Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Thurday’s Sleaford and North Hykeham – A certain CON hold or c

SystemSystem Posts: 11,015
edited December 2016 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Thurday’s Sleaford and North Hykeham – A certain CON hold or could we see a surprise?

"undefined"==typeof window.datawrapper&&(window.datawrapper={}),window.datawrapper["FKVFy"]={},window.datawrapper["FKVFy"].embedDeltas={"100":476.8,"200":394.8,"300":367.8,"400":367.8,"500":340.8,"600":340.8,"700":340.8,"800":340.8,"900":340.8,"1000":340.8},window.datawrapper["FKVFy"].iframe=document.getElementById("datawrapper-chart-FKVFy"),window.datawrapper["FKVFy"].iframe.style.height=window.datawrapper["FKVFy"].embedDeltas[Math.min(1e3,Math.max(100*Math.floor(window.datawrapper["FKVFy"].iframe.offsetWidth/100),100))]+"px",window.addEventListener("message",function(a){if("undefined"!=typeof a.data["datawrapper-height"])for(var b in a.data["datawrapper-height"])"FKVFy"==b&&(window.datawrapper["FKVFy"].iframe.style.height=a.data["datawrapper-height"][b]+"px")});

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,938
    edited December 2016
    Thirst.

    There could well be a surprise. After the year we've just been through it would be a surprise for there not to be a surprise. ;)
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,914
    Tranmere Rovers star Dr Nuttall ?
  • Options
    KenKen Posts: 24
    UKIP were 20/1 with William Hill on Saturday, 7/1 on Sunday, 9/2 by Monday and 4/1 today. I slapped my fiver down on Sunday, so am quite hoping for some beer money and bragging rights this weekend.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,914
    I'm on the Tories here at 1-7, and Labour 2nd @ 15-2 fwiw.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859
    edited December 2016
    Ken said:

    UKIP were 20/1 with William Hill on Saturday, 7/1 on Sunday, 9/2 by Monday and 4/1 today. I slapped my fiver down on Sunday, so am quite hoping for some beer money and bragging rights this weekend.

    Hills now have the Tories at 1/7 - that's better than Betfair's lay price :)
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,914
    Sandpit said:

    Ken said:

    UKIP were 20/1 with William Hill on Saturday, 7/1 on Sunday, 9/2 by Monday and 4/1 today. I slapped my fiver down on Sunday, so am quite hoping for some beer money and bragging rights this weekend.

    .
    Laddies 1-7 Tories. 4-1 UKIP I think.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,914
    edited December 2016
    Off topic:

    How can a plane cost $4 Billion ?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38221579

    Trump's right on this one. It's ridiculous.

    I bet it is a cost + contract for Boeing...
  • Options
    Pulpstar said:

    Off topic:

    How can a plane cost $4 Billion ?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38221579

    Trump's right on this one. It's ridiculous.

    I bet it is a cost + contract for Boeing...

    Buy Airbus, Donald!

    The wings are made in the UK :)
  • Options
    Mr. Jessop, no-one expects the Spanish 250/1 winner ;)
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859
    Pulpstar said:

    Sandpit said:

    Ken said:

    UKIP were 20/1 with William Hill on Saturday, 7/1 on Sunday, 9/2 by Monday and 4/1 today. I slapped my fiver down on Sunday, so am quite hoping for some beer money and bragging rights this weekend.

    .
    Laddies 1-7 Tories. 4-1 UKIP I think.
    Ignore me, I didn't read the original post and edited mine while I went away and did my research!

    Like your new avatar by the way, very good summary of 2016.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,954
    There are two interesting questions for me:

    Firstly, is ukip getting its organisation together? Can it mount a campaign and make substantial gains in a by election campaign? I don't expect them to win, but if they were to make progress, that would be a clear sign that they still have a role in post Brexit politics.

    Secondly, will Labour crash and burn? Could they slip to fourth? If they go significantly backwards, that's a clear sign that Corbyn continues to go down like a bowl of cold sick.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,954
    I works expect the LibDems to make good progress, managing north of 10% in a low turnout contest.
  • Options
    murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,040
    I'm gunning for Lincs Ind - are they standing again?
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859
    edited December 2016
    Pulpstar said:

    Off topic:

    How can a plane cost $4 Billion ?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38221579

    Trump's right on this one. It's ridiculous.

    I bet it is a cost + contract for Boeing...

    FPT:
    Sandpit said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    Donald J Trump
    Boeing is building a brand new 747 Air Force One for future presidents, but costs are out of control, more than $4 billion. Cancel order!

    LOL. The news AF1 planes are based on the new 747-8, the current ones are 747-200s from the 1980s underneath, but heavily modified. They're getting very old now, although have very few hours on them. Trump's existing 757 is probably better equipped inside, and he doesn't see why he can't just carry on using that plane and save money!

    The cost overruns are of course the various military requirements, which have to be built for only two three planes. These include extra doors, inflight refuelling capability (with the 747 on the receiving end!), lots of communications stuff and some secret squirrel bits and pieces thought to include flares and chaff.

    The Wiki article on AF1 is quite comprehensive.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_VC-25
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859

    Pulpstar said:

    Off topic:

    How can a plane cost $4 Billion ?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38221579

    Trump's right on this one. It's ridiculous.

    I bet it is a cost + contract for Boeing...

    Buy Airbus, Donald!

    The wings are made in the UK :)
    Airbus refused to bid for the contract, because they would have had to build them in the USA.
  • Options
    SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    If there is not much ground information from that by-election I would be too bored to bet on it based on past results there.
  • Options
    MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    PaddyPower has betting without Con as

    UKIP 1/4
    LDem 11/2
    Lab 15/2
    Linc Ind 16/1

    I have not heard that UKIP have been working on hard , rather the opposite , that their campaign is short of both money and activists on the ground .
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,954
    Just so everyone knows, I have banned SeanT, because I'm capricious.
  • Options
    murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,040
    SeanT said:

    fpt because this is important; people are just accepting pinkrose's drivel



    pinkrose said:

    "Of course I agree [that male testimony is worth more in court than women's], as it protects women. We are different in Islam with differing rights and responsibilities, Allahu Alam.

    “Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has made one of them to excel the other, and because they spend (to support them) from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient (to Allah and to their husbands).

    [al-Nisaa’ 4:34] "

    ****

    And there it is. You admit it. You openly admit it.

    Now let's say you agreed that the testimony of white people should be worth twice as much as black people in court as white people are the protectors of black people, given that blacks and whites are not equal. There is no moral difference between the two positions.

    It is utterly inconceivable that Mike would allow you to spout such hateful racist bilge on his site, he's banned people for less. Yet because you're a "Muslim" you're given a special pass to spit your rubbish opinions: that some people are inherently unequal to others, that some are born with fewer rights just because.

    It's repugnant. Your religion is repugnant. But it's good that you are willing to admit it.

    Sean - he/she is trolling. don't fall for it!
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,938
    edited December 2016
    Pulpstar said:

    Off topic:

    How can a plane cost $4 Billion ?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38221579

    Trump's right on this one. It's ridiculous.

    I bet it is a cost + contract for Boeing...

    They're complex beasts, and essentially one-offs. But this is nothing: the scandal of the AW101 Marine 1 helicopter replacement was hilarious.

    By this time, cost estimates had ballooned to more than $13 billion.[9] The Government Accountability Office issued a report in March 2011 that pointed to three sources for the cost overruns. First, asking for development at the same time as production led to extensive retrofitting of built models. Second, a full-scale review of the system's requirements did not occur until four months after production started. Only then was it discovered that the VH-71's design could not meet the system's needs. Third, DOD and the White House asked for excessive combat and communications capabilities.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_One#Development_of_replacement_helicopter

    How *not* to run a project, writ large.
  • Options
    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Off topic:

    How can a plane cost $4 Billion ?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38221579

    Trump's right on this one. It's ridiculous.

    I bet it is a cost + contract for Boeing...

    Buy Airbus, Donald!

    The wings are made in the UK :)
    Airbus refused to bid for the contract, because they would have had to build them in the USA.
    *facepalm*
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,961
    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Off topic:

    How can a plane cost $4 Billion ?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38221579

    Trump's right on this one. It's ridiculous.

    I bet it is a cost + contract for Boeing...

    FPT:
    Sandpit said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    Donald J Trump
    Boeing is building a brand new 747 Air Force One for future presidents, but costs are out of control, more than $4 billion. Cancel order!

    LOL. The news AF1 planes are based on the new 747-8, the current ones are 747-200s from the 1980s underneath, but heavily modified. They're getting very old now, although have very few hours on them. Trump's existing 757 is probably better equipped inside, and he doesn't see why he can't just carry on using that plane and save money!

    The cost overruns are of course the various military requirements, which have to be built for only two three planes. These include extra doors, inflight refuelling capability (with the 747 on the receiving end!), lots of communications stuff and some secret squirrel bits and pieces thought to include flares and chaff.

    The Wiki article on AF1 is quite comprehensive.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_VC-25
    And that escape pod can't be cheap ;)
  • Options

    Pulpstar said:

    Off topic:

    How can a plane cost $4 Billion ?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38221579

    Trump's right on this one. It's ridiculous.

    I bet it is a cost + contract for Boeing...

    Buy Airbus, Donald!

