally if it does happen though. A double whammy that could kill the whole party stone dead.
I wonder what Satan charged Theresa for the sale of her soul?
Surely the magic number is 117 - half plus one if the Labour MPs?
That makes them the Official Opposition and relegates Corbyn's party to the back benches with the SNP.
That only happens if they're taking the party name and organisation with them.
Let's be clear. The majority of pre-2015 members feel like the party has been stolen from us and been replaced by this democratic hate mob of chanting ideologues. To up and leave - to abandon this 116 year old movement to the kind of scum handing out anti-semitic leaflets at a merting discussing anti-semitism would be screaming cowardice. We can't leave. They will have to leave.
They don't have to take the party name. The Speaker will recognise the largest body of MPs who accept their whip as the official opposition. 117 is the magic number.
If there is to be a split, the magic number is 57 MPs. At that point, they will be securely bigger than the SNP (who are I think 54 plus two on suspension).
Can't see it myself. Will be a terrible blow to Labour organisationally and a huge boost to Corbyn personally if it does happen though. A double whammy that could kill the whole party stone dead.
I wonder what Satan charged Theresa for the sale of her soul?
Surely the magic number is 117 - half plus one if the Labour MPs?
That makes them the Official Opposition and relegates Corbyn's party to the back benches with the SNP.
That only happens if they're taking the party name and organisation with them.
Let's be clear. The majority of pre-2015 members feel like the party has been stolen from us and been replaced by this democratic hate mob of chanting ideologues. To up and leave - to abandon this 116 year old movement to the kind of scum handing out anti-semitic leaflets at a merting discussing anti-semitism would be screaming cowardice. We can't leave. They will have to leave.
They don't have to take the party name. The Speaker will recognise the largest body of MPs who accept their whip as the official opposition. 117 is the magic number.
And whatever is about to happen, that certainly isn't. Which is why I was talking about 57. That's just about realistic.
If there is to be a split, the magic number is 57 MPs. At that point, they will be securely bigger than the SNP (who are I think 54 plus two on suspension).
Can't see it myself. Will be a terrible blow to Labour organisationally and a huge boost to Corbyn personally if it does happen though. A double whammy that could kill the whole party stone dead.
I wonder what Satan charged Theresa for the sale of her soul?
Surely the magic number is 117 - half plus one if the Labour MPs?
That makes them the Official Opposition and relegates Corbyn's party to the back benches with the SNP.
That only happens if they're taking the party name and organisation with them.
Let's be clear. The majority of pre-2015 members feel like the party has been stolen from us and been replaced by this democratic hate mob of chanting ideologues. To up and leave - to abandon this 116 year old movement to the kind of scum handing out anti-semitic leaflets at a merting discussing anti-semitism would be screaming cowardice. We can't leave. They will have to leave.
They don't have to take the party name. The Speaker will recognise the largest body of MPs who accept their whip as the official opposition. 117 is the magic number.
And whatever is about to happen, that certainly isn't. Which is why I was talking about 57. That's just about realistic.
Let's wait and see. Sometimes the bark is worse than the bite.
Currently at a forum in Gothenburg, Sweden. Spent much of yesterday asking US attendees what President Trump will do in his first 100 days. This was not greatly appreciated. But most now expect him to win.
I never bought into the WWIII Brexit scaremongering. Trump though might be a different story. This isn't going to go down well in Arab and Muslim nations:
It won't go down well in the US. It will be a place to avoid for a while if he wins. An openly racist President will lead to serious trouble on city streets.
I suspect any such trouble will be brutally dealt with in much the same way as it was here before about 1850.
It will not be pleasant.
Rhodesia 2.0
(actually the US is Rhodesia 1.0 and Rhodesia is 2.0 but thats bye the bye. )
This is the eqiuvalent of the 1962 Rhodesian election when the pro UDI Rhodesian Front, later to be led by Smith unexpectedly beat the establishment United Federal Party.
The eatablishment always wins in Rhodesia it was said. However liberal Prime Minister Sir Garfield Todd was seen to gave given too many concessions to Joshua Nkomo and suffered a shock defeat.
Three years later in the 1965 election, the Rhodesia Front under Smith won every single seat.
The liberal left have made the same mistake only worse by smearing all whites as racist and now electorates are going all Rhodesian.
I think the trouble is that for at least twenty years centrist parties in the US and UK, of both left and right, have clustered around a consensus that has become so axiomatic that it brooks no criticism. They have been far too willing to dismiss those who disagree and plenty of warning signs. That includes immigration but also elected representatives not being seen to be putting the interests of their own nation/people first, above internationalism and those of global corporatism.
In short: voters feeling their representatives are on their side.
What we're seeing now is a political storm to make that sentiment fully felt. Saying that Trump is repugnant fuels it, IMHO, because the thing many voters want the most is to annoy/offend the established political players as much as possible.
The problem with that is that the elected representatives are dealing with the real world, where internationalism and global corporatism not only exist, but are here to stay.
Look at Venezuela as an example of where attempts to stop these forces have not ended well.
The third south of England 2015 candidate to go. I think it is as I suggested below - some relatively senior members resigning the party and calling on MPs to do the same.
If there is to be a split, the magic number is 57 MPs. At that point, they will be securely bigger than the SNP (who are I think 54 plus two on suspension).
Can't see it myself. Will be a terrible blow to Labour organisationally and a huge boost to Corbyn personally if it does happen though. A double whammy that could kill the whole party stone dead.
I wonder what Satan charged Theresa for the sale of her soul?
Surely the magic number is 117 - half plus one if the Labour MPs?
That makes them the Official Opposition and relegates Corbyn's party to the back benches with the SNP.
That only happens if they're taking the party name and organisation with them.
Let's be clear. The majority of pre-2015 members feel like the party has been stolen from us and been replaced by this democratic hate mob of chanting ideologues. To up and leave - to abandon this 116 year old movement to the kind of scum handing out anti-semitic leaflets at a merting discussing anti-semitism would be screaming cowardice. We can't leave. They will have to leave.
They don't have to take the party name. The Speaker will recognise the largest body of MPs who accept their whip as the official opposition. 117 is the magic number.
And whatever is about to happen, that certainly isn't. Which is why I was talking about 57. That's just about realistic.
Let's wait and see. Sometimes the bark is worse than the bite.
The real risk for Labour now is that this will be a dog that doesn't bark, which would certainly make this a curious incident. I'm still trying to think of any mistake that Labour could have made and hasn't.
Okay, so she's a nobody from Portsmouth (significant), but this is quite damning:
I cannot advocate to voters that they elect a Labour Government with Jeremy Corbyn at the helm. Indeed, I would be morally obliged to campaign against any administration that included Corbyn and John McDonnell, given my belief that they would seriously imperil our nation's national security if ever given the reins of power.
Okay, so she's a nobody from Portsmouth (significant), but this is quite damning:
I cannot advocate to voters that they elect a Labour Government with Jeremy Corbyn at the helm. Indeed, I would be morally obliged to campaign against any administration that included Corbyn and John McDonnell, given my belief that they would seriously imperil our nation's national security if ever given the reins of power.
It is from John Ferrett, Leader of Portsmouth Council Labour Group.
If there is to be a split, the magic number is 57 MPs. At that point, they will be securely bigger than the SNP (who are I think 54 plus two on suspension).
Can't see it myself. Will be a terrible blow to Labour organisationally and a huge boost to Corbyn personally if it does happen though. A double whammy that could kill the whole party stone dead.
I wonder what Satan charged Theresa for the sale of her soul?
Surely the magic number is 117 - half plus one if the Labour MPs?
That makes them the Official Opposition and relegates Corbyn's party to the back benches with the SNP.
That only happens if they're taking the party name and organisation with them.
Let's be clear. The majority of pre-2015 members feel like the party has been stolen from us and been replaced by this democratic hate mob of chanting ideologues. To up and leave - to abandon this 116 year old movement to the kind of scum handing out anti-semitic leaflets at a merting discussing anti-semitism would be screaming cowardice. We can't leave. They will have to leave.
They don't have to take the party name. The Speaker will recognise the largest body of MPs who accept their whip as the official opposition. 117 is the magic number.
And whatever is about to happen, that certainly isn't. Which is why I was talking about 57. That's just about realistic.
Let's wait and see. Sometimes the bark is worse than the bite.
The real risk for Labour now is that this will be a dog that doesn't bark, which would certainly make this a curious incident. I'm still trying to think of any mistake that Labour could have made and hasn't.
