politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » New poll has Starmer dwarfing Nandy and RLB as the one most li

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » New poll has Starmer dwarfing Nandy and RLB as the one most likely to win a general election

After four successive general election defeats the one thing that the Labour movement wants more than anything else is a leader who can lead the party into a general election victory and back to power. Note this was from Opinium’s regular voting poll and is not of the party’s selectorate.

Read the full story here

dodrade

But, it HAS to be a woman!

Philip_Thompson

dodrade said:

But, it HAS to be a woman!

Then Labour can emulate the success of Next Prime Minister Jo Swinson.

RobD

dodrade said:

But, it HAS to be a woman!

If he serves a full term it will have been fifty years since Thatcher became LoTO.

Gabs3

Nandy is actually the most electable but Labour prefer white men so will elect Starmer.

rcs1000

Gabs3 said:

Nandy is actually the most electable but Labour prefer white men so will elect Starmer.

I agree that Nandy is probably more electable. But I think this is not to do with testicles (or lack thereof). I think Labour members felt they rolled the dice last time, and that didn't work out so well.

They're feeling conservative, and Starmer is the conservative, low risk, option.

HYUFD

Gabs3 said:

Nandy is actually the most electable but Labour prefer white men so will elect Starmer.

Nandy is lightweight, she might appeal more to Leavers than Starmer but few of them are going to switch back from the Tories under Boris anyway.

Starmer is Labour's best bet if they want to appeal to Tory and LD Remainers, especially if we go to WTO+ Brexit.

Long Bailey though would be the best option for the Tories and would appeal to barely any voters beyond those already voting Labour

Philip_Thompson

rcs1000 said:

Gabs3 said:

Nandy is actually the most electable but Labour prefer white men so will elect Starmer.

I agree that Nandy is probably more electable. But I think this is not to do with testicles (or lack thereof). I think Labour members felt they rolled the dice last time, and that didn't work out so well.

They're feeling conservative, and Starmer is the conservative, low risk, option.

I wonder whether the Corbynistas changes to the method of electing a Labour leader, by introducing the CLP and union phase, has shot themselves in the foot?

When Corbyn was elected he only just scraped through the nominations but then the long campaign began and he took off.

By adding the CLP phase Starmer has been able to build on his early success with MP nominations by clearing up the CLP nominations too. He's been able to build up momentum - and thus take power away from Momentum.

RLB may in hindsight have had an easier ride if we'd gone straight from the nominations to the campaign and then ballots.

rcs1000

Philip_Thompson said:

rcs1000 said:

Gabs3 said:

Nandy is actually the most electable but Labour prefer white men so will elect Starmer.

I agree that Nandy is probably more electable. But I think this is not to do with testicles (or lack thereof). I think Labour members felt they rolled the dice last time, and that didn't work out so well.

They're feeling conservative, and Starmer is the conservative, low risk, option.

I wonder whether the Corbynistas changes to the method of electing a Labour leader, by introducing the CLP and union phase, has shot themselves in the foot?

When Corbyn was elected he only just scraped through the nominations but then the long campaign began and he took off.

By adding the CLP phase Starmer has been able to build on his early success with MP nominations by clearing up the CLP nominations too. He's been able to build up momentum - and thus take power away from Momentum.

RLB may in hindsight have had an easier ride if we'd gone straight from the nominations to the campaign and then ballots.

I think that's very plausible.

Endillion

Philip_Thompson said:

rcs1000 said:

Gabs3 said:

Nandy is actually the most electable but Labour prefer white men so will elect Starmer.

I agree that Nandy is probably more electable. But I think this is not to do with testicles (or lack thereof). I think Labour members felt they rolled the dice last time, and that didn't work out so well.

They're feeling conservative, and Starmer is the conservative, low risk, option.

I wonder whether the Corbynistas changes to the method of electing a Labour leader, by introducing the CLP and union phase, has shot themselves in the foot?

When Corbyn was elected he only just scraped through the nominations but then the long campaign began and he took off.

By adding the CLP phase Starmer has been able to build on his early success with MP nominations by clearing up the CLP nominations too. He's been able to build up momentum - and thus take power away from Momentum.

RLB may in hindsight have had an easier ride if we'd gone straight from the nominations to the campaign and then ballots.

I'm wondering if Corbyn is going to "let" RLB respond to the budget in his place next month (assuming the Budget happens).

rcs1000

Crazy rumour heard at dinner last night. Sanders is scared by the rise of Bloomberg and is considering offering Klobuchar or Buttigieg the VP role.

Apparently we could hear something sooner rather than later.

viewcode

rcs1000 said:

Crazy rumour heard at dinner last night. Sanders is scared by the rise of Bloomberg and is considering offering Klobuchar or Buttigieg the VP role.

So this is a reboot of Season 7 of the West Wing?

edmundintokyo

rcs1000 said:

Crazy rumour heard at dinner last night. Sanders is scared by the rise of Bloomberg and is considering offering Klobuchar or Buttigieg the VP role.

Apparently we could hear something sooner rather than later.

I heard he was considering Tulsi Gabbard. Maybe just put the same rumour around for all the candidates, helps snag a few of their supporters if they pull out.

Gabs3

This has made me a lot more receptive to Sanders. He is night and day from Corbyn on foreign policy.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/the-sanders-foreign-policy-you-dont-know-about/2020/02/16/aa777f6c-4e7b-11ea-b721-9f4cdc90bc1c_story.html

Gabs3

edmundintokyo said:

rcs1000 said:

Crazy rumour heard at dinner last night. Sanders is scared by the rise of Bloomberg and is considering offering Klobuchar or Buttigieg the VP role.

Apparently we could hear something sooner rather than later.

I heard he was considering Tulsi Gabbard. Maybe just put the same rumour around for all the candidates, helps snag a few of their supporters if they pull out.

Given Sanders is about 107, his main concern in choosing a VP pick will be a left wing successor.

rcs1000

Gabs3 said:

edmundintokyo said:

rcs1000 said:

Crazy rumour heard at dinner last night. Sanders is scared by the rise of Bloomberg and is considering offering Klobuchar or Buttigieg the VP role.

Apparently we could hear something sooner rather than later.

I heard he was considering Tulsi Gabbard. Maybe just put the same rumour around for all the candidates, helps snag a few of their supporters if they pull out.

Given Sanders is about 107, his main concern in choosing a VP pick will be a left wing successor.

On the other hand, he wants to win the nomination and the presidency, and therefore reaching out to the other side of the Democratic party make sense.

Tulsi Gabbard, for example, is not well liked by Democrats

rcs1000

Gabs3 said:

This has made me a lot more receptive to Sanders. He is night and day from Corbyn on foreign policy.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/the-sanders-foreign-policy-you-dont-know-about/2020/02/16/aa777f6c-4e7b-11ea-b721-9f4cdc90bc1c_story.html

Yes, I read that piece too. It made me rather like him.

My biggest issue with Sanders is health care plan. You see, he isn't proposing a National Health Service, with people being free to "top up" with private health care, as happens in the UK. He's proposing only allowing public healthcare. That's not a vote winner.

DecrepiterJohnL

edmundintokyo said:

rcs1000 said:

Crazy rumour heard at dinner last night. Sanders is scared by the rise of Bloomberg and is considering offering Klobuchar or Buttigieg the VP role.

Apparently we could hear something sooner rather than later.

I heard he was considering Tulsi Gabbard. Maybe just put the same rumour around for all the candidates, helps snag a few of their supporters if they pull out.

We hear these rumours every time that the VP pick will be one of the runners-up in the primaries but it is invariably some no-mark we've never heard of. Obama/Biden is one exception.

DecrepiterJohnL

The Met Office is to spend over £1 billion on a new supercomputer, though for some reason wants to house it abroad. #Brexit
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-51504002

It has to be IBM, doesn't it? Are there any other Western players?

edmundintokyo

DecrepiterJohnL said:

edmundintokyo said:

rcs1000 said:

Crazy rumour heard at dinner last night. Sanders is scared by the rise of Bloomberg and is considering offering Klobuchar or Buttigieg the VP role.

Apparently we could hear something sooner rather than later.

I heard he was considering Tulsi Gabbard. Maybe just put the same rumour around for all the candidates, helps snag a few of their supporters if they pull out.

We hear these rumours every time that the VP pick will be one of the runners-up in the primaries but it is invariably some no-mark we've never heard of. Obama/Biden is one exception.

I think the chances of it being another candidate are higher this time because if the combination of a fragmented field and front-loading, which means maybe 40% of delegates may have been allocated before the field really thins. There's going to be a lot of pressure to resolve it well before the convention, and the easy way to do that is for one of the top three to cut a deal with another of the top three.

This dynamic also kind of makes things easier for Bernie and/or Biden to head the ticket, because young-cardinals-old-popes.

Sandpit

DecrepiterJohnL said:

The Met Office is to spend over £1 billion on a new supercomputer, though for some reason wants to house it abroad. #Brexit
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-51504002

It has to be IBM, doesn't it? Are there any other Western players?

