What we say we like and what we actually vote for are different. A lot of people pointed out Javids chances of becoming leader would be inhibited by being bald, as bald men disproportionately lose elections due to attractiveness bias.
That is not entirely true, Berlusconi, John Howard, Eisenhower, Churchill all managed to win at least one election despite being bald
Well yes but my main point is that what we say in answer to a poll, and what we actually like are two different things. I mean a number of the most popular ones apply to Nigel Farage. When people state that it is important to mean what they say, there is a big caveat which is as long as I agree with it.
Nigel Farage got 12% of the vote in 2015 and was a key driver of the Leave vote
There was a young man named Farage Who one day got stuck in his garage He campaigned so hard But let down his guard And suffered an electoral barrage.
I'm surprised there's not more discussion of the Lords vote on the EEA. I think it's actually unprecedented in modern British history for either House to pass a motion against the wishes of the leadership of BOTH major parties. Indeed, can anyone find a precedent even in previous centuries?
Their Lordships vote against the wishes of the working class Leave voting plebs to end free movement and leave the EEA. Not much more needs to be said, it is not much of a surprise
If only those horny handed sons of toil Boris Johnson, Jacob Rees Mogg and Nigel Farage could save us!
Must someone be of a class to act for that class? We laugh at champagne socialists, but there's nothing inherently wrong with speaking for others, even if it looks silly if that turns into pretending to be of those others.
What we say we like and what we actually vote for are different. A lot of people pointed out Javids chances of becoming leader would be inhibited by being bald, as bald men disproportionately lose elections due to attractiveness bias.
That is not entirely true, Berlusconi, John Howard, Eisenhower, Churchill all managed to win at least one election despite being bald
Well yes but my main point is that what we say in answer to a poll, and what we actually like are two different things. I mean a number of the most popular ones apply to Nigel Farage. When people state that it is important to mean what they say, there is a big caveat which is as long as I agree with it.
Nigel Farage got 12% of the vote in 2015 and was a key driver of the Leave vote
There was a young man named Farage Who one day got stuck in his garage He campaigned so hard But let down his guard And suffered an electoral barrage.
I'm surprised there's not more discussion of the Lords vote on the EEA. I think it's actually unprecedented in modern British history for either House to pass a motion against the wishes of the leadership of BOTH major parties. Indeed, can anyone find a precedent even in previous centuries?
Their Lordships vote against the wishes of the working class Leave voting plebs to end free movement and leave the EEA. Not much more needs to be said, it is not much of a surprise
If only those horny handed sons of toil Boris Johnson, Jacob Rees Mogg and Nigel Farage could save us!
They are more in tune with working class voters on Brexit than their Lordships
I dont think so. They all represent a free market vision of deregulated Britain, while the Working Class voters by and large wanted to raise the drawbridge in order to keep foreigners and competition away from fortress Britain. It is a very different goal, and one of the many Leave timebombs.
I think we are entering a constitutional crisis, without a constitution.
We do have a constitution. A very detailed one.
We have a system of government.
Brexit is showing it up as the nonsensical, chaotic, unserious monstrosity that it is.
Bring on a general election.
We absolutely have a constitution, that is simple fact. Lack of codification doesn't mean it doesn't exist, so you can rest easy we are not entering into a constitutional crisis without one. What it might, in practice, require however, could be unclear.
How would a General Election make things less chaotic though? Our constitutional arrangements are unlikely to be changed by a snap GE, and those that would be proposed by a party hoping to win would likely take a long time, be very muddled, or both.
We certainly have a great many things in our system which could be improved - I'm pretty sure the Political and Constitutional Reform Committee spent 5 years exploring options for codification for instance - but expecting a GE to fix them strikes me as rather silly. It is the continual tinkering that has been both its strength and weakness.
I think May is finished. The ERG will deal the final blow.
Even if she survives, they won’t support the Versailles that she is negotiating.
Ultimately it is Parliament they need to convince, not May given she has no majority
Problem is the ERG and friends appear to have ramped things up so much that they cannot back down, yet the only things May could get through parliament requires them to. I don't know for sure that she is finished, but it is looking more likely than not at the moment.
I'm surprised there's not more discussion of the Lords vote on the EEA. I think it's actually unprecedented in modern British history for either House to pass a motion against the wishes of the leadership of BOTH major parties. Indeed, can anyone find a precedent even in previous centuries?
Their Lordships vote against the wishes of the working class Leave voting plebs to end free movement and leave the EEA. Not much more needs to be said, it is not much of a surprise
If only those horny handed sons of toil Boris Johnson, Jacob Rees Mogg and Nigel Farage could save us!
Must someone be of a class to act for that class? We laugh at champagne socialists, but there's nothing inherently wrong with speaking for others, even if it looks silly if that turns into pretending to be of those others.
"I don't pretend to be a man OF the people. But I do try to be a man FOR the people." - Derek Jacobi in "Gladiator", 2000.
I'm surprised there's not more discussion of the Lords vote on the EEA. I think it's actually unprecedented in modern British history for either House to pass a motion against the wishes of the leadership of BOTH major parties. Indeed, can anyone find a precedent even in previous centuries?
Their Lordships vote against the wishes of the working class Leave voting plebs to end free movement and leave the EEA. Not much more needs to be said, it is not much of a surprise
If only those horny handed sons of toil Boris Johnson, Jacob Rees Mogg and Nigel Farage could save us!
Must someone be of a class to act for that class? We laugh at champagne socialists, but there's nothing inherently wrong with speaking for others, even if it looks silly if that turns into pretending to be of those others.
"I don't pretend to be a man OF the people. But I do try to be a man FOR the people." - Derek Jacobi in "Gladiator", 2000.
I had to work very hard not to use that quote, it is one of my favourites; I get all my life lessons from TV and Movies. And I believe it was Senator Gracchus who said it, thank you - Mr Jacobi the actor may have felt quite differently to the character.
