Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Seasonal greetings from Marf and Ratty who’ll be returning

24

Comments

  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    edited December 2015
    Jim Pickard
    Labour has attracted 10 times as many new members in London than in Scotland since May https://t.co/hKmkdrq25x 40k and 4k respectively

    Biggest increases in London and university towns (eg Manchester) @ChrispLOL @dancrawford85
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 69,731
    Wanderer said:

    surbiton said:

    Corbyn will get the numbers needed to get the nominations. The situation is totally different now. Many of the current shadow cabinet and junior position holders will nominate him for a start. I reckon he will get 60 - 80 nominations today.

    I think that is exactly right. One way or another, Corbyn will be on the ballot if he wants to be.

    Someone - I think Stephen Bush - summed this up the other day:

    * The only candidate who can replace Corbyn against his will is one who can beat Corbyn in a ballot of the membership.

    * There is no such candidate in the PLP.

    Conclusion: Corbyn will go when he chooses. Concerning when that will be, I thought the most significant line in the recent Independent article that trails these sackings was one that said that, after Oldham, Corbyn thinks he can win the election and become Prime Minister. I think we can safely say:

    * While he thinks that he won't resign.

    * He won't stop thinking that easily. That kind of thought is hard to dislodge.

    For which reason, I think Corbyn will neither resign nor be ousted before 2020.
    There is no point even challenging Corbyn if the members are consulted, a challenge would have to be an MP orchestrated coup and that is only likely to happen if Labour start losing seats to UKIP in by elections in which case there is no alternative
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 4,593
    edited December 2015

    I wish the Leave campaign would point out the stupidity of the EU directive on dredging rivers and the consequences thereof, rainfall is not especially high, rivers are overflowing because the EU won't allow them to be dredged.

    It's unlikely we'll see that on the BBC so the better informed on here might like to discuss.

    Other way round, surely? Rapid runoff and dredged rivers = rapid flow of water = flooded town centres downstream. To be sure, it's a complex system, and I am sure that generalisation doesn;t always apply.

    But as I recall, the Somerset Levels floods a few years back were a tradeoff against many more people affected by urban flooding downstream.

    And the rainfall has been very high. Have a look at the Met Office blog.

    Even Mr Gummer (I forget his peerage title) has been raising the issue of climate change and expressing disappointment at the lack of discussion on the broadcasters.

    Edit: early days yet, it'll be interesting to see how analysis shapes out.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    edited December 2015
    malcolmg said:

    surbiton said:

    FPT


    malcolmg said:

    "Too much concrete and tarmac nowadays and building has been done on floodplains etc , usual politicians that have caused the issues looking for short term gains."

    Absolutely. The torrential rain in Cumbria earlier in the month was a record but only by a few percent. The real issue is exactly as you say. Building on both flood plain and water run off areas, reducing tree cover which allows soils to wash away and failing to maintain water courses - both by government, local authorities and private individuals.

    Yes, that has certainly contributed. But we have what we have. Are we going to demolish these houses ? Are we going to uncarpet the roads and car parks ?
    Obviously not, but they could at least try to do any future building in a better manner and get experts to look at how they can alleviate/remedy some of the worst hit areas for the future.
    No one doubts that but it does not solve the present problem. Many of these are in rural areas - Tory voters, who will now also be subsidised like bloody farmers !

    Make them pay their extra insurance like we have to. They chose to live where they live.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    HYUFD said:

    Wanderer said:

    surbiton said:

    Corbyn will get the numbers needed to get the nominations. The situation is totally different now. Many of the current shadow cabinet and junior position holders will nominate him for a start. I reckon he will get 60 - 80 nominations today.

    I think that is exactly right. One way or another, Corbyn will be on the ballot if he wants to be.

    Someone - I think Stephen Bush - summed this up the other day:

    * The only candidate who can replace Corbyn against his will is one who can beat Corbyn in a ballot of the membership.

    * There is no such candidate in the PLP.

    Conclusion: Corbyn will go when he chooses. Concerning when that will be, I thought the most significant line in the recent Independent article that trails these sackings was one that said that, after Oldham, Corbyn thinks he can win the election and become Prime Minister. I think we can safely say:

    * While he thinks that he won't resign.

    * He won't stop thinking that easily. That kind of thought is hard to dislodge.

    For which reason, I think Corbyn will neither resign nor be ousted before 2020.
    There is no point even challenging Corbyn if the members are consulted, a challenge would have to be an MP orchestrated coup and that is only likely to happen if Labour start losing seats to UKIP in by elections in which case there is no alternative
    Labour MPs cannot impose a new leader. This is not the Tory party.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 33,305
    Wanderer said:

    surbiton said:

    Corbyn will get the numbers needed to get the nominations. The situation is totally different now. Many of the current shadow cabinet and junior position holders will nominate him for a start. I reckon he will get 60 - 80 nominations today.

    I think that is exactly right. One way or another, Corbyn will be on the ballot if he wants to be.

    Someone - I think Stephen Bush - summed this up the other day:

    * The only candidate who can replace Corbyn against his will is one who can beat Corbyn in a ballot of the membership.

    * There is no such candidate in the PLP.

    Conclusion: Corbyn will go when he chooses. Concerning when that will be, I thought the most significant line in the recent Independent article that trails these sackings was one that said that, after Oldham, Corbyn thinks he can win the election and become Prime Minister. I think we can safely say:

    * While he thinks that he won't resign.

    * He won't stop thinking that easily. That kind of thought is hard to dislodge.

    For which reason, I think Corbyn will neither resign nor be ousted before 2020.
    If Corbyn won't leave Labour, Labour will have to move on in a new vehicle and leave behind Corbyn and all that is unelectable. Doubltess a couple of multi-million donations would get the ball rolling. If the majority of the current Labour MPs went to this new entity, then rump Labour would be stuffed for Short money. The remaining students and property-is-theft brigade aren't going to make up that shortfall.

    Corbyn's greatest legacy maybe making the centre-left electable again. Just not under the banner of the Labour Party.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    Wanderer said:

    surbiton said:

    Corbyn will get the numbers needed to get the nominations. The situation is totally different now. Many of the current shadow cabinet and junior position holders will nominate him for a start. I reckon he will get 60 - 80 nominations today.

    I think that is exactly right. One way or another, Corbyn will be on the ballot if he wants to be.

    Someone - I think Stephen Bush - summed this up the other day:

    * The only candidate who can replace Corbyn against his will is one who can beat Corbyn in a ballot of the membership.

    * There is no such candidate in the PLP.

    Conclusion: Corbyn will go when he chooses. Concerning when that will be, I thought the most significant line in the recent Independent article that trails these sackings was one that said that, after Oldham, Corbyn thinks he can win the election and become Prime Minister. I think we can safely say:

    * While he thinks that he won't resign.

    * He won't stop thinking that easily. That kind of thought is hard to dislodge.

    For which reason, I think Corbyn will neither resign nor be ousted before 2020.
    If Corbyn won't leave Labour, Labour will have to move on in a new vehicle and leave behind Corbyn and all that is unelectable. Doubltess a couple of multi-million donations would get the ball rolling. If the majority of the current Labour MPs went to this new entity, then rump Labour would be stuffed for Short money. The remaining students and property-is-theft brigade aren't going to make up that shortfall.

    Corbyn's greatest legacy maybe making the centre-left electable again. Just not under the banner of the Labour Party.
    The last time that happened Labour was out of office for 18 years. Corbyn will go anyway after 2020.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 69,731

    Not a chance. I'm a committed kipper but as it stands we don't have an earthly of winning a by election. No resources, no infrastructure, no money, we've even lost our message.

    Re-reading Rod's thread from May 2014, the references to the UKIP position that was going to get them multiple MPs holding the balance of power this year was interesting. UKIP believed only they could force an In/Out Referendum. Being proven wrong that Cameron would never, ever deliver that referendum really does seem to have taken the wind out of UKIP's sails.

    Yes but the referendum itself offers a second chance especially if it is a narrow In
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 69,731
    surbiton said:

    HYUFD said:

    Wanderer said:

    surbiton said:

    Corbyn will get the numbers needed to get the nominations. The situation is totally different now. Many of the current shadow cabinet and junior position holders will nominate him for a start. I reckon he will get 60 - 80 nominations today.

    I think that is exactly right. One way or another, Corbyn will be on the ballot if he wants to be.

    Someone - I think Stephen Bush - summed this up the other day:

    * The only candidate who can replace Corbyn against his will is one who can beat Corbyn in a ballot of the membership.

    * There is no such candidate in the PLP.

