Danny Fink Matthew, when we Jews finally get to organising our conspiracy, I don't think the plan is to start with Tim Farron's leadership campaign. https://t.co/zMkSCs0S1m
What is this about ?
It's about idiots trying to be clever.
I was astonished Surby is 61 - thought he was 20s something.
I do think he understands how to capture those 30 seconds or 90 seconds and not get hung up on what the press wants him to say, or what the policy wonks at [the] Heritage [Foundation] want him to say, or what I want him to say. I think he’s very gifted at understanding … the American people, and authenticity means more to them. He really is good at coming across as authentic. Debate prep doesn’t solve that, if that’s your problem.
As we are in the mid-morning lull when people actually do some work, I will exercise a personal prejudice.
One piquant side effect of the election of Jeremy Corbyn has been the quandary of those actors, comedians and other members of the liberal/left elite, often subsisting on the modern day version of outdoor relief at the BBC, who have been able to arrogate to themselves an aura of virtue, insight and understanding without the intelligence, hard work and self-sacrifice traditionally associated with those attributes.
Hitherto they have been able to develop this aesthetic by wearing scruffy jumpers, crumpled linen jackets, faded denims and loosely tied deck shoes and utter a few well-placed diatribes against brexiteers, Daily Mail readers and Tories, together with a self-effacing, modest declaration of support for the Labour party.
This neat trick has allowed these red carpet anti-capitalists to continue in their scramble for money, indulge in shameless nepotism and place their children in good schools more or less uncriticised. But now their bluff has been called by the red brigade who regard Corbyn as a middle-of–the-road political moderate. A truly socialist Labour Party will threaten their life-style and their nice houses in London and second homes in the country. What now? Saying, “Hey! I’m a normal Labour kind of guy, just like you” will not do.
Saw a great mocking tweet earlier taking the piss out of Caprio and Obama wittering about climate change - when their own behaviour is the carbon footprint of several small countries.
Like Al Gore and his giant house that was jokingly visible from space.
Al Gore never did understand the critism he got for hosting 100 leaders, travelling on 100 planes to some nice island for a summit of pontification about carbon emissions.
Hint: Next time, they should get Cisco Telepresence to sponsor it, a showcase for this new found internet thingy.
Given Al Gore invented teh interwebs - it really was a missed opportunity.
I was very depressed over Hopenhagen media cobblers - and then we got the still anonymous brave soul who leaked ClimateGate emails. I spent days reading them and sharing - appalling manipulation of data and peer group freezing out.
Nothing broke my trust in science as that did.
The Internet was invented in the late 1960s, early 1970s in academic institutions, mainly in the USA.
The world wide web was invented by Tim Berners Lee at CERN, Switzerland, in the 1980s.
Aww, you and your facts. We've long since moved onto urban legends and anti-intellextualism as the basis of discussion, as this thread shows
Poll by @SkyData suggests 45% of Labour supporters think it is unlikely the party will ever win another General Election
To give them some hope, polling in the summer of 1992 would probably have been pretty similar.
But then, they got serious and installed Blair. Chances of that happening again? Close to nil....
At least they know what they have to do. But you're right, today's Labour Party leadership don't appear to care about elections, except to their own NEC.
I voted for Blair in '01; if Labour are going to win again, they need me to at least consider voting for them. Right now, I'm a card-carrying PB Tory, the Labour Party has a long way to go.
Not just you. They need to get people like Plato back on board. And to get folks like me, looking at a pile of leaflets and thinking "what's the point? Labour are going to trounce us...."
The most absurd thing I heard this morning from McDonnell, amongst many, was him talking about how Labour wanted to work with entrepreneurs. Maybe I know the wrong people, but I think entrepreneurs and business people would run a mile from a Labour government with McDonnell and Corbyn at the helm.
In terms of the comments surrounding Brexit, I broadly agree with McDonnell. There is a need for a more interventionist UK industrial strategy after four decades without anything worthy of the name. There is a need to put in place, urgently, a new set of measures for businesses in UK assisted areas. There is a need to urgently offer much more substantial guarantees to other sectors post Brexit rather than confining this to large scale agri-business. For once, the funding is not in question either, given that we're talking about keeping in place a small fraction of what the country pays over the EU.
The shame for Labour is that this essentially social democratic agenda, which might even by itself be electorally appealing, is compromised by all the other far left economic and other baggage that comes with the far left. Moreover, a public has to trust a shadow Chancellor. Given that McDonnell is meanwhile doing everything possible to cement his reputation as Corbyn's assassin in chief, he'll be trusted no more with a purse than he will be with a knife.
As we are in the mid-morning lull when people actually do some work, I will exercise a personal prejudice.
One piquant side effect of the election of Jeremy Corbyn has been the quandary of those actors, comedians and other members of the liberal/left elite, often subsisting on the modern day version of outdoor relief at the BBC, who have been able to arrogate to themselves an aura of virtue, insight and understanding without the intelligence, hard work and self-sacrifice traditionally associated with those attributes.
Hitherto they have been able to develop this aesthetic by wearing scruffy jumpers, crumpled linen jackets, faded denims and loosely tied deck shoes and utter a few well-placed diatribes against brexiteers, Daily Mail readers and Tories, together with a self-effacing, modest declaration of support for the Labour party.
This neat trick has allowed these red carpet anti-capitalists to continue in their scramble for money, indulge in shameless nepotism and place their children in good schools more or less uncriticised. But now their bluff has been called by the red brigade who regard Corbyn as a middle-of–the-road political moderate. A truly socialist Labour Party will threaten their life-style and their nice houses in London and second homes in the country. What now? Saying, “Hey! I’m a normal Labour kind of guy, just like you” will not do.
Saw a great mocking tweet earlier taking the piss out of Caprio and Obama wittering about climate change - when their own behaviour is the carbon footprint of several small countries.
Like Al Gore and his giant house that was jokingly visible from space.
Al Gore never did understand the critism he got for hosting 100 leaders, travelling on 100 planes to some nice island for a summit of pontification about carbon emissions.
Hint: Next time, they should get Cisco Telepresence to sponsor it, a showcase for this new found internet thingy.
Given Al Gore invented teh interwebs - it really was a missed opportunity.
I was very depressed over Hopenhagen media cobblers - and then we got the still anonymous brave soul who leaked ClimateGate emails. I spent days reading them and sharing - appalling manipulation of data and peer group freezing out.
Nothing broke my trust in science as that did.
The Internet was invented in the late 1960s, early 1970s in academic institutions, mainly in the USA.
The world wide web was invented by Tim Berners Lee at CERN, Switzerland, in the 1980s.
