On the Jim Murphy rule (the more opponents have a go at them, the more they fear him), out of the Lab candidates is Starmer getting the most pelters/laughably flimsy bollox from the usual suspects?
Looks like it to me. I know Guido is a standing joke to many, but there is still a qualitative difference between its stories which might have some teeth, even if only to encourage the right, and the 'he had an Aga!' type stories which are just trying too hard.
Boris ultimately decides and he is clear, no indyref2 while he is PM under any circumstances as per the Tory manifesto
You Falangists love a strong man dontcha?
IIRC some research in modern times suggests pretty much every group, from liberals to conservatives from left to right, has a worrying tendency to like strongman tactics and leaders, or at least more of such groups like such strongman styles that we'd like to think.
I was on an unscheduled diversion last week with Emirates, absolutely fantastic service and would recommend them to anyone travelling to the Far East, Asia and Africa.
I mostly use KLM for European routes these days, BA have dropped the ball and need to invest more in service.
Feels like RLB and Nandy have decided to swap approaches for the day.
Labour's "compromise position" on Brexit "didn't satisfy our communities and meant that we weren't trusted," she told the BBC's political editor, Laura Kuenssberg.
And, she added: "We didn't tackle anti-Semitism and we weren't trusted to deal with that issue within our own party."
Can you imagine Nandy dealing with Macron, Putin, Trump, Xi, Merkel, Modi, Trudeau etc though? I can't really, she would be way out of her depth as PM, as to be fair would Long Bailey, Starmer wouldn't even if I disagree with him
Hell yeah - I can certainly imagine her doing that.
I think it's bollox, all of that "Putin would eat XYZ alive" type thing.
Sexist too, I sense - Big Horrid Men bullying Little Lisa - but I can't prove it in your case obviously. I bet Thatcher got plenty of that pre 79.
I was on an unscheduled diversion last week with Emirates, absolutely fantastic service and would recommend them to anyone travelling to the Far East, Asia and Africa.
I mostly use KLM for European routes these days, BA have dropped the ball and need to invest more in service.
It's cynical but the fact BA charge for food on EU flights means they are competing with Easyjet and no longer with the other full service / flag airlines.
Feels like RLB and Nandy have decided to swap approaches for the day.
Labour's "compromise position" on Brexit "didn't satisfy our communities and meant that we weren't trusted," she told the BBC's political editor, Laura Kuenssberg.
And, she added: "We didn't tackle anti-Semitism and we weren't trusted to deal with that issue within our own party."
Desperate fight to get into 2nd place and then somehow win on later rounds.
Nice try but if she wants to sell a message of aspiration her practical choice is between being social democrat Labour or a Tory.
The whole point of the left project is about not having aspirations, because instead you are a victim of something or other and it is someone else's fault.
Ok, I'm at the end of my relationship with BA/OneWorld. What's the fucking point of gold status of the customer service is still absolutely shite. Flight cancelled, it happens, rebooked, fine, business not available, not fine, customer service complete and utter shite.
Honestly, the airline has completely gone down the pan and I'm going to use whatever internal tools I have available to get us switched to some other flight program where I can collect some other points like delta miles.
I have 32,500 lifetime tier points, so I'm locked in
Wow, you're not far off GGL. I'm at about 9k so it's not such a big deal for me. A loss but if they sack Alex Cruz and replace him with someone who understands not to piss off the customers then I'll come back but this is just unacceptable.
I've got Italy, Japan twice and India/Bali booked. After that I'll be looking for some other airline/alliance combo.
Now Wille Walsh has gone IAG might get a new CEO not just focused on costcutting
I flew BA under Willie Walsh, it was never this bad. Alex Cruz has completed ruined what was a barely functioning business airline. BA had its faults under Walsh, but it's completely shit now under Cruz.
Yet in 2009 BA made a £230 million annual loss, by 2018 that was a £1.9 billion annual profit, cost cutting was needed and ensured the airline's survival even if it can now perhaps ease off and reinvest in customer perks
For europe (when I had to fly with them) the thing that annoyed me was a seat pitch that didn't let me use my laptop comfortable. Yes that inch was probably 1 more row of seats in economy but it lost them probably 10 return flights last year.
Economy is all about cramming them in cheaply, if you want extra space for your laptop cough up for business or first class
The trouble is I'm usually too drunk in first class to get any work done.
Well all the more profit for them then on your drinks bill
Can you imagine Nandy dealing with Macron, Putin, Trump, Xi, Merkel, Modi, Trudeau etc though? I can't really, she would be way out of her depth as PM, as to be fair would Long Bailey, Starmer wouldn't even if I disagree with him
Hell yeah - I can certainly imagine her doing that.
I think it's bollox, all of that "Putin would eat XYZ alive" type thing.
Sexist too, I sense - Big Horrid Men bullying Little Lisa - but I can't prove it in your case obviously. I bet Thatcher got plenty of that pre 79.
Thatcher was far brighter than Nandy with far more gravitas and charisma
Ok, I'm at the end of my relationship with BA/OneWorld. What's the fucking point of gold status of the customer service is still absolutely shite. Flight cancelled, it happens, rebooked, fine, business not available, not fine, customer service complete and utter shite.
