Wait, Braverman the Brexiteer went to the Sorbonne?
From the font of knowledge Wiki
"Braverman lived in France for two years, as an Erasmus Programme student and then as an Entente Cordiale Scholar, where she completed a master's degree in European and French law at Panthéon-Sorbonne University"
That will be the Erasmus scheme that British students can no longer participate in thanks to her? Nice.
It's going to be Sunak. He ticks all the boxes: supported by MPs, members will vote for him, possesses rudimentary political skills and is a serious person. I think all the other candidates fail on at least one of those grounds. I think support will coalesce around him quickly and he will beat Truss or whoever else is up against him in the members' vote.
He won't, he is the David Miliband or Michael Portillo of this race, too liberal, too slick, too presumptuous when what the party wanted was a return to traditional socialist or social democrat values with Ed Miliband or traditional Conservative values with IDS.
Wallace also beat Sunak 51% to 30% in the recent Yougov Tory members poll
You obsess with polling and only polling. Sunak is the only candidate who can win you the election.
We have already been in power 12 years, most of which under centre right liberal leaders. It is time for a traditional Conservative leader again
As has been said if you want the conservatives to win the next GE then Rishi is the one who could do it
Watch his video and realise he is the very antithesis of the Little Englander attitude of some in the party
He is a slick, ex banker metropolitan liberal, the exact opposite of what is needed to win back the redwall
Maybe. But they don't need to win back the entire Red Wall, they need to limit the damage done overall to the Tory brand. With the majority to defend, that could be enough.
Its Labour that need to 'win back' the red wall, look at the catastrophic vote % losses in 2019
Watched the Rishi vid. Not bad. The Tories could do worse. He’s got more charm and charisma than Starmer, but he’s no Boris, for good or ill
My god he is tiny tho. A leprechaun of a man
i think people might forgive the wealth stuff, as at least it makes him incorruptible. And he has an excellent backstory about immigration and social mobility. It will be quite hard for Labour to fight him, because any outright attacks might look like racism
All in all, a pretty good choice. I agree it will probably end up as Sunak V Truss or Mordaunt
How can the Tories having effectively removed Boris for being fined in lockdown replace him with Sunak, who was also fined in lockdown at the same event too?
No, they removed him for being a fucking lying toerag.
Of course, KevinB has rather missed an enormous logic hole in his fantasy.
He's been assuring us that the oldest voters are sufficiently against gay marriage to be supportive of overturning it. And whilst over-65s are the still net in favour, they are the least accepting age group.
However, there's an issue with relying on the over-65s group providing your core support 30+ years from now. I wonder if he can spot it.
(And the possible loophole that maybe people become more anti-gay-marriage as they age has not been seen at all; if anything, they've been going the other way. And each echelon has been retaining their pro-gay-marriage bias as they age into the next age group. Understandable, really, the adage that people become more conservative as they age tends to be by viewing whatever was the default when they were younger as being how things should be in future - and thirty years from now, most people will have had gay marriage as being normal for a long long time)
I think it's far more simple than that: it's social proof and convention.
It was working against gay people and now it works for them.
That can change, and change quickly, as the Supreme Court decision has started to roll things back and reopen debate in the USA and here.
I see what you mean, but I think that's a poor framing. Social conventions were working against gays, but it is not working 'for' them now. What has happened is that many, if not most, people simply do not care. The conventions are not working 'for' them; the conventions just don't care.
That's great IMO, as it is equality.
But you are correct that that could change, and perhaps rapidly.
One key issue about changing it: to roll back gay marriage, you have to annul and undo hundreds of thousands of marriages. Including reversing the legal ramifications such as next of kin aspects and inheritances, including inheritances that have already happened.
Massive issue.
I haven't been invited to a gay wedding, but loads of people must have gone to one, and it's hard to see how my heterosexual marriage has been damaged by them. I can understand why a large minority were uncomfortable about the change, but it must only be a very small minority that would support reversing it now.
We have and it was a lovely occasion
dunno i often spot in gay marriage photos the grooms parents with forced smiles looking distinctly uncomfortable...as in social pressure tells us we should be happy but is this what we really want for our son....check gay wedding photos you will see what i mean
That's a) bollocks, and b) pretty offensive to those of us who have gay offspring (let alone those who are gay themselves).
His posts are offensive and while we have no gays in our family we have close gay friends and they are all wonderful company
Why is Hunt so toxic amongst the membership? I know he has the reputation of being a remainer, but he's not exactly Grieve, Clarke, or Heseltine. He was about as prominent as an advocate of the EU as May was in the 2016 referendum... which is to say, not much at all.
Of course, KevinB has rather missed an enormous logic hole in his fantasy.
He's been assuring us that the oldest voters are sufficiently against gay marriage to be supportive of overturning it. And whilst over-65s are the still net in favour, they are the least accepting age group.
However, there's an issue with relying on the over-65s group providing your core support 30+ years from now. I wonder if he can spot it.
(And the possible loophole that maybe people become more anti-gay-marriage as they age has not been seen at all; if anything, they've been going the other way. And each echelon has been retaining their pro-gay-marriage bias as they age into the next age group. Understandable, really, the adage that people become more conservative as they age tends to be by viewing whatever was the default when they were younger as being how things should be in future - and thirty years from now, most people will have had gay marriage as being normal for a long long time)
I think it's far more simple than that: it's social proof and convention.
It was working against gay people and now it works for them.
That can change, and change quickly, as the Supreme Court decision has started to roll things back and reopen debate in the USA and here.
I see what you mean, but I think that's a poor framing. Social conventions were working against gays, but it is not working 'for' them now. What has happened is that many, if not most, people simply do not care. The conventions are not working 'for' them; the conventions just don't care.
That's great IMO, as it is equality.
But you are correct that that could change, and perhaps rapidly.
One key issue about changing it: to roll back gay marriage, you have to annul and undo hundreds of thousands of marriages. Including reversing the legal ramifications such as next of kin aspects and inheritances, including inheritances that have already happened.
Massive issue.
I haven't been invited to a gay wedding, but loads of people must have gone to one, and it's hard to see how my heterosexual marriage has been damaged by them. I can understand why a large minority were uncomfortable about the change, but it must only be a very small minority that would support reversing it now.
We have and it was a lovely occasion
dunno i often spot in gay marriage photos the grooms parents with forced smiles looking distinctly uncomfortable...as in social pressure tells us we should be happy but is this what we really want for our son....check gay wedding photos you will see what i mean
This is clearly a bit of an obsession with you - I'd hate to see your Internet search history.
honestly its really boring mainly twitter and various political and economy sites i try and avoid porn as its bad for the soul to look at too much of that
Of course, KevinB has rather missed an enormous logic hole in his fantasy.
He's been assuring us that the oldest voters are sufficiently against gay marriage to be supportive of overturning it. And whilst over-65s are the still net in favour, they are the least accepting age group.
However, there's an issue with relying on the over-65s group providing your core support 30+ years from now. I wonder if he can spot it.
(And the possible loophole that maybe people become more anti-gay-marriage as they age has not been seen at all; if anything, they've been going the other way. And each echelon has been retaining their pro-gay-marriage bias as they age into the next age group. Understandable, really, the adage that people become more conservative as they age tends to be by viewing whatever was the default when they were younger as being how things should be in future - and thirty years from now, most people will have had gay marriage as being normal for a long long time)
I think it's far more simple than that: it's social proof and convention.
It was working against gay people and now it works for them.
That can change, and change quickly, as the Supreme Court decision has started to roll things back and reopen debate in the USA and here.
I see what you mean, but I think that's a poor framing. Social conventions were working against gays, but it is not working 'for' them now. What has happened is that many, if not most, people simply do not care. The conventions are not working 'for' them; the conventions just don't care.
That's great IMO, as it is equality.
But you are correct that that could change, and perhaps rapidly.
One key issue about changing it: to roll back gay marriage, you have to annul and undo hundreds of thousands of marriages. Including reversing the legal ramifications such as next of kin aspects and inheritances, including inheritances that have already happened.
Massive issue.
I haven't been invited to a gay wedding, but loads of people must have gone to one, and it's hard to see how my heterosexual marriage has been damaged by them. I can understand why a large minority were uncomfortable about the change, but it must only be a very small minority that would support reversing it now.
We have and it was a lovely occasion
dunno i often spot in gay marriage photos the grooms parents with forced smiles looking distinctly uncomfortable...as in social pressure tells us we should be happy but is this what we really want for our son....check gay wedding photos you will see what i mean
You’re beginning to sound a tad… obsessive. That’s very, very occasionally a sign that someone’s repressing something.
Jeez christ on stilts - I have just seen the Jo Maugham tweet.
Feck me.
One of the worst tweets I have ever seen.
