Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Going back to your constituencies. Alastair Meeks on not takin

12346»

Comments

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    edited June 2019
    @Quincel Cory Booker looks a buy at around 90-1 ?

    Cory Booker
    £457.42

    Tulsi Gabbard
    -£125.50

    Anyway..
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    Mr. Flashman (deceased), I wonder if it's due to fewer big cities.

    High taxes and a flatline economy don't help. Plus the once feted education system is going down the pan.

    Scotland needs 10-15 years of a party of enterprise in Holyrood to drive the economy and get the schools back on track.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    kinabalu said:

    Does it? Are you really suggesting that there's someone engaged enough to vote in the euro elections (or indeed any elections), who is opposed to Brexit, who is going to vote for the Brexit party for that reason? All it needs is to be designed by the Russians and we can start another conspiracy theory to explain why all those poor benighted fools voted in favour of Brexit again...

    Impact on the margins, yes. Small but not totally immaterial.

    These things do have an influence. Remember the battle to have 'Yes' in a Yes/No Referendum? Or to be at the top of the ballot paper?

    (Not saying it was cheating BTW - just clever.)
    Weren’t you saying the electoral commission should get involved earlier?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. Flashman (deceased), higher taxes are relatively new, though.
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 2,869
    kinabalu said:

    Does it? Are you really suggesting that there's someone engaged enough to vote in the euro elections (or indeed any elections), who is opposed to Brexit, who is going to vote for the Brexit party for that reason? All it needs is to be designed by the Russians and we can start another conspiracy theory to explain why all those poor benighted fools voted in favour of Brexit again...

    Impact on the margins, yes. Small but not totally immaterial.

    These things do have an influence. Remember the battle to have 'Yes' in a Yes/No Referendum? Or to be at the top of the ballot paper?

    (Not saying it was cheating BTW - just clever.)
    I didn't notice the logo, but I did think it was odd to find the Brexit party at the bottom of the ballot paper. Didn't realise until then that The is part of the name.

    Good afternoon, everybody.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Good afternoon, Miss JGP.

    It does seem slightly peculiar that 'The' is part of the name, but there we are.
  • anothernickanothernick Posts: 3,547

    <

    Quite so:

    On January 16th 2019, the House voted by 325 to 306 against a motion of no confidence in Her Majesty’s Government. Yet the day before, a huge chunk of those 325 (including the DUP) had voted against the Government’s central policy and purpose, namely the Withdrawal Agreement, when that went down to its historic 230-vote defeat. In previous times a vote of that magnitude would have been framed as a matter of confidence in the government itself, and thus treated with the seriousness it deserved.

    It is clear from subsequent developments that a number of MPs could have accepted the deal but preferred not to vote for it. This may have been in the reasonable hope that they could get closer to their own position. Indeed the EU did provide some further legal assurances as a result.

    However my overriding impression from both MV1 and MV2 is that these MPs – most of the ERG and many Labour MPs sitting in Leave seats – wanted the deal to pass (eventually) but without getting their own hands dirty by actually voting for it themselves. This is a failure of salesmanship on the part of the PM and a failure of whipping, but it’s also a failure of those MPs to face up to their own responsibilities.


    http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/03/21/at-this-critical-time-a-look-at-matters-of-confidence-in-the-political-arena/

    This has been debated here before and the view is that the FTPA prevents governments from making random votes into matters of confidence. A vote of confidence must follow a prescribed format and concerns confidence only. Another legacy of Cameron's insouciant trashing of the political process.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    <

    Quite so:

    On January 16th 2019, the House voted by 325 to 306 against a motion of no confidence in Her Majesty’s Government. Yet the day before, a huge chunk of those 325 (including the DUP) had voted against the Government’s central policy and purpose, namely the Withdrawal Agreement, when that went down to its historic 230-vote defeat. In previous times a vote of that magnitude would have been framed as a matter of confidence in the government itself, and thus treated with the seriousness it deserved.

    It is clear from subsequent developments that a number of MPs could have accepted the deal but preferred not to vote for it. This may have been in the reasonable hope that they could get closer to their own position. Indeed the EU did provide some further legal assurances as a result.