Senior councillors going though is going to screw up that awesome Labour ground game we heard so much about.
If there is to be a split, the magic number is 57 MPs. At that point, they will be securely bigger than the SNP (who are I think 54 plus two on suspension).
Can't see it myself. Will be a terrible blow to Labour organisationally and a huge boost to Corbyn personally if it does happen though. A double whammy that could kill the whole party stone dead.
I wonder what Satan charged Theresa for the sale of her soul?
Surely the magic number is 117 - half plus one if the Labour MPs?
That makes them the Official Opposition and relegates Corbyn's party to the back benches with the SNP.
That only happens if they're taking the party name and organisation with them.
Let's be clear. The majority of pre-2015 members feel like the party has been stolen from us and been replaced by this democratic hate mob of chanting ideologues. To up and leave - to abandon this 116 year old movement to the kind of scum handing out anti-semitic leaflets at a merting discussing anti-semitism would be screaming cowardice. We can't leave. They will have to leave.
They don't have to take the party name. The Speaker will recognise the largest body of MPs who accept their whip as the official opposition. 117 is the magic number.
And whatever is about to happen, that certainly isn't. Which is why I was talking about 57. That's just about realistic.
Let's wait and see. Sometimes the bark is worse than the bite.
The real risk for Labour now is that this will be a dog that doesn't bark, which would certainly make this a curious incident. I'm still trying to think of any mistake that Labour could have made and hasn't.
I'm struggling to recall the last time Labour didn't do something, that in other times I'd presume was a joke or parody tweet.
Just watched McIRA on Sky - he's totally unapologetic for calling Ester McVey a stain on humanity. Now whatever one's opinion of HMG policy - that's quite an insult.
Okay, so she's a nobody from Portsmouth (significant), but this is quite damning:
I cannot advocate to voters that they elect a Labour Government with Jeremy Corbyn at the helm. Indeed, I would be morally obliged to campaign against any administration that included Corbyn and John McDonnell, given my belief that they would seriously imperil our nation's national security if ever given the reins of power.
It is from John Ferrett, Leader of Portsmouth Council Labour Group.
Okay, so she's a nobody from Portsmouth (significant), but this is quite damning:
I cannot advocate to voters that they elect a Labour Government with Jeremy Corbyn at the helm. Indeed, I would be morally obliged to campaign against any administration that included Corbyn and John McDonnell, given my belief that they would seriously imperil our nation's national security if ever given the reins of power.
There are just not going to be enough poster boards for the Tories at the next election.
Okay, so she's a nobody from Portsmouth (significant), but this is quite damning:
I cannot advocate to voters that they elect a Labour Government with Jeremy Corbyn at the helm. Indeed, I would be morally obliged to campaign against any administration that included Corbyn and John McDonnell, given my belief that they would seriously imperil our nation's national security if ever given the reins of power.
There are just not going to be enough poster boards for the Tories at the next election.
In Portsmouth this will be a gift for the LibDems, who will probably recover the council in May
Currently at a forum in Gothenburg, Sweden. Spent much of yesterday asking US attendees what President Trump will do in his first 100 days. This was not greatly appreciated. But most now expect him to win.
I never bought into the WWIII Brexit scaremongering. Trump though might be a different story. This isn't going to go down well in Arab and Muslim nations:
It won't go down well in the US. It will be a place to avoid for a while if he wins. An openly racist President will lead to serious trouble on city streets.
I suspect any such trouble will be brutally dealt with in much the same way as it was here before about 1850.
It will not be pleasant.
.
I think the trouble is that for at least twenty years centrist parties in the US and UK, of both left and right, have clustered around a consensus that has become so axiomatic that it brooks no criticism. They have been far too willing to dismiss those who disagree and plenty of warning signs. That includes immigration but also elected representatives not being seen to be putting the interests of their own nation/people first, above internationalism and those of global corporatism.
In short: voters feeling their representatives are on their side.
What we're seeing now is a political storm to make that sentiment fully felt. Saying that Trump is repugnant fuels it, IMHO, because the thing many voters want the most is to annoy/offend the established political players as much as possible.
The problem with that is that the elected representatives are dealing with the real world, where internationalism and global corporatism not only exist, but are here to stay.
Look at Venezuela as an example of where attempts to stop these forces have not ended well.
Far from Trump causing world war 3, his legacy may be civil war 2. The problem is so would Hilarys, so people are taking sides. Hitchens article describing the sudden lack of posters in peoples houses before the election when previously they were ubiquitous and people fearing to say who they support is as ominous as an approaching thunderstorm.
If there is to be a split, the magic number is 57 MPs. At that point, they will be securely bigger than the SNP (who are I think 54 plus two on suspension).
Can't see it myself. Will be a terrible blow to Labour organisationally and a huge boost to Corbyn personally if it does happen though. A double whammy that could kill the whole party stone dead.
I wonder what Satan charged Theresa for the sale of her soul?
Surely the magic number is 117 - half plus one if the Labour MPs?
That makes them the Official Opposition and relegates Corbyn's party to the back benches with the SNP.
That only happens if they're taking the party name and organisation with them.
Let's be clear. The majority of pre-2015 members feel like the party has been stolen from us and been replaced by this democratic hate mob of chanting ideologues. To up and leave - to abandon this 116 year old movement to the kind of scum handing out anti-semitic leaflets at a merting discussing anti-semitism would be screaming cowardice. We can't leave. They will have to leave.
They don't have to take the party name. The Speaker will recognise the largest body of MPs who accept their whip as the official opposition. 117 is the magic number.
And whatever is about to happen, that certainly isn't. Which is why I was talking about 57. That's just about realistic.
Let's wait and see. Sometimes the bark is worse than the bite.
The real risk for Labour now is that this will be a dog that doesn't bark, which would certainly make this a curious incident. I'm still trying to think of any mistake that Labour could have made and hasn't.
I'm struggling to recall the last time Labour didn't do something, that in other times I'd presume was a joke or parody tweet.
Just watched McIRA on Sky - he's totally unapologetic for calling Ester McVey a stain on humanity. Now whatever one's opinion of HMG policy - that's quite an insult.
I don't know what Esther McVey has done to incur the manic loathing of the hard left. But, then, the hard left is viciously misogynistic as well as viciously anti-Semitic.
If there is to be a split, the magic number is 57 MPs. At that point, they will be securely bigger than the SNP (who are I think 54 plus two on suspension).
Can't see it myself. Will be a terrible blow to Labour organisationally and a huge boost to Corbyn personally if it does happen though. A double whammy that could kill the whole party stone dead.
I wonder what Satan charged Theresa for the sale of her soul?
Surely the magic number is 117 - half plus one if the Labour MPs?
That makes them the Official Opposition and relegates Corbyn's party to the back benches with the SNP.
That only happens if they're taking the party name and organisation with them.
Let's be clear. The majority of pre-2015 members feel like the party has been stolen from us and been replaced by this democratic hate mob of chanting ideologues. To up and leave - to abandon this 116 year old movement to the kind of scum handing out anti-semitic leaflets at a merting discussing anti-semitism would be screaming cowardice. We can't leave. They will have to leave.
They don't have to take the party name. The Speaker will recognise the largest body of MPs who accept their whip as the official opposition. 117 is the magic number.
And whatever is about to happen, that certainly isn't. Which is why I was talking about 57. That's just about realistic.
Let's wait and see. Sometimes the bark is worse than the bite.
It's incredible to think how 120 seconds finished the Labour party.
At 11.58 on the 15th June 2015 Jeremy Corbyn crept over the line of the required 35 nominations: two minutes before nominations closed. Some of those came from people who disagreed with his policies but 'felt he should be on the ballot.' The rest, as they say, is history.
Those two minutes brought the death of Labour.
No, it was the election of Ed Miliband - the politician with the worst political judgement of any politician who has ever lived - that did for Labour. Ed enabled all that has followed. I said on the day he was elected that it would be an absolute disaster and, sadly, I have been proved correct.
Mr. Abode, it's going to be like the Doctor Evil inflation problem. Only instead of confusing millions for billions, they'll end up borrowing trillions.
Okay, so she's a nobody from Portsmouth (significant), but this is quite damning:
I cannot advocate to voters that they elect a Labour Government with Jeremy Corbyn at the helm. Indeed, I would be morally obliged to campaign against any administration that included Corbyn and John McDonnell, given my belief that they would seriously imperil our nation's national security if ever given the reins of power.