He’s also issued a terrible non-apology apology
“I have deleted a question to Rishi Sunak about attitudes to race in the Conservative Party membership. My point was, I want, we should all want, greater representation of people of colour leading all political parties. But it's not an issue particular to the Conservative Party.”
One of those clever men that is somehow very stupid
Just off the scale stupid. Maybe he spent the entire Friday afternoon drinking gin?
No it is not an issue for the Con Party - certainly compared to others.
Look at the bloody list:
Sunak Javid Patel Braverman Zahawi Kwarteng Cleverly Vara
Good luck Lab in office replicating that.
Throw mud at the governing party where it is deserved - don't make shit up in N London dinner parties.
It's going to be Sunak. He ticks all the boxes: supported by MPs, members will vote for him, possesses rudimentary political skills and is a serious person. I think all the other candidates fail on at least one of those grounds. I think support will coalesce around him quickly and he will beat Truss or whoever else is up against him in the members' vote.
He won't, he is the David Miliband or Michael Portillo of this race, too liberal, too slick, too presumptuous when what the party wanted was a return to traditional socialist or social democrat values with Ed Miliband or traditional Conservative values with IDS.
Wallace also beat Sunak 51% to 30% in the recent Yougov Tory members poll
And this one to see if it can handle a higher res.
I guarantee no one on here will ever have been to this place and I'd be incredibly surprised if anyone can guess where it is.
Looks rather like volcano route, La Palma. .
I'm gobsmacked. Wow.
You are absolutely right. It is indeed La Ruta de los Volcanos on La Palma.
I was the only person walking it that glorious day (or rather, that I saw). Pretty remote at times and with smouldering volcanoes, which as we now know are not dormant.
Watched the Rishi vid. Not bad. The Tories could do worse. He’s got more charm and charisma than Starmer, but he’s no Boris, for good or ill
My god he is tiny tho. A leprechaun of a man
i think people might forgive the wealth stuff, as at least it makes him incorruptible. And he has an excellent backstory about immigration and social mobility. It will be quite hard for Labour to fight him, because any outright attacks might look like racism
All in all, a pretty good choice. I agree it will probably end up as Sunak V Truss or Mordaunt
How can the Tories having effectively removed Boris for being fined in lockdown replace him with Sunak, who was also fined in lockdown at the same event too?
His explanation is worse because he claims to have meant something other than he very clearly said, but then adds a response clearly meant to show he was right to ask it in the way he did.
I have deleted a question to Rishi Sunak about attitudes to race in the Conservative Party membership. My point was, I want, we should all want, greater representation of people of colour leading all political parties. But it's not an issue particular to the Conservative Party. Private channels now full of white people, well-meaning, saying 'wise decision to delete!' and people of colour saying 'you were right, why did you delete?' FWIW, I think the tweet above is right. It is a problem, and mine was a fair question, but it's also not party political.
When people base their reputations on their intellect, insight and their ability to communicate ideas and arguments, do not trust them when they claim to have not made the point in the way they intended to make it.
It is very obvious the point he was making, obvious enough that he removed it to pretend it was a different, broader point. But he cannot have it both ways, either he stands by it or he doesn't/
Oh dear. For how long will they try and cover for him, before admitting that maybe an 80-year-old man is not the best guy to have in charge? Imagine starting to lose your faculties, whilst also being aware that you’re POTUS and the most powerful man in the world.
I am heading to 80 but really how can he be so stupid
Very unfair to 80 year olds, many of whom are more than capable, to compare them to poor old Biden.
Of course, KevinB has rather missed an enormous logic hole in his fantasy.
He's been assuring us that the oldest voters are sufficiently against gay marriage to be supportive of overturning it. And whilst over-65s are the still net in favour, they are the least accepting age group.
However, there's an issue with relying on the over-65s group providing your core support 30+ years from now. I wonder if he can spot it.
(And the possible loophole that maybe people become more anti-gay-marriage as they age has not been seen at all; if anything, they've been going the other way. And each echelon has been retaining their pro-gay-marriage bias as they age into the next age group. Understandable, really, the adage that people become more conservative as they age tends to be by viewing whatever was the default when they were younger as being how things should be in future - and thirty years from now, most people will have had gay marriage as being normal for a long long time)
I think it's far more simple than that: it's social proof and convention.
It was working against gay people and now it works for them.
That can change, and change quickly, as the Supreme Court decision has started to roll things back and reopen debate in the USA and here.
I see what you mean, but I think that's a poor framing. Social conventions were working against gays, but it is not working 'for' them now. What has happened is that many, if not most, people simply do not care. The conventions are not working 'for' them; the conventions just don't care.
That's great IMO, as it is equality.
But you are correct that that could change, and perhaps rapidly.
One key issue about changing it: to roll back gay marriage, you have to annul and undo hundreds of thousands of marriages. Including reversing the legal ramifications such as next of kin aspects and inheritances, including inheritances that have already happened.
Massive issue.
I haven't been invited to a gay wedding, but loads of people must have gone to one, and it's hard to see how my heterosexual marriage has been damaged by them. I can understand why a large minority were uncomfortable about the change, but it must only be a very small minority that would support reversing it now.
We have and it was a lovely occasion
dunno i often spot in gay marriage photos the grooms parents with forced smiles looking distinctly uncomfortable...as in social pressure tells us we should be happy but is this what we really want for our son....check gay wedding photos you will see what i mean
This is clearly a bit of an obsession with you - I'd hate to see your Internet search history.
honestly its really boring mainly twitter and various political and economy sites i try and avoid porn as its bad for the soul to look at too much of that
And you think scanning gay wedding photos for signs of repressed anguish is GOOD for your soul?
The country needs a period of dull politics . We’ve become addicted to drama . The May years were incredible for political junkies with those knife edge votes , then Bozo turned up with constant drama .
Watched the Rishi vid. Not bad. The Tories could do worse. He’s got more charm and charisma than Starmer, but he’s no Boris, for good or ill
My god he is tiny tho. A leprechaun of a man
i think people might forgive the wealth stuff, as at least it makes him incorruptible. And he has an excellent backstory about immigration and social mobility. It will be quite hard for Labour to fight him, because any outright attacks might look like racism
All in all, a pretty good choice. I agree it will probably end up as Sunak V Truss or Mordaunt
How can the Tories having effectively removed Boris for being fined in lockdown replace him with Sunak, who was also fined in lockdown at the same event too?
They can't. Rishi will not win. The real problem is that he spent months staying on as CoE when he knew Boris was tainted. And failed to resign when doing so would be principled. This problem affects several candidates.
It's going to be Sunak. He ticks all the boxes: supported by MPs, members will vote for him, possesses rudimentary political skills and is a serious person. I think all the other candidates fail on at least one of those grounds. I think support will coalesce around him quickly and he will beat Truss or whoever else is up against him in the members' vote.
He won't, he is the David Miliband or Michael Portillo of this race, too liberal, too slick, too presumptuous when what the party wanted was a return to traditional socialist or social democrat values with Ed Miliband or traditional Conservative values with IDS.
Wallace also beat Sunak 51% to 30% in the recent Yougov Tory members poll
You obsess with polling and only polling. Sunak is the only candidate who can win you the election.
We have already been in power 12 years, most of which under centre right liberal leaders. It is time for a traditional Conservative leader again
As has been said if you want the conservatives to win the next GE then Rishi is the one who could do it
Watch his video and realise he is the very antithesis of the Little Englander attitude of some in the party
He is a slick, ex banker metropolitan liberal, the exact opposite of what is needed to win back the redwall
Maybe. But they don't need to win back the entire Red Wall, they need to limit the damage done overall to the Tory brand. With the majority to defend, that could be enough.
If the Tories lose the Leave backing redwall seats Boris won from Labour in 2019 then they lose their majority.
Unless Sunak can win back the Remain backing seats Cameron won in 2015 that went Labour or LD in 2017 or 2019 which is highly unlikely given he himself was a Leaver and has backed Brexit
His explanation is worse because he claims to have meant something other than he very clearly said, but then adds a response clearly meant to show he was right to ask it in the way he did.
I have deleted a question to Rishi Sunak about attitudes to race in the Conservative Party membership. My point was, I want, we should all want, greater representation of people of colour leading all political parties. But it's not an issue particular to the Conservative Party. Private channels now full of white people, well-meaning, saying 'wise decision to delete!' and people of colour saying 'you were right, why did you delete?' FWIW, I think the tweet above is right. It is a problem, and mine was a fair question, but it's also not party political.
When people base their reputations on their intellect, insight and their ability to communicate ideas and arguments, do not trust them when they claim to have not made the point in the way they intended to make it.
It is very obvious the point he was making, obvious enough that he removed it to pretend it was a different, broader point. But he cannot have it both ways, either he stands by it or he doesn't/
When in a hole....don't take the Boris approach and lie.