Honestly, the airline has completely gone down the pan and I'm going to use whatever internal tools I have available to get us switched to some other flight program where I can collect some other points like delta miles.
Ok, I'm at the end of my relationship with BA/OneWorld. What's the fucking point of gold status of the customer service is still absolutely shite. Flight cancelled, it happens, rebooked, fine, business not available, not fine, customer service complete and utter shite.
Honestly, the airline has completely gone down the pan and I'm going to use whatever internal tools I have available to get us switched to some other flight program where I can collect some other points like delta miles.
I have 32,500 lifetime tier points, so I'm locked in
Wow, you're not far off GGL. I'm at about 9k so it's not such a big deal for me. A loss but if they sack Alex Cruz and replace him with someone who understands not to piss off the customers then I'll come back but this is just unacceptable.
I've got Italy, Japan twice and India/Bali booked. After that I'll be looking for some other airline/alliance combo.
Now Wille Walsh has gone IAG might get a new CEO not just focused on costcutting
I flew BA under Willie Walsh, it was never this bad. Alex Cruz has completed ruined what was a barely functioning business airline. BA had its faults under Walsh, but it's completely shit now under Cruz.
Yet in 2009 BA made a £230 million annual loss, by 2018 that was a £1.9 billion annual profit, cost cutting was needed and ensured the airline's survival even if it can now perhaps ease off and reinvest in customer perks
For europe (when I had to fly with them) the thing that annoyed me was a seat pitch that didn't let me use my laptop comfortable. Yes that inch was probably 1 more row of seats in economy but it lost them probably 10 return flights last year.
Economy is all about cramming them in cheaply, if you want extra space for your laptop cough up for business or first class
The trouble is I'm usually too drunk in first class to get any work done.
Well all the more profit for them then on your drinks bill
The drinks are free in first class old bean
I think ‘included in the price’ might be a better way of putting it...
Five-Thirty Eight have updated their model of the Dem primary race. The key output is the table of probabilities of a given candidate getting at least 50% of delegates:
Biden 43% Sanders 20% No-one (i.e. contested convention) 15% Warren 14% Buttigieg 7% All others: Less than 1%
Ok, I'm at the end of my relationship with BA/OneWorld. What's the fucking point of gold status of the customer service is still absolutely shite. Flight cancelled, it happens, rebooked, fine, business not available, not fine, customer service complete and utter shite.
Honestly, the airline has completely gone down the pan and I'm going to use whatever internal tools I have available to get us switched to some other flight program where I can collect some other points like delta miles.
I have 32,500 lifetime tier points, so I'm locked in
Wow, you're not far off GGL. I'm at about 9k so it's not such a big deal for me. A loss but if they sack Alex Cruz and replace him with someone who understands not to piss off the customers then I'll come back but this is just unacceptable.
I've got Italy, Japan twice and India/Bali booked. After that I'll be looking for some other airline/alliance combo.
Now Wille Walsh has gone IAG might get a new CEO not just focused on costcutting
I flew BA under Willie Walsh, it was never this bad. Alex Cruz has completed ruined what was a barely functioning business airline. BA had its faults under Walsh, but it's completely shit now under Cruz.
Yet in 2009 BA made a £230 million annual loss, by 2018 that was a £1.9 billion annual profit, cost cutting was needed and ensured the airline's survival even if it can now perhaps ease off and reinvest in customer perks
For europe (when I had to fly with them) the thing that annoyed me was a seat pitch that didn't let me use my laptop comfortable. Yes that inch was probably 1 more row of seats in economy but it lost them probably 10 return flights last year.
Economy is all about cramming them in cheaply, if you want extra space for your laptop cough up for business or first class
The trouble is I'm usually too drunk in first class to get any work done.
Well all the more profit for them then on your drinks bill
The drinks are free in first class old bean
I think ‘included in the price’ might be a better way of putting it...
I'm curious how many support it because they think it would work reliably, and if that would change if they know it doesn't.
I don't see the issue with the unreliability of polygraph tests. You're not comparing it with a more reliable system, you're comparing it with nothing. Against nothing, it's great.
I was on an unscheduled diversion last week with Emirates, absolutely fantastic service and would recommend them to anyone travelling to the Far East, Asia and Africa.
I mostly use KLM for European routes these days, BA have dropped the ball and need to invest more in service.
It's cynical but the fact BA charge for food on EU flights means they are competing with Easyjet and no longer with the other full service / flag airlines.
But they want to charge prices like the full service carriers.
I'm curious how many support it because they think it would work reliably, and if that would change if they know it doesn't.
I don't see the issue with the unreliability of polygraph tests. You're not comparing it with a more reliable system, you're comparing it with nothing. Against nothing, it's great.
Not if it gives misleading answers, then it's worse than nothing.
Ok, I'm at the end of my relationship with BA/OneWorld. What's the fucking point of gold status of the customer service is still absolutely shite. Flight cancelled, it happens, rebooked, fine, business not available, not fine, customer service complete and utter shite.
