Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Trump ends his first year in the White House with punters givi

SystemSystem Posts: 5,841
edited January 19 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Trump ends his first year in the White House with punters giving him a 60% chance staying till 2020 or later

With the exception of the period of the UK General Election the biggest political betting markets of the past year have been on Donald Trump. Is he going to survive a full first term? Will he win again in 2020? What will be the year of his actual departure from the White House?

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • Trump's making betting great (and fun) again.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694
    Second like Clinton and the Democrats.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 3,820
    Morning all :)

    Nothing much to argue with in the thread comment - the 2018 midterm elections will be decisive. IF the GOP does well and holds both the House and Senate with minimal losses, I suspect the Party will rally behind a Trump second term.

    IF the GOP loses the House and comes close to losing the Senate it will be very different and we could see a serious challenge to Trump in the GOP primaries. The problem the GOP has in states like Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania is while Democrats will vote for another Democrat who isn't Hilary Clinton will Republicans vote for another Republican who isn't Donald Trump (and it doesn't need many not to do so for that state to switch from red to blue) ?

  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 12,744
    Looking forward to Jim Naughtie's prog on it on Sunday.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,462
    I do wonder if he'll stand again.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694
    edited January 19
    Mike Pence at 15.5 for 2020 election winner is a useful hedge for Trump leaving office early, as he’d be the incumbent President in that scenario.

    As was discussed on here yesterday, Trump’s work in bringing huge corporate onshoring of profits could lead to huge infrastructure investment in key swing states.

    One of the Democrats is going to be huge value, just don’t yet know which one!
    https://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/event/28009878/market?marketId=1.128151441
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,607
    edited January 19
    Sandpit said:

    Mike Pence at 15.5 for 2020 election winner is a useful hedge for Trump leaving office early, as he’d be the incumbent President in that scenario.

    As was discussed on here yesterday, Trump’s work in bringing huge corporate onshoring of profits could lead to huge infrastructure investment in key swing states.

    One of the Democrats is going to be huge value, just don’t yet know which one!
    https://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/event/28009878/market?marketId=1.128151441

    Hadn't realised Mike Pence is only 58. He looks ten years older.

    Or maybe working with Trump ages you ten years, and last year he looked 57....
  • Sandpit said:

    Mike Pence at 15.5 for 2020 election winner is a useful hedge for Trump leaving office early, as he’d be the incumbent President in that scenario.

    As was discussed on here yesterday, Trump’s work in bringing huge corporate onshoring of profits could lead to huge infrastructure investment in key swing states.

    One of the Democrats is going to be huge value, just don’t yet know which one!
    https://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/event/28009878/market?marketId=1.128151441

    Hadn't realised Mike Pence is only 58. He looks ten years older.

    Or maybe working with Trump ages you ten years, and last year he looked 57....
    All that homophobia ages you.
  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,088
    edited January 19
    Boris once more proving how unserious he is. If we are looking for grand engineering projects there are plenty that could be done in the north of England and which would be far more beneficial for growth.


    "Can we have more money for the NHS". "No, sorry". "Can we have more money for our armed forces". "No". "Schools?". "Nope". "Police?". "Nope". "A massive bridge across the English Channel?". "Of course. Great idea". The Tories actually want to lose, don't they.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 40,493
    Losing Congress would be bad for the Republicans but by no means fatal to Trump, Obama and Clinton both lost control of Congress in their first midterms but were re elected. If a Democratic Congress pushes impeachment that could even rally Trump's base as Republican impeachment proceedings against Bill Clinton rallied Democrats.

    Currently the Democratic top tier for 2020, Biden, Sanders, Oprah and Warren all lead Trump in the polls but there is a long way to go yet
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,607
    HYUFD said:

    Losing Congress would be bad for the Republicans but by no means fatal to Trump, Obama and Clinton both lost control of Congress in their first midterms but were re elected. If a Democratic Congress pushes impeachment that could even rally Trump's base as Republican impeachment proceedings against Bill Clinton rallied Democrats.

    Currently the Democratic top tier for 2020, Biden, Sanders, Oprah and Warren all lead Trump in the polls but there is a long way to go yet

    A few hundreds of billion of dollars being repatriated won't hurt his cause one bit.....
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 4,980
    edited January 19
    JonathanD said:

    Boris once more proving how unserious he is. If we are looking for grand engineering projects there are plenty that could be done in the north of England and which would be far more beneficial for growth.


    "Can we have more money for the NHS". "No, sorry". "Can we have more money for our armed forces". "No". "Schools?". "Nope". "Police?". "Nope". "A massive bridge across the English Channel?". "Of course. Great idea". The Tories actually want to lose, don't they.

    The government would not be paying. It would be a private project like the Channel tunnel, or the Severn bridge.
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 4,980
    Sandpit said:

    Second like Clinton and the Democrats.

    Clinton was first in votes but second in seats.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694
    edited January 19

    Sandpit said:

    Second like Clinton and the Democrats.

    Clinton was first in votes but second in seats.
    She was second in the only vote that counted, that of the electoral college.

    In the same way that Corbyn weighing votes in Islington and Liverpool doesn’t make him PM, he needs to win in places like Nuneaton for that.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 19,516
    There are many worthwhile major infrastructure projects to consider. A massive bridge across the English Channel would not seem to be in the top 100 priorities.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 19,516
    Meanwhile, those who like playing with toy soldiers got another little tickle yesterday:

  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,088

    JonathanD said:

    Boris once more proving how unserious he is. If we are looking for grand engineering projects there are plenty that could be done in the north of England and which would be far more beneficial for growth.


    "Can we have more money for the NHS". "No, sorry". "Can we have more money for our armed forces". "No". "Schools?". "Nope". "Police?". "Nope". "A massive bridge across the English Channel?". "Of course. Great idea". The Tories actually want to lose, don't they.

    The government would not be paying. It would be a private project like the Channel tunnel, or the Severn bridge.
    Lol, like the private sector were going to pay for Boris' new royal yacht or his garden bridge across the Thames? Ridiculous man.
  • stevefstevef Posts: 1,044
    Trump and Corbyn the two disastrous politicians of our times. Both depend heavily on populism, the blind deluded and uncritical loyalty of their supporters, both rely on the concept of "fake news", and both eventually, whether in power or not, will crash and burn.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 3,820
    HYUFD said:

    Losing Congress would be bad for the Republicans but by no means fatal to Trump, Obama and Clinton both lost control of Congress in their first midterms but were re elected. If a Democratic Congress pushes impeachment that could even rally Trump's base as Republican impeachment proceedings against Bill Clinton rallied Democrats.

    Currently the Democratic top tier for 2020, Biden, Sanders, Oprah and Warren all lead Trump in the polls but there is a long way to go yet

    I think IF the midterms were bad for the GOP (and I mean 1994 bad) the Democrats could just sit back and watch the Republicans tear themselves apart. Trump is not Clinton - Clinton was a recognised member of the Party who had served gubernatorial terms in Arkansas. Trump was an outsider with no record of elected office who took over the Republican Party because, and let's be blunt, he faced a uniquely poor set of challengers.

    In the absence of an established credible challenger the insurgent came through and won. He was also the only GOP candidate seemingly able to reach beyond the confines of the party base and that, as we know, is how elections are won.