In the old Met Office in Bracknell, there used to be two Cray Supercomputers, known colloquially as the Cray Twins. I believe the company is now part of HP.

Sandpit

rcs1000 said:

Gabs3 said:

This has made me a lot more receptive to Sanders. He is night and day from Corbyn on foreign policy.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/the-sanders-foreign-policy-you-dont-know-about/2020/02/16/aa777f6c-4e7b-11ea-b721-9f4cdc90bc1c_story.html

Yes, I read that piece too. It made me rather like him.

My biggest issue with Sanders is health care plan. You see, he isn't proposing a National Health Service, with people being free to "top up" with private health care, as happens in the UK. He's proposing only allowing public healthcare. That's not a vote winner.

It amazes me that none of the candidates are talking about the ban on Medicare and Medicaid negotiating with drug companies, nor that the USA is the only country where TV is full of adverts for prescription-only drugs. It’s almost as if media and drug companies give massive campaign donations to all the politicians.

northernpowerhouse2

rcs1000 said:

Gabs3 said:

This has made me a lot more receptive to Sanders. He is night and day from Corbyn on foreign policy.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/the-sanders-foreign-policy-you-dont-know-about/2020/02/16/aa777f6c-4e7b-11ea-b721-9f4cdc90bc1c_story.html

Yes, I read that piece too. It made me rather like him.

My biggest issue with Sanders is health care plan. You see, he isn't proposing a National Health Service, with people being free to "top up" with private health care, as happens in the UK. He's proposing only allowing public healthcare. That's not a vote winner.

And for many with health care plans their primary care services are at a much higher standard than we expect and accept over here.

Casino_Royale

edmundintokyo said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

edmundintokyo said:

rcs1000 said:

Crazy rumour heard at dinner last night. Sanders is scared by the rise of Bloomberg and is considering offering Klobuchar or Buttigieg the VP role.

Apparently we could hear something sooner rather than later.

I heard he was considering Tulsi Gabbard. Maybe just put the same rumour around for all the candidates, helps snag a few of their supporters if they pull out.

We hear these rumours every time that the VP pick will be one of the runners-up in the primaries but it is invariably some no-mark we've never heard of. Obama/Biden is one exception.

I think the chances of it being another candidate are higher this time because if the combination of a fragmented field and front-loading, which means maybe 40% of delegates may have been allocated before the field really thins. There's going to be a lot of pressure to resolve it well before the convention, and the easy way to do that is for one of the top three to cut a deal with another of the top three.

This dynamic also kind of makes things easier for Bernie and/or Biden to head the ticket, because young-cardinals-old-popes.

My fear is Biden endorses Bloomberg.

Sandpit

Henrietta2 said:

The BBC are making a documentary about Dominic Cummings, and according to the Daily Mail they are "planning to interview" Colin Perry who says that Cummings assaulted him 20 years ago by grabbing his lapels (further on in the article the reference is to grabbing his collar and tie) and pushing him against a wall. Allegedly that was when Perry had been representing the CBI on the radio, when he accused Cummings of wanting Britain not merely to retain sterling but to withdraw from the EU entirely. Perry's story is that Cummings responded with violence to such an outrageous allegation, describing it as a "lie". Cummings's story is that the men simply stumbled into each other. Both were 27. Bit of a non-story really. But the Daily Mail have really got it in for Cummings. Why?

No date has been set for the broadcast.

"Government sources" say Cummings has "discussed" stripping the CBI of its royal charter. Until I read that, I didn't know it had one. Does it matter much?

The games that are being played at the moment!

Certain parts of the media have really got it in for Dominic Cummings, most likely over his role in the EU referendum and his desire to seriously shake up the way government works. I say good luck to the guy.

malcolmg

Sandpit said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

The Met Office is to spend over £1 billion on a new supercomputer, though for some reason wants to house it abroad. #Brexit
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-51504002

It has to be IBM, doesn't it? Are there any other Western players?

In the old Met Office in Bracknell, there used to be two Cray Supercomputers, known colloquially as the Cray Twins. I believe the company is now part of HP.

Was that some time ago , I thought they had IBM HPC system currently.

DecrepiterJohnL

Sandpit said:

Henrietta2 said:

The BBC are making a documentary about Dominic Cummings, and according to the Daily Mail they are "planning to interview" Colin Perry who says that Cummings assaulted him 20 years ago by grabbing his lapels (further on in the article the reference is to grabbing his collar and tie) and pushing him against a wall. Allegedly that was when Perry had been representing the CBI on the radio, when he accused Cummings of wanting Britain not merely to retain sterling but to withdraw from the EU entirely. Perry's story is that Cummings responded with violence to such an outrageous allegation, describing it as a "lie". Cummings's story is that the men simply stumbled into each other. Both were 27. Bit of a non-story really. But the Daily Mail have really got it in for Cummings. Why?

No date has been set for the broadcast.

"Government sources" say Cummings has "discussed" stripping the CBI of its royal charter. Until I read that, I didn't know it had one. Does it matter much?

The games that are being played at the moment!

Certain parts of the media have really got it in for Dominic Cummings, most likely over his role in the EU referendum and his desire to seriously shake up the way government works. I say good luck to the guy.

Dominic Cummings is a legitimate political story. He is said by some to be running the government, and ousting inconvenient Chancellors against the Prime Minister's wishes. Has "the media" got it in for him? Compare and contrast with Caroline Flack.

PJ Masks are on their way
Into the night to save the day!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBX7DV1JyDc

ydoethur

rcs1000 said:

Gabs3 said:

Nandy is actually the most electable but Labour prefer white men so will elect Starmer.

I agree that Nandy is probably more electable. But I think this is not to do with testicles (or lack thereof). I think Labour members felt they rolled the dice last time, and that didn't work out so well.

They're feeling conservative, and Starmer is the conservative, low risk, option.

I disagree. Corbyn was the highly conservative option. Not only did he want to take the country back to the 1950s, he did more in five years to increase the Conservative vote than six Conservative leaders since 1997.

ydoethur

Sandpit said:

Henrietta2 said:

The BBC are making a documentary about Dominic Cummings, and according to the Daily Mail they are "planning to interview" Colin Perry who says that Cummings assaulted him 20 years ago by grabbing his lapels (further on in the article the reference is to grabbing his collar and tie) and pushing him against a wall. Allegedly that was when Perry had been representing the CBI on the radio, when he accused Cummings of wanting Britain not merely to retain sterling but to withdraw from the EU entirely. Perry's story is that Cummings responded with violence to such an outrageous allegation, describing it as a "lie". Cummings's story is that the men simply stumbled into each other. Both were 27. Bit of a non-story really. But the Daily Mail have really got it in for Cummings. Why?

No date has been set for the broadcast.

"Government sources" say Cummings has "discussed" stripping the CBI of its royal charter. Until I read that, I didn't know it had one. Does it matter much?

The games that are being played at the moment!

Certain parts of the media have really got it in for Dominic Cummings, most likely over his role in the EU referendum and his desire to seriously shake up the way government works. I say good luck to the guy.

More likely it’s because they’ve met him.

Sandpit

malcolmg said:

Sandpit said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

The Met Office is to spend over £1 billion on a new supercomputer, though for some reason wants to house it abroad. #Brexit
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-51504002

It has to be IBM, doesn't it? Are there any other Western players?

In the old Met Office in Bracknell, there used to be two Cray Supercomputers, known colloquially as the Cray Twins. I believe the company is now part of HP.

Was that some time ago , I thought they had IBM HPC system currently.

Would have been early ‘90s. I lived close by, and a family friend who worked there gave me a tour one evening as a excitable young teenager.

OldKingCole

Good morning. Still windy but at least, for the moment, dry.

O/t but Guardian has a bizarre item
'Woman's ring lost 47 years ago in US is unearthed in a forest in Finland
Debra McKenna, who misplaced the ring in Maine in 1973, received it in the post after it was dug up by a metal detectorist'

Sandpit

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Sandpit said:

Henrietta2 said:

The BBC are making a documentary about Dominic Cummings, and according to the Daily Mail they are "planning to interview" Colin Perry who says that Cummings assaulted him 20 years ago by grabbing his lapels (further on in the article the reference is to grabbing his collar and tie) and pushing him against a wall. Allegedly that was when Perry had been representing the CBI on the radio, when he accused Cummings of wanting Britain not merely to retain sterling but to withdraw from the EU entirely. Perry's story is that Cummings responded with violence to such an outrageous allegation, describing it as a "lie". Cummings's story is that the men simply stumbled into each other. Both were 27. Bit of a non-story really. But the Daily Mail have really got it in for Cummings. Why?

No date has been set for the broadcast.

"Government sources" say Cummings has "discussed" stripping the CBI of its royal charter. Until I read that, I didn't know it had one. Does it matter much?