Honestly, the airline has completely gone down the pan and I'm going to use whatever internal tools I have available to get us switched to some other flight program where I can collect some other points like delta miles.
Programme.
The perils of working for an international company...
Ok, I'm at the end of my relationship with BA/OneWorld. What's the fucking point of gold status of the customer service is still absolutely shite. Flight cancelled, it happens, rebooked, fine, business not available, not fine, customer service complete and utter shite.
Honestly, the airline has completely gone down the pan and I'm going to use whatever internal tools I have available to get us switched to some other flight program where I can collect some other points like delta miles.
I have 32,500 lifetime tier points, so I'm locked in
Wow, you're not far off GGL. I'm at about 9k so it's not such a big deal for me. A loss but if they sack Alex Cruz and replace him with someone who understands not to piss off the customers then I'll come back but this is just unacceptable.
I've got Italy, Japan twice and India/Bali booked. After that I'll be looking for some other airline/alliance combo.
Now Wille Walsh has gone IAG might get a new CEO not just focused on costcutting
I flew BA under Willie Walsh, it was never this bad. Alex Cruz has completed ruined what was a barely functioning business airline. BA had its faults under Walsh, but it's completely shit now under Cruz.
Yet in 2009 BA made a £230 million annual loss, by 2018 that was a £1.9 billion annual profit, cost cutting was needed and ensured the airline's survival even if it can now perhaps ease off and reinvest in customer perks
Nice try but if she wants to sell a message of aspiration her practical choice is between being social democrat Labour or a Tory.
The whole point of the left project is about not having aspirations, because instead you are a victim of something or other and it is someone else's fault.
I'm curious how many support it because they think it would work reliably, and if that would change if they know it doesn't.
I don't see the issue with the unreliability of polygraph tests. You're not comparing it with a more reliable system, you're comparing it with nothing. Against nothing, it's great.
And you can apply the results asymmetrically (a fail means you fail, a pass just means you move on to other tests).
I was on an unscheduled diversion last week with Emirates, absolutely fantastic service and would recommend them to anyone travelling to the Far East, Asia and Africa.
I mostly use KLM for European routes these days, BA have dropped the ball and need to invest more in service.
It's cynical but the fact BA charge for food on EU flights means they are competing with Easyjet and no longer with the other full service / flag airlines.
EasyJet’s product is not actually that bad compared to BA, but their schedules, connections and airport choices often leave a lot to be desired.
Feels like RLB and Nandy have decided to swap approaches for the day.
Labour's "compromise position" on Brexit "didn't satisfy our communities and meant that we weren't trusted," she told the BBC's political editor, Laura Kuenssberg.
And, she added: "We didn't tackle anti-Semitism and we weren't trusted to deal with that issue within our own party."
And yet on here, endlessly, it was stated that Labour's "compromise position" was a very canny high-wire act that the voters would love.
Especially in the north.
AND we were told off for laughing at the back of the class.
I'm curious how many support it because they think it would work reliably, and if that would change if they know it doesn't.
I don't see the issue with the unreliability of polygraph tests. You're not comparing it with a more reliable system, you're comparing it with nothing. Against nothing, it's great.
And you can apply the results asymmetrically (a fail means you fail, a pass just means you move on to other tests).
I’m told that a key problem with the polygraph test is that it’s failed regularly by the innocent.
Feels like RLB and Nandy have decided to swap approaches for the day.
Labour's "compromise position" on Brexit "didn't satisfy our communities and meant that we weren't trusted," she told the BBC's political editor, Laura Kuenssberg.
And, she added: "We didn't tackle anti-Semitism and we weren't trusted to deal with that issue within our own party."
And yet on here, endlessly, it was stated that Labour's "compromise position" was a very canny high-wire act that the voters would love.
Especially in the north.
AND we were told off for laughing at the back of the class.
Hey now, that's a bit unfair - I certainly took that position and was quite wrong and now look silly, but I don't remember the general view on here thinking it was a canny balancing act.
I'm curious how many support it because they think it would work reliably, and if that would change if they know it doesn't.
I don't see the issue with the unreliability of polygraph tests. You're not comparing it with a more reliable system, you're comparing it with nothing. Against nothing, it's great.
Not if it gives misleading answers, then it's worse than nothing.
No source of data is 100 percent reliable.
All data comes with error. Wikipedia comes with error. Encyclopedia Brittanica comes with error. pb.com comes with error. Gossip comes with error. BBC news comes with error.
Polygraph tests are no different to all the other sources of data.
Data are valuable, if you know or can model your errors (which in the case of polygraph tests are reasonably easy to model).
Five-Thirty Eight have updated their model of the Dem primary race. The key output is the table of probabilities of a given candidate getting at least 50% of delegates:
Biden 43% Sanders 20% No-one (i.e. contested convention) 15% Warren 14% Buttigieg 7% All others: Less than 1%
I'm curious how many support it because they think it would work reliably, and if that would change if they know it doesn't.
I don't see the issue with the unreliability of polygraph tests. You're not comparing it with a more reliable system, you're comparing it with nothing. Against nothing, it's great.
