A lot of the future scenarios sketched out for the result of the next election seem like wish fulfillment.
If the Tories gain seats in the next election, then they will form the next Government.
If Corbyn has gained seats (even a modest number), then he will be seen as the winner of the election, and he will lead the next Government.
For the LibDems/SNP to force a change of Labour leader would need a demoralised Labour party to have made almost zero advance, and the Tories to have lost seats. How does that even happen?
In my opinion, Scotland will follow the path of Quebec after its independence referendum. The next election will probably see significant Labour gains in Scotland.
(This is not wish fulfilment, I think the SNP has been good for Scotland and the Labour Party has in general not been good for Scotland).
In the end, voters usually want to give the other side a go after a bit.
I have reached that point myself. Time to vote for Corbyn.
Yes: a pro-Russian anti-semitic government is exactly what we need to draw the poison of Brexit.........
I do not like the potential scenario, but neither do I like the current puppet govt lurching around in fear of a few dozen xenophobic right wing loons in their own ranks.
Corbyn is a potential screw up. The current govt is s proven screwup.
Corbyn is a proven screw up. His reaction to the Skripal poisoning, Assad using chemical weapons and anti-semitism in his party show that. Having him in charge will make post-Brexit Britain very much worse than it might otherwise be. Abolishing capitalism for socialism, as his Chancellor recently reiterated was his aim, is actively malicious and deeply damaging to my childrens’ futures.
There are no good choices here. Personally, I will no longer tolerate the current government. The system needs a good shake up for its own good even though it will be painful. The current government is already damaging everyone's future including my children's - I will not endorse such a shower by voting for them.
That only leaves one choice however distasteful
I do not wish to endorse the current government. But unlike you I do not wish to endorse an alternative which I consider to be even worse. Corbyn and his coterie are beyond the pale for me. To use Mr Meeks’s approach: those who cannot abide the xenophobic lies which led to Brexit and decide to vote Labour to punish the Tories will be, whether they like it or not, endorsing the anti-Jewish racism of Corbyn’s Labour party. I am not going to play any part in substituting one form of xenophobia with another.
Can journalists stop describing these as 'jobs' and call them by their proper title 'payment for perceived influence' ?
I am sure he works very hard in these roles....1 day a month. You have also got to give him credit how much more successful he is than say Gordo, saviour of the universe, at getting these.
Perhaps Carney shouldn't have raised rates to 0.5% after all ?
"Unfortunately for [Bank of England governor Mark] Carney and his fellow Monetary Policy Committee members, there has been no such upwards revision today and while there's still the final reading to come, it is unlikely we see much improvement there."
Can journalists stop describing these as 'jobs' and call them by their proper title 'payment for perceived influence' ?
I am sure he works very hard in these roles....1 day a month. You have also got to give him credit how much more successful he is than say Gordo, saviour of the universe, at getting these.
I think that's unfair on ol Broon. He's turned his perceived influence into a positive for charitable work.
Perhaps Carney shouldn't have raised rates to 0.5% after all ?
"Unfortunately for [Bank of England governor Mark] Carney and his fellow Monetary Policy Committee members, there has been no such upwards revision today and while there's still the final reading to come, it is unlikely we see much improvement there."
Soon Osborne's pre-Brexit forecast will be getting criticised for being too positive.
In the end, voters usually want to give the other side a go after a bit.
I have reached that point myself. Time to vote for Corbyn.
Yes: a pro-Russian anti-semitic government is exactly what we need to draw the poison of Brexit.........
Given the practical choices on offer, I suggest those appalled by both main parties use their vote so far as they can to secure the most paralysis in Parliament possible. Whoever gets their hands on the reins of power needs to do so in handcuffs.
Sadly, as a result of May’s miscalculation last year, the marginal seat I am living in has been turned into a safe Labour seat. My vote is pointless. The only practical thing I can do is try and insulate me and mine from the consequences of Brexit and Corbyn.
...which is an impossible aspiration because you really don't know how it will affect you.
If your seat was recently marginal, I don't see how you can consider your vote a wasted one. The seat clearly has the chance to become marginal and therefore switch parties again in the future. Try living in North Dorset if you want to feel your vote is wasted!
I can make some educated guesses. I can take seriously what Corbyn and McDonnell say about their economic plans and make plans of my own. I have already started on that process.
Until last year, where I live was a three-way marginal with barely 1000 votes between the top 3 parties. Now Labour has a 10,000 vote majority. I am not really inclined to vote Tory. But any other vote is utterly wasted.
The Office for National Statistics says that GDP growth remained at 0.1% in the first quarter in its second estimate of economic activity.
It is the slowest growth since 2012#
No upward estimate.
So basically, stagnation. This is why Labour will win the next GE.
John Major won just after a recession because the alternative was Kinnock, Corbyn could well be Kinnock 2 and like Kinnock the electorate have already refused to make him PM once
In the end, voters usually want to give the other side a go after a bit.
I have reached that point myself. Time to vote for Corbyn.
Yes: a pro-Russian anti-semitic government is exactly what we need to draw the poison of Brexit.........
Given the practical choices on offer, I suggest those appalled by both main parties use their vote so far as they can to secure the most paralysis in Parliament possible. Whoever gets their hands on the reins of power needs to do so in handcuffs.
Sadly, as a result of May’s miscalculation last year, the marginal seat I am living in has been turned into a safe Labour seat. My vote is pointless. The only practical thing I can do is try and insulate me and mine from the consequences of Brexit and Corbyn.
...which is an impossible aspiration because you really don't know how it will affect you.
If your seat was recently marginal, I don't see how you can consider your vote a wasted one. The seat clearly has the chance to become marginal and therefore switch parties again in the future. Try living in North Dorset if you want to feel your vote is wasted!
North Dorset was once fairly marginal (a Liberal seat at one point)
Fair point - hoisted by my own petard! I'll carry-on voting anyone-but-Tory then.
Some of us do that reluctantly even after the Great Betrayal !
Mr. Pulpstar, he shouldn't've cut them in the first place. And the new notes and coins are rubbish. Humbug!
Incidentally, other gamers here may wish to know that John Bain (better known as TotalBiscuit) has passed away (cancer). RIP.
From yesterday:
The Bank of England could pump more stimulus into Britain's economy if this year's Brexit negotiations result in a bad deal, governor Mark Carney said this evening.