The games that are being played at the moment!

Certain parts of the media have really got it in for Dominic Cummings, most likely over his role in the EU referendum and his desire to seriously shake up the way government works. I say good luck to the guy.

Dominic Cummings is a legitimate political story. He is said by some to be running the government, and ousting inconvenient Chancellors against the Prime Minister's wishes. Has "the media" got it in for him? Compare and contrast with Caroline Flack.

PJ Masks are on their way
Into the night to save the day!
ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBX7DV1JyDc

On the contrary, I think that he’s doing exactly what the PM wants him to do, but they can’t go for Johnson because he’s popular with the public and was elected on a platform to shake things up.

Yes, the coverage of the TV presenter who took her own life is also way over the top.

Pulpstar

rcs1000 said:

Crazy rumour heard at dinner last night. Sanders is scared by the rise of Bloomberg and is considering offering Klobuchar or Buttigieg the VP role.

Apparently we could hear something sooner rather than later.

He should go with Klob, "Wall St" Pete seems to rile the left which could put off his own supporters. Haven't heard much negative about Klob tbh

rcs1000

Sandpit said:

Henrietta2 said:

The BBC are making a documentary about Dominic Cummings, and according to the Daily Mail they are "planning to interview" Colin Perry who says that Cummings assaulted him 20 years ago by grabbing his lapels (further on in the article the reference is to grabbing his collar and tie) and pushing him against a wall. Allegedly that was when Perry had been representing the CBI on the radio, when he accused Cummings of wanting Britain not merely to retain sterling but to withdraw from the EU entirely. Perry's story is that Cummings responded with violence to such an outrageous allegation, describing it as a "lie". Cummings's story is that the men simply stumbled into each other. Both were 27. Bit of a non-story really. But the Daily Mail have really got it in for Cummings. Why?

No date has been set for the broadcast.

"Government sources" say Cummings has "discussed" stripping the CBI of its royal charter. Until I read that, I didn't know it had one. Does it matter much?

The games that are being played at the moment!

Certain parts of the media have really got it in for Dominic Cummings, most likely over his role in the EU referendum and his desire to seriously shake up the way government works. I say good luck to the guy.

Although people like Peter Hitchens, who's no fan of the EU, have also put their knives in.

Morris_Dancer

Good morning, everyone.

Seems a done deal for Starmer. I do wonder if they'd be better with Nandy. But neither will be as bad as Corbyn.

Gallowgate

Pulpstar said:

rcs1000 said:

Crazy rumour heard at dinner last night. Sanders is scared by the rise of Bloomberg and is considering offering Klobuchar or Buttigieg the VP role.

Apparently we could hear something sooner rather than later.

He should go with Klob, "Wall St" Pete seems to rile the left which could put off his own supporters. Haven't heard much negative about Klob tbh

Don’t you mean KLOBUCHAR?

DecrepiterJohnL

Sandpit said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Sandpit said:

Henrietta2 said:

The BBC are making a documentary about Dominic Cummings, and according to the Daily Mail they are "planning to interview" Colin Perry who says that Cummings assaulted him 20 years ago by grabbing his lapels (further on in the article the reference is to grabbing his collar and tie) and pushing him against a wall. Allegedly that was when Perry had been representing the CBI on the radio, when he accused Cummings of wanting Britain not merely to retain sterling but to withdraw from the EU entirely. Perry's story is that Cummings responded with violence to such an outrageous allegation, describing it as a "lie". Cummings's story is that the men simply stumbled into each other. Both were 27. Bit of a non-story really. But the Daily Mail have really got it in for Cummings. Why?

No date has been set for the broadcast.

"Government sources" say Cummings has "discussed" stripping the CBI of its royal charter. Until I read that, I didn't know it had one. Does it matter much?

The games that are being played at the moment!

Certain parts of the media have really got it in for Dominic Cummings, most likely over his role in the EU referendum and his desire to seriously shake up the way government works. I say good luck to the guy.

Dominic Cummings is a legitimate political story. He is said by some to be running the government, and ousting inconvenient Chancellors against the Prime Minister's wishes. Has "the media" got it in for him? Compare and contrast with Caroline Flack.

PJ Masks are on their way
Into the night to save the day!
ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBX7DV1JyDc

On the contrary, I think that he’s doing exactly what the PM wants him to do, but they can’t go for Johnson because he’s popular with the public and was elected on a platform to shake things up.

Yes, the coverage of the TV presenter who took her own life is also way over the top.

Boris was not elected on a platform to shake up the Civil Service. At least, I can't see it in the manifesto and Boris spent the entire campaign saying nothing and ducking interviews.

Casino_Royale

rcs1000 said:

Sandpit said:

Henrietta2 said:

The BBC are making a documentary about Dominic Cummings, and according to the Daily Mail they are "planning to interview" Colin Perry who says that Cummings assaulted him 20 years ago by grabbing his lapels (further on in the article the reference is to grabbing his collar and tie) and pushing him against a wall. Allegedly that was when Perry had been representing the CBI on the radio, when he accused Cummings of wanting Britain not merely to retain sterling but to withdraw from the EU entirely. Perry's story is that Cummings responded with violence to such an outrageous allegation, describing it as a "lie". Cummings's story is that the men simply stumbled into each other. Both were 27. Bit of a non-story really. But the Daily Mail have really got it in for Cummings. Why?

No date has been set for the broadcast.

"Government sources" say Cummings has "discussed" stripping the CBI of its royal charter. Until I read that, I didn't know it had one. Does it matter much?

The games that are being played at the moment!

Certain parts of the media have really got it in for Dominic Cummings, most likely over his role in the EU referendum and his desire to seriously shake up the way government works. I say good luck to the guy.

Although people like Peter Hitchens, who's no fan of the EU, have also put their knives in.

Has he ever sheathed his knife for anybody?

nichomar

I won’t go into details but after my dose of CitraFleet I've just had the most explosive night in my lifetime, an experience I have no desire to repeat in the near future although just waiting on second dose to go through.

Casino_Royale

Pulpstar said:

rcs1000 said:

Crazy rumour heard at dinner last night. Sanders is scared by the rise of Bloomberg and is considering offering Klobuchar or Buttigieg the VP role.

Apparently we could hear something sooner rather than later.

He should go with Klob, "Wall St" Pete seems to rile the left which could put off his own supporters. Haven't heard much negative about Klob tbh

I'm certainly keeping her onside all the way.

Casino_Royale

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Sandpit said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Sandpit said:

Henrietta2 said:

The BBC are making a documentary about Dominic Cummings, and according to the Daily Mail they are "planning to interview" Colin Perry who says that Cummings assaulted him 20 years ago by grabbing his lapels (further on in the article the reference is to grabbing his collar and tie) and pushing him against a wall. Allegedly that was when Perry had been representing the CBI on the radio, when he accused Cummings of wanting Britain not merely to retain sterling but to withdraw from the EU entirely. Perry's story is that Cummings responded with violence to such an outrageous allegation, describing it as a "lie". Cummings's story is that the men simply stumbled into each other. Both were 27. Bit of a non-story really. But the Daily Mail have really got it in for Cummings. Why?

No date has been set for the broadcast.

"Government sources" say Cummings has "discussed" stripping the CBI of its royal charter. Until I read that, I didn't know it had one. Does it matter much?

The games that are being played at the moment!

Certain parts of the media have really got it in for Dominic Cummings, most likely over his role in the EU referendum and his desire to seriously shake up the way government works. I say good luck to the guy.

Dominic Cummings is a legitimate political story. He is said by some to be running the government, and ousting inconvenient Chancellors against the Prime Minister's wishes. Has "the media" got it in for him? Compare and contrast with Caroline Flack.

PJ Masks are on their way
Into the night to save the day!
ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBX7DV1JyDc

On the contrary, I think that he’s doing exactly what the PM wants him to do, but they can’t go for Johnson because he’s popular with the public and was elected on a platform to shake things up.

Yes, the coverage of the TV presenter who took her own life is also way over the top.

Boris was not elected on a platform to shake up the Civil Service. At least, I can't see it in the manifesto and Boris spent the entire campaign saying nothing and ducking interviews.

Those who think Cummings pulls all the strings need to explain why No.10 quashed his ideas of shaking up the civil service and cancelling HS2.

DavidL

Morris_Dancer said:

Good morning, everyone.

Seems a done deal for Starmer. I do wonder if they'd be better with Nandy. But neither will be as bad as Corbyn.

That’s really the point. Starmer strikes me as dull and unimaginative but he is intelligent and capable of developing a coherent argument. It’s a massive step forward from where Labour has been since 2015.