And you can apply the results asymmetrically (a fail means you fail, a pass just means you move on to other tests).
I’m told that a key problem with the polygraph test is that it’s failed regularly by the innocent.
Well since it won't be used on the innocent, I see no issue.
Feels like RLB and Nandy have decided to swap approaches for the day.
Labour's "compromise position" on Brexit "didn't satisfy our communities and meant that we weren't trusted," she told the BBC's political editor, Laura Kuenssberg.
And, she added: "We didn't tackle anti-Semitism and we weren't trusted to deal with that issue within our own party."
And yet on here, endlessly, it was stated that Labour's "compromise position" was a very canny high-wire act that the voters would love.
Especially in the north.
AND we were told off for laughing at the back of the class.
Hey now, that's a bit unfair - I certainly took that position and was quite wrong and now look silly, but I don't remember the general view on here thinking it was a canny balancing act.
I think the phrase would be a "small but vocal minority".
I'm curious how many support it because they think it would work reliably, and if that would change if they know it doesn't.
I don't see the issue with the unreliability of polygraph tests. You're not comparing it with a more reliable system, you're comparing it with nothing. Against nothing, it's great.
Not if it gives misleading answers, then it's worse than nothing.
No source of data is 100 percent reliable.
All data comes with error. Wikipedia comes with error. Encyclopedia Brittanica comes with error. pb.com comes with error. Gossip comes with error. BBC news comes with error.
Polygraph tests are no different to all the other sources of data.
Data are valuable, if you know or can model your errors (which in the case of polygraph tests are reasonably easy to model).
Not really. Some data are just too crap to bother with, and modelling errors doesn't help with discrete bits of information anyway. Your cleaned up polygraph data might tell you something useful about likely overall reoffending rates in your population when what you are after is guidance on individual cases.
"Encyclopedia Brittanica comes with error" is nicely self-referential.
Feels like RLB and Nandy have decided to swap approaches for the day.
Labour's "compromise position" on Brexit "didn't satisfy our communities and meant that we weren't trusted," she told the BBC's political editor, Laura Kuenssberg.
And, she added: "We didn't tackle anti-Semitism and we weren't trusted to deal with that issue within our own party."
And yet on here, endlessly, it was stated that Labour's "compromise position" was a very canny high-wire act that the voters would love.
Especially in the north.
AND we were told off for laughing at the back of the class.
Labour were more concerned about losing remain voters to the LDs than leavers to the Tories.
I'm curious how many support it because they think it would work reliably, and if that would change if they know it doesn't.
I don't see the issue with the unreliability of polygraph tests. You're not comparing it with a more reliable system, you're comparing it with nothing. Against nothing, it's great.
Not if it gives misleading answers, then it's worse than nothing.
No it isn't. If the needle doesn't move because the terrorist is as cool as a cucumber, you're in no worse a position than you would be without the test. And if it does move, when the person actually has truly reformed, it means they have a few more hurdles to overcome before they're trusted. Which I can live with if the results are broadly or even just largely accurate.
There was no perfect position for Labour on Brexit during the GE .
It was a case of the least worst outcome . I think they managed to find that least worst outcome . With a decent leader and more credible manifesto they would have done much better .
Corbyn was the main issue not their Brexit position .
Feels like RLB and Nandy have decided to swap approaches for the day.
Labour's "compromise position" on Brexit "didn't satisfy our communities and meant that we weren't trusted," she told the BBC's political editor, Laura Kuenssberg.
And, she added: "We didn't tackle anti-Semitism and we weren't trusted to deal with that issue within our own party."
And yet on here, endlessly, it was stated that Labour's "compromise position" was a very canny high-wire act that the voters would love.
Especially in the north.
AND we were told off for laughing at the back of the class.
Hey now, that's a bit unfair - I certainly took that position and was quite wrong and now look silly, but I don't remember the general view on here thinking it was a canny balancing act.
Kudos for putting your hand up. But the ones saying it was a canny balancing act fled the field of battle after the exit poll.....never to be heard of again.
Feels like RLB and Nandy have decided to swap approaches for the day.
Labour's "compromise position" on Brexit "didn't satisfy our communities and meant that we weren't trusted," she told the BBC's political editor, Laura Kuenssberg.
And, she added: "We didn't tackle anti-Semitism and we weren't trusted to deal with that issue within our own party."
And yet on here, endlessly, it was stated that Labour's "compromise position" was a very canny high-wire act that the voters would love.
Especially in the north.
AND we were told off for laughing at the back of the class.
Hey now, that's a bit unfair - I certainly took that position and was quite wrong and now look silly, but I don't remember the general view on here thinking it was a canny balancing act.
My own view was similar to your own , and whilst it failed to cut through electorally I still maintain that as a policy it was not so very different to that adopted by Harold Wilson at both 1974 elections. Labour had rejected Ted Heath's 1973 EEC entry terms and was committed to renegotiating before presenting the new terms to the people at a Referendum. However, at the time of both elections Wilson was not in a position to indicate what his recommendation would be.
