FlyTheNest

Ah - but have you ever worked for an NGO?
I have never mentioned falsifying results - and am not slagging off scientists - I am bothered by your view that all NGOs are the same.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/unmuz ... -1.1065080" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
cf: gag order on canadian scientists from a while back

SpinningHugo wrote:

mikems wrote:

Trump will not win the Republican nomination. Sanders will not win the Democratic one either.

I'm tempted to ask you who is going to win the Grand National next spring.

Bernie Sanders won't be winning that either, if that helps.

American politics is to a degree easy to predict, but only to a degree. In short money and organisation wins. Clinton lost to Obama in part because he could raise huge amounts of cash, she isn't up against a similar opponent this time as far as I know. For her to hit trouble she needs to meet an opponent able to win big in early primaries and bring in the cash. I
Think she is a dire candidate but she looks almost nailed on this time.

Trump won't win the republican one because he isn't really part of the establishment, you also can't carry on throwing a tantrum in public once you get to the business end of the campaign.

Jeb Bush maybe, supposed to have his fathers brains as opposed to his brothers, but there are a couple of other well connected front runners. Christie would be their best shot at actually winning but I doubt they will go for him. But whoever wins it won't be Trump as his rivals will pick up more votes from other candidates dropping out. Expect John McCain to punch his lights out at the convention.

tinyclanger2 wrote:Ah - but have you ever worked for an NGO?
I have never mentioned falsifying results - and am not slagging off scientists - I am bothered by your view that all NGOs are the same.

I never said all NGO's were the same - I just said that their results should be treated with the same skepticism and rigour as all other sources

You seem to be suggesting that all scientists working for or being funded by commercial enterprises (including myself I may add) are pressured into hiding results and misleading the authorities as to results.....the link you published could be explained by other things.

When I support a PhD with a project and some funding, mostly funded by the taxpayer, some of the results may be withheld from publication as they will be commercially confident. If the idea is that all PhD students have freedom to publish all they work on then say goodbye to interesting industrial projects

And before you say we are getting free resources then I can tell the PhD students get more out of it than we do!

I feel you are calling my professionalism into question - I am paid a wage to be a scientist and not to compromise my values. You seem to know more than me though

I am a senior development scientist in a multinational company with 20 years experience....what is your experience in the area?

All I would say is that I have very little trust in NGO's either...they make a lot of money from focusing on half-truths and on hazard rather than risk.

Strongly implies they are all the same.
How about Cancer Research UK? Just as one example.

PS - am suggesting no such thing. Am merely reacting the blanket treatment of an entire - and extremely diverse - sector.

tinyclanger2 wrote:

All I would say is that I have very little trust in NGO's either...they make a lot of money from focusing on half-truths and on hazard rather than risk.

Strongly implies they are all the same.
How about Cancer Research UK? Just as one example.

Badly phrased on my part.....

I was mainly talking about the lobbying, political NGO's in my particular area of science....

For west Walians:

Stella Creasy is running one of her Campaign Fight Back workshops in Swansea on Saturday 15th August, 3pm.

It's too short notice for me as I'm already booked to work that day and only received the info today ... but others might be interested. And I would be interested to know what people think of Creasy and her approach.

I'm particularly keen to get a sense of whether she is able to translate / adapt her approach across constituencies with very different characteristics - especially the more rural and remote seats where you can't rely on social media and there are large distances and fewer people to cover them ... not to mention that some of the major issues present differently and need different solutions in such areas - e.g. health, education.

It has occurred to me that we could end up with two winners of the leader and deputy leader contests who both come from London constituencies - Corbyn and Creasy. And that is slightly worrying if neither have shown a particular ability to get out to the more remote constituencies - well more than slightly worrying if I'm honest.

To AK.

I find this a bit odd as a statement.

But the doom currently being offered by TE about him is well over the top - even if he wins it is unlikely he will lead Labour into the next GE, and the only possibility of him deciding he wants to do that is if the party under him is polling extremely well (rather than extremely badly)

What on earth? We are either electing a party leader or we aren't. Ejecting Corbyn against his will really would cause a huge problem, as would the inevitable stitch up of having a single imposed candidate to avoid a shambolic leadership election. If Corbyn leaves of his own accord things could be just as messy.