    However my overriding impression from both MV1 and MV2 is that these MPs – most of the ERG and many Labour MPs sitting in Leave seats – wanted the deal to pass (eventually) but without getting their own hands dirty by actually voting for it themselves. This is a failure of salesmanship on the part of the PM and a failure of whipping, but it’s also a failure of those MPs to face up to their own responsibilities.


    http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/03/21/at-this-critical-time-a-look-at-matters-of-confidence-in-the-political-arena/

    This has been debated here before and the view is that the FTPA prevents governments from making random votes into matters of confidence. A vote of confidence must follow a prescribed format and concerns confidence only. Another legacy of Cameron's insouciant trashing of the political process.
    Wasn’t it Clegg’s idea?
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,860
    RobD said:

    Weren’t you saying the electoral commission should get involved earlier?

    Yes. But the debate which followed left me in a minority of one on that. So I had to accept that I was being unreasonable. Don't mind being in a minority but when you're utterly alone in believing something it is best to stop believing it. Good example - James Cleverly.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,928

    Good afternoon, Miss JGP.

    It does seem slightly peculiar that 'The' is part of the name, but there we are.

    Mr Dancer, there was a lesser pop group of the 1980s going by the name of "The The".

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_The
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,704
    TGOHF said:

    The Scots have been massively overrepresented in the history of the Union and the British Empire.

    The current population balance is not what it was at the time the union started.

    image
    In the last 10 years England has added almost as many people as Scotland's population. This rapid growth is causing strains in the union and England. Scotland feels like a small town sitting next to a volcano.

    You have to ask why Scotland is so unappealling for immigrants.

    The weather ? The moribund economy run by the SNP ? The midges ? The high SNP taxes ?

    All of the above ?
    People want to live in London and the SE.
  • Harris_TweedHarris_Tweed Posts: 1,300
    kinabalu said:

    What lessons? It didn't confuse me :)

    Would not expect a PB regular to be thrown by it. I wasn't either. I did notice it though. It was impossible not to. So one does wonder.

    In fact, I have just had a cheeky few quid on LABOUR to win Peterborough at around 8/1.

    The fact that the BP logo will not be on the ballot paper this time (logos only allowed in Euros apparently) is not, I hasten to add, the main reason for me doing the bet - but it is a factor.
    Not sure where the "only in the Euros" thing came from, but this suggests otherwise:

    https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2015/656/made
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Dr. Prasannan, the 80s was a silly time.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    Is @AlastairMeeks around? Look at the second paragraph of 'Critiques of the Act' section of the Wikipedia piece on the Fixed Term Parliament Act:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fixed-term_Parliaments_Act_2011
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    RobD said:

    Wasn’t it Clegg’s idea?

    Yes, it was an example of the 'New Politics' - parties working together, the Conservatives not having it all their own way, etc. The kind of thing 'progressives' argue for and then bitch about when they get it.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,669
    RobD said:

    <

    Quite so:

    On January 16th 2019, the House voted by 325 to 306 against a motion of no confidence in Her Majesty’s Government. Yet the day before, a huge chunk of those 325 (including the DUP) had voted against the Government’s central policy and purpose, namely the Withdrawal Agreement, when that went down to its historic 230-vote defeat. In previous times a vote of that magnitude would have been framed as a matter of confidence in the government itself, and thus treated with the seriousness it deserved.

    It is clear from subsequent developments that a number of MPs could have accepted the deal but preferred not to vote for it. This may have been in the reasonable hope that they could get closer to their own position. Indeed the EU did provide some further legal assurances as a result.

    However my overriding impression from both MV1 and MV2 is that these MPs – most of the ERG and many Labour MPs sitting in Leave seats – wanted the deal to pass (eventually) but without getting their own hands dirty by actually voting for it themselves. This is a failure of salesmanship on the part of the PM and a failure of whipping, but it’s also a failure of those MPs to face up to their own responsibilities.


    http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/03/21/at-this-critical-time-a-look-at-matters-of-confidence-in-the-political-arena/

    This has been debated here before and the view is that the FTPA prevents governments from making random votes into matters of confidence. A vote of confidence must follow a prescribed format and concerns confidence only. Another legacy of Cameron's insouciant trashing of the political process.
    Wasn’t it Clegg’s idea?
    The coalition wouldn't have worked without it.
  • TrèsDifficileTrèsDifficile Posts: 1,729

    Is @AlastairMeeks around? Look at the second paragraph of 'Critiques of the Act' section of the Wikipedia piece on the Fixed Term Parliament Act:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fixed-term_Parliaments_Act_2011

    Who?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,590
    edited June 2019

    Is @AlastairMeeks around? Look at the second paragraph of 'Critiques of the Act' section of the Wikipedia piece on the Fixed Term Parliament Act:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fixed-term_Parliaments_Act_2011

    The tag next to it suggests that 'Alistair Meeks' might constitute weasel words, which seems a little unfair...