    Conclusion: Corbyn will go when he chooses. Concerning when that will be, I thought the most significant line in the recent Independent article that trails these sackings was one that said that, after Oldham, Corbyn thinks he can win the election and become Prime Minister. I think we can safely say:

    * While he thinks that he won't resign.

    * He won't stop thinking that easily. That kind of thought is hard to dislodge.

    For which reason, I think Corbyn will neither resign nor be ousted before 2020.
    There is no point even challenging Corbyn if the members are consulted, a challenge would have to be an MP orchestrated coup and that is only likely to happen if Labour start losing seats to UKIP in by elections in which case there is no alternative
    Labour MPs cannot impose a new leader. This is not the Tory party.
    Labour's own lawyers said in the Times they could if a challenger gets sufficient nominations and Corbyn does not
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    "What exactly has Benn done"...Avoided paying a penny IHT on his dear old socialist dads 5 million pound estate....
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 33,305
    HYUFD said:

    surbiton said:

    HYUFD said:

    Wanderer said:

    surbiton said:

    Corbyn will get the numbers needed to get the nominations. The situation is totally different now. Many of the current shadow cabinet and junior position holders will nominate him for a start. I reckon he will get 60 - 80 nominations today.

    I think that is exactly right. One way or another, Corbyn will be on the ballot if he wants to be.

    Someone - I think Stephen Bush - summed this up the other day:

    * The only candidate who can replace Corbyn against his will is one who can beat Corbyn in a ballot of the membership.

    * There is no such candidate in the PLP.

    Conclusion: Corbyn will go when he chooses. Concerning when that will be, I thought the most significant line in the recent Independent article that trails these sackings was one that said that, after Oldham, Corbyn thinks he can win the election and become Prime Minister. I think we can safely say:

    * While he thinks that he won't resign.

    * He won't stop thinking that easily. That kind of thought is hard to dislodge.

    For which reason, I think Corbyn will neither resign nor be ousted before 2020.
    There is no point even challenging Corbyn if the members are consulted, a challenge would have to be an MP orchestrated coup and that is only likely to happen if Labour start losing seats to UKIP in by elections in which case there is no alternative
    Labour MPs cannot impose a new leader. This is not the Tory party.
    Labour's own lawyers said in the Times they could if a challenger gets sufficient nominations and Corbyn does not
    Never understood that position. To have challengers, you have to have someone to challenge. Otherwise, it's a coup....
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 4,593

    "What exactly has Benn done"...Avoided paying a penny IHT on his dear old socialist dads 5 million pound estate....

    That would be hardly surprising as it is the estate not the beneficiary who pays tax.

    You might want to reword that for other reasons.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 69,731

    HYUFD said:

    surbiton said:

    HYUFD said:

    Wanderer said:

    surbiton said:

    Corbyn will get the numbers needed to get the nominations. The situation is totally different now. Many of the current shadow cabinet and junior position holders will nominate him for a start. I reckon he will get 60 - 80 nominations today.

    I think that is exactly right. One way or another, Corbyn will be on the ballot if he wants to be.

    Someone - I think Stephen Bush - summed this up the other day:

    * The only candidate who can replace Corbyn against his will is one who can beat Corbyn in a ballot of the membership.

    * There is no such candidate in the PLP.

    Conclusion: Corbyn will go when he chooses. Concerning when that will be, I thought the most significant line in the recent Independent article that trails these sackings was one that said that, after Oldham, Corbyn thinks he can win the election and become Prime Minister. I think we can safely say:

    * While he thinks that he won't resign.

    * He won't stop thinking that easily. That kind of thought is hard to dislodge.

    For which reason, I think Corbyn will neither resign nor be ousted before 2020.
    There is no point even challenging Corbyn if the members are consulted, a challenge would have to be an MP orchestrated coup and that is only likely to happen if Labour start losing seats to UKIP in by elections in which case there is no alternative
    Labour MPs cannot impose a new leader. This is not the Tory party.
    Labour's own lawyers said in the Times they could if a challenger gets sufficient nominations and Corbyn does not
    Never understood that position. To have challengers, you have to have someone to challenge. Otherwise, it's a coup....
    It would be a coup in effect anyway
  • WandererWanderer Posts: 3,838
    surbiton said:


    If Corbyn won't leave Labour, Labour will have to move on in a new vehicle and leave behind Corbyn and all that is unelectable. Doubltess a couple of multi-million donations would get the ball rolling. If the majority of the current Labour MPs went to this new entity, then rump Labour would be stuffed for Short money. The remaining students and property-is-theft brigade aren't going to make up that shortfall.

    Corbyn's greatest legacy maybe making the centre-left electable again. Just not under the banner of the Labour Party.

    The last time that happened Labour was out of office for 18 years. Corbyn will go anyway after 2020.
    Yes. However Labour will then need to persuade swing voters that its flirtation with the hard left really is over. That is going to be hard and is going to involve gestures, similar to Blair's scrapping of Clause 4, that are going to be painful.

    I'm not sure it will be possible. Five years of Corbyn is going to take Labour into some very strange territory.
  • notmenotme Posts: 3,293
    edited December 2015

    FPT


    malcolmg said:

    "Too much concrete and tarmac nowadays and building has been done on floodplains etc , usual politicians that have caused the issues looking for short term gains."

    Absolutely. The torrential rain in Cumbria earlier in the month was a record but only by a few percent. The real issue is exactly as you say. Building on both flood plain and water run off areas, reducing tree cover which allows soils to wash away and failing to maintain water courses - both by government, local authorities and private individuals.

    Cumbria is one of the least built up areas in England. There is not noticeable difference in the amount of land built on fifteen years ago, to today. All recent developments are now required to incorporate run off schemes as requested by water companies.

    In the area of cumbria that i know, along the Caldew, Eden and Petteril, three rivers that meet up and caused a worse flooding event than 2005, which itself was supposed to be a 1 in hundred year event, there has been no greater amount of build. The fields that surrounded them in 2000 still surround them, and still have the same amount of woodland, if not more.

    In terms of woodland there has been a concerted effort to actually increase the amount of woodland cover in the county. The woodland trust alone planted over 2,000 trees along a river derwent, an area that holds the water that essentially floods Keswick and Cockermouth.

    Im not sure if it made any appreciable difference.
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    Carnyx..The BENN ESTATE did not pay any Death Duties on the Death of Tony Benn..nice one..But I suppose the present Benn did absolutely nothing to make sure that worked out ok.. being a dyed in the wool socialist an all..
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 33,305
    HYUFD said:

    Not a chance. I'm a committed kipper but as it stands we don't have an earthly of winning a by election. No resources, no infrastructure, no money, we've even lost our message.

    Re-reading Rod's thread from May 2014, the references to the UKIP position that was going to get them multiple MPs holding the balance of power this year was interesting. UKIP believed only they could force an In/Out Referendum. Being proven wrong that Cameron would never, ever deliver that referendum really does seem to have taken the wind out of UKIP's sails.

    Yes but the referendum itself offers a second chance especially if it is a narrow In
    The only way I see there being an appetite amongst the voters to keep In/Out alive following a vote to remain, is if the Scots and/or Welsh and/or NI voting for In has blocked the majority view in England to get Out.

    But that will then be a wider constitutional clash, where the price to get out is the destruction of the United Kingdom. Will the English then vote to doubly go it alone - out of the EU AND out of the UK? I dunno, but I suspect those with the strongest loathing of the EU are those with the strongest attraction to the UK.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 69,731

    HYUFD said:

    Not a chance. I'm a committed kipper but as it stands we don't have an earthly of winning a by election. No resources, no infrastructure, no money, we've even lost our message.

    Re-reading Rod's thread from May 2014, the references to the UKIP position that was going to get them multiple MPs holding the balance of power this year was interesting. UKIP believed only they could force an In/Out Referendum. Being proven wrong that Cameron would never, ever deliver that referendum really does seem to have taken the wind out of UKIP's sails.

    Yes but the referendum itself offers a second chance especially if it is a narrow In
    The only way I see there being an appetite amongst the voters to keep In/Out alive following a vote to remain, is if the Scots and/or Welsh and/or NI voting for In has blocked the majority view in England to get Out.

    But that will then be a wider constitutional clash, where the price to get out is the destruction of the United Kingdom. Will the English then vote to doubly go it alone - out of the EU AND out of the UK? I dunno, but I suspect those with the strongest loathing of the EU are those with the strongest attraction to the UK.
    Perhaps although about a quarter of SNP voters back Brexit. However if Out get about 48% UKIP could easily win 20% at the 2020 election even if they get less than half of those Out voters
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 33,305
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Not a chance. I'm a committed kipper but as it stands we don't have an earthly of winning a by election. No resources, no infrastructure, no money, we've even lost our message.