Of course, KevinB has rather missed an enormous logic hole in his fantasy.
He's been assuring us that the oldest voters are sufficiently against gay marriage to be supportive of overturning it. And whilst over-65s are the still net in favour, they are the least accepting age group.
However, there's an issue with relying on the over-65s group providing your core support 30+ years from now. I wonder if he can spot it.
(And the possible loophole that maybe people become more anti-gay-marriage as they age has not been seen at all; if anything, they've been going the other way. And each echelon has been retaining their pro-gay-marriage bias as they age into the next age group. Understandable, really, the adage that people become more conservative as they age tends to be by viewing whatever was the default when they were younger as being how things should be in future - and thirty years from now, most people will have had gay marriage as being normal for a long long time)
I think it's far more simple than that: it's social proof and convention.
It was working against gay people and now it works for them.
That can change, and change quickly, as the Supreme Court decision has started to roll things back and reopen debate in the USA and here.
I see what you mean, but I think that's a poor framing. Social conventions were working against gays, but it is not working 'for' them now. What has happened is that many, if not most, people simply do not care. The conventions are not working 'for' them; the conventions just don't care.
That's great IMO, as it is equality.
But you are correct that that could change, and perhaps rapidly.
One key issue about changing it: to roll back gay marriage, you have to annul and undo hundreds of thousands of marriages. Including reversing the legal ramifications such as next of kin aspects and inheritances, including inheritances that have already happened.
Massive issue.
I haven't been invited to a gay wedding, but loads of people must have gone to one, and it's hard to see how my heterosexual marriage has been damaged by them. I can understand why a large minority were uncomfortable about the change, but it must only be a very small minority that would support reversing it now.
We have and it was a lovely occasion
dunno i often spot in gay marriage photos the grooms parents with forced smiles looking distinctly uncomfortable...as in social pressure tells us we should be happy but is this what we really want for our son....check gay wedding photos you will see what i mean
You’re beginning to sound a tad… obsessive. That’s very, very occasionally a sign that someone’s repressing something.
thats the standard trope used when people have lost the argument re homosexuality and actually repression aint a bad thing civilizarion is built on it sometimes i feel like killing someone but i wont do it maybe i would fancy a gay orgy in my house but i wouldnt....repression you see it can be a good thing
And this one to see if it can handle a higher res.
I guarantee no one on here will ever have been to this place and I'd be incredibly surprised if anyone can guess where it is.
Looks rather like volcano route, La Palma. .
I'm gobsmacked. Wow.
You are absolutely right. It is indeed La Ruta de los Volcanos on La Palma.
I was the only person walking it that glorious day. Pretty remote at times and with smouldering volcanoes, which as we now know are not dormant.
Right click or tap it and go to 'Google Lens'
It requires no competence.
Please instead give me my Leon-loving for not cheating. It may not be in your power at present but I'm sure he'll offer you one soon and they are tranferable.
The country needs a period of dull politics . We’ve become addicted to drama . The May years were incredible for political junkies with those knife edge votes , then Bozo turned up with constant drama .
Knife edge votes? I thought she lost most of them by more than 200!
Why is Hunt so toxic amongst the membership? I know he has the reputation of being a remainer, but he's not exactly Grieve, Clarke, or Heseltine. He was about as prominent as an advocate of the EU as May was in the 2016 referendum... which is to say, not much at all.
Was Clement Attlee the last bald man to win an election? In 1950?
Churchill was bald by 1951, also very deaf.
I think you're leftish. I'm sure you're really quite informed on history. I have recently read a book or two on the Korean war. Harsh times of course, but Atlee really doesn't look good. I'd also formed a less praiseworthy picture from other sources. I'm interested as to whether you think Atlee is over-regarded.
Why is Hunt so toxic amongst the membership? I know he has the reputation of being a remainer, but he's not exactly Grieve, Clarke, or Heseltine. He was about as prominent as an advocate of the EU as May was in the 2016 referendum... which is to say, not much at all.
I think if asked they might mention the remainer thing, but like you say it isn't very credible. I suspect part of it is simply not really liking him all that much, and another is that to choose him could be seen as admitting they made a mistake. People don't like that. Better than it was the right choice (in terms of winning an election it was), and then it was simpy unfortunate things then went wrong, rather than being foreseeable.
Uh-oh I hear you cry. Not another person posting holiday snaps
Remember some PBers will be chewing up their phone data to download your high-res images (and also screenshots of tweets from posters who do not copy/paste).
Of course, KevinB has rather missed an enormous logic hole in his fantasy.
He's been assuring us that the oldest voters are sufficiently against gay marriage to be supportive of overturning it. And whilst over-65s are the still net in favour, they are the least accepting age group.
However, there's an issue with relying on the over-65s group providing your core support 30+ years from now. I wonder if he can spot it.
(And the possible loophole that maybe people become more anti-gay-marriage as they age has not been seen at all; if anything, they've been going the other way. And each echelon has been retaining their pro-gay-marriage bias as they age into the next age group. Understandable, really, the adage that people become more conservative as they age tends to be by viewing whatever was the default when they were younger as being how things should be in future - and thirty years from now, most people will have had gay marriage as being normal for a long long time)
I think it's far more simple than that: it's social proof and convention.
It was working against gay people and now it works for them.
That can change, and change quickly, as the Supreme Court decision has started to roll things back and reopen debate in the USA and here.
I see what you mean, but I think that's a poor framing. Social conventions were working against gays, but it is not working 'for' them now. What has happened is that many, if not most, people simply do not care. The conventions are not working 'for' them; the conventions just don't care.
That's great IMO, as it is equality.
But you are correct that that could change, and perhaps rapidly.
One key issue about changing it: to roll back gay marriage, you have to annul and undo hundreds of thousands of marriages. Including reversing the legal ramifications such as next of kin aspects and inheritances, including inheritances that have already happened.
Massive issue.
I haven't been invited to a gay wedding, but loads of people must have gone to one, and it's hard to see how my heterosexual marriage has been damaged by them. I can understand why a large minority were uncomfortable about the change, but it must only be a very small minority that would support reversing it now.
We have and it was a lovely occasion
dunno i often spot in gay marriage photos the grooms parents with forced smiles looking distinctly uncomfortable...as in social pressure tells us we should be happy but is this what we really want for our son....check gay wedding photos you will see what i mean
This is clearly a bit of an obsession with you - I'd hate to see your Internet search history.
honestly its really boring mainly twitter and various political and economy sites i try and avoid porn as its bad for the soul to look at too much of that
And you think scanning gay wedding photos for signs of repressed anguish is GOOD for your soul?
It’s weird following (yet another) Tory leadership election. Hard to get excited for obvious reasons. They’re all not my cup of tea.
Really?
I thought you were on the fence and waiting to make your mind up this time?
It’s just a bit anticlimactic. After the most bizarre tumultuous week in politics, you get this private club choosing the pm from a selection of people you could never get excited about. Hard to get your head around.
I do wonder if Tories are excited about any of them either.
I’m making my early prediction - which will be bollocks no doubt.
It’s going to get to a choice of three - Rishi, Truss and a hunt/tugendhat.
Rishi will have the numbers, not enough to beat Truss but the hunt/other crew will realise he’s a better option than Truss and publicly shift their support to Rishi.
It will be made clear to Truss she won’t win a run-off and will be offered a senior role.
They (not Truss) will do what is necessary to avoid it going to the membership.
Rishi will ultimately be a palatable pick for most of the MPs, young, fresh, dishing Labour by having a BAME (not sure if this is the correct term) experienced at the highest level, doesn’t need money so not corruptible and can buy own wallpaper, Brexiters but pragmatic, sound money but can sell the idea to the country “were in the shit so this isn’t what I want but pull together for a bit longer and all will be better”.
As I said - prob balls but I think it’s a good chance.
"can buy own wallpaper".
To think that I have lived to see the day when such is a key selective metric for the leader of the UK.
I don't know. 'Doesn't have sex with dead pigs' preceded it.
Watched the Rishi vid. Not bad. The Tories could do worse. He’s got more charm and charisma than Starmer, but he’s no Boris, for good or ill
My god he is tiny tho. A leprechaun of a man
i think people might forgive the wealth stuff, as at least it makes him incorruptible. And he has an excellent backstory about immigration and social mobility. It will be quite hard for Labour to fight him, because any outright attacks might look like racism
All in all, a pretty good choice. I agree it will probably end up as Sunak V Truss or Mordaunt
How can the Tories having effectively removed Boris for being fined in lockdown replace him with Sunak, who was also fined in lockdown at the same event too?
I’m going to let you into a little secret, only known in the inner circles of the upper echelons of the Tory party. They didn’t remove Boris because of the FPN….
Of course, KevinB has rather missed an enormous logic hole in his fantasy.