As we are in the mid-morning lull when people actually do some work, I will exercise a personal prejudice.
BBC, who have been able to arrogate to themselves an aura of virtue, insight and understanding without the intelligence, hard work and self-sacrifice traditionally associated with those attributes.
Hitherto they have been able to develop this aesthetic by wearing scruffy jumpers, crumpled linen jackets, faded denims and loosely tied deck shoes and utter a few well-placed diatribes against brexiteers, Daily Mail readers and Tories, together with a self-effacing, modest declaration of support for the Labour party.
This neat trick has allowed these red carpet anti-capitalists to continue in their scramble for money, indulge in shameless nepotism and place their children in good schools more or less uncriticised. But now their bluff has been called by the red brigade who regard Corbyn as a middle-of–the-road political moderate. A truly socialist Labour Party will threaten their life-style and their nice houses in London and second homes in the country. What now? Saying, “Hey! I’m a normal Labour kind of guy, just like you” will not do.
Saw a great mocking tweet earlier taking the piss out of Caprio and Obama wittering about climate change - when their own behaviour is the carbon footprint of several small countries.
Like Al Gore and his giant house that was jokingly visible from space.
Al Gore never did understand the critism he got for hosting 100 leaders, travelling on 100 planes to some nice island for a summit of pontification about carbon emissions.
Hint: Next time, they should get Cisco Telepresence to sponsor it, a showcase for this new found internet thingy.
Given Al Gore invented teh interwebs - it really was a missed opportunity.
I was very depressed over Hopenhagen media cobblers - and then we got the still anonymous brave soul who leaked ClimateGate emails. I spent days reading them and sharing - appalling manipulation of data and peer group freezing out.
Nothing broke my trust in science as that did.
The Internet was invented in the late 1960s, early 1970s in academic institutions, mainly in the USA.
The world wide web was invented by Tim Berners Lee at CERN, Switzerland, in the 1980s.
Yes, I remember being a relatively early adopter at home in the early 90s, using Netscape. There were hardly any websites, as we now know them. Mostly it provided the opportunity to download academic papers from a few primcipally American universities, which you could do (very slowly, back in dial-up days) provided you already knew the precise address of the paper you wanted before going online!
Poll by @SkyData suggests 45% of Labour supporters think it is unlikely the party will ever win another General Election
To give them some hope, polling in the summer of 1992 would probably have been pretty similar.
But then, they got serious and installed Blair. Chances of that happening again? Close to nil....
At least they know what they have to do. But you're right, today's Labour Party leadership don't appear to care about elections, except to their own NEC.
I voted for Blair in '01; if Labour are going to win again, they need me to at least consider voting for them. Right now, I'm a card-carrying PB Tory, the Labour Party has a long way to go.
Not just you. They need to get people like Plato back on board. And to get folks like me, looking at a pile of leaflets and thinking "what's the point? Labour are going to trounce us...."
The most absurd thing I heard this morning from McDonnell, amongst many, was him talking about how Labour wanted to work with entrepreneurs. Maybe I know the wrong people, but I think entrepreneurs and business people would run a mile from a Labour government with McDonnell and Corbyn at the helm.
In terms of the comments surrounding Brexit, I broadly agree with McDonnell. There is a need for a more interventionist UK industrial strategy after four decades without anything worthy of the name. There is a need to put in place, urgently, a new set of measures for businesses in UK assisted areas. There is a need to urgently offer much more substantial guarantees to other sectors post Brexit rather than confining this to large scale agri-business. For once, the funding is not in question either, given that we're talking about keeping in place a small fraction of what the country pays over the EU.
The shame for Labour is that this essentially social democratic agenda, which might even by itself be electorally appealing, is compromised by all the other far left economic and other baggage that comes with the far left. Moreover, a public has to trust a shadow Chancellor. Given that McDonnell is meanwhile doing everything possible to cement his reputation as Corbyn's assassin in chief, he'll be trusted no more with a purse than he will be with a knife.
It would be interesting to hear what he said on Brexit. But no-one is listening to what he's saying on Brexit, they're much more interested in what he has to say about party splits, antisemitism and his condoning of violence against opponents.
Last night I chanced online upon an article by Michael Deacon, The Daily Telegraph's political sketchwriter, about Jeremy Corbyn's habit of incessant sniffing, despite his not having the least suspicion of a cold nor other obvious medical explanation for this .... and what it might possibly mean from a psychological point of view. I made a mental note to return later and read the piece more fully. When I attempted to do so during the early hours, I was surprised to discover that it had totally disappeared, even a number of varying Google searches failed to discover any trace of it. I still imagined that it might appear in this morning's hard copy of the newspaper, but no such luck. How bloody odd!
Edit: it does say he does a lot of sniffing but doesn't dwell on it.
Thanks, but this isn't the article, which absolutely majored on his constant sniffing. It's really strange .... Deacon is a senior guy at the Telegraph and unless he pulled it himself, someone from on high must have done so. Often in such circumstances, it's possible to track something like this down especially since by then it might well have migrated to other sites, but seemingly not in this case.
Last night I chanced online upon an article by Michael Deacon, The Daily Telegraph's political sketchwriter, about Jeremy Corbyn's habit of incessant sniffing, despite his not having the least suspicion of a cold nor other obvious medical explanation for this .... and what it might possibly mean from a psychological point of view. I made a mental note to return later and read the piece more fully. When I attempted to do so during the early hours, I was surprised to discover that it had totally disappeared, even a number of varying Google searches failed to discover any trace of it. I still imagined that it might appear in this morning's hard copy of the newspaper, but no such luck. How bloody odd!
Edit: it does say he does a lot of sniffing but doesn't dwell on it.
Thanks, but this isn't the article, which absolutely majored on his constant sniffing. It's really strange .... Deacon is a senior guy at the Telegraph and unless he pulled it himself, someone from on high must have done so. Often in such circumstances, it's possible to track something like this down especially since by then it might well have migrated to other sites, but seemingly not in this case.
Mr Deacon usually tweets his columns - worth checking his.
Last night I chanced online upon an article by Michael Deacon, The Daily Telegraph's political sketchwriter, about Jeremy Corbyn's habit of incessant sniffing, despite his not having the least suspicion of a cold nor other obvious medical explanation for this .... and what it might possibly mean from a psychological point of view. I made a mental note to return later and read the piece more fully. When I attempted to do so during the early hours, I was surprised to discover that it had totally disappeared, even a number of varying Google searches failed to discover any trace of it. I still imagined that it might appear in this morning's hard copy of the newspaper, but no such luck. How bloody odd!
Edit: it does say he does a lot of sniffing but doesn't dwell on it.