    Re-reading Rod's thread from May 2014, the references to the UKIP position that was going to get them multiple MPs holding the balance of power this year was interesting. UKIP believed only they could force an In/Out Referendum. Being proven wrong that Cameron would never, ever deliver that referendum really does seem to have taken the wind out of UKIP's sails.

    Yes but the referendum itself offers a second chance especially if it is a narrow In
    The only way I see there being an appetite amongst the voters to keep In/Out alive following a vote to remain, is if the Scots and/or Welsh and/or NI voting for In has blocked the majority view in England to get Out.

    But that will then be a wider constitutional clash, where the price to get out is the destruction of the United Kingdom. Will the English then vote to doubly go it alone - out of the EU AND out of the UK? I dunno, but I suspect those with the strongest loathing of the EU are those with the strongest attraction to the UK.
    Perhaps although about a quarter of SNP voters back Brexit. However if Out get about 48% UKIP could easily win 20% at the 2020 election even if they get less than half of those Out voters
    I just don't see it. UKIP is not an attractive proposition. It's leader is not an attractive proposition. And if Corbyn is in place going into the next election, there will be an even bigger bogeyman for the small c conservative minded to have to slay than the EU - red in claw and tooth Socialism --> Communism.
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    FPT: If R&T are correct in their estimate - and Corbyn doesn't dramatically improve during 2017-2019 - a 1% loss in the NEV next year would suggest that Labour are looking down the barrel of a landslide defeat in 2020...

    In excess of a 10% deficit in the PV.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 69,731

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Not a chance. I'm a committed kipper but as it stands we don't have an earthly of winning a by election. No resources, no infrastructure, no money, we've even lost our message.

    Re-reading Rod's thread from May 2014, the references to the UKIP position that was going to get them multiple MPs holding the balance of power this year was interesting. UKIP believed only they could force an In/Out Referendum. Being proven wrong that Cameron would never, ever deliver that referendum really does seem to have taken the wind out of UKIP's sails.

    Yes but the referendum itself offers a second chance especially if it is a narrow In
    The only way I see there being an appetite amongst the voters to keep In/Out alive following a vote to remain, is if the Scots and/or Welsh and/or NI voting for In has blocked the majority view in England to get Out.

    But that will then be a wider constitutional clash, where the price to get out is the destruction of the United Kingdom. Will the English then vote to doubly go it alone - out of the EU AND out of the UK? I dunno, but I suspect those with the strongest loathing of the EU are those with the strongest attraction to the UK.
    Perhaps although about a quarter of SNP voters back Brexit. However if Out get about 48% UKIP could easily win 20% at the 2020 election even if they get less than half of those Out voters
    I just don't see it. UKIP is not an attractive proposition. It's leader is not an attractive proposition. And if Corbyn is in place going into the next election, there will be an even bigger bogeyman for the small c conservative minded to have to slay than the EU - red in claw and tooth Socialism --> Communism.
    Until we get to EU ref who knows but I could easily see a 2020 result something like 33% Tory, 31% Labour and 20% UKIP
  • Greetings from the Ricoh Arena. Half time Wasps v Saracens. It's tight - 6-3 to the visitors. 20,000+ crowd.

    I am all for the Corbyn reshuffle. The more the hard left own Labour's catastrophic unelectability the better. And moving out moderates may show at least a few useful idiots that nice, polite Jeremy has absolutely no interest at all in being ecumenical.

    Dianne Abbott as shadow foreign secretary is a delicious prospect.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 33,305
    RodCrosby said:

    FPT: If R&T are correct in their estimate - and Corbyn doesn't dramatically improve during 2017-2019 - a 1% loss in the NEV next year would suggest that Labour are looking down the barrel of a landslide defeat in 2020...

    In excess of a 10% deficit in the PV.

    Rod, you seem to have fashioned yourself quite a niche here - telling people what they don't want to hear....
  • JBriskinJBriskin Posts: 2,380
    Test - hello again
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737

    Carnyx..The BENN ESTATE did not pay any Death Duties on the Death of Tony Benn..nice one..But I suppose the present Benn did absolutely nothing to make sure that worked out ok.. being a dyed in the wool socialist an all..

    There is little a beneficiary can do, other than advise the testator in their lifetime (to seek professional advice, in an estate of this size).
  • notmenotme Posts: 3,293

    Harry Cole
    Two conflicting press releases about correct response to floods in two hours from Shadow Chancellor and shadow Defra.

    One of the worst impacted ward, in the most flooded district from a few weeks ago has a by election on the 7th Jan...
  • notme said:

    FPT


    malcolmg said:

    "Too much concrete and tarmac nowadays and building has been done on floodplains etc , usual politicians that have caused the issues looking for short term gains."

    Absolutely. The torrential rain in Cumbria earlier in the month was a record but only by a few percent. The real issue is exactly as you say. Building on both flood plain and water run off areas, reducing tree cover which allows soils to wash away and failing to maintain water courses - both by government, local authorities and private individuals.

    Cumbria is one of the least built up areas in England. There is not noticeable difference in the amount of land built on fifteen years ago, to today. All recent developments are now required to incorporate run off schemes as requested by water companies.

    In the area of cumbria that i know, along the Caldew, Eden and Petteril, three rivers that meet up and caused a worse flooding event than 2005, which itself was supposed to be a 1 in hundred year event, there has been no greater amount of build. The fields that surrounded them in 2000 still surround them, and still have the same amount of woodland, if not more.

    In terms of woodland there has been a concerted effort to actually increase the amount of woodland cover in the county. The woodland trust alone planted over 2,000 trees along a river derwent, an area that holds the water that essentially floods Keswick and Cockermouth.

    Im not sure if it made any appreciable difference.
    It won'tr make an appreciable difference for probably 50 years or so. Young trees simply don't have the ability to hold the soil and hold water that mature trees have, The problem was the clearing in the first place. recovering from that is no short term fix.
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    Rod Crosby There is very little the beneficiary can do except ROTFLHAO.and singing The Red Flag...
  • Hopefully no PBers and their loved ones have been caught up in the floods.
  • RodCrosby said:

    FPT: If R&T are correct in their estimate - and Corbyn doesn't dramatically improve during 2017-2019 - a 1% loss in the NEV next year would suggest that Labour are looking down the barrel of a landslide defeat in 2020...

    In excess of a 10% deficit in the PV.

    PV generally means postal votes. What are you referring to?
  • Carnyx said:

    I wish the Leave campaign would point out the stupidity of the EU directive on dredging rivers and the consequences thereof, rainfall is not especially high, rivers are overflowing because the EU won't allow them to be dredged.

    It's unlikely we'll see that on the BBC so the better informed on here might like to discuss.

    Other way round, surely? Rapid runoff and dredged rivers = rapid flow of water = flooded town centres downstream. To be sure, it's a complex system, and I am sure that generalisation doesn;t always apply.

    But as I recall, the Somerset Levels floods a few years back were a tradeoff against many more people affected by urban flooding downstream.

    And the rainfall has been very high. Have a look at the Met Office blog.

    Even Mr Gummer (I forget his peerage title) has been raising the issue of climate change and expressing disappointment at the lack of discussion on the broadcasters.

    Edit: early days yet, it'll be interesting to see how analysis shapes out.
    Gummer has been a fanatic for climate change since it first appeared as an excuse. Of course he will take every opportunity to make false attributions. Yes the rainfall has been high and we should expect some flooding. But it is not significantly higher than it has been in the past and for December as a whole in England it is almost exactly at the 1981 to 2010 average at 99% anomaly. It is only higher than average rainfall in Scotland and Wales that has dragged the UK total up.
  • RodCrosby said:

    FPT: If R&T are correct in their estimate - and Corbyn doesn't dramatically improve during 2017-2019 - a 1% loss in the NEV next year would suggest that Labour are looking down the barrel of a landslide defeat in 2020...

    In excess of a 10% deficit in the PV.

    PV generally means postal votes. What are you referring to?
    Projected vote?
    Personal vote?
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 28,507

    HYUFD said:

    Not a chance. I'm a committed kipper but as it stands we don't have an earthly of winning a by election. No resources, no infrastructure, no money, we've even lost our message.

    Re-reading Rod's thread from May 2014, the references to the UKIP position that was going to get them multiple MPs holding the balance of power this year was interesting. UKIP believed only they could force an In/Out Referendum. Being proven wrong that Cameron would never, ever deliver that referendum really does seem to have taken the wind out of UKIP's sails.

    Yes but the referendum itself offers a second chance especially if it is a narrow In
    The only way I see there being an appetite amongst the voters to keep In/Out alive following a vote to remain, is if the Scots and/or Welsh and/or NI voting for In has blocked the majority view in England to get Out.