He's been assuring us that the oldest voters are sufficiently against gay marriage to be supportive of overturning it. And whilst over-65s are the still net in favour, they are the least accepting age group.
However, there's an issue with relying on the over-65s group providing your core support 30+ years from now. I wonder if he can spot it.
(And the possible loophole that maybe people become more anti-gay-marriage as they age has not been seen at all; if anything, they've been going the other way. And each echelon has been retaining their pro-gay-marriage bias as they age into the next age group. Understandable, really, the adage that people become more conservative as they age tends to be by viewing whatever was the default when they were younger as being how things should be in future - and thirty years from now, most people will have had gay marriage as being normal for a long long time)
I think it's far more simple than that: it's social proof and convention.
It was working against gay people and now it works for them.
That can change, and change quickly, as the Supreme Court decision has started to roll things back and reopen debate in the USA and here.
I see what you mean, but I think that's a poor framing. Social conventions were working against gays, but it is not working 'for' them now. What has happened is that many, if not most, people simply do not care. The conventions are not working 'for' them; the conventions just don't care.
That's great IMO, as it is equality.
But you are correct that that could change, and perhaps rapidly.
One key issue about changing it: to roll back gay marriage, you have to annul and undo hundreds of thousands of marriages. Including reversing the legal ramifications such as next of kin aspects and inheritances, including inheritances that have already happened.
Massive issue.
I haven't been invited to a gay wedding, but loads of people must have gone to one, and it's hard to see how my heterosexual marriage has been damaged by them. I can understand why a large minority were uncomfortable about the change, but it must only be a very small minority that would support reversing it now.
We have and it was a lovely occasion
dunno i often spot in gay marriage photos the grooms parents with forced smiles looking distinctly uncomfortable...as in social pressure tells us we should be happy but is this what we really want for our son....check gay wedding photos you will see what i mean
You’re beginning to sound a tad… obsessive. That’s very, very occasionally a sign that someone’s repressing something.
thats the standard trope used when people have lost the argument re homosexuality and actually repression aint a bad thing civilizarion is built on it sometimes i feel like killing someone but i wont do it maybe i would fancy a gay orgy in my house but i wouldnt....repression you see it can be a good thing
I’m making my early prediction - which will be bollocks no doubt.
It’s going to get to a choice of three - Rishi, Truss and a hunt/tugendhat.
Rishi will have the numbers, not enough to beat Truss but the hunt/other crew will realise he’s a better option than Truss and publicly shift their support to Rishi.
It will be made clear to Truss she won’t win a run-off and will be offered a senior role.
They (not Truss) will do what is necessary to avoid it going to the membership.
Rishi will ultimately be a palatable pick for most of the MPs, young, fresh, dishing Labour by having a BAME (not sure if this is the correct term) experienced at the highest level, doesn’t need money so not corruptible and can buy own wallpaper, Brexiters but pragmatic, sound money but can sell the idea to the country “were in the shit so this isn’t what I want but pull together for a bit longer and all will be better”.
As I said - prob balls but I think it’s a good chance.
Most of Boris' support will swing behind Wallace rather than Truss next week, anti Boris MPs will split between Sunak, Hunt, Tugendhat and Javid, giving Wallace enough to make the final 2
Wallace v Sunak would be an interesting final among the members.
Normally the final 2 are a One Nation centrist v a rightwinger eg Johnson v Hunt, May v Leadsom, Cameron v Davis, IDS v Clarke, Hague v Clarke, Major v Redwood (in 1990 Major presented himself as a Thatcherite rightwinger v Heseltine).
So in my view Tugendhat or Hunt v Wallace is more likely than Sunak or Truss v Wallace.
Metropolitan libertarians eg Portillo or Gove or effectively Sunak and Truss rarely make the final 2
I’m sure that’s right, although the divisions in the party are harder to read these days.
Brexit v Remain Wets v Dry Old School Squires v Metro Liberals One Nation Tories vs Populists
The country needs a period of dull politics . We’ve become addicted to drama . The May years were incredible for political junkies with those knife edge votes , then Bozo turned up with constant drama .
Knife edge votes? I thought she lost most of them by more than 200!
Not the deal votes but the earlier ones . Trying to stop a no deal etc .
Of course, KevinB has rather missed an enormous logic hole in his fantasy.
He's been assuring us that the oldest voters are sufficiently against gay marriage to be supportive of overturning it. And whilst over-65s are the still net in favour, they are the least accepting age group.
However, there's an issue with relying on the over-65s group providing your core support 30+ years from now. I wonder if he can spot it.
(And the possible loophole that maybe people become more anti-gay-marriage as they age has not been seen at all; if anything, they've been going the other way. And each echelon has been retaining their pro-gay-marriage bias as they age into the next age group. Understandable, really, the adage that people become more conservative as they age tends to be by viewing whatever was the default when they were younger as being how things should be in future - and thirty years from now, most people will have had gay marriage as being normal for a long long time)
I think it's far more simple than that: it's social proof and convention.
It was working against gay people and now it works for them.
That can change, and change quickly, as the Supreme Court decision has started to roll things back and reopen debate in the USA and here.
I see what you mean, but I think that's a poor framing. Social conventions were working against gays, but it is not working 'for' them now. What has happened is that many, if not most, people simply do not care. The conventions are not working 'for' them; the conventions just don't care.
That's great IMO, as it is equality.
But you are correct that that could change, and perhaps rapidly.
One key issue about changing it: to roll back gay marriage, you have to annul and undo hundreds of thousands of marriages. Including reversing the legal ramifications such as next of kin aspects and inheritances, including inheritances that have already happened.
Massive issue.
I haven't been invited to a gay wedding, but loads of people must have gone to one, and it's hard to see how my heterosexual marriage has been damaged by them. I can understand why a large minority were uncomfortable about the change, but it must only be a very small minority that would support reversing it now.
We have and it was a lovely occasion
dunno i often spot in gay marriage photos the grooms parents with forced smiles looking distinctly uncomfortable...as in social pressure tells us we should be happy but is this what we really want for our son....check gay wedding photos you will see what i mean
You’re beginning to sound a tad… obsessive. That’s very, very occasionally a sign that someone’s repressing something.
It's remarkable how many pastors and politicians who made their careers out of railing against homosexuality turned out to be secretly gay.
Here's just a few:
George Rekers Steve Wiles Ted Haggard Glenn Murphy Jr
Of course, KevinB has rather missed an enormous logic hole in his fantasy.
He's been assuring us that the oldest voters are sufficiently against gay marriage to be supportive of overturning it. And whilst over-65s are the still net in favour, they are the least accepting age group.
However, there's an issue with relying on the over-65s group providing your core support 30+ years from now. I wonder if he can spot it.
(And the possible loophole that maybe people become more anti-gay-marriage as they age has not been seen at all; if anything, they've been going the other way. And each echelon has been retaining their pro-gay-marriage bias as they age into the next age group. Understandable, really, the adage that people become more conservative as they age tends to be by viewing whatever was the default when they were younger as being how things should be in future - and thirty years from now, most people will have had gay marriage as being normal for a long long time)
I think it's far more simple than that: it's social proof and convention.
It was working against gay people and now it works for them.
That can change, and change quickly, as the Supreme Court decision has started to roll things back and reopen debate in the USA and here.
I see what you mean, but I think that's a poor framing. Social conventions were working against gays, but it is not working 'for' them now. What has happened is that many, if not most, people simply do not care. The conventions are not working 'for' them; the conventions just don't care.
That's great IMO, as it is equality.
But you are correct that that could change, and perhaps rapidly.
One key issue about changing it: to roll back gay marriage, you have to annul and undo hundreds of thousands of marriages. Including reversing the legal ramifications such as next of kin aspects and inheritances, including inheritances that have already happened.
Massive issue.
I haven't been invited to a gay wedding, but loads of people must have gone to one, and it's hard to see how my heterosexual marriage has been damaged by them. I can understand why a large minority were uncomfortable about the change, but it must only be a very small minority that would support reversing it now.
We have and it was a lovely occasion
dunno i often spot in gay marriage photos the grooms parents with forced smiles looking distinctly uncomfortable...as in social pressure tells us we should be happy but is this what we really want for our son....check gay wedding photos you will see what i mean
This is clearly a bit of an obsession with you - I'd hate to see your Internet search history.
honestly its really boring mainly twitter and various political and economy sites i try and avoid porn as its bad for the soul to look at too much of that
Apparently you can end up in hospital...
Just looked at my search history. It appears to be largely about previously obscure Tory MPs who may be PM by the Autumn and little once-a-day games.
It's going to be Sunak. He ticks all the boxes: supported by MPs, members will vote for him, possesses rudimentary political skills and is a serious person. I think all the other candidates fail on at least one of those grounds. I think support will coalesce around him quickly and he will beat Truss or whoever else is up against him in the members' vote.