It is from John Ferrett, Leader of Portsmouth Council Labour Group.
Oops, I was thinking it was the poster. So it's more senior than I realized. Poor person is a representative for Paulsgrove.
Currently at a forum in Gothenburg, Sweden. Spent much of yesterday asking US attendees what President Trump will do in his first 100 days. This was not greatly appreciated. But most now expect him to win.
I never bought into the WWIII Brexit scaremongering. Trump though might be a different story. This isn't going to go down well in Arab and Muslim nations:
It won't go down well in the US. It will be a place to avoid for a while if he wins. An openly racist President will lead to serious trouble on city streets.
I suspect any such trouble will be brutally dealt with in much the same way as it was here before about 1850.
It will not be pleasant.
.
I think the trouble is that for at least twenty years centrist parties in the US and UK, of both left and right, have clustered around a consensus that has become so axiomatic that it brooks no criticism. They have been far too willing to dismiss those who disagree and plenty of warning signs. That includes immigration but also elected representatives not being seen to be putting the interests of their own nation/people first, above internationalism and those of global corporatism.
In short: voters feeling their representatives are on their side.
What we're seeing now is a political storm to make that sentiment fully felt. Saying that Trump is repugnant fuels it, IMHO, because the thing many voters want the most is to annoy/offend the established political players as much as possible.
The problem with that is that the elected representatives are dealing with the real world, where internationalism and global corporatism not only exist, but are here to stay.
Look at Venezuela as an example of where attempts to stop these forces have not ended well.
Far from Trump causing world war 3, his legacy may be civil war 2. The problem is so would Hilarys, so people are taking sides. Hitchens article describing the sudden lack of posters in peoples houses before the election when previously they were ubiquitous and people fearing to say who they support is as ominous as an approaching thunderstorm.
After reading a US website, I'm beginning to wonder if most Republicans and Democrats now regard the other side as sub-human.
If there is to be a split, the magic number is 57 MPs. At that point, they will be securely bigger than the SNP (who are I think 54 plus two on suspension).
Can't see it myself. Will be a terrible blow to Labour organisationally and a huge boost to Corbyn personally if it does happen though. A double whammy that could kill the whole party stone dead.
I wonder what Satan charged Theresa for the sale of her soul?
Surely the magic number is 117 - half plus one if the Labour MPs?
That makes them the Official Opposition and relegates Corbyn's party to the back benches with the SNP.
That only happens if they're taking the party name and organisation with them.
Let's be clear. The majority of pre-2015 members feel like the party has been stolen from us and been replaced by this democratic hate mob of chanting ideologues. To up and leave - to abandon this 116 year old movement to the kind of scum handing out anti-semitic leaflets at a merting discussing anti-semitism would be screaming cowardice. We can't leave. They will have to leave.
They don't have to take the party name. The Speaker will recognise the largest body of MPs who accept their whip as the official opposition. 117 is the magic number.
And whatever is about to happen, that certainly isn't. Which is why I was talking about 57. That's just about realistic.
Let's wait and see. Sometimes the bark is worse than the bite.
Isn't it always that the bark is worse?
It would still be my choice of the two, nevertheless
I'm still trying to think of any mistake that Labour could have made and hasn't.
Readmit George Galloway...
Well, at least they cannot readmit Luftur Rahman and have him stand for them, as he's still barred from elections. So that's something, as we know Ken was a fan of his.
Not a word on the BBC front page about the gun and bomb attacks in Malmo, Sweden. Didn't see it on the main Europe page either. Top reporting there.
On-topic: does the debate start at 11pm? Think I saw that time on Sky, although that might be the start of preamble coverage.
2 am I believe
Lester is the moderator IIRC. He's going to be watched like a hawk given his previous donations to HRC - along with Hillary's eyes.
I've totally ignored the 'eyes' thing until it was mentioned on Sky earlier - by Dr Linda their US psychology pundit. That she's picked up on the meme...
Mr. Abode, it's going to be like the Doctor Evil inflation problem. Only instead of confusing millions for billions, they'll end up borrowing trillions.
Mr. B2, cheers. Not staying up for that.
Labour seem to be intent on turbo charging the policy failures of the last election. Crazy.
Currently at a forum in Gothenburg, Sweden. Spent much of yesterday asking US attendees what President Trump will do in his first 100 days. This was not greatly appreciated. But most now expect him to win.
I never bought into the WWIII Brexit scaremongering. Trump though might be a different story. This isn't going to go down well in Arab and Muslim nations:
It won't go down well in the US. It will be a place to avoid for a while if he wins. An openly racist President will lead to serious trouble on city streets.
I suspect any such trouble will be brutally dealt with in much the same way as it was here before about 1850.
It will not be pleasant.
.
I think the trouble is that for at least twenty years centrist parties in the US and UK, of both left and right, have clustered around a consensus that has become so axiomatic that it brooks no criticism. They have been far too willing to dismiss those who disagree and plenty of warning signs. That includes immigration but also elected representatives not being seen to be putting the interests of their own nation/people first, above internationalism and those of global corporatism.
In short: voters feeling their representatives are on their side.
What we're seeing now is a political storm to make that sentiment fully felt. Saying that Trump is repugnant fuels it, IMHO, because the thing many voters want the most is to annoy/offend the established political players as much as possible.
The problem with that is that the elected representatives are dealing with the real world, where internationalism and global corporatism not only exist, but are here to stay.
Look at Venezuela as an example of where attempts to stop these forces have not ended well.
Far from Trump causing world war 3, his legacy may be civil war 2. The problem is so would Hilarys, so people are taking sides. Hitchens article describing the sudden lack of posters in peoples houses before the election when previously they were ubiquitous and people fearing to say who they support is as ominous as an approaching thunderstorm.
In the UK house posters seem to be history.
I saw nearly none in the referendum and they were very sparse in the 2015 GE too. I think that they have been replaced by Social Media.
Currently at a forum in Gothenburg, Sweden. Spent much of yesterday asking US attendees what President Trump will do in his first 100 days. This was not greatly appreciated. But most now expect him to win.
I never bought into the WWIII Brexit scaremongering. Trump though might be a different story. This isn't going to go down well in Arab and Muslim nations:
It won't go down well in the US. It will be a place to avoid for a while if he wins. An openly racist President will lead to serious trouble on city streets.
I suspect any such trouble will be brutally dealt with in much the same way as it was here before about 1850.
It will not be pleasant.
Rhodesia 2.0
(actually the US is Rhodesia 1.0 and Rhodesia is 2.0 but thats bye the bye. )
This is the eqiuvalent of the 1962 Rhodesian election when the pro UDI Rhodesian Front, later to be led by Smith unexpectedly beat the establishment United Federal Party.
The eatablishment always wins in Rhodesia it was said. However liberal Prime Minister Sir Garfield Todd was seen to gave given too many concessions to Joshua Nkomo and suffered a shock defeat.
Three years later in the 1965 election, the Rhodesia Front under Smith won every single seat.
The liberal left have made the same mistake only worse by smearing all whites as racist and now electorates are going all Rhodesian.
UDI didn't end well as I recall.
Smith et al were pretty thick as well. Offered 80% of what they wanted on the HMS Tiger talks. Refused and got nothing.
Currently at a forum in Gothenburg, Sweden. Spent much of yesterday asking US attendees what President Trump will do in his first 100 days. This was not greatly appreciated. But most now expect him to win.
I never bought into the WWIII Brexit scaremongering. Trump though might be a different story. This isn't going to go down well in Arab and Muslim nations:
It won't go down well in the US. It will be a place to avoid for a while if he wins. An openly racist President will lead to serious trouble on city streets.
I suspect any such trouble will be brutally dealt with in much the same way as it was here before about 1850.
It will not be pleasant.
.
I think the trouble is that for at least twenty years centrist parties in the US and UK, of both left and right, have clustered around a consensus that has become so axiomatic that it brooks no criticism. They have been far too willing to dismiss those who disagree and plenty of warning signs. That includes immigration but also elected representatives not being seen to be putting the interests of their own nation/people first, above internationalism and those of global corporatism.
In short: voters feeling their representatives are on their side.
What we're seeing now is a political storm to make that sentiment fully felt. Saying that Trump is repugnant fuels it, IMHO, because the thing many voters want the most is to annoy/offend the established political players as much as possible.