Feels like RLB and Nandy have decided to swap approaches for the day.
Labour's "compromise position" on Brexit "didn't satisfy our communities and meant that we weren't trusted," she told the BBC's political editor, Laura Kuenssberg.
And, she added: "We didn't tackle anti-Semitism and we weren't trusted to deal with that issue within our own party."
And yet on here, endlessly, it was stated that Labour's "compromise position" was a very canny high-wire act that the voters would love.
Especially in the north.
AND we were told off for laughing at the back of the class.
Hey now, that's a bit unfair - I certainly took that position and was quite wrong and now look silly, but I don't remember the general view on here thinking it was a canny balancing act.
Kudos for putting your hand up. But the ones saying it was a canny balancing act fled the field of battle after the exit poll.....never to be heard of again.
I also remember when being told that the leave percentage in these Labour seats was high over 55% the answer came back that with the Labour vote at 60;40 remain there were enough Labour remain voters for Labour to hold these seats.
There was no perfect position for Labour on Brexit during the GE .
It was a case of the least worst outcome . I think they managed to find that least worst outcome . With a decent leader and more credible manifesto they would have done much better .
Corbyn was the main issue not their Brexit position .
I think the perfect position would have been renegotiating re-entry. Doing a repeat Cameron, but 'really meaning it'. Especially if they could have got a European leader to express support. Renegotiate re-entry, then put to the people, re-enter on our shiny new socialist Northern-friendly re-entry deal, or continue with Brexit. Makes much more sense than negotiating an exit deal that you don't want. Too late now happily.
There was no perfect position for Labour on Brexit during the GE .
It was a case of the least worst outcome . I think they managed to find that least worst outcome .
Yep. Terrible position - the only ones worse were all the possible alternatives.
It does make me wonder how Wilson avoided being taken apart by the Tories in 1974 in the same way.He was unable to answer the question as to what his recommendation would be. Moreover, Labour's 1974 Manifestos were more left wing than the 2019 version.
Maybe. For that large number of voters who think Labour needs a female leader, they are (realistically) going to be deciding between RLB and Lisa Nandy. And RLB has crashed in a week. And this is a long contest.
I'm back with Nandy now, Starmer as 2nd pref. She is VERY likable. Relatable. Ordinary in the best sense of that word. People will be able to imagine having a nice chinwag with her around the kitchen table. The question marks are charisma and intellect but to me she is starting to answer those. Her charisma is quiet, she wouldn't sell out the palladium, and her intellect is not showy, no ancient Greek allusions, no breathtaking philosophical insights, but I think it's all there nevertheless. I think she can rebuild that Red Wall without losing London. Which is the task at hand.
Lab should have gone EEA/EFTA they could have argued it was leaving and not really leaving. Playing their critics against each other.
Labour should have accepted May's Deal and watched the Conservatives rip themselves apart.
Corbyn would now be PM.
There was no Brexit policy Labour could have adopted that would have beaten the media, and the army of Tory spammers filling places like PB with memes and one-liners to crowd out criticism.
Lab should have gone EEA/EFTA they could have argued it was leaving and not really leaving. Playing their critics against each other.
Labour should have accepted May's Deal and watched the Conservatives rip themselves apart.
Corbyn would now be PM.
There was no Brexit policy Labour could have adopted that would have beaten the media, and the army of Tory spammers filling places like PB with memes and one-liners to crowd out criticism.
I'm curious how many support it because they think it would work reliably, and if that would change if they know it doesn't.
I don't see the issue with the unreliability of polygraph tests. You're not comparing it with a more reliable system, you're comparing it with nothing. Against nothing, it's great.
Not if it gives misleading answers, then it's worse than nothing.
No source of data is 100 percent reliable.
All data comes with error. Wikipedia comes with error. Encyclopedia Brittanica comes with error. pb.com comes with error. Gossip comes with error. BBC news comes with error.
Polygraph tests are no different to all the other sources of data.
Data are valuable, if you know or can model your errors (which in the case of polygraph tests are reasonably easy to model).
Could try Crystal Ball, I suppose. How would one model the errors on that?
Lab should have gone EEA/EFTA they could have argued it was leaving and not really leaving. Playing their critics against each other.
Labour should have accepted May's Deal and watched the Conservatives rip themselves apart.
Corbyn would now be PM.
There was no Brexit policy Labour could have adopted that would have beaten the media, and the army of Tory spammers filling places like PB with memes and one-liners to crowd out criticism.
It woz PB Spammers wot won it!!!
Seriously. Labour has to learn that they are not going to win another election until they stop threatening the wealth of billionaires. It's not the 1980s any more. Most media from Facebook all the way down to the Independent are controlled by a tiny number of unimaginably wealthy men, and apart from Zuckerberg their wealth comes not from the quality of their media product but from other sources.
Lab should have gone EEA/EFTA they could have argued it was leaving and not really leaving. Playing their critics against each other.
Labour should have accepted May's Deal and watched the Conservatives rip themselves apart.
Corbyn would now be PM.