    The wings are made in the UK :)
    That's the problem. American national security interests (and not protectionism, let us be clear here) demand the whole plane is nailed together inside the United States. Airbus could arrange that but they'd want an even bigger sack of cash.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859
    edited December 2016

    Pulpstar said:

    Off topic:

    How can a plane cost $4 Billion ?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38221579

    Trump's right on this one. It's ridiculous.

    I bet it is a cost + contract for Boeing...

    They're complex beasts, and essentially one-offs. But this is nothing: the scandal of the AW101 Marine 1 helicopter replacement was hilarious.
    By this time, cost estimates had ballooned to more than $13 billion.[9] The Government Accountability Office issued a report in March 2011 that pointed to three sources for the cost overruns. First, asking for development at the same time as production led to extensive retrofitting of built models. Second, a full-scale review of the system's requirements did not occur until four months after production started. Only then was it discovered that the VH-71's design could not meet the system's needs. Third, DOD and the White House asked for excessive combat and communications capabilities.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_One#Development_of_replacement_helicopter

    How *not* to run a project, writ large.
    That's a little project screwup - the F35 is a couple of orders of magnitude worse.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II

    The program is the most expensive military weapons system in history, and it has been the object of much criticism from those inside and outside government—in the US and in allied countries.[17] Critics argue that the plane is "plagued with design flaws," with many blaming the procurement process in which Lockheed was allowed "to design, test, and produce the F-35 all at the same time, instead of ... [identifying and fixing] defects before firing up its production line."[17] By 2014, the program was "$163 billion over budget [and] seven years behind schedule."[18] Critics further contend that the program's high sunk costs and political momentum make it "too big to kill."[19]
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,914
    I gone for the "Full Bristow" on the Tories at 1-7.

    Onnnnnnnnnnneeeeeeeeee Hundredddddddddddd and Aiiiiiiiiiiteeeeehhhhhhhh
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,938
    Off-topic:

    Some of the techies might like the following about two young girls who have manufactured rovers and other robots. One has been used by the New York Hall of Science, and are building a prototype Lunar rover for a British firm.

    http://beatty-robotics.com/

    Even with some parental help, quite amazing. I'm going to have to up my expectations for the little 'un ;)
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,961
    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Off topic:

    How can a plane cost $4 Billion ?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38221579

    Trump's right on this one. It's ridiculous.

    I bet it is a cost + contract for Boeing...

    They're complex beasts, and essentially one-offs. But this is nothing: the scandal of the AW101 Marine 1 helicopter replacement was hilarious.
    By this time, cost estimates had ballooned to more than $13 billion.[9] The Government Accountability Office issued a report in March 2011 that pointed to three sources for the cost overruns. First, asking for development at the same time as production led to extensive retrofitting of built models. Second, a full-scale review of the system's requirements did not occur until four months after production started. Only then was it discovered that the VH-71's design could not meet the system's needs. Third, DOD and the White House asked for excessive combat and communications capabilities.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_One#Development_of_replacement_helicopter

    How *not* to run a project, writ large.
    That's a little project screwup - the F35 is a couple of orders of magnitude worse.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II

    The program is the most expensive military weapons system in history, and it has been the object of much criticism from those inside and outside government—in the US and in allied countries.[17] Critics argue that the plane is "plagued with design flaws," with many blaming the procurement process in which Lockheed was allowed "to design, test, and produce the F-35 all at the same time, instead of ... [identifying and fixing] defects before firing up its production line."[17] By 2014, the program was "$163 billion over budget [and] seven years behind schedule."[18] Critics further contend that the program's high sunk costs and political momentum make it "too big to kill."[19]
    I always wonder why the US thinks it needs 1,800 fighter jets.
  • Options
    SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    edited December 2016

    Pulpstar said:

    Off topic:

    How can a plane cost $4 Billion ?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38221579

    Trump's right on this one. It's ridiculous.

    I bet it is a cost + contract for Boeing...

    They're complex beasts, and essentially one-offs. But this is nothing: the scandal of the AW101 Marine 1 helicopter replacement was hilarious.

    By this time, cost estimates had ballooned to more than $13 billion.[9] The Government Accountability Office issued a report in March 2011 that pointed to three sources for the cost overruns. First, asking for development at the same time as production led to extensive retrofitting of built models. Second, a full-scale review of the system's requirements did not occur until four months after production started. Only then was it discovered that the VH-71's design could not meet the system's needs. Third, DOD and the White House asked for excessive combat and communications capabilities.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_One#Development_of_replacement_helicopter

    How *not* to run a project, writ large.
    Smaller numbers but TSR2 rings bells in this respect
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,954

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Off topic:

    How can a plane cost $4 Billion ?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38221579

    Trump's right on this one. It's ridiculous.

    I bet it is a cost + contract for Boeing...

    Buy Airbus, Donald!

    The wings are made in the UK :)
    Airbus refused to bid for the contract, because they would have had to build them in the USA.
    *facepalm*
    Airbus builds the A320 series in Alabama. I suspect that they simply couldn't afford a production line for a modified a350 in the US.
  • Options
    MonksfieldMonksfield Posts: 2,203
    FPT

    SeanT your article on brexit as childbirth:

    The success of your premise, and I don't deny there is a prospect of success, is making the lives of people who voted for Brexit better. This will require corporate entities to change their modus operandi. However, I see little evidence that that will happen.

    Globalisation has been the driver of the misery that drove Brexit, to a far greater extent than Europe, which was a mere symptom. If May makes business share their spoils then I will applaud. But if she defends the vested interests who fund her at the expense of ordinary people she and the Tories will deserve everything they get.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859
    rcs1000 said:

    Just so everyone knows, I have banned SeanT, because I'm capricious.

    LOL - you're capricious or he's capricious?
  • Options
    Pulpstar said:

    I'm on the Tories here at 1-7, and Labour 2nd @ 15-2 fwiw.

    Who is betting on the runner-up?
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859
    edited December 2016
    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Off topic:

    How can a plane cost $4 Billion ?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38221579

    Trump's right on this one. It's ridiculous.

    I bet it is a cost + contract for Boeing...

    Buy Airbus, Donald!

    The wings are made in the UK :)
    Airbus refused to bid for the contract, because they would have had to build them in the USA.
    *facepalm*
    Airbus builds the A320 series in Alabama. I suspect that they simply couldn't afford a production line for a modified a350 in the US.
    Wiki reckons the Airbus requirement was for 3x A380s. No twinjets and ETOPS flights for POTUS.

    More likely they only even approached Airbus in the first place to stop them complaining about state aid to Boeing by not allowing AB the opportunity.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,914

    Pulpstar said:

    I'm on the Tories here at 1-7, and Labour 2nd @ 15-2 fwiw.

    Who is betting on the runner-up?
    Ladbrokes and Hills.
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    edited December 2016
    Deleted
  • Options
    pinkrosepinkrose Posts: 189
    edited December 2016
    FPT

    pinkrose said:



    Do you agree with Sharia Law? Do you wish to live under Sharia Law?


    Of course I agree with the Shariah of Allah. How can one claim to be a Muslim but not want to live with Islam as the governing system? If you believe in the Justice of the Shariah and Islam, why would you not want it? But there are strict conditions that have to be fulfilled for a true Islamic State to be established in the Lands of Islam and the Shariah to be implemented upon the people and this is a matter for the Ulama and the Leaders, not for the average Muslim who does not possess the correct knowledge or authority. The Ulama are against the fake "Caliphate" of Daesh.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,954
    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Off topic:

    How can a plane cost $4 Billion ?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38221579

    Trump's right on this one. It's ridiculous.

    I bet it is a cost + contract for Boeing...

    Buy Airbus, Donald!

    The wings are made in the UK :)
    Airbus refused to bid for the contract, because they would have had to build them in the USA.
    *facepalm*
    Airbus builds the A320 series in Alabama. I suspect that they simply couldn't afford a production line for a modified a350 in the US.
    Wiki reckons the Airbus requirement was for 3x A380s. No twinjets for POTUS.

    More likely they only even approached Airbus in the first place to stop them complaining about state aid to Boeing by not allowing AB the opportunity.
    Given a380 production is well below plans, there is no chance they'd create an additional production lines in the US just for three planes.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,954
    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Off topic:

    How can a plane cost $4 Billion ?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38221579

    Trump's right on this one. It's ridiculous.

    I bet it is a cost + contract for Boeing...

    They're complex beasts, and essentially one-offs. But this is nothing: the scandal of the AW101 Marine 1 helicopter replacement was hilarious.
    By this time, cost estimates had ballooned to more than $13 billion.[9] The Government Accountability Office issued a report in March 2011 that pointed to three sources for the cost overruns. First, asking for development at the same time as production led to extensive retrofitting of built models. Second, a full-scale review of the system's requirements did not occur until four months after production started. Only then was it discovered that the VH-71's design could not meet the system's needs. Third, DOD and the White House asked for excessive combat and communications capabilities.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_One#Development_of_replacement_helicopter

    How *not* to run a project, writ large.
    That's a little project screwup - the F35 is a couple of orders of magnitude worse.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II

    The program is the most expensive military weapons system in history, and it has been the object of much criticism from those inside and outside government—in the US and in allied countries.[17] Critics argue that the plane is "plagued with design flaws," with many blaming the procurement process in which Lockheed was allowed "to design, test, and produce the F-35 all at the same time, instead of ... [identifying and fixing] defects before firing up its production line."[17] By 2014, the program was "$163 billion over budget [and] seven years behind schedule."[18] Critics further contend that the program's high sunk costs and political momentum make it "too big to kill."[19]
    Jesus, that's worse than Gorgon LNG
  • Options
    rcs1000 said:

    Just so everyone knows, I have banned SeanT, because I'm capricious.