Thanks, but this isn't the article, which absolutely majored on his constant sniffing. It's really strange .... Deacon is a senior guy at the Telegraph and unless he pulled it himself, someone from on high must have done so. Often in such circumstances, it's possible to track something like this down especially since by then it might well have migrated to other sites, but seemingly not in this case.
I do think he understands how to capture those 30 seconds or 90 seconds and not get hung up on what the press wants him to say, or what the policy wonks at [the] Heritage [Foundation] want him to say, or what I want him to say. I think he’s very gifted at understanding … the American people, and authenticity means more to them. He really is good at coming across as authentic. Debate prep doesn’t solve that, if that’s your problem.
That's a very good read. Trump's basically like no other politician, he can talk absolute bollocks in a way that sounds convincing to even a politically engaged audience, and he's very difficult to manage for the moderator and opponent to control his overwhelming persona.
Tonight's debate is going to be must-watch TV, thats for sure. Now, work to do!
Last night I chanced online upon an article by Michael Deacon, The Daily Telegraph's political sketchwriter, about Jeremy Corbyn's habit of incessant sniffing, despite his not having the least suspicion of a cold nor other obvious medical explanation for this .... and what it might possibly mean from a psychological point of view. I made a mental note to return later and read the piece more fully. When I attempted to do so during the early hours, I was surprised to discover that it had totally disappeared, even a number of varying Google searches failed to discover any trace of it. I still imagined that it might appear in this morning's hard copy of the newspaper, but no such luck. How bloody odd!
Edit: it does say he does a lot of sniffing but doesn't dwell on it.
Thanks, but this isn't the article, which absolutely majored on his constant sniffing. It's really strange .... Deacon is a senior guy at the Telegraph and unless he pulled it himself, someone from on high must have done so. Often in such circumstances, it's possible to track something like this down especially since by then it might well have migrated to other sites, but seemingly not in this case.
If he had been a tory I would have interpreted the article (which I did read, so it was actually a thing) as obvious code for: does a lot of cocaine (which is a right wing drug - the left smokes weed and does mushrooms). Perhaps it was pulled for that reason?
The Internet was invented in the late 1960s, early 1970s in academic institutions, mainly in the USA.
The world wide web was invented by Tim Berners Lee at CERN, Switzerland, in the 1980s.
I think the first packet switch network was ARAPNET which was developed in the USA in the 1960s and funded by the American military for their needs.
In the UK we had JANET (Joint Academic Network), which was also used by some government departments. I remember using it the 1980s with a text interface on Sun Sparc Stations (whatever happened to Sun?). I think Mr. B2 is misremembering the lack of a search function because I can remember searching for academic papers and other matters (NASA had stuff available for example). It was very primitive compared to today that was for sure.
The Internet was invented in the late 1960s, early 1970s in academic institutions, mainly in the USA.
The world wide web was invented by Tim Berners Lee at CERN, Switzerland, in the 1980s.
I think the first packet switch network was ARAPNET which was developed in the USA in the 1960s and funded by the American military for their needs.
In the UK we had JANET (Joint Academic Network), which was also used by some government departments. I remember using it the 1980s with a text interface on Sun Sparc Stations (whatever happened to Sun?). I think Mr. B2 is misremembering the lack of a search function because I can remember searching for academic papers and other matters (NASA had stuff available for example). It was very primitive compared to today that was for sure.
As we are in the mid-morning lull when people actually do some work, I will exercise a personal prejudice.
BBC, who have been able to arrogate to themselves an aura of virtue, insight and understanding without the intelligence, hard work and self-sacrifice traditionally associated with those attributes.
Hitherto they have been able to develop this aesthetic by wearing scruffy jumpers, crumpled linen jackets, faded denims and loosely tied deck shoes and utter a few well-placed diatribes against brexiteers, Daily Mail readers and Tories, together with a self-effacing, modest declaration of support for the Labour party.
.
Saw a great mocking tweet earlier taking the piss out of Caprio and Obama wittering about climate change - when their own behaviour is the carbon footprint of several small countries.
Like Al Gore and his giant house that was jokingly visible from space.
Al Gore never did understand the critism he got for hosting 100 leaders, travelling on 100 planes to some nice island for a summit of pontification about carbon emissions.
Hint: Next time, they should get Cisco Telepresence to sponsor it, a showcase for this new found internet thingy.
Given Al Gore invented teh interwebs - it really was a missed opportunity.
I was very depressed over Hopenhagen media cobblers - and then we got the still anonymous brave soul who leaked ClimateGate emails. I spent days reading them and sharing - appalling manipulation of data and peer group freezing out.
Nothing broke my trust in science as that did.
The Internet was invented in the late 1960s, early 1970s in academic institutions, mainly in the USA.
The world wide web was invented by Tim Berners Lee at CERN, Switzerland, in the 1980s.
Yes, I remember being a relatively early adopter at home in the early 90s, using Netscape. There were hardly any websites, as we now know them. Mostly it provided the opportunity to download academic papers from a few primcipally American universities, which you could do (very slowly, back in dial-up days) provided you already knew the precise address of the paper you wanted before going online!
"But a spirited defense of Gore's statement penned by Internet pioneers Robert Kahn and Vinton Cerf (the latter often referred to as the "father of the Internet") in 2000 noted that "Al Gore was the first political leader to recognize the importance of the Internet and to promote and support its development" and that "No other elected official, to our knowledge, has made a greater contribution [to the Internet] over a longer period of time":"
Poll by @SkyData suggests 45% of Labour supporters think it is unlikely the party will ever win another General Election
To give them some hope, polling in the summer of 1992 would probably have been pretty similar.
But then, they got serious and installed Blair. Chances of that happening again? Close to nil....
At least they know what they have to do. But you're right, today's Labour Party leadership don't appear to care about elections, except to their own NEC.
I voted for Blair in '01; if Labour are going to win again, they need me to at least consider voting for them. Right now, I'm a card-carrying PB Tory, the Labour Party has a long way to go.
Not just you. They need to get people like Plato back on board. And to get folks like me, looking at a pile of leaflets and thinking "what's the point? Labour are going to trounce us...."
You're right about the leaflets. Labour needs to get on with it. It is wealthy.
Pamela Fitzpatrick @CllrFitzpatrick 12h12 hours ago @chunkymark I am hearing BBC has a letter embargoed until tomorrow announcing some of PLP resigning & forming a separate party.
The most absurd thing I heard this morning from McDonnell, amongst many, was him talking about how Labour wanted to work with entrepreneurs. Maybe I know the wrong people, but I think entrepreneurs and business people would run a mile from a Labour government with McDonnell and Corbyn at the helm.