Casino_Royale

Sandpit said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Sandpit said:

Henrietta2 said:

The BBC are making a documentary about Dominic Cummings, and according to the Daily Mail they are "planning to interview" Colin Perry who says that Cummings assaulted him 20 years ago by grabbing his lapels (further on in the article the reference is to grabbing his collar and tie) and pushing him against a wall. Allegedly that was when Perry had been representing the CBI on the radio, when he accused Cummings of wanting Britain not merely to retain sterling but to withdraw from the EU entirely. Perry's story is that Cummings responded with violence to such an outrageous allegation, describing it as a "lie". Cummings's story is that the men simply stumbled into each other. Both were 27. Bit of a non-story really. But the Daily Mail have really got it in for Cummings. Why?

No date has been set for the broadcast.

"Government sources" say Cummings has "discussed" stripping the CBI of its royal charter. Until I read that, I didn't know it had one. Does it matter much?

The games that are being played at the moment!

Certain parts of the media have really got it in for Dominic Cummings, most likely over his role in the EU referendum and his desire to seriously shake up the way government works. I say good luck to the guy.

Dominic Cummings is a legitimate political story. He is said by some to be running the government, and ousting inconvenient Chancellors against the Prime Minister's wishes. Has "the media" got it in for him? Compare and contrast with Caroline Flack.

PJ Masks are on their way
Into the night to save the day!
ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBX7DV1JyDc

On the contrary, I think that he’s doing exactly what the PM wants him to do, but they can’t go for Johnson because he’s popular with the public and was elected on a platform to shake things up.

Yes, the coverage of the TV presenter who took her own life is also way over the top.

It's at least understandable, particularly given questions already hanging over Love Island.

Philip Schofield coverage was truly over the top.

I'm surprised he wasn't recommended for the Victoria Cross.

DecrepiterJohnL

nichomar said:

I won’t go into details but after my dose of CitraFleet I've just had the most explosive night in my lifetime, an experience I have no desire to repeat in the near future although just waiting on second dose to go through.

There's your mistake. If you don't want a repeat in the near future then you should not have taken the second dose. Good luck.

rcs1000

Casino_Royale said:

rcs1000 said:

Sandpit said:

Henrietta2 said:

The BBC are making a documentary about Dominic Cummings, and according to the Daily Mail they are "planning to interview" Colin Perry who says that Cummings assaulted him 20 years ago by grabbing his lapels (further on in the article the reference is to grabbing his collar and tie) and pushing him against a wall. Allegedly that was when Perry had been representing the CBI on the radio, when he accused Cummings of wanting Britain not merely to retain sterling but to withdraw from the EU entirely. Perry's story is that Cummings responded with violence to such an outrageous allegation, describing it as a "lie". Cummings's story is that the men simply stumbled into each other. Both were 27. Bit of a non-story really. But the Daily Mail have really got it in for Cummings. Why?

No date has been set for the broadcast.

"Government sources" say Cummings has "discussed" stripping the CBI of its royal charter. Until I read that, I didn't know it had one. Does it matter much?

The games that are being played at the moment!

Certain parts of the media have really got it in for Dominic Cummings, most likely over his role in the EU referendum and his desire to seriously shake up the way government works. I say good luck to the guy.

Although people like Peter Hitchens, who's no fan of the EU, have also put their knives in.

Has he ever sheathed his knife for anybody?

@isam ?

Casino_Royale

nichomar said:

I won’t go into details

I think you just did.

Gallowgate

DavidL said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Good morning, everyone.

Seems a done deal for Starmer. I do wonder if they'd be better with Nandy. But neither will be as bad as Corbyn.

That’s really the point. Starmer strikes me as dull and unimaginative but he is intelligent and capable of developing a coherent argument. It’s a massive step forward from where Labour has been since 2015.

I thought he would be really boring before I went to see him talk in Newcastle and he was actually pretty warm and charismatic...

Perhaps he’s better in person.

kle4

Starmer is so far ahead he should go full Trump and talk about how he could shoot someone and not lose support.

The rest of the contest is to establish what shadow cabinet positions the other two get, or if RLB wants such a position.

Nigelb

Sandpit said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Sandpit said:

Henrietta2 said:

The BBC are making a documentary about Dominic Cummings, and according to the Daily Mail they are "planning to interview" Colin Perry who says that Cummings assaulted him 20 years ago by grabbing his lapels (further on in the article the reference is to grabbing his collar and tie) and pushing him against a wall. Allegedly that was when Perry had been representing the CBI on the radio, when he accused Cummings of wanting Britain not merely to retain sterling but to withdraw from the EU entirely. Perry's story is that Cummings responded with violence to such an outrageous allegation, describing it as a "lie". Cummings's story is that the men simply stumbled into each other. Both were 27. Bit of a non-story really. But the Daily Mail have really got it in for Cummings. Why?

No date has been set for the broadcast.

"Government sources" say Cummings has "discussed" stripping the CBI of its royal charter. Until I read that, I didn't know it had one. Does it matter much?

The games that are being played at the moment!

Certain parts of the media have really got it in for Dominic Cummings, most likely over his role in the EU referendum and his desire to seriously shake up the way government works. I say good luck to the guy.

Dominic Cummings is a legitimate political story. He is said by some to be running the government, and ousting inconvenient Chancellors against the Prime Minister's wishes. Has "the media" got it in for him? Compare and contrast with Caroline Flack.

PJ Masks are on their way
Into the night to save the day!
ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBX7DV1JyDc

On the contrary, I think that he’s doing exactly what the PM wants him to do, but they can’t go for Johnson because he’s popular with the public and was elected on a platform to shake things up. ...

How is any of that an argument against his being a legitimate political story, and meriting close scrutiny ?
And your opinion is no evidence for who it is that might be driving policy, which remains an open question.

DavidL

Gallowgate said:

DavidL said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Good morning, everyone.

Seems a done deal for Starmer. I do wonder if they'd be better with Nandy. But neither will be as bad as Corbyn.

That’s really the point. Starmer strikes me as dull and unimaginative but he is intelligent and capable of developing a coherent argument. It’s a massive step forward from where Labour has been since 2015.

I thought he would be really boring before I went to see him talk in Newcastle and he was actually pretty warm and charismatic...

Perhaps he’s better in person.

Maybe but I know a dull lawyer when I see one. On the plus side he is going to have several years to learn the job, refine the team and develop his pitch. Given where Labour is starting from he may need all the time he can get.

I wish him well. We need an opposition that offers a viable choice. Governments without one become self indulgent and more foolish than usual.

Sandpit

Casino_Royale said:

Sandpit said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Sandpit said:

Henrietta2 said:

The BBC are making a documentary about Dominic Cummings, and according to the Daily Mail they are "planning to interview" Colin Perry who says that Cummings assaulted him 20 years ago by grabbing his lapels (further on in the article the reference is to grabbing his collar and tie) and pushing him against a wall. Allegedly that was when Perry had been representing the CBI on the radio, when he accused Cummings of wanting Britain not merely to retain sterling but to withdraw from the EU entirely. Perry's story is that Cummings responded with violence to such an outrageous allegation, describing it as a "lie". Cummings's story is that the men simply stumbled into each other. Both were 27. Bit of a non-story really. But the Daily Mail have really got it in for Cummings. Why?

No date has been set for the broadcast.

"Government sources" say Cummings has "discussed" stripping the CBI of its royal charter. Until I read that, I didn't know it had one. Does it matter much?

The games that are being played at the moment!

Certain parts of the media have really got it in for Dominic Cummings, most likely over his role in the EU referendum and his desire to seriously shake up the way government works. I say good luck to the guy.

Dominic Cummings is a legitimate political story. He is said by some to be running the government, and ousting inconvenient Chancellors against the Prime Minister's wishes. Has "the media" got it in for him? Compare and contrast with Caroline Flack.

PJ Masks are on their way
Into the night to save the day!
ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBX7DV1JyDc

On the contrary, I think that he’s doing exactly what the PM wants him to do, but they can’t go for Johnson because he’s popular with the public and was elected on a platform to shake things up.

Yes, the coverage of the TV presenter who took her own life is also way over the top.

It's at least understandable, particularly given questions already hanging over Love Island.

Philip Schofield coverage was truly over the top.

I'm surprised he wasn't recommended for the Victoria Cross.

Yes, I understand that that TV show has a history of mental illness among those involved with it - although it’s not usually presenters who suffer in these ‘reality’ shows.

The most surprising thing most of us found out about Philip Schofield, is that he was married to a woman!

nichomar

DecrepiterJohnL said:

nichomar said:

I won’t go into details but after my dose of CitraFleet I've just had the most explosive night in my lifetime, an experience I have no desire to repeat in the near future although just waiting on second dose to go through.

There's your mistake. If you don't want a repeat in the near future then you should not have taken the second dose. Good luck.

No choice colonoscopy at 15:00 just following instructions!

malcolmg

Sandpit said:

malcolmg said:

Sandpit said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

The Met Office is to spend over £1 billion on a new supercomputer, though for some reason wants to house it abroad. #Brexit
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-51504002

It has to be IBM, doesn't it? Are there any other Western players?

In the old Met Office in Bracknell, there used to be two Cray Supercomputers, known colloquially as the Cray Twins. I believe the company is now part of HP.