I'm surprised there's not more discussion of the Lords vote on the EEA. I think it's actually unprecedented in modern British history for either House to pass a motion against the wishes of the leadership of BOTH major parties. Indeed, can anyone find a precedent even in previous centuries?
Their Lordships vote against the wishes of the working class Leave voting plebs to end free movement and leave the EEA. Not much more needs to be said, it is not much of a surprise
If only those horny handed sons of toil Boris Johnson, Jacob Rees Mogg and Nigel Farage could save us!
Must someone be of a class to act for that class? We laugh at champagne socialists, but there's nothing inherently wrong with speaking for others, even if it looks silly if that turns into pretending to be of those others.
"I don't pretend to be a man OF the people. But I do try to be a man FOR the people." - Derek Jacobi in "Gladiator", 2000.
I had to work very hard not to use that quote, it is one of my favourites; I get all my life lessons from TV and Movies. And I believe it was Senator Gracchus who said it, thank you - Mr Jacobi the actor may have felt quite differently to the character.
"Win the crowd and you will win your freedom!" - Oliver Reed as Proximo in "Gladiator", 2000.
I'm surprised there's not more discussion of the Lords vote on the EEA. I think it's actually unprecedented in modern British history for either House to pass a motion against the wishes of the leadership of BOTH major parties. Indeed, can anyone find a precedent even in previous centuries?
As a nation we are entering incredibly serious and uncharted waters now...
I'm surprised there's not more discussion of the Lords vote on the EEA. I think it's actually unprecedented in modern British history for either House to pass a motion against the wishes of the leadership of BOTH major parties. Indeed, can anyone find a precedent even in previous centuries?
Their Lordships vote against the wishes of the working class Leave voting plebs to end free movement and leave the EEA. Not much more needs to be said, it is not much of a surprise
If only those horny handed sons of toil Boris Johnson, Jacob Rees Mogg and Nigel Farage could save us!
They are more in tune with working class voters on Brexit than their Lordships
I dont think so. They all represent a free market vision of deregulated Britain, while the Working Class voters by and large wanted to raise the drawbridge in order to keep foreigners and competition away from fortress Britain. It is a very different goal, and one of the many Leave timebombs.
The House of Lords tonight voted to keep us in the EEA which by definition requires continued free movement, in opposition to the Lords on that both Boris, Mogg, Farage and the working class are united
I think May is finished. The ERG will deal the final blow.
Even if she survives, they won’t support the Versailles that she is negotiating.
Ultimately it is Parliament they need to convince, not May given she has no majority
Problem is the ERG and friends appear to have ramped things up so much that they cannot back down, yet the only things May could get through parliament requires them to. I don't know for sure that she is finished, but it is looking more likely than not at the moment.
Good night all.
May is probably the only Tory who can manage to get something through that satisfies both Remainers and Brexiteers, those who ask if she is finished are asking the wrong question, it is more whether their vision of Brexit is finished
The biggest risk to the Republicans of the Trump administration is not the loss of a Senatorial or House seat here or there, it is the unravelling of the Republicans as the party of State government.
Across the US, the Republicans dominate State government. They have more than two thirds of Governors, and control a larger proportion of state Senates. And this means that they have draw up Congressional districts.
The current Democratic leads will land them control of several state Senates. And this means that gerrymandering is likely to go the other way. This, to my mind, is the thing to watch in 2018.
The biggest risk to the Republicans of the Trump administration is not the loss of a Senatorial or House seat here or there, it is the unravelling of the Republicans as the party of State government.
Across the US, the Republicans dominate State government. They have more than two thirds of Governors, and control a larger proportion of state Senates. And this means that they have draw up Congressional districts.
The current Democratic leads will land them control of several state Senates. And this means that gerrymandering is likely to go the other way. This, to my mind, is the thing to watch in 2018.
Allowing politicians to draw their own constituency boundaries is one of the more bonkers aspects of the American political system
The biggest risk to the Republicans of the Trump administration is not the loss of a Senatorial or House seat here or there, it is the unravelling of the Republicans as the party of State government.
Across the US, the Republicans dominate State government. They have more than two thirds of Governors, and control a larger proportion of state Senates. And this means that they have draw up Congressional districts.
The current Democratic leads will land them control of several state Senates. And this means that gerrymandering is likely to go the other way. This, to my mind, is the thing to watch in 2018.
Allowing politicians to draw their own constituency boundaries is one of the more bonkers aspects of the American political system
I'm surprised there's not more discussion of the Lords vote on the EEA. I think it's actually unprecedented in modern British history for either House to pass a motion against the wishes of the leadership of BOTH major parties. Indeed, can anyone find a precedent even in previous centuries?
Their Lordships vote against the wishes of the working class Leave voting plebs to end free movement and leave the EEA. Not much more needs to be said, it is not much of a surprise
i think Nan off the Catherine Tate show sums up the reaction of many to this example of the Lords seriously over-reaching on the single market/EEA. Apologies for the language but it is post watershed!
Chuka in 2016 and the fact that something 2 years old made no waves tells us Labour splits on Brexit do not matter. It is hard enough keeping up with the 17 different Brexit policies being pursued by the Cabinet and they are in power. Well, they are in office anyway.
What we say we like and what we actually vote for are different. A lot of people pointed out Javids chances of becoming leader would be inhibited by being bald, as bald men disproportionately lose elections due to attractiveness bias.
People say they want honesty. What they really want is for politicians to tell them what they want to hear, and for that to be true too.
It appears Israel has wasted no time backing up its rhetoric. Yet another strike in Syria against a surface to surface missile convoy at the south end of Damascus.
And they may not be done for the night. Everyone, apparently, knows they are coming but no one seems to be able to organise to successfully step them back.