We have to assume we are electing the 2020 candidate, although frankly at this rate Ed Miliband would be mobbed if he agreed to stand again (which I do find strangely satisfying).

To Roger Robert.

The reasons for Labours defeat are complex, but there is a degree of consensus around:

-Not trusted on the economy.
-SNP seen as too extreme and Labour was perceived as letting them in.
-LabourKip disliked our generosity to welfare scrounges (TM Osborne,Murdoch,Dacre) and being soft on immigrants.
-Miliband was the wrong Brother (TM) which probably wouldn't have been fatal as of itself.

Recent opinion polling quoted in the Guardian showed annoying amounts of support for austerity. I agree there is appetite for renationalising railways, but it is kind of a secondary thing and has a kind of only if my taxes don't go up vibe about it. Much of Labours policy platform polled popularly but the economy/SNP/immigration drowned it out.

So I think that is the consensus, nobody agrees what to do about it though.

The reason I say in normal times you have to win from the political centre is that this tends to be true. As opposition you can't really control the agenda and you are always looking to build a coalition of the disaffected. To a degree the political centre moves with the government.
To change stuff (like Thatcher in 79), first get elected and then move the country.

Apologies to TC2 - it was my poor phrasing that led to a bit of an unnecessary tiff - shame as we are normally on the same side - hope I am forgiven for my testiness

Back to something truly unpleasant and substantial

http://i100.independent.co.uk/article/w ... Zy4ccsnBEx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

likewise

TE wrote:although frankly at this rate Ed Miliband would be mobbed if he agreed to stand again (which I do find strangely satisfying).

In-very-deed.

TechnicalEphemera wrote:To AK.

I find this a bit odd as a statement.

But the doom currently being offered by TE about him is well over the top - even if he wins it is unlikely he will lead Labour into the next GE, and the only possibility of him deciding he wants to do that is if the party under him is polling extremely well (rather than extremely badly)

What on earth? We are either electing a party leader or we aren't. Ejecting Corbyn against his will really would cause a huge problem, as would the inevitable stitch up of having a single imposed candidate to avoid a shambolic leadership election. If Corbyn leaves of his own accord things could be just as messy.

We have to assume we are electing the 2020 candidate, although frankly at this rate Ed Miliband would be mobbed if he agreed to stand again (which I do find strangely satisfying).

To Roger.

The reasons for Labours defeat are complex, but there is a degree of consensus around:

-Not trusted on the economy.
-SNP seen as too extreme and Labour was perceived as letting them in.
-LabourKip disliked our generosity to welfare scrounges (TM Osborne,Murdoch,Dacre) and being soft on immigrants.
-Miliband was the wrong Brother (TM) which probably wouldn't have been fatal as of itself.

Recent opinion polling quoted in the Guardian showed annoying amounts of support for austerity. I agree there is appetite for renationalising railways, but it is kind of a secondary thing and has a kind of only if my taxes don't go up vibe about it. Much of Labours policy platform polled popularly but the economy/SNP/immigration drowned it out.

So I think that is the consensus, nobody agrees what to do about it though.

The reason I say in normal times you have to win from the political centre is that this tends to be true. As opposition you can't really control the agenda and you are always looking to build a coalition of the disaffected. To a degree the political centre moves with the government.
To change stuff (like Thatcher in 79), first get elected and then move the country.

Agree with all of this but most importantly the bit I've bolded, we can't possibly go into another leaders election 18 months 2 years before the election, but having a leader imposed would wrench the party wide open.
Its a can of worms.
Whoever is elected now must take the party forward to the election 2020.

https://twitter.com/labourlewis" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; MP argues with Inspiration Trust ‏@InspirationEast over Sure Start Centre taken over by them.....

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

TechnicalEphemera wrote:To AK.

I find this a bit odd as a statement.