Mr. Pulpstar, he shouldn't've cut them in the first place. And the new notes and coins are rubbish. Humbug!
Morris all the Brex-o-loons criticise Project Fear for their forecasts, which didn't transpire, while ignoring the fact that immediately after the vote, the BoE dropped interest rates to say: we've got this, we stand ready to support the economy in case any one has the jitters.
And hence, there was precious little short term impact on the economy, currency aside. Longer term? Well we are seeing that play out now.
It is classic Lynton Crosby scare Tactics from some of the Tories on this thread to suggest that Labour only needs to take 15 seats from the Conservatives to ensure that Corbyn becomes p.m. That would make it CON 303 seats to Labour 277. In these circumstances I doubt if the Lib Dems would go in with labour particularly one led by Jeremy Corbyn with all his issues relating to anti-semitism and brexit
Of course, in 2010 the Lib Dems made it a condition of their discussions with Labour that Gordon Brown would not remain as Prime Minister. Might the Lib Dems similarly make it a condition of discussions with Labour in such a hung Parliament that a Prime Minister acceptable to a majority in Parliament be found?
Just IMAGINE the reaction of the Corbynites...
A very intriguing thought. I doubt the LDs alone would have the muscle to do that, but if they clubbed together with the SNP, maybe together they could force it through. I suspect Corbyn would agree to step aside provided he felt Labour's key policies would get through.
The difference for the LDs now vs 2010 is that almost all their seats now (outside Scotland) are ex-Tory or would be Tory seats. So are most of their major targets and their main target audience now is essentially wet Tory. Doing a deal with Corbyn would alienate that base.
Mr. Pulpstar, he shouldn't've cut them in the first place. And the new notes and coins are rubbish. Humbug!
Incidentally, other gamers here may wish to know that John Bain (better known as TotalBiscuit) has passed away (cancer). RIP.
From yesterday:
The Bank of England could pump more stimulus into Britain's economy if this year's Brexit negotiations result in a bad deal, governor Mark Carney said this evening.
Another round of asset inflation ?
Nope - as mentioned, another effort to stave off some of the Project Fear predictions.
In the end, voters usually want to give the other side a go after a bit.
I have reached that point myself. Time to vote for Corbyn.
Yes: a pro-Russian anti-semitic government is exactly what we need to draw the poison of Brexit.........
I do not like the potential scenario, but neither do I like the current puppet govt lurching around in fear of a few dozen xenophobic right wing loons in their own ranks.
Corbyn is a potential screw up. The current govt is s proven screwup.
Corbyn is a proven screw up. His reaction to the Skripal poisoning, Assad using chemical weapons and anti-semitism in his party show that. Having him in charge will make post-Brexit Britain very much worse than it might otherwise be. Abolishing capitalism for socialism, as his Chancellor recently reiterated was his aim, is actively malicious and deeply damaging to my childrens’ futures.
There are no good choices here. Personally, I will no longer tolerate the current government. The system needs a good shake up for its own good even though it will be painful. The current government is already damaging everyone's future including my children's - I will not endorse such a shower by voting for them.
That only leaves one choice however distasteful
I do not wish to endorse the current government. But unlike you I do not wish to endorse an alternative which I consider to be even worse. Corbyn and his coterie are beyond the pale for me. To use Mr Meeks’s approach: those who cannot abide the xenophobic lies which led to Brexit and decide to vote Labour to punish the Tories will be, whether they like it or not, endorsing the anti-Jewish racism of Corbyn’s Labour party. I am not going to play any part in substituting one form of xenophobia with another.
We have two to choose from - and they are both s**t
Mr. Cabinet, not to worry. Corbyn's love of Venezuelan socialism may see him take a page out of Maduro's book. Easier to win elections if you ban those pesky Tories from standing.
Mr. Topping, Carney dropped rates because he believed his own wrongness. Then had to raise them. Then got his forward guidance wrong.
Nah Morris. While I bow to your expertise on monetary policy, I contend that Carney dropped rates because in his mind was this, from 30 years previously:
“The Federal Reserve, consistent with its responsibilities as the Nation's central bank, affirmed today its readiness to serve as a source of liquidity to support the economic and financial system”
In the end, voters usually want to give the other side a go after a bit.
I have reached that point myself. Time to vote for Corbyn.
Yes: a pro-Russian anti-semitic government is exactly what we need to draw the poison of Brexit.........
Given the practical choices on offer, I suggest those appalled by both main parties use their vote so far as they can to secure the most paralysis in Parliament possible. Whoever gets their hands on the reins of power needs to do so in handcuffs.
Sadly, as a result of May’s miscalculation last year, the marginal seat I am living in has been turned into a safe Labour seat. My vote is pointless. The only practical thing I can do is try and insulate me and mine from the consequences of Brexit and Corbyn.
...which is an impossible aspiration because you really don't know how it will affect you.
If your seat was recently marginal, I don't see how you can consider your vote a wasted one. The seat clearly has the chance to become marginal and therefore switch parties again in the future. Try living in North Dorset if you want to feel your vote is wasted!
I can make some educated guesses. I can take seriously what Corbyn and McDonnell say about their economic plans and make plans of my own. I have already started on that process.
Until last year, where I live was a three-way marginal with barely 1000 votes between the top 3 parties. Now Labour has a 10,000 vote majority. I am not really inclined to vote Tory. But any other vote is utterly wasted.
C'mon. You are a Tory.
No. I vote Lib Dem. But doing so will make no difference. Even in the recent local elections where I helped a neighbour standing as a Lib Dem councillor for the first time the Lib Dems made no real progress. One of my children who joined them post-Brexit has lost their enthusiasm. Cable has been a disastrous choice as leader. My husband has taken to voting Green, mainly because of the proposed pylons in the Duddon Valley.
Joining our street’s WhatsApp group so that we can share lawnmowers and trips to the recycling centre is probably more useful political activity than voting for any of this lot.
Doing a deal with Corbyn would alienate that base.
That doesn't matter if the deal is done after all the votes have been counted.
As the LDs found in 2015, it does when you come up against your electorate the next time...
The raison d'etre of a political party is to be in power. Just as they made the decision in 2010 to be in power, so would they at any other possible moment, with whomever.