    But should we be able to quote Sean T's posts?

    Should we even be able to refute Sean T's posts while he doesn't have the right to reply?

    Do we need eleven Judge Lords to decide?

  • Options
    DadgeDadge Posts: 2,038

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Off topic:

    How can a plane cost $4 Billion ?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38221579

    Trump's right on this one. It's ridiculous.

    I bet it is a cost + contract for Boeing...

    Buy Airbus, Donald!

    The wings are made in the UK :)
    Airbus refused to bid for the contract, because they would have had to build them in the USA.
    *facepalm*
    I sypathise with Airbus. Part of the point of manufacturung Airbus is to provide employment in Europe. Building them in the US rather defeats that object.
  • Options
    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I'm on the Tories here at 1-7, and Labour 2nd @ 15-2 fwiw.

    Who is betting on the runner-up?
    Ladbrokes and Hills.
    Thanks. I've taken 10/1 from Shadsy but now see Hills have the better offer -- 10/1 without the Conservatives, so it will still pay out in the unlikely event Labour wins.
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,952
    UKIP look very short priced given their recent form, and an unattractive candidate. Am on both LDs and Labour for 2nd. Richmond form and Labour vote holding up at a number of recent by elections. I expect a comfortable Con hold though.
  • Options
    Blue_rogBlue_rog Posts: 2,019
    So, what's the consensus? Brilliant strategic play or desperate panic response?
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,938
    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Off topic:

    How can a plane cost $4 Billion ?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38221579

    Trump's right on this one. It's ridiculous.

    I bet it is a cost + contract for Boeing...

    They're complex beasts, and essentially one-offs. But this is nothing: the scandal of the AW101 Marine 1 helicopter replacement was hilarious.
    By this time, cost estimates had ballooned to more than $13 billion.[9] The Government Accountability Office issued a report in March 2011 that pointed to three sources for the cost overruns. First, asking for development at the same time as production led to extensive retrofitting of built models. Second, a full-scale review of the system's requirements did not occur until four months after production started. Only then was it discovered that the VH-71's design could not meet the system's needs. Third, DOD and the White House asked for excessive combat and communications capabilities.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_One#Development_of_replacement_helicopter

    How *not* to run a project, writ large.
    That's a little project screwup - the F35 is a couple of orders of magnitude worse.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II

    The program is the most expensive military weapons system in history, and it has been the object of much criticism from those inside and outside government—in the US and in allied countries.[17] Critics argue that the plane is "plagued with design flaws," with many blaming the procurement process in which Lockheed was allowed "to design, test, and produce the F-35 all at the same time, instead of ... [identifying and fixing] defects before firing up its production line."[17] By 2014, the program was "$163 billion over budget [and] seven years behind schedule."[18] Critics further contend that the program's high sunk costs and political momentum make it "too big to kill."[19]
    Well, yes. The F35 is a bit of a mess, but we will get something out of it in the end. Much worse are the projects where billions are spent and you get nothing. E.g. the A-12 Avenger:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_A-12_Avenger_II

    It was cancelled in 1991 and the litigation only ended in 2014!
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,961
    Dadge said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Off topic:

    How can a plane cost $4 Billion ?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38221579

    Trump's right on this one. It's ridiculous.

    I bet it is a cost + contract for Boeing...

    Buy Airbus, Donald!

    The wings are made in the UK :)
    Airbus refused to bid for the contract, because they would have had to build them in the USA.
    *facepalm*
    I sypathise with Airbus. Part of the point of manufacturung Airbus is to provide employment in Europe. Building them in the US rather defeats that object.
    I think the shareholders would disagree. Besides, they have a factory in the US.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859
    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Off topic:

    How can a plane cost $4 Billion ?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38221579

    Trump's right on this one. It's ridiculous.

    I bet it is a cost + contract for Boeing...

    Buy Airbus, Donald!

    The wings are made in the UK :)
    Airbus refused to bid for the contract, because they would have had to build them in the USA.
    *facepalm*
    Airbus builds the A320 series in Alabama. I suspect that they simply couldn't afford a production line for a modified a350 in the US.
    Wiki reckons the Airbus requirement was for 3x A380s. No twinjets for POTUS.

    More likely they only even approached Airbus in the first place to stop them complaining about state aid to Boeing by not allowing AB the opportunity.
    Given a380 production is well below plans, there is no chance they'd create an additional production lines in the US just for three planes.
    Which of course is why they declined to bid, it would have been hideously expensive in tooling and training before they even started making the planes themselves.

    Pretty much only EK are keeping the existing line going at the moment, I think they're hoping for Indian and Chinese demand in the next couple of years before they run out of orders.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,954
    RobD said:

    Dadge said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Off topic:

    How can a plane cost $4 Billion ?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38221579

    Trump's right on this one. It's ridiculous.

    I bet it is a cost + contract for Boeing...

    Buy Airbus, Donald!

    The wings are made in the UK :)
    Airbus refused to bid for the contract, because they would have had to build them in the USA.
    *facepalm*
    I sypathise with Airbus. Part of the point of manufacturung Airbus is to provide employment in Europe. Building them in the US rather defeats that object.
    I think the shareholders would disagree. Besides, they have a factory in the US.
    Airbus has quietly changed from a "jobs for the boys" organisation to a commercial one, without anyone really noticing.
  • Options
    MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    edited December 2016
    pinkrose said:


    Of course I agree with the Shariah of Allah. How can one claim to be a Muslim but not want to live with Islam as the governing system? If you believe in the Justice of the Shariah and Islam, why would you not want it? But there are strict conditions that have to be fulfilled for a true Islamic State to be established in the Lands of Islam and the Shariah to be implemented upon the people and this is a matter for the Ulama and the Leaders, not for the average Muslim who does not possess the correct knowledge or authority. The Ulama are against the fake "Caliphate" of Daesh.

    So not just women should protect themselves by submitting totally to men, but also we shouldn't have democracy because the average person does not possess the correct knowledge or authority. Power, instead, should reside solely with the Ulama.

    Let's face it, these views are simply incompatible with Western liberal democracy.
  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,767

    Pulpstar said:

    Off topic:

    How can a plane cost $4 Billion ?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38221579

    Trump's right on this one. It's ridiculous.

    I bet it is a cost + contract for Boeing...

    They're complex beasts, and essentially one-offs. But this is nothing: the scandal of the AW101 Marine 1 helicopter replacement was hilarious.

    By this time, cost estimates had ballooned to more than $13 billion.[9] The Government Accountability Office issued a report in March 2011 that pointed to three sources for the cost overruns. First, asking for development at the same time as production led to extensive retrofitting of built models. Second, a full-scale review of the system's requirements did not occur until four months after production started. Only then was it discovered that the VH-71's design could not meet the system's needs. Third, DOD and the White House asked for excessive combat and communications capabilities.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_One#Development_of_replacement_helicopter

    How *not* to run a project, writ large.
    Smaller numbers but TSR2 rings bells in this respect
    TSR2 cancellation is mostly viewed as a mistake.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,914
    edited December 2016

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I'm on the Tories here at 1-7, and Labour 2nd @ 15-2 fwiw.

    Who is betting on the runner-up?
    Ladbrokes and Hills.
    Thanks. I've taken 10/1 from Shadsy but now see Hills have the better offer -- 10/1 without the Conservatives, so it will still pay out in the unlikely event Labour wins.
    Hah Yes I'll lose out heavily if Labour win, but I think it is a remote risk :@()
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Off topic:

    How can a plane cost $4 Billion ?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38221579

    Trump's right on this one. It's ridiculous.

    I bet it is a cost + contract for Boeing...

    They're complex beasts, and essentially one-offs. But this is nothing: the scandal of the AW101 Marine 1 helicopter replacement was hilarious.
    By this time, cost estimates had ballooned to more than $13 billion.[9] The Government Accountability Office issued a report in March 2011 that pointed to three sources for the cost overruns. First, asking for development at the same time as production led to extensive retrofitting of built models. Second, a full-scale review of the system's requirements did not occur until four months after production started. Only then was it discovered that the VH-71's design could not meet the system's needs. Third, DOD and the White House asked for excessive combat and communications capabilities.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_One#Development_of_replacement_helicopter

    How *not* to run a project, writ large.
    That's a little project screwup - the F35 is a couple of orders of magnitude worse.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II

    The program is the most expensive military weapons system in history, and it has been the object of much criticism from those inside and outside government—in the US and in allied countries.[17] Critics argue that the plane is "plagued with design flaws," with many blaming the procurement process in which Lockheed was allowed "to design, test, and produce the F-35 all at the same time, instead of ... [identifying and fixing] defects before firing up its production line."[17] By 2014, the program was "$163 billion over budget [and] seven years behind schedule."[18] Critics further contend that the program's high sunk costs and political momentum make it "too big to kill."[19]
    Well, yes. The F35 is a bit of a mess, but we will get something out of it in the end. Much worse are the projects where billions are spent and you get nothing. E.g. the A-12 Avenger:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_A-12_Avenger_II

    It was cancelled in 1991 and the litigation only ended in 2014!
    That's also pretty impressive.

