Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Pulpstar says the Tories look value at 13-8 in the Lewisham ma

SystemSystem Posts: 11,015
edited May 2018 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Pulpstar says the Tories look value at 13-8 in the Lewisham match bet

Anyone for a couple of Lewisham East match bets? #LewishamEastByElection

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,961
    Thanks, Pulpstar :smiley:
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,610
    Second! Like Corbyn, Yes & Remain.....
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,610
    The Daily Mail poll on the HoL - the questions are not too bad - the plurality favour all elected (37%) followed by abolish (24% - which peaks at ~30% among the over 45s) and term limits (22%) - only 17% plump for leave it as it is.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5759969/Poll-reveals-voters-think-House-Lords-outdated-touch-wrong-thwart-Brexit.html

    I guess ComRes balked at asking if the 'Traitorous swine Lords should be strung up from Lamposts'....
  • Options
    MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    Only problem with this analysis is that Pulpstar totally ignores what has happened in Westminster by-elections since the Referendum and this is a Westminster by-election.

    Remember that LAB has a piss poor record defending by-elections. Copeland last year was the first occasion since 1982 that a governing party took a seat from the main opposition in a by-election. Since the referendum (with the exception of Jo Cox's seat where CON and LD didn't stand) LAB has lost vote share in every by-election.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,610
    FPT on that Polish Presidential Air Crash investigation - having read the whole report I suspect the significance of the report is not in what may or may not have happened (and despite the 'questions raised' pilot/ground error control error is still the most likely cause) is that 'brought down deliberately' is clearly what the current Polish government believes.
  • Options
    felixfelix Posts: 15,124

    The Daily Mail poll on the HoL - the questions are not too bad - the plurality favour all elected (37%) followed by abolish (24% - which peaks at ~30% among the over 45s) and term limits (22%) - only 17% plump for leave it as it is.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5759969/Poll-reveals-voters-think-House-Lords-outdated-touch-wrong-thwart-Brexit.html

    I guess ComRes balked at asking if the 'Traitorous swine Lords should be strung up from Lamposts'....

    I wonder what Adonis will be tweeting about it.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,937

    FPT on that Polish Presidential Air Crash investigation - having read the whole report I suspect the significance of the report is not in what may or may not have happened (and despite the 'questions raised' pilot/ground error control error is still the most likely cause) is that 'brought down deliberately' is clearly what the current Polish government believes.

    Good points.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,610

    FPT on that Polish Presidential Air Crash investigation - having read the whole report I suspect the significance of the report is not in what may or may not have happened (and despite the 'questions raised' pilot/ground error control error is still the most likely cause) is that 'brought down deliberately' is clearly what the current Polish government believes.

    Good points.
    The other bit that struck me was what appeared to be their argument that while the plane was already flying inverted with its tail 6 meters above the ground what really did for them was the explosion in the cabin.....
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Shame the headline gets the price wrong: 13/10 is shorter than 13/8.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,937
    On the radio they've just said that Boris wants his own 'Brexit jet' as the governmental jets are rarely available for him.

    Bless.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,189

    On the radio they've just said that Boris wants his own 'Brexit jet' as the governmental jets are rarely available for him.

    Bless.

    The Sun went with "The JumBoJo Jet"
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,937

    FPT on that Polish Presidential Air Crash investigation - having read the whole report I suspect the significance of the report is not in what may or may not have happened (and despite the 'questions raised' pilot/ground error control error is still the most likely cause) is that 'brought down deliberately' is clearly what the current Polish government believes.

    Good points.
    The other bit that struck me was what appeared to be their argument that while the plane was already flying inverted with its tail 6 meters above the ground what really did for them was the explosion in the cabin.....
    I've only quickly skimmed the report, but it does say that the people within that cabin were essentially shredded. So yes, those people may have been killed by an explosion a few seconds before a rapid unscheduled destruction did for them.

    The question is what would have caused such explosions in the wing tip and fuselage? I doubt it could be a fuel explosion, so was it anti-air missiles, or would simple RPGs work when the plane was at such low height?

    The problem Russia faces is that their behaviour has been so abhorrent that it's perfectly possible to believe they would do this sort of sh*t.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,937
    tlg86 said:

    On the radio they've just said that Boris wants his own 'Brexit jet' as the governmental jets are rarely available for him.

    Bless.

    The Sun went with "The JumBoJo Jet"
    Badum-tish!

    This sort of thing will not play well with the Great British Public. A question is whether this story has come directly from the Boris camp; if not, who has leaked it?
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859

    FPT on that Polish Presidential Air Crash investigation - having read the whole report I suspect the significance of the report is not in what may or may not have happened (and despite the 'questions raised' pilot/ground error control error is still the most likely cause) is that 'brought down deliberately' is clearly what the current Polish government believes.

    This was a classic case of what pilots refer to as ‘getthereitis’, the unwillingness to want to deal with the hassle that a diversion will bring, and especially prevalent on private charters and VIP flights. In this case the pilots’ (military) bosses and the President were all on the plane and expected to land where they were supposed to land, irrespective of the weather.

    The airlines have invested heavily in training this perfectly natural tendency out of pilots -because it kills people.
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300

    tlg86 said:

    On the radio they've just said that Boris wants his own 'Brexit jet' as the governmental jets are rarely available for him.

    Bless.

    The Sun went with "The JumBoJo Jet"
    Badum-tish!

    This sort of thing will not play well with the Great British Public. A question is whether this story has come directly from the Boris camp; if not, who has leaked it?
    I've no idea who leaked the Boris story. The Telegraph seems eager to clear the most obvious suspects in its own lead Gove vs Hammond story: The letter was passed to the Telegraph by a Whitehall source from outside Defra and the Treasury, who described the row as "extraordinary even by the Cabinet's standards".
  • Options
    Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981

    FPT on that Polish Presidential Air Crash investigation - having read the whole report I suspect the significance of the report is not in what may or may not have happened (and despite the 'questions raised' pilot/ground error control error is still the most likely cause) is that 'brought down deliberately' is clearly what the current Polish government believes.

    There is a lot of history behind this, and Poland has been saying for years that it was Russia: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Polish_Air_Force_Tu-154_crash

    We are directly involved in that MOD scientists are testing for explosives for the Poles: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/27/mod-experts-investigate-polish-leaders-plane-crash-blamed-russian/
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,937
    Way off-topic:

    I've just been reading the history of 'Old Glory'. It's quite fascinating:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Glory
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859

    On the radio they've just said that Boris wants his own 'Brexit jet' as the governmental jets are rarely available for him.

    Bless.

    Rather like with the discussions about a new ‘Royal Yacht’, the economic case for it is very easy to make in the amount of trade it can generate.

    The political case, however, is much more difficult - most people see such things as unnecessarily extravagant.

    The RAF Voyager VIP conversion was a very elegant solution to the problem, take an existing air tanker / troop carrier and put a few biz class seats at the front, at a marginal cost of only a couple of million. That said, if Boris is going to continue to charter planes for his foreign trips, let’s make sure they’re made by Airbus and are in BA colours.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181

    tlg86 said:

    On the radio they've just said that Boris wants his own 'Brexit jet' as the governmental jets are rarely available for him.

    Bless.

    The Sun went with "The JumBoJo Jet"
    Badum-tish!