No. I vote Lib Dem. But doing so will make no difference. Even in the recent local elections where I helped a neighbour standing as a Lib Dem councillor for the first time the Lib Dems made no real progress. One of my children who joined them post-Brexit has lost their enthusiasm. Cable has been a disastrous choice as leader. My husband has taken to voting Green, mainly because of the proposed pylons in the Duddon Valley.
Cable's interim - no-one's under any illusions about that - and there were no other good choices at the time. I think we're probably two years away from Moran being leader, with the usual proviso about Brexit working in strange ways.
In the end, voters usually want to give the other side a go after a bit.
I have reached that point myself. Time to vote for Corbyn.
Yes: a pro-Russian anti-semitic government is exactly what we need to draw the poison of Brexit.........
Given the practical choices on offer, I suggest those appalled by both main parties use their vote so far as they can to secure the most paralysis in Parliament possible. Whoever gets their hands on the reins of power needs to do so in handcuffs.
Sadly, as a result of May’s miscalculation last year, the marginal seat I am living in has been turned into a safe Labour seat. My vote is pointless. The only practical thing I can do is try and insulate me and mine from the consequences of Brexit and Corbyn.
...which is an impossible aspiration because you really don't know how it will affect you.
If your seat was recently marginal, I don't see how you can consider your vote a wasted one. The seat clearly has the chance to become marginal and therefore switch parties again in the future. Try living in North Dorset if you want to feel your vote is wasted!
I can make some educated guesses. I can take seriously what Corbyn and McDonnell say about their economic plans and make plans of my own. I have already started on that process.
Until last year, where I live was a three-way marginal with barely 1000 votes between the top 3 parties. Now Labour has a 10,000 vote majority. I am not really inclined to vote Tory. But any other vote is utterly wasted.
C'mon. You are a Tory.
No. I vote Lib Dem. But doing so will make no difference. Even in the recent local elections where I helped a neighbour standing as a Lib Dem councillor for the first time the Lib Dems made no real progress. One of my children who joined them post-Brexit has lost their enthusiasm. Cable has been a disastrous choice as leader. My husband has taken to voting Green, mainly because of the proposed pylons in the Duddon Valley.
Joining our street’s WhatsApp group so that we can share lawnmowers and trips to the recycling centre is probably more useful political activity than voting for any of this lot.
That is perhaps true, but I'm inclined to think that punishing a party of the centre for picking a useless leader is somewhat self-defeating. Someone has to encourage centrist politicians.
Useless though Great Uncle Vince might be, and he is, I regard a vote for the LibDems as the least worst option.
In the end, voters usually want to give the other side a go after a bit.
I have reached that point myself. Time to vote for Corbyn.
Yes: a pro-Russian anti-semitic government is exactly what we need to draw the poison of Brexit.........
I do not like the potential scenario, but neither do I like the current puppet govt lurching around in fear of a few dozen xenophobic right wing loons in their own ranks.
Corbyn is a potential screw up. The current govt is s proven screwup.
Corbyn is a proven screw up. His reaction to the Skripal poisoning, Assad using chemical weapons and anti-semitism in his party show that. Having him in charge will make post-Brexit Britain very much worse than it might otherwise be. Abolishing capitalism for socialism, as his Chancellor recently reiterated was his aim, is actively malicious and deeply damaging to my childrens’ futures.
There are no good choices here. Personally, I will no longer tolerate the current government. The system needs a good shake up for its own good even though it will be painful. The current government is already damaging everyone's future including my children's - I will not endorse such a shower by voting for them.
That only leaves one choice however distasteful
I do not wish to endorse the current government. But unlike you I do not wish to endorse an alternative which I consider to be even worse. Corbyn and his coterie are beyond the pale for me. To use Mr Meeks’s approach: those who cannot abide the xenophobic lies which led to Brexit and decide to vote Labour to punish the Tories will be, whether they like it or not, endorsing the anti-Jewish racism of Corbyn’s Labour party. I am not going to play any part in substituting one form of xenophobia with another.
We have two to choose from - and they are both s**t
So choose neither then. But you are actively choosing to give Corbyn a go. So clearly you think he is less s**t than the alternative. That’s the difference between us.
No. I vote Lib Dem. But doing so will make no difference. Even in the recent local elections where I helped a neighbour standing as a Lib Dem councillor for the first time the Lib Dems made no real progress. One of my children who joined them post-Brexit has lost their enthusiasm. Cable has been a disastrous choice as leader. My husband has taken to voting Green, mainly because of the proposed pylons in the Duddon Valley.
Joining our street’s WhatsApp group so that we can share lawnmowers and trips to the recycling centre is probably more useful political activity than voting for any of this lot.
Personally I think voting (in the UK at least) always makes some small difference.
Labour NEC nominations so far - the left slate leading the right slate by 2-1ish, but Ann Black ahead of both: suspect she will get a seat from people weary of block votes. My CLP (which is not predictably left or right) met last night and decided to endorse nobody - I argued (explicitly speaking as a Momentum member but with an inclination to vote for Ann rather than the pure slate) that we didn't know most of the candidates, and should trust our members to read their pitches and make an intelligent decision, rather than try (probably ineffectively) to marshal them all in one direction or another. The meeting unanimously agreed.
Doing a deal with Corbyn would alienate that base.
That doesn't matter if the deal is done after all the votes have been counted.
As the LDs found in 2015, it does when you come up against your electorate the next time...
They are not going to refuse to be in a coalition with Corbyn's gang of twats in 2022 just because it might cost them in 2027. They are just not.
I suspect that any LD or SNP support for a minority Labour government would be not as a coalition, but on a bill by bill basis. The problem may well be more via executive orders, one of many reasons that these perogative powers need to be limited and answerable to Parliament. May's authoritarian tendencies to have Henry VIII powers are not just dangerous in themselves, but also set disturbing precedent for a PM Corbyn.
Labour NEC nominations so far - the left slate leading the right slate by 2-1ish, but Ann Black ahead of both: suspect she will get a seat from people weary of block votes. My CLP (which is not predictably left or right) met last night and decided to endorse nobody - I argued (explicitly speaking as a Momentum member but with an inclination to vote for Ann rather than the pure slate) that we didn't know most of the candidates, and should trust our members to read their pitches and make an intelligent decision, rather than try (probably ineffectively) to marshal them all in one direction or another. The meeting unanimously agreed.