Was that some time ago , I thought they had IBM HPC system currently.

Would have been early ‘90s. I lived close by, and a family friend who worked there gave me a tour one evening as a excitable young teenager.

OK so I am probably correct that they have an IBM HPC power setup nowadays.

Casino_Royale

DavidL said:

Gallowgate said:

DavidL said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Good morning, everyone.

Seems a done deal for Starmer. I do wonder if they'd be better with Nandy. But neither will be as bad as Corbyn.

That’s really the point. Starmer strikes me as dull and unimaginative but he is intelligent and capable of developing a coherent argument. It’s a massive step forward from where Labour has been since 2015.

I thought he would be really boring before I went to see him talk in Newcastle and he was actually pretty warm and charismatic...

Perhaps he’s better in person.

Maybe but I know a dull lawyer when I see one. On the plus side he is going to have several years to learn the job, refine the team and develop his pitch. Given where Labour is starting from he may need all the time he can get.

I wish him well. We need an opposition that offers a viable choice. Governments without one become self indulgent and more foolish than usual.

Lisa Nandy is clearly the best candidate.

But, it seems, she’ll come a distant third.

Charles

rcs1000 said:

Gabs3 said:

This has made me a lot more receptive to Sanders. He is night and day from Corbyn on foreign policy.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/the-sanders-foreign-policy-you-dont-know-about/2020/02/16/aa777f6c-4e7b-11ea-b721-9f4cdc90bc1c_story.html

Yes, I read that piece too. It made me rather like him.

My biggest issue with Sanders is health care plan. You see, he isn't proposing a National Health Service, with people being free to "top up" with private health care, as happens in the UK. He's proposing only allowing public healthcare. That's not a vote winner.

I don’t believe you are allowed to top up in the NHS.

If you choose to supplement your healthcare the NHS can kick you out (ie it’s our way or the highway)

Charles

nichomar said:

I won’t go into details but after my dose of CitraFleet I've just had the most explosive night in my lifetime, an experience I have no desire to repeat in the near future although just waiting on second dose to go through.

Good luck with the op

DavidL

Casino_Royale said:

DavidL said:

Gallowgate said:

DavidL said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Good morning, everyone.

Seems a done deal for Starmer. I do wonder if they'd be better with Nandy. But neither will be as bad as Corbyn.

That’s really the point. Starmer strikes me as dull and unimaginative but he is intelligent and capable of developing a coherent argument. It’s a massive step forward from where Labour has been since 2015.

I thought he would be really boring before I went to see him talk in Newcastle and he was actually pretty warm and charismatic...

Perhaps he’s better in person.

Maybe but I know a dull lawyer when I see one. On the plus side he is going to have several years to learn the job, refine the team and develop his pitch. Given where Labour is starting from he may need all the time he can get.

I wish him well. We need an opposition that offers a viable choice. Governments without one become self indulgent and more foolish than usual.

Lisa Nandy is clearly the best candidate.

But, it seems, she’ll come a distant third.

Labour don’t just need a competent leader, they need a competent team. I am sure Nandy will be an important part of that giving her a chance to knock off the rough edges too. RLB, not so much.

malcolmg

malcolmg said:

Sandpit said:

malcolmg said:

Sandpit said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

The Met Office is to spend over £1 billion on a new supercomputer, though for some reason wants to house it abroad. #Brexit
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-51504002

It has to be IBM, doesn't it? Are there any other Western players?

In the old Met Office in Bracknell, there used to be two Cray Supercomputers, known colloquially as the Cray Twins. I believe the company is now part of HP.

Was that some time ago , I thought they had IBM HPC system currently.

Would have been early ‘90s. I lived close by, and a family friend who worked there gave me a tour one evening as a excitable young teenager.

OK so I am probably correct that they have an IBM HPC power setup nowadays.

Just checked and it looks like they put new Cray machine in in 2016, assume that replaced the IBM machine.
Strange they are already talking about replacement.
https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/about-us/what/technology/supercomputer

squareroot2

malcolmg said:

malcolmg said:

Sandpit said:

malcolmg said:

Sandpit said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

The Met Office is to spend over £1 billion on a new supercomputer, though for some reason wants to house it abroad. #Brexit
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-51504002

It has to be IBM, doesn't it? Are there any other Western players?

In the old Met Office in Bracknell, there used to be two Cray Supercomputers, known colloquially as the Cray Twins. I believe the company is now part of HP.

Was that some time ago , I thought they had IBM HPC system currently.

Would have been early ‘90s. I lived close by, and a family friend who worked there gave me a tour one evening as a excitable young teenager.

OK so I am probably correct that they have an IBM HPC power setup nowadays.

Just checked and it looks like they put new Cray machine in in 2016, assume that replaced the IBM machine.
Strange they are already talking about replacement.
https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/about-us/what/technology/supercomputer

Complete waste of money. Use the methods employed by the Allies just before D Day, weather forecast perfect!

kinabalu

edmundintokyo said:

I think the chances of it being another candidate are higher this time because if the combination of a fragmented field and front-loading, which means maybe 40% of delegates may have been allocated before the field really thins. There's going to be a lot of pressure to resolve it well before the convention, and the easy way to do that is for one of the top three to cut a deal with another of the top three.

This dynamic also kind of makes things easier for Bernie and/or Biden to head the ticket, because young-cardinals-old-popes.

Verbatim of @BernieSanders going after Bloomberg in Las Vegas just now pic.twitter.com/6qsxpONT5u

— Dave Weigel (@daveweigel) February 16, 2020

SouthamObserver

Labour leadership ballots start going out on 24th February.

DavidL

malcolmg said:

malcolmg said:

Sandpit said:

malcolmg said:

Sandpit said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

The Met Office is to spend over £1 billion on a new supercomputer, though for some reason wants to house it abroad. #Brexit
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-51504002

It has to be IBM, doesn't it? Are there any other Western players?

In the old Met Office in Bracknell, there used to be two Cray Supercomputers, known colloquially as the Cray Twins. I believe the company is now part of HP.

Was that some time ago , I thought they had IBM HPC system currently.

Would have been early ‘90s. I lived close by, and a family friend who worked there gave me a tour one evening as a excitable young teenager.

OK so I am probably correct that they have an IBM HPC power setup nowadays.

Just checked and it looks like they put new Cray machine in in 2016, assume that replaced the IBM machine.
Strange they are already talking about replacement.
https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/about-us/what/technology/supercomputer

Yes that is odd. Have things really moved forward that much in the last 4 years?

Casino_Royale

nichomar said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

nichomar said:

I won’t go into details but after my dose of CitraFleet I've just had the most explosive night in my lifetime, an experience I have no desire to repeat in the near future although just waiting on second dose to go through.

There's your mistake. If you don't want a repeat in the near future then you should not have taken the second dose. Good luck.

No choice colonoscopy at 15:00 just following instructions!

Ah. Good luck with it.

Philip_Thompson

DavidL said:

malcolmg said:

malcolmg said:

Sandpit said:

malcolmg said:

Sandpit said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

The Met Office is to spend over £1 billion on a new supercomputer, though for some reason wants to house it abroad. #Brexit
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-51504002

It has to be IBM, doesn't it? Are there any other Western players?

In the old Met Office in Bracknell, there used to be two Cray Supercomputers, known colloquially as the Cray Twins. I believe the company is now part of HP.

Was that some time ago , I thought they had IBM HPC system currently.

Would have been early ‘90s. I lived close by, and a family friend who worked there gave me a tour one evening as a excitable young teenager.

OK so I am probably correct that they have an IBM HPC power setup nowadays.

Just checked and it looks like they put new Cray machine in in 2016, assume that replaced the IBM machine.
Strange they are already talking about replacement.
https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/about-us/what/technology/supercomputer

Yes that is odd. Have things really moved forward that much in the last 4 years?

Probably yes, but that's what makes it absurd IMO to pay a billion pounds for a supercomputer today. A billion pound supercomputer will surely be only worth a tiny, tiny fraction of that before long.

SouthamObserver

DavidL said:

Gallowgate said:

DavidL said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Good morning, everyone.

Seems a done deal for Starmer. I do wonder if they'd be better with Nandy. But neither will be as bad as Corbyn.

That’s really the point. Starmer strikes me as dull and unimaginative but he is intelligent and capable of developing a coherent argument. It’s a massive step forward from where Labour has been since 2015.

I thought he would be really boring before I went to see him talk in Newcastle and he was actually pretty warm and charismatic...

Perhaps he’s better in person.

Maybe but I know a dull lawyer when I see one. On the plus side he is going to have several years to learn the job, refine the team and develop his pitch. Given where Labour is starting from he may need all the time he can get.

I wish him well. We need an opposition that offers a viable choice. Governments without one become self indulgent and more foolish than usual.