There was no Brexit policy Labour could have adopted that would have beaten the media, and the army of Tory spammers filling places like PB with memes and one-liners to crowd out criticism.
To not decide, to sit painfully on the fence, exposes you to criticism from everyone. Blaming Tories is emotionally easier perhaps some self-analysis might be a more effective way forward.
Whilst this Brillo v Thornberry smackdown is tetchy, not sure it is quite the car crash 'gotcha' that Guido has sold it as.
Was just thinking the same until the issue of selective education came up.
Clearly going to a secondary modern didn’t stop her making it.
Nah, she’s doing fine.
I find Neil quite annoying really; he always presents as needlessly bad tempered.
I think Neil over does it sometimes, but it was an open goal and he didn’t miss. Hypocrisy on education is very easy for the voters to understand.
Will salt of the earth Sir Keir grant working class kids, maybe like his younger self, the chance to got to Grammars or maybe get the state to pay for their private schooling?
At last we move on from second referendums and revoke
We move on to Rejoin! Hallelujah!
(Not that we will ever rejoin.....)
When Boris finally loses power in the 2044 GE, it will be to the Federal Socialists who will win a landslide on a manifesto of joining the United States of Europe.
Whilst this Brillo v Thornberry smackdown is tetchy, not sure it is quite the car crash 'gotcha' that Guido has sold it as.
Was just thinking the same until the issue of selective education came up.
Clearly going to a secondary modern didn’t stop her making it.
Nah, she’s doing fine.
I find Neil quite annoying really; he always presents as needlessly bad tempered.
I think Neil over does it sometimes, but it was an open goal and he didn’t miss. Hypocrisy on education is very easy for the voters to understand.
Will salt of the earth Sir Keir grant working class kids, maybe like his younger self, the chance to got to Grammars or maybe get the state to pay for their private schooling?
We may find out on 4 March, would seem an obvious line of questioning from Brillo.
Feels like RLB and Nandy have decided to swap approaches for the day.
Labour's "compromise position" on Brexit "didn't satisfy our communities and meant that we weren't trusted," she told the BBC's political editor, Laura Kuenssberg.
And, she added: "We didn't tackle anti-Semitism and we weren't trusted to deal with that issue within our own party."
Says the MP who voted against adopting the internationally recognised definition of anti-semitism, one of the reasons why the party’s leadership - of which she was a member - was not trusted on the topic.
Clearly Mays deal for Remainers would have kept closer economic ties with the EU but still FOM rights would have gone .
And FOM as a Remainer was one of the best aspects of EU membership for me . Thankfully I can continue to enjoy that with my new EU passport . Thanks mum and dad !
I still don’t think much of the public realize that their FOM is ending , the debate has centered so much on FOM from the EU and not the other way round . Some are going to be in for a nasty shock when they realize they’ve lost that.
Clearly Mays deal for Remainers would have kept closer economic ties with the EU but still FOM rights would have gone .
And FOM as a Remainer was one of the best aspects of EU membership for me . Thankfully I can continue to enjoy that with my new EU passport . Thanks mum and dad !
I still don’t think much of the public realize that their FOM is ending , the debate has centered so much on FOM from the EU and not the other way round . Some are going to be in for a nasty shock when they realize they’ve lost that.
Queuing with the Russians at Alicante Airport while the Germans and Irish sail through immigration will be a drag.
Lab should have gone EEA/EFTA they could have argued it was leaving and not really leaving. Playing their critics against each other.
Labour should have accepted May's Deal and watched the Conservatives rip themselves apart.
Corbyn would now be PM.
There was no Brexit policy Labour could have adopted that would have beaten the media, and the army of Tory spammers filling places like PB with memes and one-liners to crowd out criticism.
It woz PB Spammers wot won it!!!
Seriously. Labour has to learn that they are not going to win another election until they stop threatening the wealth of billionaires. It's not the 1980s any more. Most media from Facebook all the way down to the Independent are controlled by a tiny number of unimaginably wealthy men, and apart from Zuckerberg their wealth comes not from the quality of their media product but from other sources.
I hope you're right, because Labour's never going to learn that lesson. Saying 'billionaires' to Labourites is like saying 'Pedigree Chum' to an undiscerning canine...
Ok, I'm at the end of my relationship with BA/OneWorld. What's the fucking point of gold status of the customer service is still absolutely shite. Flight cancelled, it happens, rebooked, fine, business not available, not fine, customer service complete and utter shite.
Honestly, the airline has completely gone down the pan and I'm going to use whatever internal tools I have available to get us switched to some other flight program where I can collect some other points like delta miles.
I have 32,500 lifetime tier points, so I'm locked in
Wow, you're not far off GGL. I'm at about 9k so it's not such a big deal for me. A loss but if they sack Alex Cruz and replace him with someone who understands not to piss off the customers then I'll come back but this is just unacceptable.
I've got Italy, Japan twice and India/Bali booked. After that I'll be looking for some other airline/alliance combo.
Now Wille Walsh has gone IAG might get a new CEO not just focused on costcutting
I flew BA under Willie Walsh, it was never this bad. Alex Cruz has completed ruined what was a barely functioning business airline. BA had its faults under Walsh, but it's completely shit now under Cruz.