No. I vote Lib Dem. But doing so will make no difference. Even in the recent local elections where I helped a neighbour standing as a Lib Dem councillor for the first time the Lib Dems made no real progress. One of my children who joined them post-Brexit has lost their enthusiasm. Cable has been a disastrous choice as leader. My husband has taken to voting Green, mainly because of the proposed pylons in the Duddon Valley.
Joining our street’s WhatsApp group so that we can share lawnmowers and trips to the recycling centre is probably more useful political activity than voting for any of this lot.
Personally I think voting (in the UK at least) always makes some small difference.
Yes, voting for a party that you believe in, whether SNP, LD, Green or UKIP, does tend to make the two major parties take notice and nudge their policy in that direction. Somewhat destructively in the case of Brexit, but it does have effect.
It is classic Lynton Crosby scare Tactics from some of the Tories on this thread to suggest that Labour only needs to take 15 seats from the Conservatives to ensure that Corbyn becomes p.m. That would make it CON 303 seats to Labour 277. In these circumstances I doubt if the Lib Dems would go in with labour particularly one led by Jeremy Corbyn with all his issues relating to anti-semitism and brexit
Of course, in 2010 the Lib Dems made it a condition of their discussions with Labour that Gordon Brown would not remain as Prime Minister. Might the Lib Dems similarly make it a condition of discussions with Labour in such a hung Parliament that a Prime Minister acceptable to a majority in Parliament be found?
Just IMAGINE the reaction of the Corbynites...
A very intriguing thought. I doubt the LDs alone would have the muscle to do that, but if they clubbed together with the SNP, maybe together they could force it through. I suspect Corbyn would agree to step aside provided he felt Labour's key policies would get through.
The difference for the LDs now vs 2010 is that almost all their seats now (outside Scotland) are ex-Tory or would be Tory seats. So are most of their major targets and their main target audience now is essentially wet Tory. Doing a deal with Corbyn would alienate that base.
I'm puzzled. Their voters vote LD to get rid of a Tory MP. The LDs then act to get rid of a Tory government. Their voters are then alienated????
No. I vote Lib Dem. But doing so will make no difference. Even in the recent local elections where I helped a neighbour standing as a Lib Dem councillor for the first time the Lib Dems made no real progress. One of my children who joined them post-Brexit has lost their enthusiasm. Cable has been a disastrous choice as leader. My husband has taken to voting Green, mainly because of the proposed pylons in the Duddon Valley.
Joining our street’s WhatsApp group so that we can share lawnmowers and trips to the recycling centre is probably more useful political activity than voting for any of this lot.
Personally I think voting (in the UK at least) always makes some small difference.
Yes, voting for a party that you believe in, whether SNP, LD, Green or UKIP, does tend to make the two major parties take notice and nudge their policy in that direction. Somewhat destructively in the case of Brexit, but it does have effect.
Indeed UKIP are an excellent example of this. Who can deny the impact they have had on British politics? Even though probably >99.9% of votes cast for them was 'wasted' in the sense that it did not lead to a UKIP MP.
Mr. Cabinet, not to worry. Corbyn's love of Venezuelan socialism may see him take a page out of Maduro's book. Easier to win elections if you ban those pesky Tories from standing.
Labour NEC nominations so far - the left slate leading the right slate by 2-1ish, but Ann Black ahead of both: suspect she will get a seat from people weary of block votes. My CLP (which is not predictably left or right) met last night and decided to endorse nobody - I argued (explicitly speaking as a Momentum member but with an inclination to vote for Ann rather than the pure slate) that we didn't know most of the candidates, and should trust our members to read their pitches and make an intelligent decision, rather than try (probably ineffectively) to marshal them all in one direction or another. The meeting unanimously agreed.
These slates of candidates just do my head in. We should be electing the 9 candidates best able to hold down a place on the NEC and make a useful contribution to its work. Not nine donkeys with a big "M" on their lapel.
Just like electing a CLP Chair and Sec because of their ideology. And then discovering half way through the next meeting that they are both a bit crap at the job.
Mr. Cabinet, not to worry. Corbyn's love of Venezuelan socialism may see him take a page out of Maduro's book. Easier to win elections if you ban those pesky Tories from standing.
Labour NEC nominations so far - the left slate leading the right slate by 2-1ish, but Ann Black ahead of both: suspect she will get a seat from people weary of block votes. My CLP (which is not predictably left or right) met last night and decided to endorse nobody - I argued (explicitly speaking as a Momentum member but with an inclination to vote for Ann rather than the pure slate) that we didn't know most of the candidates, and should trust our members to read their pitches and make an intelligent decision, rather than try (probably ineffectively) to marshal them all in one direction or another. The meeting unanimously agreed.
These slates of candidates just do my head in. We should be electing the 9 candidates best able to hold down a place on the NEC and make a useful contribution to its work. Not nine donkeys with a big "M" on their lapel.
Just like electing a CLP Chair and Sec because of their ideology. And then discovering half way through the next meeting that they are both a bit crap at the job.
Yeah, that's what we thought at our CLP (which has a Blairite Chair and a Momentum Secretary (me)). The tendency to vote monolithically for slates was a reaction to the Corbyn-PLP confrontation: it seemed important to a lot of us to elect an NEC that would not try to undermine the leadership. Now that's largely subsided, quite a few of us on the left of the party are not that bothered, and it seems only fair to new candidates in particular to give them the chance to put their case. I'll probably mostly vote Momentum as I don't want to re-create a divided NEC but I'll read what everyone says and keep open the possibility of spreading it around a bit.
Labour NEC nominations so far - the left slate leading the right slate by 2-1ish, but Ann Black ahead of both: suspect she will get a seat from people weary of block votes. My CLP (which is not predictably left or right) met last night and decided to endorse nobody - I argued (explicitly speaking as a Momentum member but with an inclination to vote for Ann rather than the pure slate) that we didn't know most of the candidates, and should trust our members to read their pitches and make an intelligent decision, rather than try (probably ineffectively) to marshal them all in one direction or another. The meeting unanimously agreed.
These slates of candidates just do my head in. We should be electing the 9 candidates best able to hold down a place on the NEC and make a useful contribution to its work. Not nine donkeys with a big "M" on their lapel.
Just like electing a CLP Chair and Sec because of their ideology. And then discovering half way through the next meeting that they are both a bit crap at the job.