    Good spot, though.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. Song, the absence of a proper sunset clause was dumb as a post, though.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,165

    RobD said:

    <

    Quite so:

    On January 16th 2019, the House voted by 325 to 306 against a motion of no confidence in Her Majesty’s Government. Yet the day before, a huge chunk of those 325 (including the DUP) had voted against the Government’s central policy and purpose, namely the Withdrawal Agreement, when that went down to its historic 230-vote defeat. In previous times a vote of that magnitude would have been framed as a matter of confidence in the government itself, and thus treated with the seriousness it deserved.

    It is clear from subsequent developments that a number of MPs could have accepted the deal but preferred not to vote for it. This may have been in the reasonable hope that they could get closer to their own position. Indeed the EU did provide some further legal assurances as a result.

    However my overriding impression from both MV1 and MV2 is that these MPs – most of the ERG and many Labour MPs sitting in Leave seats – wanted the deal to pass (eventually) but without getting their own hands dirty by actually voting for it themselves. This is a failure of salesmanship on the part of the PM and a failure of whipping, but it’s also a failure of those MPs to face up to their own responsibilities.


    http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/03/21/at-this-critical-time-a-look-at-matters-of-confidence-in-the-political-arena/

    This has been debated here before and the view is that the FTPA prevents governments from making random votes into matters of confidence. A vote of confidence must follow a prescribed format and concerns confidence only. Another legacy of Cameron's insouciant trashing of the political process.
    Wasn’t it Clegg’s idea?
    The coalition wouldn't have worked without it.
    Really? Given the way the polling went I rather doubt Cameron would have called a GE earlier than 2015.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    HYUFD said:
    Not even a glint in his Mother's eye but already giving Winston bad advice. Thanks for keeping us up to date HYUFD
  • TrèsDifficileTrèsDifficile Posts: 1,729
    Nigelb said:

    Is @AlastairMeeks around? Look at the second paragraph of 'Critiques of the Act' section of the Wikipedia piece on the Fixed Term Parliament Act:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fixed-term_Parliaments_Act_2011

    The tag next to it suggests that 'Alistair Meeks' might constitute weasel words, which seems a little unfair...

    Good spot, though.
    The 'who?' was added by a bot - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:AnomieBOT

    And Mr Meeks was only added to the page less than a month ago
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,165

    Nigelb said:

    Is @AlastairMeeks around? Look at the second paragraph of 'Critiques of the Act' section of the Wikipedia piece on the Fixed Term Parliament Act:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fixed-term_Parliaments_Act_2011

    The tag next to it suggests that 'Alistair Meeks' might constitute weasel words, which seems a little unfair...

    Good spot, though.
    The 'who?' was added by a bot - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:AnomieBOT

    And Mr Meeks was only added to the page less than a month ago
    And now it's been removed!
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    tlg86 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Is @AlastairMeeks around? Look at the second paragraph of 'Critiques of the Act' section of the Wikipedia piece on the Fixed Term Parliament Act:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fixed-term_Parliaments_Act_2011

    The tag next to it suggests that 'Alistair Meeks' might constitute weasel words, which seems a little unfair...

    Good spot, though.
    The 'who?' was added by a bot - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:AnomieBOT

    And Mr Meeks was only added to the page less than a month ago
    And now it's been removed!
    PB not a reliable source? Scandalous.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    RobD said:

    Wasn’t it Clegg’s idea?

    Yes, it was an example of the 'New Politics' - parties working together, the Conservatives not having it all their own way, etc. The kind of thing 'progressives' argue for and then bitch about when they get it.
    The trick is to give them nothing. :p
  • TabmanTabman Posts: 1,046

    Good afternoon, Miss JGP.

    It does seem slightly peculiar that 'The' is part of the name, but there we are.

    Mr Dancer, there was a lesser pop group of the 1980s going by the name of "The The".

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_The
    "Lesser"????

    The pure genius that is Matt Johnson is still going strong - I saw him at the Royal Festival Hall but a year ago!
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,928
    Tabman said:

    Good afternoon, Miss JGP.

    It does seem slightly peculiar that 'The' is part of the name, but there we are.