The problem with that is that the elected representatives are dealing with the real world, where internationalism and global corporatism not only exist, but are here to stay.
Look at Venezuela as an example of where attempts to stop these forces have not ended well.
Far from Trump causing world war 3, his legacy may be civil war 2. The problem is so would Hilarys, so people are taking sides. Hitchens article describing the sudden lack of posters in peoples houses before the election when previously they were ubiquitous and people fearing to say who they support is as ominous as an approaching thunderstorm.
I never mentioned war!
But yes, the increasingly large splits in the US's politics and society are worrying. They stand a god chance of becoming the Disunited States.
Morning all. Stayed away from the Pres bettering so far, apart from a tenner on Trump at 5/1 in the middle of the primaries.
I wonder how much either candidate can gain from the debates, although maybe there's a low bar of expectation from them both. They've both got a lot to lose though, one slip of the tongue could sink their campaign.
From a betting view, maybe it's worth a quid or two on Gary Johnson, currently 950 on Betfair. He's unlikely to win, but if the American public wake up to how completely crap the main two candidates are, there might be a chance he can get a seat in one of the later debates - which would bring his price in massively.
Gary What's Aleppo Johnson?
And this?
ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_azcqlYC2s
Yep, that guy. Remember that most people haven't been paying much attention up until now. If both Trump and Clinton lose tonight, the American public might look around. If he can add enough points to get in a debate, his odds will come in dramatically from 949/1
He does have the advantage of actually being on the ballot, unlike some of the other names bandied around.
Indeed, he's on the ballot in all 50 states. I'm on for £2 at 950, hoping to lay off at 100 or 200 later.
My sub 1000.0 (But not HRC or Trump) book in full:
Back:
Joe Biden 99.05 £21.00 Gary Johnson 650.20 £4.00 Mike Pence 1,000.00 £5.00 V green Paul Ryan 386.39 £7.20 Bernie Sanders 33.41 £232.75 Jill Stein 1,000.00 £2.00
Lay:
Joe Biden 52.53 £69.15 Very red Tim Kaine 160.00 £12.00 Quite green Michelle Obama 480 £2.00 V red Paul Ryan 220.00 £2.00 Green Bernie Sanders 32.52 £286.27 V red Elizabeth Warren 990.00 £2.00 red.
Which adds up to £100 profit come the night itself.
Not a word on the BBC front page about the gun and bomb attacks in Malmo, Sweden. Didn't see it on the main Europe page either. Top reporting there.
On-topic: does the debate start at 11pm? Think I saw that time on Sky, although that might be the start of preamble coverage.
2 am I believe
Lester is the moderator IIRC. He's going to be watched like a hawk given his previous donations to HRC - along with Hillary's eyes.
I've totally ignored the 'eyes' thing until it was mentioned on Sky earlier - by Dr Linda their US psychology pundit. That she's picked up on the meme...
Dare I ask...what is the Hillary's eyes meme? Do they turn bright red when she's crossed?
I wonder how much either candidate can gain from the debates, although maybe there's a low bar of expectation from them both. They've both got a lot to lose though, one slip of the tongue could sink their campaign.
Which would win it for the other.
There isn't symmetry. Shocks favour Trump. This makes it like Brexit.
Predictions about the TV "debate" are of little value if they come from journalists who don't mention the fake world of wrestling. Here is how Trump is seen to "stand up to pressure" in that environment:
Okay, so she's a nobody from Portsmouth (significant), but this is quite damning:
I cannot advocate to voters that they elect a Labour Government with Jeremy Corbyn at the helm. Indeed, I would be morally obliged to campaign against any administration that included Corbyn and John McDonnell, given my belief that they would seriously imperil our nation's national security if ever given the reins of power.
There are just not going to be enough poster boards for the Tories at the next election.
In Portsmouth this will be a gift for the LibDems, who will probably recover the council in May
There is the innovation of the Solent Mayoralty too. Soton, Pompey and Wight in one fiefdom.
Currently at a forum in Gothenburg, Sweden. Spent much of yesterday asking US attendees what President Trump will do in his first 100 days. This was not greatly appreciated. But most now expect him to win.
I never bought into the WWIII Brexit scaremongering. Trump though might be a different story. This isn't going to go down well in Arab and Muslim nations:
It won't go down well in the US. It will be a place to avoid for a while if he wins. An openly racist President will lead to serious trouble on city streets.
I suspect any such trouble will be brutally dealt with in much the same way as it was here before about 1850.
It will not be pleasant.
.
In short: voters feeling their representatives are on their side.
What we're seeing now is a political storm to make that sentiment fully felt. Saying that Trump is repugnant fuels it, IMHO, because the thing many voters want the most is to annoy/offend the established political players as much as possible.
The problem with that is that the elected representatives are dealing with the real world, where internationalism and global corporatism not only exist, but are here to stay.
Look at Venezuela as an example of where attempts to stop these forces have not ended well.
Far from Trump causing world war 3, his legacy may be civil war 2. The problem is so would Hilarys, so people are taking sides. Hitchens article describing the sudden lack of posters in peoples houses before the election when previously they were ubiquitous and people fearing to say who they support is as ominous as an approaching thunderstorm.
I never mentioned war!
But yes, the increasingly large splits in the US's politics and society are worrying. They stand a god chance of becoming the Disunited States.
No you didnt. But there is no longer a Demos in the USA. There are two. One is mainly white, Christian and conservative. The other is mainly from non european ancestry but includes white liberals and whites who are outside traditional cultural values.
It wont end well whoever wins in November. Its no longer about equality. Its a battle for the whip hand to paraphrase a certain former wolverhampton MP.
Okay, so she's a nobody from Portsmouth (significant), but this is quite damning:
I cannot advocate to voters that they elect a Labour Government with Jeremy Corbyn at the helm. Indeed, I would be morally obliged to campaign against any administration that included Corbyn and John McDonnell, given my belief that they would seriously imperil our nation's national security if ever given the reins of power.
There are just not going to be enough poster boards for the Tories at the next election.
In Portsmouth this will be a gift for the LibDems, who will probably recover the council in May
Not a word on the BBC front page about the gun and bomb attacks in Malmo, Sweden. Didn't see it on the main Europe page either. Top reporting there.
On-topic: does the debate start at 11pm? Think I saw that time on Sky, although that might be the start of preamble coverage.
2 am I believe
Lester is the moderator IIRC. He's going to be watched like a hawk given his previous donations to HRC - along with Hillary's eyes.
I've totally ignored the 'eyes' thing until it was mentioned on Sky earlier - by Dr Linda their US psychology pundit. That she's picked up on the meme...
Dare I ask...what is the Hillary's eyes meme? Do they turn bright red when she's crossed?
There's a lot of footage of her eyes going in opposite directions - apparently a cranial nerve damage thing following her concussion. It looks really crazy and photoshopped - but isn't.
That goes along with her weird face pulling/rapid nodding/head jiggling. It just looks odd. I'm very wary of tweaked videos - but there's a lot of footage of this stuff and it's strange.
Currently at a forum in Gothenburg, Sweden. Spent much of yesterday asking US attendees what President Trump will do in his first 100 days. This was not greatly appreciated. But most now expect him to win.
I never bought into the WWIII Brexit scaremongering. Trump though might be a different story. This isn't going to go down well in Arab and Muslim nations:
It won't go down well in the US. It will be a place to avoid for a while if he wins. An openly racist President will lead to serious trouble on city streets.
I suspect any such trouble will be brutally dealt with in much the same way as it was here before about 1850.
It will not be pleasant.
Rhodesia 2.0
(actually the US is Rhodesia 1.0 and Rhodesia is 2.0 but thats bye the bye. )
This is the eqiuvalent of the 1962 Rhodesian election when the pro UDI Rhodesian Front, later to be led by Smith unexpectedly beat the establishment United Federal Party.
The eatablishment always wins in Rhodesia it was said. However liberal Prime Minister Sir Garfield Todd was seen to gave given too many concessions to Joshua Nkomo and suffered a shock defeat.
Three years later in the 1965 election, the Rhodesia Front under Smith won every single seat.
The liberal left have made the same mistake only worse by smearing all whites as racist and now electorates are going all Rhodesian.
UDI didn't end well as I recall.
Smith et al were pretty thick as well. Offered 80% of what they wanted on the HMS Tiger talks. Refused and got nothing.
Nearer 90%.