After five years of constant conflict and confrontation under Cummings/Johnson dull and competent may be looking very appealing. What Nandy or Starmer will do is ensure that Labour provides a strong opposition. We have not had one for a long time and it will come at a time when almost all the talent that exists on the Tory side will be on the backbenches.

NorthCadboll

Morning all and I beg to differ with Mike's premis. I think from speaking to many of them that a great many Labour members want them to adhere to the 1970s "real Labour" principles and policies" and winning is not the priority. That is why Corbyn had such a fanatical following.

Philip_Thompson

SouthamObserver said:

DavidL said:

Gallowgate said:

DavidL said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Good morning, everyone.

Seems a done deal for Starmer. I do wonder if they'd be better with Nandy. But neither will be as bad as Corbyn.

That’s really the point. Starmer strikes me as dull and unimaginative but he is intelligent and capable of developing a coherent argument. It’s a massive step forward from where Labour has been since 2015.

I thought he would be really boring before I went to see him talk in Newcastle and he was actually pretty warm and charismatic...

Perhaps he’s better in person.

Maybe but I know a dull lawyer when I see one. On the plus side he is going to have several years to learn the job, refine the team and develop his pitch. Given where Labour is starting from he may need all the time he can get.

I wish him well. We need an opposition that offers a viable choice. Governments without one become self indulgent and more foolish than usual.

After five years of constant conflict and confrontation under Cummings/Johnson dull and competent may be looking very appealing. What Nandy or Starmer will do is ensure that Labour provides a strong opposition. We have not had one for a long time and it will come at a time when almost all the talent that exists on the Tory side will be on the backbenches.

Which talent are you thinking of on the Tory side which will be on the backbenches? Fox? Davis? Leadsom? Fallon? Green? Grayling?

This cabinet has a refreshing amount of fresh talent rather than sticking with duds of the past.

HYUFD

NorthCadboll said:

Morning all and I beg to differ with Mike's premis. I think from speaking to many of them that a great many Labour members want them to adhere to the 1970s "real Labour" principles and policies" and winning is not the priority. That is why Corbyn had such a fanatical following.

Starmer is not really promising a vast difference in policy from Corbyn anyway other than being a bit more pro single market and anti anti Semitism, Starmer is certainly no Blairite

SouthamObserver

Philip_Thompson said:

SouthamObserver said:

DavidL said:

Gallowgate said:

DavidL said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Good morning, everyone.

Seems a done deal for Starmer. I do wonder if they'd be better with Nandy. But neither will be as bad as Corbyn.

That’s really the point. Starmer strikes me as dull and unimaginative but he is intelligent and capable of developing a coherent argument. It’s a massive step forward from where Labour has been since 2015.

I thought he would be really boring before I went to see him talk in Newcastle and he was actually pretty warm and charismatic...

Perhaps he’s better in person.

Maybe but I know a dull lawyer when I see one. On the plus side he is going to have several years to learn the job, refine the team and develop his pitch. Given where Labour is starting from he may need all the time he can get.

I wish him well. We need an opposition that offers a viable choice. Governments without one become self indulgent and more foolish than usual.

After five years of constant conflict and confrontation under Cummings/Johnson dull and competent may be looking very appealing. What Nandy or Starmer will do is ensure that Labour provides a strong opposition. We have not had one for a long time and it will come at a time when almost all the talent that exists on the Tory side will be on the backbenches.

Which talent are you thinking of on the Tory side which will be on the backbenches? Fox? Davis? Leadsom? Fallon? Green? Grayling?

This cabinet has a refreshing amount of fresh talent rather than sticking with duds of the past.

There is not much talent there, I agree. Cox and Javid are the obvious ones, I guess. The Cabinet will do exactly as it is told.

HYUFD

Gabs3 said:

This has made me a lot more receptive to Sanders. He is night and day from Corbyn on foreign policy.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/the-sanders-foreign-policy-you-dont-know-about/2020/02/16/aa777f6c-4e7b-11ea-b721-9f4cdc90bc1c_story.html

Sanders opposed the Iraq War just like Corbyn

HYUFD

Morris_Dancer said:

Good morning, everyone.

Seems a done deal for Starmer. I do wonder if they'd be better with Nandy. But neither will be as bad as Corbyn.

Nandy would be better to appeal to Leavers but most of them will stick with Boris anyway, Starmer is better to appeal to Tory and LD Remainers, Long Bailey to appeal to neither

ydoethur

HYUFD said:

Gabs3 said:

This has made me a lot more receptive to Sanders. He is night and day from Corbyn on foreign policy.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/the-sanders-foreign-policy-you-dont-know-about/2020/02/16/aa777f6c-4e7b-11ea-b721-9f4cdc90bc1c_story.html

Sanders opposed the Iraq War just like Corbyn

I opposed the Iraq War too, because it was clearly a very stupid idea. That does not make me a Corbynista.

DavidL

Philip_Thompson said:

DavidL said:

malcolmg said:

malcolmg said:

Sandpit said:

malcolmg said:

Sandpit said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

The Met Office is to spend over £1 billion on a new supercomputer, though for some reason wants to house it abroad. #Brexit
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-51504002

It has to be IBM, doesn't it? Are there any other Western players?

In the old Met Office in Bracknell, there used to be two Cray Supercomputers, known colloquially as the Cray Twins. I believe the company is now part of HP.

Was that some time ago , I thought they had IBM HPC system currently.

Would have been early ‘90s. I lived close by, and a family friend who worked there gave me a tour one evening as a excitable young teenager.

OK so I am probably correct that they have an IBM HPC power setup nowadays.

Just checked and it looks like they put new Cray machine in in 2016, assume that replaced the IBM machine.
Strange they are already talking about replacement.
https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/about-us/what/technology/supercomputer

Yes that is odd. Have things really moved forward that much in the last 4 years?

Probably yes, but that's what makes it absurd IMO to pay a billion pounds for a supercomputer today. A billion pound supercomputer will surely be only worth a tiny, tiny fraction of that before long.

Looking at the BBC report it looks like a Gordon Brown billion running up 10 years expenditure into one figure.

MikeSmithson

Philip_Thompson said:

SouthamObserver said:

DavidL said:

Gallowgate said:

DavidL said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Good morning, everyone.

Seems a done deal for Starmer. I do wonder if they'd be better with Nandy. But neither will be as bad as Corbyn.

That’s really the point. Starmer strikes me as dull and unimaginative but he is intelligent and capable of developing a coherent argument. It’s a massive step forward from where Labour has been since 2015.

I thought he would be really boring before I went to see him talk in Newcastle and he was actually pretty warm and charismatic...

Perhaps he’s better in person.

Maybe but I know a dull lawyer when I see one. On the plus side he is going to have several years to learn the job, refine the team and develop his pitch. Given where Labour is starting from he may need all the time he can get.

I wish him well. We need an opposition that offers a viable choice. Governments without one become self indulgent and more foolish than usual.

After five years of constant conflict and confrontation under Cummings/Johnson dull and competent may be looking very appealing. What Nandy or Starmer will do is ensure that Labour provides a strong opposition. We have not had one for a long time and it will come at a time when almost all the talent that exists on the Tory side will be on the backbenches.

Which talent are you thinking of on the Tory side which will be on the backbenches? Fox? Davis? Leadsom? Fallon? Green? Grayling?

This cabinet has a refreshing amount of fresh talent rather than sticking with duds of the past.

Like who?

DavidL

ydoethur said:

HYUFD said:

Gabs3 said:

This has made me a lot more receptive to Sanders. He is night and day from Corbyn on foreign policy.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/the-sanders-foreign-policy-you-dont-know-about/2020/02/16/aa777f6c-4e7b-11ea-b721-9f4cdc90bc1c_story.html

Sanders opposed the Iraq War just like Corbyn

I opposed the Iraq War too, because it was clearly a very stupid idea. That does not make me a Corbynista.

The second one. The first was fair enough.

SandyRentool

It occurred to me that unless the budget is delayed Jezza gets to respond.

His last hurrah.

Why we need over a month to cast our votes is beyond me.

HYUFD

ydoethur said:

HYUFD said:

Gabs3 said:

This has made me a lot more receptive to Sanders. He is night and day from Corbyn on foreign policy.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/the-sanders-foreign-policy-you-dont-know-about/2020/02/16/aa777f6c-4e7b-11ea-b721-9f4cdc90bc1c_story.html

Sanders opposed the Iraq War just like Corbyn

I opposed the Iraq War too, because it was clearly a very stupid idea. That does not make me a Corbynista.

Sanders also spent his honeymoon in the Soviet Union

DavidL

MikeSmithson said:

Philip_Thompson said:

SouthamObserver said:

DavidL said:

Gallowgate said:

DavidL said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Good morning, everyone.

Seems a done deal for Starmer. I do wonder if they'd be better with Nandy. But neither will be as bad as Corbyn.

That’s really the point. Starmer strikes me as dull and unimaginative but he is intelligent and capable of developing a coherent argument. It’s a massive step forward from where Labour has been since 2015.