  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694

    Meanwhile, those who like playing with toy soldiers got another little tickle yesterday:

    It’s more likely that the World Cup 2022 gets played in England than Qatar.

    After they’ve fallen out with all their neighbours, work on all the construction projects has ground to a halt for the last six months, they ain’t going to have the stadia nor the hotels and training grounds finished in time.
  • TonyETonyE Posts: 938
    I'm not sure whether it will change much, but overnight in the USA there have been developments in the FISA warrants story. I'm not sure I understand all of it, but it looks like the allegation that the FBI colluded with the Obama Administration to use surveillance on the Trump campaign might have been stood up. DOJ Documents/evidence files have been released to congress that are not yet public, but there is growing pressure for that to happen.

    Sounds all a bit 'Tin Foil Hat', but if this is the case, its a bigger abuse than Watergate, much bigger, because it suggests Federal Agencies involvement is direct, in the act (not just the cover up).
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 1,513



    The only time I've travelled the Drake Passage, it was a mill-pond.

    When we got to Antarctica - not so much....

    I've never had the pleasure. I did have an oppo on my Ark cruise who'd been through it on Protector in a winter storm and he said it was "fucking horrific". At first he was worried about dying then he was worried he wouldn't die and the suffering would continue.

    And this was from a man I once saw casually quaff from a tin of cold chicken soup in the ACRB as we battled sea state 8 across the Flemish Cap.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694
    edited January 19
    England run rate slowing down a little, we should still get there though.
    Aus 7.6 to stop us
    https://www.betfair.com/exchange/cricket/event/28547422/multi-market?marketIds=1.138937387&marketIds=1.138937389
  • There are many worthwhile major infrastructure projects to consider. A massive bridge across the English Channel would not seem to be in the top 100 priorities.

    It's part of the grand plan to invade France.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 12,744
    JonathanD said:

    Boris once more proving how unserious he is. If we are looking for grand engineering projects there are plenty that could be done in the north of England and which would be far more beneficial for growth.


    "Can we have more money for the NHS". "No, sorry". "Can we have more money for our armed forces". "No". "Schools?". "Nope". "Police?". "Nope". "A massive bridge across the English Channel?". "Of course. Great idea". The Tories actually want to lose, don't they.

    Hold on - does Labour want Government-inspired large infrastructure projects or not?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 12,744
    Dura_Ace said:



    The only time I've travelled the Drake Passage, it was a mill-pond.

    When we got to Antarctica - not so much....

    I've never had the pleasure. I did have an oppo on my Ark cruise who'd been through it on Protector in a winter storm and he said it was "fucking horrific". At first he was worried about dying then he was worried he wouldn't die and the suffering would continue.

    And this was from a man I once saw casually quaff from a tin of cold chicken soup in the ACRB as we battled sea state 8 across the Flemish Cap.
    I once went through the Thames Barrier on Cornwall (long before the Iran debacle). Seemed pretty bloody unstable getting off it on the other side, that was enough for me thanks.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,846

    Meanwhile, those who like playing with toy soldiers got another little tickle yesterday:

    Does this include penalty shoot outs?
  • TonyE said:

    I'm not sure whether it will change much, but overnight in the USA there have been developments in the FISA warrants story. I'm not sure I understand all of it, but it looks like the allegation that the FBI colluded with the Obama Administration to use surveillance on the Trump campaign might have been stood up. DOJ Documents/evidence files have been released to congress that are not yet public, but there is growing pressure for that to happen.

    Sounds all a bit 'Tin Foil Hat', but if this is the case, its a bigger abuse than Watergate, much bigger, because it suggests Federal Agencies involvement is direct, in the act (not just the cover up).

    Then there's this as well

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,846

    There are many worthwhile major infrastructure projects to consider. A massive bridge across the English Channel would not seem to be in the top 100 priorities.

    That's harsh. Mid 90s at worst.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 40,493
    edited January 19
    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:

    Losing Congress would be bad for the Republicans but by no means fatal to Trump, Obama and Clinton both lost control of Congress in their first midterms but were re elected. If a Democratic Congress pushes impeachment that could even rally Trump's base as Republican impeachment proceedings against Bill Clinton rallied Democrats.

    Currently the Democratic top tier for 2020, Biden, Sanders, Oprah and Warren all lead Trump in the polls but there is a long way to go yet

    I think IF the midterms were bad for the GOP (and I mean 1994 bad) the Democrats could just sit back and watch the Republicans tear themselves apart. Trump is not Clinton - Clinton was a recognised member of the Party who had served gubernatorial terms in Arkansas. Trump was an outsider with no record of elected office who took over the Republican Party because, and let's be blunt, he faced a uniquely poor set of challengers.

    In the absence of an established credible challenger the insurgent came through and won. He was also the only GOP candidate seemingly able to reach beyond the confines of the party base and that, as we know, is how elections are won.

    The key reasons Clinton bounced back were first he worked with the Republicans on welfare reform, reducing the deficit and growing the economy and the Republicans overreacted in attacking him. Trump is a dealmaker and was even a Democrat himself in the 1990s and there is no reason he could not do the same with a Democrat majority in Congress and the Democrats are clearly at risk of going too hard in attacking him.

    Clinton was also helped by the fact the main Republican contenders in 1996 were the dull, establishment Dole or the extremist populist Buchanan or Steve Forbes whose main reason for running was his wealth. None of the Democratic top tier for 2020, Biden, Sanders, Oprah and Warren look really threatening if Trump recovers
  • "It is never difficult to distinguish between a Scot Nat with a grievance and a ray of sunshine."

  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 14,486
    TOPPING said:

    JonathanD said:

    Boris once more proving how unserious he is. If we are looking for grand engineering projects there are plenty that could be done in the north of England and which would be far more beneficial for growth.


    "Can we have more money for the NHS". "No, sorry". "Can we have more money for our armed forces". "No". "Schools?". "Nope". "Police?". "Nope". "A massive bridge across the English Channel?". "Of course. Great idea". The Tories actually want to lose, don't they.

    Hold on - does Labour want Government-inspired large infrastructure projects or not?
    This bridge is the have your cake and eat it metaphor in shining steel.

    Boris has pulled us out of the EU, wants out of the single market and customs union so we can trade with rest of the world, wants minimal EU migration etc etc.

    Yet, he does want a bridge to France so that traffic can flow between the two countries.

    Are there actually two Boriss?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,846
    I put a little on Trump winning in 2020 yesterday with Wm Hills. It just seems about a 75% chance to me at the moment and the odds are generous. Of course he is more unpredictable and volatile than almost any leader so you never know what is going to happen but the economics are nailed on for him and that usually counts.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 14,486
    stevef said:

    Trump and Corbyn the two disastrous politicians of our times. Both depend heavily on populism, the blind deluded and uncritical loyalty of their supporters, both rely on the concept of "fake news", and both eventually, whether in power or not, will crash and burn.

    Although we can be pretty sure Corbyn wont start a nuclear war.
  • TOPPING said:

    JonathanD said:

    Boris once more proving how unserious he is. If we are looking for grand engineering projects there are plenty that could be done in the north of England and which would be far more beneficial for growth.