Yeah, that's what we thought at our CLP (which has a Blairite Chair and a Momentum Secretary (me)). The tendency to vote monolithically for slates was a reaction to the Corbyn-PLP confrontation: it seemed important to a lot of us to elect an NEC that would not try to undermine the leadership. Now that's largely subsided, quite a few of us on the left of the party are not that bothered, and it seems only fair to new candidates in particular to give them the chance to put their case. I'll probably mostly vote Momentum as I don't want to re-create a divided NEC but I'll read what everyone says and keep open the possibility of spreading it around a bit.
The slates and the party-within-a-party stuff are hugely damaging to Labour. They should be phased out completely.
Hmm I disagree, with the exception of one or two Lab-Tory battles in Scotland it doesn't matter if the SNP or Labour win the seats. Both back Corbyn for PM.
I agree. It only takes Labour to win 15 seats off the Conservatives in England and say hello to Prime Minister Corbyn.
Indeed, were the SNP to resurge to their 2015 levels, Labour might only need to stand still in England and Wales.
15 seats *net*
It’s unlikely that RBKC will re-elect the current MP, for example
Hmm I disagree, with the exception of one or two Lab-Tory battles in Scotland it doesn't matter if the SNP or Labour win the seats. Both back Corbyn for PM.
I agree. It only takes Labour to win 15 seats off the Conservatives in England and say hello to Prime Minister Corbyn.
Indeed, were the SNP to resurge to their 2015 levels, Labour might only need to stand still in England and Wales.
15 seats *net*
It’s unlikely that RBKC will re-elect the current MP, for example
You don't think she might benefit from the first term incumbency bonus that many new MPs get?
The guy that directed Last Jedi has been given another trilogy to write and direct...
If Han Solo flops due to the damage The Last Jedi has done to the IP (and preliminary Thursday preview data looks a disaster in US) he'll be out of the door, IMO
It is classic Lynton Crosby scare Tactics from some of the Tories on this thread to suggest that Labour only needs to take 15 seats from the Conservatives to ensure that Corbyn becomes p.m. That would make it CON 303 seats to Labour 277. In these circumstances I doubt if the Lib Dems would go in with labour particularly one led by Jeremy Corbyn with all his issues relating to anti-semitism and brexit
@AlastairMeeks a Tory? Selling a classic Crosby scare tactic?
If Han Solo flops due to the damage The Last Jedi has done to the IP (and preliminary Thursday preview data looks a disaster in US) he'll be out of the door, IMO
The directors's commentary on Last Jedi is 2 hours of "This scene is better than you think because..."
What does "Hold Russia legally responsible" actually mean? Are they planning to sue somebody?
The decision of both the Netherlands and Australia was announced in a statement from the Dutch cabinet.
"On the basis of the [joint international team's] conclusions, the Netherlands and Australia are now convinced that Russia is responsible for the deployment of the Buk installation that was used to down MH17," Dutch foreign minister Stef Blok said.
"The government is now taking the next step by formally holding Russia accountable."
The statement added, however, that holding a nation state responsible for a breach of international law would involve "a complex legal process".
Australia and the Netherlands have asked Russia to enter talks as a first step, but held out the prospect of taking the case to an international court.
Mr. Gin, I never got around to seeing The Last Jedi. Looks like a decision of masterly inactivity on my part
Imagine having to listen to radiohead live at Glastonbury combined with the worst of may, brown and corbyn speeches on repeat for 24hrs...That is preferable to having to watch the last Jedi again.
Mr. Cabinet, not to worry. Corbyn's love of Venezuelan socialism may see him take a page out of Maduro's book. Easier to win elections if you ban those pesky Tories from standing.
Great - so we can work off the basis that a lower bound of 90,000 people will be disenfranchised at the next election. Then we can estimate how many people won't even bother going to the polling station etc. etc.
A small price to pay to ensure the one case of convicted impersonation out of 28 allegations from the previous general election is dealt with.
In the end, voters usually want to give the other side a go after a bit.
I have reached that point myself. Time to vote for Corbyn.
Yes: a pro-Russian anti-semitic government is exactly what we need to draw the poison of Brexit.........
I do not like the potential scenario, but neither do I like the current puppet govt lurching around in fear of a few dozen xenophobic right wing loons in their own ranks.
Corbyn is a potential screw up. The current govt is s proven screwup.
Corbyn is a proven screw up. His reaction to the Skripal poisoning, Assad using chemical weapons and anti-semitism in his party show that. Having him in charge will make post-Brexit Britain very much worse than it might otherwise be. Abolishing capitalism for socialism, as his Chancellor recently reiterated was his aim, is actively malicious and deeply damaging to my childrens’ futures.
There are no good choices here. Personally, I will no longer tolerate the current government. The system needs a good shake up for its own good even though it will be painful. The current government is already damaging everyone's future including my children's - I will not endorse such a shower by voting for them.
That only leaves one choice however distasteful
I won’t cross this bridge myself, but the PB Tories need to ask themselves just why Corbynism is now mainstream for anyone under the age of 50.
Mr. Cabinet, not to worry. Corbyn's love of Venezuelan socialism may see him take a page out of Maduro's book. Easier to win elections if you ban those pesky Tories from standing.
Great - so we can work off the basis that a lower bound of 90,000 people will be disenfranchised at the next election. Then we can estimate how many people won't even bother going to the polling station etc. etc.
A small price to pay to ensure the one case of convicted impersonation out of 28 allegations from the previous general election is dealt with.
Wasn’t turnout in the test sites about the same as usual?
Mr. Topping, Carney dropped rates because he believed his own wrongness. Then had to raise them. Then got his forward guidance wrong.
Nah Morris. While I bow to your expertise on monetary policy, I contend that Carney dropped rates because in his mind was this, from 30 years previously:
“The Federal Reserve, consistent with its responsibilities as the Nation's central bank, affirmed today its readiness to serve as a source of liquidity to support the economic and financial system”
Tuesday 20th October, 1987.
It was a poor decision by someone what has disappointed as Guv’nor
Mr. Topping, Carney dropped rates because he believed his own wrongness. Then had to raise them. Then got his forward guidance wrong.