    Mr Dancer, there was a lesser pop group of the 1980s going by the name of "The The".

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_The
    "Lesser"????

    The pure genius that is Matt Johnson is still going strong - I saw him at the Royal Festival Hall but a year ago!
    Only two top 20 hits? (sorry!)
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,547

    Dr. Prasannan, the 80s was a silly time.

    I've just watched the film "Top Secret"

    The 1980s were indeed a silly time. And very, very funny. :)
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,928
    RobD said:

    tlg86 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Is @AlastairMeeks around? Look at the second paragraph of 'Critiques of the Act' section of the Wikipedia piece on the Fixed Term Parliament Act:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fixed-term_Parliaments_Act_2011

    The tag next to it suggests that 'Alistair Meeks' might constitute weasel words, which seems a little unfair...

    Good spot, though.
    The 'who?' was added by a bot - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:AnomieBOT

    And Mr Meeks was only added to the page less than a month ago
    And now it's been removed!
    PB not a reliable source? Scandalous.
    Changed again!
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,165

    RobD said:

    tlg86 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Is @AlastairMeeks around? Look at the second paragraph of 'Critiques of the Act' section of the Wikipedia piece on the Fixed Term Parliament Act:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fixed-term_Parliaments_Act_2011

    The tag next to it suggests that 'Alistair Meeks' might constitute weasel words, which seems a little unfair...

    Good spot, though.
    The 'who?' was added by a bot - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:AnomieBOT

    And Mr Meeks was only added to the page less than a month ago
    And now it's been removed!
    PB not a reliable source? Scandalous.
    Changed again!
    This is just a warm up for Friday.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. Jessop, one remembers the Safety Dance Literal Video, featuring morris dancers :D
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    Mr. Jessop, one remembers the Safety Dance Literal Video, featuring morris dancers :D

    There’s more than one Morris dancer? :o
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Is the by-election count overnight?
  • TabmanTabman Posts: 1,046

    Tabman said:

    Good afternoon, Miss JGP.

    It does seem slightly peculiar that 'The' is part of the name, but there we are.

    Mr Dancer, there was a lesser pop group of the 1980s going by the name of "The The".

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_The
    "Lesser"????

    The pure genius that is Matt Johnson is still going strong - I saw him at the Royal Festival Hall but a year ago!
    Only two top 20 hits? (sorry!)
    Chart success is not a measure of quality :-D
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. D, there are thousands of morris dancers. But only one Morris Dancer.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,860
    edited June 2019

    Is @AlastairMeeks around? Look at the second paragraph of 'Critiques of the Act' section of the Wikipedia piece on the Fixed Term Parliament Act:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fixed-term_Parliaments_Act_2011

    Just followed the link on that, and hence to Mike's wiki entry, which has the following accolade:

    "The 33rd most influential over 50 on Twitter".
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    Mr. D, there are thousands of morris dancers. But only one Morris Dancer.

    And no Morris dancers? :p
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. D, there are, but they're car enthusiasts.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,669
    tlg86 said:

    RobD said:

    <

    Quite so:

    On January 16th 2019, the House voted by 325 to 306 against a motion of no confidence in Her Majesty’s Government. Yet the day before, a huge chunk of those 325 (including the DUP) had voted against the Government’s central policy and purpose, namely the Withdrawal Agreement, when that went down to its historic 230-vote defeat. In previous times a vote of that magnitude would have been framed as a matter of confidence in the government itself, and thus treated with the seriousness it deserved.

    It is clear from subsequent developments that a number of MPs could have accepted the deal but preferred not to vote for it. This may have been in the reasonable hope that they could get closer to their own position. Indeed the EU did provide some further legal assurances as a result.

    However my overriding impression from both MV1 and MV2 is that these MPs – most of the ERG and many Labour MPs sitting in Leave seats – wanted the deal to pass (eventually) but without getting their own hands dirty by actually voting for it themselves. This is a failure of salesmanship on the part of the PM and a failure of whipping, but it’s also a failure of those MPs to face up to their own responsibilities.


    http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/03/21/at-this-critical-time-a-look-at-matters-of-confidence-in-the-political-arena/

    This has been debated here before and the view is that the FTPA prevents governments from making random votes into matters of confidence. A vote of confidence must follow a prescribed format and concerns confidence only. Another legacy of Cameron's insouciant trashing of the political process.
    Wasn’t it Clegg’s idea?
    The coalition wouldn't have worked without it.
    Really? Given the way the polling went I rather doubt Cameron would have called a GE earlier than 2015.
    Would you have risked it?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    Tabman said:

    Tabman said:

    Good afternoon, Miss JGP.