Western foreign policy is directed by the Saudi and Zionist regimes. The EU27 and the UK will have to fall in line and scrap the Iran deal. If their companies continue to trade with Iran, they will be treated as "friends of the enemy" and suffer severe economic sanctions.
What we say we like and what we actually vote for are different. A lot of people pointed out Javids chances of becoming leader would be inhibited by being bald, as bald men disproportionately lose elections due to attractiveness bias.
People say they want honesty. What they really want is for politicians to tell them what they want to hear, and for that to be true too.
Yep. Similarly people want good news and no-one gets credit for a gloomy prediction, even when prescient.
What we say we like and what we actually vote for are different. A lot of people pointed out Javids chances of becoming leader would be inhibited by being bald, as bald men disproportionately lose elections due to attractiveness bias.
People say they want honesty. What they really want is for politicians to tell them what they want to hear, and for that to be true too.
Yep. Similarly people want good news and no-one gets credit for a gloomy prediction, even when prescient.
That of course has always been true. Look at the unfortunate Cassandra.
48% for Labour in Lewisham East at the local elections wasn't exactly a crushing performance. They could potentially lose the seat with 45%.
The bar chart maker must be very creative. To show 12% share "winning here" is difficult!
The LibDems rising from 4.4% in 2017 to 8% in last week's mayoral justifies a nice big yellow column with +80% on it. Over the same year Labours vote is plummeting with a dramatic -20% slump, as are the Tories by roughly -40%, so there's two falling columns for you. The only problem is finding some reason to forget to include the Green Party.
48% for Labour in Lewisham East at the local elections wasn't exactly a crushing performance. They could potentially lose the seat with 45%.
The bar chart maker must be very creative. To show 12% share "winning here" is difficult!
The LibDems rising from 4.4% in 2017 to 8% in last week's mayoral justifies a nice big yellow column with +80% on it. Over the same year Labours vote is plummeting with a dramatic -20% slump, as are the Tories by roughly -40%, so there's two falling columns for you. The only problem is finding some reason to forget to include the Green Party.
In order to make Green, you have to mix Blue and Yellow, and the Yellows ain't gonna allow that again for a while after the last time.
So there are no Greens at the moment, only people who don't realise the basic scientific truth of what I've said and can be ignored.
The biggest risk to the Republicans of the Trump administration is not the loss of a Senatorial or House seat here or there, it is the unravelling of the Republicans as the party of State government.
Across the US, the Republicans dominate State government. They have more than two thirds of Governors, and control a larger proportion of state Senates. And this means that they have draw up Congressional districts.
The current Democratic leads will land them control of several state Senates. And this means that gerrymandering is likely to go the other way. This, to my mind, is the thing to watch in 2018.
Allowing politicians to draw their own constituency boundaries is one of the more bonkers aspects of the American political system
48% for Labour in Lewisham East at the local elections wasn't exactly a crushing performance. They could potentially lose the seat with 45%.
The local CLP is dominated by moderates. If the NEC imposes a Momentum-backed candidate it could spark the kind of row that might make things interesting, while once again opening up questions about exactly how the far left defines internal Labour democracy. It should be a safe Labour hold, though.
Still not convinced local elections are a very useful guide to a general election, particularly post-Brexit.
This graph clearly shows Corbyn doing worse than Miliband, Kinnock or Michael Foot. But in the recent GE he did much better than all of them.
They tell us that Labour isn't riding triumphant over everyone else right now. And that last year's GE had as much to do with the Tory campaign as the Labour one. They also hint at some diminishing returns of having an army of people knocking on doors. But not much more.
Still not convinced local elections are a very useful guide to a general election, particularly post-Brexit.
This graph clearly shows Corbyn doing worse than Miliband, Kinnock or Michael Foot. But in the recent GE he did much better than all of them.
Surely the effect is the to excite and motivate the party workers.
The effect of a local election? Not sure what you mean... And belated happy returns!
Many thanks. Very odd, seeing all the birthday cards with the number on it, but feeling mentally and (fairly at least) physically active. Something tells me I ought not to be, but I am!
I mean that if there is ‘success’ however measured, in a local election, then party workers feel that there’s some point to what they are doing and do more of it.
48% for Labour in Lewisham East at the local elections wasn't exactly a crushing performance. They could potentially lose the seat with 45%.
The local CLP is dominated by moderates. If the NEC imposes a Momentum-backed candidate it could spark the kind of row that might make things interesting, while once again opening up questions about exactly how the far left defines internal Labour democracy. It should be a safe Labour hold, though.
Unless Labour split and field two candidates or put forward somebody with questions to answer on child sex abuse - something really crazy like that - there is surely no way they can lose Lewisham.
Still not convinced local elections are a very useful guide to a general election, particularly post-Brexit.
This graph clearly shows Corbyn doing worse than Miliband, Kinnock or Michael Foot. But in the recent GE he did much better than all of them.
They tell us that Labour isn't riding triumphant over everyone else right now. And that last year's GE had as much to do with the Tory campaign as the Labour one. They also hint at some diminishing returns of having an army of people knocking on doors. But not much more.
Points 1 and 3 were obvious well before the local election I would argue. Point 2 I'm still not sure about. Clearly the Tories made missteps, but so did Labour, and at the end of the day both got enough votes they would normally expect to win a majority. I remain convinced that Labour's manifesto was a big positive for the party.
Still not convinced local elections are a very useful guide to a general election, particularly post-Brexit.
This graph clearly shows Corbyn doing worse than Miliband, Kinnock or Michael Foot. But in the recent GE he did much better than all of them.
They tell us that Labour isn't riding triumphant over everyone else right now. And that last year's GE had as much to do with the Tory campaign as the Labour one. They also hint at some diminishing returns of having an army of people knocking on doors. But not much more.