He won't, he is the David Miliband or Michael Portillo of this race, too liberal, too slick, too presumptuous when what the party wanted was a return to traditional socialist or social democrat values with Ed Miliband or traditional Conservative values with IDS.
Wallace also beat Sunak 51% to 30% in the recent Yougov Tory members poll
You obsess with polling and only polling. Sunak is the only candidate who can win you the election.
We have already been in power 12 years, most of which under centre right liberal leaders. It is time for a traditional Conservative leader again
As has been said if you want the conservatives to win the next GE then Rishi is the one who could do it
Watch his video and realise he is the very antithesis of the Little Englander attitude of some in the party
He is a slick, ex banker metropolitan liberal, the exact opposite of what is needed to win back the redwall
Maybe. But they don't need to win back the entire Red Wall, they need to limit the damage done overall to the Tory brand. With the majority to defend, that could be enough.
If the Tories lose the Leave backing redwall seats Boris won from Labour in 2019 then they lose their majority.
There's a crucial word missing there. If they lose all those seats. How many can they afford to lose, assuming they can hold the line generally elsewhere (factor in losses in Scotland, a few in the South etc)?
The Red Wall is clearly a part of their defensive strategy, you're right to highlight they need to focus on it if they want a good chance of winning.
But it's still a balance - Boris holding the Red Wall but causing a collapse elsewhere would see them lose. Sunak holding elsewhere but losing all the Red Wall would also see them lose.
Can Sunak, or someone, try to ride both horses at the same time? Not well, perhaps, but well enough?
My family WhatsApp, which is quite rightwing (but with greens and lefties too) has gone from accepting the departure of Boris to OMFG look at these idiots (the potential replacements) and Can we have Boris back
Watched the Rishi vid. Not bad. The Tories could do worse. He’s got more charm and charisma than Starmer, but he’s no Boris, for good or ill
My god he is tiny tho. A leprechaun of a man
i think people might forgive the wealth stuff, as at least it makes him incorruptible. And he has an excellent backstory about immigration and social mobility. It will be quite hard for Labour to fight him, because any outright attacks might look like racism
All in all, a pretty good choice. I agree it will probably end up as Sunak V Truss or Mordaunt
How can the Tories having effectively removed Boris for being fined in lockdown replace him with Sunak, who was also fined in lockdown at the same event too?
Because he apologised and didn't make self serving lying statements to parliament?
My family WhatsApp, which is quite rightwing (but with greens and lefties too) has gone from accepting the departure of Boris to OMFG look at these idiots (the potential replacements) and Can we have Boris back
yes Leon i think thats the standard reaction in the country...many who voted Boris wont touch Sunak
My family WhatsApp, which is quite rightwing (but with greens and lefties too) has gone from accepting the departure of Boris to OMFG look at these idiots (the potential replacements) and Can we have Boris back
yes Leon i think thats the standard reaction in the country...many who voted Boris wont touch Sunak
Watched the Rishi vid. Not bad. The Tories could do worse. He’s got more charm and charisma than Starmer, but he’s no Boris, for good or ill
My god he is tiny tho. A leprechaun of a man
i think people might forgive the wealth stuff, as at least it makes him incorruptible. And he has an excellent backstory about immigration and social mobility. It will be quite hard for Labour to fight him, because any outright attacks might look like racism
All in all, a pretty good choice. I agree it will probably end up as Sunak V Truss or Mordaunt
How can the Tories having effectively removed Boris for being fined in lockdown replace him with Sunak, who was also fined in lockdown at the same event too?
I’m going to let you into a little secret, only known in the inner circles of the upper echelons of the Tory party. They didn’t remove Boris because of the FPN….
They didn't directly - but partygate is where he lost the country. But I don't think Rishi is anything like as tainted. The perception of Rishi is not one of a party animal. And Rishi was notable in being one of the more reluctant to impose restrictions. Still mildly problematic, of course.
My family WhatsApp, which is quite rightwing (but with greens and lefties too) has gone from accepting the departure of Boris to OMFG look at these idiots (the potential replacements) and Can we have Boris back
yes Leon i think thats the standard reaction in the country...many who voted Boris wont touch Sunak
I’m making my early prediction - which will be bollocks no doubt.
It’s going to get to a choice of three - Rishi, Truss and a hunt/tugendhat.
Rishi will have the numbers, not enough to beat Truss but the hunt/other crew will realise he’s a better option than Truss and publicly shift their support to Rishi.
It will be made clear to Truss she won’t win a run-off and will be offered a senior role.
They (not Truss) will do what is necessary to avoid it going to the membership.
Rishi will ultimately be a palatable pick for most of the MPs, young, fresh, dishing Labour by having a BAME (not sure if this is the correct term) experienced at the highest level, doesn’t need money so not corruptible and can buy own wallpaper, Brexiters but pragmatic, sound money but can sell the idea to the country “were in the shit so this isn’t what I want but pull together for a bit longer and all will be better”.
As I said - prob balls but I think it’s a good chance.
"can buy own wallpaper".
To think that I have lived to see the day when such is a key selective metric for the leader of the UK.
I don't know. 'Doesn't have sex with dead pigs' preceded it.
That was admittedly difficult to validate as a metric, as it was more correctly "Didn't previously ...".
PS MInd, the PBTory criterion of "Being able to eat a bacon sandwich" of yore now sounds terribly malicious, if not downright naive.
Of course he does - he is part of the problem and with Dorries is going to be booted out of the cabinet and many of us will be very pleased if he losses his seat in 24
Of course, KevinB has rather missed an enormous logic hole in his fantasy.
He's been assuring us that the oldest voters are sufficiently against gay marriage to be supportive of overturning it. And whilst over-65s are the still net in favour, they are the least accepting age group.
However, there's an issue with relying on the over-65s group providing your core support 30+ years from now. I wonder if he can spot it.
(And the possible loophole that maybe people become more anti-gay-marriage as they age has not been seen at all; if anything, they've been going the other way. And each echelon has been retaining their pro-gay-marriage bias as they age into the next age group. Understandable, really, the adage that people become more conservative as they age tends to be by viewing whatever was the default when they were younger as being how things should be in future - and thirty years from now, most people will have had gay marriage as being normal for a long long time)
I think it's far more simple than that: it's social proof and convention.
It was working against gay people and now it works for them.
That can change, and change quickly, as the Supreme Court decision has started to roll things back and reopen debate in the USA and here.
I see what you mean, but I think that's a poor framing. Social conventions were working against gays, but it is not working 'for' them now. What has happened is that many, if not most, people simply do not care. The conventions are not working 'for' them; the conventions just don't care.
That's great IMO, as it is equality.
But you are correct that that could change, and perhaps rapidly.
One key issue about changing it: to roll back gay marriage, you have to annul and undo hundreds of thousands of marriages. Including reversing the legal ramifications such as next of kin aspects and inheritances, including inheritances that have already happened.
Massive issue.
I haven't been invited to a gay wedding, but loads of people must have gone to one, and it's hard to see how my heterosexual marriage has been damaged by them. I can understand why a large minority were uncomfortable about the change, but it must only be a very small minority that would support reversing it now.
We have and it was a lovely occasion
dunno i often spot in gay marriage photos the grooms parents with forced smiles looking distinctly uncomfortable...as in social pressure tells us we should be happy but is this what we really want for our son....check gay wedding photos you will see what i mean
You’re beginning to sound a tad… obsessive. That’s very, very occasionally a sign that someone’s repressing something.
It's remarkable how many pastors and politicians who made their careers out of railing against homosexuality turned out to be secretly gay.
Here's just a few:
George Rekers Steve Wiles Ted Haggard Glenn Murphy Jr
i honestly think because they were so high profile in their opposition they could well have been targeted
My family WhatsApp, which is quite rightwing (but with greens and lefties too) has gone from accepting the departure of Boris to OMFG look at these idiots (the potential replacements) and Can we have Boris back
Assume last bit is sheer irony. At least at this stage.
Of course, KevinB has rather missed an enormous logic hole in his fantasy.
He's been assuring us that the oldest voters are sufficiently against gay marriage to be supportive of overturning it. And whilst over-65s are the still net in favour, they are the least accepting age group.
However, there's an issue with relying on the over-65s group providing your core support 30+ years from now. I wonder if he can spot it.
(And the possible loophole that maybe people become more anti-gay-marriage as they age has not been seen at all; if anything, they've been going the other way. And each echelon has been retaining their pro-gay-marriage bias as they age into the next age group. Understandable, really, the adage that people become more conservative as they age tends to be by viewing whatever was the default when they were younger as being how things should be in future - and thirty years from now, most people will have had gay marriage as being normal for a long long time)
I think it's far more simple than that: it's social proof and convention.
It was working against gay people and now it works for them.