    But that will then be a wider constitutional clash, where the price to get out is the destruction of the United Kingdom. Will the English then vote to doubly go it alone - out of the EU AND out of the UK? I dunno, but I suspect those with the strongest loathing of the EU are those with the strongest attraction to the UK.
    The EU won't go away, if there's a Remain vote. Indeed, I'd expect the EU to see it as a green light for More Europe. They could argue, very reasonably, that this is what the British people had signed up to. The British government will argue that they didn't sign up to this, and so the argument continues.

    In any case, UKIP (or something similar) continues for so long as large numbers of people lose out from globalisation.
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737

    RodCrosby said:

    FPT: If R&T are correct in their estimate - and Corbyn doesn't dramatically improve during 2017-2019 - a 1% loss in the NEV next year would suggest that Labour are looking down the barrel of a landslide defeat in 2020...

    In excess of a 10% deficit in the PV.

    PV generally means postal votes. What are you referring to?
    Popular Vote.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    SeanT said:

    Jim Pickard
    Labour has attracted 10 times as many new members in London than in Scotland since May https://t.co/hKmkdrq25x 40k and 4k respectively

    Biggest increases in London and university towns (eg Manchester) @ChrispLOL @dancrawford85

    For me this summarises Labour's problem.

    The Corbynites are orgasming over 300 new members in North Cornwall. A surge in membership. A SURGE!



    But look at their result in North Cornwall in 2015.

    They came fourth. With 5%. Fully 19,000 votes adrift of the winning Tory

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000837

    Nineteen thousand votes behind. 19,000!

    300 mad new members who love Jeremy Corbyn and his lovely vests are not going to make a whit of difference, except give the Corbynites reasons to cling on to the painful and fateful delusion that they can actually win back seats.

    What's more, if you look at the data in that seat, and the hints in the allied article, it's clear where these new members are coming from: the even leftier Greens, who ran Labour a close 5th in North Cornwall.

    These people will take Labour in Cornwall further from the centre.

    I suspect the consequence for Labour, in the south west, of the Corbyn leadership, will be a net loss of MPs, as Ben Bradshaw is defeated in Exeter.
    So , what should Labour do in places like Cornwall ? Give up ? Cornwall is Britain's poorest county.

    The Labour vote in 2010 in the six Cornish seats was 8.64%. In 2015 it was 12.3%
    The Tory vote also went up: from 40.95% to 43.10%. LD: 22.4% [41.76%]. UKIP 13.83% [4.9%]

    In the past, Labour's policy was benign neglect. We sub-contracted out to the Lib Dems - the Tory "B" team.

    It is to Ed Miliband's credit that the first "organisor" was appointed for Devon and Cornwall. I think you will find Labour will begin to win a few council seats. Labour should never again give up some regions. It is going to be a long haul.
  • RodCrosby said:

    RodCrosby said:

    FPT: If R&T are correct in their estimate - and Corbyn doesn't dramatically improve during 2017-2019 - a 1% loss in the NEV next year would suggest that Labour are looking down the barrel of a landslide defeat in 2020...

    In excess of a 10% deficit in the PV.

    PV generally means postal votes. What are you referring to?
    Popular Vote.
    By 10% deficit in the popular vote do you mean 10% of the party's GE2015 share or ten percentage points i.e 28% of the GB vote or 21%?
  • glwglw Posts: 6,044
    SeanT said:

    My publishers gave me a bottle as a present for getting a number 1 on the charts, and I looked at it askance at first: Just a bottle of malt, where's my vintage champagne, etc

    Then I tried it. Bloody hell. An amazing whisky. Some say it's the best in the world and they might be right.

    It's certainly up there, and it is my personal favourite.
  • Good afternoon, everyone.

    Mr. T, my mother got, as a Christmas gift, something called The Ice Twins. Apparently it's moderately readable.

    Welcome back, Miss Marf.
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    And if Labour do suffer a landslide reverse in 2020, their realistic next opportunity for a win is when? 2030?

    I'll be a pensioner...
  • @Blackburn63 - Are you going to respond to my query about your assertion that it is against EU law to dredge rivers?
  • Did Scrooge McCorbyn end up giving his Christmas message?
  • WandererWanderer Posts: 3,838

    RodCrosby said:

    RodCrosby said:

    FPT: If R&T are correct in their estimate - and Corbyn doesn't dramatically improve during 2017-2019 - a 1% loss in the NEV next year would suggest that Labour are looking down the barrel of a landslide defeat in 2020...

    In excess of a 10% deficit in the PV.

    PV generally means postal votes. What are you referring to?
    Popular Vote.
    By 10% deficit in the popular vote do you mean 10% of the party's GE2015 share or ten percentage points i.e 28% of the GB vote or 21%?
    I was reading it as 10 percentage points behind the Conservatives.

    Perhaps Rod can clarify :)
  • RodCrosby said:

    RodCrosby said:

    FPT: If R&T are correct in their estimate - and Corbyn doesn't dramatically improve during 2017-2019 - a 1% loss in the NEV next year would suggest that Labour are looking down the barrel of a landslide defeat in 2020...

    In excess of a 10% deficit in the PV.

    PV generally means postal votes. What are you referring to?
    Popular Vote.
    Is that the Popular Vote of Judaea, or the Judaean Popular Vote?
  • WandererWanderer Posts: 3,838

    Did Scrooge McCorbyn end up giving his Christmas message?

    I think we are awaiting his New Year message.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    The details are in the Chronicle article I linked to upthread.

    @Blackburn63 - Are you going to respond to my query about your assertion that it is against EU law to dredge rivers?

  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737

    RodCrosby said:

    RodCrosby said:

    FPT: If R&T are correct in their estimate - and Corbyn doesn't dramatically improve during 2017-2019 - a 1% loss in the NEV next year would suggest that Labour are looking down the barrel of a landslide defeat in 2020...

    In excess of a 10% deficit in the PV.

    PV generally means postal votes. What are you referring to?
    Popular Vote.
    By 10% deficit in the popular vote do you mean 10% of the party's GE2015 share or ten percentage points i.e 28% of the GB vote or 21%?
    Unlike you to be so slow, Mike.

    I mean it looks like the Tories will be at least 10% ahead in the popular vote in 2020. What the actual numbers are is anyone's guess (and largely irrelevant under FPTP).

    A straw in the wind, however, at this early juncture. Corbyn could yet be recognized as the Messiah, I suppose...
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    @Blackburn63 - Are you going to respond to my query about your assertion that it is against EU law to dredge rivers?

    Mike, a posted a bbc clip about dredging in Somerset Plains. It all went quiet after that. Cheap anti-EU stunts, that's all.
  • The PED documentary is well worth 40 mins of people's time.
  • F1: for those of you who missed it, here's my belated 2015 season review, team-by-team, with thoughts on 2016 as well:
    http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2015/12/2015-season-review.html
  • notmenotme Posts: 3,293

    Hopefully no PBers and their loved ones have been caught up in the floods.

    The missus has a ground floor flat in York and is now in a bit of a flap....
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 5,978
    edited December 2015
    surbiton said:

    @Blackburn63 - Are you going to respond to my query about your assertion that it is against EU law to dredge rivers?

    Mike, a posted a bbc clip about dredging in Somerset Plains. It all went quiet after that. Cheap anti-EU stunts, that's all.
    There is no EU law on dredging. @Blackburn63 is wrong to assert that there is.



  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    Rod Crosby There is very little the beneficiary can do except ROTFLHAO.and singing The Red Flag...



    And, of course, in Arabic !
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Wanderer said:

    RodCrosby said:

    RodCrosby said:

    FPT: If R&T are correct in their estimate - and Corbyn doesn't dramatically improve during 2017-2019 - a 1% loss in the NEV next year would suggest that Labour are looking down the barrel of a landslide defeat in 2020...

    In excess of a 10% deficit in the PV.

    PV generally means postal votes. What are you referring to?
    Popular Vote.
    By 10% deficit in the popular vote do you mean 10% of the party's GE2015 share or ten percentage points i.e 28% of the GB vote or 21%?
    I was reading it as 10 percentage points behind the Conservatives.

    Perhaps Rod can clarify :)
    I think he meant 21% instead of 31% in 2015.
  • surbiton said:

    HYUFD said:

    Wanderer said:

    surbiton said:

    Corbyn will get the numbers needed to get the nominations. The situation is totally different now. Many of the current shadow cabinet and junior position holders will nominate him for a start. I reckon he will get 60 - 80 nominations today.

    I think that is exactly right. One way or another, Corbyn will be on the ballot if he wants to be.