I thought he would be really boring before I went to see him talk in Newcastle and he was actually pretty warm and charismatic...

Perhaps he’s better in person.

Maybe but I know a dull lawyer when I see one. On the plus side he is going to have several years to learn the job, refine the team and develop his pitch. Given where Labour is starting from he may need all the time he can get.

I wish him well. We need an opposition that offers a viable choice. Governments without one become self indulgent and more foolish than usual.

After five years of constant conflict and confrontation under Cummings/Johnson dull and competent may be looking very appealing. What Nandy or Starmer will do is ensure that Labour provides a strong opposition. We have not had one for a long time and it will come at a time when almost all the talent that exists on the Tory side will be on the backbenches.

Which talent are you thinking of on the Tory side which will be on the backbenches? Fox? Davis? Leadsom? Fallon? Green? Grayling?

This cabinet has a refreshing amount of fresh talent rather than sticking with duds of the past.

Like who?

Compared to those names the PJ Masks are an improvement.

ydoethur

DavidL said:

ydoethur said:

HYUFD said:

Gabs3 said:

This has made me a lot more receptive to Sanders. He is night and day from Corbyn on foreign policy.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/the-sanders-foreign-policy-you-dont-know-about/2020/02/16/aa777f6c-4e7b-11ea-b721-9f4cdc90bc1c_story.html

Sanders opposed the Iraq War just like Corbyn

I opposed the Iraq War too, because it was clearly a very stupid idea. That does not make me a Corbynista.

The second one. The first was fair enough.

I was six at the time of the first one. I get a free pass. But I tend to think of that as the ‘Gulf War’ not the ‘First Iraq War.’

Casino_Royale

SouthamObserver said:

Philip_Thompson said:

SouthamObserver said:

DavidL said:

Gallowgate said:

DavidL said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Good morning, everyone.

Seems a done deal for Starmer. I do wonder if they'd be better with Nandy. But neither will be as bad as Corbyn.

That’s really the point. Starmer strikes me as dull and unimaginative but he is intelligent and capable of developing a coherent argument. It’s a massive step forward from where Labour has been since 2015.

I thought he would be really boring before I went to see him talk in Newcastle and he was actually pretty warm and charismatic...

Perhaps he’s better in person.

Maybe but I know a dull lawyer when I see one. On the plus side he is going to have several years to learn the job, refine the team and develop his pitch. Given where Labour is starting from he may need all the time he can get.

I wish him well. We need an opposition that offers a viable choice. Governments without one become self indulgent and more foolish than usual.

After five years of constant conflict and confrontation under Cummings/Johnson dull and competent may be looking very appealing. What Nandy or Starmer will do is ensure that Labour provides a strong opposition. We have not had one for a long time and it will come at a time when almost all the talent that exists on the Tory side will be on the backbenches.

Which talent are you thinking of on the Tory side which will be on the backbenches? Fox? Davis? Leadsom? Fallon? Green? Grayling?

This cabinet has a refreshing amount of fresh talent rather than sticking with duds of the past.

There is not much talent there, I agree. Cox and Javid are the obvious ones, I guess. The Cabinet will do exactly as it is told.

Hunt and Hinds. Stewart before he bailed.

ydoethur

HYUFD said:

ydoethur said:

HYUFD said:

Gabs3 said:

This has made me a lot more receptive to Sanders. He is night and day from Corbyn on foreign policy.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/the-sanders-foreign-policy-you-dont-know-about/2020/02/16/aa777f6c-4e7b-11ea-b721-9f4cdc90bc1c_story.html

Sanders opposed the Iraq War just like Corbyn

I opposed the Iraq War too, because it was clearly a very stupid idea. That does not make me a Corbynista.

Sanders also spent his honeymoon in the Soviet Union

So? That wasn’t the question.

ydoethur

SandyRentool said:

It occurred to me that unless the budget is delayed Jezza gets to respond.

His last hurrah.

Why we need over a month to cast our votes is beyond me.

Because in the glorious People’s Socialist Republic of North Islington, they may need a month to find a pencil buried under the mass of luxury goods?

matt

Gallowgate said:

DavidL said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Good morning, everyone.

Seems a done deal for Starmer. I do wonder if they'd be better with Nandy. But neither will be as bad as Corbyn.

That’s really the point. Starmer strikes me as dull and unimaginative but he is intelligent and capable of developing a coherent argument. It’s a massive step forward from where Labour has been since 2015.

I thought he would be really boring before I went to see him talk in Newcastle and he was actually pretty warm and charismatic...

Perhaps he’s better in person.

That’s always the defence for poor leaders - they’re great in small numbers/private. It was rolled out for John Major and Theresa May. Perhaps this time it’s different?

NickPalmer

HYUFD said:

NorthCadboll said:

Morning all and I beg to differ with Mike's premis. I think from speaking to many of them that a great many Labour members want them to adhere to the 1970s "real Labour" principles and policies" and winning is not the priority. That is why Corbyn had such a fanatical following.

Starmer is not really promising a vast difference in policy from Corbyn anyway other than being a bit more pro single market and anti anti Semitism, Starmer is certainly no Blairite

I agree with HYUFD on this. Most Labour members don't want an election-winning cipher with no particular policies - we could spend 5 years slogging away to get them in and then find it made no difference at all. But we'd also like to win for a change. So the sweet spot is a candidate who would be a plausible PM but nonetheless is broadly signed up for leftish reform. Starmer is vaguer than I'd like but he is IMO in the right area for most members. They don't feel RLB is very easy to imagine in Number 10 (too preoccupied with fringe issues), and Lisa Nandy is interesting but seems slow to come up with distinctive policies or an election-winning formula.

Banterman

Starmer is currently relatively positively received by voters because they don't understand what an ardent lefty he actually is.

He's the definition of a hypocrite champagne socialist.

ydoethur

Banterman said:

Starmer is currently relatively positively received by voters because they don't understand what an ardent lefty he actually is.

He's the definition of a hypocrite champagne socialist.

Are you suggesting his father made a tool?

Ah, my coat...

Have a good morning.

NickPalmer

Casino_Royale said:

nichomar said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

nichomar said:

I won’t go into details but after my dose of CitraFleet I've just had the most explosive night in my lifetime, an experience I have no desire to repeat in the near future although just waiting on second dose to go through.

There's your mistake. If you don't want a repeat in the near future then you should not have taken the second dose. Good luck.

No choice colonoscopy at 15:00 just following instructions!

Ah. Good luck with it.

+1 - sounds as though you're getting immediate attention, hope you're on the mend soon.

Fysics_Teacher

DavidL said:

malcolmg said:

malcolmg said:

Sandpit said:

malcolmg said:

Sandpit said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

The Met Office is to spend over £1 billion on a new supercomputer, though for some reason wants to house it abroad. #Brexit
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-51504002

It has to be IBM, doesn't it? Are there any other Western players?

In the old Met Office in Bracknell, there used to be two Cray Supercomputers, known colloquially as the Cray Twins. I believe the company is now part of HP.

Was that some time ago , I thought they had IBM HPC system currently.

Would have been early ‘90s. I lived close by, and a family friend who worked there gave me a tour one evening as a excitable young teenager.

OK so I am probably correct that they have an IBM HPC power setup nowadays.

Just checked and it looks like they put new Cray machine in in 2016, assume that replaced the IBM machine.
Strange they are already talking about replacement.
https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/about-us/what/technology/supercomputer

Yes that is odd. Have things really moved forward that much in the last 4 years?

Moore’s Law would suggest that computers are now four times as powerful as they were four years ago.

You are probably reading this on a computer more powerful than the eighties vintage Cray supercomputers.

SouthamObserver

NickPalmer said:

HYUFD said:

NorthCadboll said:

Morning all and I beg to differ with Mike's premis. I think from speaking to many of them that a great many Labour members want them to adhere to the 1970s "real Labour" principles and policies" and winning is not the priority. That is why Corbyn had such a fanatical following.

Starmer is not really promising a vast difference in policy from Corbyn anyway other than being a bit more pro single market and anti anti Semitism, Starmer is certainly no Blairite

I agree with HYUFD on this. Most Labour members don't want an election-winning cipher with no particular policies - we could spend 5 years slogging away to get them in and then find it made no difference at all. But we'd also like to win for a change. So the sweet spot is a candidate who would be a plausible PM but nonetheless is broadly signed up for leftish reform. Starmer is vaguer than I'd like but he is IMO in the right area for most members. They don't feel RLB is very easy to imagine in Number 10 (too preoccupied with fringe issues), and Lisa Nandy is interesting but seems slow to come up with distinctive policies or an election-winning formula.

I agree. Starmer is to the left of me, for sure, but I believe he’s pragmatic and will have people who do think like me in prominent positions on his front bench team. He’ll provide strong opposition and, crucially, will tackle anti-Semitism head on and without any prevarication. I will vote Nandy 1, because I like the fact she has thought a lot about the key issues, but Starmer will be my strong 2.