That can change, and change quickly, as the Supreme Court decision has started to roll things back and reopen debate in the USA and here.
I see what you mean, but I think that's a poor framing. Social conventions were working against gays, but it is not working 'for' them now. What has happened is that many, if not most, people simply do not care. The conventions are not working 'for' them; the conventions just don't care.
That's great IMO, as it is equality.
But you are correct that that could change, and perhaps rapidly.
One key issue about changing it: to roll back gay marriage, you have to annul and undo hundreds of thousands of marriages. Including reversing the legal ramifications such as next of kin aspects and inheritances, including inheritances that have already happened.
Massive issue.
I haven't been invited to a gay wedding, but loads of people must have gone to one, and it's hard to see how my heterosexual marriage has been damaged by them. I can understand why a large minority were uncomfortable about the change, but it must only be a very small minority that would support reversing it now.
We have and it was a lovely occasion
dunno i often spot in gay marriage photos the grooms parents with forced smiles looking distinctly uncomfortable...as in social pressure tells us we should be happy but is this what we really want for our son....check gay wedding photos you will see what i mean
You’re beginning to sound a tad… obsessive. That’s very, very occasionally a sign that someone’s repressing something.
It's remarkable how many pastors and politicians who made their careers out of railing against homosexuality turned out to be secretly gay.
Here's just a few:
George Rekers Steve Wiles Ted Haggard Glenn Murphy Jr
i honestly think because they were so high profile in their opposition they could well have been targeted
My family WhatsApp, which is quite rightwing (but with greens and lefties too) has gone from accepting the departure of Boris to OMFG look at these idiots (the potential replacements) and Can we have Boris back
Classic worry of the unknown, to be expected. Most of them are not well known enough for people to know they are idiots (what has Wallace ever done to provoke such a reaction?).
Plenty of time for a new leader to attempt to change their minds - remember, they don't have to replicate Boris's success, that would be hard after 12-14 years in power anyway, they have to shore things up.
My family WhatsApp, which is quite rightwing (but with greens and lefties too) has gone from accepting the departure of Boris to OMFG look at these idiots (the potential replacements) and Can we have Boris back
yes Leon i think thats the standard reaction in the country...many who voted Boris wont touch Sunak
Why? Do you detect something with your gaydar?
funny Foxy...wish i could get a GP to touch me but i still cant locate one..
My family WhatsApp, which is quite rightwing (but with greens and lefties too) has gone from accepting the departure of Boris to OMFG look at these idiots (the potential replacements) and Can we have Boris back
yes Leon i think thats the standard reaction in the country...many who voted Boris wont touch Sunak
Could Boris stand? Is it technically possible?
No. A key difference between Tory and Labour constitutions.
My family WhatsApp, which is quite rightwing (but with greens and lefties too) has gone from accepting the departure of Boris to OMFG look at these idiots (the potential replacements) and Can we have Boris back
yes Leon i think thats the standard reaction in the country...many who voted Boris wont touch Sunak
Could Boris stand? Is it technically possible?
Someone posted earlier the actual rule that prevents him standing
Was Clement Attlee the last bald man to win an election? In 1950?
Churchill was bald by 1951, also very deaf.
I think you're leftish. I'm sure you're really quite informed on history. I have recently read a book or two on the Korean war. Harsh times of course, but Atlee really doesn't look good. I'd also formed a less praiseworthy picture from other sources. I'm interested as to whether you think Atlee is over-regarded.
If you think I'm leftish, God help you, as not that long ago I was a fairly dependable Conservative although I was never a party member and voted for other parties as and when I saw fit.
I think there is a tendency to be starry eyed about Attlee simply because he was regarded by the left as not only Labour's most successful leader until recently but in many ways the only truly successful one who totally changed the terms of economic discourse in this country for decades.
However, quite a lot of that would have happened anyway, and his government contained some pretty nasty human beings, the likes of Dalton, Shinwell and Bevan who quite openly made policy based on punishing those they hated (those with any money) not based on sound governance. Which had a number of disastrous side effects including the blowing of huge sums of Marshal aid as current account expenditure on economically unremunerative ventures e.g. the NHS when they could have been spent on repairing war damage. Ironically, that's much the same thing Labour (and Harold Macmillan) later accused Thatcher of doing with North Sea Oil and the profits from selling nationalised industry.
At the same time, they achieved a very great deal of their programme - however flawed it was - against a ticking clock and facing very difficult circumstances, including the unwinding of Britain's war debts, the winter of 1946-47 followed by the harvest failures of the later 1940s, the beginning of the Cold War which stretched Britain militarily and the increasing pressure from the colonies for independence at this moment. That's no small achievement.
Overall, like most governments, the record is mixed. Whether for good or ill, however, they did change Britain very considerably. And they wouldn't have done it without Attlee's diplomatic skill in keeping the government of Bevan, Bevin, Morrison, Dalton, Cripps and Ede, who all hated each other, together and functioning.
For that, he probably does deserve to be ranked alongside Thatcher as the most impactful postwar PM.
Of course, KevinB has rather missed an enormous logic hole in his fantasy.
He's been assuring us that the oldest voters are sufficiently against gay marriage to be supportive of overturning it. And whilst over-65s are the still net in favour, they are the least accepting age group.
However, there's an issue with relying on the over-65s group providing your core support 30+ years from now. I wonder if he can spot it.
(And the possible loophole that maybe people become more anti-gay-marriage as they age has not been seen at all; if anything, they've been going the other way. And each echelon has been retaining their pro-gay-marriage bias as they age into the next age group. Understandable, really, the adage that people become more conservative as they age tends to be by viewing whatever was the default when they were younger as being how things should be in future - and thirty years from now, most people will have had gay marriage as being normal for a long long time)
I think it's far more simple than that: it's social proof and convention.
It was working against gay people and now it works for them.
That can change, and change quickly, as the Supreme Court decision has started to roll things back and reopen debate in the USA and here.
I see what you mean, but I think that's a poor framing. Social conventions were working against gays, but it is not working 'for' them now. What has happened is that many, if not most, people simply do not care. The conventions are not working 'for' them; the conventions just don't care.
That's great IMO, as it is equality.
But you are correct that that could change, and perhaps rapidly.
One key issue about changing it: to roll back gay marriage, you have to annul and undo hundreds of thousands of marriages. Including reversing the legal ramifications such as next of kin aspects and inheritances, including inheritances that have already happened.
Massive issue.
I haven't been invited to a gay wedding, but loads of people must have gone to one, and it's hard to see how my heterosexual marriage has been damaged by them. I can understand why a large minority were uncomfortable about the change, but it must only be a very small minority that would support reversing it now.
We have and it was a lovely occasion
dunno i often spot in gay marriage photos the grooms parents with forced smiles looking distinctly uncomfortable...as in social pressure tells us we should be happy but is this what we really want for our son....check gay wedding photos you will see what i mean
You’re beginning to sound a tad… obsessive. That’s very, very occasionally a sign that someone’s repressing something.
thats the standard trope used when people have lost the argument re homosexuality and actually repression aint a bad thing civilizarion is built on it sometimes i feel like killing someone but i wont do it maybe i would fancy a gay orgy in my house but i wouldnt....repression you see it can be a good thing
I try to avoid doing personal on here, but you're provocative, so....
My daughter's gay. She's getting married shortly to a beautiful (in every sense of the word) woman. I, and the rest of the family, are immensely proud of her, and are really excited and looking forward to the wedding. As a parent, I've found it very rewarding to have a daughter with a different sexuality from my own, and have learnt a lot.
By contrast, your homophobia means you're missing out on the rich variety of human life. Though it may be that it's just gay men you've got a thing about?
And this one to see if it can handle a higher res.
I guarantee no one on here will ever have been to this place and I'd be incredibly surprised if anyone can guess where it is.
Looks rather like volcano route, La Palma. .
I'm gobsmacked. Wow.
You are absolutely right. It is indeed La Ruta de los Volcanos on La Palma.
I was the only person walking it that glorious day (or rather, that I saw). Pretty remote at times and with smouldering volcanoes, which as we now know are not dormant.
It isn’t that hard. It’s obviously volcanic - the dark soil, the piles of cinder and dust. The green trees give away a likely region or latitude
Then it has to be accessible. And sunny. And somewhere that, despite the altitude is warm enough to walk and take photos
i didn’t see your quiz but I would have guessed the Canaries or the Aeolians, or Hawaii
Watched the Rishi vid. Not bad. The Tories could do worse. He’s got more charm and charisma than Starmer, but he’s no Boris, for good or ill
My god he is tiny tho. A leprechaun of a man
i think people might forgive the wealth stuff, as at least it makes him incorruptible. And he has an excellent backstory about immigration and social mobility. It will be quite hard for Labour to fight him, because any outright attacks might look like racism
All in all, a pretty good choice. I agree it will probably end up as Sunak V Truss or Mordaunt
How can the Tories having effectively removed Boris for being fined in lockdown replace him with Sunak, who was also fined in lockdown at the same event too?