    This sort of thing will not play well with the Great British Public. A question is whether this story has come directly from the Boris camp; if not, who has leaked it?
    The Blair Force One controversy springs to mind - and that was for a Prime Minister, not the Foreign Secretary.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,976
    Good morning, everyone.

    Quite persuasive. Put a small sum on yesterday (think it was Mr. (Miss?) Blue who raised it at the time).
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,908
    Sandpit said:

    On the radio they've just said that Boris wants his own 'Brexit jet' as the governmental jets are rarely available for him.

    Bless.

    Rather like with the discussions about a new ‘Royal Yacht’, the economic case for it is very easy to make in the amount of trade it can generate.
    Trade generated because our ambassador/FS turns up in a yacht rather than on a plane?
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,588
    edited May 2018

    FPT on that Polish Presidential Air Crash investigation - having read the whole report I suspect the significance of the report is not in what may or may not have happened (and despite the 'questions raised' pilot/ground error control error is still the most likely cause) is that 'brought down deliberately' is clearly what the current Polish government believes.

    Good points.
    The other bit that struck me was what appeared to be their argument that while the plane was already flying inverted with its tail 6 meters above the ground what really did for them was the explosion in the cabin.....
    Pretty good shooting to hit a low flying inverted plane during a storm.

    Though the real significance is what the Poles believe.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859

    Good morning, everyone.

    Quite persuasive. Put a small sum on yesterday (think it was Mr. (Miss?) Blue who raised it at the time).

    Morning. Just reading through your Monaco posts yesterday. There’s been a safety car in every race this season, and there’s almost certainly going to be one here too - but having bet against it for 3 years can’t bear to miss the time it does actually happen! Looking for 10/1 though.

    Agree Raikkonen is great value for pole, as is Ricciardo.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181
    In Ivanhoe, Wamba complained that peace treaties in the Middle East were making an old man of him. He could remember four, each of which were to last fifty years, which meant he must be over 200.

    Now a different sort of Scot is showing that generations are shrinking rapidly!
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,588
    rkrkrk said:

    Sandpit said:

    On the radio they've just said that Boris wants his own 'Brexit jet' as the governmental jets are rarely available for him.

    Bless.

    Rather like with the discussions about a new ‘Royal Yacht’, the economic case for it is very easy to make in the amount of trade it can generate.
    Trade generated because our ambassador/FS turns up in a yacht rather than on a plane?
    Surely Trade is generated by good products at good prices, not cocktails with a buffoon?
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,212

    Only problem with this analysis is that Pulpstar totally ignores what has happened in Westminster by-elections since the Referendum and this is a Westminster by-election.

    Remember that LAB has a piss poor record defending by-elections. Copeland last year was the first occasion since 1982 that a governing party took a seat from the main opposition in a by-election. Since the referendum (with the exception of Jo Cox's seat where CON and LD didn't stand) LAB has lost vote share in every by-election.

    Whilst true I don't think that is the problem. The problem with Pulpstar's recommendation is that as bad as Labour are at bye elections, the Lib Dems remain good at them. They thrive on the attention and need the profile at a time when having their voice heard in Parliament is so much more difficult. If this was a GE the tories would be nailed on second. Its not and I think any value here is on the Lib Dems coming second, even at odds on.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,914

    Shame the headline gets the price wrong: 13/10 is shorter than 13/8.

    I am on at 13-8, prices move about you know.
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,908
    Foxy said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Sandpit said:

    On the radio they've just said that Boris wants his own 'Brexit jet' as the governmental jets are rarely available for him.

    Bless.

    Rather like with the discussions about a new ‘Royal Yacht’, the economic case for it is very easy to make in the amount of trade it can generate.
    Trade generated because our ambassador/FS turns up in a yacht rather than on a plane?
    Surely Trade is generated by good products at good prices, not cocktails with a buffoon?
    That would have been my suspicion.
  • Options
    daodaodaodao Posts: 821
    Why do you have such contempt for Ms Sturgeon? She is a reasonable, pleasant and impressive politician, unlike most of the leaders of the Scottish branch offices of the other political parties.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,302

    FPT on that Polish Presidential Air Crash investigation - having read the whole report I suspect the significance of the report is not in what may or may not have happened (and despite the 'questions raised' pilot/ground error control error is still the most likely cause) is that 'brought down deliberately' is clearly what the current Polish government believes.

    Good points.
    The other bit that struck me was what appeared to be their argument that while the plane was already flying inverted with its tail 6 meters above the ground what really did for them was the explosion in the cabin.....
    I've only quickly skimmed the report, but it does say that the people within that cabin were essentially shredded. So yes, those people may have been killed by an explosion a few seconds before a rapid unscheduled destruction did for them.

    The question is what would have caused such explosions in the wing tip and fuselage? I doubt it could be a fuel explosion, so was it anti-air missiles, or would simple RPGs work when the plane was at such low height?

    The problem Russia faces is that their behaviour has been so abhorrent that it's perfectly possible to believe they would do this sort of sh*t.
    I had a dream I was novichoked by the Russians last night.

    Dusted myself off, showed everyone the CCTV footage of me slumped and gargling, and then had some water and went on the run.

    Weird. Maybe I need a holiday.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,302
    On topic, great to see a betting post on here again. And great analysis from Pulpstar.

    I’m going to take a serious look at this.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859
    edited May 2018
    rkrkrk said:

    Sandpit said:

    On the radio they've just said that Boris wants his own 'Brexit jet' as the governmental jets are rarely available for him.

    Bless.

    Rather like with the discussions about a new ‘Royal Yacht’, the economic case for it is very easy to make in the amount of trade it can generate.
    Trade generated because our ambassador/FS turns up in a yacht rather than on a plane?
    Britannia’s USP was that she used to host parties and networking events. Every time she turned up in a city, it was the hottest ticket in town. The invitations had the Royal Crest embossed in gold and came from HM herself - executives have them framed in their offices all over the world. Everyone wanted to say they were on the Queen’s boat, even if they only got to actually meet AirMiles Andy and the minister for trade, and a huge number of deals got done there with the British businessmen present.

    Whether we like it or not, it was a massive enabler of British projection abroad and paid for itself a thousand times over, it was the best value marketing spend the UK ever made.

    Edit: and while on the subject of boats, the QE2 hotel has just opened after its refit in Dubai.
    https://www.qe2.com
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,937
    Foxy said:

    FPT on that Polish Presidential Air Crash investigation - having read the whole report I suspect the significance of the report is not in what may or may not have happened (and despite the 'questions raised' pilot/ground error control error is still the most likely cause) is that 'brought down deliberately' is clearly what the current Polish government believes.

    Good points.
    The other bit that struck me was what appeared to be their argument that while the plane was already flying inverted with its tail 6 meters above the ground what really did for them was the explosion in the cabin.....
    Pretty good shooting to hit a low flying inverted plane during a storm.

    Though the real significance is what the Poles believe.
    I might have misunderstood whist skimming, but isn't the argument that the first explosion took the wingtip off, causing it to invert, and then a second a few seconds later finished it off? And planes are rather large and hot targets, albeit fast-moving ones.

    Certainly the investigation does not seem as thorough as the Dutch ones into MH17, but like MH17, the Russians and their agents have not proved too helpful to the investigation.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,937
    Sandpit said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Sandpit said:

    On the radio they've just said that Boris wants his own 'Brexit jet' as the governmental jets are rarely available for him.

    Bless.