    When we finally canned the 'new Nimrod' in 2010, in favour of an off-the-shelf replacement from the US, pretty much everyone not involved cheered loudly.

    Why is it that militaries always feel the need to re-invent the wheel - and then carry on trying to reinvent the wheel again while they're making the new ones? I imagine Trump is going to take a very long look at US mil procurement in the next few years.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859
    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I'm on the Tories here at 1-7, and Labour 2nd @ 15-2 fwiw.

    Who is betting on the runner-up?
    Ladbrokes and Hills.
    Thanks. I've taken 10/1 from Shadsy but now see Hills have the better offer -- 10/1 without the Conservatives, so it will still pay out in the unlikely event Labour wins.
    Hah Yes I'll lose out heavily if Labour win, but I think it is a remote risk :@()
    Shadsy has Lab at 100/1 if anyone feels the need to green up, but it's not going to happen.
  • Options
    MP_SEMP_SE Posts: 3,642
    I presume a Tory win in Sleaford and North Hykeham will be considered a victory for hard Brexit.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,914
    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I'm on the Tories here at 1-7, and Labour 2nd @ 15-2 fwiw.

    Who is betting on the runner-up?
    Ladbrokes and Hills.
    Thanks. I've taken 10/1 from Shadsy but now see Hills have the better offer -- 10/1 without the Conservatives, so it will still pay out in the unlikely event Labour wins.
    Hah Yes I'll lose out heavily if Labour win, but I think it is a remote risk :@()
    Shadsy has Lab at 100/1 if anyone feels the need to green up, but it's not going to happen.
    UKIP winning and Tories second probably a bigger risk in all honesty than Labour winning.
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,393
    pinkrose said:

    FPT

    pinkrose said:



    Do you agree with Sharia Law? Do you wish to live under Sharia Law?


    Of course I agree with the Shariah of Allah. How can one claim to be a Muslim but not want to live with Islam as the governing system? If you believe in the Justice of the Shariah and Islam, why would you not want it? But there are strict conditions that have to be fulfilled for a true Islamic State to be established in the Lands of Islam and the Shariah to be implemented upon the people and this is a matter for the Ulama and the Leaders, not for the average Muslim who does not possess the correct knowledge or authority. The Ulama are against the fake "Caliphate" of Daesh.
    The reaon why a devout Muslim perhaps should not want it is that regardless of what system of law (many would say opression) people are under, the heart would not be changed.

    This is why I find your commitment to Islam, whilst laudable and brave in it's own way, to be sad. You don't have a God, you have a rulebook. You don't have right and wrong, goodness and wickedness, you have honour and dishonour. It's a lifestyle; a tribe, an outward observance not a matter of inner conscience. That's why Christianity can't be compared to Islam. To be a Christian is to have a relationship with a merciful, loving God.

  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,914
    Irish Snail trumps Trump !

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-38228037

    "opposed the two-mile long development saying it threatened a rare breed of snail."
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983
    edited December 2016
    MP_SE said:

    I presume a Tory win in Sleaford and North Hykeham will be considered a victory for hard Brexit.

    Given May's and Davies' comments on budget contributions to the EU and the reported comments Boris made on his support for free movement only a UKIP victory would be a victory for hard Brexit, most likely the Tories hold but UKIP close behind them and Labour trying to hold off the LDs for third
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,938
    edited December 2016
    Sandpit said:

    That's also pretty impressive.

    When we finally canned the 'new Nimrod' in 2010, in favour of an off-the-shelf replacement from the US, pretty much everyone not involved cheered loudly.

    Why is it that militaries always feel the need to re-invent the wheel - and then carry on trying to reinvent the wheel again while they're making the new ones? I imagine Trump is going to take a very long look at US mil procurement in the next few years.

    What amused me about the Nimrod cancellation was an MP, straight-faced, claiming in parliament that the cancellation wold make the Olympics less safe. This is despite the fact they weren't due to go to Initial Operating Capability until a few months after the Olympics!

    As for why military peeps want to reinvent the wheel: money (it feeds the arms companies), pride in the country, slightly differing requirements (even when the requirements are bogus), wanting a differentiatior.

    For years I've been saying we ought to look at making weapons systems that are priced so we can actually export the bu**ers better. Some of our kit is top-notch, but too expensive.
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,709
    rcs1000 said:

    RobD said:

    Dadge said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Off topic:

    How can a plane cost $4 Billion ?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38221579

    Trump's right on this one. It's ridiculous.

    I bet it is a cost + contract for Boeing...

    Buy Airbus, Donald!

    The wings are made in the UK :)
    Airbus refused to bid for the contract, because they would have had to build them in the USA.
    *facepalm*
    I sypathise with Airbus. Part of the point of manufacturung Airbus is to provide employment in Europe. Building them in the US rather defeats that object.
    I think the shareholders would disagree. Besides, they have a factory in the US.
    Airbus has quietly changed from a "jobs for the boys" organisation to a commercial one, without anyone really noticing.
    Not quite so. Airbus was unusual setup. It was a commercial consortium masquerading as a government project. Usually it is the other way round. In the early days the French government was highly suspicious of Airbus as they didn't seem to be controlling it and sent in their chief hatchet man to shut it down. The people at Airbus convinced him that aerospace in France didn't have a future as a government department, it had to be a commercial venture,
    and he then became its greatest advocate.
  • Options
    Pulpstar said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I'm on the Tories here at 1-7, and Labour 2nd @ 15-2 fwiw.

    Who is betting on the runner-up?
    Ladbrokes and Hills.
    Thanks. I've taken 10/1 from Shadsy but now see Hills have the better offer -- 10/1 without the Conservatives, so it will still pay out in the unlikely event Labour wins.
    Hah Yes I'll lose out heavily if Labour win, but I think it is a remote risk :@()
    Shadsy has Lab at 100/1 if anyone feels the need to green up, but it's not going to happen.
    UKIP winning and Tories second probably a bigger risk in all honesty than Labour winning.
    With the proviso that I've not been following this byelection very closely, so pb readers should dyor, as they say, I can't see where is the evidence for the Ukip and LD surges, except in the betting itself. Can we trust the judgement of journalists on the ground?
  • Options
    chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    HYUFD said:

    MP_SE said:

    I presume a Tory win in Sleaford and North Hykeham will be considered a victory for hard Brexit.

    Given May's and Davies' comments on budget contributions to the EU and the reported comments Boris made on his support for free movement only a UKIP victory would be a victory for hard Brexit, most likely the Tories hold but UKIP close behind them and Labour trying to hold off the LDs for third
    It's a bit early to expect UKIP to start eating substantially into the Tory numbers.

    If A50 hasn't been triggered by 31 March, then it will rapidly kick in.

  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859

    Pulpstar said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I'm on the Tories here at 1-7, and Labour 2nd @ 15-2 fwiw.

    Who is betting on the runner-up?
    Ladbrokes and Hills.
    Thanks. I've taken 10/1 from Shadsy but now see Hills have the better offer -- 10/1 without the Conservatives, so it will still pay out in the unlikely event Labour wins.
    Hah Yes I'll lose out heavily if Labour win, but I think it is a remote risk :@()
    Shadsy has Lab at 100/1 if anyone feels the need to green up, but it's not going to happen.
    UKIP winning and Tories second probably a bigger risk in all honesty than Labour winning.
    With the proviso that I've not been following this byelection very closely, so pb readers should dyor, as they say, I can't see where is the evidence for the Ukip and LD surges, except in the betting itself. Can we trust the judgement of journalists on the ground?
    We got a good post from LD activist @MrsB the other day:
    MrsB said:

    O/T reporting back on what I found in Sleaford & North Hykeham - make what you will of it

    UKIP are active - Farage and Nuttall have both had public meetings. On the other hand, they managed to spell their candidate's name wrong on a leaflet, and the constituency name wrong on a large banner pictured behind Farage. And their candidate is the woman who in the GE asked "what do we do when the renewable energy runs out?". UKIP were the only people I personally saw campaigning who weren't Lib Dems. But among the voters I spoke to, there were no fervent kippers.

    Very very few posters and stakeboards for anyone. I am told far fewer than usual for the Tories. Feels like no-one has really woken up to the fact that there is an election on Thursday, so turnout will be low IMO.

    Corbyn has visited. Saw no signs of Labour literature where I was. Saw no signs of Tory literature either but was told there have been several pieces including a letter from Mrs May.

    Lib Dems are cheerful and working hard but in smaller numbers than either Richmond Park or Witney. The Lib Dem candidate is the only Remain supporter on the ballot in a constituency that was I believe 38% Remain. Brexit is not the only subject on the Lib Dem leaflets though.

    The countryside was lovely, as was the weather, and the natives were friendly. And I set a new daily step record.

    As I say, make of it what you will.

  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,282
    Fpt
    DavidL said:

    Maybe its me but how is May backing down to a group of Tory backbenchers threatening to rebel and conceding that the government will set out its plans for Brexit before the Article 50 notice in accordance with a Labour motion (a) clever (b) strong or (c) competent?

    It seems to me that she is once again on the run trying to make it up as she goes along and not being especially coherent about it. But maybe I am missing, well, quite a lot actually.