Nah Morris. While I bow to your expertise on monetary policy, I contend that Carney dropped rates because in his mind was this, from 30 years previously:
“The Federal Reserve, consistent with its responsibilities as the Nation's central bank, affirmed today its readiness to serve as a source of liquidity to support the economic and financial system”
Tuesday 20th October, 1987.
It was a poor decision by someone what has disappointed as Guv’nor
Disagree. It was a backstop and despooked the markets.
Mr. P, commentaries can be very interesting. Some are absolutely cracking (some GoT DVDs have great combinations of actors/directors) others very tedious. Wasn't an especial fan of the LoTR commentaries, might've been because of too many cooks.
I don't partake myself, but there's a thingummyjig whereby people record radio, as it were, commentaries of films etc, which you watched muted whilst listening to their witty or insightful remarks.
Mr. Topping, Carney dropped rates because he believed his own wrongness. Then had to raise them. Then got his forward guidance wrong.
Nah Morris. While I bow to your expertise on monetary policy, I contend that Carney dropped rates because in his mind was this, from 30 years previously:
“The Federal Reserve, consistent with its responsibilities as the Nation's central bank, affirmed today its readiness to serve as a source of liquidity to support the economic and financial system”
Tuesday 20th October, 1987.
It was a poor decision by someone what has disappointed as Guv’nor
Disagree. It was a backstop and despooked the markets.
They waited until August to do it. Coincidentally, waiting until August had the effect of not taking the edge off of August's RPI figure - the figure which is used for setting the increase in rail fares.
I presume there must have been some tougher questions asked of Ken at the hearing? That bit that Theo Usher has posted is just Russell Cartwright getting him to agree that it's all a Tory smear campaign (presumably with the help of their media 'mogul' friends..)
In the end, voters usually want to give the other side a go after a bit.
I have reached that point myself. Time to vote for Corbyn.
Yes: a pro-Russian anti-semitic government is exactly what we need to draw the poison of Brexit.........
I do not like the potential scenario, but neither do I like the current puppet govt lurching around in fear of a few dozen xenophobic right wing loons in their own ranks.
Corbyn is a potential screw up. The current govt is s proven screwup.
Corbyn is a proven screw up. His reaction to the Skripal poisoning, Assad using chemical weapons and anti-semitism in his party show that. Having him in charge will make post-Brexit Britain very much worse than it might otherwise be. Abolishing capitalism for socialism, as his Chancellor recently reiterated was his aim, is actively malicious and deeply damaging to my childrens’ futures.
There are no good choices here. Personally, I will no longer tolerate the current government. The system needs a good shake up for its own good even though it will be painful. The current government is already damaging everyone's future including my children's - I will not endorse such a shower by voting for them.
That only leaves one choice however distasteful
I won’t cross this bridge myself, but the PB Tories need to ask themselves just why Corbynism is now mainstream for anyone under the age of 50.
That's easy:-
- Brexit - Student debt - The cost of housing - Stagnating wages - The NHS and worries over social care - Greedy companies taking the piss out of consumers - Banks: TSB, pensions misspelling to Tata steel workers and too many other examples to list here - People at the top not taking responsibility for their actions - Some Tories sounding as if they'd like to repeal the 1832 Reform Act
etc etc
Criticising and opposing are easy. Creating solutions and resolving problems are hard. Those who think that Corbynism is the answer need to ask themselves whether Corbyn really does have the - or any - solutions to any of these problems.
Mr. Topping, Carney dropped rates because he believed his own wrongness. Then had to raise them. Then got his forward guidance wrong.
Nah Morris. While I bow to your expertise on monetary policy, I contend that Carney dropped rates because in his mind was this, from 30 years previously:
“The Federal Reserve, consistent with its responsibilities as the Nation's central bank, affirmed today its readiness to serve as a source of liquidity to support the economic and financial system”
Tuesday 20th October, 1987.
It was a poor decision by someone what has disappointed as Guv’nor
Disagree. It was a backstop and despooked the markets.
They waited until August to do it. Coincidentally, waiting until August had the effect of not taking the edge off of August's RPI figure - the figure which is used for setting the increase in rail fares.
In an age of 24-hour news, people want the economy to behave, demonstrably, in a bite-sized digestible time frame, whereas it of course doesn't. I see nothing wrong, and a lot right, with waiting and seeing, not acting immediately, and taking a view after some consideration.
I realise we are all experts on PB, but this inclination to jump to criticism of actual experts when their decisions don't coincide with or support the particular point we happen to be making, is very curious.
Hmm I disagree, with the exception of one or two Lab-Tory battles in Scotland it doesn't matter if the SNP or Labour win the seats. Both back Corbyn for PM.
I agree. It only takes Labour to win 15 seats off the Conservatives in England and say hello to Prime Minister Corbyn.
Indeed, were the SNP to resurge to their 2015 levels, Labour might only need to stand still in England and Wales.
15 seats *net*
It’s unlikely that RBKC will re-elect the current MP, for example
You don't think she might benefit from the first term incumbency bonus that many new MPs get?
That arises from being a hard worker and people approving of the way they represent the community in public
All she’s been noted for is being rude about a couple of her constituents
Mr. Cabinet, not to worry. Corbyn's love of Venezuelan socialism may see him take a page out of Maduro's book. Easier to win elections if you ban those pesky Tories from standing.
Bit hypocritical coming from the party that implemented voter identification for over a million people in Northern Ireland. Have you been campaigning to repeal Labour's Electoral Fraud (Northern Ireland) Act 2002? Thought not.
Great - so we can work off the basis that a lower bound of 90,000 people will be disenfranchised at the next election.
No.
The people who were not able to vote at the trial were not able to prove they were eligible
We don't know how many would have been eligible if they could prove it
EDITed for clarity: We don't know how many ineligible people tried to vote
This is true.
If you want to estimate then: 28 allegations nationally vs. how many hundreds of thousands of people without the right identification + presumably many more who just forgot and couldn't be bothered to go back and get it.
Mr. Cabinet, not to worry. Corbyn's love of Venezuelan socialism may see him take a page out of Maduro's book. Easier to win elections if you ban those pesky Tories from standing.
Bit hypocritical coming from the party that implemented voter identification for over a million people in Northern Ireland. Have you been campaigning to repeal Labour's Electoral Fraud (Northern Ireland) Act 2002? Thought not.
Northern Ireland had evidence of a problem. The UK doesn't.
In the end, voters usually want to give the other side a go after a bit.