    Rather like with the discussions about a new ‘Royal Yacht’, the economic case for it is very easy to make in the amount of trade it can generate.
    Trade generated because our ambassador/FS turns up in a yacht rather than on a plane?
    Britannia’s USP wasI that she used to host parties and networking events. Every time she turned up in a city, it was the hottest ticket in town. The invitations had the Royal Crest embossed in gold and came from HM herself - executives have them framed in their offices all over the world. Everyone wanted to say they were on the Queen’s boat, even if they only got to actually meet AirMiles Andy and the minister for trade, and a huge number of deals got done there with the British businessmen present.

    Whether we like it or not, it was a massive enabler of British projection abroad and paid for itself a thousand times over, it was the best value marketing spend the UK ever made.

    Edit: and while on the subject of boats, the QE2 hotel has just opened after its refit in Dubai.
    https://www.qe2.com
    I agree with every word of that. The UK has massive soft power, and Britannia was a symbol of that. And as we saw last week, the Royal Family has massive international prestige.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,914
    DavidL said:

    Only problem with this analysis is that Pulpstar totally ignores what has happened in Westminster by-elections since the Referendum and this is a Westminster by-election.

    Remember that LAB has a piss poor record defending by-elections. Copeland last year was the first occasion since 1982 that a governing party took a seat from the main opposition in a by-election. Since the referendum (with the exception of Jo Cox's seat where CON and LD didn't stand) LAB has lost vote share in every by-election.

    Whilst true I don't think that is the problem. The problem with Pulpstar's recommendation is that as bad as Labour are at bye elections, the Lib Dems remain good at them. They thrive on the attention and need the profile at a time when having their voice heard in Parliament is so much more difficult. If this was a GE the tories would be nailed on second. Its not and I think any value here is on the Lib Dems coming second, even at odds on.
    Witney is the best evidence you should back the Lib Dems here.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,212
    So if the Poles are convinced that the Russians did this what happens next? I don't see how they invoke article 5 at this length in time. But they will want to respond and will presumably be pushing for yet more EU sanctions.

    They have already built facilities to allow them to import US and presumably ME gas but they still get significant quantities from Russia, maybe 35% of their energy use. I expect to see them improving their alternative supplies even further which may well have significant implications well beyond Poland. If the EU as a whole starts to wean itself off Russian energy supplies the consequences for Russia could be pretty catastrophic.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    On the radio they've just said that Boris wants his own 'Brexit jet' as the governmental jets are rarely available for him.

    Bless.

    It needs big sign on the side.

    Something like "This plane costs £X a week. Let's spend it on the NHS instead..."
  • Options
    RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 3,223
    Interesting rumblings on the EU. In some ways if forced to choose I’d rather stay in the SM than the CU. Even if we had to retain ‘free movement’, the end of European citizenship would mean migrants would interact with our welfare system differently (ie less!).

    Perhaps it’s now sellable to the public.
  • Options
    Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    Foxy said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Sandpit said:

    On the radio they've just said that Boris wants his own 'Brexit jet' as the governmental jets are rarely available for him.

    Bless.

    Rather like with the discussions about a new ‘Royal Yacht’, the economic case for it is very easy to make in the amount of trade it can generate.
    Trade generated because our ambassador/FS turns up in a yacht rather than on a plane?
    Surely Trade is generated by good products at good prices, not cocktails with a buffoon?
    Not unless people know about the products and the prices. Your line of business entails 1. Having a monopoly on a product for which demand is universal and unlimited 2. Giving it away for free and 3. Virtually unlimited free publicity in the form of major news stories every week of the year. None of this is typical.
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    edited May 2018
    Pulpstar said:

    Shame the headline gets the price wrong: 13/10 is shorter than 13/8.

    I am on at 13-8, prices move about you know.
    The headline shows 13-8 but the screenshot in the OP shows 13-10 which is far shorter. Your OP advises taking 13-10.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,976
    Mr. Sandpit, if there's no safety car I reserve the right to make a voodoo doll of you.

    Agree on Ricciardo. I was looking at backing the Red Bulls early, but the odds fell off a bit and I think Raikkonen's longer odds presents more value.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,914

    Pulpstar said:

    Shame the headline gets the price wrong: 13/10 is shorter than 13/8.

    I am on at 13-8, prices move about you know.
    The headline shows 13-8 but the screenshot in the OP shows 13-10 which is far shorter.
    I didn't provide the screenshot, my error is that I have 13-8 in the header and 13-10 in the body.

    I think it is 6-4 now
  • Options
    felixfelix Posts: 15,124
    daodao said:

    Why do you have such contempt for Ms Sturgeon? She is a reasonable, pleasant and impressive politician, unlike most of the leaders of the Scottish branch offices of the other political parties.
    Pleasant? She is floundering and clutching at straws having been roundly outflanked by the Tories as the Scottish m/c re-asserted themselves after many years in the wilderness. The party is hopelessly split and lacking direction.
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,908
    Sandpit said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Sandpit said:

    On the radio they've just said that Boris wants his own 'Brexit jet' as the governmental jets are rarely available for him.

    Bless.

    Rather like with the discussions about a new ‘Royal Yacht’, the economic case for it is very easy to make in the amount of trade it can generate.
    Trade generated because our ambassador/FS turns up in a yacht rather than on a plane?
    Britannia’s USP was that she used to host parties and networking events. Every time she turned up in a city, it was the hottest ticket in town. The invitations had the Royal Crest embossed in gold and came from HM herself - executives have them framed in their offices all over the world. Everyone wanted to say they were on the Queen’s boat, even if they only got to actually meet AirMiles Andy and the minister for trade, and a huge number of deals got done there with the British businessmen present.

    Whether we like it or not, it was a massive enabler of British projection abroad and paid for itself a thousand times over, it was the best value marketing spend the UK ever made.

    Edit: and while on the subject of boats, the QE2 hotel has just opened after its refit in Dubai.
    https://www.qe2.com
    I'd love to believe that's true and it makes a difference. How easy international trade must be if all you need to do is throw big parties.

    A glance at trade figures shows no precipitous drop when the yacht was decommissioned. From 1998-2008 our exports doubled.

    At running costs of around 10m/year back then, for your thousand fold claim to be true - there would have to have been 10bn of value/year created from that yacht.

  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,937
    Scott_P said:

    On the radio they've just said that Boris wants his own 'Brexit jet' as the governmental jets are rarely available for him.

    Bless.

    It needs big sign on the side.

    Something like "This plane costs £X a week. Let's spend it on the NHS instead..."
    LOL!

    This idea will not sell well to the public.
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300

    On the radio they've just said that Boris wants his own 'Brexit jet' as the governmental jets are rarely available for him.

    Bless.

    From the Sun: “What I will say about the Voyager, I think it’s great, but it seems to be very difficult to get hold of. It never seems to be available. I don’t know who uses it, but it never seems to be available." If this were Labour, this would be spun as an attack on the leader.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,212
    Pulpstar said:

    DavidL said:

    Only problem with this analysis is that Pulpstar totally ignores what has happened in Westminster by-elections since the Referendum and this is a Westminster by-election.

    Remember that LAB has a piss poor record defending by-elections. Copeland last year was the first occasion since 1982 that a governing party took a seat from the main opposition in a by-election. Since the referendum (with the exception of Jo Cox's seat where CON and LD didn't stand) LAB has lost vote share in every by-election.