In terms of the comments surrounding Brexit, I broadly agree with McDonnell. There is a need for a more interventionist UK industrial strategy after four decades without anything worthy of the name. There is a need to put in place, urgently, a new set of measures for businesses in UK assisted areas. There is a need to urgently offer much more substantial guarantees to other sectors post Brexit rather than confining this to large scale agri-business. For once, the funding is not in question either, given that we're talking about keeping in place a small fraction of what the country pays over the EU.
The shame for Labour is that this essentially social democratic agenda, which might even by itself be electorally appealing, is compromised by all the other far left economic and other baggage that comes with the far left. Moreover, a public has to trust a shadow Chancellor. Given that McDonnell is meanwhile doing everything possible to cement his reputation as Corbyn's assassin in chief, he'll be trusted no more with a purse than he will be with a knife.
I am very sceptical about these industrial strategies, especially when they include ideas like assisted areas or development zones. We had them in various guises from the 1940s through to the 1980s and they never seemed to do much good and sometimes great harm.
Pamela Fitzpatrick @CllrFitzpatrick 12h12 hours ago @chunkymark I am hearing BBC has a letter embargoed until tomorrow announcing some of PLP resigning & forming a separate party.</blockquot
An Israeli parliamentary correspondent saw his press pass revoked by Momentum just over an hour after it was approved. Jerry Lewis was granted accreditation to Momentum’s “The World Transformed” fringe event at the Labour Conference before they withdrew just 1 hour 22 minutes later when an email told him he had been approved by mistake.
The most absurd thing I heard this morning from McDonnell, amongst many, was him talking about how Labour wanted to work with entrepreneurs. Maybe I know the wrong people, but I think entrepreneurs and business people would run a mile from a Labour government with McDonnell and Corbyn at the helm.
In terms of the comments surrounding Brexit, I broadly agree with McDonnell. There is a need for a more interventionist UK industrial strategy after four decades without anything worthy of the name. There is a need to put in place, urgently, a new set of measures for businesses in UK assisted areas. There is a need to urgently offer much more substantial guarantees to other sectors post Brexit rather than confining this to large scale agri-business. For once, the funding is not in question either, given that we're talking about keeping in place a small fraction of what the country pays over the EU.
The shame for Labour is that this essentially social democratic agenda, which might even by itself be electorally appealing, is compromised by all the other far left economic and other baggage that comes with the far left. Moreover, a public has to trust a shadow Chancellor. Given that McDonnell is meanwhile doing everything possible to cement his reputation as Corbyn's assassin in chief, he'll be trusted no more with a purse than he will be with a knife.
I am very sceptical about these industrial strategies, especially when they include ideas like assisted areas or development zones. We had them in various guises from the 1940s through to the 1980s and they never seemed to do much good and sometimes great harm.
One of the biggest challenges we have is that industrial strategies have been so discredited by our post-war failure that sensible ideas don't get a look in before someone starts rolling their eyes and talking about British Leyland et al.
As for development zones, I don't think London's financial services industry would be on par with New York today without the Docklands redevelopment strategy that gave us a second financial centre.
Miss Plato, point of order: science is great. Scientists, however, are only human. Some make mistakes, and some are rapscallions.
Scientists are indeed only human. The point about the scientific method, though, is that it is self correcting. That is why it has been so successful. Because it is a naturally transparent process that relies on objective evidence, mistakes or attempts to deceive are usually discovered quickly. Scientists love to prove one another wrong!
The most absurd thing I heard this morning from McDonnell, amongst many, was him talking about how Labour wanted to work with entrepreneurs. Maybe I know the wrong people, but I think entrepreneurs and business people would run a mile from a Labour government with McDonnell and Corbyn at the helm.
In terms of the comments surrounding Brexit, I broadly agree with McDonnell. There is a need for a more interventionist UK industrial strategy after four decades without anything worthy of the name. There is a need to put in place, urgently, a new set of measures for businesses in UK assisted areas. There is a need to urgently offer much more substantial guarantees to other sectors post Brexit rather than confining this to large scale agri-business. For once, the funding is not in question either, given that we're talking about keeping in place a small fraction of what the country pays over the EU.
The shame for Labour is that this essentially social democratic agenda, which might even by itself be electorally appealing, is compromised by all the other far left economic and other baggage that comes with the far left. Moreover, a public has to trust a shadow Chancellor. Given that McDonnell is meanwhile doing everything possible to cement his reputation as Corbyn's assassin in chief, he'll be trusted no more with a purse than he will be with a knife.
I am very sceptical about these industrial strategies, especially when they include ideas like assisted areas or development zones. We had them in various guises from the 1940s through to the 1980s and they never seemed to do much good and sometimes great harm.
Nissan Sunderland and Canary Wharf were a couple of development zones that worked well, although I'd imagine that there are dozens of others that failed which we don't hear about. Overall though you would have thought creating a good national framework for business would be better than investing too much time and money in one particular area or idea.
Miss Plato, point of order: science is great. Scientists, however, are only human. Some make mistakes, and some are rapscallions.
Scientists are indeed only human. The point about the scientific method, though, is that it is self correcting. That is why it has been so successful. Because it is a naturally transparent process that relies on objective evidence, mistakes or attempts to deceive are usually discovered quickly. Scientists love to prove one another wrong!
So do politicians, but we don't seem to be making much progress.
The most absurd thing I heard this morning from McDonnell, amongst many, was him talking about how Labour wanted to work with entrepreneurs. Maybe I know the wrong people, but I think entrepreneurs and business people would run a mile from a Labour government with McDonnell and Corbyn at the helm.
In terms of the comments surrounding Brexit, I broadly agree with McDonnell. There is a need for a more interventionist UK industrial strategy after four decades without anything worthy of the name. There is a need to put in place, urgently, a new set of measures for businesses in UK assisted areas. There is a need to urgently offer much more substantial guarantees to other sectors post Brexit rather than confining this to large scale agri-business. For once, the funding is not in question either, given that we're talking about keeping in place a small fraction of what the country pays over the EU.
The shame for Labour is that this essentially social democratic agenda, which might even by itself be electorally appealing, is compromised by all the other far left economic and other baggage that comes with the far left. Moreover, a public has to trust a shadow Chancellor. Given that McDonnell is meanwhile doing everything possible to cement his reputation as Corbyn's assassin in chief, he'll be trusted no more with a purse than he will be with a knife.
I am very sceptical about these industrial strategies, especially when they include ideas like assisted areas or development zones. We had them in various guises from the 1940s through to the 1980s and they never seemed to do much good and sometimes great harm.