But the doom currently being offered by TE about him is well over the top - even if he wins it is unlikely he will lead Labour into the next GE, and the only possibility of him deciding he wants to do that is if the party under him is polling extremely well (rather than extremely badly)

What on earth? We are either electing a party leader or we aren't. Ejecting Corbyn against his will really would cause a huge problem, as would the inevitable stitch up of having a single imposed candidate to avoid a shambolic leadership election. If Corbyn leaves of his own accord things could be just as messy.

We have to assume we are electing the 2020 candidate, although frankly at this rate Ed Miliband would be mobbed if he agreed to stand again (which I do find strangely satisfying).

To Roger.

The reasons for Labours defeat are complex, but there is a degree of consensus around:

-Not trusted on the economy.
-SNP seen as too extreme and Labour was perceived as letting them in.
-LabourKip disliked our generosity to welfare scrounges (TM Osborne,Murdoch,Dacre) and being soft on immigrants.
-Miliband was the wrong Brother (TM) which probably wouldn't have been fatal as of itself.

Recent opinion polling quoted in the Guardian showed annoying amounts of support for austerity. I agree there is appetite for renationalising railways, but it is kind of a secondary thing and has a kind of only if my taxes don't go up vibe about it. Much of Labours policy platform polled popularly but the economy/SNP/immigration drowned it out.

So I think that is the consensus, nobody agrees what to do about it though.

The reason I say in normal times you have to win from the political centre is that this tends to be true. As opposition you can't really control the agenda and you are always looking to build a coalition of the disaffected. To a degree the political centre moves with the government.
To change stuff (like Thatcher in 79), first get elected and then move the country.

One of AK's good traits (I am being serious not flippant) is that he is one of nature's optimists.

DfE Data: Sponsored academies lead to slower school improvement

http://www.localschoolsnetwork.org.uk/2 ... provement/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Above, I appear to have my logical identifiers mixed up.

Replace abstract entity label Roger with Robert.

For this muppetry I apologise profusely.

Bevanknewbest ‏@Bevanknewbest · 4s4 seconds ago
NHS spending on private ambulances soars by over 150% in 5 years http://telegraph.co.uk/news/nhs/11794" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

Oddly the page is not available now......

David Cameron will fight 2020 election, senior Tories believe

Senior Conservatives say that they are convinced David Cameron will fight a third general election in 2020 because the “lure of power will be too strong”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... lieve.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Jeremy Corbyn predicted landslide 53% victory in shock new YouGov poll
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/je ... ar_twitter" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Many here support him, I know that.
But this fills me with despair it really does. He can't and won't win an election and those who really need a Labour government will suffer.
And for those who want to know if I have a crystal ball, no I don't, I have a time machine that takes me back to this....

“I’ll tell you what happens with impossible promises. You start with far-fetched resolutions. They are then pickled into a rigid dogma, a code, and you go through the years sticking to that, out-dated, mis-placed, irrelevant to the real needs, and you end in the grotesque chaos of a Labour council – a Labour council - hiring taxis to scuttle round a city handing out redundancy notices to its own workers".
These are probably the most famous words ever delivered by Neil Kinnock, whose ‘Parliamentary Report’, presented at Bournemouth on October 11th, 1985

http://www.britishpoliticalspeech.org/s ... speech=191" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Good night all

AngryAsWell wrote:David Cameron will fight 2020 election, senior Tories believe

Senior Conservatives say that they are convinced David Cameron will fight a third general election in 2020 because the “lure of power will be too strong”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... lieve.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Just how much more unattractive can this man be made to look? If this is why he might stay on it's worse than his previous reason for wanting to be Prime Minister ... and that's saying something.

I happened to be in Liverpool during that time,pressurised intensely but didn't relent.Our branch was suspended.Now I am not saying Corbyn is a militant,but there is definately a sort of similar intensity bordering on hysteria and cult of personality(ies) which I recognise;similarly the more he and his supporters are "attacked" the more resilient and steadfast they become.People are looking for a saviour,a pent up frustration coalescing.

rebeccariots2 wrote:

Chinese SNP councillor quits amid ‘racism’ claims
http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/t ... -1-3852813" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

...and it would appear that the People's Front for Liberation (SNP) is to be joined by the People's Liberation Front (SIP):

New Scottish independence party to field Holyrood candidates
A NEW pro-independence party is hoping to field candidates across Scotland in next year’s Holyrood election, but says they must be able to pay their own deposits to stand.
http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/t ... -1-3854660

Nats btl are already saying it's a Unionist plot.