The problem was that Smith couldnt prevail against the far right nutjobs in his cabinet like Van Der Byl so anything he agreed on the boat was worthless and he chose to dissemble his way out of it instead of admitting it.
I wonder how much either candidate can gain from the debates, although maybe there's a low bar of expectation from them both. They've both got a lot to lose though, one slip of the tongue could sink their campaign.
Which would win it for the other.
There isn't symmetry. Shocks favour Trump. This makes it like Brexit.
Predictions about the TV "debate" are of little value if they come from journalists who don't mention the fake world of wrestling. Here is how Trump is seen to "stand up to pressure" in that environment:
Morning all. Stayed away from the Pres bettering so far, apart from a tenner on Trump at 5/1 in the middle of the primaries.
I wonder how much either candidate can gain from the debates, although maybe there's a low bar of expectation from them both. They've both got a lot to lose though, one slip of the tongue could sink their campaign.
From a betting view, maybe it's worth a quid or two on Gary Johnson, currently 950 on Betfair. He's unlikely to win, but if the American public wake up to how completely crap the main two candidates are, there might be a chance he can get a seat in one of the later debates - which would bring his price in massively.
Gary What's Aleppo Johnson?
And this?
ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_azcqlYC2s
Yep, that guy. Remember that most people haven't been paying much attention up until now. If both Trump and Clinton lose tonight, the American public might look around. If he can add enough points to get in a debate, his odds will come in dramatically from 949/1
He does have the advantage of actually being on the ballot, unlike some of the other names bandied around.
Indeed, he's on the ballot in all 50 states. I'm on for £2 at 950, hoping to lay off at 100 or 200 later.
My sub 1000.0 (But not HRC or Trump) book in full:
Back:
Joe Biden 99.05 £21.00 Gary Johnson 650.20 £4.00 Mike Pence 1,000.00 £5.00 V green Paul Ryan 386.39 £7.20 Bernie Sanders 33.41 £232.75 Jill Stein 1,000.00 £2.00
Lay:
Joe Biden 52.53 £69.15 Very red Tim Kaine 160.00 £12.00 Quite green Michelle Obama 480 £2.00 V red Paul Ryan 220.00 £2.00 Green Bernie Sanders 32.52 £286.27 V red Elizabeth Warren 990.00 £2.00 red.
Which adds up to £100 profit come the night itself.
If there is to be a split, the magic number is 57 MPs. At that point, they will be securely bigger than the SNP (who are I think 54 plus two on suspension).
Can't see it myself. Will be a terrible blow to Labour organisationally and a huge boost to Corbyn personally if it does happen though. A double whammy that could kill the whole party stone dead.
I wonder what Satan charged Theresa for the sale of her soul?
Surely the magic number is 117 - half plus one if the Labour MPs?
That makes them the Official Opposition and relegates Corbyn's party to the back benches with the SNP.
That only happens if they're taking the party name and organisation with them.
Let's be clear. The majority of pre-2015 members feel like the party has been stolen from us and been replaced by this democratic hate mob of chanting ideologues. To up and leave - to abandon this 116 year old movement to the kind of scum handing out anti-semitic leaflets at a merting discussing anti-semitism would be screaming cowardice. We can't leave. They will have to leave.
They don't have to take the party name. The Speaker will recognise the largest body of MPs who accept their whip as the official opposition. 117 is the magic number.
And whatever is about to happen, that certainly isn't. Which is why I was talking about 57. That's just about realistic.
Let's wait and see. Sometimes the bark is worse than the bite.
The real risk for Labour now is that this will be a dog that doesn't bark, which would certainly make this a curious incident. I'm still trying to think of any mistake that Labour could have made and hasn't.
I'm struggling to recall the last time Labour didn't do something, that in other times I'd presume was a joke or parody tweet.
Just watched McIRA on Sky - he's totally unapologetic for calling Ester McVey a stain on humanity. Now whatever one's opinion of HMG policy - that's quite an insult.
I don't know what Esther McVey has done to incur the manic loathing of the hard left. But, then, the hard left is viciously misogynistic as well as viciously anti-Semitic.
She was a lone Tory MP in a Labour area. Also was a minister in the DWP, which made her doubly evil in the eyes of the hard left. The treatment she got during the election campaign was disgusting, stuff like a sewage truck emptied onto the lawn of her parents.
There is a strange atmosphere down by the docks, with the Labour Party apparently occupying a smaller conference space than the Lib Dems did when they were here in 2010.
Currently at a forum in Gothenburg, Sweden. Spent much of yesterday asking US attendees what President Trump will do in his first 100 days. This was not greatly appreciated. But most now expect him to win.
I never bought into the WWIII Brexit scaremongering. Trump though might be a different story. This isn't going to go down well in Arab and Muslim nations:
It won't go down well in the US. It will be a place to avoid for a while if he wins. An openly racist President will lead to serious trouble on city streets.
I suspect any such trouble will be brutally dealt with in much the same way as it was here before about 1850.
It will not be pleasant.
.
I think the trouble is that for at least twenty years centrist parties in the US and UK, of both left and right, have clustered around a consensus that has become so axiomatic that it brooks no criticism. They have been far too willing to dismiss those who disagree and plenty of warning signs. That includes immigration but also elected representatives not being seen to be putting the interests of their own nation/people first, above internationalism and those of global corporatism.
In short: voters feeling their representatives are on their side.
What we're seeing now is a political storm to make that sentiment fully felt. Saying that Trump is repugnant fuels it, IMHO, because the thing many voters want the most is to annoy/offend the established political players as much as possible.
The problem with that is that the elected representatives are dealing with the real world, where internationalism and global corporatism not only exist, but are here to stay.
Look at Venezuela as an example of where attempts to stop these forces have not ended well.
Far from Trump causing world war 3, his legacy may be civil war 2. The problem is so would Hilarys, so people are taking sides. Hitchens article describing the sudden lack erstorm.
In the UK house posters seem to be history.
I saw nearly none in the referendum and they were very sparse in the 2015 GE too. I think that they have been replaced by Social Media.
Still a fair few garden and field posters were around
Not a word on the BBC front page about the gun and bomb attacks in Malmo, Sweden. Didn't see it on the main Europe page either. Top reporting there.
On-topic: does the debate start at 11pm? Think I saw that time on Sky, although that might be the start of preamble coverage.
2 am I believe
Lester is the moderator IIRC. He's going to be watched like a hawk given his previous donations to HRC - along with Hillary's eyes.
I've totally ignored the 'eyes' thing until it was mentioned on Sky earlier - by Dr Linda their US psychology pundit. That she's picked up on the meme...
Dare I ask...what is the Hillary's eyes meme? Do they turn bright red when she's crossed?
There's a lot of footage of her eyes going in opposite directions - apparently a cranial nerve damage thing following her concussion. It looks really crazy and photoshopped - but isn't.
That goes along with her weird face pulling/rapid nodding/head jiggling. It just looks odd. I'm very wary of tweaked videos - but there's a lot of footage of this stuff and it's strange.
Thanks. Will look out for, along for signs of Parkinson's, Epilepsy, and Rabies.
By the way, did you coin "dresses like a Space Commander"? It's quite good.
Morning all. Stayed away from the Pres bettering so far, apart from a tenner on Trump at 5/1 in the middle of the primaries.
I wonder how much either candidate can gain from the debates, although maybe there's a low bar of expectation from them both. They've both got a lot to lose though, one slip of the tongue could sink their campaign.
From a betting view, maybe it's worth a quid or two on Gary Johnson, currently 950 on Betfair. He's unlikely to win, but if the American public wake up to how completely crap the main two candidates are, there might be a chance he can get a seat in one of the later debates - which would bring his price in massively.
Gary What's Aleppo Johnson?
And this?
ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_azcqlYC2s
Yep, that guy. Remember that most people haven't been paying much attention up until now. If both Trump and Clinton lose tonight, the American public might look around. If he can add enough points to get in a debate, his odds will come in dramatically from 949/1
He does have the advantage of actually being on the ballot, unlike some of the other names bandied around.
Indeed, he's on the ballot in all 50 states. I'm on for £2 at 950, hoping to lay off at 100 or 200 later.