Is that a serious question? Because you know Boris was not removed for being fined in lockdown - as you have been pointing out for weeks, the party had a vote and decide not to remove him despite being fined (and indeed, depspite parliament - somehow - being misled about it).
Many of the people who quit and caused him to be removed stuck with him through the fine, so again that proves that was not the reason for it.
It was that more and more scandals kept coming. That's why they said 'enough is enough' and not 'actually, I've decided for no reason to change my mind and he should have quit because of that fine'.
The fine weakened him, and added to the cumulative effect, but if that had been the end of it, he would have been safe.
Just thinking, if Dehenna Davison were to throw her fascinator into the ring, someone with a warehouse full of "DD" T-shirts left over from David Davis' leadership bid will be pleased.
I don’t understand why anyone is bothering arguing with KevinB/MickTrain.
It’s the whole MO - try and cause dissent over things that we disagree with but not to the level that is something that’s such an issue in Russia.
He can poke about sexual freedoms, gay marriage, general politics and then eventually some news agency in Russia is reporting that a “major” (yes I know) political discussion forum in the UK where politicians are known to post is full of people who reject the western liberal view.
Give Kevin/Gary/Mick a few posts to embarrass themselves then shut them down as it’s not being done for no reason.
Of course, KevinB has rather missed an enormous logic hole in his fantasy.
He's been assuring us that the oldest voters are sufficiently against gay marriage to be supportive of overturning it. And whilst over-65s are the still net in favour, they are the least accepting age group.
However, there's an issue with relying on the over-65s group providing your core support 30+ years from now. I wonder if he can spot it.
(And the possible loophole that maybe people become more anti-gay-marriage as they age has not been seen at all; if anything, they've been going the other way. And each echelon has been retaining their pro-gay-marriage bias as they age into the next age group. Understandable, really, the adage that people become more conservative as they age tends to be by viewing whatever was the default when they were younger as being how things should be in future - and thirty years from now, most people will have had gay marriage as being normal for a long long time)
I think it's far more simple than that: it's social proof and convention.
It was working against gay people and now it works for them.
That can change, and change quickly, as the Supreme Court decision has started to roll things back and reopen debate in the USA and here.
I see what you mean, but I think that's a poor framing. Social conventions were working against gays, but it is not working 'for' them now. What has happened is that many, if not most, people simply do not care. The conventions are not working 'for' them; the conventions just don't care.
That's great IMO, as it is equality.
But you are correct that that could change, and perhaps rapidly.
One key issue about changing it: to roll back gay marriage, you have to annul and undo hundreds of thousands of marriages. Including reversing the legal ramifications such as next of kin aspects and inheritances, including inheritances that have already happened.
Massive issue.
I haven't been invited to a gay wedding, but loads of people must have gone to one, and it's hard to see how my heterosexual marriage has been damaged by them. I can understand why a large minority were uncomfortable about the change, but it must only be a very small minority that would support reversing it now.
We have and it was a lovely occasion
dunno i often spot in gay marriage photos the grooms parents with forced smiles looking distinctly uncomfortable...as in social pressure tells us we should be happy but is this what we really want for our son....check gay wedding photos you will see what i mean
This is clearly a bit of an obsession with you - I'd hate to see your Internet search history.
honestly its really boring mainly twitter and various political and economy sites i try and avoid porn as its bad for the soul to look at too much of that
Apparently you can end up in hospital...
Just looked at my search history. It appears to be largely about previously obscure Tory MPs who may be PM by the Autumn and little once-a-day games.
Is that a new (and especially vile) porno genre? No wonder your avatar is squinting!
Why is Hunt so toxic amongst the membership? I know he has the reputation of being a remainer, but he's not exactly Grieve, Clarke, or Heseltine. He was about as prominent as an advocate of the EU as May was in the 2016 referendum... which is to say, not much at all.
I don't understand it at all.
But, it seems to exist.
It's bizarre. Hunt is like a Tory leader out of central casting, but is apparently anathema to the membership. Too Remainery? Too metropolitan? Too sensible?
Just thinking, if Dehenna Davison were to throw her fascinator into the ring, someone with a warehouse full of "DD" T-shirts left over from David Davis' leadership bid will be pleased.
Watched the Rishi vid. Not bad. The Tories could do worse. He’s got more charm and charisma than Starmer, but he’s no Boris, for good or ill
My god he is tiny tho. A leprechaun of a man
i think people might forgive the wealth stuff, as at least it makes him incorruptible. And he has an excellent backstory about immigration and social mobility. It will be quite hard for Labour to fight him, because any outright attacks might look like racism
All in all, a pretty good choice. I agree it will probably end up as Sunak V Truss or Mordaunt
How can the Tories having effectively removed Boris for being fined in lockdown replace him with Sunak, who was also fined in lockdown at the same event too?
I’m going to let you into a little secret, only known in the inner circles of the upper echelons of the Tory party. They didn’t remove Boris because of the FPN….
They didn't directly - but partygate is where he lost the country. But I don't think Rishi is anything like as tainted. The perception of Rishi is not one of a party animal. And Rishi was notable in being one of the more reluctant to impose restrictions. Still mildly problematic, of course.
Problematic in that one leader can say 'I wasn't fined, but he was' in a general election contest. It won't be the only factor but it all adds up, including a cost of living crisis.
Sunak might be the MPs choice but I don't see him beating Starmer in a GE. People underestimate Starmer and downplay the job he has done turning around Labour from the Corbyn years.
I don’t understand why anyone is bothering arguing with KevinB/MickTrain.
It’s the whole MO - try and cause dissent over things that we disagree with but not to the level that is something that’s such an issue in Russia.
He can poke about sexual freedoms, gay marriage, general politics and then eventually some news agency in Russia is reporting that a “major” (yes I know) political discussion forum in the UK where politicians are known to post is full of people who reject the western liberal view.
Give Kevin/Gary/Mick a few posts to embarrass themselves then shut them down as it’s not being done for no reason.
Who he was happy to support mere days ago. And if he was not, he is claiming Boris was a terrible PM because he would be admitting Boris could not control his own Chancellor.
Which do you think it is - is he lying about thinking Sunak is terrible, or is he admitting Boris was terrible?
My family WhatsApp, which is quite rightwing (but with greens and lefties too) has gone from accepting the departure of Boris to OMFG look at these idiots (the potential replacements) and Can we have Boris back
yes Leon i think thats the standard reaction in the country...many who voted Boris wont touch Sunak
Why? Do you detect something with your gaydar?
funny Foxy...wish i could get a GP to touch me but i still cant locate one..
I am afraid it is against professional ethics to touch you in the way you want to be touched.
I don’t understand why anyone is bothering arguing with KevinB/MickTrain.
It’s the whole MO - try and cause dissent over things that we disagree with but not to the level that is something that’s such an issue in Russia.
He can poke about sexual freedoms, gay marriage, general politics and then eventually some news agency in Russia is reporting that a “major” (yes I know) political discussion forum in the UK where politicians are known to post is full of people who reject the western liberal view.
Give Kevin/Gary/Mick a few posts to embarrass themselves then shut them down as it’s not being done for no reason.
And Kevin is seriously in the closet.
Do you secretly fancy me boulay
Didn't the last sockpuppet but two go down exactly this line? Also punctuated exactly the same.
Watched the Rishi vid. Not bad. The Tories could do worse. He’s got more charm and charisma than Starmer, but he’s no Boris, for good or ill
My god he is tiny tho. A leprechaun of a man
i think people might forgive the wealth stuff, as at least it makes him incorruptible. And he has an excellent backstory about immigration and social mobility. It will be quite hard for Labour to fight him, because any outright attacks might look like racism
All in all, a pretty good choice. I agree it will probably end up as Sunak V Truss or Mordaunt
How can the Tories having effectively removed Boris for being fined in lockdown replace him with Sunak, who was also fined in lockdown at the same event too?
Just thinking, if Dehenna Davison were to throw her fascinator into the ring, someone with a warehouse full of "DD" T-shirts left over from David Davis' leadership bid will be pleased.
She's endorsed Truss.
Not surprising. Did you see the DD T-shirt photos? Like a 1960s trade fair.
My family WhatsApp, which is quite rightwing (but with greens and lefties too) has gone from accepting the departure of Boris to OMFG look at these idiots (the potential replacements) and Can we have Boris back
yes Leon i think thats the standard reaction in the country...many who voted Boris wont touch Sunak
Why? Do you detect something with your gaydar?
funny Foxy...wish i could get a GP to touch me but i still cant locate one..
Why do you keep holding Foxy responsible for the state of all GPs?