    It does seem slightly peculiar that 'The' is part of the name, but there we are.

    Mr Dancer, there was a lesser pop group of the 1980s going by the name of "The The".

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_The
    "Lesser"????

    The pure genius that is Matt Johnson is still going strong - I saw him at the Royal Festival Hall but a year ago!
    Only two top 20 hits? (sorry!)
    Chart success is not a measure of quality :-D
    https://www.officialcharts.com/charts/singles-chart/19810215/7501/ proves the point !
  • stodgestodge Posts: 12,745
    Afternoon all :)

    "Progressives" presumably defined by Conservatives as people who ought to support us but don't. Defined by Labour as people who shouldn't vote for us but do.

    Elsewhere, the final Voxmeter for today's Danish general election has come back into line with many of the other polls showing the centre-left bloc still leading 55%-45% and in terms of seats likely to win around 100 in the new Folketing.

    The Social Democrats have slipped back to 26% - a drop of four points and more in line with other pollsters - and now win 48 seats. Venstre have improved slightly to 36 and it looks as though some of the more right-wing and anti-Islamic forces will get into the Folketing so the split looks to be about 100-77 for the centre-left.

    For Venstre to survive will require one of the centre-left players to jump ship but if the Socialistik Folkeparti and Radikale Venstre do as well and the Dansk Folkeparti loses half its seats, it will be all over for Lars Lokke Rasmussen.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 13,766
    TGOHF said:

    The Scots have been massively overrepresented in the history of the Union and the British Empire.

    The current population balance is not what it was at the time the union started.

    image
    In the last 10 years England has added almost as many people as Scotland's population. This rapid growth is causing strains in the union and England. Scotland feels like a small town sitting next to a volcano.

    You have to ask why Scotland is so unappealling for immigrants.

    The weather ? The moribund economy run by the SNP ? The midges ? The high SNP taxes ?

    All of the above ?
    When I briefly worked for a Scottish company I was told by continental colleagues that they could not understand Scottish people when they spoke English, that it was easier to understand someone else where English wasn't their first language. Same applies to Newcastle. Perhaps that is the real reason!
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,165

    tlg86 said:

    RobD said:

    <

    Quite so:

    On January 16th 2019, the House voted by 325 to 306 against a motion of no confidence in Her Majesty’s Government. Yet the day before, a huge chunk of those 325 (including the DUP) had voted against the Government’s central policy and purpose, namely the Withdrawal Agreement, when that went down to its historic 230-vote defeat. In previous times a vote of that magnitude would have been framed as a matter of confidence in the government itself, and thus treated with the seriousness it deserved.

    It is clear from subsequent developments that a number of MPs could have accepted the deal but preferred not to vote for it. This may have been in the reasonable hope that they could get closer to their own position. Indeed the EU did provide some further legal assurances as a result.

    However my overriding impression from both MV1 and MV2 is that these MPs – most of the ERG and many Labour MPs sitting in Leave seats – wanted the deal to pass (eventually) but without getting their own hands dirty by actually voting for it themselves. This is a failure of salesmanship on the part of the PM and a failure of whipping, but it’s also a failure of those MPs to face up to their own responsibilities.


    http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/03/21/at-this-critical-time-a-look-at-matters-of-confidence-in-the-political-arena/

    This has been debated here before and the view is that the FTPA prevents governments from making random votes into matters of confidence. A vote of confidence must follow a prescribed format and concerns confidence only. Another legacy of Cameron's insouciant trashing of the political process.
    Wasn’t it Clegg’s idea?
    The coalition wouldn't have worked without it.
    Really? Given the way the polling went I rather doubt Cameron would have called a GE earlier than 2015.
    Would you have risked it?
    I wouldn't have gone into coalition with the Tories.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,860
    edited June 2019

    Mr Dancer, there was a lesser pop group of the 1980s going by the name of "The The".

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_The

    And on that topic, although further back in time, Pink Floyd were initially called THE Pink Floyd. It gave them a more Faustian, deterministic feel (which was appropriate) but caused a certain clumsiness of expression amongst fans. "I'm going to a The Pink Floyd concert tonight." Or even worse, "Just cannot get tickets for the The Pink Floyd gig next week. Really peed off."