Yet in 2009 BA made a £230 million annual loss, by 2018 that was a £1.9 billion annual profit, cost cutting was needed and ensured the airline's survival even if it can now perhaps ease off and reinvest in customer perks
Tbh, that doesn't bother me and 2009 was a very bad year for all airlines as corporates cut back business flights to save costs. It's a bad comparison. Additionally BA was a highly profitable airline well before 2019, yet they keep cutting away at what makes people want to fly with them.
For europe (when I had to fly with them) the thing that annoyed me was a seat pitch that didn't let me use my laptop comfortable. Yes that inch was probably 1 more row of seats in economy but it lost them probably 10 return flights last year.
Lab should have gone EEA/EFTA they could have argued it was leaving and not really leaving. Playing their critics against each other.
Labour should have accepted May's Deal and watched the Conservatives rip themselves apart.
Corbyn would now be PM.
There was no Brexit policy Labour could have adopted that would have beaten the media, and the army of Tory spammers filling places like PB with memes and one-liners to crowd out criticism.
It woz PB Spammers wot won it!!!
Seriously. Labour has to learn that they are not going to win another election until they stop threatening the wealth of billionaires. It's not the 1980s any more. Most media from Facebook all the way down to the Independent are controlled by a tiny number of unimaginably wealthy men, and apart from Zuckerberg their wealth comes not from the quality of their media product but from other sources.
I hope you're right, because Labour's never going to learn that lesson. Saying 'billionaires' to Labourites is like saying 'Pedigree Chum' to an undiscerning canine...
The threat to billionaires is uniquely problematic for PB Tories as they have the most to lose,, for the more modest earners amongst us, believe me, we don't feel sorry for high taxed billionaires at all.
At last we move on from second referendums and revoke
We move on to Rejoin! Hallelujah!
(Not that we will ever rejoin.....)
When Boris finally loses power in the 2044 GE, it will be to the Federal Socialists who will win a landslide on a manifesto of joining the United States of Europe.
I will rejoice from beyond the grave.
Either we'll be doing better than the EU, in which case there will be no appetite to rejoin, or we'll be doing worse, in which case there'll be no appetite to accept us.
Five-Thirty Eight have updated their model of the Dem primary race. The key output is the table of probabilities of a given candidate getting at least 50% of delegates:
Biden 43% Sanders 20% No-one (i.e. contested convention) 15% Warren 14% Buttigieg 7% All others: Less than 1%
Clearly Mays deal for Remainers would have kept closer economic ties with the EU but still FOM rights would have gone .
And FOM as a Remainer was one of the best aspects of EU membership for me . Thankfully I can continue to enjoy that with my new EU passport . Thanks mum and dad !
I still don’t think much of the public realize that their FOM is ending , the debate has centered so much on FOM from the EU and not the other way round . Some are going to be in for a nasty shock when they realize they’ve lost that.
Just as a matter of interest what is a EU passport ?
At last we move on from second referendums and revoke
We move on to Rejoin! Hallelujah!
(Not that we will ever rejoin.....)
When Boris finally loses power in the 2044 GE, it will be to the Federal Socialists who will win a landslide on a manifesto of joining the United States of Europe.
I will rejoice from beyond the grave.
Either we'll be doing better than the EU, in which case there will be no appetite to rejoin, or we'll be doing worse, in which case there'll be no appetite to accept us.
If it is the former, welcome to Singapore on Thames.
If it is the latter, they will have us join the club, but on German, French and Russian terms.
Whilst this Brillo v Thornberry smackdown is tetchy, not sure it is quite the car crash 'gotcha' that Guido has sold it as.
Was just thinking the same until the issue of selective education came up.
Clearly going to a secondary modern didn’t stop her making it.
Nah, she’s doing fine.
I find Neil quite annoying really; he always presents as needlessly bad tempered.
I think Neil over does it sometimes, but it was an open goal and he didn’t miss. Hypocrisy on education is very easy for the voters to understand.
Will salt of the earth Sir Keir grant working class kids, maybe like his younger self, the chance to got to Grammars or maybe get the state to pay for their private schooling?
Regarding the latter, it's quite possible that Starmer could move in that direction. Something like a default position of removing the charitable status of every private school, except those that agree to accept a minimum quota of annual admissions from the LEA list, with the LEA not the school deciding on which pupils would be admitted. The state would pay for the places in the schools which decided to play ball, funded from a reallocation of the extra tax revenue gathered from those private schools which didn't.
Lab should have gone EEA/EFTA they could have argued it was leaving and not really leaving. Playing their critics against each other.
Labour should have accepted May's Deal and watched the Conservatives rip themselves apart.
Corbyn would now be PM.
There was no Brexit policy Labour could have adopted that would have beaten the media, and the army of Tory spammers filling places like PB with memes and one-liners to crowd out criticism.
It woz PB Spammers wot won it!!!