I see Johnson has just promoted Sarah Dines, despite her involvement in the Pincher affair. He going to spend the next couple of months thinking up petty acts of defiance, isn’t he ?
I don’t understand why anyone is bothering arguing with KevinB/MickTrain.
It’s the whole MO - try and cause dissent over things that we disagree with but not to the level that is something that’s such an issue in Russia.
He can poke about sexual freedoms, gay marriage, general politics and then eventually some news agency in Russia is reporting that a “major” (yes I know) political discussion forum in the UK where politicians are known to post is full of people who reject the western liberal view.
Give Kevin/Gary/Mick a few posts to embarrass themselves then shut them down as it’s not being done for no reason.
And Kevin is seriously in the closet.
You're right, and I already regret rising to the bait.
Comments
i try and avoid porn as its bad for the soul to look at too much of that
That’s very, very occasionally a sign that someone’s repressing something.
No it is not an issue for the Con Party - certainly compared to others.
Look at the bloody list:
Sunak
Javid
Patel
Braverman
Zahawi
Kwarteng
Cleverly
Vara
Good luck Lab in office replicating that.
Throw mud at the governing party where it is deserved - don't make shit up in N London dinner parties.
If I'm correct, I will win a wank by Leon.
You are absolutely right. It is indeed La Ruta de los Volcanos on La Palma.
I was the only person walking it that glorious day (or rather, that I saw). Pretty remote at times and with smouldering volcanoes, which as we now know are not dormant.
I thought you were on the fence and waiting to make your mind up this time?
I have deleted a question to Rishi Sunak about attitudes to race in the Conservative Party membership. My point was, I want, we should all want, greater representation of people of colour leading all political parties. But it's not an issue particular to the Conservative Party.
Private channels now full of white people, well-meaning, saying 'wise decision to delete!' and people of colour saying 'you were right, why did you delete?' FWIW, I think the tweet above is right. It is a problem, and mine was a fair question, but it's also not party political.
When people base their reputations on their intellect, insight and their ability to communicate ideas and arguments, do not trust them when they claim to have not made the point in the way they intended to make it.
It is very obvious the point he was making, obvious enough that he removed it to pretend it was a different, broader point. But he cannot have it both ways, either he stands by it or he doesn't/
Well done @FrancisUrquhart
Maybe I will post some more for fun from time to time unless it irritates people. I thought that last one was pretty hard!
Unless Sunak can win back the Remain backing seats Cameron won in 2015 that went Labour or LD in 2017 or 2019 which is highly unlikely given he himself was a Leaver and has backed Brexit
and actually repression aint a bad thing civilizarion is built on it
sometimes i feel like killing someone but i wont do it
maybe i would fancy a gay orgy in my house but i wouldnt....repression you see it can be a good thing
It requires no competence.
Please instead give me my Leon-loving for not cheating. It may not be in your power at present but I'm sure he'll offer you one soon and they are tranferable.
But, it seems to exist.
I do wonder if Tories are excited about any of them either.
https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/1545495803309035520?s=20&t=Hkrayn5myVcMmAbISYCotw
Life-changing experience.
Brexit v Remain
Wets v Dry
Old School Squires v Metro Liberals
One Nation Tories vs Populists
Eg
Brexity - Baker, Braverman, Mordaunt, Truss, Zahawi, Sunak
Remainery - Tugendhat, Hunt, Wallace, Javid
Sure this has already been posted. Sunak comfortably ahead, but not many high profile MP's declared yet. And Zahawi and Hunt have swapped heads.
Here's just a few:
George Rekers
Steve Wiles
Ted Haggard
Glenn Murphy Jr
Just looked at my search history. It appears to be largely about previously obscure Tory MPs who may be PM by the Autumn and little once-a-day games.
The Red Wall is clearly a part of their defensive strategy, you're right to highlight they need to focus on it if they want a good chance of winning.
But it's still a balance - Boris holding the Red Wall but causing a collapse elsewhere would see them lose. Sunak holding elsewhere but losing all the Red Wall would also see them lose.
Can Sunak, or someone, try to ride both horses at the same time? Not well, perhaps, but well enough?
https://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/1545453882930827264?s=20&t=1ak5T3Au964YuhJtLLhT1w
https://twitter.com/DmitryOpines/status/1545376694277734402
** 14 April 2024 - Day 646 of Tory Leadership Race **
- Every single Tory MP still in the race except Ben Wallace who is leading a Ukrainian tank division to reclaim Crimea;
- Johnson still in No. 10 and planning addition of 3rd floor to son's treehouse
….
- Rishi Sunak rescued after fourteen hours trapped in own car due to both valets who ordinarily open doors for him calling in sick.
Rescuers bemused but appreciative of his attempts to tip them by repeatedly tapping their foreheads with his Black Amex.
But I don't think Rishi is anything like as tainted. The perception of Rishi is not one of a party animal. And Rishi was notable in being one of the more reluctant to impose restrictions.
Still mildly problematic, of course.
PS MInd, the PBTory criterion of "Being able to eat a bacon sandwich" of yore now sounds terribly malicious, if not downright naive.
Plenty of time for a new leader to attempt to change their minds - remember, they don't have to replicate Boris's success, that would be hard after 12-14 years in power anyway, they have to shore things up.
I think there is a tendency to be starry eyed about Attlee simply because he was regarded by the left as not only Labour's most successful leader until recently but in many ways the only truly successful one who totally changed the terms of economic discourse in this country for decades.
However, quite a lot of that would have happened anyway, and his government contained some pretty nasty human beings, the likes of Dalton, Shinwell and Bevan who quite openly made policy based on punishing those they hated (those with any money) not based on sound governance. Which had a number of disastrous side effects including the blowing of huge sums of Marshal aid as current account expenditure on economically unremunerative ventures e.g. the NHS when they could have been spent on repairing war damage. Ironically, that's much the same thing Labour (and Harold Macmillan) later accused Thatcher of doing with North Sea Oil and the profits from selling nationalised industry.
At the same time, they achieved a very great deal of their programme - however flawed it was - against a ticking clock and facing very difficult circumstances, including the unwinding of Britain's war debts, the winter of 1946-47 followed by the harvest failures of the later 1940s, the beginning of the Cold War which stretched Britain militarily and the increasing pressure from the colonies for independence at this moment. That's no small achievement.
Overall, like most governments, the record is mixed. Whether for good or ill, however, they did change Britain very considerably. And they wouldn't have done it without Attlee's diplomatic skill in keeping the government of Bevan, Bevin, Morrison, Dalton, Cripps and Ede, who all hated each other, together and functioning.
For that, he probably does deserve to be ranked alongside Thatcher as the most impactful postwar PM.
Hope that is of interest.
My daughter's gay. She's getting married shortly to a beautiful (in every sense of the word) woman. I, and the rest of the family, are immensely proud of her, and are really excited and looking forward to the wedding. As a parent, I've found it very rewarding to have a daughter with a different sexuality from my own, and have learnt a lot.
By contrast, your homophobia means you're missing out on the rich variety of human life. Though it may be that it's just gay men you've got a thing about?
Then it has to be accessible. And sunny. And somewhere that, despite the altitude is warm enough to walk and take photos
i didn’t see your quiz but I would have guessed the Canaries or the Aeolians, or Hawaii
Many of the people who quit and caused him to be removed stuck with him through the fine, so again that proves that was not the reason for it.
It was that more and more scandals kept coming. That's why they said 'enough is enough' and not 'actually, I've decided for no reason to change my mind and he should have quit because of that fine'.
The fine weakened him, and added to the cumulative effect, but if that had been the end of it, he would have been safe.
It’s the whole MO - try and cause dissent over things that we disagree with but not to the level that is something that’s such an issue in Russia.
He can poke about sexual freedoms, gay marriage, general politics and then eventually some news agency in Russia is reporting that a “major” (yes I know) political discussion forum in the UK where politicians are known to post is full of people who reject the western liberal view.
Give Kevin/Gary/Mick a few posts to embarrass themselves then shut them down as it’s not being done for no reason.
And Kevin is seriously in the closet.
- The House of Lords swells to 14,423 members as Boris Johnson continues to appoint anyone who has ever tweeted anything nice about him.
New Lord Britain4Boris2024 attends ceremony remotely from St. Petersburg but says he still feels included as ceremony is conducted in Russian.
Sunak might be the MPs choice but I don't see him beating Starmer in a GE. People underestimate Starmer and downplay the job he has done turning around Labour from the Corbyn years.
Which do you think it is - is he lying about thinking Sunak is terrible, or is he admitting Boris was terrible?
He even still has a blue-yellow coalition border around his profile picture.
Or his uncle. 'Who was the last Prime Minister to lead his government only from the Lords?'
He going to spend the next couple of months thinking up petty acts of defiance, isn’t he ?