    Someone - I think Stephen Bush - summed this up the other day:

    * The only candidate who can replace Corbyn against his will is one who can beat Corbyn in a ballot of the membership.

    * There is no such candidate in the PLP.

    Conclusion: Corbyn will go when he chooses. Concerning when that will be, I thought the most significant line in the recent Independent article that trails these sackings was one that said that, after Oldham, Corbyn thinks he can win the election and become Prime Minister. I think we can safely say:

    * While he thinks that he won't resign.

    * He won't stop thinking that easily. That kind of thought is hard to dislodge.

    For which reason, I think Corbyn will neither resign nor be ousted before 2020.
    There is no point even challenging Corbyn if the members are consulted, a challenge would have to be an MP orchestrated coup and that is only likely to happen if Labour start losing seats to UKIP in by elections in which case there is no alternative
    Labour MPs cannot impose a new leader. This is not the Tory party.
    They did in 2007.
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    SeanT said:

    Good afternoon, everyone.

    Mr. T, my mother got, as a Christmas gift, something called The Ice Twins. Apparently it's moderately readable.

    Welcome back, Miss Marf.

    Hah. I am glad she was moderately diverted. Please give your mother my festive salutations.

    ICE TWINS is selling everywhere. Tesco's are shipping shedloads. A friend of mine came back from Australia and said it was so bloody ubiquitous over there he began to get obscurely angry.

    The next book will be a total and embarrassing flop, I am sure, so I am enjoying this brief success. Sic Transit.
    Congrats. Maybe the next one will ride the coattails and it's the one after to look out for ... But kudos for writing a best seller and may 2016 be as successful for you.
  • @RodCrosby

    When you make numerical statements you need to be totally clear about what you mean and don't assume that everybody understands what you mean by when you use initials like PV.
  • HYUFD said:

    surbiton said:

    HYUFD said:

    Wanderer said:

    surbiton said:

    Corbyn will get the numbers needed to get the nominations. The situation is totally different now. Many of the current shadow cabinet and junior position holders will nominate him for a start. I reckon he will get 60 - 80 nominations today.

    I think that is exactly right. One way or another, Corbyn will be on the ballot if he wants to be.

    Someone - I think Stephen Bush - summed this up the other day:

    * The only candidate who can replace Corbyn against his will is one who can beat Corbyn in a ballot of the membership.

    * There is no such candidate in the PLP.

    Conclusion: Corbyn will go when he chooses. Concerning when that will be, I thought the most significant line in the recent Independent article that trails these sackings was one that said that, after Oldham, Corbyn thinks he can win the election and become Prime Minister. I think we can safely say:

    * While he thinks that he won't resign.

    * He won't stop thinking that easily. That kind of thought is hard to dislodge.

    For which reason, I think Corbyn will neither resign nor be ousted before 2020.
    There is no point even challenging Corbyn if the members are consulted, a challenge would have to be an MP orchestrated coup and that is only likely to happen if Labour start losing seats to UKIP in by elections in which case there is no alternative
    Labour MPs cannot impose a new leader. This is not the Tory party.
    Labour's own lawyers said in the Times they could if a challenger gets sufficient nominations and Corbyn does not
    You keep saying that, but it's the NEC that interprets the rules, and JC is quickly making it Corbyn-friendly.
  • Mr. T, brief?

    Hasn't it been in the bestsellers' list for a period so lengthy as to be considered vulgar?

    She got many books so I don't know when she'll read it, but I shall report back her opinion.
  • surbiton said:

    @Blackburn63 - Are you going to respond to my query about your assertion that it is against EU law to dredge rivers?

    Mike, a posted a bbc clip about dredging in Somerset Plains. It all went quiet after that. Cheap anti-EU stunts, that's all.
    There is no EU law on dredging. @Blackburn63 is wrong to assert that there is.



    Rather disingenuous of you Mike.

    http://www.european-dredging.eu/pdf/EULawOnDredging.pdf

    Whilst there is no specific EU law on dredging there are EU laws which affect whether or not dredging occurs by placing a huge financial burden on anyone wanting to dredge.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    Jim Pickard
    Labour has attracted 10 times as many new members in London than in Scotland since May https://t.co/hKmkdrq25x 40k and 4k respectively

    Biggest increases in London and university towns (eg Manchester) @ChrispLOL @dancrawford85

    For me this summarises Labour's problem.

    The Corbynites are orgasming over 300 new members in North Cornwall. A surge in membership. A SURGE!



    But look at their result in North Cornwall in 2015.

    They came fourth. With 5%. Fully 19,000 votes adrift of the winning Tory

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000837

    Nineteen thousand votes behind. 19,000!


    I suspect the consequence for Labour, in the south west, of the Corbyn leadership, will be a net loss of MPs, as Ben Bradshaw is defeated in Exeter.
    So , what should Labour do in places like Cornwall ? Give up ? Cornwall is Britain's poorest county.

    The Labour vote in 2010 in the six Cornish seats was 8.64%. In 2015 it was 12.3%
    The Tory vote also went up: from 40.95% to 43.10%. LD: 22.4% [41.76%]. UKIP 13.83% [4.9%]

    In the past, Labour's policy was benign neglect. We sub-contracted out to the Lib Dems - the Tory "B" team.

    It is to Ed Miliband's credit that the first "organisor" was appointed for Devon and Cornwall. I think you will find Labour will begin to win a few council seats. Labour should never again give up some regions. It is going to be a long haul.
    I appreciate your dilemma, and sympathise. Heh.

    And of course it is nice to gain members, and good to win council seats. But my larger point remains entirely valid. Barely a decade ago Labour actually had MPs in Cornwall, now they are utterly irrelevant.

    Will a leftier Labour party full of excited, hairy, mildly insane defectors from the Greens win back any of those seats? No. (have you met any Cornish Greens? - I have, oh dear oh dear).

    But they will give Labour the delusion they are recovering, which makes it all worse, as Corbyn depends on this false optimism. And the net effect will probably be a LOSS of seats in the end.

    So, paradoxically, it would be better for you in the long term if Labour membership imploded right now, so Corbyn could be ousted.

    Labour had only one MP in Camborne won in a landslide, She kept her seat in 2001 as that was largely the same result as in 1997. I am not sure when they had an MP before that.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 28,507
    SeanT said:

    malcolmg said:



    Afternoon Hurst, you could call it lust or future greed, they are looking to feather their own nests. Neither have shown any talent , I doubt they could run a bath. The dire lack of any talent is the real Labour issue rather than Corbyn , he is just the symptom of how poor the remainder of them really are.
    Hard to see Labour doing anything till thy get rid of these two and their ilk, it is unfortunate that Corbyn is not up to a cull of the dead wood. Now is the time to do it and hope some new talent surfaces by the next election, not as if they have much to beat.

    The dire lack of talent is not something that afflicts Labour alone. The actual government Front Bench, never mind its shadow, does not exactly sparkle.

    On a happy note, my boy bought me a bottle of the 16 year-old Jura for Christmas. I have had the Jura before but not that one - I have to say I am impressed (and me an Islay fan of many years standing).
    Have you tried 18 year old Highland Park?

    My publishers gave me a bottle as a present for getting a number 1 on the charts, and I looked at it askance at first: Just a bottle of malt, where's my vintage champagne, etc

    Then I tried it. Bloody hell. An amazing whisky. Some say it's the best in the world and they might be right.

    https://www.thewhiskyexchange.com/P-6942.aspx

    All the best whiskies come from the Islands, Highland Park, Talisker, Islay, Jura.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    surbiton said:

    @Blackburn63 - Are you going to respond to my query about your assertion that it is against EU law to dredge rivers?

    Mike, a posted a bbc clip about dredging in Somerset Plains. It all went quiet after that. Cheap anti-EU stunts, that's all.
    There is no EU law on dredging. @Blackburn63 is wrong to assert that there is.



    Rather disingenuous of you Mike.

    http://www.european-dredging.eu/pdf/EULawOnDredging.pdf

    Whilst there is no specific EU law on dredging there are EU laws which affect whether or not dredging occurs by placing a huge financial burden on anyone wanting to dredge.
    Disingenuous of you , actually. Nowhere does it state that you cannot dredge as the Somerset Levels dredging proves it. You and your mates never qualified your statement.

    There is no ban on dredging by the EU. Simple.
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    surbiton said:

    Wanderer said:

    RodCrosby said:

    RodCrosby said:

    FPT: If R&T are correct in their estimate - and Corbyn doesn't dramatically improve during 2017-2019 - a 1% loss in the NEV next year would suggest that Labour are looking down the barrel of a landslide defeat in 2020...