    Whilst true I don't think that is the problem. The problem with Pulpstar's recommendation is that as bad as Labour are at bye elections, the Lib Dems remain good at them. They thrive on the attention and need the profile at a time when having their voice heard in Parliament is so much more difficult. If this was a GE the tories would be nailed on second. Its not and I think any value here is on the Lib Dems coming second, even at odds on.
    Witney is the best evidence you should back the Lib Dems here.
    It just means so much more to them than it does to the Tories who are not really interested in a distant second. I would be very surprised if the Lib Dems do not try a lot harder and pick up some disgruntled remainers who have finally worked out Corbyn means what he says.

    They will still lose by miles of course. But they need to show that they are still players. Bye elections are less common these days and even a pretty pathetic opportunity like this needs to be seized.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,326
    On the Labour side, the organisation is normally quite formidable in London and there would be no shortage of volunteers. I wonder if factionalism will get in the way - the selection seems to have been quite extraordinarily bitter and the (ex-)chair's yucky tweets and a gloating piece by the candidate's campaign manager won't have helped. It'll be tempting for some activists to sit it out, though extremely unwise. On balance I expect a decent effort, though - there are just so many Labour Labour activists that if 25% sit it out there will still be plenty.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,100
    Ishmael_Z said:

    Foxy said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Sandpit said:

    On the radio they've just said that Boris wants his own 'Brexit jet' as the governmental jets are rarely available for him.

    Bless.

    Rather like with the discussions about a new ‘Royal Yacht’, the economic case for it is very easy to make in the amount of trade it can generate.
    Trade generated because our ambassador/FS turns up in a yacht rather than on a plane?
    Surely Trade is generated by good products at good prices, not cocktails with a buffoon?
    Not unless people know about the products and the prices. Your line of business entails 1. Having a monopoly on a product for which demand is universal and unlimited 2. Giving it away for free and 3. Virtually unlimited free publicity in the form of major news stories every week of the year. None of this is typical.
    Nothing is as guaranteed to twist the Lefties' face into a sneer of disdain like mention of how a Royal Yacht helps trade. Anyone would think they would prefer us to do what our competitors do - fill officials' Swiss bank accounts on their way to the deal...
  • Options
    Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    rkrkrk said:

    Sandpit said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Sandpit said:

    On the radio they've just said that Boris wants his own 'Brexit jet' as the governmental jets are rarely available for him.

    Bless.

    Rather like with the discussions about a new ‘Royal Yacht’, the economic case for it is very easy to make in the amount of trade it can generate.
    Trade generated because our ambassador/FS turns up in a yacht rather than on a plane?
    Britannia’s USP was that she used to host parties and networking events. Every time she turned up in a city, it was the hottest ticket in town. The invitations had the Royal Crest embossed in gold and came from HM herself - executives have them framed in their offices all over the world. Everyone wanted to say they were on the Queen’s boat, even if they only got to actually meet AirMiles Andy and the minister for trade, and a huge number of deals got done there with the British businessmen present.

    Whether we like it or not, it was a massive enabler of British projection abroad and paid for itself a thousand times over, it was the best value marketing spend the UK ever made.

    Edit: and while on the subject of boats, the QE2 hotel has just opened after its refit in Dubai.
    https://www.qe2.com
    I'd love to believe that's true and it makes a difference. How easy international trade must be if all you need to do is throw big parties.

    A glance at trade figures shows no precipitous drop when the yacht was decommissioned. From 1998-2008 our exports doubled.

    At running costs of around 10m/year back then, for your thousand fold claim to be true - there would have to have been 10bn of value/year created from that yacht.

    Don't be silly, no one is saying that is all you have to do. I take it you do not work in the private sector?
  • Options
    Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    edited May 2018
    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Shame the headline gets the price wrong: 13/10 is shorter than 13/8.

    I am on at 13-8, prices move about you know.
    The headline shows 13-8 but the screenshot in the OP shows 13-10 which is far shorter.
    I didn't provide the screenshot, my error is that I have 13-8 in the header and 13-10 in the body.

    I think it is 6-4 now
    Haha - clearly the Smithson pennies weigh more than the Pulpstar ones. I'm with you, the Tories should be able to bank about 7000 here on a 45% turnout and I think that is a very big ask for the Lib Dems, given Labour have selected from the anti-Brexit end of their spectrum.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,937
    Mrs J's just come up with the perfect solution to Boris's travel travails: give him transportation related to his performance in his role.

    And given his performance as FS so far, and the staggering number of trade deals signed, he should get ...

    a donkey.
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    edited May 2018

    Ishmael_Z said:

    Foxy said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Sandpit said:

    On the radio they've just said that Boris wants his own 'Brexit jet' as the governmental jets are rarely available for him.

    Bless.

    Rather like with the discussions about a new ‘Royal Yacht’, the economic case for it is very easy to make in the amount of trade it can generate.
    Trade generated because our ambassador/FS turns up in a yacht rather than on a plane?
    Surely Trade is generated by good products at good prices, not cocktails with a buffoon?
    Not unless people know about the products and the prices. Your line of business entails 1. Having a monopoly on a product for which demand is universal and unlimited 2. Giving it away for free and 3. Virtually unlimited free publicity in the form of major news stories every week of the year. None of this is typical.
    Nothing is as guaranteed to twist the Lefties' face into a sneer of disdain like mention of how a Royal Yacht helps trade. Anyone would think they would prefer us to do what our competitors do - fill officials' Swiss bank accounts on their way to the deal...
    The righties have had eight years now to commission a replacement gin palace.
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,941
    O/T, but Danny Finkelstein’s column in today’s Times should be required reading for any Corbynista or opponent!

  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,985
    Sandpit said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Sandpit said:

    On the radio they've just said that Boris wants his own 'Brexit jet' as the governmental jets are rarely available for him.

    Bless.

    Rather like with the discussions about a new ‘Royal Yacht’, the economic case for it is very easy to make in the amount of trade it can generate.
    Trade generated because our ambassador/FS turns up in a yacht rather than on a plane?
    Britannia’s USP was that she used to host parties and networking events. Every time she turned up in a city, it was the hottest ticket in town. The invitations had the Royal Crest embossed in gold and came from HM herself - executives have them framed in their offices all over the world. Everyone wanted to say they were on the Queen’s boat, even if they only got to actually meet AirMiles Andy and the minister for trade, and a huge number of deals got done there with the British businessmen present.
    The vessel itself was a complete deathtrap. It killed one of its captains (and probably plenty others) with asbestosis.

    It also needed more crew than a T45!

    Also, it goes without saying that, Boris can fuck right off with his Brexit Express jet idea.
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,908
    Ishmael_Z said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Sandpit said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Sandpit said:

    On the radio they've just said that Boris wants his own 'Brexit jet' as the governmental jets are rarely available for him.

    Bless.

    Rather like with the discussions about a new ‘Royal Yacht’, the economic case for it is very easy to make in the amount of trade it can generate.
    Trade generated because our ambassador/FS turns up in a yacht rather than on a plane?
    Britannia’s USP was that she used to host parties and networking events. Every time she turned up in a city, it was the hottest ticket in town. The invitations had the Royal Crest embossed in gold and came from HM herself - executives have them framed in their offices all over the world. Everyone wanted to say they were on the Queen’s boat, even if they only got to actually meet AirMiles Andy and the minister for trade, and a huge number of deals got done there with the British businessmen present.

    Whether we like it or not, it was a massive enabler of British projection abroad and paid for itself a thousand times over, it was the best value marketing spend the UK ever made.