    What were her alternatives?

    Don't forget that Brexit isn't a matter of party politics. Or life and death. It's more important than that.
  • Options
    Passed through Sleaford station twice in the summer:

    Peterborough to Lincoln line in June, and Grantham to Skegness in July :)
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,938
    edited December 2016
    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I'm on the Tories here at 1-7, and Labour 2nd @ 15-2 fwiw.

    Who is betting on the runner-up?
    Ladbrokes and Hills.
    Thanks. I've taken 10/1 from Shadsy but now see Hills have the better offer -- 10/1 without the Conservatives, so it will still pay out in the unlikely event Labour wins.
    Hah Yes I'll lose out heavily if Labour win, but I think it is a remote risk :@()
    Shadsy has Lab at 100/1 if anyone feels the need to green up, but it's not going to happen.
    UKIP winning and Tories second probably a bigger risk in all honesty than Labour winning.
    With the proviso that I've not been following this byelection very closely, so pb readers should dyor, as they say, I can't see where is the evidence for the Ukip and LD surges, except in the betting itself. Can we trust the judgement of journalists on the ground?
    We got a good post from LD activist @MrsB the other day:
    That was a good post by Mrs B. It will be interesting to see how well the Lib Dems mop up the 38% remain vote, if at all.

    Edit: in fact, does anyone know what the turnout at the referendum was in percentage terms in the constituency?
  • Options
    JobabobJobabob Posts: 3,807
    A rural seat in the middle of nowhere, where sheep probably outnumber people. Reactionary Brexity views probably commonplace. Yet I doubt the Kippers will cut through.

    Easy Tory hold. I doubt many residents are even aware there is a byelection.
  • Options
    TOPPING said:

    Fpt

    DavidL said:

    Maybe its me but how is May backing down to a group of Tory backbenchers threatening to rebel and conceding that the government will set out its plans for Brexit before the Article 50 notice in accordance with a Labour motion (a) clever (b) strong or (c) competent?

    It seems to me that she is once again on the run trying to make it up as she goes along and not being especially coherent about it. But maybe I am missing, well, quite a lot actually.

    What were her alternatives?

    Don't forget that Brexit isn't a matter of party politics. Or life and death. It's more important than that.
    Yes but frankly Mr Shankly it's no football.
  • Options
    JobabobJobabob Posts: 3,807
    chestnut said:

    HYUFD said:

    MP_SE said:

    I presume a Tory win in Sleaford and North Hykeham will be considered a victory for hard Brexit.

    Given May's and Davies' comments on budget contributions to the EU and the reported comments Boris made on his support for free movement only a UKIP victory would be a victory for hard Brexit, most likely the Tories hold but UKIP close behind them and Labour trying to hold off the LDs for third
    It's a bit early to expect UKIP to start eating substantially into the Tory numbers.

    If A50 hasn't been triggered by 31 March, then it will rapidly kick in.

    We will all be bored to tears with Brexit by then, and will have found some other daft idea to kick the mythical elite.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983
    SeanT said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I'm on the Tories here at 1-7, and Labour 2nd @ 15-2 fwiw.

    Who is betting on the runner-up?
    Ladbrokes and Hills.
    Thanks. I've taken 10/1 from Shadsy but now see Hills have the better offer -- 10/1 without the Conservatives, so it will still pay out in the unlikely event Labour wins.
    Hah Yes I'll lose out heavily if Labour win, but I think it is a remote risk :@()
    Shadsy has Lab at 100/1 if anyone feels the need to green up, but it's not going to happen.
    UKIP winning and Tories second probably a bigger risk in all honesty than Labour winning.
    With the proviso that I've not been following this byelection very closely, so pb readers should dyor, as they say, I can't see where is the evidence for the Ukip and LD surges, except in the betting itself. Can we trust the judgement of journalists on the ground?
    We got a good post from LD activist @MrsB the other day:
    MrsB said:

    O/T reporting back on what I found in Sleaford & North Hykeham - make what you will of it

    UKIP are active - Farage and Nuttall have both had public meetings. On the other hand, they managed to spell their

    Very very few posters and stakeboards for anyone. I am told far fewer than usual for the Tories. Feels like no-one has really woken up to the fact that there is an election on Thursday, so turnout will be low IMO.

    Corbyn has visited. Saw no signs of Labour literature where I was. Saw no signs of Tory literature either but was told there have been several pieces including a letter from Mrs May.

    Lib Dems are cheerful and working hard but in smaller numbers than either Richmond Park or Witney. The Lib Dem candidate is the only Remain supporter on the ballot in a constituency that was I believe 38% Remain. Brexit is not the only subject on the Lib Dem leaflets though.

    The countryside was lovely, as was the weather, and the natives were friendly. And I set a new daily step record.

    As I say, make of it what you will.

    Lincolnshire is surprisingly lovely. Lincoln is one of the most underrated cities in Europe. My god, the cathedral!
    Yes I went to a friend's wedding in the Cathedral last summer, it is magnificent and has a copy of Magna Carta too
  • Options
    JobabobJobabob Posts: 3,807
    SeanT said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I'm on the Tories here at 1-7, and Labour 2nd @ 15-2 fwiw.

    Who is betting on the runner-up?
    Ladbrokes and Hills.
    Thanks. I've taken 10/1 from Shadsy but now see Hills have the better offer -- 10/1 without the Conservatives, so it will still pay out in the unlikely event Labour wins.
    Hah Yes I'll lose out heavily if Labour win, but I think it is a remote risk :@()
    Shadsy has Lab at 100/1 if anyone feels the need to green up, but it's not going to happen.
    UKIP winning and Tories second probably a bigger risk in all honesty than Labour winning.
    With the proviso that I've not been following this byelection very closely, so pb readers should dyor, as they say, I can't see where is the evidence for the Ukip and LD surges, except in the betting itself. Can we trust the judgement of journalists on the ground?
    We got a good post from LD activist @MrsB the other day:
    MrsB said:

    O/T reporting back on what I found in Sleaford & North Hykeham - make what you will of it

    UKIP are active - Farage and Nuttall have both had public meetings. On the other hand, they managed to spell their candidate's name wrong on a leaflet, and the constituency name wrong on a large banner pictured behind Farage. And their candidate is the woman who in the GE asked "what do we do when the renewable energy runs out?". UKIP were the only people I personally saw campaigning who weren't Lib Dems. But among the voters I spoke to, there were no fervent kippers.

    Very very few posters and stakeboards for anyone. I am told far fewer than usual for the Tories. Feels like no-one has really woken up to the fact that there is an election on Thursday, so turnout will be low IMO.

    Corbyn has visited. Saw no signs of Labour literature where I wsnip

    The countryside was lovely, as was the weather, and the natives were friendly. And I set a new daily step record.

    As I say, make of it what you will.

    Lincolnshire is surprisingly lovely. Lincoln is one of the most underrated cities in Europe. My god, the cathedral!
    Indeed - a hidden gem among the tulips and dykes.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,914
    I believe our very own Richard Tyndall has a vote in this election...
  • Options
    AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 2,869
    edited December 2016

    Off-topic:

    Some of the techies might like the following about two young girls who have manufactured rovers and other robots. One has been used by the New York Hall of Science, and are building a prototype Lunar rover for a British firm.

    http://beatty-robotics.com/

    Even with some parental help, quite amazing. I'm going to have to up my expectations for the little 'un ;)

    Lucky young ladies!

    One of the main things we’ve learned is that if you can imagine it, then you can do it–whatever it is.

    Every time I walk into my office, I wonder why the techs are being so slow about inventing the Tardis technology. We've known about the concept for ages.

    (edited to add: good evening, everyone.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983
    edited December 2016
    chestnut said:

    HYUFD said:

    MP_SE said:

    I presume a Tory win in Sleaford and North Hykeham will be considered a victory for hard Brexit.

    Given May's and Davies' comments on budget contributions to the EU and the reported comments Boris made on his support for free movement only a UKIP victory would be a victory for hard Brexit, most likely the Tories hold but UKIP close behind them and Labour trying to hold off the LDs for third
    It's a bit early to expect UKIP to start eating substantially into the Tory numbers.

    If A50 hasn't been triggered by 31 March, then it will rapidly kick in.

    North Kesteven, which includes Sleaford and North Hykeham, voted 62% Leave, 10% more than the UK as a whole and it is a polar opposite constituency of Richmond Park, rural as opposed to urban and full of older and retired non-graduates rather than professionals and graduates. I would certainly expect UKIP to eat into the Tories' 24000 majority even if it may not be enough for them to win yet. May is clearly aiming for a middle way between soft and hard Brexit, ie a job offer required to come to the UK and some contributions for limited single market access but that will not nearly be enough for hardcore Leavers
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,282

    TOPPING said:

    Fpt

    DavidL said:

    Maybe its me but how is May backing down to a group of Tory backbenchers threatening to rebel and conceding that the government will set out its plans for Brexit before the Article 50 notice in accordance with a Labour motion (a) clever (b) strong or (c) competent?

    It seems to me that she is once again on the run trying to make it up as she goes along and not being especially coherent about it. But maybe I am missing, well, quite a lot actually.

    What were her alternatives?