    They therefore dropped the THE and became just Pink Floyd. Often shortened these days to Floyd or - ironically - 'The' Floyd.
  • kingbongokingbongo Posts: 393
    stodge said:

    Afternoon all :)



    Elsewhere, the final Voxmeter for today's Danish general election has come back into line with many of the other polls showing the centre-left bloc still leading 55%-45% and in terms of seats likely to win around 100 in the new Folketing.

    The Social Democrats have slipped back to 26% - a drop of four points and more in line with other pollsters - and now win 48 seats. Venstre have improved slightly to 36 and it looks as though some of the more right-wing and anti-Islamic forces will get into the Folketing so the split looks to be about 100-77 for the centre-left.

    For Venstre to survive will require one of the centre-left players to jump ship but if the Socialistik Folkeparti and Radikale Venstre do as well and the Dansk Folkeparti loses half its seats, it will be all over for Lars Lokke Rasmussen.

    Venstre will not be able to construct a coalition - Lars Løkke's best hope is to be in a grand coalition - pity as he's a good PM
  • OllyTOllyT Posts: 4,911

    HYUFD said:

    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pulpstar said:

    The Tories would much rather Corbyn won Peterborough than Nige I expect. On that basis they should be trying very hard indeed.

    No, the Tories would far rather the Brexit Party won Peterborough from Labour leading to a Labour civil war while they can regain Brexit Party voters once Boris takes over
    Labour can never, will never & didn't even in the 1995 Tory nadir pose an existential threat to the Tories. The Brexit party can.
    Provided Boris becomes leader that is not a problem, Yougov yesterday had a Boris led Tory Party with a 7% lead over Labour with the Brexit Party falling back to 13%. Even Raab cut the Brexit Party back to 17% with the Tories narrowly ahead.

    However if Hunt or Gove succeeded May that would be a problem as the Brexit Party would still be over 20% in that poll with the Tories trailing behind
    You are ignoring a large elephant. Boris Johnson becoming leader does not deliver Brexit. He would be faced with exactly the same issues that brought down Theresa May.
    Everyone will face the same issues. The difference is how you're prepared to address them.

    Clear out and sack all opponents of Brexit who aren't prepared to No Deal should be done on day one. Show you're serious then go for broke with simultaneous no deal planning and negotiating. Get a good deal and great, no deal and so be it.

    If need be hold an election removing the whip from anyone who isn't prepared to follow policy and actually bother to turn up to the debates. Can't do worse than May.
    What are the grounds for believing the EU will u-turn and reopen negotiations because Johnson? As I understand it there isn't anyone to negotiate with till November 1st even if there was a desire to bend to Johnson's demands.

    So what are looking at is No Deal with about 8 weeks "planning". Sufficient numbers of Tories will not accept that and ally with all the other parties with the possible exception of the DUP to block it. Are you convinced a No Deal Brexit policy will win a working majority in a GE?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,044
    kinabalu said:

    Mr Dancer, there was a lesser pop group of the 1980s going by the name of "The The".

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_The

    And on that topic, although further back in time, Pink Floyd were initially called THE Pink Floyd. It gave them a more Faustian, deterministic feel (which was appropriate) but caused a certain clumsiness of expression amongst fans. "I'm going to a The Pink Floyd concert tonight." Or even worse, "Just cannot get tickets for the The Pink Floyd gig next week. Really peed off."

    They therefore dropped the THE and became just Pink Floyd. Often shortened these days to Floyd or - ironically - 'The' Floyd.
    By weird Floydian coincidence I have just opened an email advertising 25th anniversary blue LP edition of Division Bell.

  • kingbongokingbongo Posts: 393

    King Bongo, cheers for that post.

    tak skal du have!
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,860

    Not sure where the "only in the Euros" thing came from, but this suggests otherwise:

    https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2015/656/made

    Ah OK, my mistake. My only source was another poster (recidivist?) saying that they thought it might be the case. Think I leapt on that because I so wanted it to be the case.

