Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

Sunak is a liability in contrast to Starmer – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 11,011
edited February 4 in General
Sunak is a liability in contrast to Starmer – politicalbetting.com

Starmer's numbers are more stable – a small dip but the public are still more likely to say he's an asset to Labour. Overall 37% say he's an asset to Labour to 28% that he isn't compared to 40% to 28% in Labour. Overall Starmer is a net asset +9, Sunak -17 pic.twitter.com/QmV7G83NXr

Read the full story here

«134

Comments

  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,335
    edited January 22
    To think I was accused of Hindiphobia (sic) for pointing out Sunak was a duffer back in late 2022.

    His epitaph will be not as nutty as Truss or not as sleazy as Boris Johnson.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,932

    To think I was accused of Hindiphobia (sic) for pointing out Sunak was a duffer back in late 2022.

    His epitaph will be not as nutty as Truss or not as sleazy as Boris Johnson.

    You are truly challenging Leonardarmus in your foretelling.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,870
    It would be ironic is Starmer stops the boats...

    @JohnRentoul

    Important story from Andrew Grice, which fits with what I hear



    @JohnRentoul
    Compare with what David Cameron said to @bbclaurak last weekend


  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 24,936
    edited January 22

    To think I was accused of Hindiphobia (sic) for pointing out Sunak was a duffer back in late 2022.

    His epitaph will be not as nutty as Truss or not as sleazy as Boris Johnson.

    Sunak is the best they have - because the other options were removed from the party by Bozo in 2019....

    As for Sunak's epitaph - I said back in 2019 it's the last Conservative Prime Minister.

    Yes I know we've had 2 more since then because Bozo screwed up and they then picked the world's worst candidate but the point is the same Brexit left the party going down a dead end with no way of return..
  • Options
    TazTaz Posts: 11,111
    eek said:

    To think I was accused of Hindiphobia (sic) for pointing out Sunak was a duffer back in late 2022.

    His epitaph will be not as nutty as Truss or not as sleazy as Boris Johnson.

    Sunak is the best they have - because the other options were removed from the party by Bozo in 2019....

    As for Sunak's epitaph - I said back in 2019 it's the last Conservative Prime Minister - yes I know we've had 2 more since then because Bozo screwed up and they picked the world's worst candidate afterwards but the point is the same Brexit left them going down a dead end with no way of return..
    What brilliant options were removed by Johnson ?

    Gauke ? Grieve ? Hammond ? Stewart ?

    Nope. I do not see it. I think there is just a lack of any strong talent in either of the main parties. Especially the Tories.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,425
    Pretty large anti fascist rally in Berlin.
    https://twitter.com/TerryReintke/status/1749171977825173952

    Similar scenes in other German cities.
  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,673
    eek said:

    To think I was accused of Hindiphobia (sic) for pointing out Sunak was a duffer back in late 2022.

    His epitaph will be not as nutty as Truss or not as sleazy as Boris Johnson.

    Sunak is the best they have - because the other options were removed from the party by Bozo in 2019....

    As for Sunak's epitaph - I said back in 2019 it's the last Conservative Prime Minister.

    Yes I know we've had 2 more since then because Bozo screwed up and they then picked the world's worst candidate but the point is the same Brexit left the party going down a dead end with no way of return..
    Whilst I kind of agree, I think only Rory the ex Tory was (future) leadership material from those kicked out. The lack of talent goes back further. And a bigger leadership problem than the lack of talent is the internal division. The Tory MPs don't agree on much and hate each other. Good luck leading that.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,174
    I would agree that the Cameronite liberals were a major bloc in support of Sunak. I am one of that bloc and instinctively preferred someone who appeared an intelligent technocrat against the unpredictability and wildness of Truss.

    But this group are probably the most upset by his absurd focus on Rwandan nonsense. Whilst it might bolster him somewhat with the red wallers/Brexiteers it is materially undermining him with this group (which, once upon a time might also have been called one nation Conservatives). And he needs this group even more than the Brexiteers.
  • Options
    TimSTimS Posts: 9,527
    DavidL said:

    I would agree that the Cameronite liberals were a major bloc in support of Sunak. I am one of that bloc and instinctively preferred someone who appeared an intelligent technocrat against the unpredictability and wildness of Truss.

    But this group are probably the most upset by his absurd focus on Rwandan nonsense. Whilst it might bolster him somewhat with the red wallers/Brexiteers it is materially undermining him with this group (which, once upon a time might also have been called one nation Conservatives). And he needs this group even more than the Brexiteers.

    I've felt for a while that the conservatives might outperform expectations in the Blue Wall at the election and the Lib Dems underperform there (not least because expectations have got a bit out of control with people expecting vast swathes of the commuter belt to turn yellow). And for the Lib Dems to outperform rather muted expectations in their old Wessex and West Country heartland. This sort of polling being the reason.

    If he continues to pivot towards culture war he's not going to convince the hard core nationalists but he is going to erode a lot of that (rather unearned) quiet competence reputation among the Cameronites.
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,106
    edited January 22
    Tomorrow marks just one year until the next General Election. Rejoice!
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 24,936
    Taz said:

    eek said:

    To think I was accused of Hindiphobia (sic) for pointing out Sunak was a duffer back in late 2022.

    His epitaph will be not as nutty as Truss or not as sleazy as Boris Johnson.

    Sunak is the best they have - because the other options were removed from the party by Bozo in 2019....

    As for Sunak's epitaph - I said back in 2019 it's the last Conservative Prime Minister - yes I know we've had 2 more since then because Bozo screwed up and they picked the world's worst candidate afterwards but the point is the same Brexit left them going down a dead end with no way of return..
    What brilliant options were removed by Johnson ?

    Gauke ? Grieve ? Hammond ? Stewart ?

    Nope. I do not see it. I think there is just a lack of any strong talent in either of the main parties. Especially the Tories.
    True the list isn't great but the options there are no worse than what the Tory party currently has.

    The funny thing is I think the best thing Labour could do for the Tory party is to introduce some form of AV / PR as it would allow the party to split into the separate warring fractions that currently seek to dominate it...
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,174
    Scott_xP said:

    It would be ironic is Starmer stops the boats...

    @JohnRentoul

    Important story from Andrew Grice, which fits with what I hear



    @JohnRentoul
    Compare with what David Cameron said to @bbclaurak last weekend


    The French never agreed to this when we were even in the EU. The Dublin agreement resulted in a bare handful of people being returned to any European country and never worked in practice.

    Why on earth would the French agree to this when they have a far larger illegal immigrant problem than us already? What on earth is in it for them? There is not a chance in hell that Starmer would ever get this.
  • Options
    TimSTimS Posts: 9,527

    To think I was accused of Hindiphobia (sic) for pointing out Sunak was a duffer back in late 2022.

    His epitaph will be not as nutty as Truss or not as sleazy as Boris Johnson.

    And not as strong and stable as May.
  • Options
    TimSTimS Posts: 9,527
    eek said:

    Taz said:

    eek said:

    To think I was accused of Hindiphobia (sic) for pointing out Sunak was a duffer back in late 2022.

    His epitaph will be not as nutty as Truss or not as sleazy as Boris Johnson.

    Sunak is the best they have - because the other options were removed from the party by Bozo in 2019....

    As for Sunak's epitaph - I said back in 2019 it's the last Conservative Prime Minister - yes I know we've had 2 more since then because Bozo screwed up and they picked the world's worst candidate afterwards but the point is the same Brexit left them going down a dead end with no way of return..
    What brilliant options were removed by Johnson ?

    Gauke ? Grieve ? Hammond ? Stewart ?

    Nope. I do not see it. I think there is just a lack of any strong talent in either of the main parties. Especially the Tories.
    True the list isn't great but the options there are no worse than what the Tory party currently has.

    The funny thing is I think the best thing Labour could do for the Tory party is to introduce some form of AV / PR as it would allow the party to split into the separate warring fractions that currently seek to dominate it...
    Whilst none of those (with the possible exception of Rory) were necessarily PM material, they were all competent ministers with a reasonable grasp of their brief - and in Gauke's case as exchequer secretary, an extremely strong grasp of the brief.
  • Options
    Taz said:

    eek said:

    To think I was accused of Hindiphobia (sic) for pointing out Sunak was a duffer back in late 2022.

    His epitaph will be not as nutty as Truss or not as sleazy as Boris Johnson.

    Sunak is the best they have - because the other options were removed from the party by Bozo in 2019....

    As for Sunak's epitaph - I said back in 2019 it's the last Conservative Prime Minister - yes I know we've had 2 more since then because Bozo screwed up and they picked the world's worst candidate afterwards but the point is the same Brexit left them going down a dead end with no way of return..
    What brilliant options were removed by Johnson ?

    Gauke ? Grieve ? Hammond ? Stewart ?

    Nope. I do not see it. I think there is just a lack of any strong talent in either of the main parties. Especially the Tories.
    Every single one of those you name is superior to anyone in the current Cabinet, with the possible exception of Cameron. Add those to some of the junior ministers at the time who left or were kicked out and you would have leadership on a wholly different level to the current set of incompetents.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,174
    TimS said:

    DavidL said:

    I would agree that the Cameronite liberals were a major bloc in support of Sunak. I am one of that bloc and instinctively preferred someone who appeared an intelligent technocrat against the unpredictability and wildness of Truss.

    But this group are probably the most upset by his absurd focus on Rwandan nonsense. Whilst it might bolster him somewhat with the red wallers/Brexiteers it is materially undermining him with this group (which, once upon a time might also have been called one nation Conservatives). And he needs this group even more than the Brexiteers.

    I've felt for a while that the conservatives might outperform expectations in the Blue Wall at the election and the Lib Dems underperform there (not least because expectations have got a bit out of control with people expecting vast swathes of the commuter belt to turn yellow). And for the Lib Dems to outperform rather muted expectations in their old Wessex and West Country heartland. This sort of polling being the reason.

    If he continues to pivot towards culture war he's not going to convince the hard core nationalists but he is going to erode a lot of that (rather unearned) quiet competence reputation among the Cameronites.
    I expect the Lib Dems to be the dog that doesn't bark. They have made no impact on the polling in the last couple of years and are now regularly polling behind Reform. Then they have the Davey problem. They normally do much better when the Tories are making arses of themselves but maybe not this time.
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,944
    Scott_xP said:

    It would be ironic is Starmer stops the boats...

    @JohnRentoul

    Important story from Andrew Grice, which fits with what I hear



    @JohnRentoul
    Compare with what David Cameron said to @bbclaurak last weekend


    What about those entitled to asylum who have been forced, or deceived into using, such methods?
  • Options
    CleitophonCleitophon Posts: 210
    This is a really nice post. It definitely looks like the tories are being chewed up at both ends of the political spectrum now. They need a GE as quickly as possible to save what is left or it can get really really ugly for them... as obliteration ugly.
  • Options
    TazTaz Posts: 11,111

    Taz said:

    eek said:

    To think I was accused of Hindiphobia (sic) for pointing out Sunak was a duffer back in late 2022.

    His epitaph will be not as nutty as Truss or not as sleazy as Boris Johnson.

    Sunak is the best they have - because the other options were removed from the party by Bozo in 2019....

    As for Sunak's epitaph - I said back in 2019 it's the last Conservative Prime Minister - yes I know we've had 2 more since then because Bozo screwed up and they picked the world's worst candidate afterwards but the point is the same Brexit left them going down a dead end with no way of return..
    What brilliant options were removed by Johnson ?

    Gauke ? Grieve ? Hammond ? Stewart ?