Points 1 and 3 were obvious well before the local election I would argue. Point 2 I'm still not sure about. Clearly the Tories made missteps, but so did Labour, and at the end of the day both got enough votes they would normally expect to win a majority. I remain convinced that Labour's manifesto was a big positive for the party.
I don't disagree. My point was that effectively Labour tried to run the same campaign again last week, whereas the Tories didn't.
Still not convinced local elections are a very useful guide to a general election, particularly post-Brexit.
This graph clearly shows Corbyn doing worse than Miliband, Kinnock or Michael Foot. But in the recent GE he did much better than all of them.
They tell us that Labour isn't riding triumphant over everyone else right now. And that last year's GE had as much to do with the Tory campaign as the Labour one. They also hint at some diminishing returns of having an army of people knocking on doors. But not much more.
Points 1 and 3 were obvious well before the local election I would argue. Point 2 I'm still not sure about. Clearly the Tories made missteps, but so did Labour, and at the end of the day both got enough votes they would normally expect to win a majority. I remain convinced that Labour's manifesto was a big positive for the party.
I'm still disappointed that having promised free ownership of utilities, free university education, free school meals, free road building and free housing, they didn't go the whole hog and promise free unicorns.
Fun fact - the last bald party leader to win an election (discounting Cameron's combover) was Winston Churchill in 1951, up against Attlee who was also bald.
Before those two I think I'm right in saying it was the Marquis of Salisbury in 1900.
What we say we like and what we actually vote for are different. A lot of people pointed out Javids chances of becoming leader would be inhibited by being bald, as bald men disproportionately lose elections due to attractiveness bias.
People say they want honesty. What they really want is for politicians to tell them what they want to hear, and for that to be true too.
Yep. Similarly people want good news and no-one gets credit for a gloomy prediction, even when prescient.
That of course has always been true. Look at the unfortunate Cassandra.
Hmm...Always? Winston Churchill - "I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat."
What we say we like and what we actually vote for are different. A lot of people pointed out Javids chances of becoming leader would be inhibited by being bald, as bald men disproportionately lose elections due to attractiveness bias.
People say they want honesty. What they really want is for politicians to tell them what they want to hear, and for that to be true too.
Yep. Similarly people want good news and no-one gets credit for a gloomy prediction, even when prescient.
That of course has always been true. Look at the unfortunate Cassandra.
Hmm...Always? Winston Churchill - "I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat."
He was clever enough to miss out the 'your' from the sentence, I guess?
What we say we like and what we actually vote for are different. A lot of people pointed out Javids chances of becoming leader would be inhibited by being bald, as bald men disproportionately lose elections due to attractiveness bias.
People say they want honesty. What they really want is for politicians to tell them what they want to hear, and for that to be true too.
Yep. Similarly people want good news and no-one gets credit for a gloomy prediction, even when prescient.
That of course has always been true. Look at the unfortunate Cassandra.
Hmm...Always? Winston Churchill - "I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat."
You've missed out the last section;
'You ask, what is our aim? It is victory.'
Edit: you might also have added that in 1945 when he correctly stated the country couldn't afford to implement the Beveridge report immediately, he lost to the Labour Party, who claimed it could be done at once but had to use Marshall Aid to make it happen.
Fun fact - the last bald party leader to win an election (discounting Cameron's combover) was Winston Churchill in 1951, up against Attlee who was also bald.
Before those two I think I'm right in saying it was the Marquis of Salisbury in 1900.
DC's combover was mildly embarrassing. Javid at least is loud and proud about his baldness.
Still not convinced local elections are a very useful guide to a general election, particularly post-Brexit.
This graph clearly shows Corbyn doing worse than Miliband, Kinnock or Michael Foot. But in the recent GE he did much better than all of them.
They tell us that Labour isn't riding triumphant over everyone else right now. And that last year's GE had as much to do with the Tory campaign as the Labour one. They also hint at some diminishing returns of having an army of people knocking on doors. But not much more.
Points 1 and 3 were obvious well before the local election I would argue. Point 2 I'm still not sure about. Clearly the Tories made missteps, but so did Labour, and at the end of the day both got enough votes they would normally expect to win a majority. I remain convinced that Labour's manifesto was a big positive for the party.
I'm still disappointed that having promised free ownership of utilities, free university education, free school meals, free road building and free housing, they didn't go the whole hog and promise free unicorns.
Still not convinced local elections are a very useful guide to a general election, particularly post-Brexit.
This graph clearly shows Corbyn doing worse than Miliband, Kinnock or Michael Foot. But in the recent GE he did much better than all of them.
They tell us that Labour isn't riding triumphant over everyone else right now. And that last year's GE had as much to do with the Tory campaign as the Labour one. They also hint at some diminishing returns of having an army of people knocking on doors. But not much more.
Points 1 and 3 were obvious well before the local election I would argue. Point 2 I'm still not sure about. Clearly the Tories made missteps, but so did Labour, and at the end of the day both got enough votes they would normally expect to win a majority. I remain convinced that Labour's manifesto was a big positive for the party.
I'm still disappointed that having promised free ownership of utilities, free university education, free school meals, free road building and free housing, they didn't go the whole hog and promise free unicorns.
What we say we like and what we actually vote for are different. A lot of people pointed out Javids chances of becoming leader would be inhibited by being bald, as bald men disproportionately lose elections due to attractiveness bias.
People say they want honesty. What they really want is for politicians to tell them what they want to hear, and for that to be true too.
Yep. Similarly people want good news and no-one gets credit for a gloomy prediction, even when prescient.
That of course has always been true. Look at the unfortunate Cassandra.
Hmm...Always? Winston Churchill - "I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat."
You've missed out the last section;
'You ask, what is our aim? It is victory.'