    Still, I'm happy enough with 8/1 for Labour to hold Peterborough, BP arrow or no BP arrow.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891

    isam said:

    Decent effort, with a betting tip on the Trade Union Elections at the end

    https://twitter.com/jeremy_hunt/status/1136180858686099456?s=21

    It is a good video. Gove drifting and Hunt firming up a bit this morning.
    An extraordinary decision talking to the void without the hint of an interviewer! Why not direct to camera/the viewer? Apart from that rather wooden. A pity really because wandering round his old haunts with his Chinese wife as an opening should have worked well. 6/10. My scores to date.....Gove 5/10 Hunt 6/10 Raab 7/10 Boris 7.5/10
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,010
    kinabalu said:

    What lessons? Its their logo that has been approved by the Electoral Commission. It doesn't cause any confusion.

    Well I was very conscious of it when I was voting.
    Strangely, I was just about to vote LIb Dem when I must have dozed off. When I woke up there was a cross next to "Brexit."
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,842
    edited June 2019
    What a catch! Kohli out. May get a contest after all.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,789
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,044
    OllyT said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pulpstar said:

    The Tories would much rather Corbyn won Peterborough than Nige I expect. On that basis they should be trying very hard indeed.

    No, the Tories would far rather the Brexit Party won Peterborough from Labour leading to a Labour civil war while they can regain Brexit Party voters once Boris takes over
    Labour can never, will never & didn't even in the 1995 Tory nadir pose an existential threat to the Tories. The Brexit party can.
    Provided Boris becomes leader that is not a problem, Yougov yesterday had a Boris led Tory Party with a 7% lead over Labour with the Brexit Party falling back to 13%. Even Raab cut the Brexit Party back to 17% with the Tories narrowly ahead.

    However if Hunt or Gove succeeded May that would be a problem as the Brexit Party would still be over 20% in that poll with the Tories trailing behind
    You are ignoring a large elephant. Boris Johnson becoming leader does not deliver Brexit. He would be faced with exactly the same issues that brought down Theresa May.
    Everyone will face the same issues. The difference is how you're prepared to address them.

    Clear out and sack all opponents of Brexit who aren't prepared to No Deal should be done on day one. Show you're serious then go for broke with simultaneous no deal planning and negotiating. Get a good deal and great, no deal and so be it.

    If need be hold an election removing the whip from anyone who isn't prepared to follow policy and actually bother to turn up to the debates. Can't do worse than May.
    What are the grounds for believing the EU will u-turn and reopen negotiations because Johnson? As I understand it there isn't anyone to negotiate with till November 1st even if there was a desire to bend to Johnson's demands.

    So what are looking at is No Deal with about 8 weeks "planning". Sufficient numbers of Tories will not accept that and ally with all the other parties with the possible exception of the DUP to block it. Are you convinced a No Deal Brexit policy will win a working majority in a GE?

    "The only hope left for the next Tory PM is to call an election and go for a no-deal Brexit" YANIS VAROUFAKIS

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/06/04/hope-left-next-tory-pm-call-election-go-no-deal-brexit/
  • stodgestodge Posts: 12,745
    tlg86 said:


    I wouldn't have gone into coalition with the Tories.

    Without the benefit of the hindsight of the last nine years, enlighten me as to what Nick Clegg should have done in May 2010.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,590
    dixiedean said:

    What a catch! Kohli out. May get a contest after all.

    For catch of the tournament, perhaps.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,590
    New thread, btw.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,860

    By weird Floydian coincidence I have just opened an email advertising 25th anniversary blue LP edition of Division Bell.

    That is spooky indeed!

    Something similar with me yesterday. I was on the Trump demo - I know you don't approve - and on my walk home I got to brooding about why so many people here on the right of politics seem so sanguine, supportive even, when it comes to the dreadful Orange One. We are talking about the Toby Youngs of this world. Indeed I was mentally visualizing that very individual as I walked and brooded. Then I turned a corner (Piccadilly area) and who should I see coming out of the doorway of a catering establishment? Yes. I saw the actual Toby. Incredible co-incidence.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,860
    Chris said:

    Strangely, I was just about to vote LIb Dem when I must have dozed off. When I woke up there was a cross next to "Brexit."

    :smile:

    Begs the question - how many others?

    We can only speculate.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340

    Is @AlastairMeeks around? Look at the second paragraph of 'Critiques of the Act' section of the Wikipedia piece on the Fixed Term Parliament Act:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fixed-term_Parliaments_Act_2011

    Ha! Fame at last.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,684
    brendan16 said:

    malcolmg said:

    brendan16 said:

    malcolmg said:

    Look at the state of your average unionist in Scotland , beggars belief. Beware if you are of a sensitive nature it is not for before the watershed
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2&v=Vmt9T-WrsvQ

    Ruth must condemn..