    Edit: and while on the subject of boats, the QE2 hotel has just opened after its refit in Dubai.
    https://www.qe2.com
    I'd love to believe that's true and it makes a difference. How easy international trade must be if all you need to do is throw big parties.

    A glance at trade figures shows no precipitous drop when the yacht was decommissioned. From 1998-2008 our exports doubled.

    At running costs of around 10m/year back then, for your thousand fold claim to be true - there would have to have been 10bn of value/year created from that yacht.

    Don't be silly, no one is saying that is all you have to do. I take it you do not work in the private sector?
    I've certainly never been on a royal yacht. Perhaps that's what my previous employers were missing!

    But the case for the royal yacht rests upon the idea that trade deals are signed which would not otherwise have been signed unless there was a yacht and a big party. If said deals would have been signed anyway - then the yacht did not contribute.

    So yes - they are arguing that all that is missing for big new deals is a yacht.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859
    rkrkrk said:

    Sandpit said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Sandpit said:

    On the radio they've just said that Boris wants his own 'Brexit jet' as the governmental jets are rarely available for him.

    Bless.

    Rather like with the discussions about a new ‘Royal Yacht’, the economic case for it is very easy to make in the amount of trade it can generate.
    Trade generated because our ambassador/FS turns up in a yacht rather than on a plane?
    Britannia’s USP was that she used to host parties and networking events. Every time she turned up in a city, it was the hottest ticket in town. The invitations had the Royal Crest embossed in gold and came from HM herself - executives have them framed in their offices all over the world. Everyone wanted to say they were on the Queen’s boat, even if they only got to actually meet AirMiles Andy and the minister for trade, and a huge number of deals got done there with the British businessmen present.

    Whether we like it or not, it was a massive enabler of British projection abroad and paid for itself a thousand times over, it was the best value marketing spend the UK ever made.

    Edit: and while on the subject of boats, the QE2 hotel has just opened after its refit in Dubai.
    https://www.qe2.com
    I'd love to believe that's true and it makes a difference. How easy international trade must be if all you need to do is throw big parties.

    A glance at trade figures shows no precipitous drop when the yacht was decommissioned. From 1998-2008 our exports doubled.

    At running costs of around 10m/year back then, for your thousand fold claim to be true - there would have to have been 10bn of value/year created from that yacht.

    $10bn a year, absolutely no problem. Excluding the defence contracts.

    Yes of course you have to do a lot more than just go to a party, but it provides a focal point for the discussions.

    As an example, a lot of people with “New Money” in places like the Middle East and China are very careful about how they spend it. They look to build relationships before doing deals, and they can often prevaricate for months or even years before they actually sign a contract. An event at which the contract can be presented is a big lever to get them to the point that they’re ready to sign it, and in their mind shows commitment from their partner.

    They also love access to people such as ministers and royalty, and the feeling of prestige that brings. It’s how they work, and if you want to do business with them then you have to play their game.
  • Options
    swing_voterswing_voter Posts: 1,435
    Dura_Ace said:

    Sandpit said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Sandpit said:

    On the radio they've just said that Boris wants his own 'Brexit jet' as the governmental jets are rarely available for him.

    Bless.

    Rather like with the discussions about a new ‘Royal Yacht’, the economic case for it is very easy to make in the amount of trade it can generate.
    Trade generated because our ambassador/FS turns up in a yacht rather than on a plane?
    Britannia’s USP was that she used to host parties and networking events. Every time she turned up in a city, it was the hottest ticket in town. The invitations had the Royal Crest embossed in gold and came from HM herself - executives have them framed in their offices all over the world. Everyone wanted to say they were on the Queen’s boat, even if they only got to actually meet AirMiles Andy and the minister for trade, and a huge number of deals got done there with the British businessmen present.
    The vessel itself was a complete deathtrap. It killed one of its captains (and probably plenty others) with asbestosis.

    It also needed more crew than a T45!

    Also, it goes without saying that, Boris can fuck right off with his Brexit Express jet idea.
    Isnt it now a very popular tourist attraction in Edinbugh (even without propellor? doesnt sound like a deathtrap to me.....

    Boris's days in FCO are numbered, even if they did buy him a plane, he would be out before he could travel in it
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,212

    Dura_Ace said:

    Sandpit said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Sandpit said:

    On the radio they've just said that Boris wants his own 'Brexit jet' as the governmental jets are rarely available for him.

    Bless.

    Rather like with the discussions about a new ‘Royal Yacht’, the economic case for it is very easy to make in the amount of trade it can generate.
    Trade generated because our ambassador/FS turns up in a yacht rather than on a plane?
    Britannia’s USP was that she used to host parties and networking events. Every time she turned up in a city, it was the hottest ticket in town. The invitations had the Royal Crest embossed in gold and came from HM herself - executives have them framed in their offices all over the world. Everyone wanted to say they were on the Queen’s boat, even if they only got to actually meet AirMiles Andy and the minister for trade, and a huge number of deals got done there with the British businessmen present.
    The vessel itself was a complete deathtrap. It killed one of its captains (and probably plenty others) with asbestosis.

    It also needed more crew than a T45!

    Also, it goes without saying that, Boris can fuck right off with his Brexit Express jet idea.
    Isnt it now a very popular tourist attraction in Edinbugh (even without propellor? doesnt sound like a deathtrap to me.....

    Boris's days in FCO are numbered, even if they did buy him a plane, he would be out before he could travel in it
    It consistently promotes itself as Scotland's most popular tourist attraction. Which I must confess I find surprising.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,719

    The Daily Mail poll on the HoL - the questions are not too bad - the plurality favour all elected (37%) followed by abolish (24% - which peaks at ~30% among the over 45s) and term limits (22%) - only 17% plump for leave it as it is.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5759969/Poll-reveals-voters-think-House-Lords-outdated-touch-wrong-thwart-Brexit.html

    I guess ComRes balked at asking if the 'Traitorous swine Lords should be strung up from Lamposts'....

    I'm in favour of time limited appointments and disqualification if they don't attend enough, with no new ones created if they are more than the Commons. Should focus things without dsmaging it's purpose.
  • Options
    old_labourold_labour Posts: 3,238

    On the radio they've just said that Boris wants his own 'Brexit jet' as the governmental jets are rarely available for him.

    Bless.

    I am sure Theresa would give him a state of the art Russian jet from about 1955 to help him on his way.
  • Options
    The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,830
    Re the last thread, I’m unsure why the US was brought up as examples as to arguing that those against abortion aren’t necessarily catholic or Conservative. The United States is known for being a much more religious society that many other countries in West, and also a country that leans more to the right as well.
  • Options
    FenmanFenman Posts: 1,047
    I've no idea who pulpstar is but he knows nothing about the dynamics of by elections.
  • Options
    The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,830
    daodao said:

    Why do you have such contempt for Ms Sturgeon? She is a reasonable, pleasant and impressive politician, unlike most of the leaders of the Scottish branch offices of the other political parties.
    I like Sturgeon.
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,908
    Sandpit said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Sandpit said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Sandpit said:

    On the radio they've just said that Boris wants his own 'Brexit jet' as the governmental jets are rarely available for him.

    Bless.