Edit: you might also have added that when he correctly stated the country couldn't afford to implement the Beveridge report immediately, he lost to the Labour Party, who claimed it oculus but had to use Marshall Aid to make it happen.
Do I gather that the young people you teach are now involved with exams, and you have more free time?
What we say we like and what we actually vote for are different. A lot of people pointed out Javids chances of becoming leader would be inhibited by being bald, as bald men disproportionately lose elections due to attractiveness bias.
People say they want honesty. What they really want is for politicians to tell them what they want to hear, and for that to be true too.
Yep. Similarly people want good news and no-one gets credit for a gloomy prediction, even when prescient.
That of course has always been true. Look at the unfortunate Cassandra.
Hmm...Always? Winston Churchill - "I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat."
He was clever enough to miss out the 'your' from the sentence, I guess?
48% for Labour in Lewisham East at the local elections wasn't exactly a crushing performance. They could potentially lose the seat with 45%.
The local CLP is dominated by moderates. If the NEC imposes a Momentum-backed candidate it could spark the kind of row that might make things interesting, while once again opening up questions about exactly how the far left defines internal Labour democracy. It should be a safe Labour hold, though.
Unless Labour split and field two candidates or put forward somebody with questions to answer on child sex abuse - something really crazy like that - there is surely no way they can lose Lewisham.
Didn't Ken Livingstone say that he fancies a return to Parliament?
Still not convinced local elections are a very useful guide to a general election, particularly post-Brexit.
This graph clearly shows Corbyn doing worse than Miliband, Kinnock or Michael Foot. But in the recent GE he did much better than all of them.
They tell us that Labour isn't riding triumphant over everyone else right now. And that last year's GE had as much to do with the Tory campaign as the Labour one. They also hint at some diminishing returns of having an army of people knocking on doors. But not much more.
Points 1 and 3 were obvious well before the local election I would argue. Point 2 I'm still not sure about. Clearly the Tories made missteps, but so did Labour, and at the end of the day both got enough votes they would normally expect to win a majority. I remain convinced that Labour's manifesto was a big positive for the party.
I'm still disappointed that having promised free ownership of utilities, free university education, free school meals, free road building and free housing, they didn't go the whole hog and promise free unicorns.
I don't think it would get on with the dog.
What?!! They promised free dogs as well? I missed that one!
Interesting graph. Mostly, those who do best had their opposition period after a long time of Conservative incumbency. Callaghan and Corbyn (if we count the Coalition as Mostly Conservative) seem to buck that trend.
What we say we like and what we actually vote for are different. A lot of people pointed out Javids chances of becoming leader would be inhibited by being bald, as bald men disproportionately lose elections due to attractiveness bias.
People say they want honesty. What they really want is for politicians to tell them what they want to hear, and for that to be true too.
Yep. Similarly people want good news and no-one gets credit for a gloomy prediction, even when prescient.
That of course has always been true. Look at the unfortunate Cassandra.
Hmm...Always? Winston Churchill - "I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat."
You've missed out the last section;
'You ask, what is our aim? It is victory.'
Edit: you might also have added that when he correctly stated the country couldn't afford to implement the Beveridge report immediately, he lost to the Labour Party, who claimed it oculus but had to use Marshall Aid to make it happen.
Do I gather that the young people you teach are now involved with exams, and you have more free time?
Sadly not yet. Exams start today and kick off properly next week.
I hope you had some good free time over the big day though and were not too disheartened by Essex's rare stumble to Yorkshire.
What we say we like and what we actually vote for are different. A lot of people pointed out Javids chances of becoming leader would be inhibited by being bald, as bald men disproportionately lose elections due to attractiveness bias.
People say they want honesty. What they really want is for politicians to tell them what they want to hear, and for that to be true too.
Yep. Similarly people want good news and no-one gets credit for a gloomy prediction, even when prescient.
That of course has always been true. Look at the unfortunate Cassandra.
Hmm...Always? Winston Churchill - "I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat."
You've missed out the last section;
'You ask, what is our aim? It is victory.'
Edit: you might also have added that in 1945 when he correctly stated the country couldn't afford to implement the Beveridge report immediately, he lost to the Labour Party, who claimed it could be done at once but had to use Marshall Aid to make it happen.
I'm not too proud to deny a tear in the eye when watching that in Darkest Hour. What a sensationally good film that was, despite the ridiculous and unnecessary Tube scene.
Still not convinced local elections are a very useful guide to a general election, particularly post-Brexit.
This graph clearly shows Corbyn doing worse than Miliband, Kinnock or Michael Foot. But in the recent GE he did much better than all of them.
They tell us that Labour isn't riding triumphant over everyone else right now. And that last year's GE had as much to do with the Tory campaign as the Labour one. They also hint at some diminishing returns of having an army of people knocking on doors. But not much more.
Points 1 and 3 were obvious well before the local election I would argue. Point 2 I'm still not sure about. Clearly the Tories made missteps, but so did Labour, and at the end of the day both got enough votes they would normally expect to win a majority. I remain convinced that Labour's manifesto was a big positive for the party.
I'm still disappointed that having promised free ownership of utilities, free university education, free school meals, free road building and free housing, they didn't go the whole hog and promise free unicorns.
I don't think it would get on with the dog.
What?!! They promised free dogs as well? I missed that one!
Certainly the park would be a nightmare to navigate what with everyone taking their free unicorn for a walk and its morning evacuation.
Still not convinced local elections are a very useful guide to a general election, particularly post-Brexit.
This graph clearly shows Corbyn doing worse than Miliband, Kinnock or Michael Foot. But in the recent GE he did much better than all of them.
They tell us that Labour isn't riding triumphant over everyone else right now. And that last year's GE had as much to do with the Tory campaign as the Labour one. They also hint at some diminishing returns of having an army of people knocking on doors. But not much more.