    "Can we have more money for the NHS". "No, sorry". "Can we have more money for our armed forces". "No". "Schools?". "Nope". "Police?". "Nope". "A massive bridge across the English Channel?". "Of course. Great idea". The Tories actually want to lose, don't they.

    Hold on - does Labour want Government-inspired large infrastructure projects or not?
    This bridge is the have your cake and eat it metaphor in shining steel.

    Boris has pulled us out of the EU, wants out of the single market and customs union so we can trade with rest of the world, wants minimal EU migration etc etc.

    Yet, he does want a bridge to France so that traffic can flow between the two countries.

    Are there actually two Boriss?
    A Bridge Too Far?
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 1,513

    Meanwhile, those who like playing with toy soldiers got another little tickle yesterday:

    This will be 12(B) squadron who are to stand up at Coningsby as a joint British/Qatari unit. This is the correct sort of pooled sovereignty and not to be confused with incorrect forms such as an EU force.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 19,516
    TOPPING said:

    JonathanD said:

    Boris once more proving how unserious he is. If we are looking for grand engineering projects there are plenty that could be done in the north of England and which would be far more beneficial for growth.


    "Can we have more money for the NHS". "No, sorry". "Can we have more money for our armed forces". "No". "Schools?". "Nope". "Police?". "Nope". "A massive bridge across the English Channel?". "Of course. Great idea". The Tories actually want to lose, don't they.

    Hold on - does Labour want Government-inspired large infrastructure projects or not?
    There's nothing wrong with Government-inspired large infrastructure projects that are of great utility. Since there's already a Channel tunnel and no obvious present pressing need for a further crossing, this does not come in that category.

    Crossrail 2 and sorting out the Transpennine railways would both be a much higher priority. For that matter, improving the Scottish central belt's transport connectivity would also be very worthwhile.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 12,744
    edited January 19

    TOPPING said:

    JonathanD said:

    Boris once more proving how unserious he is. If we are looking for grand engineering projects there are plenty that could be done in the north of England and which would be far more beneficial for growth.


    "Can we have more money for the NHS". "No, sorry". "Can we have more money for our armed forces". "No". "Schools?". "Nope". "Police?". "Nope". "A massive bridge across the English Channel?". "Of course. Great idea". The Tories actually want to lose, don't they.

    Hold on - does Labour want Government-inspired large infrastructure projects or not?
    This bridge is the have your cake and eat it metaphor in shining steel.

    Boris has pulled us out of the EU, wants out of the single market and customs union so we can trade with rest of the world, wants minimal EU migration etc etc.

    Yet, he does want a bridge to France so that traffic can flow between the two countries.

    Are there actually two Boriss?
    It is absolutely bonkers, as you say - leave the EU while building literal bridges to it. But there you have it. Plus it would do something as opposed to digging holes and then filling them in again.

    Would, that said, mean a whole lot more furriners able and willing to come here but, as every Leaver stated categorically during the campaign, they are all for immigration.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,846
    Sandpit said:

    England run rate slowing down a little, we should still get there though.
    Aus 7.6 to stop us
    https://www.betfair.com/exchange/cricket/event/28547422/multi-market?marketIds=1.138937387&marketIds=1.138937389

    Butller is starting to play some ridiculous shots. Either Aus get him right now or this is over.
  • stevefstevef Posts: 1,044

    stevef said:

    Trump and Corbyn the two disastrous politicians of our times. Both depend heavily on populism, the blind deluded and uncritical loyalty of their supporters, both rely on the concept of "fake news", and both eventually, whether in power or not, will crash and burn.

    Although we can be pretty sure Corbyn wont start a nuclear war.
    Corbyn's policies could provoke a nuclear attack. They would place us in the same position that Japan was in 1945 -a country without nuclear weapons vs one with nuclear weapons. By removing the deterrent, he would destabilise the balance and make nuclear attack more likely.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 12,744

    TOPPING said:

    JonathanD said:

    Boris once more proving how unserious he is. If we are looking for grand engineering projects there are plenty that could be done in the north of England and which would be far more beneficial for growth.


    "Can we have more money for the NHS". "No, sorry". "Can we have more money for our armed forces". "No". "Schools?". "Nope". "Police?". "Nope". "A massive bridge across the English Channel?". "Of course. Great idea". The Tories actually want to lose, don't they.

    Hold on - does Labour want Government-inspired large infrastructure projects or not?
    There's nothing wrong with Government-inspired large infrastructure projects that are of great utility. Since there's already a Channel tunnel and no obvious present pressing need for a further crossing, this does not come in that category.

    Crossrail 2 and sorting out the Transpennine railways would both be a much higher priority. For that matter, improving the Scottish central belt's transport connectivity would also be very worthwhile.
    Wrong kind of large-scale infrastructure project?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694
    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    England run rate slowing down a little, we should still get there though.
    Aus 7.6 to stop us
    https://www.betfair.com/exchange/cricket/event/28547422/multi-market?marketIds=1.138937387&marketIds=1.138937389

    Butller is starting to play some ridiculous shots. Either Aus get him right now or this is over.
    Yep. Aus odds now out to 21, a couple of wickets changes that significantly but I can’t see England contriving to mess it up from here. 70 runs from 96 balls.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,846

    TOPPING said:

    JonathanD said:

    Boris once more proving how unserious he is. If we are looking for grand engineering projects there are plenty that could be done in the north of England and which would be far more beneficial for growth.


    "Can we have more money for the NHS". "No, sorry". "Can we have more money for our armed forces". "No". "Schools?". "Nope". "Police?". "Nope". "A massive bridge across the English Channel?". "Of course. Great idea". The Tories actually want to lose, don't they.

    Hold on - does Labour want Government-inspired large infrastructure projects or not?
    There's nothing wrong with Government-inspired large infrastructure projects that are of great utility. Since there's already a Channel tunnel and no obvious present pressing need for a further crossing, this does not come in that category.

    Crossrail 2 and sorting out the Transpennine railways would both be a much higher priority. For that matter, improving the Scottish central belt's transport connectivity would also be very worthwhile.
    The M8 carpark is coming close to being an historic monument up here. If they don't improve it soon there may be additional planning issues.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 19,516
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    JonathanD said:

    Boris once more proving how unserious he is. If we are looking for grand engineering projects there are plenty that could be done in the north of England and which would be far more beneficial for growth.


    "Can we have more money for the NHS". "No, sorry". "Can we have more money for our armed forces". "No". "Schools?". "Nope". "Police?". "Nope". "A massive bridge across the English Channel?". "Of course. Great idea". The Tories actually want to lose, don't they.

    Hold on - does Labour want Government-inspired large infrastructure projects or not?
    There's nothing wrong with Government-inspired large infrastructure projects that are of great utility. Since there's already a Channel tunnel and no obvious present pressing need for a further crossing, this does not come in that category.

    Crossrail 2 and sorting out the Transpennine railways would both be a much higher priority. For that matter, improving the Scottish central belt's transport connectivity would also be very worthwhile.
    Wrong kind of large-scale infrastructure project?
    I liked the idea of Boris Island, so this isn't a personal grudge against Mr J. This just doesn't look like a particularly good use of large sums of money.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694
    DavidL said:

    TOPPING said:

    JonathanD said:

    Boris once more proving how unserious he is. If we are looking for grand engineering projects there are plenty that could be done in the north of England and which would be far more beneficial for growth.