On the other hand basic infrastructure is a no brainer.
Our infrastructure is second rate. Housing, broad band, roads, power, airports, the things that make life easier and more efficient.
This country has been skimping for the last 50 years and it shows.
Mr. Enjineeya, yes, although incorrect (or, at best, impartial) views can prevail for decades or even centuries. Newton's perspective on light was held as true and went practically unchallenged for hundreds of years.
Mr. Owls, do you think there will be a split?
I'm about as far outside Labour as can be, but I cannot see it happening. Maybe I'm wrong.
Last night I chanced online upon an article by Michael Deacon, The Daily Telegraph's political sketchwriter, about Jeremy Corbyn's habit of incessant sniffing, despite his not having the least suspicion of a cold nor other obvious medical explanation for this .... and what it might possibly mean from a psychological point of view. I made a mental note to return later and read the piece more fully. When I attempted to do so during the early hours, I was surprised to discover that it had totally disappeared, even a number of varying Google searches failed to discover any trace of it. I still imagined that it might appear in this morning's hard copy of the newspaper, but no such luck. How bloody odd!
Edit: it does say he does a lot of sniffing but doesn't dwell on it.
Thanks, but this isn't the article, which absolutely majored on his constant sniffing. It's really strange .... Deacon is a senior guy at the Telegraph and unless he pulled it himself, someone from on high must have done so. Often in such circumstances, it's possible to track something like this down especially since by then it might well have migrated to other sites, but seemingly not in this case.
If he had been a tory I would have interpreted the article (which I did read, so it was actually a thing) as obvious code for: does a lot of cocaine (which is a right wing drug - the left smokes weed and does mushrooms). Perhaps it was pulled for that reason?
Interesting ..... thank you and I'm pleased to hear I wasn't imagining the whole thing!
Yes, I remember being a relatively early adopter at home in the early 90s, using Netscape. There were hardly any websites, as we now know them. Mostly it provided the opportunity to download academic papers from a few primcipally American universities, which you could do (very slowly, back in dial-up days) provided you already knew the precise address of the paper you wanted before going online!
I think I adopted in 1993, perhaps even in the famous "last September". At one point there were 3 million internet users worldwide, and the number was increasing at a rate of 1 million per month. I got in by dial-up to the university I was working at, then had to browse to CERN through a link at the bottom of the page (it was all text), and from there, out to many different places. Singapore was in there early. Wasn't there a browser called Mosaic? A 14.4k modem was fast.
The Internet was invented in the late 1960s, early 1970s in academic institutions, mainly in the USA.
The world wide web was invented by Tim Berners Lee at CERN, Switzerland, in the 1980s.
I think the first packet switch network was ARAPNET which was developed in the USA in the 1960s and funded by the American military for their needs.
In the UK we had JANET (Joint Academic Network), which was also used by some government departments. I remember using it the 1980s with a text interface on Sun Sparc Stations (whatever happened to Sun?). I think Mr. B2 is misremembering the lack of a search function because I can remember searching for academic papers and other matters (NASA had stuff available for example). It was very primitive compared to today that was for sure.
Sun is part of Oracle now.
Is it by Jove. How the mighty have fallen. I loved those pizza box computers with their enormous (for the time screens) and the three button mice. Horrendously expensive though they were.
If he wins Ohio (likely), Nevada (likely), North Carolina (very likely) and Florida (toss up) he really only needs one of these to put him over the top.
Why has Donald Trump just dropped like a stone on Betfair? He's gone from 2.7 to 2.92 in minutes.
CNN has him up in Colorado, confirming earlier an trend, plus just one point behind in PA. If he wins Colorado he wins the White House, IMO. Worrying times.
The most absurd thing I heard this morning from McDonnell, amongst many, was him talking about how Labour wanted to work with entrepreneurs. Maybe I know the wrong people, but I think entrepreneurs and business people would run a mile from a Labour government with McDonnell and Corbyn at the helm.
In terms of the comments surrounding Brexit, I broadly agree with McDonnell. There is a need for a more interventionist UK industrial strategy after four decades without anything worthy of the name. There is a need to put in place, urgently, a new set of measures for businesses in UK assisted areas. There is a need to urgently offer much more substantial guarantees to other sectors post Brexit rather than confining this to large scale agri-business. For once, the funding is not in question either, given that we're talking about keeping in place a small fraction of what the country pays over the EU.
The shame for Labour is that this essentially social democratic agenda, which might even by itself be electorally appealing, is compromised by all the other far left economic and other baggage that comes with the far left. Moreover, a public has to trust a shadow Chancellor. Given that McDonnell is meanwhile doing everything possible to cement his reputation as Corbyn's assassin in chief, he'll be trusted no more with a purse than he will be with a knife.
I am very sceptical about these industrial strategies, especially when they include ideas like assisted areas or development zones. We had them in various guises from the 1940s through to the 1980s and they never seemed to do much good and sometimes great harm.
On the other hand basic infrastructure is a no brainer.
Our infrastructure is second rate. Housing, broad band, roads, power, airports, the things that make life easier and more efficient.
This country has been skimping for the last 50 years and it shows.
I suspect that a McDonnell industrial strategy would be as wildly successful *cough* as that of Tony Benn in the 70s. Probably worse.
Well targeted infrastructure spending (not Hinckley), on the other hand, is to be welcomed.
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.
Oh by all means criticise her. I'm thinking more of people advocating she be lynched or calling her a stain on humanity or vandalising her office or threatening her parents. They're from the same stable as people calling a Jewish Labour MP a "yid cunt".
The original query was why she attracts particular attention from the hard left. The answer explains why she stands out from other conservative MPs, and also why she might have critics who have no political affiliations at all. It wasn't justifying any of the attacks on her. That people from the right of politics are at the very least just as abusive as those on the left can be established simply by reading this forum. The implicit assumption that any abusive behaviour can automatically be assigned to one particular strand of the left is not correct.
Miss Plato, point of order: science is great. Scientists, however, are only human. Some make mistakes, and some are rapscallions.
As ever, go with the evidence not the people.
Who decides what research gets done and what spin is put on it, with a view to doing what research in future? "Evidence" or people who give out or get big-money grants?
There used to be ice fairs on the Thames, until the climate warmed up so much that they couldn't be held any more. That was before industry. The climate has always changed and it always will. It's natural for it to change. The bought-and-paid-for "knowledgists", or "scientists" to use the Latinate term, haven't got much of a clue why. As for stopping the climate changing, if that isn't an insane anti-nature aim (for some clothed apes with their necks wound right out) then I don't know what is.