Points 1 and 3 were obvious well before the local election I would argue. Point 2 I'm still not sure about. Clearly the Tories made missteps, but so did Labour, and at the end of the day both got enough votes they would normally expect to win a majority. I remain convinced that Labour's manifesto was a big positive for the party.
I'm still disappointed that having promised free ownership of utilities, free university education, free school meals, free road building and free housing, they didn't go the whole hog and promise free unicorns.
I don't think it would get on with the dog.
What?!! They promised free dogs as well? I missed that one!
Certainly the park would be a nightmare to navigate what with everyone taking their free unicorn for a walk and its morning evacuation.
That's the problem with Liberal Democrats. Everything always turns to shit.
Still not convinced local elections are a very useful guide to a general election, particularly post-Brexit.
This graph clearly shows Corbyn doing worse than Miliband, Kinnock or Michael Foot. But in the recent GE he did much better than all of them.
They tell us that Labour isn't riding triumphant over everyone else right now. And that last year's GE had as much to do with the Tory campaign as the Labour one. They also hint at some diminishing returns of having an army of people knocking on doors. But not much more.
Points 1 and 3 were obvious well before the local election I would argue. Point 2 I'm still not sure about. Clearly the Tories made missteps, but so did Labour, and at the end of the day both got enough votes they would normally expect to win a majority. I remain convinced that Labour's manifesto was a big positive for the party.
I'm still disappointed that having promised free ownership of utilities, free university education, free school meals, free road building and free housing, they didn't go the whole hog and promise free unicorns.
Still not convinced local elections are a very useful guide to a general election, particularly post-Brexit.
This graph clearly shows Corbyn doing worse than Miliband, Kinnock or Michael Foot. But in the recent GE he did much better than all of them.
They tell us that Labour isn't riding triumphant over everyone else right now. And that last year's GE had as much to do with the Tory campaign as the Labour one. They also hint at some diminishing returns of having an army of people knocking on doors. But not much more.
Points 1 and 3 were obvious well before the local election I would argue. Point 2 I'm still not sure about. Clearly the Tories made missteps, but so did Labour, and at the end of the day both got enough votes they would normally expect to win a majority. I remain convinced that Labour's manifesto was a big positive for the party.
I'm still disappointed that having promised free ownership of utilities, free university education, free school meals, free road building and free housing, they didn't go the whole hog and promise free unicorns.
I don't think it would get on with the dog.
What?!! They promised free dogs as well? I missed that one!
Certainly the park would be a nightmare to navigate what with everyone taking their free unicorn for a walk and its morning evacuation.
That's the problem with Liberal Democrats. Everything always turns to shit.
You would certainly need a lot of unicorn bins. Typical Labour; easy promises without thinking through the consequences.
Still not convinced local elections are a very useful guide to a general election, particularly post-Brexit.
This graph clearly shows Corbyn doing worse than Miliband, Kinnock or Michael Foot. But in the recent GE he did much better than all of them.
Surely the effect is the to excite and motivate the party workers.
The effect of a local election? Not sure what you mean... And belated happy returns!
Many thanks. Very odd, seeing all the birthday cards with the number on it, but feeling mentally and (fairly at least) physically active. Something tells me I ought not to be, but I am!
I mean that if there is ‘success’ however measured, in a local election, then party workers feel that there’s some point to what they are doing and do more of it.
Thanks - yes I'm sure you're right. There may be a long way to go before the next GE and it is important that Labour supporters stay motivated.
Still not convinced local elections are a very useful guide to a general election, particularly post-Brexit.
This graph clearly shows Corbyn doing worse than Miliband, Kinnock or Michael Foot. But in the recent GE he did much better than all of them.
Surely the effect is the to excite and motivate the party workers.
The effect of a local election? Not sure what you mean... And belated happy returns!
Many thanks. Very odd, seeing all the birthday cards with the number on it, but feeling mentally and (fairly at least) physically active. Something tells me I ought not to be, but I am!
I mean that if there is ‘success’ however measured, in a local election, then party workers feel that there’s some point to what they are doing and do more of it.
Thanks - yes I'm sure you're right. There may be a long way to go before the next GE and it is important that Labour supporters stay motivated.
From a GE when everyone was a loser to an LE when everyone won (except UKIP, of course).
What we say we like and what we actually vote for are different. A lot of people pointed out Javids chances of becoming leader would be inhibited by being bald, as bald men disproportionately lose elections due to attractiveness bias.
People say they want honesty. What they really want is for politicians to tell them what they want to hear, and for that to be true too.
Yep. Similarly people want good news and no-one gets credit for a gloomy prediction, even when prescient.
That of course has always been true. Look at the unfortunate Cassandra.
Hmm...Always? Winston Churchill - "I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat."
You've missed out the last section;
'You ask, what is our aim? It is victory.'
Edit: you might also have added that when he correctly stated the country couldn't afford to implement the Beveridge report immediately, he lost to the Labour Party, who claimed it oculus but had to use Marshall Aid to make it happen.
Do I gather that the young people you teach are now involved with exams, and you have more free time?
Sadly not yet. Exams start today and kick off properly next week.
I hope you had some good free time over the big day though and were not too disheartened by Essex's rare stumble to Yorkshire.
Thank you. I had an excellent day with much of my family present.
What we say we like and what we actually vote for are different. A lot of people pointed out Javids chances of becoming leader would be inhibited by being bald, as bald men disproportionately lose elections due to attractiveness bias.
People say they want honesty. What they really want is for politicians to tell them what they want to hear, and for that to be true too.
Yep. Similarly people want good news and no-one gets credit for a gloomy prediction, even when prescient.
That of course has always been true. Look at the unfortunate Cassandra.
Hmm...Always? Winston Churchill - "I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat."
You've missed out the last section;
'You ask, what is our aim? It is victory.'