    Rather like with the discussions about a new ‘Royal Yacht’, the economic case for it is very easy to make in the amount of trade it can generate.
    Trade generated because our ambassador/FS turns up in a yacht rather than on a plane?
    Britannia’s USP was that she used to host parties and networking events. Every time she turned up in a city, it was the hottest ticket in town. The invitations had the Royal Crest embossed in gold and came from HM herself - executives have them framed in their offices all over the world. Everyone wanted to say they were on the Queen’s boat, even if they only got to actually meet AirMiles Andy and the minister for trade, and a huge number of deals got done there with the British businessmen present.

    Whether we like it or not, it was a massive enabler of British projection abroad and paid for itself a thousand times over, it was the best value marketing spend the UK ever made.

    Edit: and while on the subject of boats, the QE2 hotel has just opened after its refit in Dubai.
    https://www.qe2.com
    I'd love to believe that's true and it makes a difference. How easy international trade must be if all you need to do is throw big parties.

    A glance at trade figures shows no precipitous drop when the yacht was decommissioned. From 1998-2008 our exports doubled.

    At running costs of around 10m/year back then, for your thousand fold claim to be true - there would have to have been 10bn of value/year created from that yacht.

    $10bn a year, absolutely no problem. Excluding the defence contracts.

    10bn GBP/year in 1997 = about 18bn GBP/year today.
    To put that into another perspective- in 2016, the UK won 5.9bn GBP of defence export orders. You think the royal yacht alone is worth approximately 3x the value to Britain's exports as our entire defence industry.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/uk-defence-and-security-export-figures-2016/uk-defence-and-security-export-statistics-for-2016
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,951
    Hi all,

    I posted this on the last thread, but thought everybody should be forced able to watch this.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cot_Uvc7ZbA

    It's me talking about whether US Airlines are a Good (or Bad) investment proposition.

    Please watch, and then hit the subscribe button.

    Thanks :)
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607
    DavidL said:

    So if the Poles are convinced that the Russians did this what happens next? I don't see how they invoke article 5 at this length in time. But they will want to respond and will presumably be pushing for yet more EU sanctions.

    They have already built facilities to allow them to import US and presumably ME gas but they still get significant quantities from Russia, maybe 35% of their energy use. I expect to see them improving their alternative supplies even further which may well have significant implications well beyond Poland. If the EU as a whole starts to wean itself off Russian energy supplies the consequences for Russia could be pretty catastrophic.

    Merkel has been sucking up to Putin over the last few days. She wants cheap Russian gas for German industry. Russia have played the Europeans very well.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,976
    Mr. 1000, as someone who occasionally thinks of making more F1 'radio', I entirely approve of this.
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,020
    DavidL said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Sandpit said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Sandpit said:

    On the radio they've just said that Boris wants his own 'Brexit jet' as the governmental jets are rarely available for him.

    Bless.

    Rather like with the discussions about a new ‘Royal Yacht’, the economic case for it is very easy to make in the amount of trade it can generate.
    Trade generated because our ambassador/FS turns up in a yacht rather than on a plane?
    Britannia’s USP was that she used to host parties and networking events. Every time she turned up in a city, it was the hottest ticket in town. The invitations had the Royal Crest embossed in gold and came from HM herself - executives have them framed in their offices all over the world. Everyone wanted to say they were on the Queen’s boat, even if they only got to actually meet AirMiles Andy and the minister for trade, and a huge number of deals got done there with the British businessmen present.
    The vessel itself was a complete deathtrap. It killed one of its captains (and probably plenty others) with asbestosis.

    It also needed more crew than a T45!

    Also, it goes without saying that, Boris can fuck right off with his Brexit Express jet idea.
    Isnt it now a very popular tourist attraction in Edinbugh (even without propellor? doesnt sound like a deathtrap to me.....

    Boris's days in FCO are numbered, even if they did buy him a plane, he would be out before he could travel in it
    It consistently promotes itself as Scotland's most popular tourist attraction. Which I must confess I find surprising.
    I've been in the fairly tatty Ocean Terminal maybe 50 times for not entirely happy reasons, and not even slightly tempted.
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,020
    felix said:

    daodao said:

    Why do you have such contempt for Ms Sturgeon? She is a reasonable, pleasant and impressive politician, unlike most of the leaders of the Scottish branch offices of the other political parties.
    Pleasant? She is floundering and clutching at straws having been roundly outflanked by the Tories as the Scottish m/c re-asserted themselves after many years in the wilderness. The party is hopelessly split and lacking direction.
    PB EU immigrant Anglo experts on Scottish politics are my favourite PB experts.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,100

    felix said:

    daodao said:

    Why do you have such contempt for Ms Sturgeon? She is a reasonable, pleasant and impressive politician, unlike most of the leaders of the Scottish branch offices of the other political parties.
    Pleasant? She is floundering and clutching at straws having been roundly outflanked by the Tories as the Scottish m/c re-asserted themselves after many years in the wilderness. The party is hopelessly split and lacking direction.
    PB EU immigrant Anglo experts on Scottish politics are my favourite PB experts.
    Unfortunatley for you, they seem to have a better handle on this politics thing than the SNP.....
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983
    Good article Pulpstar and I agree.

    The Tories have been second to Labour in Lewisham East far more than the LDs and indeed the Tories won the seat in 1983 to 1987 in the two Thatcher general election landslides of that decade.

    As you say Lewisham East was over a third Leave at the EU referendum and the Labour candidate in Lewisham East is much more Europhile than Kate Hoey was so there is less room for the LDs to campaign on a 'Stop Brexit' platform
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,020
    ydoethur said:

    In Ivanhoe, Wamba complained that peace treaties in the Middle East were making an old man of him. He could remember four, each of which were to last fifty years, which meant he must be over 200.

    Now a different sort of Scot is showing that generations are shrinking rapidly!
    I'm old enough to remember when Scottish pols thought Brexit would be a disaster.

    https://twitter.com/alanferrier/status/998250954410594304

    I'm even old enough to remember when Scottish pols said no to indy was the way to guarantee EU membership.

    https://twitter.com/joannaccherry/status/821335361003646976

    https://twitter.com/Grouse_Beater/status/824908789128249344

    Life comes at you fast.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,976
    Mr. Divvie, you seem upset that Scotland is leaving the EU two years later than you wanted.
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,020

    felix said:

    daodao said:

    Why do you have such contempt for Ms Sturgeon? She is a reasonable, pleasant and impressive politician, unlike most of the leaders of the Scottish branch offices of the other political parties.
    Pleasant? She is floundering and clutching at straws having been roundly outflanked by the Tories as the Scottish m/c re-asserted themselves after many years in the wilderness. The party is hopelessly split and lacking direction.
    PB EU immigrant Anglo experts on Scottish politics are my favourite PB experts.
    Unfortunatley for you, they seem to have a better handle on this politics thing than the SNP.....
    What would your evidence be for that?
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983
    edited May 2018
    RoyalBlue said:

    Interesting rumblings on the EU. In some ways if forced to choose I’d rather stay in the SM than the CU. Even if we had to retain ‘free movement’, the end of European citizenship would mean migrants would interact with our welfare system differently (ie less!).

    Perhaps it’s now sellable to the public.

    It is not sellable to the public I am afraid.

    Brexit without new immigration controls and leaving free movement in place for most Leave voters, especially working class Leave voters, would be no Brexit at all. Staying in the Customs Union but not being able to do our own trade deals would be just about sellable to all but the most ideological Brexiteers but staying in the Single Market with free movement continuing would not.