A good time for mass resignations would be during the middle of Jezza's conference speech. It would at least wipe the smirk off his face. Don't suppose it will happen.
Mr. Enjineeya, yes, although incorrect (or, at best, impartial) views can prevail for decades or even centuries. Newton's perspective on light was held as true and went practically unchallenged for hundreds of years.
Mr. Owls, do you think there will be a split?
I'm about as far outside Labour as can be, but I cannot see it happening. Maybe I'm wrong.
Although Newton's prestige may have led to his corpuscular theory of light prevailing for longer than it might otherwise have done, even his great stature didn't save it from being abandoned when it was unable to explain experimental phenomena such as diffraction and interference. Evidence trumps everything in science.
A good time for mass resignations would be during the middle of Jezza's conference speech. It would at least wipe the smirk off his face. Don't suppose it will happen.
He'd just smile and say that the reselection process just got a lot easier.
The most absurd thing I heard this morning from McDonnell, amongst many, was him talking about how Labour wanted to work with entrepreneurs. Maybe I know the wrong people, but I think entrepreneurs and business people would run a mile from a Labour government with McDonnell and Corbyn at the helm.
In terms of the comments surrounding Brexit, I broadly agree with McDonnell. There is a need for a more interventionist UK industrial strategy after four decades without anything worthy of the name. There is a need to put in place, urgently, a new set of measures for businesses in UK assisted areas. There is a need to urgently offer much more substantial guarantees to other sectors post Brexit rather than confining this to large scale agri-business. For once, the funding is not in question either, given that we're talking about keeping in place a small fraction of what the country pays over the EU.
The shame for Labour is that this essentially social democratic agenda, which might even by itself be electorally appealing, is compromised by all the other far left economic and other baggage that comes with the far left. Moreover, a public has to trust a shadow Chancellor. Given that McDonnell is meanwhile doing everything possible to cement his reputation as Corbyn's assassin in chief, he'll be trusted no more with a purse than he will be with a knife.
I am very sceptical about these industrial strategies, especially when they include ideas like assisted areas or development zones. We had them in various guises from the 1940s through to the 1980s and they never seemed to do much good and sometimes great harm.
On the other hand basic infrastructure is a no brainer.
Our infrastructure is second rate. Housing, broad band, roads, power, airports, the things that make life easier and more efficient.
This country has been skimping for the last 50 years and it shows.
I suspect that a McDonnell industrial strategy would be as wildly successful *cough* as that of Tony Benn in the 70s. Probably worse.
Well targeted infrastructure spending (not Hinckley), on the other hand, is to be welcomed.
I cant get too excited by Tony Benn's failures, compared to the Brown\Osborne consensus of pushing financial services to be the only pillar of the economy he was a success.
The "New Economy" bollocks has to be the biggest economic failure of modern history and the most expensive to bail out. BL and mining are just loose change by comparison.
If Labour is truly in the meltdown phase that is being suggested on here, then the tactic of giving such a party a free hand in Batley and Spen is surely open to very serious question.
At last, there's a spreads market on the ECV. Spreadex go 280-290 Clinton ECV. They also have a market on states won (Clinton 22.25-23.75).
Sporting Index still only have a binary index market (and a very uncompetitive one at that).
The Clinton ECV market is interesting but somewhat dangerous, because on current polling you might expect 280-290 to be a sell (RCP's 'No tossups' is currently 272), and the polling trend seems to be in Trump's favour at the moment. But it would only take sentiment on Florida to flip, and you're suddenly 29 ECVs worse off.
Miss Plato, point of order: science is great. Scientists, however, are only human. Some make mistakes, and some are rapscallions.
As ever, go with the evidence not the people.
Who decides what research gets done and what spin is put on it, with a view to doing what research in future? "Evidence" or people who give out or get big-money grants?
There used to be ice fairs on the Thames, until the climate warmed up so much that they couldn't be held any more. That was before industry. The climate has always changed and it always will. It's natural for it to change. The bought-and-paid-for "knowledgists", or "scientists" to use the Latinate term, haven't got much of a clue why. As for stopping the climate changing, if that isn't an insane anti-nature aim (for some clothed apes with their necks wound right out) then I don't know what is.
A good time for mass resignations would be during the middle of Jezza's conference speech. It would at least wipe the smirk off his face. Don't suppose it will happen.
It's lunchtime and I still can't even cross off my first five bar gate. Only 1 down and allegedly 83 to go......
Miss Plato, point of order: science is great. Scientists, however, are only human. Some make mistakes, and some are rapscallions.
As ever, go with the evidence not the people.
Who decides what research gets done and what spin is put on it, with a view to doing what research in future? "Evidence" or people who give out or get big-money grants?
There used to be ice fairs on the Thames, until the climate warmed up so much that they couldn't be held any more. That was before industry. The climate has always changed and it always will. It's natural for it to change. The bought-and-paid-for "knowledgists", or "scientists" to use the Latinate term, haven't got much of a clue why. As for stopping the climate changing, if that isn't an insane anti-nature aim (for some clothed apes with their necks wound right out) then I don't know what is.
Indeed. You might just as well dismiss a housefire with the assertion, "Yes, the temperature in the lounge always changes. It was much warmer last summer than it is now."
At last, there's a spreads market on the ECV. Spreadex go 280-290 Clinton ECV. They also have a market on states won (Clinton 22.25-23.75).
Sporting Index still only have a binary index market (and a very uncompetitive one at that).
The Clinton ECV market is interesting but somewhat dangerous, because on current polling you might expect 280-290 to be a sell (RCP's 'No tossups' is currently 272), and the polling trend seems to be in Trump's favour at the moment. But it would only take sentiment on Florida to flip, and you're suddenly 29 ECVs worse off.
No bet for me so far.
Spreads on the ECV are dangerous. Two or three percent in two or three states could be a 100 ECV swing one way or the other!
At last, there's a spreads market on the ECV. Spreadex go 280-290 Clinton ECV. They also have a market on states won (Clinton 22.25-23.75).
Sporting Index still only have a binary index market (and a very uncompetitive one at that).
The Clinton ECV market is interesting but somewhat dangerous, because on current polling you might expect 280-290 to be a sell (RCP's 'No tossups' is currently 272), and the polling trend seems to be in Trump's favour at the moment. But it would only take sentiment on Florida to flip, and you're suddenly 29 ECVs worse off.
No bet for me so far.
Even though the polling is close, I can forsee an electoral college landslide for either one candidate or the other. I think Clinton 285 ECVs is a fair midpoint - but the uncertainty this year is enormous in my opinion.