HYUFD

NickPalmer said:

HYUFD said:

NorthCadboll said:

Morning all and I beg to differ with Mike's premis. I think from speaking to many of them that a great many Labour members want them to adhere to the 1970s "real Labour" principles and policies" and winning is not the priority. That is why Corbyn had such a fanatical following.

Starmer is not really promising a vast difference in policy from Corbyn anyway other than being a bit more pro single market and anti anti Semitism, Starmer is certainly no Blairite

I agree with HYUFD on this. Most Labour members don't want an election-winning cipher with no particular policies - we could spend 5 years slogging away to get them in and then find it made no difference at all. But we'd also like to win for a change. So the sweet spot is a candidate who would be a plausible PM but nonetheless is broadly signed up for leftish reform. Starmer is vaguer than I'd like but he is IMO in the right area for most members. They don't feel RLB is very easy to imagine in Number 10 (too preoccupied with fringe issues), and Lisa Nandy is interesting but seems slow to come up with distinctive policies or an election-winning formula.

Yes, Starmer is more Blairite in style but Ed Miliband in policy

DavidL

SouthamObserver said:

DavidL said:

Gallowgate said:

DavidL said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Good morning, everyone.

Seems a done deal for Starmer. I do wonder if they'd be better with Nandy. But neither will be as bad as Corbyn.

That’s really the point. Starmer strikes me as dull and unimaginative but he is intelligent and capable of developing a coherent argument. It’s a massive step forward from where Labour has been since 2015.

I thought he would be really boring before I went to see him talk in Newcastle and he was actually pretty warm and charismatic...

Perhaps he’s better in person.

Maybe but I know a dull lawyer when I see one. On the plus side he is going to have several years to learn the job, refine the team and develop his pitch. Given where Labour is starting from he may need all the time he can get.

I wish him well. We need an opposition that offers a viable choice. Governments without one become self indulgent and more foolish than usual.

After five years of constant conflict and confrontation under Cummings/Johnson dull and competent may be looking very appealing. What Nandy or Starmer will do is ensure that Labour provides a strong opposition. We have not had one for a long time and it will come at a time when almost all the talent that exists on the Tory side will be on the backbenches.

I will be utterly gobsmacked if Cummings is still there in 4 years time.

SandyRentool

I don't think I've seen anything from Starmer to demonstrate that he understands why we lost in the North. It wasn't just because of Jezza.

Someone who can double Labour majorities in London and other big city seats is not what we need.

For years I was saying that Starmer was the right choice. Now I am not sure he will take us in the right direction.

Nandy gets it. She should get the job. But she won't.

NickPalmer

Charles said:

I don’t believe you are allowed to top up in the NHS.

If you choose to supplement your healthcare the NHS can kick you out (ie it’s our way or the highway)

Foxy can advise better, but my understanding is that you can supplement if you're getting treatment for a different condition. What they don't like is if you flip-flop between NHS and private for the same treatment, potentially creating confusion.

I think you can still pay extra for a private room, too, perhaps other kinds of non-medical upgrades? I've fortunately never been seriously ill yet so I don't actually know.

HYUFD

Banterman said:

Starmer is currently relatively positively received by voters because they don't understand what an ardent lefty he actually is.

He's the definition of a hypocrite champagne socialist.

It is Remainers where Starmer polls best, Leavers are not fans

Fysics_Teacher

ydoethur said:

DavidL said:

ydoethur said:

HYUFD said:

Gabs3 said:

This has made me a lot more receptive to Sanders. He is night and day from Corbyn on foreign policy.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/the-sanders-foreign-policy-you-dont-know-about/2020/02/16/aa777f6c-4e7b-11ea-b721-9f4cdc90bc1c_story.html

Sanders opposed the Iraq War just like Corbyn

I opposed the Iraq War too, because it was clearly a very stupid idea. That does not make me a Corbynista.

The second one. The first was fair enough.

I was six at the time of the first one. I get a free pass. But I tend to think of that as the ‘Gulf War’ not the ‘First Iraq War.’

Now you’ve made me feel old...

The War between Iran and Iraq was called the Gulf War at the time I think.

Philip_Thompson

SouthamObserver said:

NickPalmer said:

HYUFD said:

NorthCadboll said:

Morning all and I beg to differ with Mike's premis. I think from speaking to many of them that a great many Labour members want them to adhere to the 1970s "real Labour" principles and policies" and winning is not the priority. That is why Corbyn had such a fanatical following.

Starmer is not really promising a vast difference in policy from Corbyn anyway other than being a bit more pro single market and anti anti Semitism, Starmer is certainly no Blairite

I agree with HYUFD on this. Most Labour members don't want an election-winning cipher with no particular policies - we could spend 5 years slogging away to get them in and then find it made no difference at all. But we'd also like to win for a change. So the sweet spot is a candidate who would be a plausible PM but nonetheless is broadly signed up for leftish reform. Starmer is vaguer than I'd like but he is IMO in the right area for most members. They don't feel RLB is very easy to imagine in Number 10 (too preoccupied with fringe issues), and Lisa Nandy is interesting but seems slow to come up with distinctive policies or an election-winning formula.

I agree. Starmer is to the left of me, for sure, but I believe he’s pragmatic and will have people who do think like me in prominent positions on his front bench team. He’ll provide strong opposition and, crucially, will tackle anti-Semitism head on and without any prevarication. I will vote Nandy 1, because I like the fact she has thought a lot about the key issues, but Starmer will be my strong 2.

Considering there's three candidates and who number three is, that seems entirely rational to me.

squareroot2

NickPalmer said:

Charles said:

I don’t believe you are allowed to top up in the NHS.

If you choose to supplement your healthcare the NHS can kick you out (ie it’s our way or the highway)

Foxy can advise better, but my understanding is that you can supplement if you're getting treatment for a different condition. What they don't like is if you flip-flop between NHS and private for the same treatment, potentially creating confusion.

I think you can still pay extra for a private room, too, perhaps other kinds of non-medical upgrades? I've fortunately never been seriously ill yet so I don't actually know.

but of course you would if you were ill....

DavidL

Fysics_Teacher said:

DavidL said:

malcolmg said:

malcolmg said:

Sandpit said:

malcolmg said:

Sandpit said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

The Met Office is to spend over £1 billion on a new supercomputer, though for some reason wants to house it abroad. #Brexit
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-51504002

It has to be IBM, doesn't it? Are there any other Western players?

In the old Met Office in Bracknell, there used to be two Cray Supercomputers, known colloquially as the Cray Twins. I believe the company is now part of HP.

Was that some time ago , I thought they had IBM HPC system currently.

Would have been early ‘90s. I lived close by, and a family friend who worked there gave me a tour one evening as a excitable young teenager.

OK so I am probably correct that they have an IBM HPC power setup nowadays.

Just checked and it looks like they put new Cray machine in in 2016, assume that replaced the IBM machine.
Strange they are already talking about replacement.
https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/about-us/what/technology/supercomputer

Yes that is odd. Have things really moved forward that much in the last 4 years?

Moore’s Law would suggest that computers are now four times as powerful as they were four years ago.

You are probably reading this on a computer more powerful than the eighties vintage Cray supercomputers.

I thought that we were getting to the limits of that. The £1bn figure includes a major upgrade in another 5 years. And my laptop is ancient. Over 5 years old.

TOPPING

HYUFD said:

Banterman said:

Starmer is currently relatively positively received by voters because they don't understand what an ardent lefty he actually is.

He's the definition of a hypocrite champagne socialist.

It is Remainers where Starmer polls best, Leavers are not fans

But there is a large number of Cons Remainers, the two of us for example, who remain very much put off by his leftist policies.

Wulfrun_Phil

HYUFD said:

Banterman said:

Starmer is currently relatively positively received by voters because they don't understand what an ardent lefty he actually is.

He's the definition of a hypocrite champagne socialist.

It is Remainers where Starmer polls best, Leavers are not fans

You may not be, I am.

DavidL

Fysics_Teacher said:

ydoethur said:

DavidL said:

ydoethur said:

HYUFD said:

Gabs3 said:

This has made me a lot more receptive to Sanders. He is night and day from Corbyn on foreign policy.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/the-sanders-foreign-policy-you-dont-know-about/2020/02/16/aa777f6c-4e7b-11ea-b721-9f4cdc90bc1c_story.html

Sanders opposed the Iraq War just like Corbyn

I opposed the Iraq War too, because it was clearly a very stupid idea. That does not make me a Corbynista.

The second one. The first was fair enough.

I was six at the time of the first one. I get a free pass. But I tend to think of that as the ‘Gulf War’ not the ‘First Iraq War.’

Now you’ve made me feel old...

The War between Iran and Iraq was called the Gulf War at the time I think.

I remember it being called the Iran/Iraq war where our glorious ally, Saddam Hussain, held back the forces of evil with some of our technology and a lot of blood.