    Nope. I do not see it. I think there is just a lack of any strong talent in either of the main parties. Especially the Tories.
    Every single one of those you name is superior to anyone in the current Cabinet, with the possible exception of Cameron. Add those to some of the junior ministers at the time who left or were kicked out and you would have leadership on a wholly different level to the current set of incompetents.
    They really aren't. None of them hardly set the world alight when in office either. All much of a muchness really. If these people were in the cabinet now people would be getting nostalgic for the Cameron cabinet and waxing lyrical about its members in comparison to the current crop.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,856
    FPT
    Fishing said:

    Sandpit said:

    1/2 million kids with mental health issues are on waiting list says Indie front page tonight.

    Social Media, lockdown or over-medicalisation of growing up?

    Hard to know. But something aint right.

    Perhaps underfunding of the health service?
    It’s not a money problem - or at least it’s not just a money problem.

    Funding has never been higher, and the NHS has had their famous extra £350m a week three times over since 2016 with spending up 2.8% annually in real terms since then to £180bn a year - that’s roughly £3,000 per person in the UK.

    https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/projects/nhs-in-a-nutshell/nhs-budget

    Yes we spend about the OECD average on healthcare as a % of GDP but routinely get the worst results in studies of similar countries, except obviously the US, which spends much more and is often bottom.

    Blaming it on a lack of funding is lazy thinking and lets the real culprits (greeedy unions, spineless and incompetent management, spin-obsessed politicians and a monolithic 1940s Stalinist bureaucracy) off the hook too easily.
    It really needs the politicians to take a look at what works well elsewhere in the world, in terms of money vs outcomes, but that requires challenging the almost religious aspect of the ‘service’ that no other OECD country has decided to copy.

    Perhaps it needs a Labour government to get the necessary reforms through, past the emotion?
  • Options
    TimSTimS Posts: 9,527
    DavidL said:

    Scott_xP said:

    It would be ironic is Starmer stops the boats...

    @JohnRentoul

    Important story from Andrew Grice, which fits with what I hear



    @JohnRentoul
    Compare with what David Cameron said to @bbclaurak last weekend


    The French never agreed to this when we were even in the EU. The Dublin agreement resulted in a bare handful of people being returned to any European country and never worked in practice.

    Why on earth would the French agree to this when they have a far larger illegal immigrant problem than us already? What on earth is in it for them? There is not a chance in hell that Starmer would ever get this.
    Looking at it from the French perspective, I would have thought a combination of money/cooperation with a blow against the smuggling business model that is placing large numbers of listless wandering individuals and families along large swathes of the North coast, unnerving local populations and pushing them towards the RN would be welcome. The camps and all the security demands around them are not fun for the French authorities either.

    We could of course knock this on the head by a mixture of much more rapid on-shore processing, a returns policy, and opening up a pan-European asylum processing system where everyone takes their fair share rather than frontline states like Italy and Greece bearing the brunt, but understandably Britain with its privileged geography and much lower numbers isn't going to want to go there.
  • Options
    TazTaz Posts: 11,111
    eek said:

    Taz said:

    eek said:

    To think I was accused of Hindiphobia (sic) for pointing out Sunak was a duffer back in late 2022.

    His epitaph will be not as nutty as Truss or not as sleazy as Boris Johnson.

    Sunak is the best they have - because the other options were removed from the party by Bozo in 2019....

    As for Sunak's epitaph - I said back in 2019 it's the last Conservative Prime Minister - yes I know we've had 2 more since then because Bozo screwed up and they picked the world's worst candidate afterwards but the point is the same Brexit left them going down a dead end with no way of return..
    What brilliant options were removed by Johnson ?

    Gauke ? Grieve ? Hammond ? Stewart ?

    Nope. I do not see it. I think there is just a lack of any strong talent in either of the main parties. Especially the Tories.
    True the list isn't great but the options there are no worse than what the Tory party currently has.

    The funny thing is I think the best thing Labour could do for the Tory party is to introduce some form of AV / PR as it would allow the party to split into the separate warring fractions that currently seek to dominate it...
    I would agree and I also think those "progressive alliance" posters on social media who think PR/AV would guarantee left of centre govts for life would end up disappointed as it would not work out like that.

    Also labour could fracture to into a social democratic parts, a party of the left and a corbynite party with the likes of Zarah Sultana and Nadia Whittome
  • Options
    TimSTimS Posts: 9,527
    edited January 22
    DavidL said:

    TimS said:

    DavidL said:

    I would agree that the Cameronite liberals were a major bloc in support of Sunak. I am one of that bloc and instinctively preferred someone who appeared an intelligent technocrat against the unpredictability and wildness of Truss.

    But this group are probably the most upset by his absurd focus on Rwandan nonsense. Whilst it might bolster him somewhat with the red wallers/Brexiteers it is materially undermining him with this group (which, once upon a time might also have been called one nation Conservatives). And he needs this group even more than the Brexiteers.

    I've felt for a while that the conservatives might outperform expectations in the Blue Wall at the election and the Lib Dems underperform there (not least because expectations have got a bit out of control with people expecting vast swathes of the commuter belt to turn yellow). And for the Lib Dems to outperform rather muted expectations in their old Wessex and West Country heartland. This sort of polling being the reason.

    If he continues to pivot towards culture war he's not going to convince the hard core nationalists but he is going to erode a lot of that (rather unearned) quiet competence reputation among the Cameronites.
    I expect the Lib Dems to be the dog that doesn't bark. They have made no impact on the polling in the last couple of years and are now regularly polling behind Reform. Then they have the Davey problem. They normally do much better when the Tories are making arses of themselves but maybe not this time.
    I think a rising tide will lift all boats at the election, but it's hard to see a yellow tsunami I agree.
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,702
    I disagree. Sunak is an asset to the Conservatives. ie He is better than the rest of them.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,243
    Taz said:

    eek said:

    To think I was accused of Hindiphobia (sic) for pointing out Sunak was a duffer back in late 2022.

    His epitaph will be not as nutty as Truss or not as sleazy as Boris Johnson.

    Sunak is the best they have - because the other options were removed from the party by Bozo in 2019....

    As for Sunak's epitaph - I said back in 2019 it's the last Conservative Prime Minister - yes I know we've had 2 more since then because Bozo screwed up and they picked the world's worst candidate afterwards but the point is the same Brexit left them going down a dead end with no way of return..
    What brilliant options were removed by Johnson ?

    Gauke ? Grieve ? Hammond ? Stewart ?

    Nope. I do not see it. I think there is just a lack of any strong talent in either of the main parties. Especially the Tories.
    Maybe not for the top job, but the loss of talent, judgement and moderation from the Tory top team - which has been accompanied by further loss of support in the 'blue wall' - was a classic Johnson manouvre bringing tactical advantage while advancing strategic defeat.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,255
    DavidL said:

    I would agree that the Cameronite liberals were a major bloc in support of Sunak. I am one of that bloc and instinctively preferred someone who appeared an intelligent technocrat against the unpredictability and wildness of Truss.

    But this group are probably the most upset by his absurd focus on Rwandan nonsense. Whilst it might bolster him somewhat with the red wallers/Brexiteers it is materially undermining him with this group (which, once upon a time might also have been called one nation Conservatives). And he needs this group even more than the Brexiteers.

    Exactly right. There's appointing Braverman into cabinet because you need to appease the loons, but then this absurd focus on Rwanda and the piddling number of people who arrive here by boat is near-incomprehensible. Unless he really thinks that his colour/religion is such that he has to be more aggressive about immigration.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,870
    DavidL said:

    I would agree that the Cameronite liberals were a major bloc in support of Sunak. I am one of that bloc and instinctively preferred someone who appeared an intelligent technocrat against the unpredictability and wildness of Truss.

    But this group are probably the most upset by his absurd focus on Rwandan nonsense. Whilst it might bolster him somewhat with the red wallers/Brexiteers it is materially undermining him with this group (which, once upon a time might also have been called one nation Conservatives). And he needs this group even more than the Brexiteers.

    Posted the other day, Richi's entire experience of politics has been 3 word slogans "gettin' it done"

    He can't understand why "stop the boats" isn't stopping the boats, and why people who call themselves Conservative aren't cheering "Get Rwanda Done"

    He is a talentless politician, playing a very poor hand, very badly.

    When he is finally put out of our misery, there will be much rejoicing.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,870
    edited January 22
    DavidL said:

    Why on earth would the French agree to this when they have a far larger illegal immigrant problem than us already? What on earth is in it for them? There is not a chance in hell that Starmer would ever get this.

    How about the 400M we sent to Rwanda
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,255
    Scott_xP said:

    DavidL said:

    Why on earth would the French agree to this when they have a far larger illegal immigrant problem than us already? What on earth is in it for them? There is not a chance in hell that Starmer would ever get this.

    How about the 400M we sent to Rwanda
    Or the money we send to India as aid. £400m for France is like me offering you 2p if you'll never mention Brexit again.
  • Options
    StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,386
    eek said:

    To think I was accused of Hindiphobia (sic) for pointing out Sunak was a duffer back in late 2022.

    His epitaph will be not as nutty as Truss or not as sleazy as Boris Johnson.

    Sunak is the best they have - because the other options were removed from the party by Bozo in 2019....

    As for Sunak's epitaph - I said back in 2019 it's the last Conservative Prime Minister.

    Yes I know we've had 2 more since then because Bozo screwed up and they then picked the world's worst candidate but the point is the same Brexit left the party going down a dead end with no way of return..
    Two brilliant wheezes the Conservatives had before all this unpleasantness kicked off have come back to bite the party on the bum, possibly fatally.

    First was Red Wall Theory. That added the votes of socially conservative northerners to the party. Extra votes, sure, but at the cost of changing the shape of the party. Now that socially liberal working age professionals have clocked what's going on (and they're not help in place by fear of Corbyn), they're off.

    The other, possibly more important, is the Dump The Leader meme. It worked in the unusual circumstances of 1990, but the party took the wrong lesson from that. Now it's the default reaction whenever there's a problem or a disagreement. Which makes the party pretty ungovernable.
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,944
    edited January 22
    FF43 said:

    I disagree. Sunak is an asset to the Conservatives. ie He is better than the rest of them.

    Not saying a lot though, is it!
  • Options
    EabhalEabhal Posts: 5,882
    Anecdotal evidence from colleagues/friends who voted for Cameron supports this article and the following observations BTL.

    Sunak was a beacon of sense and stability during COVID-19 and he still retains that reputation to a degree - even the Rwanda stuff is nowhere near as high profile as furlough, eat out to help out etc. But it's eroding away.

    In an alternative universe, Sunak adopted a steady-as-she-goes approach, retained HS2, made vague long term interventions in public health, allowed fiscal drag to suppress demand (and therefore inflation) and to close the deficit before the election, all while waiting for Hamas/Houthis to stir things up a bit.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,255

    This is a really nice post. It definitely looks like the tories are being chewed up at both ends of the political spectrum now. They need a GE as quickly as possible to save what is left or it can get really really ugly for them... as obliteration ugly.

    To remind that I have backed next GE as Jan 2025. The difference in degree of obliteration does not matter for Rishi as each day he is clawing his way up the table of longest serving PMs (he is around 40th now IIRC). What does he care if another 20-30 seats are lost by waiting. And also, there is a chance that events will turn his way somehow.
  • Options
    StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,386
    TOPPING said:

    DavidL said:

    I would agree that the Cameronite liberals were a major bloc in support of Sunak. I am one of that bloc and instinctively preferred someone who appeared an intelligent technocrat against the unpredictability and wildness of Truss.