Mr. Taffys, too late to change now. It was wrong then and is wrong now for major parties to stand aside (after all, an election is meant to be a choice). They can't participate now, even if time permitted, because they withdrew on moral grounds.
Mr. Taffys, too late to change now. It was wrong then and is wrong now for major parties to stand aside (after all, an election is meant to be a choice). They can't participate now, even if time permitted, because they withdrew on moral grounds.
There is no right moral solution to what happened in Batley and Spen.
If Labour is truly in the meltdown phase that is being suggested on here, then the tactic of giving such a party a free hand in Batley and Spen is surely open to very serious question.
Yes, but it's politically bloody difficult for the Cons or LDs to change their mind about not standing now, given the circumstances.
Must be a good opportunity for UKIP to pick up a seat, if supporters of the blues make an effort to get behind them.
A good time for mass resignations would be during the middle of Jezza's conference speech. It would at least wipe the smirk off his face. Don't suppose it will happen.
It's lunchtime and I still can't even cross off my first five bar gate. Only 1 down and allegedly 83 to go......
Buying Hillary on the spreads is probably fairly safe in the short term. There seems to be a lot of support for her on the betting markets on the sketchiest of good news and a resistance to giving full weight to bad news for her even on quite solid bad news. If she did well in the debate tonight, you could expect to see her price rise a fair bit while if she did badly it might not fall much.
That doesn't mean that she's a good long term buy.
@iainjwatson: Len mccluskey of unite tells #lab16 those who don't support the leadership should 'depart the stage' (does a Shakespearian tragedy await?)
Buying Hillary on the spreads is probably fairly safe in the short term. There seems to be a lot of support for her on the betting markets on the sketchiest of good news and a resistance to giving full weight to bad news for her even on quite solid bad news. If she did well in the debate tonight, you could expect to see her price rise a fair bit while if she did badly it might not fall much.
That doesn't mean that she's a good long term buy.
It reminds me a bit of a certain "Con supremacy" spread bet sell placed by someone here who got stuck for 'a few quid'...
On the other hand basic infrastructure is a no brainer.
Our infrastructure is second rate. Housing, broad band, roads, power, airports, the things that make life easier and more efficient.
This country has been skimping for the last 50 years and it shows.
I think I would agree with that Mr. Brooke, and having driven up to Leeds and back this last weekend it would seem that at least on the motorway network serious money is now being invested.
That said, I think we are patching and bodging rather than actually doing some creative big thinking. The M25, for example, seems permanently overloaded in certain sections (from the M40 to the M3 especially). Once there used to be certain times of day when this section would clog up and the knowing would avoid them but now it seems to be solid in in at least one section from about 08:00 to 20:00, seven days a week. And they want to put even more traffic on it to expand Heathrow.
However, there is only so much money available to HMG and if you take out of that sum the money needed to ringfence the areas that are untouchable, for political reasons, then maybe there isn't a lot left for infrastructure.
If Labour is truly in the meltdown phase that is being suggested on here, then the tactic of giving such a party a free hand in Batley and Spen is surely open to very serious question.
Yes, but it's politically bloody difficult for the Cons or LDs to change their mind about not standing now, given the circumstances.
Must be a good opportunity for UKIP to pick up a seat, if supporters of the blues make an effort to get behind them.
@iainjwatson: Len mccluskey of unite tells #lab16 those who don't support the leadership should 'depart the stage' (does a Shakespearian tragedy await?)
@iainjwatson: Len mccluskey of unite tells #lab16 those who don't support the leadership should 'depart the stage' (does a Shakespearian tragedy await?)
I know it's been said a million times, but I can't get over how this is always trotted out, given Corbyn and McDonnell's looong history of not supporting the party leadership.
EDIT: I'm not good with irrationality, which characterises much of the Corbynite mindset.
Laura Kuenssberg @bbclaurak 44s44 seconds ago McDonnell expected to make big announcement, labour would raise minimum wage to £10 an hour by 2020 - details in his speech soon
Laura Kuenssberg @bbclaurak 44s44 seconds ago McDonnell expected to make big announcement, labour would raise minimum wage to £10 an hour by 2020 - details in his speech soon
er, they are not in power and wont be until at least may 2020 (and not then either)
On the other hand basic infrastructure is a no brainer.
Our infrastructure is second rate. Housing, broad band, roads, power, airports, the things that make life easier and more efficient.
This country has been skimping for the last 50 years and it shows.
I think I would agree with that Mr. Brooke, and having driven up to Leeds and back this last weekend it would seem that at least on the motorway network serious money is now being invested.
I live between J30 and 31, and can';t work out quite what has been done on the motorway. There seem to have been speed restrictions for ages and a large purple pipe has been put down the middle of the carriageways...
Laura Kuenssberg @bbclaurak 44s44 seconds ago McDonnell expected to make big announcement, labour would raise minimum wage to £10 an hour by 2020 - details in his speech soon
Magic money sequoia.
Hmm. Or not, given what's going to happen anyway...
Laura Kuenssberg @bbclaurak 44s44 seconds ago McDonnell expected to make big announcement, labour would raise minimum wage to £10 an hour by 2020 - details in his speech soon
er, they are not in power and wont be until at least may 2020 (and not then either)
@iainjwatson: Len mccluskey of unite tells #lab16 those who don't support the leadership should 'depart the stage' (does a Shakespearian tragedy await?)
Only if pursued by a bear....
russian bear probably given corbyn's and len's support for putin.
@PolhomeEditor: NEW: Clive Lewis forced by Seumas Milne to ditch pledge not to change Labour's pro-Trident policy bit.ly/2cPlKKc pic.twitter.com/Gy2qJbNpPm
Laura Kuenssberg @bbclaurak 44s44 seconds ago McDonnell expected to make big announcement, labour would raise minimum wage to £10 an hour by 2020 - details in his speech soon
So the big announcement is basically they are going to match the Tories plus a little bit? Or is this £10 for even 16 year olds (which is a brilliant way to make sure 16-24 year olds are extremely unattractive to employ).
If Labour is truly in the meltdown phase that is being suggested on here, then the tactic of giving such a party a free hand in Batley and Spen is surely open to very serious question.
Yes, but it's politically bloody difficult for the Cons or LDs to change their mind about not standing now, given the circumstances.
Must be a good opportunity for UKIP to pick up a seat, if supporters of the blues make an effort to get behind them.
I understand why the other parties said what they did in the heat of the battle in June, but it's looking a little silly now to give Corbyn a free pass.
Laura Kuenssberg @bbclaurak 44s44 seconds ago McDonnell expected to make big announcement, labour would raise minimum wage to £10 an hour by 2020 - details in his speech soon
Magic money sequoia.