    "Can we have more money for the NHS". "No, sorry". "Can we have more money for our armed forces". "No". "Schools?". "Nope". "Police?". "Nope". "A massive bridge across the English Channel?". "Of course. Great idea". The Tories actually want to lose, don't they.

    Hold on - does Labour want Government-inspired large infrastructure projects or not?
    There's nothing wrong with Government-inspired large infrastructure projects that are of great utility. Since there's already a Channel tunnel and no obvious present pressing need for a further crossing, this does not come in that category.

    Crossrail 2 and sorting out the Transpennine railways would both be a much higher priority. For that matter, improving the Scottish central belt's transport connectivity would also be very worthwhile.
    The M8 carpark is coming close to being an historic monument up here. If they don't improve it soon there may be additional planning issues.
    The M8 through Glasgow is possibly the most confusing road in the country, exits every couple of hundred yards, with nowhere near enough signposts and badly numbered junctions. The only other road that comes close is the massive one way roundabout that is Leeds city centre.
  • John_MJohn_M Posts: 6,466
    stevef said:

    stevef said:

    Trump and Corbyn the two disastrous politicians of our times. Both depend heavily on populism, the blind deluded and uncritical loyalty of their supporters, both rely on the concept of "fake news", and both eventually, whether in power or not, will crash and burn.

    Although we can be pretty sure Corbyn wont start a nuclear war.
    Corbyn's policies could provoke a nuclear attack. They would place us in the same position that Japan was in 1945 -a country without nuclear weapons vs one with nuclear weapons. By removing the deterrent, he would destabilise the balance and make nuclear attack more likely.
    Who is going to launch a nuclear attack on the UK? I'm genuinely baffled.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 9,910
    I want to correct something said about me FPT.

    I think there is an issue with anti-semitism in the Labour party at the moment, far more than with the Tories (t’was not always thus). It is more than just Livingstone. I do not think Corbyn himself is an anti-semite. Nor do I think it is official Labour party policy.

    Some of Corbyn’s advisers and associates and too many lower in the ranks, however, have great difficulty understanding the difference between criticism of Israel, sympathy for Palestinians and anti-semitism. There have been far too many examples of repeated behaviour & comments which are utterly vile, offensive & completely contrary to Labour’s professed values.

    There is a very real problem - which has nothing to do with pro-Palestinian sympathy - when at last year’s conference one of those attending thought - and said publicly - that the Labour party should debate whether the Holocaust happened. This is the sort of “debate” previously reserved for neo-Nazi groupuscules hiding in dark corners. It ought, in my view, to be a matter of shame to decent people that it is happening in Labour. This kind of stuff ought to be more firmly stamped down on by the leadership. It hasn’t been & that is one reason why it continues to flourish like one of those weeds which keeps popping up all over the garden despite some occasional ineffectual hacking now and again.

    Corbyn had a wonderful opportunity in his main speech at last year’s conference to denounce this sort of behaviour very explicitly He chose not to take it. A pity.

    My sources: well, Jon Lansmann, Emily Thornberry, well-sourced newspaper reports, the Jewish Labour Movement website and newsletter and a former Labour councillor & twice a Parliamentary candidate, whose name will be well known to you all, were I permitted to reveal it. Luciana Berger and Ruth Smeeth, both MPs, have talked about the abuse they have received, some of it sent by people apparently doing it on behalf of Jeremy. There is plenty of information out there. It is happening far too often and far too regularly to simply be isolated examples.

    Banking, for a long time, said that repeated examples of misconduct were simply “bad apples”. It was eventually forced to admit that there was a more deep-seated cultural problem which it needed to address. I think Labour needs to do the same and needs to be more honest about the possible roots of the problem. Its Chakrabarti report was an attempt but was seriously flawed, superficial & has not worked. To my mind, Labour risks looking as if it just wants to give the appearance of doing something rather than actually doing something effective.

    I have some ideas as to why that might be. But I think Labour’s conduct in not really getting to grips with this issue dishonours its own principles and the very many decent Labour people who are not like this. A pity. Labour should be better than this.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,846
    Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    TOPPING said:

    JonathanD said:

    Boris once more proving how unserious he is. If we are looking for grand engineering projects there are plenty that could be done in the north of England and which would be far more beneficial for growth.


    "Can we have more money for the NHS". "No, sorry". "Can we have more money for our armed forces". "No". "Schools?". "Nope". "Police?". "Nope". "A massive bridge across the English Channel?". "Of course. Great idea". The Tories actually want to lose, don't they.

    Hold on - does Labour want Government-inspired large infrastructure projects or not?
    There's nothing wrong with Government-inspired large infrastructure projects that are of great utility. Since there's already a Channel tunnel and no obvious present pressing need for a further crossing, this does not come in that category.

    Crossrail 2 and sorting out the Transpennine railways would both be a much higher priority. For that matter, improving the Scottish central belt's transport connectivity would also be very worthwhile.
    The M8 carpark is coming close to being an historic monument up here. If they don't improve it soon there may be additional planning issues.
    The M8 through Glasgow is possibly the most confusing road in the country, exits every couple of hundred yards, with nowhere near enough signposts and badly numbered junctions. The only other road that comes close is the massive one way roundabout that is Leeds city centre.
    Unfortunately it gets worse when you get off it. The one way system in Glasgow centre is just ridiculous. After 30 years I still get caught out.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 19,516
    DavidL said:

    TOPPING said:

    JonathanD said:

    Boris once more proving how unserious he is. If we are looking for grand engineering projects there are plenty that could be done in the north of England and which would be far more beneficial for growth.


    "Can we have more money for the NHS". "No, sorry". "Can we have more money for our armed forces". "No". "Schools?". "Nope". "Police?". "Nope". "A massive bridge across the English Channel?". "Of course. Great idea". The Tories actually want to lose, don't they.

    Hold on - does Labour want Government-inspired large infrastructure projects or not?
    There's nothing wrong with Government-inspired large infrastructure projects that are of great utility. Since there's already a Channel tunnel and no obvious present pressing need for a further crossing, this does not come in that category.

    Crossrail 2 and sorting out the Transpennine railways would both be a much higher priority. For that matter, improving the Scottish central belt's transport connectivity would also be very worthwhile.
    The M8 carpark is coming close to being an historic monument up here. If they don't improve it soon there may be additional planning issues.
    The Central Belt could easily develop sufficient gravity (and distance from London) to act as an independent centre within the UK to act as a sort of counterweight to London. It's far easier to envisage how one might achieve this than a Leeds/Manchester axis.

    I can't for the life of me understand why absolutely no one seems to be pushing the idea.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 11,034
    Buttler gone.46 to get.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 11,034
    Ali gone.Only 2 more balls for Starc, though.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,462
    edited January 19
    Mr. Meeks, Leeds and Manchester are very slightly closer together, with a combined population of over three million, more than three times that of Edinburgh and Glasgow.

    And that's without getting into the political delights of trying to make the British counterweight to London in Scotland, which is subject to its own devolution.