    In excess of a 10% deficit in the PV.

    PV generally means postal votes. What are you referring to?
    Popular Vote.
    By 10% deficit in the popular vote do you mean 10% of the party's GE2015 share or ten percentage points i.e 28% of the GB vote or 21%?
    I was reading it as 10 percentage points behind the Conservatives.

    Perhaps Rod can clarify :)
    I think he meant 21% instead of 31% in 2015.
    10% behind the winner of the popular vote.


  • JBriskin said:
    How long do we give them until they are bust then?
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    Ice Twins has finally just been handed back to me by my wife..who snatched it ..she reckons it would make a good movie..and she seems to know about such things
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    RodCrosby said:

    surbiton said:

    Wanderer said:

    RodCrosby said:

    RodCrosby said:

    FPT: If R&T are correct in their estimate - and Corbyn doesn't dramatically improve during 2017-2019 - a 1% loss in the NEV next year would suggest that Labour are looking down the barrel of a landslide defeat in 2020...

    In excess of a 10% deficit in the PV.

    PV generally means postal votes. What are you referring to?
    Popular Vote.
    By 10% deficit in the popular vote do you mean 10% of the party's GE2015 share or ten percentage points i.e 28% of the GB vote or 21%?
    I was reading it as 10 percentage points behind the Conservatives.

    Perhaps Rod can clarify :)
    I think he meant 21% instead of 31% in 2015.
    10% behind the winner of the popular vote.


    So, like 1987 ?
  • surbiton said:

    surbiton said:

    @Blackburn63 - Are you going to respond to my query about your assertion that it is against EU law to dredge rivers?

    Mike, a posted a bbc clip about dredging in Somerset Plains. It all went quiet after that. Cheap anti-EU stunts, that's all.
    There is no EU law on dredging. @Blackburn63 is wrong to assert that there is.



    Rather disingenuous of you Mike.

    http://www.european-dredging.eu/pdf/EULawOnDredging.pdf

    Whilst there is no specific EU law on dredging there are EU laws which affect whether or not dredging occurs by placing a huge financial burden on anyone wanting to dredge.
    Disingenuous of you , actually. Nowhere does it state that you cannot dredge as the Somerset Levels dredging proves it. You and your mates never qualified your statement.

    There is no ban on dredging by the EU. Simple.
    I didn't make the statement in the first place, neither when the levels were flooding nor now. So forget disingenuous. You just made an outright false statement.

    All I was doing was pointing out to Mike that you don't have to have a specific law in place to make something very difficult or impossible to do.
  • On the last thread I noticed people trying to prove human caused climate change by referring to weather records that go back less than a century and a half. Rather brave.
  • JBriskinJBriskin Posts: 2,380
    FUrguhart - as long as he doesn't get the keys to the fleet cars should be okay ? - or something
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    SeanT said:

    notme said:

    Hopefully no PBers and their loved ones have been caught up in the floods.

    The missus has a ground floor flat in York and is now in a bit of a flap....
    Friend of mine was enduring a dour Yorkshire Boxing Day with his mother-in-law, when the floods got so bad they had to be evacuated, allowing him to spend the rest of the day in the pub...
    I hope he has recovered from the ordeal. Or, has he volunteered to stay there ?
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 28,507
    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    Jim Pickard
    Labour has attracted 10 times as many new members in London than in Scotland since May https://t.co/hKmkdrq25x 40k and 4k respectively

    Biggest increases in London and university towns (eg Manchester) @ChrispLOL @dancrawford85

    For me this summarises Labour's problem.

    The Corbynites are orgasming over 300 new members in North Cornwall. A surge in membership. A SURGE!



    But look at their result in North Cornwall in 2015.

    They came fourth. With 5%. Fully 19,000 votes adrift of the winning Tory

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000837

    Nineteen thousand votes behind. 19,000!


    I suspect the consequence for Labour, in the south west, of the Corbyn leadership, will be a net loss of MPs, as Ben Bradshaw is defeated in Exeter.
    So , what should Labour do in places like Cornwall ? Give up ? Cornwall is Britain's poorest county.

    The Labour vote in 2010 in the six Cornish seats was 8.64%. In 2015 it was 12.3%
    The Tory vote also went up: from 40.95% to 43.10%. LD: 22.4% [41.76%]. UKIP 13.83% [4.9%]

    In the past, Labour's policy was benign neglect. We sub-contracted out to the Lib Dems - the Tory "B" team.

    It is to Ed Miliband's credit that the first "organisor" was appointed for Devon and Cornwall. I think you will find Labour will begin to win a few council seats. Labour should never again give up some regions. It is going to be a long haul.
    I appreciate your dilemma, and sympathise. Heh.

    And of course it is nice to gain members, and good to win council seats. But my larger point remains entirely valid. Barely a decade ago Labour actually had MPs in Cornwall, now they are utterly irrelevant.

    Will a leftier Labour party full of excited, hairy, mildly insane defectors from the Greens win back any of those seats? No. (have you met any Cornish Greens? - I have, oh dear oh dear).

    But they will give Labour the delusion they are recovering, which makes it all worse, as Corbyn depends on this false optimism. And the net effect will probably be a LOSS of seats in the end.

    So, paradoxically, it would be better for you in the long term if Labour membership imploded right now, so Corbyn could be ousted.

    Labour had only one MP in Camborne won in a landslide, She kept her seat in 2001 as that was largely the same result as in 1997. I am not sure when they had an MP before that.
    Camborne was Labour from 1950-70.
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034

    surbiton said:

    @Blackburn63 - Are you going to respond to my query about your assertion that it is against EU law to dredge rivers?

    Mike, a posted a bbc clip about dredging in Somerset Plains. It all went quiet after that. Cheap anti-EU stunts, that's all.
    There is no EU law on dredging. @Blackburn63 is wrong to assert that there is.




    While there may be no EU law specifically on dredging, Mike Smithson is wrong to imply that there is no EU law that affects dredging. There is plenty:

    http://www.european-dredging.eu/pdf/EULawOnDredging.pdf
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Sean_F said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    Jim Pickard
    Labour has attracted 10 times as many new members in London than in Scotland since May https://t.co/hKmkdrq25x 40k and 4k respectively

    Biggest increases in London and university towns (eg Manchester) @ChrispLOL @dancrawford85

    For me this summarises Labour's problem.

    The Corbynites are orgasming over 300 new members in North Cornwall. A surge in membership. A SURGE!



    But look at their result in North Cornwall in 2015.

    They came fourth. With 5%. Fully 19,000 votes adrift of the winning Tory

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000837

    Nineteen thousand votes behind. 19,000!


    I suspect the consequence for Labour, in the south west, of the Corbyn leadership, will be a net loss of MPs, as Ben Bradshaw is defeated in Exeter.
    So , what should Labour do in places like Cornwall ? Give up ? Cornwall is Britain's poorest county.

    The Labour vote in 2010 in the six Cornish seats was 8.64%. In 2015 it was 12.3%
    The Tory vote also went up: from 40.95% to 43.10%. LD: 22.4% [41.76%]. UKIP 13.83% [4.9%]

    In the past, Labour's policy was benign neglect. We sub-contracted out to the Lib Dems - the Tory "B" team.

    It is to Ed Miliband's credit that the first "organisor" was appointed for Devon and Cornwall. I think you will find Labour will begin to win a few council seats. Labour should never again give up some regions. It is going to be a long haul.
    I appreciate your dilemma, and sympathise. Heh.

    And of course it is nice to gain members, and good to win council seats. But my larger point remains entirely valid. Barely a decade ago Labour actually had MPs in Cornwall, now they are utterly irrelevant.

    Will a leftier Labour party full of excited, hairy, mildly insane defectors from the Greens win back any of those seats? No. (have you met any Cornish Greens? - I have, oh dear oh dear).

    But they will give Labour the delusion they are recovering, which makes it all worse, as Corbyn depends on this false optimism. And the net effect will probably be a LOSS of seats in the end.

    So, paradoxically, it would be better for you in the long term if Labour membership imploded right now, so Corbyn could be ousted.

    Labour had only one MP in Camborne won in a landslide, She kept her seat in 2001 as that was largely the same result as in 1997. I am not sure when they had an MP before that.
    Camborne was Labour from 1950-70.
    We will get it back. Is Seb Coe from Cornwall ?
  • Another British first: first man to ever row solo across the Pacific:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-35186209

    Very impressive, though he must be stark raving mad.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 52,908
    edited December 2015
    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    Jim Pickard
    Labour has attracted 10 times as many new members in London than in Scotland since May https://t.co/hKmkdrq25x 40k and 4k respectively

    Biggest increases in London and university towns (eg Manchester) @ChrispLOL @dancrawford85

    For me this summarises Labour's problem.