    Don't forget that Brexit isn't a matter of party politics. Or life and death. It's more important than that.
    Yes but frankly Mr Shankly it's no football.
    Brexit, bloody hell.
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,936
    edited December 2016
    Sandpit said:



    With the proviso that I've not been following this byelection very closely, so pb readers should dyor, as they say, I can't see where is the evidence for the Ukip and LD surges, except in the betting itself. Can we trust the judgement of journalists on the ground?

    I don't see any evidence of either Lib Dems, Labour or UKIP making any breakthroughs. The ground game from all of them seems almost non existent.

    I can't see this being anything but an easy Tory hold.
  • Options
    brokenwheelbrokenwheel Posts: 3,352
    edited December 2016
    Can't really see a Tory loss unless turnout is unusually low, their retention gets worse the more turnout drops. Based on the most recent by-elections we can expect the Tory candidate to get something like ~17k votes on a turnout hovering around 50%. And based on how the various parties are retaining votes in by-elections i'm not sure there'll be enough spare for the challenger.
  • Options
    chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    edited December 2016
    HYUFD said:

    chestnut said:

    HYUFD said:

    MP_SE said:

    I presume a Tory win in Sleaford and North Hykeham will be considered a victory for hard Brexit.

    Given May's and Davies' comments on budget contributions to the EU and the reported comments Boris made on his support for free movement only a UKIP victory would be a victory for hard Brexit, most likely the Tories hold but UKIP close behind them and Labour trying to hold off the LDs for third
    It's a bit early to expect UKIP to start eating substantially into the Tory numbers.

    If A50 hasn't been triggered by 31 March, then it will rapidly kick in.

    North Kesteven, which includes Sleaford and North Hykeham, voted 62% Leave, 10% more than the UK as a whole and its a polar opposite constituency of Richmond, rural as opposed to urban and full of older non-graduates rather than professionals and graduates. I would certainly expect UKIP to eat into the Tories' 24000 majority even if it may not be enough for them to win yet. May is clearly aiming for a middle way between soft and hard Brexit, ie a job offer required to come to the UK and some contributions for limited single market access but that will not nearly be enough for hardcore Leavers
    Maybe.

    I get the impression that the people who are most keen to talk about Brexit presently are disgruntled Remainers. Most leavers seem pretty content to bide their time and see how things unfold.

    There's no reason for a Leave protest vote yet.
  • Options
    MonksfieldMonksfield Posts: 2,203
    Jobabob said:

    A rural seat in the middle of nowhere, where sheep probably outnumber people. Reactionary Brexity views probably commonplace. Yet I doubt the Kippers will cut through.

    Easy Tory hold. I doubt many residents are even aware there is a byelection.

    Not too many sheep in that neck of the woods. Lots of massive fields of wheat and rape and a few of field vegetables....
  • Options
    I voted for AndyJS as POTY

    Honourable mentions for election information go to:

    HYUFD, Plato, Speedy and RodCrosby (if we're allowed to mention him)

    For general polite, constructive, non-partisan comments to cyclefree, MBS, ydroether and stodge

    Not to be forgotten JackW for talking out of his ARSE, Bob Smithson's certainty that Clinton was going to win Florida and TSE expecting South Yorkshire to vote Remain :wink: no offence meant we all make mistakes

    And to everyone else at PB - without you all the place would not be the success it is.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Pulpstar said:

    I believe our very own Richard Tyndall has a vote in this election...

    Despite being a member, he did not seem keen to help the kippers. He always has been a soft Brexiteer. I think Soft Brexit is a mirage, at least in any meaningful sense.
  • Options
    Omnium said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Off topic:

    How can a plane cost $4 Billion ?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38221579

    Trump's right on this one. It's ridiculous.

    I bet it is a cost + contract for Boeing...

    They're complex beasts, and essentially one-offs. But this is nothing: the scandal of the AW101 Marine 1 helicopter replacement was hilarious.

    By this time, cost estimates had ballooned to more than $13 billion.[9] The Government Accountability Office issued a report in March 2011 that pointed to three sources for the cost overruns. First, asking for development at the same time as production led to extensive retrofitting of built models. Second, a full-scale review of the system's requirements did not occur until four months after production started. Only then was it discovered that the VH-71's design could not meet the system's needs. Third, DOD and the White House asked for excessive combat and communications capabilities.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_One#Development_of_replacement_helicopter

    How *not* to run a project, writ large.
    Smaller numbers but TSR2 rings bells in this respect
    TSR2 cancellation is mostly viewed as a mistake.
    Especially by Elliott Automation and their shareholders (like me).
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983
    edited December 2016
    chestnut said:

    HYUFD said:

    chestnut said:

    HYUFD said:

    MP_SE said:

    I presume a Tory win in Sleaford and North Hykeham will be considered a victory for hard Brexit.

    Given May's and Davies' comments on budget contributions to the EU and the reported comments Boris made on his support for free movement only a UKIP victory would be a victory for hard Brexit, most likely the Tories hold but UKIP close behind them and Labour trying to hold off the LDs for third
    It's a bit early to expect UKIP to start eating substantially into the Tory numbers.

    If A50 hasn't been triggered by 31 March, then it will rapidly kick in.

    North Kesteven, which includes Sleaford and North Hykeham, voted 62% Leave, 10% more than the UK as a whole and its a polar opposite constituency of Richmond, rural as opposed to urban and full of older non-graduates rather than professionals and graduates. I would certainly expect UKIP to eat into the Tories' 24000 majority even if it may not be enough for them to win yet. May is clearly aiming for a middle way between soft and hard Brexit, ie a job offer required to come to the UK and some contributions for limited single market access but that will not nearly be enough for hardcore Leavers
    Maybe.

    I get the impression that the people who are clearly most keen to talk about Brexit presently are disgruntled Remainers. Most leavers seem pretty content to bide their time and see how things unfold.

    There's no reason for a Leave protest vote yet.
    So far this year based on the immediate aftermath of Brexit and May's nod to hard Brexit at the party conference it has been Remainers who have been complaining loudest with the LDs capitalising on their discontent while UKIP has been leaderless and split. However as it becomes clearer that there will not be a fully hard Brexit once the negotiations get under way and is already clear I would expect UKIP to capitalise too with disgruntled Leavers. Expect both UKIP and the LDs to progress with a firm hard Brexit and soft Brexit message respectively which will take Leave and Remain voters from both Labour and the Tories given the splits in both the main parties on Brexit and its aftermath
  • Options
    PeterCPeterC Posts: 1,274
    SeanT said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I'm on the Tories here at 1-7, and Labour 2nd @ 15-2 fwiw.

    Who is betting on the runner-up?
    Ladbrokes and Hills.
    Thanks. I've taken 10/1 from Shadsy but now see Hills have the better offer -- 10/1 without the Conservatives, so it will still pay out in the unlikely event Labour wins.
    Hah Yes I'll lose out heavily if Labour win, but I think it is a remote risk :@()
    Shadsy has Lab at 100/1 if anyone feels the need to green up, but it's not going to happen.
    UKIP winning and Tories second probably a bigger risk in all honesty than Labour winning.
    MrsB said:

    O/T reporting back on what I found in Sleaford & North Hykeham - make what you will of it

    UKIP are active - Farage and Nuttall have both had public meetings. On the other hand, they managed to spell their candidate's name wrong on a leaflet, and the constituency name wrong on a large banner pictured behind Farage. And their candidate is the woman who in the GE asked "what do we do when the renewable energy runs out?". UKIP were the only people I personally saw campaigning who weren't Lib Dems. But among the voters I spoke to, there were no fervent kippers.

    Very very few posters and stakeboards for anyone. I am told far fewer than usual for the Tories. Feels like no-one has really woken up to the fact that there is an election on Thursday, so turnout will be low IMO.

    Corbyn has visited. Saw no signs of Labour literature where I was. Saw no signs of Tory literature either but was told there have been several pieces including a letter from Mrs May.

    Lib Dems are cheerful and working hard but in smaller numbers than either Richmond Park or Witney. The Lib Dem candidate is the only Remain supporter on the ballot in a constituency that was I believe 38% Remain. Brexit is not the only subject on the Lib Dem leaflets though.

    The countryside was lovely, as was the weather, and the natives were friendly. And I set a new daily step record.

    As I say, make of it what you will.

    Lincolnshire is surprisingly lovely. Lincoln is one of the most underrated cities in Europe. My god, the cathedral!
    As a Lincolnshire boy myself I can say spot on. Louth is a really lovely town - my father was brought up there.
  • Options
    Dr Nuttall - Is that what Cameron meany by fruit and nut cases?
  • Options
    AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 2,869
    chestnut said:

    HYUFD said:

    chestnut said:

    HYUFD said:

    MP_SE said:

    I presume a Tory win in Sleaford and North Hykeham will be considered a victory for hard Brexit.

    Given May's and Davies' comments on budget contributions to the EU and the reported comments Boris made on his support for free movement only a UKIP victory would be a victory for hard Brexit, most likely the Tories hold but UKIP close behind them and Labour trying to hold off the LDs for third
    It's a bit early to expect UKIP to start eating substantially into the Tory numbers.

    If A50 hasn't been triggered by 31 March, then it will rapidly kick in.