    The only possible exception to that is if somehow we could stay in the Single Market but with new controls on free movement for the UK to reflect the transition controls on free movement from the new accession countries in 2004 the EU allowed us to have for 7 years but Blair refused to take
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,610
    daodao said:

    Why do you have such contempt for Ms Sturgeon? She is a reasonable, pleasant and impressive politician, unlike most of the leaders of the Scottish branch offices of the other political parties.
    Writes he...displaying contempt....

    SLAB got all they deserved after decades of venal incompetence - lets see what the 'SNP Growth Commission' come up with. Meanwhile, the challenges Ms Sturgeon faces:

    https://stephendaisley.com/2018/05/19/sturgeon-under-siege/
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607

    ydoethur said:

    In Ivanhoe, Wamba complained that peace treaties in the Middle East were making an old man of him. He could remember four, each of which were to last fifty years, which meant he must be over 200.

    Now a different sort of Scot is showing that generations are shrinking rapidly!
    I'm old enough to remember when Scottish pols thought Brexit would be a disaster.

    I'm even old enough to remember when Scottish pols said no to indy was the way to guarantee EU membership.

    Life comes at you fast.
    And yet the SNP have nothing to offer those who voted Yes/Leave and very little to offer those who voted No/Remain. Again, a second referendum on this would be lost so badly by Yes that it may be worth the hassle of listening to the SNP for another few months to make them shut up for the rest of time.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,610

    felix said:

    daodao said:

    Why do you have such contempt for Ms Sturgeon? She is a reasonable, pleasant and impressive politician, unlike most of the leaders of the Scottish branch offices of the other political parties.
    Pleasant? She is floundering and clutching at straws having been roundly outflanked by the Tories as the Scottish m/c re-asserted themselves after many years in the wilderness. The party is hopelessly split and lacking direction.
    PB EU immigrant Anglo experts on Scottish politics are my favourite PB experts.
    I love it when 'Civic Nationalists' go all 'more Scottish than thou'......
  • Options
    FregglesFreggles Posts: 3,486
    Fenman said:

    I've no idea who pulpstar is but he knows nothing about the dynamics of by elections.

    I look forward to your rebuttal thread
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,020

    felix said:

    daodao said:

    Why do you have such contempt for Ms Sturgeon? She is a reasonable, pleasant and impressive politician, unlike most of the leaders of the Scottish branch offices of the other political parties.
    Pleasant? She is floundering and clutching at straws having been roundly outflanked by the Tories as the Scottish m/c re-asserted themselves after many years in the wilderness. The party is hopelessly split and lacking direction.
    PB EU immigrant Anglo experts on Scottish politics are my favourite PB experts.
    I love it when 'Civic Nationalists' go all 'more Scottish than thou'......
    Despite his prolixity on matters Scotch, I wasn't aware Felix was Scottish. Every day a school day.
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,020

    Mr. Divvie, you seem upset that Scotland is leaving the EU two years later than you wanted.

    I think I was a fairly early adopter of the idea of Ruth as a bullshitter (as well as a bull sitter).
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859
    rkrkrk said:

    Sandpit said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Sandpit said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Sandpit said:

    .

    Bless.

    .
    Trade generated because our ambassador/FS turns up in a yacht rather than on a plane?
    Britannia’s USP was that she used to host parties and networking events. Every time she turned up in a city, it was the hottest ticket in town. The invitations had the Royal Crest embossed in gold and came from HM herself - executives have them framed in their offices all over the world. Everyone wanted to say they were on the Queen’s boat, even if they only got to actually meet AirMiles Andy and the minister for trade, and a huge number of deals got done there with the British businessmen present.

    Whether we like it or not, it was a massive enabler of British projection abroad and paid for itself a thousand times over, it was the best value marketing spend the UK ever made.

    Edit: and while on the subject of boats, the QE2 hotel has just opened after its refit in Dubai.
    https://www.qe2.com
    I'd love to believe that's true and it makes a difference. How easy international trade must be if all you need to do is throw big parties.

    A glance at trade figures shows no precipitous drop when the yacht was decommissioned. From 1998-2008 our exports doubled. "

    At running costs of around 10m/year back then, for your thousand fold claim to be true - there would have to have been 10bn of value/year created from that yacht.

    $10bn a year, absolutely no problem. Excluding the defence contracts.

    10bn GBP/year in 1997 = about 18bn GBP/year today.
    To put that into another perspective- in 2016, the UK won 5.9bn GBP of defence export orders. You think the royal yacht alone is worth approximately 3x the value to Britain's exports as our entire defence industry.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/uk-defence-and-security-export-figures-2016/uk-defence-and-security-export-statistics-for-2016
    For context, total UK exports are running around £50bn a month. Defence exports are a tiny fraction of the total.

    https://tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/exports/survey

    I’m not saying that a yacht is the only reason all these deals happen, but as a marketing tool and facilitator of trade there’s never been anything better.

    As Mr Ace notes, the old yacht was long overdue for decommissioning when she finally finished her touring of the seas. If we are going to show that Britain is a global trading nation we could do a lot worse than hurry up Britannia’s replacement.
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,908
    Freggles said:

    Fenman said:

    I've no idea who pulpstar is but he knows nothing about the dynamics of by elections.

    I look forward to your rebuttal thread
    IMO pulpstar is one of the best tipsters on here.
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,056
    HYUFD said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    Interesting rumblings on the EU. In some ways if forced to choose I’d rather stay in the SM than the CU. Even if we had to retain ‘free movement’, the end of European citizenship would mean migrants would interact with our welfare system differently (ie less!).

    Perhaps it’s now sellable to the public.

    It is not sellable to the public I am afraid.

    Brexit without new immigration controls and leaving free movement in place for most Leave voters, especially working class Leave voters, would be no Brexit at all. Staying in the Customs Union but not being able to do our own trade deals would be just about sellable to all but the most ideological Brexiteers but staying in the Single Market with free movement continuing would not.

    The only possible exception to that is if somehow we could stay in the Single Market but with new controls on free movement for the UK to reflect the transition controls on free movement from the new accession countries in 2004 the EU allowed us to have but Blair refused to take
    The yearning some Leavers here have for Liam Fox to conduct new trade deals amazes me.

    While I think the UK can set up more advantageous trade deals that will require ability and time and trying to set them up while having a shortage of both will lead to worse terms of trade than present.

    That some Leavers think that not letting Liam Fox loose on the world is such a terrible sovereignty restriction that they're willing to concede control of UK immigration to the EU is beyond bizarre.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983
    edited May 2018
    felix said:

    daodao said:

    Why do you have such contempt for Ms Sturgeon? She is a reasonable, pleasant and impressive politician, unlike most of the leaders of the Scottish branch offices of the other political parties.
    Pleasant? She is floundering and clutching at straws having been roundly outflanked by the Tories as the Scottish m/c re-asserted themselves after many years in the wilderness. The party is hopelessly split and lacking direction.
    Personally Sturgeon is growing on me as shown by her classy tweet of congratulation to Harry and Meghan on their wedding unlike Corbyn who sent no such tweet and also due to the fact she is now effectively paying no more than lip service to indyref2 after GE17 to keep her base on side.

    She is basically a pro EU social democrat who happens to be in a nationalist party rather than a MalcG style Scottish nationalist for whom the battle for independence from the oppressive English is the be all and end all. Salmond was more in the latter category.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,610
    Even so, the First Minister might be onto something. Buy-one-get-one-free deals haven’t always served Scotland well. We’re still trying to work out how we ended up with two Murrells for the price of one.