    But this group are probably the most upset by his absurd focus on Rwandan nonsense. Whilst it might bolster him somewhat with the red wallers/Brexiteers it is materially undermining him with this group (which, once upon a time might also have been called one nation Conservatives). And he needs this group even more than the Brexiteers.

    Exactly right. There's appointing Braverman into cabinet because you need to appease the loons, but then this absurd focus on Rwanda and the piddling number of people who arrive here by boat is near-incomprehensible. Unless he really thinks that his colour/religion is such that he has to be more aggressive about immigration.
    I assume it's more that Rishi just really sincerely wants to be a American. Small taxes, exponential incomes at the top, and lots of social conservatism and border control.
  • Options
    Taz said:

    Taz said:

    eek said:

    To think I was accused of Hindiphobia (sic) for pointing out Sunak was a duffer back in late 2022.

    His epitaph will be not as nutty as Truss or not as sleazy as Boris Johnson.

    Sunak is the best they have - because the other options were removed from the party by Bozo in 2019....

    As for Sunak's epitaph - I said back in 2019 it's the last Conservative Prime Minister - yes I know we've had 2 more since then because Bozo screwed up and they picked the world's worst candidate afterwards but the point is the same Brexit left them going down a dead end with no way of return..
    What brilliant options were removed by Johnson ?

    Gauke ? Grieve ? Hammond ? Stewart ?

    Nope. I do not see it. I think there is just a lack of any strong talent in either of the main parties. Especially the Tories.
    Every single one of those you name is superior to anyone in the current Cabinet, with the possible exception of Cameron. Add those to some of the junior ministers at the time who left or were kicked out and you would have leadership on a wholly different level to the current set of incompetents.
    They really aren't. None of them hardly set the world alight when in office either. All much of a muchness really. If these people were in the cabinet now people would be getting nostalgic for the Cameron cabinet and waxing lyrical about its members in comparison to the current crop.
    You may be right that, were they in office now, we would be nostalgic for the Cameron team. But that doesn't change the fact that they are head and shoulders above the current crew, most of whom (as Lucy Frazer demonstrated this morning on Sky) are even unable to conduct a coherent interview.
  • Options
    ChrisChris Posts: 11,105
    TimS said:

    DavidL said:

    TimS said:

    DavidL said:

    I would agree that the Cameronite liberals were a major bloc in support of Sunak. I am one of that bloc and instinctively preferred someone who appeared an intelligent technocrat against the unpredictability and wildness of Truss.

    But this group are probably the most upset by his absurd focus on Rwandan nonsense. Whilst it might bolster him somewhat with the red wallers/Brexiteers it is materially undermining him with this group (which, once upon a time might also have been called one nation Conservatives). And he needs this group even more than the Brexiteers.

    I've felt for a while that the conservatives might outperform expectations in the Blue Wall at the election and the Lib Dems underperform there (not least because expectations have got a bit out of control with people expecting vast swathes of the commuter belt to turn yellow). And for the Lib Dems to outperform rather muted expectations in their old Wessex and West Country heartland. This sort of polling being the reason.

    If he continues to pivot towards culture war he's not going to convince the hard core nationalists but he is going to erode a lot of that (rather unearned) quiet competence reputation among the Cameronites.
    I expect the Lib Dems to be the dog that doesn't bark. They have made no impact on the polling in the last couple of years and are now regularly polling behind Reform. Then they have the Davey problem. They normally do much better when the Tories are making arses of themselves but maybe not this time.
    I think a rising tide will lift all boats at the election, but it's hard to see a yellow tsunami I agree.
    Including small boats like the Lib Dems?
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,856

    TOPPING said:

    DavidL said:

    I would agree that the Cameronite liberals were a major bloc in support of Sunak. I am one of that bloc and instinctively preferred someone who appeared an intelligent technocrat against the unpredictability and wildness of Truss.

    But this group are probably the most upset by his absurd focus on Rwandan nonsense. Whilst it might bolster him somewhat with the red wallers/Brexiteers it is materially undermining him with this group (which, once upon a time might also have been called one nation Conservatives). And he needs this group even more than the Brexiteers.

    Exactly right. There's appointing Braverman into cabinet because you need to appease the loons, but then this absurd focus on Rwanda and the piddling number of people who arrive here by boat is near-incomprehensible. Unless he really thinks that his colour/religion is such that he has to be more aggressive about immigration.
    I assume it's more that Rishi just really sincerely wants to be a American. Small taxes, exponential incomes at the top, and lots of social conservatism and border control.
    Border control? Right now the US is dealing with a massive border control problem, thousands of people getting through illegally every day from Mexico and Canada. It’s going to be one of the main issues at the election.
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 24,936
    Sandpit said:

    TOPPING said:

    DavidL said:

    I would agree that the Cameronite liberals were a major bloc in support of Sunak. I am one of that bloc and instinctively preferred someone who appeared an intelligent technocrat against the unpredictability and wildness of Truss.

    But this group are probably the most upset by his absurd focus on Rwandan nonsense. Whilst it might bolster him somewhat with the red wallers/Brexiteers it is materially undermining him with this group (which, once upon a time might also have been called one nation Conservatives). And he needs this group even more than the Brexiteers.

    Exactly right. There's appointing Braverman into cabinet because you need to appease the loons, but then this absurd focus on Rwanda and the piddling number of people who arrive here by boat is near-incomprehensible. Unless he really thinks that his colour/religion is such that he has to be more aggressive about immigration.
    I assume it's more that Rishi just really sincerely wants to be a American. Small taxes, exponential incomes at the top, and lots of social conservatism and border control.
    Border control? Right now the US is dealing with a massive border control problem, thousands of people getting through illegally every day from Mexico and Canada. It’s going to be one of the main issues at the election.
    It’s going to be an issue in Texas and probably New Mexico but not sure about elsewhere no matter how much work Texas is doing in making it a national problem.

    Equally how do you solve the problem - a lot of America’s industry is based on abusing illegal immigrants until they become legal and move on to better paid options
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 46,945
    Britain, today. Sadiq Khan's London. Today

    "Three attacked in Leicester Square ‘for being Jewish’

    Police were called 10 times but failed to show up, claims victim of alleged hate crime"

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/01/21/three-attacked-leicester-square-being-jewish-speak-hebrew/
  • Options
    StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,386
    Sandpit said:

    TOPPING said:

    DavidL said:

    I would agree that the Cameronite liberals were a major bloc in support of Sunak. I am one of that bloc and instinctively preferred someone who appeared an intelligent technocrat against the unpredictability and wildness of Truss.

    But this group are probably the most upset by his absurd focus on Rwandan nonsense. Whilst it might bolster him somewhat with the red wallers/Brexiteers it is materially undermining him with this group (which, once upon a time might also have been called one nation Conservatives). And he needs this group even more than the Brexiteers.

    Exactly right. There's appointing Braverman into cabinet because you need to appease the loons, but then this absurd focus on Rwanda and the piddling number of people who arrive here by boat is near-incomprehensible. Unless he really thinks that his colour/religion is such that he has to be more aggressive about immigration.
    I assume it's more that Rishi just really sincerely wants to be a American. Small taxes, exponential incomes at the top, and lots of social conservatism and border control.
    Border control? Right now the US is dealing with a massive border control problem, thousands of people getting through illegally every day from Mexico and Canada. It’s going to be one of the main issues at the election.
    Fair point- border control obsession, then.

    Stop The Boats. Build The Wall. Maths and engineering say they are both absurd to an impossible degree, and neither really solves the problem.

    But at a symbolic level, both policies are seen as desirable.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 46,945
    DavidL said:

    Scott_xP said:

    It would be ironic is Starmer stops the boats...

    @JohnRentoul

    Important story from Andrew Grice, which fits with what I hear



    @JohnRentoul
    Compare with what David Cameron said to @bbclaurak last weekend


    The French never agreed to this when we were even in the EU. The Dublin agreement resulted in a bare handful of people being returned to any European country and never worked in practice.

    Why on earth would the French agree to this when they have a far larger illegal immigrant problem than us already? What on earth is in it for them? There is not a chance in hell that Starmer would ever get this.
    Yes, that is absolute and obvious bollocks, from the get-go

    It's not great if Starmer's team are lying like this - making absurd promises which will never eventuate - many months before they even take office
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,106
    eek said:

    Sandpit said:

    TOPPING said:

    DavidL said:

    I would agree that the Cameronite liberals were a major bloc in support of Sunak. I am one of that bloc and instinctively preferred someone who appeared an intelligent technocrat against the unpredictability and wildness of Truss.

    But this group are probably the most upset by his absurd focus on Rwandan nonsense. Whilst it might bolster him somewhat with the red wallers/Brexiteers it is materially undermining him with this group (which, once upon a time might also have been called one nation Conservatives). And he needs this group even more than the Brexiteers.

    Exactly right. There's appointing Braverman into cabinet because you need to appease the loons, but then this absurd focus on Rwanda and the piddling number of people who arrive here by boat is near-incomprehensible. Unless he really thinks that his colour/religion is such that he has to be more aggressive about immigration.
    I assume it's more that Rishi just really sincerely wants to be a American. Small taxes, exponential incomes at the top, and lots of social conservatism and border control.
    Border control? Right now the US is dealing with a massive border control problem, thousands of people getting through illegally every day from Mexico and Canada. It’s going to be one of the main issues at the election.
    It’s going to be an issue in Texas and probably New Mexico but not sure about elsewhere no matter how much work Texas is doing in making it a national problem.

    Equally how do you solve the problem - a lot of America’s industry is based on abusing illegal immigrants until they become legal and move on to better paid options
    Aren't Southern GOP Mayor's and Governors shipping them all North and dumping them in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Illinois?

    Biden will be viewed by history as a much better President than the electorate gave him credit, but he dropped this ball.
  • Options
    TazTaz Posts: 11,111
    Leon said:

    Britain, today. Sadiq Khan's London. Today

    "Three attacked in Leicester Square ‘for being Jewish’

    Police were called 10 times but failed to show up, claims victim of alleged hate crime"

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/01/21/three-attacked-leicester-square-being-jewish-speak-hebrew/

    Too busy harrassing a youtube pianist who had committed no offence.
  • Options
    TazTaz Posts: 11,111

    eek said:

    Sandpit said:

    TOPPING said:

    DavidL said:

    I would agree that the Cameronite liberals were a major bloc in support of Sunak. I am one of that bloc and instinctively preferred someone who appeared an intelligent technocrat against the unpredictability and wildness of Truss.

    But this group are probably the most upset by his absurd focus on Rwandan nonsense. Whilst it might bolster him somewhat with the red wallers/Brexiteers it is materially undermining him with this group (which, once upon a time might also have been called one nation Conservatives). And he needs this group even more than the Brexiteers.

    Exactly right. There's appointing Braverman into cabinet because you need to appease the loons, but then this absurd focus on Rwanda and the piddling number of people who arrive here by boat is near-incomprehensible. Unless he really thinks that his colour/religion is such that he has to be more aggressive about immigration.
    I assume it's more that Rishi just really sincerely wants to be a American. Small taxes, exponential incomes at the top, and lots of social conservatism and border control.
    Border control? Right now the US is dealing with a massive border control problem, thousands of people getting through illegally every day from Mexico and Canada. It’s going to be one of the main issues at the election.
    It’s going to be an issue in Texas and probably New Mexico but not sure about elsewhere no matter how much work Texas is doing in making it a national problem.