Edit: you might also have added that in 1945 when he correctly stated the country couldn't afford to implement the Beveridge report immediately, he lost to the Labour Party, who claimed it could be done at once but had to use Marshall Aid to make it happen.
I'm not too proud to deny a tear in the eye when watching that in Darkest Hour. What a sensationally good film that was, despite the ridiculous and unnecessary Tube scene.
I’m afraid that scene really did ruin it for me.
Most moving part for me was the sacrifice of the Calais garrison.
Still not convinced local elections are a very useful guide to a general election, particularly post-Brexit.
This graph clearly shows Corbyn doing worse than Miliband, Kinnock or Michael Foot. But in the recent GE he did much better than all of them.
They tell us that Labour isn't riding triumphant over everyone else right now. And that last year's GE had as much to do with the Tory campaign as the Labour one. They also hint at some diminishing returns of having an army of people knocking on doors. But not much more.
Points 1 and 3 were obvious well before the local election I would argue. Point 2 I'm still not sure about. Clearly the Tories made missteps, but so did Labour, and at the end of the day both got enough votes they would normally expect to win a majority. I remain convinced that Labour's manifesto was a big positive for the party.
I'm still disappointed that having promised free ownership of utilities, free university education, free school meals, free road building and free housing, they didn't go the whole hog and promise free unicorns.
Didn't know free unicorns were 'standard European social democrat policies' - can you give me an example?
More seriously, it wasn't the policies themselves I had a beef with, even though I was doubtful about how effective most of them would be in practice. It was the blatant lie that they could be afforded from either extraordinary revenue or modest tax increase (always on somebody else) that did (and does) raise my hackles.
For example does anyone really think the confiscation of the water industry - which is what Corbyn effectively proposed - would not have had rather serious knock-on financial consequences, especially for pensions?
His faintly bizarre claim that utility prices would be lower in the public sector and profits would then accrue to the State rather overlooks the minor point that most utilities, especially railways, are effectively run at a loss. In many ways, that's the real argument for renationalising them. However, that then means taxes have to go up to meet the gap if prices are to be reduced, which was not allowed for in this allegedly 'fully costed' manifesto.
And underpinning it all was the assumption the gilts market would et him ramp up borrowing sixfold in his first year alone, which to say the least was a bold assumption.
Has anyone managed to extricate Boris's head from Donald's derriere yet? If not it might be a good time for Mrs May to make her move......
Struggling with your description. Did he not go to the US to try and talk Trump from repudiating the Iran agreement, even if he failed? If he thought a little flattery would make his message more palatable I don't think he can be blamed for trying.
Two or three good bars and a whopping bonus and bankers will go anywhere. Just a Frankfurter journo who doesn't want them doing to frankfurt what they've done to london
Didn't know free unicorns were 'standard European social democrat policies' - can you give me an example?
More seriously, it wasn't the policies themselves I had a beef with, even though I was doubtful about how effective most of them would be in practice. It was the blatant lie that they could be afforded from either extraordinary revenue or modest tax increase (always on somebody else) that did (and does) raise my hackles.
For example does anyone really think the confiscation of the water industry - which is what Corbyn effectively proposed - would not have had rather serious knock-on financial consequences, especially for pensions?
His faintly bizarre claim that utility prices would be lower in the public sector and profits would then accrue to the State rather overlooks the minor point that most utilities, especially railways, are effectively run at a loss. In many ways, that's the real argument for renationalising them. However, that then means taxes have to go up to meet the gap if prices are to be reduced, which was not allowed for in this allegedly 'fully costed' manifesto.
And underpinning it all was the assumption the gilts market would et him ramp up borrowing sixfold in his first year alone, which to say the least was a bold assumption.
Has anyone managed to extricate Boris's head from Donald's derriere yet? If not it might be a good time for Mrs May to make her move......
Struggling with your description. Did he not go to the US to try and talk Trump from repudiating the Iran agreement, even if he failed? If he thought a little flattery would make his message more palatable I don't think he can be blamed for trying.
Pathetic and humiliating. International watchers must have been squirming
Has anyone managed to extricate Boris's head from Donald's derriere yet? If not it might be a good time for Mrs May to make her move......
Struggling with your description. Did he not go to the US to try and talk Trump from repudiating the Iran agreement, even if he failed? If he thought a little flattery would make his message more palatable I don't think he can be blamed for trying.
Indeed - the appearance on Trump's favourite tv show was well worth a try I would say. Presumably war with Iran just became more likely? Will Europe stick to the deal and ignore the US or fall in behind Trump?
Two or three good bars and a whopping bonus and bankers will go anywhere. Just a Frankfurter journo who doesn't want them doing to frankfurt what they've done to london
Has anyone managed to extricate Boris's head from Donald's derriere yet? If not it might be a good time for Mrs May to make her move......
Struggling with your description. Did he not go to the US to try and talk Trump from repudiating the Iran agreement, even if he failed? If he thought a little flattery would make his message more palatable I don't think he can be blamed for trying.
Pathetic and humiliating. International watchers must have been squirming
Has anyone managed to extricate Boris's head from Donald's derriere yet? If not it might be a good time for Mrs May to make her move......
Struggling with your description. Did he not go to the US to try and talk Trump from repudiating the Iran agreement, even if he failed? If he thought a little flattery would make his message more palatable I don't think he can be blamed for trying.
Pathetic and humiliating. International watchers must have been squirming
you seem particularly tetchy today Roger, maybe its time to change your mohel
Has anyone managed to extricate Boris's head from Donald's derriere yet? If not it might be a good time for Mrs May to make her move......
Struggling with your description. Did he not go to the US to try and talk Trump from repudiating the Iran agreement, even if he failed? If he thought a little flattery would make his message more palatable I don't think he can be blamed for trying.
Pathetic and humiliating. International watchers must have been squirming
Amazing you didn't describe Macron in the same way.