I have reached that point myself. Time to vote for Corbyn.
Yes: a pro-Russian anti-semitic government is exactly what we need to draw the poison of Brexit.........
I do not like the potential scenario, but neither do I like the current puppet govt lurching around in fear of a few dozen xenophobic right wing loons in their own ranks.
Corbyn is a potential screw up. The current govt is s proven screwup.
Corbyn is a proven screw up. His reaction to the Skripal poisoning, Assad using chemical weapons and anti-semitism in his party show that. Having him in charge will make post-Brexit Britain very much worse than it might otherwise be. Abolishing capitalism for socialism, as his Chancellor recently reiterated was his aim, is actively malicious and deeply damaging to my childrens’ futures.
There are no good choices here. Personally, I will no longer tolerate the current government. The system needs a good shake up for its own good even though it will be painful. The current government is already damaging everyone's future including my children's - I will not endorse such a shower by voting for them.
That only leaves one choice however distasteful
I won’t cross this bridge myself, but the PB Tories need to ask themselves just why Corbynism is now mainstream for anyone under the age of 50.
That's easy:-
- Brexit - Student debt - The cost of housing - Stagnating wages - The NHS and worries over social care - Greedy companies taking the piss out of consumers - Banks: TSB, pensions misspelling to Tata steel workers and too many other examples to list here - People at the top not taking responsibility for their actions - Some Tories sounding as if they'd like to repeal the 1832 Reform Act
etc etc
Criticising and opposing are easy. Creating solutions and resolving problems are hard. Those who think that Corbynism is the answer need to ask themselves whether Corbyn really does have the - or any - solutions to any of these problems.
This question is never really asked about the opposition save until the GE campaign.
Mr. Topping, Carney dropped rates because he believed his own wrongness. Then had to raise them. Then got his forward guidance wrong.
Nah Morris. While I bow to your expertise on monetary policy, I contend that Carney dropped rates because in his mind was this, from 30 years previously:
“The Federal Reserve, consistent with its responsibilities as the Nation's central bank, affirmed today its readiness to serve as a source of liquidity to support the economic and financial system”
Tuesday 20th October, 1987.
It was a poor decision by someone what has disappointed as Guv’nor
Disagree. It was a backstop and despooked the markets.
They waited until August to do it. Coincidentally, waiting until August had the effect of not taking the edge off of August's RPI figure - the figure which is used for setting the increase in rail fares.
I realise we are all experts on PB, but this inclination to jump to criticism of actual experts when their decisions don't coincide with or support the particular point we happen to be making, is very curious.
Great - so we can work off the basis that a lower bound of 90,000 people will be disenfranchised at the next election.
No.
The people who were not able to vote at the trial were not able to prove they were eligible
We don't know how many would have been eligible if they could prove it
EDITed for clarity: We don't know how many ineligible people tried to vote
This is true.
If you want to estimate then: 28 allegations nationally vs. how many hundreds of thousands of people without the right identification + presumably many more who just forgot and couldn't be bothered to go back and get it.
And how many people got away with out being spotted?
Fundamentally this isn’t about numbers.
My view is that the democratic process is sacrosanct and it is reasonable to require people to prove they have the right to vote.
It may or may not substantially reduce fraud (if tighten up postal voting as well) but it’s about risk mitigation. Applying the precautionary principle
Mr. Topping, Carney dropped rates because he believed his own wrongness. Then had to raise them. Then got his forward guidance wrong.
Nah Morris. While I bow to your expertise on monetary policy, I contend that Carney dropped rates because in his mind was this, from 30 years previously:
“The Federal Reserve, consistent with its responsibilities as the Nation's central bank, affirmed today its readiness to serve as a source of liquidity to support the economic and financial system”
Tuesday 20th October, 1987.
It was a poor decision by someone what has disappointed as Guv’nor
Disagree. It was a backstop and despooked the markets.
They waited until August to do it. Coincidentally, waiting until August had the effect of not taking the edge off of August's RPI figure - the figure which is used for setting the increase in rail fares.
I realise we are all experts on PB, but this inclination to jump to criticism of actual experts when their decisions don't coincide with or support the particular point we happen to be making, is very curious.
Those who can do, those who can't comment on PB.
Lowering interest rates and providing liquidity to the market are two entirly different things.
Hmm I disagree, with the exception of one or two Lab-Tory battles in Scotland it doesn't matter if the SNP or Labour win the seats. Both back Corbyn for PM.
I agree. It only takes Labour to win 15 seats off the Conservatives in England and say hello to Prime Minister Corbyn.
Indeed, were the SNP to resurge to their 2015 levels, Labour might only need to stand still in England and Wales.
15 seats *net*
It’s unlikely that RBKC will re-elect the current MP, for example
You don't think she might benefit from the first term incumbency bonus that many new MPs get?
Lol - just the right amount of straight/sarcasm there.
Mr. Topping, Carney dropped rates because he believed his own wrongness. Then had to raise them. Then got his forward guidance wrong.
Nah Morris. While I bow to your expertise on monetary policy, I contend that Carney dropped rates because in his mind was this, from 30 years previously:
“The Federal Reserve, consistent with its responsibilities as the Nation's central bank, affirmed today its readiness to serve as a source of liquidity to support the economic and financial system”
Tuesday 20th October, 1987.
It was a poor decision by someone what has disappointed as Guv’nor
Disagree. It was a backstop and despooked the markets.
They waited until August to do it. Coincidentally, waiting until August had the effect of not taking the edge off of August's RPI figure - the figure which is used for setting the increase in rail fares.
I realise we are all experts on PB, but this inclination to jump to criticism of actual experts when their decisions don't coincide with or support the particular point we happen to be making, is very curious.
Those who can do, those who can't comment on PB.
Lowering interest rates and providing liquidity to the market are two entirly different things.
Has a bank ever raised rates and gone for more QE at a meeting anywhere in the world, ever ?
Looks like curtains for Rajoy and possibly the PP to be replaced as largest party by Ciudadanos. I'd be muy contento! Could also do for PSOE so there's a double bonus. However, all based on the polls which here in Spain make the UK ones look reliable!
I heard Richard Leonard on the radio this morning, a somewhat rare turn of events. In fairness he exceeded my expectations. He largely spoke in complete sentences, for example. Kezia was hardly the guiding light of the nation but she had a much, much higher media profile than Leonard has achieved to date. Labour in Scotland seem to have very little to say.