    Edited extra bit: sorry, misread it a bit. Used the Greater figure for Manchester but not Leeds. Using that for both, that's about 5 million.

    Glasgow is 1.8, Edinburgh 1.3. So the point stands.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,846

    DavidL said:

    TOPPING said:

    JonathanD said:

    Boris once more proving how unserious he is. If we are looking for grand engineering projects there are plenty that could be done in the north of England and which would be far more beneficial for growth.


    "Can we have more money for the NHS". "No, sorry". "Can we have more money for our armed forces". "No". "Schools?". "Nope". "Police?". "Nope". "A massive bridge across the English Channel?". "Of course. Great idea". The Tories actually want to lose, don't they.

    Hold on - does Labour want Government-inspired large infrastructure projects or not?
    There's nothing wrong with Government-inspired large infrastructure projects that are of great utility. Since there's already a Channel tunnel and no obvious present pressing need for a further crossing, this does not come in that category.

    Crossrail 2 and sorting out the Transpennine railways would both be a much higher priority. For that matter, improving the Scottish central belt's transport connectivity would also be very worthwhile.
    The M8 carpark is coming close to being an historic monument up here. If they don't improve it soon there may be additional planning issues.
    The Central Belt could easily develop sufficient gravity (and distance from London) to act as an independent centre within the UK to act as a sort of counterweight to London. It's far easier to envisage how one might achieve this than a Leeds/Manchester axis.

    I can't for the life of me understand why absolutely no one seems to be pushing the idea.
    It really doesn't help that we have a government which is obsessed with independence, that as a result is focussed on providing popularist freebies that may win votes in the short term, that seems to have no interest in developing the private sector, who seem intent on producing a hostile environment for those who are successful with an aggressive tax regime and who are seriously undermining our education system demolishing one of our competitive advantages. Even the Labour politicians in Leeds and Manchester seem to have a greater commitment to growth and enterprise.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 19,516

    Mr. Meeks, Leeds and Manchester are very slightly closer together, with a combined population of over three million, more than three times that of Edinburgh and Glasgow.

    And that's without getting into the political delights of trying to make the British counterweight to London in Scotland, which is subject to its own devolution.

    Edited extra bit: sorry, misread it a bit. Used the Greater figure for Manchester but not Leeds. Using that for both, that's about 5 million.

    Glasgow is 1.8, Edinburgh 1.3. So the point stands.

    Glasgow and Edinburgh sit in the central lowlands, which makes connectivity very easy to organise if you're so minded.

    Leeds and Manchester are divided by the Pennines, which are culturally higher than the Himalayas.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 18,218

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    JonathanD said:

    Boris once more proving how unserious he is. If we are looking for grand engineering projects there are plenty that could be done in the north of England and which would be far more beneficial for growth.


    "Can we have more money for the NHS". "No, sorry". "Can we have more money for our armed forces". "No". "Schools?". "Nope". "Police?". "Nope". "A massive bridge across the English Channel?". "Of course. Great idea". The Tories actually want to lose, don't they.

    Hold on - does Labour want Government-inspired large infrastructure projects or not?
    There's nothing wrong with Government-inspired large infrastructure projects that are of great utility. Since there's already a Channel tunnel and no obvious present pressing need for a further crossing, this does not come in that category.

    Crossrail 2 and sorting out the Transpennine railways would both be a much higher priority. For that matter, improving the Scottish central belt's transport connectivity would also be very worthwhile.
    Wrong kind of large-scale infrastructure project?
    I liked the idea of Boris Island, so this isn't a personal grudge against Mr J. This just doesn't look like a particularly good use of large sums of money.
    There again, since it took 192 years from the first proposal, and 119 years from the first digging, to open the Channel Tunnel, perhaps we should start planning now for the next cross-channel link.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 8,081
    Offered with no comment.

    Father-in-Law's stage three cancer op cancelled for the second time this January due to lack of beds. His family distraught.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,462
    Mr. Meeks, according to Google (which annoyingly gave me the Greater Manchester figure but smaller [ie non-comparable] ones for the other cities...) the journey time is practically identical between Manchester and Leeds, as for Glasgow and Edinburgh.

    Not to mention Leeds is a massive transport hub, perhaps the most significant in the North.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694
    Great couple of boundaries from Chris Woakes, nearly home now.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 11,034

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    JonathanD said:

    Boris once more proving how unserious he is. If we are looking for grand engineering projects there are plenty that could be done in the north of England and which would be far more beneficial for growth.


    "Can we have more money for the NHS". "No, sorry". "Can we have more money for our armed forces". "No". "Schools?". "Nope". "Police?". "Nope". "A massive bridge across the English Channel?". "Of course. Great idea". The Tories actually want to lose, don't they.

    Hold on - does Labour want Government-inspired large infrastructure projects or not?
    There's nothing wrong with Government-inspired large infrastructure projects that are of great utility. Since there's already a Channel tunnel and no obvious present pressing need for a further crossing, this does not come in that category.

    Crossrail 2 and sorting out the Transpennine railways would both be a much higher priority. For that matter, improving the Scottish central belt's transport connectivity would also be very worthwhile.
    Wrong kind of large-scale infrastructure project?
    I liked the idea of Boris Island, so this isn't a personal grudge against Mr J. This just doesn't look like a particularly good use of large sums of money.
    There again, since it took 192 years from the first proposal, and 119 years from the first digging, to open the Channel Tunnel, perhaps we should start planning now for the next cross-channel link.
    I'm not impressed with Boris' grasp of issues involved in Civil Engineering.

    Or much, in fact.Including Foreign Affairs.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,462
    My sympathies, Mr. Jonathan.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 11,034

    My sympathies, Mr. Jonathan.

    Yes, dreadful. However, the situation does seem to be patchy. A friend has had no problems with delays.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 9,910
    Jonathan said:

    Offered with no comment.

    Father-in-Law's stage three cancer op cancelled for the second time this January due to lack of beds. His family distraught.

    I am so very sorry to hear that.

    If we have money for bridges we have money for this.
  • Jonathan said:

    Offered with no comment.

    Father-in-Law's stage three cancer op cancelled for the second time this January due to lack of beds. His family distraught.

    That is so upsetting - hope it is resolved quickly
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,846
    Jonathan said:

    Offered with no comment.

    Father-in-Law's stage three cancer op cancelled for the second time this January due to lack of beds. His family distraught.

    Desperately sad. My condolences to the family.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 5,459
    What are the odds on Romney as the Republican candidate in 2020 ?
    I don't think he's running for the Senate just for fun.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694
    Jonathan said:

    Offered with no comment.

    Father-in-Law's stage three cancer op cancelled for the second time this January due to lack of beds. His family distraught.

    Sorry to hear that, hope they find a bed for him soon.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 8,020
    DavidL said:

    I put a little on Trump winning in 2020 yesterday with Wm Hills. It just seems about a 75% chance to me at the moment and the odds are generous. Of course he is more unpredictable and volatile than almost any leader so you never know what is going to happen but the economics are nailed on for him and that usually counts.