Two or three good bars and a whopping bonus and bankers will go anywhere. Just a Frankfurter journo who doesn't want them doing to frankfurt what they've done to london
Michael Lewis, in Liar's Poker, considered that one should not underestimate the importance of shopping opportunities, when banks decide to locate in London. Frankfurt doesn't have the shops.
Comments
Who one day got stuck in his garage
He campaigned so hard
But let down his guard
And suffered an electoral barrage.
Even if she survives, they won’t support the Versailles that she is negotiating.
I'm REALLY busy until the end of this month preparing for the London Rare Book Fair at Battersea Park.
Could you please hang on until at least after that?
Last year was a nightmare with the campaign overlapping with the highlight of our commercial year....
How would a General Election make things less chaotic though? Our constitutional arrangements are unlikely to be changed by a snap GE, and those that would be proposed by a party hoping to win would likely take a long time, be very muddled, or both.
We certainly have a great many things in our system which could be improved - I'm pretty sure the Political and Constitutional Reform Committee spent 5 years exploring options for codification for instance - but expecting a GE to fix them strikes me as rather silly. It is the continual tinkering that has been both its strength and weakness.
Good night all.
- Derek Jacobi in "Gladiator", 2000.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44047113
The U.K. in the 70s was little different. With Corbyn in Number 10, we would revert to that childish state.
- Oliver Reed as Proximo in "Gladiator", 2000.
Most interesting race is GOP Primary where Blankenship could win the nomination to take on Democrat Manchin in the Senate. Google him.......
That would be the same David Willets who now wants to give 25 year olds a £10k handout ?
https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/993983925348335618
Across the US, the Republicans dominate State government. They have more than two thirds of Governors, and control a larger proportion of state Senates. And this means that they have draw up Congressional districts.
The current Democratic leads will land them control of several state Senates. And this means that gerrymandering is likely to go the other way. This, to my mind, is the thing to watch in 2018.
https://youtu.be/ytY9_xy7qgY
We Should Be Prepared To Sacrifice Single Market Membership To Axe Freedom Of Movement
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/chuka-umunna-single-market-free-movement-brexit_uk_57e3e201e4b0db20a6e8b057
https://twitter.com/CambridgeLDs/status/993913070538952709
https://www.libdemvoice.org/sad-news-colin-rosenstiel-has-died-57452.html
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/05/trump-lawyer-michael-cohen-received-usd500-000-from-russian-oligarch-linked-company.html
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2018/05/the-strange-case-of-atts-payments-to-michael-cohen/559994/
Western foreign policy is directed by the Saudi and Zionist regimes. The EU27 and the UK will have to fall in line and scrap the Iran deal. If their companies continue to trade with Iran, they will be treated as "friends of the enemy" and suffer severe economic sanctions.
So there are no Greens at the moment, only people who don't realise the basic scientific truth of what I've said and can be ignored.
This graph clearly shows Corbyn doing worse than Miliband, Kinnock or Michael Foot.
But in the recent GE he did much better than all of them.
And belated happy returns!
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-politics-pennsylvania/pennsylvania-court-orders-new-congressional-map-due-to-gerrymandering-idUSKBN1FB2N8
I mean that if there is ‘success’ however measured, in a local election, then party workers feel that there’s some point to what they are doing and do more of it.
Point 2 I'm still not sure about. Clearly the Tories made missteps, but so did Labour, and at the end of the day both got enough votes they would normally expect to win a majority.
I remain convinced that Labour's manifesto was a big positive for the party.
Before those two I think I'm right in saying it was the Marquis of Salisbury in 1900.
'You ask, what is our aim? It is victory.'
Edit: you might also have added that in 1945 when he correctly stated the country couldn't afford to implement the Beveridge report immediately, he lost to the Labour Party, who claimed it could be done at once but had to use Marshall Aid to make it happen.
Interesting graph. Mostly, those who do best had their opposition period after a long time of Conservative incumbency. Callaghan and Corbyn (if we count the Coalition as Mostly Conservative) seem to buck that trend.
I hope you had some good free time over the big day though and were not too disheartened by Essex's rare stumble to Yorkshire.
https://www.theguardian.com/housing-network/2017/mar/22/finland-solved-homelessness-eu-crisis-housing-first
Cocaine delivered more rapidly than pizza (with or without pineapple toppings).
Germans realising all those bankers don't want to go to Frankfurt, or more particularly their wives wont go.
https://www.welt.de/wirtschaft/plus176183769/Brexit-Ehefrauen-von-Londoner-Bankern-vereint-gegen-Frankfurt.html
Most moving part for me was the sacrifice of the Calais garrison.
More seriously, it wasn't the policies themselves I had a beef with, even though I was doubtful about how effective most of them would be in practice. It was the blatant lie that they could be afforded from either extraordinary revenue or modest tax increase (always on somebody else) that did (and does) raise my hackles.
For example does anyone really think the confiscation of the water industry - which is what Corbyn effectively proposed - would not have had rather serious knock-on financial consequences, especially for pensions?
His faintly bizarre claim that utility prices would be lower in the public sector and profits would then accrue to the State rather overlooks the minor point that most utilities, especially railways, are effectively run at a loss. In many ways, that's the real argument for renationalising them. However, that then means taxes have to go up to meet the gap if prices are to be reduced, which was not allowed for in this allegedly 'fully costed' manifesto.
And underpinning it all was the assumption the gilts market would et him ramp up borrowing sixfold in his first year alone, which to say the least was a bold assumption.
I have to go. Have a good morning.
National embarrassment No 1
https://ntknetwork.com/boris-johnson-trump-deserves-nobel-peace-prize-if-he-solves-nk-iran/
Presumably war with Iran just became more likely? Will Europe stick to the deal and ignore the US or fall in behind Trump?