    Equally how do you solve the problem - a lot of America’s industry is based on abusing illegal immigrants until they become legal and move on to better paid options
    Aren't Southern GOP Mayor's and Governors shipping them all North and dumping them in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Illinois?

    Biden will be viewed by history as a much better President than the electorate gave him credit, but he dropped this ball.
    Yes they are. But these states did declare some of their cities as sanctuary cities so they are getting what they wanted. Surely.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,856

    eek said:

    Sandpit said:

    TOPPING said:

    DavidL said:

    I would agree that the Cameronite liberals were a major bloc in support of Sunak. I am one of that bloc and instinctively preferred someone who appeared an intelligent technocrat against the unpredictability and wildness of Truss.

    But this group are probably the most upset by his absurd focus on Rwandan nonsense. Whilst it might bolster him somewhat with the red wallers/Brexiteers it is materially undermining him with this group (which, once upon a time might also have been called one nation Conservatives). And he needs this group even more than the Brexiteers.

    Exactly right. There's appointing Braverman into cabinet because you need to appease the loons, but then this absurd focus on Rwanda and the piddling number of people who arrive here by boat is near-incomprehensible. Unless he really thinks that his colour/religion is such that he has to be more aggressive about immigration.
    I assume it's more that Rishi just really sincerely wants to be a American. Small taxes, exponential incomes at the top, and lots of social conservatism and border control.
    Border control? Right now the US is dealing with a massive border control problem, thousands of people getting through illegally every day from Mexico and Canada. It’s going to be one of the main issues at the election.
    It’s going to be an issue in Texas and probably New Mexico but not sure about elsewhere no matter how much work Texas is doing in making it a national problem.

    Equally how do you solve the problem - a lot of America’s industry is based on abusing illegal immigrants until they become legal and move on to better paid options
    Aren't Southern GOP Mayor's and Governors shipping them all North and dumping them in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Illinois?

    Biden will be viewed by history as a much better President than the electorate gave him credit, but he dropped this ball.
    When Trump was president and his rhetoric was about building the wall and stopping illegal immigration, a number of Democrat-controlled cities and states declared themselves to be “Sanctuary Cities” where illegals are welcomed.

    So the border states have started shipping illegal immigrants to the places that said they are welcome.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 46,945
    Taz said:

    Leon said:

    Britain, today. Sadiq Khan's London. Today

    "Three attacked in Leicester Square ‘for being Jewish’

    Police were called 10 times but failed to show up, claims victim of alleged hate crime"

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/01/21/three-attacked-leicester-square-being-jewish-speak-hebrew/

    Too busy harrassing a youtube pianist who had committed no offence.
    It's gone beyond angering or infuriating, this stuff now induces - in me - a bleak despair
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,425
    edited January 22
    So once again, someone who Donald Trump has relentlessly denigrated and insulted, waves a white flag, bends a knee and offers the former president his backing. It’s like there’s a whole generation of Republican politicians who were born without backbones
    https://twitter.com/jonsopel/status/1749165679847067675

    When even Jon Sopel notices..
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,095
    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    Scott_xP said:

    It would be ironic is Starmer stops the boats...

    @JohnRentoul

    Important story from Andrew Grice, which fits with what I hear



    @JohnRentoul
    Compare with what David Cameron said to @bbclaurak last weekend


    The French never agreed to this when we were even in the EU. The Dublin agreement resulted in a bare handful of people being returned to any European country and never worked in practice.

    Why on earth would the French agree to this when they have a far larger illegal immigrant problem than us already? What on earth is in it for them? There is not a chance in hell that Starmer would ever get this.
    Yes, that is absolute and obvious bollocks, from the get-go

    It's not great if Starmer's team are lying like this - making absurd promises which will never eventuate - many months before they even take office
    It's stuff like this why I think Starmer could have a Theresa May-level bad election campaign.
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,944
    TOPPING said:

    This is a really nice post. It definitely looks like the tories are being chewed up at both ends of the political spectrum now. They need a GE as quickly as possible to save what is left or it can get really really ugly for them... as obliteration ugly.

    To remind that I have backed next GE as Jan 2025. The difference in degree of obliteration does not matter for Rishi as each day he is clawing his way up the table of longest serving PMs (he is around 40th now IIRC). What does he care if another 20-30 seats are lost by waiting. And also, there is a chance that events will turn his way somehow.
    Agreed. Rishi’s a significant figure (fairly) on the world stage at the moment; probably the only chance he’ll have of being so. He’s going to hang on as long as possible.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,856
    edited January 22
    Taz said:

    Leon said:

    Britain, today. Sadiq Khan's London. Today

    "Three attacked in Leicester Square ‘for being Jewish’

    Police were called 10 times but failed to show up, claims victim of alleged hate crime"

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/01/21/three-attacked-leicester-square-being-jewish-speak-hebrew/

    Too busy harrassing a youtube pianist who had committed no offence.
    The one at Waterloo station? For some reason in the last few weeks Youtube has been feeding me dozens of videos of a piano at Waterloo, with various excellent pianists turning up seemingly at random to play it or to sing along. They all have millions of views.
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,106

    eek said:

    Sandpit said:

    TOPPING said:

    DavidL said:

    I would agree that the Cameronite liberals were a major bloc in support of Sunak. I am one of that bloc and instinctively preferred someone who appeared an intelligent technocrat against the unpredictability and wildness of Truss.

    But this group are probably the most upset by his absurd focus on Rwandan nonsense. Whilst it might bolster him somewhat with the red wallers/Brexiteers it is materially undermining him with this group (which, once upon a time might also have been called one nation Conservatives). And he needs this group even more than the Brexiteers.

    Exactly right. There's appointing Braverman into cabinet because you need to appease the loons, but then this absurd focus on Rwanda and the piddling number of people who arrive here by boat is near-incomprehensible. Unless he really thinks that his colour/religion is such that he has to be more aggressive about immigration.
    I assume it's more that Rishi just really sincerely wants to be a American. Small taxes, exponential incomes at the top, and lots of social conservatism and border control.
    Border control? Right now the US is dealing with a massive border control problem, thousands of people getting through illegally every day from Mexico and Canada. It’s going to be one of the main issues at the election.
    It’s going to be an issue in Texas and probably New Mexico but not sure about elsewhere no matter how much work Texas is doing in making it a national problem.

    Equally how do you solve the problem - a lot of America’s industry is based on abusing illegal immigrants until they become legal and move on to better paid options
    Aren't Southern GOP Mayor's and Governors shipping them all North and dumping them in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Illinois?

    Biden will be viewed by history as a much better President than the electorate gave him credit, but he dropped this ball.
    Sorry about the rogue apostrophe. It wasn't me!
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,944

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    Scott_xP said:

    It would be ironic is Starmer stops the boats...

    @JohnRentoul

    Important story from Andrew Grice, which fits with what I hear



    @JohnRentoul
    Compare with what David Cameron said to @bbclaurak last weekend


    The French never agreed to this when we were even in the EU. The Dublin agreement resulted in a bare handful of people being returned to any European country and never worked in practice.

    Why on earth would the French agree to this when they have a far larger illegal immigrant problem than us already? What on earth is in it for them? There is not a chance in hell that Starmer would ever get this.
    Yes, that is absolute and obvious bollocks, from the get-go

    It's not great if Starmer's team are lying like this - making absurd promises which will never eventuate - many months before they even take office
    It's stuff like this why I think Starmer could have a Theresa May-level bad election campaign.
    Or the ‘minor parties’ have a really good one!
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,236

    To think I was accused of Hindiphobia (sic) for pointing out Sunak was a duffer back in late 2022.

    His epitaph will be not as nutty as Truss or not as sleazy as Boris Johnson.

    Hinduphobia?

    Hindi is a language (which, along with Urdu, is simply one version of Hindustani).
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindustani_language

    Speaking of which, right-wing Modi opens a temple on the site of the Ayodhya mosque demolished by right-wing nutters in 1992:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-68003095
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,055

    eek said:

    Sandpit said:

    TOPPING said:

    DavidL said:

    I would agree that the Cameronite liberals were a major bloc in support of Sunak. I am one of that bloc and instinctively preferred someone who appeared an intelligent technocrat against the unpredictability and wildness of Truss.

    But this group are probably the most upset by his absurd focus on Rwandan nonsense. Whilst it might bolster him somewhat with the red wallers/Brexiteers it is materially undermining him with this group (which, once upon a time might also have been called one nation Conservatives). And he needs this group even more than the Brexiteers.

    Exactly right. There's appointing Braverman into cabinet because you need to appease the loons, but then this absurd focus on Rwanda and the piddling number of people who arrive here by boat is near-incomprehensible. Unless he really thinks that his colour/religion is such that he has to be more aggressive about immigration.
    I assume it's more that Rishi just really sincerely wants to be a American. Small taxes, exponential incomes at the top, and lots of social conservatism and border control.
    Border control? Right now the US is dealing with a massive border control problem, thousands of people getting through illegally every day from Mexico and Canada. It’s going to be one of the main issues at the election.
    It’s going to be an issue in Texas and probably New Mexico but not sure about elsewhere no matter how much work Texas is doing in making it a national problem.

    Equally how do you solve the problem - a lot of America’s industry is based on abusing illegal immigrants until they become legal and move on to better paid options
    Aren't Southern GOP Mayor's and Governors shipping them all North and dumping them in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Illinois?

    Biden will be viewed by history as a much better President than the electorate gave him credit, but he dropped this ball.
    Biden has the problem that the Dems are a very broad party ranging, in UK terms, from the equivalent of Corbynistas to moderate Conservatives.

    This division can be exposed by 'events'.

    Visible most clearly in both a large majority of Jews and a large majority of Jew haters voting Dem.

    While on immigration a significant number of Dems seem to oppose any sort of border control at all.
  • Options
    CookieCookie Posts: 11,366

    eek said:

    Sandpit said:

    TOPPING said:

    DavidL said:

    I would agree that the Cameronite liberals were a major bloc in support of Sunak. I am one of that bloc and instinctively preferred someone who appeared an intelligent technocrat against the unpredictability and wildness of Truss.

    But this group are probably the most upset by his absurd focus on Rwandan nonsense. Whilst it might bolster him somewhat with the red wallers/Brexiteers it is materially undermining him with this group (which, once upon a time might also have been called one nation Conservatives). And he needs this group even more than the Brexiteers.

    Exactly right. There's appointing Braverman into cabinet because you need to appease the loons, but then this absurd focus on Rwanda and the piddling number of people who arrive here by boat is near-incomprehensible. Unless he really thinks that his colour/religion is such that he has to be more aggressive about immigration.
    I assume it's more that Rishi just really sincerely wants to be a American. Small taxes, exponential incomes at the top, and lots of social conservatism and border control.
    Border control? Right now the US is dealing with a massive border control problem, thousands of people getting through illegally every day from Mexico and Canada. It’s going to be one of the main issues at the election.
    It’s going to be an issue in Texas and probably New Mexico but not sure about elsewhere no matter how much work Texas is doing in making it a national problem.

    Equally how do you solve the problem - a lot of America’s industry is based on abusing illegal immigrants until they become legal and move on to better paid options
    Aren't Southern GOP Mayor's and Governors shipping them all North and dumping them in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Illinois?

    Biden will be viewed by history as a much better President than the electorate gave him credit, but he dropped this ball.
    Sorry about the rogue apostrophe. It wasn't me!
    Blame autocorrect! I turned mine off - the frequent fat finger errors which result make me cringe far less than autocorrect's more-frequent-than-you-would-expect erroneous 'corrections'.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,425
    Nigelb said:

    So once again, someone who Donald Trump has relentlessly denigrated and insulted, waves a white flag, bends a knee and offers the former president his backing. It’s like there’s a whole generation of Republican politicians who were born without backbones
    https://twitter.com/jonsopel/status/1749165679847067675

    When even Jon Sopel notices..