    Trump might easily win in 2020 but will he stand? Is he enjoying being president? Does he want to set up Ivanka as America's first woman president? Perhaps the answers are in the Wolff book, which I have bought but not yet read.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 5,459
    DavidL said:

    I put a little on Trump winning in 2020 yesterday with Wm Hills. It just seems about a 75% chance to me at the moment and the odds are generous. Of course he is more unpredictable and volatile than almost any leader so you never know what is going to happen but the economics are nailed on for him and that usually counts.

    50% at best, IMO & FWIW...
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,846

    DavidL said:

    I put a little on Trump winning in 2020 yesterday with Wm Hills. It just seems about a 75% chance to me at the moment and the odds are generous. Of course he is more unpredictable and volatile than almost any leader so you never know what is going to happen but the economics are nailed on for him and that usually counts.

    Trump might easily win in 2020 but will he stand? Is he enjoying being president? Does he want to set up Ivanka as America's first woman president? Perhaps the answers are in the Wolff book, which I have bought but not yet read.
    I may be wrong about this but I have a suspicion that Mr Trump has something of an ego and it will always be all about him. Maybe I am being uncharacteristically harsh.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,846
    edited January 19
    Woakes denying Root his half century here. Good win though.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 11,443

    DavidL said:

    TOPPING said:

    JonathanD said:

    Boris once more proving how unserious he is. If we are looking for grand engineering projects there are plenty that could be done in the north of England and which would be far more beneficial for growth.


    "Can we have more money for the NHS". "No, sorry". "Can we have more money for our armed forces". "No". "Schools?". "Nope". "Police?". "Nope". "A massive bridge across the English Channel?". "Of course. Great idea". The Tories actually want to lose, don't they.

    Hold on - does Labour want Government-inspired large infrastructure projects or not?
    There's nothing wrong with Government-inspired large infrastructure projects that are of great utility. Since there's already a Channel tunnel and no obvious present pressing need for a further crossing, this does not come in that category.

    Crossrail 2 and sorting out the Transpennine railways would both be a much higher priority. For that matter, improving the Scottish central belt's transport connectivity would also be very worthwhile.
    The M8 carpark is coming close to being an historic monument up here. If they don't improve it soon there may be additional planning issues.
    The Central Belt could easily develop sufficient gravity (and distance from London) to act as an independent centre within the UK to act as a sort of counterweight to London. It's far easier to envisage how one might achieve this than a Leeds/Manchester axis.

    I can't for the life of me understand why absolutely no one seems to be pushing the idea.
    They've just finished 3 laning & completing the motorway element of the M8 between Glasgow and Newhouse after 2+ years which helps a bit. I sense the will to do more at the moment is exhausted both in the budgetary & tolerance of delays departments.

    They really need to go something about Livingston/Bathgate stretches and its several exit/slip roads, it's a bugger for 6 hours a day.
  • Good win for England
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,462
    Mr. L, that can still work, though. Parents are often vicariously arrogant/greedy about their children. He'd probably love both having been president and fathered a president (particularly the first female one).

    Should say I have a couple of pounds on Ivanka at 101.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 5,459

    Good win for England

    Root failing to convert, yet again...
    :smile:
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694
    DavidL said:

    Woakes denying Root his half century here. Good win though.

    Not that Root looks too unhappy about it.

    Another great result for the one day side, shame we couldn’t deliver in the much more important Test series though.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,846

    DavidL said:

    TOPPING said:

    JonathanD said:

    Boris once more proving how unserious he is. If we are looking for grand engineering projects there are plenty that could be done in the north of England and which would be far more beneficial for growth.


    "Can we have more money for the NHS". "No, sorry". "Can we have more money for our armed forces". "No". "Schools?". "Nope". "Police?". "Nope". "A massive bridge across the English Channel?". "Of course. Great idea". The Tories actually want to lose, don't they.

    Hold on - does Labour want Government-inspired large infrastructure projects or not?
    There's nothing wrong with Government-inspired large infrastructure projects that are of great utility. Since there's already a Channel tunnel and no obvious present pressing need for a further crossing, this does not come in that category.

    Crossrail 2 and sorting out the Transpennine railways would both be a much higher priority. For that matter, improving the Scottish central belt's transport connectivity would also be very worthwhile.
    The M8 carpark is coming close to being an historic monument up here. If they don't improve it soon there may be additional planning issues.
    The Central Belt could easily develop sufficient gravity (and distance from London) to act as an independent centre within the UK to act as a sort of counterweight to London. It's far easier to envisage how one might achieve this than a Leeds/Manchester axis.

    I can't for the life of me understand why absolutely no one seems to be pushing the idea.
    They've just finished 3 laning & completing the motorway element of the M8 between Glasgow and Newhouse after 2+ years which helps a bit. I sense the will to do more at the moment is exhausted both in the budgetary & tolerance of delays departments.

    They really need to go something about Livingston/Bathgate stretches and its several exit/slip roads, it's a bugger for 6 hours a day.
    The Newhouse section is certainly an improvement but when you see the empty 3 lane motorway on the M6/M74 north of Manchester and south of Glasgow you really wonder about priorities. The lack of dual carriageway on the A1 south of Haddington to not much short of Newcastle is also absurd and a real drag on Scotland's economic growth.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 14,237
    This is what an American said to me earlier this week, if before the election you could vote for a candidate who would get unemployment down to 4% and the Dow up to 26 thousand you'd probably vote for them. That's why Trump will stay the course.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 4,040
    DavidL said:

    I put a little on Trump winning in 2020 yesterday with Wm Hills. It just seems about a 75% chance to me at the moment and the odds are generous. Of course he is more unpredictable and volatile than almost any leader so you never know what is going to happen but the economics are nailed on for him and that usually counts.

    Trump isn’t even a 75% chance to run in 2020 never mind win.

    The economy doing well didn’t help Hilary much. The weakness in 2012 (albeit on an improving path) didn’t hurt Obama either.

    I’d put Trumps chances around 25% myself.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 11,443
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    TOPPING said:

    JonathanD said:

    Boris once more proving how unserious he is. If we are looking for grand engineering projects there are plenty that could be done in the north of England and which would be far more beneficial for growth.


    "Can we have more money for the NHS". "No, sorry". "Can we have more money for our armed forces". "No". "Schools?". "Nope". "Police?". "Nope". "A massive bridge across the English Channel?". "Of course. Great idea". The Tories actually want to lose, don't they.

    Hold on - does Labour want Government-inspired large infrastructure projects or not?
    There's nothing wrong with Government-inspired large infrastructure projects that are of great utility. Since there's already a Channel tunnel and no obvious present pressing need for a further crossing, this does not come in that category.

    Crossrail 2 and sorting out the Transpennine railways would both be a much higher priority. For that matter, improving the Scottish central belt's transport connectivity would also be very worthwhile.
    The M8 carpark is coming close to being an historic monument up here. If they don't improve it soon there may be additional planning issues.
    The Central Belt could easily develop sufficient gravity (and distance from London) to act as an independent centre within the UK to act as a sort of counterweight to London. It's far easier to envisage how one might achieve this than a Leeds/Manchester axis.

    I can't for the life of me understand why absolutely no one seems to be pushing the idea.
    They've just finished 3 laning & completing the motorway element of the M8 between Glasgow and Newhouse after 2+ years which helps a bit. I sense the will to do more at the moment is exhausted both in the budgetary & tolerance of delays departments.