    It’s not just low-cost pizza. Sturgeon’s government wants to crack down on advertising for fatty and salty foods and to extend taxes on sugary drinks. At least Margaret Thatcher only took our milk. Sturgeon wants to empty the entire fridge.

    Somehow, Saint Nicola of the Sacred Selfie has turned into Supernanny Sturgeon, a finger-wagging, eyebrow-raising, tut-tutting interferer. Where once thousands packed into concert halls to hang on her every word, now they just want her to give it a rest.

    We don’t have a First Minister so much as the human equivalent of a self-service checkout: ‘Do you know how much sugar is in that cake? Do you really need that second G&T? Did you not see the half-price offer on peas and carrots?’


    https://stephendaisley.com/2018/05/21/thatcher-took-our-milk-nanny-nicola-wants-to-empty-your-entire-fridge/
  • Options
    logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,709
    Freggles said:

    Fenman said:

    I've no idea who pulpstar is but he knows nothing about the dynamics of by elections.

    I look forward to your rebuttal thread
    ... or we could wait a few weeks to see who's right.
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    HYUFD said:

    felix said:

    daodao said:

    Why do you have such contempt for Ms Sturgeon? She is a reasonable, pleasant and impressive politician, unlike most of the leaders of the Scottish branch offices of the other political parties.
    Pleasant? She is floundering and clutching at straws having been roundly outflanked by the Tories as the Scottish m/c re-asserted themselves after many years in the wilderness. The party is hopelessly split and lacking direction.
    Personally Sturgeon is growing on me as shown by her classy tweet of congratulation to Harry and Meghan on their wedding unlike Corbyn who sent no such tweet and also due to the fact she is now effectively paying no more than lip service to indyref2 after GE17 to keep her base on side.

    She is basically a pro EU social democrat who happens to be in a nationalist party rather than a MalcG style Scottish nationalist for whom the battle for independence from the oppressive English is the be all and end all. Salmond was more in the latter category.
    Salmond was an economic rather than a cultural nationalist. Trouble is Mrs Thatcher used North Sea Oil as a magic money tree rather than for Norweigan-style investment and the SNP has no time machine.
  • Options
    MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    rcs1000 said:

    Hi all,

    I posted this on the last thread, but thought everybody should be forced able to watch this.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cot_Uvc7ZbA

    It's me talking about whether US Airlines are a Good (or Bad) investment proposition.

    Please watch, and then hit the subscribe button.

    Thanks :)

    This is really good
  • Options
    Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 4,814

    Only problem with this analysis is that Pulpstar totally ignores what has happened in Westminster by-elections since the Referendum and this is a Westminster by-election.

    Remember that LAB has a piss poor record defending by-elections. Copeland last year was the first occasion since 1982 that a governing party took a seat from the main opposition in a by-election. Since the referendum (with the exception of Jo Cox's seat where CON and LD didn't stand) LAB has lost vote share in every by-election.

    Ignoring Batley and Spen, there have been 5 mainland by-elections.
    It is true that Labour has lost vote share in each of them, from 2.2% (Witney, Stoke on Trent Central) to 8.67% (Richmond Park), with an average loss of 5%.

    In Lewisham East they start from 67%. They would have to lose double the vote share they did in Richmond Park (the worst of their post-referendum performances) to even dip below 50%.

    Their record may be poor, but they've got a huge cushion, and can afford to have a very very very poor result and still win at a canter. Not impossible, but would take a pre-Coalition-type LD by-election swing.
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,056
    MaxPB said:

    ydoethur said:

    In Ivanhoe, Wamba complained that peace treaties in the Middle East were making an old man of him. He could remember four, each of which were to last fifty years, which meant he must be over 200.

    Now a different sort of Scot is showing that generations are shrinking rapidly!
    I'm old enough to remember when Scottish pols thought Brexit would be a disaster.

    I'm even old enough to remember when Scottish pols said no to indy was the way to guarantee EU membership.

    Life comes at you fast.
    And yet the SNP have nothing to offer those who voted Yes/Leave and very little to offer those who voted No/Remain. Again, a second referendum on this would be lost so badly by Yes that it may be worth the hassle of listening to the SNP for another few months to make them shut up for the rest of time.
    That is one prediction I can confidently say would be proven wrong.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,302
    HYUFD said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    Interesting rumblings on the EU. In some ways if forced to choose I’d rather stay in the SM than the CU. Even if we had to retain ‘free movement’, the end of European citizenship would mean migrants would interact with our welfare system differently (ie less!).

    Perhaps it’s now sellable to the public.

    It is not sellable to the public I am afraid.

    Brexit without new immigration controls and leaving free movement in place for most Leave voters, especially working class Leave voters, would be no Brexit at all. Staying in the Customs Union but not being able to do our own trade deals would be just about sellable to all but the most ideological Brexiteers but staying in the Single Market with free movement continuing would not.

    The only possible exception to that is if somehow we could stay in the Single Market but with new controls on free movement for the UK to reflect the transition controls on free movement from the new accession countries in 2004 the EU allowed us to have for 7 years but Blair refused to take
    What would be ideal for the UK is a customs alignment (light) in goods, and single market (light) in goods, both with UK voting rights on those rules, with financial services access, services entirely UK regulated, and capped free-ish movement of workers by sector, annually reviewed in Parliament, with continent wide security/defence cooperation, as agreed between EU/UK. Our trade deals would be 50% influenced by ties to Europe and 50% what we want to do on the domestic/global stage, with the balance perhaps changing over time.

    In other words, half-out/half-in, and no longer part of the EU political project. But, that looser sort of associate membership probably isn’t on offer, so there will need to be a compromise.
  • Options
    Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    rkrkrk said:



    I've certainly never been on a royal yacht. Perhaps that's what my previous employers were missing!

    But the case for the royal yacht rests upon the idea that trade deals are signed which would not otherwise have been signed unless there was a yacht and a big party. If said deals would have been signed anyway - then the yacht did not contribute.

    So yes - they are arguing that all that is missing for big new deals is a yacht.

    Your "no drop off in business" argument is nonsense because it is consistent with any of: the yacht made no difference, the yacht was a drag on performance and we leapt ahead once it had gone, the yacht was brilliant and exports would have trebled if we had kept it. And here is some specific and credible evidence of the yacht getting billions of pounds of business in one trip:
    https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/712166/Bringing-Royal-yacht-Britannia-back-could-secure-billions-of-pounds-trade-deals .
  • Options
    Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039

    rcs1000 said:

    Hi all,

    I posted this on the last thread, but thought everybody should be forced able to watch this.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cot_Uvc7ZbA

    It's me talking about whether US Airlines are a Good (or Bad) investment proposition.

    Please watch, and then hit the subscribe button.

    Thanks :)

    This is really good
    Very good, @rcs1000. Subscribed, and I have moved all my pension into Southwest. That's right, isn't it?
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,052

    What would be ideal for the UK is...

    - UK voting rights...
    - no longer part of the EU political project....

    Isn't your ideal scenario a contradiction in terms?
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,369
    Fenman said:

    I've no idea who pulpstar is but he knows nothing about the dynamics of by elections.

    My stint as guest editor begins Sunday evening, I’ll be quite happy to publish your article Fisking Pulpstar’s article, it will also be an opportunity to share your wisdom with PB.
This discussion has been closed.