    A week is a very long time in Republican politics.

    DeSantis: You can be the most worthless Republican in America, if you kiss the ring, Trump will say you are wonderful.
    https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1746712953275994215
  • Options
    theakestheakes Posts: 841
    As Kennedy's poll ratings inevitably fall closer to the election where will his votes go, at present they seem to be hurting Biden. Then there is Phillips, will he drop out at some stage.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 46,945

    Sandpit said:

    TOPPING said:

    DavidL said:

    I would agree that the Cameronite liberals were a major bloc in support of Sunak. I am one of that bloc and instinctively preferred someone who appeared an intelligent technocrat against the unpredictability and wildness of Truss.

    But this group are probably the most upset by his absurd focus on Rwandan nonsense. Whilst it might bolster him somewhat with the red wallers/Brexiteers it is materially undermining him with this group (which, once upon a time might also have been called one nation Conservatives). And he needs this group even more than the Brexiteers.

    Exactly right. There's appointing Braverman into cabinet because you need to appease the loons, but then this absurd focus on Rwanda and the piddling number of people who arrive here by boat is near-incomprehensible. Unless he really thinks that his colour/religion is such that he has to be more aggressive about immigration.
    I assume it's more that Rishi just really sincerely wants to be a American. Small taxes, exponential incomes at the top, and lots of social conservatism and border control.
    Border control? Right now the US is dealing with a massive border control problem, thousands of people getting through illegally every day from Mexico and Canada. It’s going to be one of the main issues at the election.
    Fair point- border control obsession, then.

    Stop The Boats. Build The Wall. Maths and engineering say they are both absurd to an impossible degree, and neither really solves the problem.

    But at a symbolic level, both policies are seen as desirable.
    It's really not "impossible". You could, for instance, start shooting people that cross borders illegally. It's not like this hasn't happened in human history; if anything, violence against illegal incursions is the default. It is, ultimately, what people expect of any government: control of the borders, with guns if needs be. That is what governments are FOR

    Of course the situation in the Channel or Texas would have to get vastly worse before any government considered this ultimate, desolate and inhumane option - but if it occurred, that would solve the problem instantly. Violence is, also, the inevitable endpoint if illegal migration continues and worsens, and no other alternative is found

    Which is one reason we desperately need to solve this, now, and humanely



  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,592

    Tomorrow marks just one year until the next General Election. Rejoice!

    Strictly speaking 28 January 2025 is the the last possible date for the next GE, so you may need to wait an extra week :-(
  • Options
    StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,386
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    So once again, someone who Donald Trump has relentlessly denigrated and insulted, waves a white flag, bends a knee and offers the former president his backing. It’s like there’s a whole generation of Republican politicians who were born without backbones
    https://twitter.com/jonsopel/status/1749165679847067675

    When even Jon Sopel notices..

    A week is a very long time in Republican politics.

    DeSantis: You can be the most worthless Republican in America, if you kiss the ring, Trump will say you are wonderful.
    https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1746712953275994215
    Unfortunately, the weak are an even longer time in Republican politics.
  • Options
    TazTaz Posts: 11,111
    Sandpit said:

    Taz said:

    Leon said:

    Britain, today. Sadiq Khan's London. Today

    "Three attacked in Leicester Square ‘for being Jewish’

    Police were called 10 times but failed to show up, claims victim of alleged hate crime"

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/01/21/three-attacked-leicester-square-being-jewish-speak-hebrew/

    Too busy harrassing a youtube pianist who had committed no offence.
    The one at Waterloo station? For some reason in the last few weeks Youtube has been feeding me dozens of videos of a piano at Waterloo, with various excellent pianists turning up seemingly at random to play it or to sing along. They all have millions of views.
    It was this one

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65iwnI2hjAA
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,856
    Taz said:

    Sandpit said:

    Taz said:

    Leon said:

    Britain, today. Sadiq Khan's London. Today

    "Three attacked in Leicester Square ‘for being Jewish’

    Police were called 10 times but failed to show up, claims victim of alleged hate crime"

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/01/21/three-attacked-leicester-square-being-jewish-speak-hebrew/

    Too busy harrassing a youtube pianist who had committed no offence.
    The one at Waterloo station? For some reason in the last few weeks Youtube has been feeding me dozens of videos of a piano at Waterloo, with various excellent pianists turning up seemingly at random to play it or to sing along. They all have millions of views.
    It was this one

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65iwnI2hjAA
    Ah yes I’ve seen a lot of his videos. 2m views in two days for that one.
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,106

    eek said:

    Sandpit said:

    TOPPING said:

    DavidL said:

    I would agree that the Cameronite liberals were a major bloc in support of Sunak. I am one of that bloc and instinctively preferred someone who appeared an intelligent technocrat against the unpredictability and wildness of Truss.

    But this group are probably the most upset by his absurd focus on Rwandan nonsense. Whilst it might bolster him somewhat with the red wallers/Brexiteers it is materially undermining him with this group (which, once upon a time might also have been called one nation Conservatives). And he needs this group even more than the Brexiteers.

    Exactly right. There's appointing Braverman into cabinet because you need to appease the loons, but then this absurd focus on Rwanda and the piddling number of people who arrive here by boat is near-incomprehensible. Unless he really thinks that his colour/religion is such that he has to be more aggressive about immigration.
    I assume it's more that Rishi just really sincerely wants to be a American. Small taxes, exponential incomes at the top, and lots of social conservatism and border control.
    Border control? Right now the US is dealing with a massive border control problem, thousands of people getting through illegally every day from Mexico and Canada. It’s going to be one of the main issues at the election.
    It’s going to be an issue in Texas and probably New Mexico but not sure about elsewhere no matter how much work Texas is doing in making it a national problem.

    Equally how do you solve the problem - a lot of America’s industry is based on abusing illegal immigrants until they become legal and move on to better paid options
    Aren't Southern GOP Mayor's and Governors shipping them all North and dumping them in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Illinois?

    Biden will be viewed by history as a much better President than the electorate gave him credit, but he dropped this ball.
    Biden has the problem that the Dems are a very broad party ranging, in UK terms, from the equivalent of Corbynistas to moderate Conservatives.

    This division can be exposed by 'events'.

    Visible most clearly in both a large majority of Jews and a large majority of Jew haters voting Dem.

    While on immigration a significant number of Dems seem to oppose any sort of border control at all.
    I am not sure your range is remotely accurate. The likes of Bernie and AOC are more Starmerite than Corbynite and some of the Southern Dems are extremely reactionary.

    Trump's wall was Patel/Braverman's Rwanda. Plans so absurd that they generate a wild over reaction by opponents.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,425
    The government's fiscal plans have been looking unrealistic for some time.
    Unless they are actually holding the election in May, I don't see how they can do the whole 'cut tax & leave Labour to sort out the resulting spending cuts' thing without it first biting them.

    More than 40 Tory MPs call for extra council funding
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68046627
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,255
    Leon said:

    Violence is, also, the inevitable endpoint if illegal migration continues and worsens, and no other alternative is found

    Which is one reason we desperately need to solve this, now, and humanely

    I imagine you would have said this at any point over the past 50 years. Indeed I believe it was said with a degree of rhetorical flourish some 55 years ago.
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,106

    Tomorrow marks just one year until the next General Election. Rejoice!

    Strictly speaking 28 January 2025 is the the last possible date for the next GE, so you may need to wait an extra week :-(
    ...which is a Tuesday. Last possible Thursday is one year tomorrow. So by Wednesday the election will be happening within the year. Rejoice!
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 46,945
    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    Violence is, also, the inevitable endpoint if illegal migration continues and worsens, and no other alternative is found

    Which is one reason we desperately need to solve this, now, and humanely

    I imagine you would have said this at any point over the past 50 years. Indeed I believe it was said with a degree of rhetorical flourish some 55 years ago.
    Yes, yawn, whatever, bur I'm not wrong, am I?

    In the end if illegal immigration just gets worse and worse, governments will be forced to extreme methods to deter it

    We can already see it in parts of the world. It is also a particular hazard on the US Southern Border, where the local citizens are well armed, and generally not known for accepting fate with stoic pacifism
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,829
    Meanwhile in the real world. Voters of all Parties prioritise Public Services over tax cuts

    https://twitter.com/JackTShaw/status/1749355870490652971
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 24,270
    Leon said:

    Britain, today. Sadiq Khan's London. Today

    "Three attacked in Leicester Square ‘for being Jewish’

    Police were called 10 times but failed to show up, claims victim of alleged hate crime"

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/01/21/three-attacked-leicester-square-being-jewish-speak-hebrew/

    Police dragging their feet is not confined to "Sadiq Khan's London". Lincolnshire police did not go to the home of 2yo Bronson Battersby. Norfolk police did not go to the house where four people, including two children, were found dead on Friday.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-68040787

    Clearly we need an ITV drama and some Cyclefree headers.
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 39,991
    edited January 22
    Nigelb said:

    Pretty large anti fascist rally in Berlin.
    https://twitter.com/TerryReintke/status/1749171977825173952

    Similar scenes in other German cities.

    Seems to be quite a large national response to the new Wansee..sorry..Potsdam conference story. Has there been any German polling since it broke? I sense despite their denials AfD may have temporarily shot themselves in the foot by being associated with it. I read that there were also CDU members at the meeting though encouragingly they now seem to have peeled off to form their own nasty party.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,255
    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    Violence is, also, the inevitable endpoint if illegal migration continues and worsens, and no other alternative is found

    Which is one reason we desperately need to solve this, now, and humanely

    I imagine you would have said this at any point over the past 50 years. Indeed I believe it was said with a degree of rhetorical flourish some 55 years ago.
    Yes, yawn, whatever, bur I'm not wrong, am I?

    In the end if illegal immigration just gets worse and worse, governments will be forced to extreme methods to deter it

    We can already see it in parts of the world. It is also a particular hazard on the US Southern Border, where the local citizens are well armed, and generally not known for accepting fate with stoic pacifism
    Yawn yourself. We are a huge country with plenty of room and the areas where immigration is most prevalent isn't Little Rissington in the Cotswolds. Londoners meanwhile don't mind it at all.

    Saying "there will be blood" is just posturing and alarmist. And has been shown in the UK not to be the case.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,425
    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    Violence is, also, the inevitable endpoint if illegal migration continues and worsens, and no other alternative is found

    Which is one reason we desperately need to solve this, now, and humanely

    I imagine you would have said this at any point over the past 50 years. Indeed I believe it was said with a degree of rhetorical flourish some 55 years ago.
    Yes, yawn, whatever, bur I'm not wrong, am I?

    In the end if illegal immigration just gets worse and worse, governments will be forced to extreme methods to deter it

    We can already see it in parts of the world. It is also a particular hazard on the US Southern Border, where the local citizens are well armed, and generally not known for accepting fate with stoic pacifism
    You are foaming with much hyperbole.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,302
    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    Violence is, also, the inevitable endpoint if illegal migration continues and worsens, and no other alternative is found

    Which is one reason we desperately need to solve this, now, and humanely

    I imagine you would have said this at any point over the past 50 years. Indeed I believe it was said with a degree of rhetorical flourish some 55 years ago.
    Yes, yawn, whatever, bur I'm not wrong, am I?