    They really need to go something about Livingston/Bathgate stretches and its several exit/slip roads, it's a bugger for 6 hours a day.
    The Newhouse section is certainly an improvement but when you see the empty 3 lane motorway on the M6/M74 north of Manchester and south of Glasgow you really wonder about priorities. The lack of dual carriageway on the A1 south of Haddington to not much short of Newcastle is also absurd and a real drag on Scotland's economic growth.
    Useful in slowing the migration southward of the high tax refugees though :)
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    TOPPING said:

    JonathanD said:

    Boris once more proving how unserious he is. If we are looking for grand engineering projects there are plenty that could be done in the north of England and which would be far more beneficial for growth.


    "Can we have more money for the NHS". "No, sorry". "Can we have more money for our armed forces". "No". "Schools?". "Nope". "Police?". "Nope". "A massive bridge across the English Channel?". "Of course. Great idea". The Tories actually want to lose, don't they.

    Hold on - does Labour want Government-inspired large infrastructure projects or not?
    There's nothing wrong with Government-inspired large infrastructure projects that are of great utility. Since there's already a Channel tunnel and no obvious present pressing need for a further crossing, this does not come in that category.

    Crossrail 2 and sorting out the Transpennine railways would both be a much higher priority. For that matter, improving the Scottish central belt's transport connectivity would also be very worthwhile.
    The M8 carpark is coming close to being an historic monument up here. If they don't improve it soon there may be additional planning issues.
    The Central Belt could easily develop sufficient gravity (and distance from London) to act as an independent centre within the UK to act as a sort of counterweight to London. It's far easier to envisage how one might achieve this than a Leeds/Manchester axis.

    I can't for the life of me understand why absolutely no one seems to be pushing the idea.
    They've just finished 3 laning & completing the motorway element of the M8 between Glasgow and Newhouse after 2+ years which helps a bit. I sense the will to do more at the moment is exhausted both in the budgetary & tolerance of delays departments.

    They really need to go something about Livingston/Bathgate stretches and its several exit/slip roads, it's a bugger for 6 hours a day.
    The Newhouse section is certainly an improvement but when you see the empty 3 lane motorway on the M6/M74 north of Manchester and south of Glasgow you really wonder about priorities. The lack of dual carriageway on the A1 south of Haddington to not much short of Newcastle is also absurd and a real drag on Scotland's economic growth.
    But the Scottish government prefer to give your middle class kids a “free” university education, rather than address the profound infrastructure and transport issues preventing growth in the economy.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 4,040
    Jonathan said:

    Offered with no comment.

    Father-in-Law's stage three cancer op cancelled for the second time this January due to lack of beds. His family distraught.

    Very sorry for you and your family.
    Hope something comes through soon.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,846

    DavidL said:

    I put a little on Trump winning in 2020 yesterday with Wm Hills. It just seems about a 75% chance to me at the moment and the odds are generous. Of course he is more unpredictable and volatile than almost any leader so you never know what is going to happen but the economics are nailed on for him and that usually counts.

    Trump might easily win in 2020 but will he stand? Is he enjoying being president? Does he want to set up Ivanka as America's first woman president? Perhaps the answers are in the Wolff book, which I have bought but not yet read.
    Talking of books, I started Adults in the Room last night by Yanis Varoufakis. Really enjoying it. The first sentence sets the tone:
    "My previous book, "And the Weak Suffer What they Must?: Europe Austerity and the Threat to Global Stability", offered an historical explanation of why Europe is now in the process, decades in the making, of losing its integrity and forfeiting its soul."

    Maybe not one for WilliamGlenn but I would recommend to anyone else. What is interesting is that Varoufakis gets on very well with right winger politicians/economists in both the UK and US and agrees with their analysis, particularly about extend and pretend. He has complete contempt for EU bureaucrats, Junker in particular getting rough treatment.

    There was a good bit when he states: "George was among the first finance ministers I met after my election. The most startling aspect of that encounter -at least to those in the press who expected a frosty or outright acrimonious meeting- was that we found very little to disagree on. In the first few minutes of our discussion I suggested to him that, " While we may disagree on the merits of austerity, you are not doing much of it, George, are you?" He agreed smilingly...Osborne also seemed appreciative of the help he was getting from the Bank of England, which from the moment the City went through its 2008 convulsion had printed billions to refloat the banks and kept the economy "liquid". "

    He is a stylish and thought provoking writer enjoyable for both the left and the right.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 3,171
    Jonathan said:

    Offered with no comment.

    Father-in-Law's stage three cancer op cancelled for the second time this January due to lack of beds. His family distraught.

    Jonathan , really hope it can go ahead quickly.
  • What i can't work out is why the hell they've never put a decent road link between Manchester and Sheffield in. The snake and Woodhead passes are crap and leave you crawling through towns and villages on the Manchester side.

    If we're considering bridges over the channel, surely a tunnel through the peaks shouldn't be too much to ask for?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,462
    Mr. Rob, a tunnel was part of the £70bn (by 2030 or 2050, forget which) proposed recently.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 3,171

    Good win for England

    It was , be nice to win a world cup in the future.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 8,081
    Thanks for everyone's kind words. Whilst such things are generally highly charged and political in nature, I make no political point. We will get through this.

    I hope that if any politicians or policy makers are tuning in to PB today that they take note that behind every stat, every story and every data point there is a real person. The choices you make, change lives. Politics is not a game.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,607
    edited January 19
    Dura_Ace said:



    The only time I've travelled the Drake Passage, it was a mill-pond.

    When we got to Antarctica - not so much....

    I've never had the pleasure. I did have an oppo on my Ark cruise who'd been through it on Protector in a winter storm and he said it was "fucking horrific". At first he was worried about dying then he was worried he wouldn't die and the suffering would continue.

    And this was from a man I once saw casually quaff from a tin of cold chicken soup in the ACRB as we battled sea state 8 across the Flemish Cap.
    We went down to Antarctica a week later than anyone else had tried. Got there and discovered why - an early winter storm was a Force 11. Minus 17, but with wind-chill, minus 50-odd. We got stuck in a bay for 48 hours - and with a force 11 behind them, icebergs can't half shift. The big chaps showed up on radar, but the low-level "growlers" had to be scanned for visually. Which was fine, except for the white-out snow - and all the windows were freezing solid. We tried to break out the bay - which was poorly chartered - but too much seawater was freezing on the vessel. A big bank of heaters installed, passengers as volunteers to keep eyes open for anything we had to avoid.

    The captain said they were the worst conditions in his decades-long career. And if anything had gone wrong, we were the only surface vessel in Antarctica. And if you weren't on the bridge at 7.00 am and saw the mountain peaks, then you didn't actually see anything of Antarctica through the blizzards.

    But we saw some penguins. Hard-core birding!
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 3,171
    Government will not launch any legal action against decision to release Warboys.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694
    edited January 19

    What i can't work out is why the hell they've never put a decent road link between Manchester and Sheffield in. The snake and Woodhead passes are crap and leave you crawling through towns and villages on the Manchester side.

    If we're considering bridges over the channel, surely a tunnel through the peaks shouldn't be too much to ask for?