My sub 1000.0 (But not HRC or Trump) book in full:
Back:
Joe Biden 99.05 £21.00 Gary Johnson 650.20 £4.00 Mike Pence 1,000.00 £5.00 V green Paul Ryan 386.39 £7.20 Bernie Sanders 33.41 £232.75 Jill Stein 1,000.00 £2.00
Lay:
Joe Biden 52.53 £69.15 Very red Tim Kaine 160.00 £12.00 Quite green Michelle Obama 480 £2.00 V red Paul Ryan 220.00 £2.00 Green Bernie Sanders 32.52 £286.27 V red Elizabeth Warren 990.00 £2.00 red.
Which adds up to £100 profit come the night itself.
How many hours work?
Placing those specific bets ?
1/2 an hour maybe ?
I suppose you're interested in this so would follow it anyway so it isn't really like work. Pence coming in would be a nice bonus for you, though!
I wonder how much either candidate can gain from the debates, although maybe there's a low bar of expectation from them both. They've both got a lot to lose though, one slip of the tongue could sink their campaign.
Which would win it for the other.
There isn't symmetry. Shocks favour Trump. This makes it like Brexit.
Predictions about the TV "debate" are of little value if they come from journalists who don't mention the fake world of wrestling. Here is how Trump is seen to "stand up to pressure" in that environment:
Not a word on the BBC front page about the gun and bomb attacks in Malmo, Sweden. Didn't see it on the main Europe page either. Top reporting there.
On-topic: does the debate start at 11pm? Think I saw that time on Sky, although that might be the start of preamble coverage.
2 am I believe
Lester is the moderator IIRC. He's going to be watched like a hawk given his previous donations to HRC - along with Hillary's eyes.
I've totally ignored the 'eyes' thing until it was mentioned on Sky earlier - by Dr Linda their US psychology pundit. That she's picked up on the meme...
Dare I ask...what is the Hillary's eyes meme? Do they turn bright red when she's crossed?
There's a lot of footage of her eyes going in opposite directions - apparently a cranial nerve damage thing following her concussion. It looks really crazy and photoshopped - but isn't.
That goes along with her weird face pulling/rapid nodding/head jiggling. It just looks odd. I'm very wary of tweaked videos - but there's a lot of footage of this stuff and it's strange.
Thanks. Will look out for, along for signs of Parkinson's, Epilepsy, and Rabies.
By the way, did you coin "dresses like a Space Commander"? It's quite good.
Ooh, no idea - it struck me the moment I saw her - but doesn't she just
I'm out for a beer in Liverpool with the old gits on Wednesday but we'll have to plot a course to avoid the Trots. A sober one is bad enough, but one in his cups ...
Like all things medical, there is a long list of potential causes but in my opinion the most likely one, based on Clinton's known medical history is an intermittent lateral rectus palsy caused by damage to or pressure on her sixth cranial nerve.
It is known that she suffered a traumatic brain injury in late 2012 when she fell and struck her head. What is also known is that she was diagnosed with a transverse sinus thrombosis — blood clot in the major vein at the base of the brain. Almost all patients with a transverse sinus thrombosis suffer swelling of the brain and increased intracranial pressure. Most have headaches, balance issues and visual disturbances — all of which Clinton was reported to have following that event.
Clinton's physician reported that she was placed on Coumadin (a blood thinner) to dissolve the blood clot. Actually, that is incorrect, because Coumadin has no effect on an existing clot. It serves only to decrease the chance of further clotting occurring Clinton's physician has also reported that on follow up exam, the clot had resolved. That is surprising since the majority of such clots do not dissolve. The way it was documented that the clot had resolved has not been reported.
If, as is statistically likely, Clinton's transverse sinus is still blocked, she would still have increased pressure and swelling and decreased blood flow to her brain. That swelling would place pressure on the exposed portion of the sixth cranial nerve at the base of her brain, explaining the apparent lateral rectus palsy. And such a deficit can be partial and/or intermittent.
Does anyone here have enough medical knowledge to comment on the plausibility of this?
To us, it looks like they've captured the party - to them, they're still persecuted minority facing implacable forces of reaction
That was the rationale of the Gulags. That the revolution was so necessary for the welfare of mankind but so fragile and weak against the massed forces of reactionaryism that those even suspected of harbouring reactionary tendencies had to be removed from society on the precautionary principle.
Miss Plato, sounds vaguely reminiscent of Mandelson's 'insurgents despite being in government' approach, except that that was political strategy rather than genuinely fetishising victimhood.
In other news, there seems to have been a device found/dealt with in Gothenburg.
Is that it then. Leader of Portsmouth council. Not 84? No embargoed letter release?
Pah!
*surveys boxes of unopened popcorn*
Rather boring wasn't it?
There was a mention of co-ordinated resignations in the earlier Twitter rumours, so far it has just been the one senior councillor, who resigned live on local radio. The last time the Blairites co-ordinated it turned out to be resignations spread through the day, so who knows?
To us, it looks like they've captured the party - to them, they're still persecuted minority facing implacable forces of reaction
From Mr Mid-Life-Crisis blog
"Here’s twelve bullet points I am using to orientate myself during the next phase of Labour politics. You are welcome to use them, attack them, or pick and mix. You’ll understand why I’ve called it neo-Bevanism when you get to point 12 — but in general I am inspired by Nye’s lifelong determination to combine what he learned as a syndicalist with radical Labour politics and parliamentary democracy, which he described as “a sword pointed at the heart of property-power”
"...The most exciting left organisation to be in now is Labour.
The most revolutionary thing we can do in the era of fragmenting neoliberalism is put a truly radical social-democracy in power."
To us, it looks like they've captured the party - to them, they're still persecuted minority facing implacable forces of reaction
That was the rationale of the Gulags. That the revolution was so necessary for the welfare of mankind but so fragile and weak against the massed forces of reactionaryism that those even suspected of harbouring reactionary tendencies had to be removed from society on the precautionary principle.
And there was no other way to get stuff dug and built in Siberia.
Like all things medical, there is a long list of potential causes but in my opinion the most likely one, based on Clinton's known medical history is an intermittent lateral rectus palsy caused by damage to or pressure on her sixth cranial nerve.
It is known that she suffered a traumatic brain injury in late 2012 when she fell and struck her head. What is also known is that she was diagnosed with a transverse sinus thrombosis — blood clot in the major vein at the base of the brain. Almost all patients with a transverse sinus thrombosis suffer swelling of the brain and increased intracranial pressure. Most have headaches, balance issues and visual disturbances — all of which Clinton was reported to have following that event.
Clinton's physician reported that she was placed on Coumadin (a blood thinner) to dissolve the blood clot. Actually, that is incorrect, because Coumadin has no effect on an existing clot. It serves only to decrease the chance of further clotting occurring Clinton's physician has also reported that on follow up exam, the clot had resolved. That is surprising since the majority of such clots do not dissolve. The way it was documented that the clot had resolved has not been reported.
If, as is statistically likely, Clinton's transverse sinus is still blocked, she would still have increased pressure and swelling and decreased blood flow to her brain. That swelling would place pressure on the exposed portion of the sixth cranial nerve at the base of her brain, explaining the apparent lateral rectus palsy. And such a deficit can be partial and/or intermittent.
Does anyone here have enough medical knowledge to comment on the plausibility of this?
she has released pages of her medical information so thats a good place to start.
trump released that 1 page letter, so harder to know for sure what the matter with him is
If there is to be a split, the magic number is 57 MPs. At that point, they will be securely bigger than the SNP (who are I think 54 plus two on suspension).
Can't see it myself. Will be a terrible blow to Labour organisationally and a huge boost to Corbyn personally if it does happen though. A double whammy that could kill the whole party stone dead.
I wonder what Satan charged Theresa for the sale of her soul?
Surely the magic number is 117 - half plus one if the Labour MPs?
That makes them the Official Opposition and relegates Corbyn's party to the back benches with the SNP.
That
They don't have to take the party name. The Speaker will recognise the largest body of MPs who accept their whip as the official opposition. 117 is the magic number.
And whatever is about to happen, that certainly isn't. Which is why I was talking about 57. That's just about realistic.
Let's wait and see. Sometimes the bark is worse than the bite.
The real risk for Labour now is that this will be a dog that doesn't bark, which would certainly make this a curious incident. I'm still trying to think of any mistake that Labour could have made and hasn't.
I'm struggling to recall the last time Labour didn't do something, that in other times I'd presume was a joke or parody tweet.
Just watched McIRA on Sky - he's totally unapologetic for calling Ester McVey a stain on humanity. Now whatever one's opinion of HMG policy - that's quite an insult.