    In the end if illegal immigration just gets worse and worse, governments will be forced to extreme methods to deter it

    We can already see it in parts of the world. It is also a particular hazard on the US Southern Border, where the local citizens are well armed, and generally not known for accepting fate with stoic pacifism
    Yawn yourself. We are a huge country with plenty of room and the areas where immigration is most prevalent isn't Little Rissington in the Cotswolds. Londoners meanwhile don't mind it at all.

    Saying "there will be blood" is just posturing and alarmist. And has been shown in the UK not to be the case.
    At the end of the day borders need to be enforced. Just as the law needs to be enforced. You arrest, detain and deport.

    I struggle to work out how, somewhere along the line, this became controversial.
  • Options
    EabhalEabhal Posts: 5,882

    Meanwhile in the real world. Voters of all Parties prioritise Public Services over tax cuts

    https://twitter.com/JackTShaw/status/1749355870490652971

    Look at the over 50s! I presume that is NHS related?

    What chance that in 10 years time we have a public sector more in line with the French one?
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,255

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    Violence is, also, the inevitable endpoint if illegal migration continues and worsens, and no other alternative is found

    Which is one reason we desperately need to solve this, now, and humanely

    I imagine you would have said this at any point over the past 50 years. Indeed I believe it was said with a degree of rhetorical flourish some 55 years ago.
    Yes, yawn, whatever, bur I'm not wrong, am I?

    In the end if illegal immigration just gets worse and worse, governments will be forced to extreme methods to deter it

    We can already see it in parts of the world. It is also a particular hazard on the US Southern Border, where the local citizens are well armed, and generally not known for accepting fate with stoic pacifism
    Yawn yourself. We are a huge country with plenty of room and the areas where immigration is most prevalent isn't Little Rissington in the Cotswolds. Londoners meanwhile don't mind it at all.

    Saying "there will be blood" is just posturing and alarmist. And has been shown in the UK not to be the case.
    At the end of the day borders need to be enforced. Just as the law needs to be enforced. You arrest, detain and deport.

    I struggle to work out how, somewhere along the line, this became controversial.
    It is not controversial. Saying "violence is inevitable" if illegal immigration continues is, however, idiotic.
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 24,270
    Sandpit said:

    Taz said:

    Sandpit said:

    Taz said:

    Leon said:

    Britain, today. Sadiq Khan's London. Today

    "Three attacked in Leicester Square ‘for being Jewish’

    Police were called 10 times but failed to show up, claims victim of alleged hate crime"

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/01/21/three-attacked-leicester-square-being-jewish-speak-hebrew/

    Too busy harrassing a youtube pianist who had committed no offence.
    The one at Waterloo station? For some reason in the last few weeks Youtube has been feeding me dozens of videos of a piano at Waterloo, with various excellent pianists turning up seemingly at random to play it or to sing along. They all have millions of views.
    It was this one

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65iwnI2hjAA
    Ah yes I’ve seen a lot of his videos. 2m views in two days for that one.
    I find Brendan Kavanagh a bit samey. Lots of videos of boogie woogie and people being "shocked". But isn't that St Pancras? Though I suppose all stations look much the same now.
  • Options
    nico679nico679 Posts: 4,760
    The politburo won’t be happy with tonight’s BBC Panorama programme .

    This will be classed as bias because the BBC should be a mouthpiece for No 10.

    The Tories have no problem with bias as long as it’s arse licking them !
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,055

    eek said:

    Sandpit said:

    TOPPING said:

    DavidL said:

    I would agree that the Cameronite liberals were a major bloc in support of Sunak. I am one of that bloc and instinctively preferred someone who appeared an intelligent technocrat against the unpredictability and wildness of Truss.

    But this group are probably the most upset by his absurd focus on Rwandan nonsense. Whilst it might bolster him somewhat with the red wallers/Brexiteers it is materially undermining him with this group (which, once upon a time might also have been called one nation Conservatives). And he needs this group even more than the Brexiteers.

    Exactly right. There's appointing Braverman into cabinet because you need to appease the loons, but then this absurd focus on Rwanda and the piddling number of people who arrive here by boat is near-incomprehensible. Unless he really thinks that his colour/religion is such that he has to be more aggressive about immigration.
    I assume it's more that Rishi just really sincerely wants to be a American. Small taxes, exponential incomes at the top, and lots of social conservatism and border control.
    Border control? Right now the US is dealing with a massive border control problem, thousands of people getting through illegally every day from Mexico and Canada. It’s going to be one of the main issues at the election.
    It’s going to be an issue in Texas and probably New Mexico but not sure about elsewhere no matter how much work Texas is doing in making it a national problem.

    Equally how do you solve the problem - a lot of America’s industry is based on abusing illegal immigrants until they become legal and move on to better paid options
    Aren't Southern GOP Mayor's and Governors shipping them all North and dumping them in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Illinois?

    Biden will be viewed by history as a much better President than the electorate gave him credit, but he dropped this ball.
    Biden has the problem that the Dems are a very broad party ranging, in UK terms, from the equivalent of Corbynistas to moderate Conservatives.

    This division can be exposed by 'events'.

    Visible most clearly in both a large majority of Jews and a large majority of Jew haters voting Dem.

    While on immigration a significant number of Dems seem to oppose any sort of border control at all.
    I am not sure your range is remotely accurate. The likes of Bernie and AOC are more Starmerite than Corbynite and some of the Southern Dems are extremely reactionary.

    Trump's wall was Patel/Braverman's Rwanda. Plans so absurd that they generate a wild over reaction by opponents.
    Bernie and AOC are moderates compared to some 'progressive' Democrats.

    But we agree on the wide range of Dem politicians.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,856
    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    Violence is, also, the inevitable endpoint if illegal migration continues and worsens, and no other alternative is found

    Which is one reason we desperately need to solve this, now, and humanely

    I imagine you would have said this at any point over the past 50 years. Indeed I believe it was said with a degree of rhetorical flourish some 55 years ago.
    Yes, yawn, whatever, bur I'm not wrong, am I?

    In the end if illegal immigration just gets worse and worse, governments will be forced to extreme methods to deter it

    We can already see it in parts of the world. It is also a particular hazard on the US Southern Border, where the local citizens are well armed, and generally not known for accepting fate with stoic pacifism
    Yawn yourself. We are a huge country with plenty of room and the areas where immigration is most prevalent isn't Little Rissington in the Cotswolds. Londoners meanwhile don't mind it at all.

    Saying "there will be blood" is just posturing and alarmist. And has been shown in the UK not to be the case.
    There’s a massive airfield at Little Rissington. Put 10,000 tents on the runways.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,964
    Starmer generally polls below his party though, in contrast to Blair, while Sunak polls level or slightly better than his.

    Sunak's problem is that beyond his core Tory support, he next appeals most to centrist liberals, who he is battling Starmer for as Sir Keir also polls strongly with that group. Redwall and working class Leavers however have leaked from the Tories to Reform since Boris left with Sunak having much left appeal to that group
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 46,945
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    Violence is, also, the inevitable endpoint if illegal migration continues and worsens, and no other alternative is found

    Which is one reason we desperately need to solve this, now, and humanely

    I imagine you would have said this at any point over the past 50 years. Indeed I believe it was said with a degree of rhetorical flourish some 55 years ago.
    Yes, yawn, whatever, bur I'm not wrong, am I?

    In the end if illegal immigration just gets worse and worse, governments will be forced to extreme methods to deter it

    We can already see it in parts of the world. It is also a particular hazard on the US Southern Border, where the local citizens are well armed, and generally not known for accepting fate with stoic pacifism
    Yawn yourself. We are a huge country with plenty of room and the areas where immigration is most prevalent isn't Little Rissington in the Cotswolds. Londoners meanwhile don't mind it at all.

    Saying "there will be blood" is just posturing and alarmist. And has been shown in the UK not to be the case.
    At the end of the day borders need to be enforced. Just as the law needs to be enforced. You arrest, detain and deport.

    I struggle to work out how, somewhere along the line, this became controversial.
    It is not controversial. Saying "violence is inevitable" if illegal immigration continues is, however, idiotic.
    But I did not say that

    I specifically and carefully said "if illegal immigration continues and WORSENS"

    That's the key word. WORSENS. Look, I said it, up there. WORSENS

    Then I said, in reply to you

    "In the end if illegal immigration just gets worse and worse"

    There, again, my actual words - "worse and worse"

    You do this quite a lot. Mischaracterise comments, or deliberately misquote, to try and 'win' some argument. It is stupid and childish. Stop it
  • Options
    StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 7,001
    Taz said:

    Taz said:

    eek said:

    To think I was accused of Hindiphobia (sic) for pointing out Sunak was a duffer back in late 2022.

    His epitaph will be not as nutty as Truss or not as sleazy as Boris Johnson.

    Sunak is the best they have - because the other options were removed from the party by Bozo in 2019....

    As for Sunak's epitaph - I said back in 2019 it's the last Conservative Prime Minister - yes I know we've had 2 more since then because Bozo screwed up and they picked the world's worst candidate afterwards but the point is the same Brexit left them going down a dead end with no way of return..
    What brilliant options were removed by Johnson ?

    Gauke ? Grieve ? Hammond ? Stewart ?

    Nope. I do not see it. I think there is just a lack of any strong talent in either of the main parties. Especially the Tories.
    Every single one of those you name is superior to anyone in the current Cabinet, with the possible exception of Cameron. Add those to some of the junior ministers at the time who left or were kicked out and you would have leadership on a wholly different level to the current set of incompetents.
    They really aren't. None of them hardly set the world alight when in office either. All much of a muchness really. If these people were in the cabinet now people would be
    getting nostalgic for the Cameron cabinet and waxing lyrical about its members in comparison to the current crop.
    It’s the party’s own fault

    As an example (n=1)

    I have a friend in his early 30s.Sensible and well educated (Oxbridge I think but possibly Imperial). Solid Thatcherite right economically; articulate and intelligent. Local councillor

    All that notwithstanding, he wants to be an MP (goodness knows why!)

    And central office vetoed him because his uncle was an MP in the Thatcher/Major era and made some enemies at the time.

    It’s just insane.
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,106
    ...
    nico679 said:

    The politburo won’t be happy with tonight’s BBC Panorama programme .

    This will be classed as bias because the BBC should be a mouthpiece for No 10.

    The Tories have no problem with bias as long as it’s arse licking them !

    Laura was on message yesterday. Blamed Cooper for the boats and allowed Defence Minister Michael Green a free swipe at defence insecurity under Starmer Labour.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 46,945

    Leon said:

    Britain, today. Sadiq Khan's London. Today

    "Three attacked in Leicester Square ‘for being Jewish’

    Police were called 10 times but failed to show up, claims victim of alleged hate crime"

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/01/21/three-attacked-leicester-square-being-jewish-speak-hebrew/

    Police dragging their feet is not confined to "Sadiq Khan's London". Lincolnshire police did not go to the home of 2yo Bronson Battersby. Norfolk police did not go to the house where four people, including two children, were found dead on Friday.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-68040787

    Clearly we need an ITV drama and some Cyclefree headers.
    This story is truly shocking, if it is genuine. Elements of it make me wonder if we are getting the whole story

    But if we are then Jeez. Why did it take the coppers 28 minutes to get to.... Leicester Square?!

    They weren't being summoned to the Isle of Foula
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,255
    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    Violence is, also, the inevitable endpoint if illegal migration continues and worsens, and no other alternative is found

    Which is one reason we desperately need to solve this, now, and humanely

    I imagine you would have said this at any point over the past 50 years. Indeed I believe it was said with a degree of rhetorical flourish some 55 years ago.
    Yes, yawn, whatever, bur I'm not wrong, am I?