    Build a tunnel for those who want to get quickly from Mcr to Sheffield, and leave the Snake Pass for those who want to enjoy the drive ;)
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,846

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    TOPPING said:

    JonathanD said:

    Boris once more proving how unserious he is. If we are looking for grand engineering projects there are plenty that could be done in the north of England and which would be far more beneficial for growth.


    "Can we have more money for the NHS". "No, sorry". "Can we have more money for our armed forces". "No". "Schools?". "Nope". "Police?". "Nope". "A massive bridge across the English Channel?". "Of course. Great idea". The Tories actually want to lose, don't they.

    Hold on - does Labour want Government-inspired large infrastructure projects or not?
    There's nothing wrong with Government-inspired large infrastructure projects that are of great utility. Since there's already a Channel tunnel and no obvious present pressing need for a further crossing, this does not come in that category.

    Crossrail 2 and sorting out the Transpennine railways would both be a much higher priority. For that matter, improving the Scottish central belt's transport connectivity would also be very worthwhile.
    The M8 carpark is coming close to being an historic monument up here. If they don't improve it soon there may be additional planning issues.
    The Central Belt could easily develop sufficient gravity (and distance from London) to act as an independent centre within the UK to act as a sort of counterweight to London. It's far easier to envisage how one might achieve this than a Leeds/Manchester axis.

    I can't for the life of me understand why absolutely no one seems to be pushing the idea.
    They've just finished 3 laning & completing the motorway element of the M8 between Glasgow and Newhouse after 2+ years which helps a bit. I sense the will to do more at the moment is exhausted both in the budgetary & tolerance of delays departments.

    They really need to go something about Livingston/Bathgate stretches and its several exit/slip roads, it's a bugger for 6 hours a day.
    The Newhouse section is certainly an improvement but when you see the empty 3 lane motorway on the M6/M74 north of Manchester and south of Glasgow you really wonder about priorities. The lack of dual carriageway on the A1 south of Haddington to not much short of Newcastle is also absurd and a real drag on Scotland's economic growth.
    Useful in slowing the migration southward of the high tax refugees though :)
    LOL. Very good.
  • Sandpit said:

    What i can't work out is why the hell they've never put a decent road link between Manchester and Sheffield in. The snake and Woodhead passes are crap and leave you crawling through towns and villages on the Manchester side.

    If we're considering bridges over the channel, surely a tunnel through the peaks shouldn't be too much to ask for?

    Build a tunnel for those who want to get quickly from Mcr to Sheffield, and leave the Snake Pass for those who want to enjoy the drive ;)
    Well yes exactly! I used to travel from North Notts to North Wales a fair bit and must have tried 4 different ways including the dreaded M62, but the least worst option was always Woodhead Pass which given its atrocious through Tintwistle isn't saying much!
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,607
    edited January 19
    Jonathan said:

    Thanks for everyone's kind words. Whilst such things are generally highly charged and political in nature, I make no political point. We will get through this.

    I hope that if any politicians or policy makers are tuning in to PB today that they take note that behind every stat, every story and every data point there is a real person. The choices you make, change lives. Politics is not a game.

    Politics is full of 51-49 choices. It's a tough and bloody old career, and most of the time, thankless. Large chunks of our services now seem to be run on the verge of imminent collapse as the default setting. On the flip side of the 51-49, I'm sure there are families with elderly flu victims who are pleased that the bed became available. I just hope that the delay does not worsen your father-in-laws prognosis.

    But the only way this stops happening is if you have spare capacity in the system, and have politicians that are prepared to take the brickbats when that stands idle a portion of the year. But that is not a debate we have been having.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,846
    Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    TOPPING said:

    JonathanD said:

    The Central Belt could easily develop sufficient gravity (and distance from London) to act as an independent centre within the UK to act as a sort of counterweight to London. It's far easier to envisage how one might achieve this than a Leeds/Manchester axis.

    I can't for the life of me understand why absolutely no one seems to be pushing the idea.
    They've just finished 3 laning & completing the motorway element of the M8 between Glasgow and Newhouse after 2+ years which helps a bit. I sense the will to do more at the moment is exhausted both in the budgetary & tolerance of delays departments.

    They really need to go something about Livingston/Bathgate stretches and its several exit/slip roads, it's a bugger for 6 hours a day.
    The Newhouse section is certainly an improvement but when you see the empty 3 lane motorway on the M6/M74 north of Manchester and south of Glasgow you really wonder about priorities. The lack of dual carriageway on the A1 south of Haddington to not much short of Newcastle is also absurd and a real drag on Scotland's economic growth.
    But the Scottish government prefer to give your middle class kids a “free” university education, rather than address the profound infrastructure and transport issues preventing growth in the economy.
    Its driven by independence. They want/need the quick wins and have done nothing for the long term. Ironically our economy is the most compelling reason why we will not become an independent country. But who wants to be a drag or the slow boy in the class? I really want us to get on and I agree with Alastair that there are opportunities.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 12,744
    Jonathan said:

    Thanks for everyone's kind words. Whilst such things are generally highly charged and political in nature, I make no political point. We will get through this.

    I hope that if any politicians or policy makers are tuning in to PB today that they take note that behind every stat, every story and every data point there is a real person. The choices you make, change lives. Politics is not a game.

    Hope things get sorted asap for your father in law.
  • felixfelix Posts: 7,406
    Newport Pagnell N. & Hanslope (Milton Keynes) result: CON: 53.0% (+15.3) LAB: 24.8% (+11.7) LDEM: 22.2% (+6.8) Conservative HOLD.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 11,443
    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    TOPPING said:

    JonathanD said:

    The Central Belt could easily develop sufficient gravity (and distance from London) to act as an independent centre within the UK to act as a sort of counterweight to London. It's far easier to envisage how one might achieve this than a Leeds/Manchester axis.

    I can't for the life of me understand why absolutely no one seems to be pushing the idea.
    They've just finished 3 laning & completing the motorway element of the M8 between Glasgow and Newhouse after 2+ years which helps a bit. I sense the will to do more at the moment is exhausted both in the budgetary & tolerance of delays departments.

    They really need to go something about Livingston/Bathgate stretches and its several exit/slip roads, it's a bugger for 6 hours a day.
    The Newhouse section is certainly an improvement but when you see the empty 3 lane motorway on the M6/M74 north of Manchester and south of Glasgow you really wonder about priorities. The lack of dual carriageway on the A1 south of Haddington to not much short of Newcastle is also absurd and a real drag on Scotland's economic growth.
    But the Scottish government prefer to give your middle class kids a “free” university education, rather than address the profound infrastructure and transport issues preventing growth in the economy.
    Its driven by independence. They want/need the quick wins and have done nothing for the long term. Ironically our economy is the most compelling reason why we will not become an independent country. But who wants to be a drag or the slow boy in the class? I really want us to get on and I agree with Alastair that there are opportunities.

    Serious question, what are the SCons' proposals for education, SNHS, infrastructure, Brexit, long term business & economic strategies etc? Apart from no second referendum and Ruth trumpeting a so far illusory influence on UK government policy, I haven't really seen anything.

    Of course that may be down to the notoriously pro SNP Scottish media hiding Ruth's meticulously constructed plan for government under a bushel.
This discussion has been closed.