I don't know what Esther McVey has done to incur the manic loathing of the hard left. But, then, the hard left is viciously misogynistic as well as viciously anti-Semitic.
There was a very nasty campaign in Wirral West against her last year. It's a real shame it succeeded.
McDonnell is doing nothing more than showing himself up to be the dirt he really is.
Okay, so she's a nobody from Portsmouth (significant), but this is quite damning:
I cannot advocate to voters that they elect a Labour Government with Jeremy Corbyn at the helm. Indeed, I would be morally obliged to campaign against any administration that included Corbyn and John McDonnell, given my belief that they would seriously imperil our nation's national security if ever given the reins of power.
It is from John Ferrett, Leader of Portsmouth Council Labour Group.
If there is to be a split, the magic number is 57 MPs. At that point, they will be securely bigger than the SNP (who are I think 54 plus two on suspension).
Can't see it myself. Will be a terrible blow to Labour organisationally and a huge boost to Corbyn personally if it does happen though. A double whammy that could kill the whole party stone dead.
I wonder what Satan charged Theresa for the sale of her soul?
Surely the magic number is 117 - half plus one if the Labour MPs?
That makes them the Official Opposition and relegates Corbyn's party to the back benches with the SNP.
That.
They don't have to take the party name. The Speaker will recognise the largest body of MPs who accept their whip as the official opposition. 117 is the magic number.
And whatever is about to happen, that certainly isn't. Which is why I was talking about 57. That's just about realistic.
Let's wait and see. Sometimes the bark is worse than the bite.
The real risk for Labour now is that this will be a dog that doesn't bark, which would certainly make this a curious incident. I'm still trying to think of any mistake that Labour could have made and hasn't.
I'm struggling to recall the last time Labour didn't do something, that in other times I'd presume was a joke or parody tweet.
Just watched McIRA on Sky - he's totally unapologetic for calling Ester McVey a stain on humanity. Now whatever one's opinion of HMG policy - that's quite an insult.
I don't know what Esther McVey has done to incur the manic loathing of the hard left. But, then, the hard left is viciously misogynistic as well as viciously anti-Semitic.
She was a lone Tory MP in a Labour area. Also was a minister in the DWP, which made her doubly evil in the eyes of the hard left. The treatment she got during the election campaign was disgusting, stuff like a sewage truck emptied onto the lawn of her parents.
I think Charlotte Leslie actually had abuse emptied onto the lawn of her parents as well.
Some people just dislike themselves so much they have to get their sense of decency from marking out others as more wicked than them, and then publicly abusing them.
They enjoy hating because at heart they hate themselves.
Like all things medical, there is a long list of potential causes but in my opinion the most likely one, based on Clinton's known medical history is an intermittent lateral rectus palsy caused by damage to or pressure on her sixth cranial nerve.
It is known that she suffered a traumatic brain injury in late 2012 when she fell and struck her head. What is also known is that she was diagnosed with a transverse sinus thrombosis — blood clot in the major vein at the base of the brain. Almost all patients with a transverse sinus thrombosis suffer swelling of the brain and increased intracranial pressure. Most have headaches, balance issues and visual disturbances — all of which Clinton was reported to have following that event.
Clinton's physician reported that she was placed on Coumadin (a blood thinner) to dissolve the blood clot. Actually, that is incorrect, because Coumadin has no effect on an existing clot. It serves only to decrease the chance of further clotting occurring Clinton's physician has also reported that on follow up exam, the clot had resolved. That is surprising since the majority of such clots do not dissolve. The way it was documented that the clot had resolved has not been reported.
If, as is statistically likely, Clinton's transverse sinus is still blocked, she would still have increased pressure and swelling and decreased blood flow to her brain. That swelling would place pressure on the exposed portion of the sixth cranial nerve at the base of her brain, explaining the apparent lateral rectus palsy. And such a deficit can be partial and/or intermittent.
Does anyone here have enough medical knowledge to comment on the plausibility of this?
An intermittent Lateral Rectus Palsy lasts months at a time, not seconds. If she still had it then one or both of her eyes would not move outwards, becoming cross-eyed when lokking to the affected side. I have seen nothing like this during the campaign.
Hillary wore glasses with prisms after her Transverse sinus thrombosis, but these palsies resolve over a couple of months.
Coumarim (Warfarin in the UK) does not dissolve the clot, but a natural bypass opens up as the other veins dilate. As long as she remains on Warfarin the risk of recurrence is very low, and potentially treatable if it did.
I don't know what Esther McVey has done to incur the manic loathing of the hard left.
If you stopped spitting ("manic", "loathing", "hard left"), you could find out some of what it is that people have against her. Start by looking at how her family demolition business, in which she used to be a director, operates. Then look at how she has claimed as her great inspiration William Lever. She calls him "the Merseyside soap baron who became one of the greatest philanthropists". Also known as Lord Leverhulme, the guy ran a private slave-based regime in Congo under the wing of Leopold II of Belgium. The population got reduced by half. This is described in the book Lord Leverhulme's Ghosts: Colonial Exploitation in the Congo. At the DWP she was Minister for Employment, That job normally comes with a health and safety role, namely responsibility for the Health and Safety Executive. But given her family firm's terrible record in health and safety, she got banned from having any responsibilities in that area after the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health wrote to David Cameron to tell them about her. Maybe they are all hard maniacs from the rabid left-handed brigade of misogynistic loathers.
I wonder how much either candidate can gain from the debates, although maybe there's a low bar of expectation from them both. They've both got a lot to lose though, one slip of the tongue could sink their campaign.
Which would win it for the other.
There isn't symmetry. Shocks favour Trump. This makes it like Brexit.
Predictions about the TV "debate" are of little value if they come from journalists who don't mention the fake world of wrestling. Here is how Trump is seen to "stand up to pressure" in that environment:
Like all things medical, there is a long list of potential causes but in my opinion the most likely one, based on Clinton's known medical history is an intermittent lateral rectus palsy caused by damage to or pressure on her sixth cranial nerve.
It is known that she suffered a traumatic brain injury in late 2012 when she fell and struck her head. What is also known is that she was diagnosed with a transverse sinus thrombosis — blood clot in the major vein at the base of the brain. Almost all patients with a transverse sinus thrombosis suffer swelling of the brain and increased intracranial pressure. Most have headaches, balance issues and visual disturbances — all of which Clinton was reported to have following that event.
Clinton's physician reported that she was placed on Coumadin (a blood thinner) to dissolve the blood clot. Actually, that is incorrect, because Coumadin has no effect on an existing clot. It serves only to decrease the chance of further clotting occurring Clinton's physician has also reported that on follow up exam, the clot had resolved. That is surprising since the majority of such clots do not dissolve. The way it was documented that the clot had resolved has not been reported.
If, as is statistically likely, Clinton's transverse sinus is still blocked, she would still have increased pressure and swelling and decreased blood flow to her brain. That swelling would place pressure on the exposed portion of the sixth cranial nerve at the base of her brain, explaining the apparent lateral rectus palsy. And such a deficit can be partial and/or intermittent.
Does anyone here have enough medical knowledge to comment on the plausibility of this?
she has released pages of her medical information so thats a good place to start.
trump released that 1 page letter, so harder to know for sure what the matter with him is
Is this an electorate made up of physicians or of normal people with eyes?
Does Hillary look ill and strange - yes. Does Trump look ill - no.
It's about as plausible as the nitwit trying to claim Mrs May is lily-livered. It's just not a credible bit of name calling. Her brand is being very firm and rather cold/school mistress.
Does anyone here have enough medical knowledge to comment on the plausibility of this?
she has released pages of her medical information so thats a good place to start.
But can we trust the medical information Hillary has released?
Quoting from that site again: "Clinton's physician reported that she was placed on Coumadin (a blood thinner) to dissolve the blood clot. Actually, that is incorrect, because Coumadin has no effect on an existing clot. It serves only to decrease the chance of further clotting occurring Clinton's physician has also reported that on follow up exam, the clot had resolved. That is surprising since the majority of such clots do not dissolve. The way it was documented that the clot had resolved has not been reported."
If that claim about Coumadin is accurate, Clinton's doctor must have given false information.
Okay, so she's a nobody from Portsmouth (significant), but this is quite damning:
I cannot advocate to voters that they elect a Labour Government with Jeremy Corbyn at the helm. Indeed, I would be morally obliged to campaign against any administration that included Corbyn and John McDonnell, given my belief that they would seriously imperil our nation's national security if ever given the reins of power.