Seriously. Labour has to learn that they are not going to win another election until they stop threatening the wealth of billionaires. It's not the 1980s any more. Most media from Facebook all the way down to the Independent are controlled by a tiny number of unimaginably wealthy men, and apart from Zuckerberg their wealth comes not from the quality of their media product but from other sources.
I hope you're right, because Labour's never going to learn that lesson. Saying 'billionaires' to Labourites is like saying 'Pedigree Chum' to an undiscerning canine...
The threat to billionaires is uniquely problematic for PB Tories as they have the most to lose,, for the more modest earners amongst us, believe me, we don't feel sorry for high taxed billionaires at all.
I don't actually care about billionaires, it's more about what the mindless attacks on them represent - once expropriating people's wealth for the sin of, er, having it becomes normalised, then the whole middle class becomes vulnerable.
It does make me wonder how Wilson avoided being taken apart by the Tories in 1974 in the same way.He was unable to answer the question as to what his recommendation would be. Moreover, Labour's 1974 Manifestos were more left wing than the 2019 version.
I give great credit to Johnson. He framed and timed this GE perfectly. It left Labour in a Brexit election with nowhere to go on Brexit. It was high risk, ruthless politics and it worked.
Clearly Mays deal for Remainers would have kept closer economic ties with the EU but still FOM rights would have gone .
And FOM as a Remainer was one of the best aspects of EU membership for me . Thankfully I can continue to enjoy that with my new EU passport . Thanks mum and dad !
I still don’t think much of the public realize that their FOM is ending , the debate has centered so much on FOM from the EU and not the other way round . Some are going to be in for a nasty shock when they realize they’ve lost that.
England being part of FOM was the equivalent of giving a man, happily married to the woman of his dreams, the freedom to go on a date with any woman in the EU, a freedom he had no intention of using, in return for every bloke in the EU getting to try it on with his missus
Comments
I mostly use KLM for European routes these days, BA have dropped the ball and need to invest more in service.
Labour's "compromise position" on Brexit "didn't satisfy our communities and meant that we weren't trusted," she told the BBC's political editor, Laura Kuenssberg.
And, she added: "We didn't tackle anti-Semitism and we weren't trusted to deal with that issue within our own party."
I think it's bollox, all of that "Putin would eat XYZ alive" type thing.
Sexist too, I sense - Big Horrid Men bullying Little Lisa - but I can't prove it in your case obviously. I bet Thatcher got plenty of that pre 79.
See 17:44
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2020/jan/22/labour-leadership-pmqs-johnson-corbyn-nandy-criticises-blairbrown-governments-for-keeping-elements-of-thatcherism-live-news
The whole point of the left project is about not having aspirations, because instead you are a victim of something or other and it is someone else's fault.
Biden 43%
Sanders 20%
No-one (i.e. contested convention) 15%
Warren 14%
Buttigieg 7%
All others: Less than 1%
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-primary-forecast/
I'd take it with some rather large pinches of salt, but it doesn't look ridiculous.
https://twitter.com/BorisJohnson/status/1220029136552579073?s=20
Especially in the north.
AND we were told off for laughing at the back of the class.
All data comes with error. Wikipedia comes with error. Encyclopedia Brittanica comes with error. pb.com comes with error. Gossip comes with error. BBC news comes with error.
Polygraph tests are no different to all the other sources of data.
Data are valuable, if you know or can model your errors (which in the case of polygraph tests are reasonably easy to model).
"Encyclopedia Brittanica comes with error" is nicely self-referential.
It was a case of the least worst outcome . I think they managed to find that least worst outcome . With a decent leader and more credible manifesto they would have done much better .
Corbyn was the main issue not their Brexit position .
That argument worked out well.
No gold stars on it then?
(Not that we will ever rejoin.....)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51210602
Corbyn would now be PM.
She wont make the ballot though so irrelevant
Clearly going to a secondary modern didn’t stop her making it.
Blown out on being a hypocrite on selective education
Plays into the narrative about her.
I find Neil quite annoying really; he always presents as needlessly bad tempered.
I will rejoice from beyond the grave.
Clearly Mays deal for Remainers would have kept closer economic ties with the EU but still FOM rights would have gone .
And FOM as a Remainer was one of the best aspects of EU membership for me . Thankfully I can continue to enjoy that with my new EU passport . Thanks mum and dad !
I still don’t think much of the public realize that their FOM is ending , the debate has centered so much on FOM from the EU and not the other way round . Some are going to be in for a nasty shock when they realize they’ve lost that.
Sanders needs the moderate lane to stay crowded, because if Buttigeg and Bloomberg drop out, those votes aren't going to him.
Biden needs the other moderates to drop out, and the earlier the better
Warren needs to beat Sanders in the early contests, and then assume the mantle of the Left
Buttigieg has to win Iowa, and then follow that through to a win in New Hampshire. He also has to have beaten Biden
If it is the latter, they will have us join the club, but on German, French and Russian terms.
She comes across as genuine. And nice. And thoughful. And not having her responses to the issues of the day governed by a hundred years of dogma.
Breath of fresh air for Labour. Of the three leading candidates, she has the best chance of conecting with voters north of the Severn-Wash.