    The Corbynites are orgasming over 300 new members in North Cornwall. A surge in membership. A SURGE!



    But look at their result in North Cornwall in 2015.

    They came fourth. With 5%. Fully 19,000 votes adrift of the winning Tory

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000837

    Nineteen thousand votes behind. 19,000!


    I suspect the consequence for Labour, in the south west, of the Corbyn leadership, will be a net loss of MPs, as Ben Bradshaw is defeated in Exeter.
    So , what should Labour do in places like Cornwall ? Give up ? Cornwall is Britain's poorest county.

    The Labour vote in 2010 in the six Cornish seats was 8.64%. In 2015 it was 12.3%
    The Tory vote also went up: from 40.95% to 43.10%. LD: 22.4% [41.76%]. UKIP 13.83% [4.9%]

    In the past, Labour's policy was benign neglect. We sub-contracted out to the Lib Dems - the Tory "B" team.

    It is to Ed Miliband's credit that the first "organisor" was appointed for Devon and Cornwall. I think you will find Labour will begin to win a few council seats. Labour should never again give up some regions. It is going to be a long haul.
    I appreciate your dilemma, and sympathise. Heh.



    Labour had only one MP in Camborne won in a landslide, She kept her seat in 2001 as that was largely the same result as in 1997. I am not sure when they had an MP before that.
    Labour had MPs in Cornwall back through the 50s and 60s.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falmouth_and_Camborne_(UK_Parliament_constituency)

    Cornwall has never been that fertile for Labour, but I posit that under Corbyn the party will do even worse than usual, west of the Tamar.
    Not convinced by Tristram Hunt that Labour is now the party of rural England?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/countryside/12067570/Labour-is-now-the-party-of-rural-England.html
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    That drinker in York will probably stay in the pub until the water reaches top of the bar level...not nice having wet elbows
  • Mr. kle4, why not? Just because the Shadow Minister for Agriculture [or whatever the title is] wants to make meat socially unacceptable?
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    Jim Pickard
    Labour has attracted 10 times as many new members in London than in Scotland since May https://t.co/hKmkdrq25x 40k and 4k respectively

    Biggest increases in London and university towns (eg Manchester) @ChrispLOL @dancrawford85

    For me this summarises Labour's problem.

    The Corbynites are orgasming over 300 new members in North Cornwall. A surge in membership. A SURGE!



    But look at their result in North Cornwall in 2015.

    They came fourth. With 5%. Fully 19,000 votes adrift of the winning Tory

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000837

    Nineteen thousand votes behind. 19,000!


    I suspect the consequence for Labour, in the south west, of the Corbyn leadership, will be a net loss of MPs, as Ben Bradshaw is defeated in Exeter.
    So , what should Labour do in places like Cornwall ? Give up ? Cornwall is Britain's poorest county.

    The Labour vote in 2010 in the six Cornish seats was 8.64%. In 2015 it was 12.3%
    The Tory vote also went up: from 40.95% to 43.10%. LD: 22.4% [41.76%]. UKIP 13.83% [4.9%]

    In the past, Labour's policy was benign neglect. We sub-contracted out to the Lib Dems - the Tory "B" team.

    It is to Ed Miliband's credit that the first "organisor" was appointed for Devon and Cornwall. I think you will find Labour will begin to win a few council seats. Labour should never again give up some regions. It is going to be a long haul.
    I appreciate your dilemma, and sympathise. Heh.



    Labour had only one MP in Camborne won in a landslide, She kept her seat in 2001 as that was largely the same result as in 1997. I am not sure when they had an MP before that.
    Labour had MPs in Cornwall back through the 50s and 60s.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falmouth_and_Camborne_(UK_Parliament_constituency)

    Cornwall has never been that fertile for Labour, but I posit that under Corbyn the party will do even worse than usual, west of the Tamar.
    It's the 1983 and 87 elections that broke the link. Bloody SDP. But we will be back in contention. I guess by 2025.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    surbiton said:

    HYUFD said:

    Wanderer said:

    surbiton said:

    Corbyn will get the numbers needed to get the nominations. The situation is totally different now. Many of the current shadow cabinet and junior position holders will nominate him for a start. I reckon he will get 60 - 80 nominations today.

    I think that is exactly right. One way or another, Corbyn will be on the ballot if he wants to be.

    Someone - I think Stephen Bush - summed this up the other day:

    * The only candidate who can replace Corbyn against his will is one who can beat Corbyn in a ballot of the membership.

    * There is no such candidate in the PLP.

    Conclusion: Corbyn will go when he chooses. Concerning when that will be, I thought the most significant line in the recent Independent article that trails these sackings was one that said that, after Oldham, Corbyn thinks he can win the election and become Prime Minister. I think we can safely say:

    * While he thinks that he won't resign.

    * He won't stop thinking that easily. That kind of thought is hard to dislodge.

    For which reason, I think Corbyn will neither resign nor be ousted before 2020.
    There is no point even challenging Corbyn if the members are consulted, a challenge would have to be an MP orchestrated coup and that is only likely to happen if Labour start losing seats to UKIP in by elections in which case there is no alternative
    Labour MPs cannot impose a new leader. This is not the Tory party.
    They did in 2007.
    I think the rules are different when we are in government.
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    MD I think that rower did the Atlantic last year..He is a Yorkshireman so that probably explains it..maybe he comes from York and is used to it
  • That drinker in York will probably stay in the pub until the water reaches top of the bar level...not nice having wet elbows

    The Kings Arms in York, a city where I used to live, has built up a reputation over the decades as "the pub that floods" - all part of its appeal.

    http://www.tripadvisor.co.uk/ShowUserReviews-g186346-d5565863-r189615490-Kings_Arms-York_North_Yorkshire_England.html
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034

    surbiton said:

    @Blackburn63 - Are you going to respond to my query about your assertion that it is against EU law to dredge rivers?

    Mike, a posted a bbc clip about dredging in Somerset Plains. It all went quiet after that. Cheap anti-EU stunts, that's all.
    There is no EU law on dredging. @Blackburn63 is wrong to assert that there is.



    Rather disingenuous of you Mike.

    http://www.european-dredging.eu/pdf/EULawOnDredging.pdf

    Whilst there is no specific EU law on dredging there are EU laws which affect whether or not dredging occurs by placing a huge financial burden on anyone wanting to dredge.
    Mr Tyndall. Snap. Sorry I did not see this before posting an almost identical post with the same reference link.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 52,908

    That drinker in York will probably stay in the pub until the water reaches top of the bar level...not nice having wet elbows

    The Kings Arms in York, a city where I used to live, has built up a reputation over the decades as "the pub that floods" - all part of its appeal.
    Sure it is. No doubt there's a pub that makes a virtue of serving the worst beer in the nation as well, as part of its appeal.
  • MTimT said:

    surbiton said:

    @Blackburn63 - Are you going to respond to my query about your assertion that it is against EU law to dredge rivers?

    Mike, a posted a bbc clip about dredging in Somerset Plains. It all went quiet after that. Cheap anti-EU stunts, that's all.
    There is no EU law on dredging. @Blackburn63 is wrong to assert that there is.



    Rather disingenuous of you Mike.

    http://www.european-dredging.eu/pdf/EULawOnDredging.pdf

    Whilst there is no specific EU law on dredging there are EU laws which affect whether or not dredging occurs by placing a huge financial burden on anyone wanting to dredge.
    Mr Tyndall. Snap. Sorry I did not see this before posting an almost identical post with the same reference link.
    No worries old chap. :-)
  • Mr. Smithson, aye, York's always flooding, though not usually quite so much.

    Mr. Dodd, if so, he'll only have the Indian Ocean left (I think the north and south seas probably too dangerous. And rowing the South China Sea might be a bit risky).
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    OGH I filmed the same pub many times..practically every year..nice pub in the summer tho
  • ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133
    edited December 2015
    surbiton said:

    surbiton said:

    HYUFD said:

    Wanderer said:

    surbiton said:

    Corbyn will get the numbers needed to get the nominations. The situation is totally different now. Many of the current shadow cabinet and junior position holders will nominate him for a start. I reckon he will get 60 - 80 nominations today.

    I think that is exactly right. One way or another, Corbyn will be on the ballot if he wants to be.

    Someone - I think Stephen Bush - summed this up the other day:

    * The only candidate who can replace Corbyn against his will is one who can beat Corbyn in a ballot of the membership.

    * There is no such candidate in the PLP.