Is anyone keeping track of labours borrowing/ spending pledges? Seems like they're just chucking money around everywhere
@PolhomeEditor: NEW: Clive Lewis forced by Seumas Milne to ditch pledge not to change Labour's pro-Trident policy bit.ly/2cPlKKc pic.twitter.com/Gy2qJbNpPm
don't they have to do something boring like go to conference for a vote? They spent all day on TV going on about democracy and members etc etc.
Laura Kuenssberg @bbclaurak 44s44 seconds ago McDonnell expected to make big announcement, labour would raise minimum wage to £10 an hour by 2020 - details in his speech soon
Magic money sequoia.
Is anyone keeping track of labours borrowing/ spending pledges? Seems like they're just chucking money around everywhere
£100bn extra is what they are going to borrow invest..
Laura Kuenssberg @bbclaurak 44s44 seconds ago McDonnell expected to make big announcement, labour would raise minimum wage to £10 an hour by 2020 - details in his speech soon
Magic money sequoia.
Is anyone keeping track of labours borrowing/ spending pledges? Seems like they're just chucking money around everywhere
You can say what you like when you're unelectable. Look at the hilarious promises from the Green Party (or the LibDems, before that MO bit them on the arse).
Laura Kuenssberg @bbclaurak 44s44 seconds ago McDonnell expected to make big announcement, labour would raise minimum wage to £10 an hour by 2020 - details in his speech soon
And put everyone whose labour is subsequently no longer competitive with the outside world on the dole.
Comments
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/09/26/what_its_like_to_debate_trump_131882.html
I do think he understands how to capture those 30 seconds or 90 seconds and not get hung up on what the press wants him to say, or what the policy wonks at [the] Heritage [Foundation] want him to say, or what I want him to say. I think he’s very gifted at understanding … the American people, and authenticity means more to them. He really is good at coming across as authentic. Debate prep doesn’t solve that, if that’s your problem.
The shame for Labour is that this essentially social democratic agenda, which might even by itself be electorally appealing, is compromised by all the other far left economic and other baggage that comes with the far left. Moreover, a public has to trust a shadow Chancellor. Given that McDonnell is meanwhile doing everything possible to cement his reputation as Corbyn's assassin in chief, he'll be trusted no more with a purse than he will be with a knife.
Another story this morning, Momentum withdraws press accreditation from Jewish journalist at their side-conference. http://order-order.com/2016/09/26/momentum-withdraw-israeli-radio-journalist-press-accreditation/
Clinton was leading by 4 In the previous poll in August, and by 12 in the poll in June.
At this rate, Trump will be leading by 8 to 12 points by Election Day.
And Scott Adams' prediction of a historic Trump landslide will be proven correct.
https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-09-26/national-poll
Tonight's debate is going to be must-watch TV, thats for sure. Now, work to do!
There's a lot factors going on here.
In the UK we had JANET (Joint Academic Network), which was also used by some government departments. I remember using it the 1980s with a text interface on Sun Sparc Stations (whatever happened to Sun?). I think Mr. B2 is misremembering the lack of a search function because I can remember searching for academic papers and other matters (NASA had stuff available for example). It was very primitive compared to today that was for sure.
Clinton 1.675 (59.7%)
Trump 2.68 (37.3%)
Crossover tonight?
Is this the first time Clinton has gone below 60% at Betfair?
http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp
@chunkymark I am hearing BBC has a letter embargoed until tomorrow announcing some of PLP resigning & forming a separate party.
http://order-order.com/2016/09/26/momentum-withdraw-israeli-radio-journalist-press-accreditation/
As for development zones, I don't think London's financial services industry would be on par with New York today without the Docklands redevelopment strategy that gave us a second financial centre.
Our infrastructure is second rate. Housing, broad band, roads, power, airports, the things that make life easier and more efficient.
This country has been skimping for the last 50 years and it shows.
Mr. Owls, do you think there will be a split?
I'm about as far outside Labour as can be, but I cannot see it happening. Maybe I'm wrong.
New CNN/ORC polls.
Trump leading by 1 in Colorado & only 1 point behind in Pennsylvania.
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/09/26/politics/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-colorado-pennsylvania-polls/index.html?sr=twCNN092616donald-trump-hillary-clinton-colorado-pennsylvania-polls1027AMVODtopLink&linkId=29195816
Choo choo.
My last move was to buy at 3.1
If.
I suspect that a McDonnell industrial strategy would be as wildly successful *cough* as that of Tony Benn in the 70s. Probably worse.
Well targeted infrastructure spending (not Hinckley), on the other hand, is to be welcomed.
I guess you could have scalped some extra profit by selling at 2.7 and buying back at 2.94
But who knows which way his price will move next ?
How does everyone have their books balanced at the moment ?
https://xkcd.com/1732/
The "New Economy" bollocks has to be the biggest economic failure of modern history and the most expensive to bail out. BL and mining are just loose change by comparison.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-37470962
Sporting Index still only have a binary index market (and a very uncompetitive one at that).
The Clinton ECV market is interesting but somewhat dangerous, because on current polling you might expect 280-290 to be a sell (RCP's 'No tossups' is currently 272), and the polling trend seems to be in Trump's favour at the moment. But it would only take sentiment on Florida to flip, and you're suddenly 29 ECVs worse off.
No bet for me so far.
*puts popcorn away for tonight's debate*
Must be a good opportunity for UKIP to pick up a seat, if supporters of the blues make an effort to get behind them.
That doesn't mean that she's a good long term buy.
That said, I think we are patching and bodging rather than actually doing some creative big thinking. The M25, for example, seems permanently overloaded in certain sections (from the M40 to the M3 especially). Once there used to be certain times of day when this section would clog up and the knowing would avoid them but now it seems to be solid in in at least one section from about 08:00 to 20:00, seven days a week. And they want to put even more traffic on it to expand Heathrow.
However, there is only so much money available to HMG and if you take out of that sum the money needed to ringfence the areas that are untouchable, for political reasons, then maybe there isn't a lot left for infrastructure.
EDIT: I'm not good with irrationality, which characterises much of the Corbynite mindset.
Jeremy Corbyn protesting against the abolition of the Shadow Cabinet minister for mental health, abolished by him.
http://order-order.com/2016/09/26/jez-protests-against-himself/
McDonnell expected to make big announcement, labour would raise minimum wage to £10 an hour by 2020 - details in his speech soon
Hmm. Or not, given what's going to happen anyway...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batley_and_Spen_by-election,_2016
I understand why the other parties said what they did in the heat of the battle in June, but it's looking a little silly now to give Corbyn a free pass.
borrowinvest..