It is from John Ferrett, Leader of Portsmouth Council Labour Group.
Does anyone here have enough medical knowledge to comment on the plausibility of this?
she has released pages of her medical information so thats a good place to start.
But can we trust the medical information Hillary has released?
Quoting from that site again: "Clinton's physician reported that she was placed on Coumadin (a blood thinner) to dissolve the blood clot. Actually, that is incorrect, because Coumadin has no effect on an existing clot. It serves only to decrease the chance of further clotting occurring Clinton's physician has also reported that on follow up exam, the clot had resolved. That is surprising since the majority of such clots do not dissolve. The way it was documented that the clot had resolved has not been reported."
If that claim about Coumadin is accurate, Clinton's doctor must have given false information.
And as they say, when you're explaining - you're losing.
Like all things medical, there is a long list of potential causes but in my opinion the most likely one, based on Clinton's known medical history is an intermittent lateral rectus palsy caused by damage to or pressure on her sixth cranial nerve.
It is known that she suffered a traumatic brain injury in late 2012 when she fell and struck her head. What is also known is that she was diagnosed with a transverse sinus thrombosis — blood clot in the major vein at the base of the brain. Almost all patients with a transverse sinus thrombosis suffer swelling of the brain and increased intracranial pressure. Most have headaches, balance issues and visual disturbances — all of which Clinton was reported to have following that event.
Clinton's physician reported that she was placed on Coumadin (a blood thinner) to dissolve the blood clot. Actually, that is incorrect, because Coumadin has no effect on an existing clot. It serves only to decrease the chance of further clotting occurring Clinton's physician has also reported that on follow up exam, the clot had resolved. That is surprising since the majority of such clots do not dissolve. The way it was documented that the clot had resolved has not been reported.
If, as is statistically likely, Clinton's transverse sinus is still blocked, she would still have increased pressure and swelling and decreased blood flow to her brain. That swelling would place pressure on the exposed portion of the sixth cranial nerve at the base of her brain, explaining the apparent lateral rectus palsy. And such a deficit can be partial and/or intermittent.
Does anyone here have enough medical knowledge to comment on the plausibility of this?
she has released pages of her medical information so thats a good place to start.
trump released that 1 page letter, so harder to know for sure what the matter with him is
Trump? He is, hopefully, suffering from (politically) terminal egoism.
Comments
its like being a BNP voter in this country
Calls for a new breakaway party from @John_Ferrett as the #Portsmouth #Labour group leader quits @UKLabour. Here's his resignation letter https://t.co/xRLUvhM3zN
Look at Venezuela as an example of where attempts to stop these forces have not ended well.
I'm still trying to think of any mistake that Labour could have made and hasn't.
I cannot advocate to voters that they elect a Labour Government with Jeremy Corbyn at the helm. Indeed, I would be morally obliged to campaign against any administration that included Corbyn and John McDonnell, given my belief that they would seriously imperil our nation's national security if ever given the reins of power.
Just watched McIRA on Sky - he's totally unapologetic for calling Ester McVey a stain on humanity. Now whatever one's opinion of HMG policy - that's quite an insult.
Not a word on the BBC front page about the gun and bomb attacks in Malmo, Sweden. Didn't see it on the main Europe page either. Top reporting there.
On-topic: does the debate start at 11pm? Think I saw that time on Sky, although that might be the start of preamble coverage.
Having -ist as the end of your surname is winning the lottery of life if you are a leftie.
Mr. B2, cheers. Not staying up for that.
I've totally ignored the 'eyes' thing until it was mentioned on Sky earlier - by Dr Linda their US psychology pundit. That she's picked up on the meme...
I saw nearly none in the referendum and they were very sparse in the 2015 GE too. I think that they have been replaced by Social Media.
But yes, the increasingly large splits in the US's politics and society are worrying. They stand a god chance of becoming the Disunited States.
Do they turn bright red when she's crossed?
There isn't symmetry. Shocks favour Trump. This makes it like Brexit.
Predictions about the TV "debate" are of little value if they come from journalists who don't mention the fake world of wrestling. Here is how Trump is seen to "stand up to pressure" in that environment:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHwypvDvuFY?t=01m20s
It wont end well whoever wins in November. Its no longer about equality. Its a battle for the whip hand to paraphrase a certain former wolverhampton MP.
Pah!
*surveys boxes of unopened popcorn*
That goes along with her weird face pulling/rapid nodding/head jiggling. It just looks odd. I'm very wary of tweaked videos - but there's a lot of footage of this stuff and it's strange.
The problem was that Smith couldnt prevail against the far right nutjobs in his cabinet like Van Der Byl so anything he agreed on the boat was worthless and he chose to dissemble his way out of it instead of admitting it.
They're all coming out the woodwork. Wolfie Smith next?
It's like watching Soubry commenting on Brexit voters.
1/2 an hour maybe ?
There is a strange atmosphere down by the docks, with the Labour Party apparently occupying a smaller conference space than the Lib Dems did when they were here in 2010.
By the way, did you coin "dresses like a Space Commander"? It's quite good.
If you want to understand Corbynista mentality, this from @paulmasonnews is a good place to start https://t.co/TDhjDBM3cQ https://t.co/zbHuMKXziN
To us, it looks like they've captured the party - to them, they're still persecuted minority facing implacable forces of reaction
See, for example, http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/healthcare/297208-clintons-eyes-a-window-into-her-health-issues
Quoting from that page: Does anyone here have enough medical knowledge to comment on the plausibility of this?
In other news, there seems to have been a device found/dealt with in Gothenburg.
http://www.snopes.com/clinton-byrd-photo-klan/
Google searches are a great way of finding stuff out btw.
"Here’s twelve bullet points I am using to orientate myself during the next phase of Labour politics. You are welcome to use them, attack them, or pick and mix. You’ll understand why I’ve called it neo-Bevanism when you get to point 12 — but in general I am inspired by Nye’s lifelong determination to combine what he learned as a syndicalist with radical Labour politics and parliamentary democracy, which he described as “a sword pointed at the heart of property-power”
"...The most exciting left organisation to be in now is Labour.
The most revolutionary thing we can do in the era of fragmenting neoliberalism is put a truly radical social-democracy in power."
not the same as david dukes. At all.
she has released pages of her medical information so thats a good place to start.
trump released that 1 page letter, so harder to know for sure what the matter with him is
https://twitter.com/johannabaxter/status/780307676404252672
McDonnell is doing nothing more than showing himself up to be the dirt he really is.
Some people just dislike themselves so much they have to get their sense of decency from marking out others as more wicked than them, and then publicly abusing them.
They enjoy hating because at heart they hate themselves.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/apr/26/klan-leader-claims-kkk-has-given-20k-clinton-campa/
Does that mean the Scottish and Welsh NEC members will happen, or not?
An intermittent Lateral Rectus Palsy lasts months at a time, not seconds. If she still had it then one or both of her eyes would not move outwards, becoming cross-eyed when lokking to the affected side. I have seen nothing like this during the campaign.
Hillary wore glasses with prisms after her Transverse sinus thrombosis, but these palsies resolve over a couple of months.
Coumarim (Warfarin in the UK) does not dissolve the clot, but a natural bypass opens up as the other veins dilate. As long as she remains on Warfarin the risk of recurrence is very low, and potentially treatable if it did.
The only source of the truth is the right wing news sites and columnist you constantly copy and paste.
Is that correct? Does it not cross your mind that this bias is actually because what you believe to be true is not consistent with reality?
Does Hillary look ill and strange - yes. Does Trump look ill - no.
It's about as plausible as the nitwit trying to claim Mrs May is lily-livered. It's just not a credible bit of name calling. Her brand is being very firm and rather cold/school mistress.
Quoting from that site again: "Clinton's physician reported that she was placed on Coumadin (a blood thinner) to dissolve the blood clot. Actually, that is incorrect, because Coumadin has no effect on an existing clot. It serves only to decrease the chance of further clotting occurring Clinton's physician has also reported that on follow up exam, the clot had resolved. That is surprising since the majority of such clots do not dissolve. The way it was documented that the clot had resolved has not been reported."
If that claim about Coumadin is accurate, Clinton's doctor must have given false information.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0491t63
trump released that 1 page letter, so harder to know for sure what the matter with him is
Trump?
He is, hopefully, suffering from (politically) terminal egoism.