    Och, no need now that lot have buggered off to TBP.
    A couple of angry old people shouting nonsense in the street (the evidence in said video) is probably more evidence of the failings of the Scottish health and social care system than representing 'average unionists' in Scotland .Unless you believe the majority of Scots think the same?

    Is that the health and social care system that is much better than England you are talking about , free home care, prescriptions , etc etc. This is the type of stuff that has been encouraged by the Ruth Davidson Tory party
    malcolmg said:

    brendan16 said:

    malcolmg said:

    Look at the state of your average unionist in Scotland , beggars belief. Beware if you are of a sensitive nature it is not for before the watershed
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2&v=Vmt9T-WrsvQ

    Ruth must condemn..

    Och, no need now that lot have buggered off to TBP.
    A couple of angry old people shouting nonsense in the street (the evidence in said video) is probably more evidence of the failings of the Scottish health and social care system than representing 'average unionists' in Scotland .Unless you believe the majority of Scots think the same?

    Is that the health and social care system that is much better than England you are talking about , free home care, prescriptions , etc etc. This is the type of stuff that has been encouraged by the Ruth Davidson Tory party
    You sort of missed the irony? But it does help if you get thousands more funding per head for services than the Welsh and English?

    Of course those are only ‘average’ figures!
    Well we choose to spend our pocket money well, little as it is after being pillaged by Westminster
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,684
    TGOHF said:

    The Scots have been massively overrepresented in the history of the Union and the British Empire.

    The current population balance is not what it was at the time the union started.

    image
    In the last 10 years England has added almost as many people as Scotland's population. This rapid growth is causing strains in the union and England. Scotland feels like a small town sitting next to a volcano.

    You have to ask why Scotland is so unappealling for immigrants.

    The weather ? The moribund economy run by the SNP ? The midges ? The high SNP taxes ?

    All of the above ?
    we here plenty of whinging obout the influx from you xenophobes Harry , even though you are supposedly an immigrant yourself
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,684
    TGOHF said:

    Mr. Flashman (deceased), I wonder if it's due to fewer big cities.

    High taxes and a flatline economy don't help. Plus the once feted education system is going down the pan.

    Scotland needs 10-15 years of a party of enterprise in Holyrood to drive the economy and get the schools back on track.
    LOL , what higher taxes pray tell, you Tories like the fibbing.
  • rural_voterrural_voter Posts: 2,038
    kinabalu said:

    Not sure where the "only in the Euros" thing came from, but this suggests otherwise:

    https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2015/656/made

    Ah OK, my mistake. My only source was another poster (recidivist?) saying that they thought it might be the case. Think I leapt on that because I so wanted it to be the case.

    Still, I'm happy enough with 8/1 for Labour to hold Peterborough, BP arrow or no BP arrow.
    ___________________________________________

    Where did you get odds of 9.0 (or 8/1 in UK units)? Best I found was ~7.4.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,860

    Where did you get odds of 9.0 (or 8/1 in UK units)? Best I found was ~7.4.

    Apols, I got 8.6 and rounded up for my post.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,072
    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Come November I, any of the Tory contenders turns into Theresa May II, particularly Boris.
    How can he avoid this. What on earth does he do ?
    It's a box locked on all sides.

    A General Election, clearly. Though they can't say that.
    It's a gamble but a General Election promising we'll really leave this time then passing the withdrawal agreement with a majority would be the best way out. Once we're out very few will care about the detail, even Corbyn will probably be relieved he or his succesor can move onto other issues
    You really think that this is over even if we’ve officially left? This culture war will rage for years and years to come.
  • kingbongokingbongo Posts: 393
    Danish exit poll in 20 minutes - so good to have a proper election going on!
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Come November I, any of the Tory contenders turns into Theresa May II, particularly Boris.
    How can he avoid this. What on earth does he do ?
    It's a box locked on all sides.

    A General Election, clearly. Though they can't say that.
    It's a gamble but a General Election promising we'll really leave this time then passing the withdrawal agreement with a majority would be the best way out. Once we're out very few will care about the detail, even Corbyn will probably be relieved he or his succesor can move onto other issues
    You really think that this is over even if we’ve officially left? This culture war will rage for years and years to come.
    Sure, the Brexit Party will be down to UKIP levels I think again though.
This discussion has been closed.