    North Kesteven, which includes Sleaford and North Hykeham, voted 62% Leave, 10% more than the UK as a whole and its a polar opposite constituency of Richmond, rural as opposed to urban and full of older non-graduates rather than professionals and graduates. I would certainly expect UKIP to eat into the Tories' 24000 majority even if it may not be enough for them to win yet. May is clearly aiming for a middle way between soft and hard Brexit, ie a job offer required to come to the UK and some contributions for limited single market access but that will not nearly be enough for hardcore Leavers
    Maybe.

    I get the impression that the people who are most keen to talk about Brexit presently are disgruntled Remainers. Most leavers seem pretty content to bide their time and see how things unfold.

    There's no reason for a Leave protest vote yet.
    I haven't heard anyone talk at all about Brexit (or the EU) for months.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983
    SeanT said:

    HYUFD said:

    SeanT said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I'm on the Tories here at 1-7, and Labour 2nd @ 15-2 fwiw.

    Who is betting on the runner-up?
    Ladbrokes and Hills.
    Thanks. I've taken 10/1 from Shadsy but now see Hills have the better offer -- 10/1 without the Conservatives, so it will still pay out in the unlikely event Labour wins.
    Hah Yes I'll lose out heavily if Labour win, but I think it is a remote risk :@()
    Shadsy has Lab at 100/1 if anyone feels the need to green up, but it's not going to happen.
    UKIP winning and Tories second probably a bigger risk in all honesty than Labour winning.
    With the proviso that I've not been following this byelection very closely, so pb readers should dyor, as they say, I can't see where is the evidence for the Ukip and LD surges, except in the betting itself. Can we trust the judgement of journalists on the ground?
    We got a good post from LD activist @MrsB the other day:
    MrsB said:

    O/T reporting back on what I found in Sleaford & North Hykeham - make what you will of it

    UKIP are active - Farage and Nuttall have both had public meetings. On the other hand, they managed to spell their

    As I say, make of it what you will.

    Lincolnshire is surprisingly lovely. Lincoln is one of the most underrated cities in Europe. My god, the cathedral!
    Yes I went to a friend's wedding in the Cathedral last summer, it is magnificent and has a copy of Magna Carta too
    It's not just the cathedral tho, is it, it's the entire medieval, Tudor and Georgian core of the city, almost flawless, entirely poetic, just gorgeously English and historic. I imagine Coventry and Exeter must have looked like this, until the bastard Luftwaffe did their thing.

    On a misty winter twilight the walk up to Lincoln cathedral is sublimely atmospheric.
    Yes the centre of Lincoln is reminiscent of the best medieval cities in France or Germany, having studied at university near Coventry it is true to say that the city centre of the latter has largely been ruined by sixties architecture with just a few historic buildings around the remains of the old Cathedral itself
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,052

    TOPPING said:

    Fpt

    DavidL said:

    Maybe its me but how is May backing down to a group of Tory backbenchers threatening to rebel and conceding that the government will set out its plans for Brexit before the Article 50 notice in accordance with a Labour motion (a) clever (b) strong or (c) competent?

    It seems to me that she is once again on the run trying to make it up as she goes along and not being especially coherent about it. But maybe I am missing, well, quite a lot actually.

    What were her alternatives?

    Don't forget that Brexit isn't a matter of party politics. Or life and death. It's more important than that.
    Yes but frankly Mr Shankly it's no football.
    I want to leave and I want to love
    I want to sign trade deals that I might be ashamed of
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,961

    Dr Nuttall - Is that what Cameron meany by fruit and nut cases?

    I think OGH was being a bit of a cheeky bugger ;)
  • Options
    MonksfieldMonksfield Posts: 2,203
    PeterC said:

    SeanT said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I'm on the Tories here at 1-7, and Labour 2nd @ 15-2 fwiw.

    Who is betting on the runner-up?
    Ladbrokes and Hills.
    Thanks. I've taken 10/1 from Shadsy but now see Hills have the better offer -- 10/1 without the Conservatives, so it will still pay out in the unlikely event Labour wins.
    Hah Yes I'll lose out heavily if Labour win, but I think it is a remote risk :@()
    Shadsy has Lab at 100/1 if anyone feels the need to green up, but it's not going to happen.
    UKIP winning and Tories second probably a bigger risk in all honesty than Labour winning.
    MrsB said:

    O/T reporting back on what I found in Sleaford & North Hykeham - make what you will of it

    UKIP are active - Farage and Nuttall have both had public meetings. On the other hand, they managed to spell their candidate's name wrong on a leaflet, and the constituency name wrong on a large banner pictured behind Farage. And their candidate is the woman who in the GE asked "what do we do when the renewable energy runs out?". UKIP were the only people I personally saw campaigning who weren't Lib Dems. But among the voters I spoke to, there were no fervent kippers.

    Lincolnshire is surprisingly lovely. Lincoln is one of the most underrated cities in Europe. My god, the cathedral!
    As a Lincolnshire boy myself I can say spot on. Louth is a really lovely town - my father was brought up there.
    Louth is a nice place, quite unspoilt being in the back of beyond. I spent a couple of nights there two years ago and really enjoyed it, especially the boozer in the square that seemed unchanged since the 50s.
  • Options
    SeanT said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:


    Hah Yes I'll lose out heavily if Labour win, but I think it is a remote risk :@()

    Shadsy has Lab at 100/1 if anyone feels the need to green up, but it's not going to happen.
    UKIP winning and Tories second probably a bigger risk in all honesty than Labour winning.
    With the proviso that I've not been following this byelection very closely, so pb readers should dyor, as they say, I can't see where is the evidence for the Ukip and LD surges, except in the betting itself. Can we trust the judgement of journalists on the ground?
    We got a good post from LD activist @MrsB the other day:
    MrsB said:

    O/T reporting back on what I found in Sleaford & North Hykeham - make what you will of it

    UKIP are active - Farage and Nuttall have both had public meetings. On the other hand, they managed to spell their candidate's name wrong on a leaflet, and the constituency name wrong on a large banner pictured behind Farage. And their candidate is the woman who in the GE asked "what do we do when the renewable energy runs out?". UKIP were the only people I personally saw campaigning who weren't Lib Dems. But among the voters I spoke to, there were no fervent kippers.

    Very very few posters and stakeboards for anyone. I am told far fewer than usual for the Tories. Feels like no-one has really woken up to the fact that there is an election on Thursday, so turnout will be low IMO.

    Corbyn has visited. Saw no signs of Labour literature where I was. Saw no signs of Tory literature either but was told there have been several pieces including a letter from Mrs May.

    Lib Dems are cheerful and working hard but in smaller numbers than either Richmond Park or Witney. The Lib Dem candidate is the only Remain supporter on the ballot in a constituency that was I believe 38% Remain. Brexit is not the only subject on the Lib Dem leaflets though.

    The countryside was lovely, as was the weather, and the natives were friendly. And I set a new daily step record.

    As I say, make of it what you will.

    Lincolnshire is surprisingly lovely. Lincoln is one of the most underrated cities in Europe. My god, the cathedral!
    The cathedral was once even more impressive - it surpassed the Great Pyramid as the world's tallest structure and but for a collapse would have held that title as late as 1884:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_and_structures#History

    The street from the river to the cathedral / castle has won awards:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lincolnshire-15691941
  • Options
    perdixperdix Posts: 1,806
    @SeanT - British bombers flattened many ancient German cities but the Germans, even though impoverished by the War, decided to restore many of the city centres to previous glory. Places like Exeter suffered from British short-terminism and stupid planning rules.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,502
    HYUFD said:

    SeanT said:

    HYUFD said:

    SeanT said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I'm on the Tories here at 1-7, and Labour 2nd @ 15-2 fwiw.

    Who is betting on the runner-up?
    Ladbrokes and Hills.
    Thanks. I've taken 10/1 from Shadsy but now see Hills have the better offer -- 10/1 without the Conservatives, so it will still pay out in the unlikely event Labour wins.
    Hah Yes I'll lose out heavily if Labour win, but I think it is a remote risk :@()
    Shadsy has Lab at 100/1 if anyone feels the need to green up, but it's not going to happen.
    UKIP winning and Tories second probably a bigger risk in all honesty than Labour winning.
    With the proviso that I've not been following this byelection very closely, so pb readers should dyor, as they say, I can't see where is the evidence for the Ukip and LD surges, except in the betting itself. Can we trust the judgement of journalists on the ground?
    We got a good post from LD activist @MrsB the other day:
    MrsB said:

    O/T reporting back on what I found in Sleaford & North Hykeham - make what you will of it

    UKIP are active - Farage and Nuttall have both had public meetings. On the other hand, they managed to spell their

    As I say, make of it what you will.

    Lincolnshire is surprisingly lovely. Lincoln is one of the most underrated cities in Europe. My god, the cathedral!
    Yes I went to a friend's wedding in the Cathedral last summer, it is magnificent and has a copy of Magna Carta too
    It's not just the cathedral tho, is it, it's the entire medieval, Tudor and Georgian core of the city, almost flawless, entirely poetic, just gorgeously English and historic. I imagine Coventry and Exeter must have looked like this, until the bastard Luftwaffe did their thing.

    On a misty winter twilight the walk up to Lincoln cathedral is sublimely atmospheric.
    Yes the centre of Lincoln is reminiscent of the best medieval cities in France or Germany, having studied at university near Coventry it is true to say that the city centre of the latter has largely been ruined by sixties architecture with just a few historic buildings around the remains of the old Cathedral itself
    Coventry is, I am sad to say, hideous.