    Conclusion: Corbyn will go when he chooses. Concerning when that will be, I thought the most significant line in the recent Independent article that trails these sackings was one that said that, after Oldham, Corbyn thinks he can win the election and become Prime Minister. I think we can safely say:

    * While he thinks that he won't resign.

    * He won't stop thinking that easily. That kind of thought is hard to dislodge.

    For which reason, I think Corbyn will neither resign nor be ousted before 2020.
    There is no point even challenging Corbyn if the members are consulted, a challenge would have to be an MP orchestrated coup and that is only likely to happen if Labour start losing seats to UKIP in by elections in which case there is no alternative
    Labour MPs cannot impose a new leader. This is not the Tory party.
    They did in 2007.
    I think the rules are different when we are in government.
    Yes but no.

    They are different but it wouldn't affect this mode of leadership change: bully the leader out before he wants to go and then bully enough of your MPs to nominate a candidate unopposed.
  • JBriskinJBriskin Posts: 2,380
    Scottish fitba -

    Heart of Midlothian Verified account ‏@JamTarts 1m1 minute ago Glasgow, Scotland
    FT: Hearts 2-2 Celtic #HMFCLive
  • Welcome back, Mr. Briskin.
  • JBriskinJBriskin Posts: 2,380
    Thanks Morris!!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 69,731

    HYUFD said:

    surbiton said:

    HYUFD said:

    Wanderer said:

    surbiton said:

    Corbyn will get the numbers needed to get the nominations. The situation is totally different now. Many of the current shadow cabinet and junior position holders will nominate him for a start. I reckon he will get 60 - 80 nominations today.

    I think that is exactly right. One way or another, Corbyn will be on the ballot if he wants to be.

    Someone - I think Stephen Bush - summed this up the other day:

    * The only candidate who can replace Corbyn against his will is one who can beat Corbyn in a ballot of the membership.

    * There is no such candidate in the PLP.

    Conclusion: Corbyn will go when he chooses. Concerning when that will be, I thought the most significant line in the recent Independent article that trails these sackings was one that said that, after Oldham, Corbyn thinks he can win the election and become Prime Minister. I think we can safely say:

    * While he thinks that he won't resign.

    * He won't stop thinking that easily. That kind of thought is hard to dislodge.

    For which reason, I think Corbyn will neither resign nor be ousted before 2020.
    There is no point even challenging Corbyn if the members are consulted, a challenge would have to be an MP orchestrated coup and that is only likely to happen if Labour start losing seats to UKIP in by elections in which case there is no alternative
    Labour MPs cannot impose a new leader. This is not the Tory party.
    Labour's own lawyers said in the Times they could if a challenger gets sufficient nominations and Corbyn does not
    You keep saying that, but it's the NEC that interprets the rules, and JC is quickly making it Corbyn-friendly.
    The NEC is not yet the Corbynista politburo and any coup would likely occur by the end of 2017 before it becomes so
  • Mr. HYUFD, hmm. I thought Corbyn had a majority of loyal dunderheads on the NEC?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 69,731
    RodCrosby said:

    surbiton said:

    Wanderer said:

    RodCrosby said:

    RodCrosby said:

    FPT: If R&T are correct in their estimate - and Corbyn doesn't dramatically improve during 2017-2019 - a 1% loss in the NEV next year would suggest that Labour are looking down the barrel of a landslide defeat in 2020...

    In excess of a 10% deficit in the PV.

    PV generally means postal votes. What are you referring to?
    Popular Vote.
    By 10% deficit in the popular vote do you mean 10% of the party's GE2015 share or ten percentage points i.e 28% of the GB vote or 21%?
    I was reading it as 10 percentage points behind the Conservatives.

    Perhaps Rod can clarify :)
    I think he meant 21% instead of 31% in 2015.
    10% behind the winner of the popular vote.


    UKIP will be the biggest gainers in 2020 in my view post EU ref so even if Labour stands still I doubt the Tories will reach a 10% lead
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 69,731

    Mr. HYUFD, hmm. I thought Corbyn had a majority of loyal dunderheads on the NEC?

    Not at the moment in a few years time maybe
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    Sean_F said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:



    For me this summarises Labour's problem.

    The Corbynites are orgasming over 300 new members in North Cornwall. A surge in membership. A SURGE!



    But look at their result in North Cornwall in 2015.

    They came fourth. With 5%. Fully 19,000 votes adrift of the winning Tory

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000837

    Nineteen thousand votes behind. 19,000!


    I suspect the consequence for Labour, in the south west, of the Corbyn leadership, will be a net loss of MPs, as Ben Bradshaw is defeated in Exeter.
    So , what should Labour do in places like Cornwall ? Give up ? Cornwall is Britain's poorest county.

    The Labour vote in 2010 in the six Cornish seats was 8.64%. In 2015 it was 12.3%
    The Tory vote also went up: from 40.95% to 43.10%. LD: 22.4% [41.76%]. UKIP 13.83% [4.9%]

    In the past, Labour's policy was benign neglect. We sub-contracted out to the Lib Dems - the Tory "B" team.

    It is to Ed Miliband's credit that the first "organisor" was appointed for Devon and Cornwall. I think you will find Labour will begin to win a few council seats. Labour should never again give up some regions. It is going to be a long haul.
    I appreciate your dilemma, and sympathise. Heh.

    And of course it is nice to gain members, and good to win council seats. But my larger point remains entirely valid. Barely a decade ago Labour actually had MPs in Cornwall, now they are utterly irrelevant.

    Will a leftier Labour party full of excited, hairy, mildly insane defectors from the Greens win back any of those seats? No. (have you met any Cornish Greens? - I have, oh dear oh dear).

    But they will give Labour the delusion they are recovering, which makes it all worse, as Corbyn depends on this false optimism. And the net effect will probably be a LOSS of seats in the end.

    So, paradoxically, it would be better for you in the long term if Labour membership imploded right now, so Corbyn could be ousted.

    Labour had only one MP in Camborne won in a landslide, She kept her seat in 2001 as that was largely the same result as in 1997. I am not sure when they had an MP before that.
    Camborne was Labour from 1950-70.
    Labour had tons of seats in the counties during that period, as did the Tories in the cities.

    The long term urban-rural, north-south spatial polarization of votes has reduced these results to historical curiosities...
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Momentum Huddersfield
    @hilarybennmp Shadow Cabinet reshuffle soon lad. So you'll have more time to spend with your constituents.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 44,488
    surbiton said:


    So , what should Labour do in places like Cornwall ? Give up ? Cornwall is Britain's poorest county.

    Is this relative to urban areas? Because I imagine the cost of living is somewhat lower in Cornwall.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 28,507
    surbiton said:

    Sean_F said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    Jim Pickard
    Labour has attracted 10 times as many new members in London than in Scotland since May https://t.co/hKmkdrq25x 40k and 4k respectively

    Biggest increases in London and university towns (eg Manchester) @ChrispLOL @dancrawford85

    For me this summarises Labour's problem.

    The Corbynites are orgasming over 300 new members in North Cornwall. A surge in membership. A SURGE!



    But look at their result in North Cornwall in 2015.

    They came fourth. With 5%. Fully 19,000 votes adrift of the winning Tory

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000837

    Nineteen thousand votes behind. 19,000!


    I suspect the consequence for Labour, in the south west, of the Corbyn leadership, will be a net loss of MPs, as Ben Bradshaw is defeated in Exeter.
    So , what should Labour do in places like Cornwall ? Give up ? Cornwall is Britain's poorest county.

    The Labour vote in 2010 in the six Cornish seats was 8.64%. In 2015 it was 12.3%
    The Tory vote also went up: from 40.95% to 43.10%. LD: 22.4% [41.76%]. UKIP 13.83% [4.9%]

    In the past, Labour's policy was benign neglect. We sub-contracted out to the Lib Dems - the Tory "B" team.

    It is to Ed Miliband's credit that the first "organisor" was appointed for Devon and Cornwall. I think you will find Labour will begin to win a few council seats. Labour should never again give up some regions. It is going to be a long haul.

    Labour had only one MP in Camborne won in a landslide, She kept her seat in 2001 as that was largely the same result as in 1997. I am not sure when they had an MP before that.
    Camborne was Labour from 1950-70.
    We will get it back. Is Seb Coe from Cornwall ?
    It 's right that Labour supporters in Cornwall and Devon should have someone to vote for. There's probably a latent Labour vote of 20% or so, across both counties. That could be reduced in a particular constituency to 5%, due to tactical voting for Lib Dems.

    Now, the Lib Dems are gone. Labour, UKIP, Greens (and remaining Lib Dems) are all scrapping for the non-Conservative vote. The Conservatives are sitting pretty on 45% or so.
This discussion has been closed.