Odds have moved sharply with that Mirror poll
Corbyn now odds on everywhere

http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/bri ... our-leader" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

YouGov: Full Labour Party members as opposed to registered supporters think by 51 to 40 unlikely to win 2020 general election with Corbyyn

Another Miliband triumph.

Here is the poll.

1,411 sample

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/08/10/corbyn-pull-ahead/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Basically unless something surprising happens PDQ, Jeremy Corbyn is the new leader of the Labour party.

A majority of full Labour members think Labour likely to win 2020 Election with Burnham or Cooper, but with Corbyn likely to lose. Corbyn still ahead.

Mad bastards.

"Tory hopeful in futile bid for some control over schools now run by DfE and its placemen"



No. Fucking. Chance.

FWIW
This full member of 35 years,thinks Labour highly unlikely to win in 2020 regardless.

SpinningHugo wrote:Here is the poll.

1,411 sample

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/08/10/corbyn-pull-ahead/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Basically unless something surprising happens PDQ, Jeremy Corbyn is the new leader of the Labour party.

A majority of full Labour members think Labour likely to win 2020 Election with Burnham or Cooper, but with Corbyn likely to lose. Corbyn still ahead.

Mad bastards.

There is always hope, a cull of new sign ups and a hope that when push comes to shove rational thoughts prevail.

Failing that there will have to be an intervention, possibly in the spring. Of course if Corbyn storms to a 20 point lead in the polls and stays there I will be delighted. In which case all hail the saviour.


Bit unfair to blame Miliband for this. He purposely set the system up to prevent this happening. Some stupid MPs thought it would be a laugh to put him on the ballot.

HindleA wrote:FWIW
This full member of 35 years,thinks Labour highly unlikely to win in 2020 regardless.

I think Burnham or Cooper have a shot. Much can go wrong for Dave.

True.I am in a "week is a long time in politics,another five ####ing years (or more)is interminable gloom"frame of mind,hopefully this will change.

David Cameron has appointed the founder of the lingerie brand Ultimo as the government’s new entrepreneurship tsar for areas of high unemployment.

Michelle Mone – tipped to be on the list of new peers, expected to be revealed later this month – will lead a review of obstacles faced by people in disadvantaged areas when it comes to setting up their own businesses.

The Department for Work and Pensions said Mone, from Glasgow, would look at how to encourage benefit claimants, women, young people, disabled people and ex-offenders to become entrepreneurs. The former model, who left school at 15, founded Ultimo in her 20s and sold an 80% stake in the firm last year.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... rship-tsar

IDS said, "There’s no one I can think of that’s better qualified to help young entrepreneurs from deprived backgrounds to turn a good idea into a flourishing business."

Nuff said...

Incidentally, given that the Mayor currently has no responsibility for schools in London, can someone tell me how this Policy Exchange woman manages to trouser (can I uses that in a female connotation?) £131k?

https://www.london.gov.uk/mayor-assembl ... nira-mirza" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

What does she even do?

Patronising prick.

HindleA wrote:Patronising prick.

IDS

RogerOThornhill wrote:Incidentally, given that the Mayor currently has no responsibility for schools in London, can someone tell me how this Policy Exchange woman manages to trouser (can I uses that in a female connotation?) £131k?

https://www.london.gov.uk/mayor-assembl ... nira-mirza" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

What does she even do?

That is a bloody good question.

Sits on her arse counting her cash I suspect.

RogerOThornhill wrote:Incidentally, given that the Mayor currently has no responsibility for schools in London, can someone tell me how this Policy Exchange woman manages to trouser (can I uses that in a female connotation?) £131k?

https://www.london.gov.uk/mayor-assembl ... nira-mirza" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

What does she even do?

Stuff like this:
https://www.london.gov.uk/priorities/sc ... our-vision
And helping find sites for Free Schools:
https://www.london.gov.uk/priorities/sc ... hool-sites