    The prison in Lincoln castle is remarkable; the lockable pews in the chapel extraordinary.
  • Options
    SeanT said:

    HYUFD said:

    SeanT said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I'm on the Tories here at 1-7, and Labour 2nd @ 15-2 fwiw.

    Who is betting on the runner-up?
    Ladbrokes and Hills.
    Thanks. I've taken 10/1 from Shadsy but now see Hills have the better offer -- 10/1 without the Conservatives, so it will still pay out in the unlikely event Labour wins.
    Hah Yes I'll lose out heavily if Labour win, but I think it is a remote risk :@()
    Shadsy has Lab at 100/1 if anyone feels the need to green up, but it's not going to happen.
    UKIP winning and Tories second probably a bigger risk in all honesty than Labour winning.
    With the proviso that I've not been following this byelection very closely, so pb readers should dyor, as they say, I can't see where is the evidence for the Ukip and LD surges, except in the betting itself. Can we trust the judgement of journalists on the ground?
    We got a good post from LD activist @MrsB the other day:
    MrsB said:

    O/T reporting back on what I found in Sleaford & North Hykeham - make what you will of it

    UKIP are active - Farage and Nuttall have both had public meetings. On the other hand, they managed to spell their

    As I say, make of it what you will.

    Lincolnshire is surprisingly lovely. Lincoln is one of the most underrated cities in Europe. My god, the cathedral!
    Yes I went to a friend's wedding in the Cathedral last summer, it is magnificent and has a copy of Magna Carta too
    It's not just the cathedral tho, is it, it's the entire medieval, Tudor and Georgian core of the city, almost flawless, entirely poetic, just gorgeously English and historic. I imagine Coventry and Exeter must have looked like this, until the bastard Luftwaffe did their thing.

    On a misty winter twilight the walk up to Lincoln cathedral is sublimely atmospheric.
    Imagine a medieval battle taking place there:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Lincoln_(1217)

    I would blame the town planners more than the Luftwaffe for heritage destruction.
  • Options

    TOPPING said:

    Fpt

    DavidL said:

    Maybe its me but how is May backing down to a group of Tory backbenchers threatening to rebel and conceding that the government will set out its plans for Brexit before the Article 50 notice in accordance with a Labour motion (a) clever (b) strong or (c) competent?

    It seems to me that she is once again on the run trying to make it up as she goes along and not being especially coherent about it. But maybe I am missing, well, quite a lot actually.

    What were her alternatives?

    Don't forget that Brexit isn't a matter of party politics. Or life and death. It's more important than that.
    Yes but frankly Mr Shankly it's no football.
    I want to leave and I want to love
    I want to sign trade deals that I might be ashamed of
    Bigmouth strikes again ;)
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983

    I voted for AndyJS as POTY

    Honourable mentions for election information go to:

    HYUFD, Plato, Speedy and RodCrosby (if we're allowed to mention him)

    For general polite, constructive, non-partisan comments to cyclefree, MBS, ydroether and stodge

    Not to be forgotten JackW for talking out of his ARSE, Bob Smithson's certainty that Clinton was going to win Florida and TSE expecting South Yorkshire to vote Remain :wink: no offence meant we all make mistakes

    And to everyone else at PB - without you all the place would not be the success it is.

    Thankyou and for your comments too
  • Options
    RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,679

    Sandpit said:

    That's also pretty impressive.

    When we finally canned the 'new Nimrod' in 2010, in favour of an off-the-shelf replacement from the US, pretty much everyone not involved cheered loudly.

    Why is it that militaries always feel the need to re-invent the wheel - and then carry on trying to reinvent the wheel again while they're making the new ones? I imagine Trump is going to take a very long look at US mil procurement in the next few years.

    What amused me about the Nimrod cancellation was an MP, straight-faced, claiming in parliament that the cancellation wold make the Olympics less safe. This is despite the fact they weren't due to go to Initial Operating Capability until a few months after the Olympics!

    As for why military peeps want to reinvent the wheel: money (it feeds the arms companies), pride in the country, slightly differing requirements (even when the requirements are bogus), wanting a differentiatior.

    For years I've been saying we ought to look at making weapons systems that are priced so we can actually export the bu**ers better. Some of our kit is top-notch, but too expensive.
    That's right. Pile 'em high, sell 'em cheap.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983
    Nigelb said:

    HYUFD said:

    SeanT said:

    HYUFD said:

    SeanT said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I'm on the Tories here at 1-7, and Labour 2nd @ 15-2 fwiw.

    Who is betting on the runner-up?
    Ladbrokes and Hills.
    Thanks. I've taken 10/1 from Shadsy but now see Hills have the better offer -- 10/1 without the Conservatives, so it will still pay out in the unlikely event Labour wins.
    Hah Yes I'll lose out heavily if Labour win, but I think it is a remote risk :@()
    Shadsy has Lab at 100/1 if anyone feels the need to green up, but it's not going to happen.
    UKIP winning and Tories second probably a bigger risk in all honesty than Labour winning.
    With the proviso that I've not been following this byelection very closely, so pb readers should dyor, as they say, I can't see where is the evidence for the Ukip and LD surges, except in the betting itself. Can we trust the judgement of journalists on the ground?
    We got a good post from LD activist @MrsB the other day:
    MrsB said:

    O/T reporting back on what I found in Sleaford & North Hykeham - make what you will of it

    UKIP are active - Farage and Nuttall have both had public meetings. On the other hand, they managed to spell their

    As I say, make of it what you will.

    Lincolnshire is surprisingly lovely. Lincoln is one of the most underrated cities in Europe. My god, the cathedral!
    Yes I went to a friend's wedding in the Cathedral last summer, it is magnificent and has a copy of Magna Carta too
    It's not just the cathedral tho, is it, it's the entire medieval, Tudor and Georgian core of the city, almost.
    Yes the centre of Lincoln is reminiscent of the best medieval cities in France or Germany, having studied at university near Coventry it is true to say that the city centre of the latter has largely been ruined by sixties architecture with just a few historic buildings around the remains of the old Cathedral itself
    Coventry is, I am sad to say, hideous.

    The prison in Lincoln castle is remarkable; the lockable pews in the chapel extraordinary.
    Yes, sadly the war turned the centre of Coventry from Lincoln to Slough. Will have to try and visit the castle next time I visit
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,914

    I voted for AndyJS as POTY

    Honourable mentions for election information go to:

    HYUFD, Plato, Speedy and RodCrosby (if we're allowed to mention him)

    For general polite, constructive, non-partisan comments to cyclefree, MBS, ydroether and stodge

    Not to be forgotten JackW for talking out of his ARSE, Bob Smithson's certainty that Clinton was going to win Florida and TSE expecting South Yorkshire to vote Remain :wink: no offence meant we all make mistakes

    And to everyone else at PB - without you all the place would not be the success it is.

    @JackW predicted Remain would win by twelve points on the day of the referendum.

    Fwiw I had it Remain 50.5 / Leave 49.5 on the 23rd.
  • Options



    The cathedral was once even more impressive - it surpassed the Great Pyramid as the world's tallest structure and but for a collapse would have held that title as late as 1884:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_and_structures#History

    The street from the river to the cathedral / castle has won awards:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lincolnshire-15691941

    From a historical point of view what I like is that the street plan is very similar to its Roman predecessor. Hidden amongst the medieval gems is a wealth of Roman building.
  • Options
    MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034

    SeanT said:

    HYUFD said:

    SeanT said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I'm on the Tories here at 1-7, and Labour 2nd @ 15-2 fwiw.

    Who is betting on the runner-up?
    Ladbrokes and Hills.
    Thanks. I've taken 10/1 from Shadsy but now see Hills have the better offer -- 10/1 without the Conservatives, so it will still pay out in the unlikely event Labour wins.
    Hah Yes I'll lose out heavily if Labour win, but I think it is a remote risk :@()
    Shadsy has Lab at 100/1 if anyone feels the need to green up, but it's not going to happen.
    UKIP winning and Tories second probably a bigger risk in all honesty than Labour winning.
    With the proviso that I've not been following this byelection very closely, so pb readers should dyor, as they say, I can't see where is the evidence for the Ukip and LD surges, except in the betting itself. Can we trust the judgement of journalists on the ground?
    We got a good post from LD activist @MrsB the other day:
    MrsB said:

    O/T reporting back on what I found in Sleaford & North Hykeham - make what you will of it

    UKIP are active - Farage and Nuttall have both had public meetings. On the other hand, they managed to spell their

    As I say, make of it what you will.

    Lincolnshire is surprisingly lovely. Lincoln is one of the most underrated cities in Europe. My god, the cathedral!
    Yes I went to a friend's wedding in the Cathedral last summer, it is magnificent and has a copy of Magna Carta too
    It's not just the cathedral tho, is it, it's the entire medieval, Tudor and Georgian core of the city, almost flawless, entirely poetic, just gorgeously English and historic. I imagine Coventry and Exeter must have looked like this, until the bastard Luftwaffe did their thing.

    On a misty winter twilight the walk up to Lincoln cathedral is sublimely atmospheric.
    Imagine a medieval battle taking place there:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Lincoln_(1217)

    I would blame the town planners more than the Luftwaffe for heritage destruction.
    As a Plymothian, I might take issue with that assessment.
This discussion has been closed.