To give an example, he was pointing out this morning that Scotland currently has a 9% fiscal deficit compared with 2.4% for the UK as a whole. When a lefty Labour leader is reduced to talking about the adverse consequences of deficits something is far wrong.
Comments
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/george-osborne-finds-he-has-time-for-yet-another-job-hc5lbwg2f
If the Tories gain seats in the next election, then they will form the next Government.
If Corbyn has gained seats (even a modest number), then he will be seen as the winner of the election, and he will lead the next Government.
For the LibDems/SNP to force a change of Labour leader would need a demoralised Labour party to have made almost zero advance, and the Tories to have lost seats. How does that even happen?
In my opinion, Scotland will follow the path of Quebec after its independence referendum. The next election will probably see significant Labour gains in Scotland.
(This is not wish fulfilment, I think the SNP has been good for Scotland and the Labour Party has in general not been good for Scotland).
My email inbox is a joke over the last 24 hours.
What I mean is, if you ain't got much of anything, how exactly would an alternative economic strategy make it worse as far as you perceive?
"Unfortunately for [Bank of England governor Mark] Carney and his fellow Monetary Policy Committee members, there has been no such upwards revision today and while there's still the final reading to come, it is unlikely we see much improvement there."
https://twitter.com/AlexInAir/status/999937094528176128
Incidentally, other gamers here may wish to know that John Bain (better known as TotalBiscuit) has passed away (cancer). RIP.
The Bank of England could pump more stimulus into Britain's economy if this year's Brexit negotiations result in a bad deal, governor Mark Carney said this evening.
Another round of asset inflation ?
And hence, there was precious little short term impact on the economy, currency aside. Longer term? Well we are seeing that play out now.
Net result? My savings account, such as it is, got an immediate rate cut, but not an immediate rate increase.
Mr. Ace, indeed, such is the wickedness of coalitions.
“The Federal Reserve, consistent with its responsibilities as the Nation's central bank, affirmed today its readiness to serve as a source of liquidity to support the economic and financial system”
Tuesday 20th October, 1987.
Joining our street’s WhatsApp group so that we can share lawnmowers and trips to the recycling centre is probably more useful political activity than voting for any of this lot.
https://order-order.com/2018/05/25/tough-labour-questions-ken-full/
Useless though Great Uncle Vince might be, and he is, I regard a vote for the LibDems as the least worst option.
https://labourlist.org/2018/05/labours-nec-race-the-full-list-of-clp-nominations-so-far-2/
The LDs then act to get rid of a Tory government.
Their voters are then alienated????
4,000 people disenfranchised in the pilot and the govt views that as a success.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/local-election-voter-id-trial-pilot-turned-away-a8336886.html
Just like electing a CLP Chair and Sec because of their ideology. And then discovering half way through the next meeting that they are both a bit crap at the job.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-44197338
http://variety.com/2018/film/news/star-wars-boba-fett-movie-1202821798
It’s unlikely that RBKC will re-elect the current MP, for example
Mr. rkrkrk, 4,000? Or 338?
https://twitter.com/AEHALL1983/status/998963971586748418
If you're told to turn up with ID and don't bother, whose fault is that? Why is voter ID fine for Northern Ireland but abhorrent for England?
Wonders will never cease
"On the basis of the [joint international team's] conclusions, the Netherlands and Australia are now convinced that Russia is responsible for the deployment of the Buk installation that was used to down MH17," Dutch foreign minister Stef Blok said.
"The government is now taking the next step by formally holding Russia accountable."
The statement added, however, that holding a nation state responsible for a breach of international law would involve "a complex legal process".
Australia and the Netherlands have asked Russia to enter talks as a first step, but held out the prospect of taking the case to an international court.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-44252150
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-44250056
A small price to pay to ensure the one case of convicted impersonation out of 28 allegations from the previous general election is dealt with.
The people who were not able to vote at the trial were not able to prove they were eligible
We don't know how many would have been eligible if they could prove itEDITed for clarity: We don't know how many ineligible people tried to vote
Edit: I like this article and yes it is him saying it. https://express.co.uk/finance/city/770195/Carney-says-Bank-of-England-helped-save-UK-economy-after-Brexit-vote
Mr. P, commentaries can be very interesting. Some are absolutely cracking (some GoT DVDs have great combinations of actors/directors) others very tedious. Wasn't an especial fan of the LoTR commentaries, might've been because of too many cooks.
I don't partake myself, but there's a thingummyjig whereby people record radio, as it were, commentaries of films etc, which you watched muted whilst listening to their witty or insightful remarks.
That's easy:-
- Brexit
- Student debt
- The cost of housing
- Stagnating wages
- The NHS and worries over social care
- Greedy companies taking the piss out of consumers
- Banks: TSB, pensions misspelling to Tata steel workers and too many other examples to list here
- People at the top not taking responsibility for their actions
- Some Tories sounding as if they'd like to repeal the 1832 Reform Act
etc etc
Criticising and opposing are easy. Creating solutions and resolving problems are hard. Those who think that Corbynism is the answer need to ask themselves whether Corbyn really does have the - or any - solutions to any of these problems.
I realise we are all experts on PB, but this inclination to jump to criticism of actual experts when their decisions don't coincide with or support the particular point we happen to be making, is very curious.
All she’s been noted for is being rude about a couple of her constituents
If you want to estimate then:
28 allegations nationally vs. how many hundreds of thousands of people without the right identification + presumably many more who just forgot and couldn't be bothered to go back and get it.
Exchanging SNP seats with Labour seats does not change the position. Labour has to win seats from the Conservatives in England to form a government.
Is it capitalism?
Fundamentally this isn’t about numbers.
My view is that the democratic process is sacrosanct and it is reasonable to require people to prove they have the right to vote.
It may or may not substantially reduce fraud (if tighten up postal voting as well) but it’s about risk mitigation. Applying the precautionary principle
Lab gains from SNP have no impact on whether Jezza becomes PM IMO
Although with their support for anti-Semites I might have to revisit that opinion
To give an example, he was pointing out this morning that Scotland currently has a 9% fiscal deficit compared with 2.4% for the UK as a whole. When a lefty Labour leader is reduced to talking about the adverse consequences of deficits something is far wrong.