    In the end if illegal immigration just gets worse and worse, governments will be forced to extreme methods to deter it

    We can already see it in parts of the world. It is also a particular hazard on the US Southern Border, where the local citizens are well armed, and generally not known for accepting fate with stoic pacifism
    Yawn yourself. We are a huge country with plenty of room and the areas where immigration is most prevalent isn't Little Rissington in the Cotswolds. Londoners meanwhile don't mind it at all.

    Saying "there will be blood" is just posturing and alarmist. And has been shown in the UK not to be the case.
    At the end of the day borders need to be enforced. Just as the law needs to be enforced. You arrest, detain and deport.

    I struggle to work out how, somewhere along the line, this became controversial.
    It is not controversial. Saying "violence is inevitable" if illegal immigration continues is, however, idiotic.
    But I did not say that

    I specifically and carefully said "if illegal immigration continues and WORSENS"

    That's the key word. WORSENS. Look, I said it, up there. WORSENS

    Then I said, in reply to you

    "In the end if illegal immigration just gets worse and worse"

    There, again, my actual words - "worse and worse"

    You do this quite a lot. Mischaracterise comments, or deliberately misquote, to try and 'win' some argument. It is stupid and childish. Stop it
    Weasel words. "and worsens". OK - AND WORSENS. THEN AND ONLY THEN will violence take place.

    But what is worsen? Has or hasn't illegal immigration worsened over the past 60 years. I mean what is the flow rate it has to be above for it to be worse than previously.

    Very unlike you I have to say. Living in the heart of a cosmopolitan city with a huge mix of people from all over the world now saying mark my words we'll be like the southern states of the US if this carries on.

    Your premise is false and there is no shame in admitting it.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,964
    DavidL said:

    TimS said:

    DavidL said:

    I would agree that the Cameronite liberals were a major bloc in support of Sunak. I am one of that bloc and instinctively preferred someone who appeared an intelligent technocrat against the unpredictability and wildness of Truss.

    But this group are probably the most upset by his absurd focus on Rwandan nonsense. Whilst it might bolster him somewhat with the red wallers/Brexiteers it is materially undermining him with this group (which, once upon a time might also have been called one nation Conservatives). And he needs this group even more than the Brexiteers.

    I've felt for a while that the conservatives might outperform expectations in the Blue Wall at the election and the Lib Dems underperform there (not least because expectations have got a bit out of control with people expecting vast swathes of the commuter belt to turn yellow). And for the Lib Dems to outperform rather muted expectations in their old Wessex and West Country heartland. This sort of polling being the reason.

    If he continues to pivot towards culture war he's not going to convince the hard core nationalists but he is going to erode a lot of that (rather unearned) quiet competence reputation among the Cameronites.
    I expect the Lib Dems to be the dog that doesn't bark. They have made no impact on the polling in the last couple of years and are now regularly polling behind Reform. Then they have the Davey problem. They normally do much better when the Tories are making arses of themselves but maybe not this time.
    Given the national swing against the Tories the LDs will pick up 20-30 southern seats just simply as they were second to the Tories last time in those seats and Labour voters will tactically vote for them
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 46,945
    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    Violence is, also, the inevitable endpoint if illegal migration continues and worsens, and no other alternative is found

    Which is one reason we desperately need to solve this, now, and humanely

    I imagine you would have said this at any point over the past 50 years. Indeed I believe it was said with a degree of rhetorical flourish some 55 years ago.
    Yes, yawn, whatever, bur I'm not wrong, am I?

    In the end if illegal immigration just gets worse and worse, governments will be forced to extreme methods to deter it

    We can already see it in parts of the world. It is also a particular hazard on the US Southern Border, where the local citizens are well armed, and generally not known for accepting fate with stoic pacifism
    Yawn yourself. We are a huge country with plenty of room and the areas where immigration is most prevalent isn't Little Rissington in the Cotswolds. Londoners meanwhile don't mind it at all.

    Saying "there will be blood" is just posturing and alarmist. And has been shown in the UK not to be the case.
    At the end of the day borders need to be enforced. Just as the law needs to be enforced. You arrest, detain and deport.

    I struggle to work out how, somewhere along the line, this became controversial.
    It is not controversial. Saying "violence is inevitable" if illegal immigration continues is, however, idiotic.
    But I did not say that

    I specifically and carefully said "if illegal immigration continues and WORSENS"

    That's the key word. WORSENS. Look, I said it, up there. WORSENS

    Then I said, in reply to you

    "In the end if illegal immigration just gets worse and worse"

    There, again, my actual words - "worse and worse"

    You do this quite a lot. Mischaracterise comments, or deliberately misquote, to try and 'win' some argument. It is stupid and childish. Stop it
    Weasel words. "and worsens". OK - AND WORSENS. THEN AND ONLY THEN will violence take place.

    But what is worsen? Has or hasn't illegal immigration worsened over the past 60 years. I mean what is the flow rate it has to be above for it to be worse than previously.

    Very unlike you I have to say. Living in the heart of a cosmopolitan city with a huge mix of people from all over the world now saying mark my words we'll be like the southern states of the US if this carries on.

    Your premise is false and there is no shame in admitting it.
    Are you actually 13 years old?

    I have had a sudden epiphany. That would explain much of your commentary
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,255
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Britain, today. Sadiq Khan's London. Today

    "Three attacked in Leicester Square ‘for being Jewish’

    Police were called 10 times but failed to show up, claims victim of alleged hate crime"

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/01/21/three-attacked-leicester-square-being-jewish-speak-hebrew/

    Police dragging their feet is not confined to "Sadiq Khan's London". Lincolnshire police did not go to the home of 2yo Bronson Battersby. Norfolk police did not go to the house where four people, including two children, were found dead on Friday.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-68040787

    Clearly we need an ITV drama and some Cyclefree headers.
    This story is truly shocking, if it is genuine. Elements of it make me wonder if we are getting the whole story

    But if we are then Jeez. Why did it take the coppers 28 minutes to get to.... Leicester Square?!

    They weren't being summoned to the Isle of Foula
    There are usually four or five police wagons parked up near Leicester Square to say nothing of foot patrols constantly through it so it does sound strange.

    Is this the sort of violence you are talking about btw.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,964
    Trump camp slams Haley.

    'After Mr DeSantis' announcement, the Trump campaign called on all Republicans to rally behind Mr Trump, slamming his former UN Ambassador as "the candidate of the globalists and Democrats who will do everything to stop the America First movement".'
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68051757
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,255
    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    Violence is, also, the inevitable endpoint if illegal migration continues and worsens, and no other alternative is found

    Which is one reason we desperately need to solve this, now, and humanely

    I imagine you would have said this at any point over the past 50 years. Indeed I believe it was said with a degree of rhetorical flourish some 55 years ago.
    Yes, yawn, whatever, bur I'm not wrong, am I?

    In the end if illegal immigration just gets worse and worse, governments will be forced to extreme methods to deter it

    We can already see it in parts of the world. It is also a particular hazard on the US Southern Border, where the local citizens are well armed, and generally not known for accepting fate with stoic pacifism
    Yawn yourself. We are a huge country with plenty of room and the areas where immigration is most prevalent isn't Little Rissington in the Cotswolds. Londoners meanwhile don't mind it at all.

    Saying "there will be blood" is just posturing and alarmist. And has been shown in the UK not to be the case.
    At the end of the day borders need to be enforced. Just as the law needs to be enforced. You arrest, detain and deport.

    I struggle to work out how, somewhere along the line, this became controversial.
    It is not controversial. Saying "violence is inevitable" if illegal immigration continues is, however, idiotic.
    But I did not say that

    I specifically and carefully said "if illegal immigration continues and WORSENS"

    That's the key word. WORSENS. Look, I said it, up there. WORSENS

    Then I said, in reply to you

    "In the end if illegal immigration just gets worse and worse"

    There, again, my actual words - "worse and worse"

    You do this quite a lot. Mischaracterise comments, or deliberately misquote, to try and 'win' some argument. It is stupid and childish. Stop it
    Weasel words. "and worsens". OK - AND WORSENS. THEN AND ONLY THEN will violence take place.

    But what is worsen? Has or hasn't illegal immigration worsened over the past 60 years. I mean what is the flow rate it has to be above for it to be worse than previously.

    Very unlike you I have to say. Living in the heart of a cosmopolitan city with a huge mix of people from all over the world now saying mark my words we'll be like the southern states of the US if this carries on.

    Your premise is false and there is no shame in admitting it.
    Are you actually 13 years old?

    I have had a sudden epiphany. That would explain much of your commentary
    I wish. What I would/wouldn't do if I had that time over, eh.

    You have woken up (or had your first Mojito if you are still travelling) and thought you would make some kind of incisive comment about immigration. Fair enough, we've all thought - how can I wow PB today. You then said there would be violence if illegal immigration worsens.

    But that is just hyperbolic bollocks. You say look at the southern US to see how this plays out when I would say that we are as a nation about as far from the southern US ideologically as we are physically. I mean you count the period since our last mass shooting in years, not hours, as in the US.

    So you are just scaremongering and being alarmist and as I said, we have had it all before, noticeably 55 years ago in Birmingham (W Midlands, not Alabama).
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 46,945
    David Mamet is a Trumpite

    I knew he was maverick and unusually conservative, for a Hollywood writer, but didn't know he actual pro-Donald

    He doesn't mince words and his vituperation is great entertainment; lots of choice quotes here


    https://unherd.com/2024/01/david-mamet-on-hollywood-hamas-and-donald-trump/


    " What always happens, going back to the fall of Jerusalem, is that when things get tough, people turn on the Jews. It’s the equivalent of kicking the cat or screaming at the secretary."
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 46,945
    Also:


    "The most terrible thing in the world was the idea that there were certain crimes which are hate crimes. The question is not what did the person do, but what do we think about their motives in regard to certain societal norms which we have today. There’s no such thing as a love crime. All crimes are hate crimes, right?"
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 46,945
    edited January 22
    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    Violence is, also, the inevitable endpoint if illegal migration continues and worsens, and no other alternative is found

    Which is one reason we desperately need to solve this, now, and humanely

    I imagine you would have said this at any point over the past 50 years. Indeed I believe it was said with a degree of rhetorical flourish some 55 years ago.
    Yes, yawn, whatever, bur I'm not wrong, am I?

    In the end if illegal immigration just gets worse and worse, governments will be forced to extreme methods to deter it

    We can already see it in parts of the world. It is also a particular hazard on the US Southern Border, where the local citizens are well armed, and generally not known for accepting fate with stoic pacifism
    Yawn yourself. We are a huge country with plenty of room and the areas where immigration is most prevalent isn't Little Rissington in the Cotswolds. Londoners meanwhile don't mind it at all.

    Saying "there will be blood" is just posturing and alarmist. And has been shown in the UK not to be the case.
    At the end of the day borders need to be enforced. Just as the law needs to be enforced. You arrest, detain and deport.

    I struggle to work out how, somewhere along the line, this became controversial.
    It is not controversial. Saying "violence is inevitable" if illegal immigration continues is, however, idiotic.
    But I did not say that

    I specifically and carefully said "if illegal immigration continues and WORSENS"

    That's the key word. WORSENS. Look, I said it, up there. WORSENS

    Then I said, in reply to you

    "In the end if illegal immigration just gets worse and worse"

    There, again, my actual words - "worse and worse"

    You do this quite a lot. Mischaracterise comments, or deliberately misquote, to try and 'win' some argument. It is stupid and childish. Stop it
    Weasel words. "and worsens". OK - AND WORSENS. THEN AND ONLY THEN will violence take place.

    But what is worsen? Has or hasn't illegal immigration worsened over the past 60 years. I mean what is the flow rate it has to be above for it to be worse than previously.

    Very unlike you I have to say. Living in the heart of a cosmopolitan city with a huge mix of people from all over the world now saying mark my words we'll be like the southern states of the US if this carries on.

    Your premise is false and there is no shame in admitting it.
    Are you actually 13 years old?

    I have had a sudden epiphany. That would explain much of your commentary
    I wish. What I would/wouldn't do if I had that time over, eh.

    You have woken up (or had your first Mojito if you are still travelling) and thought you would make some kind of incisive comment about immigration. Fair enough, we've all thought - how can I wow PB today. You then said there would be violence if illegal immigration worsens.

    But that is just hyperbolic bollocks. You say look at the southern US to see how this plays out when I would say that we are as a nation about as far from the southern US ideologically as we are physically. I mean you count the period since our last mass shooting in years, not hours, as in the US.

    So you are just scaremongering and being alarmist and as I said, we have had it all before, noticeably 55 years ago in Birmingham (W Midlands, not Alabama).
    Get back to me in about 5 years, when you should be out of your teens. Then we can have an adult debate
  • Options
    bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 7,568

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    Violence is, also, the inevitable endpoint if illegal migration continues and worsens, and no other alternative is found

    Which is one reason we desperately need to solve this, now, and humanely

    I imagine you would have said this at any point over the past 50 years. Indeed I believe it was said with a degree of rhetorical flourish some 55 years ago.
    Yes, yawn, whatever, bur I'm not wrong, am I?

    In the end if illegal immigration just gets worse and worse, governments will be forced to extreme methods to deter it

    We can already see it in parts of the world. It is also a particular hazard on the US Southern Border, where the local citizens are well armed, and generally not known for accepting fate with stoic pacifism
    Yawn yourself. We are a huge country with plenty of room and the areas where immigration is most prevalent isn't Little Rissington in the Cotswolds. Londoners meanwhile don't mind it at all.

    Saying "there will be blood" is just posturing and alarmist. And has been shown in the UK not to be the case.
    At the end of the day borders need to be enforced. Just as the law needs to be enforced. You arrest, detain and deport.

    I struggle to work out how, somewhere along the line, this became controversial.
    Deportations are massively down compared to 2010. See https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/immigration-system-statistics-year-ending-march-2023/how-many-people-are-detained-or-returned

    That’s the issue. The Tories talk a lot about Rwanda, but they’re not doing the basics.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,095
    HYUFD said:

    Trump camp slams Haley.

    'After Mr DeSantis' announcement, the Trump campaign called on all Republicans to rally behind Mr Trump, slamming his former UN Ambassador as "the candidate of the globalists and Democrats who will do everything to stop the America First movement".'
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68051757

    If she will stop MAGA, then she has something going for her. But still, Haley as the Last Great Hope is considerably depressing.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,255
    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    Violence is, also, the inevitable endpoint if illegal migration continues and worsens, and no other alternative is found

    Which is one reason we desperately need to solve this, now, and humanely

    I imagine you would have said this at any point over the past 50 years. Indeed I believe it was said with a degree of rhetorical flourish some 55 years ago.
    Yes, yawn, whatever, bur I'm not wrong, am I?

    In the end if illegal immigration just gets worse and worse, governments will be forced to extreme methods to deter it

    We can already see it in parts of the world. It is also a particular hazard on the US Southern Border, where the local citizens are well armed, and generally not known for accepting fate with stoic pacifism
    Yawn yourself. We are a huge country with plenty of room and the areas where immigration is most prevalent isn't Little Rissington in the Cotswolds. Londoners meanwhile don't mind it at all.

    Saying "there will be blood" is just posturing and alarmist. And has been shown in the UK not to be the case.
    At the end of the day borders need to be enforced. Just as the law needs to be enforced. You arrest, detain and deport.

    I struggle to work out how, somewhere along the line, this became controversial.
    It is not controversial. Saying "violence is inevitable" if illegal immigration continues is, however, idiotic.
    But I did not say that

    I specifically and carefully said "if illegal immigration continues and WORSENS"

    That's the key word. WORSENS. Look, I said it, up there. WORSENS

    Then I said, in reply to you

    "In the end if illegal immigration just gets worse and worse"

    There, again, my actual words - "worse and worse"

    You do this quite a lot. Mischaracterise comments, or deliberately misquote, to try and 'win' some argument. It is stupid and childish. Stop it
    Weasel words. "and worsens". OK - AND WORSENS. THEN AND ONLY THEN will violence take place.

    But what is worsen? Has or hasn't illegal immigration worsened over the past 60 years. I mean what is the flow rate it has to be above for it to be worse than previously.

    Very unlike you I have to say. Living in the heart of a cosmopolitan city with a huge mix of people from all over the world now saying mark my words we'll be like the southern states of the US if this carries on.

    Your premise is false and there is no shame in admitting it.
    Are you actually 13 years old?

    I have had a sudden epiphany. That would explain much of your commentary
    I wish. What I would/wouldn't do if I had that time over, eh.

    You have woken up (or had your first Mojito if you are still travelling) and thought you would make some kind of incisive comment about immigration. Fair enough, we've all thought - how can I wow PB today. You then said there would be violence if illegal immigration worsens.

    But that is just hyperbolic bollocks. You say look at the southern US to see how this plays out when I would say that we are as a nation about as far from the southern US ideologically as we are physically. I mean you count the period since our last mass shooting in years, not hours, as in the US.

    So you are just scaremongering and being alarmist and as I said, we have had it all before, noticeably 55 years ago in Birmingham (W Midlands, not Alabama).
    Get back to me in about 5 years, when you should be out of your teens. Then we can have an adult debate
    If I'm 13 now how does being 18 make me "out of my teens".
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 24,270
    Leon said:

    David Mamet is a Trumpite

    I knew he was maverick and unusually conservative, for a Hollywood writer, but didn't know he actual pro-Donald

    He doesn't mince words and his vituperation is great entertainment; lots of choice quotes here


    https://unherd.com/2024/01/david-mamet-on-hollywood-hamas-and-donald-trump/


    " What always happens, going back to the fall of Jerusalem, is that when things get tough, people turn on the Jews. It’s the equivalent of kicking the cat or screaming at the secretary."

    Mamet praises Jews for taking unpopular jobs. His examples are lawyers and Hollywood. With that level of incisive thinking, is it any surprise the man supports Trump?
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,255
    edited January 22

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    Violence is, also, the inevitable endpoint if illegal migration continues and worsens, and no other alternative is found

    Which is one reason we desperately need to solve this, now, and humanely

    I imagine you would have said this at any point over the past 50 years. Indeed I believe it was said with a degree of rhetorical flourish some 55 years ago.
    Yes, yawn, whatever, bur I'm not wrong, am I?

    In the end if illegal immigration just gets worse and worse, governments will be forced to extreme methods to deter it

    We can already see it in parts of the world. It is also a particular hazard on the US Southern Border, where the local citizens are well armed, and generally not known for accepting fate with stoic pacifism
    Yawn yourself. We are a huge country with plenty of room and the areas where immigration is most prevalent isn't Little Rissington in the Cotswolds. Londoners meanwhile don't mind it at all.

    Saying "there will be blood" is just posturing and alarmist. And has been shown in the UK not to be the case.
    At the end of the day borders need to be enforced. Just as the law needs to be enforced. You arrest, detain and deport.

    I struggle to work out how, somewhere along the line, this became controversial.
    Deportations are massively down compared to 2010. See https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/immigration-system-statistics-year-ending-march-2023/how-many-people-are-detained-or-returned

    That’s the issue. The Tories talk a lot about Rwanda, but they’re not doing the basics.
    Like a better national health service, the country simply does not want it. We don't, really, want to reduce immigration. If we did we would but we don't so we don't.
  • Options
    El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 3,870
    DavidL said:

    TimS said:

    DavidL said:

    I would agree that the Cameronite liberals were a major bloc in support of Sunak. I am one of that bloc and instinctively preferred someone who appeared an intelligent technocrat against the unpredictability and wildness of Truss.

    But this group are probably the most upset by his absurd focus on Rwandan nonsense. Whilst it might bolster him somewhat with the red wallers/Brexiteers it is materially undermining him with this group (which, once upon a time might also have been called one nation Conservatives). And he needs this group even more than the Brexiteers.

    I've felt for a while that the conservatives might outperform expectations in the Blue Wall at the election and the Lib Dems underperform there (not least because expectations have got a bit out of control with people expecting vast swathes of the commuter belt to turn yellow). And for the Lib Dems to outperform rather muted expectations in their old Wessex and West Country heartland. This sort of polling being the reason.

    If he continues to pivot towards culture war he's not going to convince the hard core nationalists but he is going to erode a lot of that (rather unearned) quiet competence reputation among the Cameronites.
    I expect the Lib Dems to be the dog that doesn't bark. They have made no impact on the polling in the last couple of years and are now regularly polling behind Reform. Then they have the Davey problem. They normally do much better when the Tories are making arses of themselves but maybe not this time.
    It could go either way. Davey has not set the world on fire and the LibDems haven't carved out an identity beyond "we're Starmer for the south". But I find it difficult to see how Conservative MPs are going to hold on in those areas of the Blue Wall where they've been utterly eviscerated by the LibDems in local government (not a single Tory on Vale of White Horse, only one in South Oxfordshire), and where Sunak's anti-immigrant rhetoric is repellent.

    Probably Sunak's best chance in the Blue Wall is a split LD/Lab vote allowing the incumbent Tories to cling on.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,856

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    Violence is, also, the inevitable endpoint if illegal migration continues and worsens, and no other alternative is found

    Which is one reason we desperately need to solve this, now, and humanely

    I imagine you would have said this at any point over the past 50 years. Indeed I believe it was said with a degree of rhetorical flourish some 55 years ago.
    Yes, yawn, whatever, bur I'm not wrong, am I?

    In the end if illegal immigration just gets worse and worse, governments will be forced to extreme methods to deter it

    We can already see it in parts of the world. It is also a particular hazard on the US Southern Border, where the local citizens are well armed, and generally not known for accepting fate with stoic pacifism
    Yawn yourself. We are a huge country with plenty of room and the areas where immigration is most prevalent isn't Little Rissington in the Cotswolds. Londoners meanwhile don't mind it at all.

    Saying "there will be blood" is just posturing and alarmist. And has been shown in the UK not to be the case.
    At the end of the day borders need to be enforced. Just as the law needs to be enforced. You arrest, detain and deport.

    I struggle to work out how, somewhere along the line, this became controversial.
    Deportations are massively down compared to 2010. See https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/immigration-system-statistics-year-ending-march-2023/how-many-people-are-detained-or-returned

    That’s the issue. The Tories talk a lot about Rwanda, but they’re not doing the basics.
    Two reasons for the reduction in deportations:

    1. Illegals deliberately arriving with no documents or paperwork, meaning that it costs a lot of time and money to even work out who they are.

    2. Organised groups of British individuals funding limitless appeals and legal processes, including harrasment of airlines.

    Fix those two issues, the first with Rwanda or the Falklands, and the second by legislating for a single appeal before automatic deportation, and the problem gets a lot easier.
This discussion has been closed.