I don't think that Starmer is going to outsource his Cabinet choices to Iain Dale, or to any other Tory for that matter. Still, speculation is fun I guess.
Iain Dale on X raising the prospect of Mandy as FS
Surely a very short tenure as Lab will be abolishing the HoL toot sweet.
I think some time ago (April?) I suggested HoL would be Quick, Quick, Slow, Slow, which works aspirationally and to BFONT the rump Tories
- First months
Hereditaries OUT (I'd say totally gone by Christmas). Retirement age (maybe) 50 Labour working piers IN. A few others IN, but no Tories since they have been relatively stuffing them in for years like a Labrador and sausages, and there are ~100 Tory MPs. Minimal Honours for Rishi 'because reform is being conisered'.
then reconsider the thing over 12-18 months during 1st term:
Retirement age (maybe as part of transition) Longer term reform.
The thing is that the House of Lords works, and I don't see how an elected second chamber helps.
Retirement age and the ability to remove voting rights so that the House of Lords represents roughly the make up of the commons (i.e. the governing party have a majority in the house) would be as far as I would want to go..
An elected second chamber would open a whole set of issues and probably not actual solve any...
A ton of election material landed on the doormat this morning! LibDems, Labour, Conservatives, Reform, Greens, even the SDP!
The SDP seem to have been more prominent in this election than any since 1992. They're not only standing in my constituency (Wythenshawe and Sale East) but have been actively campaigning.
I really dislike Theresa May's politics in many respects, but as a person she seems alright. I like to see former PMs who don't think that the daily grind of politics is beneath them.
One of the reasons I ended up voting for Labour in this election, was for Ed Miliband to be in charge of energy and climate in the next Cabinet. I didn't vote for his local candidate at GE 2015, but I think he has a real interest in this area of policy, and I hope good will come of his time as a Cabinet Minister.
I agree. Whilst her politics are not mine, she comes across as a decent public servant.
A mixed bag. She campaigned against institutionalised racism, and for GRC Reform, but was also behind the "Hostile Environment" and Windrush scandal.
Better than most recent Tory Prime Ministers isn't a very high bar.
She was the worst. Her “red line” speech - entirely unwanted - made sure Brexit would be hideously painful and costly
Nah, your hero Farage did that - along with the other Europhobes - when they did not set what Brexit meant for the referendum. A central lie that led to this mess.
As ever with you, it's someone else's fault.
Believe it or not I partly agree with you here
A failure to define Brexit before the referendum WAS a fundamental error, but the responsibility lies not with Farage - he’s a blustering populist who was never in charge and therefore decided nothing. PM Cameron should have imposed this stipulation
The whole vote was a shambolic disgrace. We should have had a formal national discussion about what Brexit might mean on both sides. We should have had a two stage vote. Remain or Leave, then, if Leave - what kind
Cameron fucked the whole thing, just as he fucked the “renegotiations” and then lost the vote with his ineptitude. Quite why @TSE worships him escapes me. A mediocrity
There's zero way Cameron could have defined what Brexit meant. And if he had, then Farage and the Europhobes within the party would have railed against it, whatever it was. He could only give his side of the argument.
I LOL at you calling Cameron inept. I mean, the Europhobes have hardly shone, have they? A bunch of nasty incompetent fuckwits.
You really have become a bitter and twisted sad old man these days JJ. It's a shame as you used to be reasonably sensible.
???
Given what the Europhobes have done to the country and democracy in the country, a little anger is in order.
But bitter and twisted? Nah. That's projection.
Why should I be bitter and twisted. I pretty much got what I wanted and am still delighted compared to how things would have been if we had stayed in. I spite of the efforts of teh politicians on both sides deocracy is far stronger in this country than many parts of your beloved EU. It is you who have degenerated into a sad old moaner.
Where on Earth do you get the idea that I love the EU? And that's your problem: anyone who isn't totally against the EU is, in your eyes, someone who loves the EU. There can be no middle ground.
Britain could have been a success in the EU. It could have been a failure in the EU. It could have been a success outside the EU, or a failure outside the EU.
Those were all options; sadly, we've headed towards the latter option. That's largely down to Brexit, the Brexiteers and the Europhobes. Being outside the EU meant more than what was good for the country.
What a stupid comment. So according to you Britain could have been a success outside the EU but we aren't because of Brexit - your words not mine. So how do we be a success outside the EU without having left the EU?
And yet, your continual use of the term Europhobe makes very clear your view of the EU. I mean I understand your desperate need to moan about everything but at some point you are going to have to accept - just like the rest of us - that you can't always get your own way all the time. Stop sulking and grow up.
If Biden is determined to stay in the race, my expectation is that all hell will break loose. If the 1968 Chicago Democratic Convention was marked by rioting (mainly by the cops) outside the hall, the 2024 Chicago Democratic Convention will be marked by riots inside the hall.
The last edition of the Economist before the election backs Labour. It also indicates the fragility of prediction. In a single short article it predicts both of these: Tories 76, and Tories 117. At the same time it refers to its recent prediction (last week!) of Tories 185.
We are three sleeps off polling day and no-one knows anything much. This is remarkable
I think John Curtice will have a tough gig on Thursday, though at the end of it we will still admire his wisdom and clarity. Expect lots of caveats at 10 pm.
Just over 81 hours to go.
We could do with an exit poll countdown clock at the top of each PB page, with hours/minutes/seconds to 10pm Thursday.
The NYT is reporting that Biden is relying heavily for advice on his son, Hunter Biden, as Joe regards his son - the convicted villain and crack addict - as “the smartest man I know”
That’s it in a nutshell isn’t it. The democrats are saying the choice in 2024 is a country run by a convicted felon Trump, and a country run by another convicted felon, Hunter Biden, who is also a crack addict with a gun problem, but it’s ok because he’ll be working alongside Jill Biden a retired au pair, as the president himself will be juddering in a corner shouting “bomb China bomb China” and they don’t know whether to ignore him
Time for your nap?
Time for my oysters old boy. I’m in Dinard and it’s HIDEOUS
Only joking. It’s lovely. As all these towns are
I'm slumming it on Razor Clams wokked in olive oil, today
I’m doing what I promised myself. A dozen cancales with Chablis in dinard. It’s a reward for all the work I’ve done with week haring around Brittany’s islands
The oysters are excellent, just a couple of notches below those in ushant, but great
What a trip. I can absolutely recommend a road trip around four or five different Breton islands. They are all brilliantly different: from the opulence of belle ile to the the Neolithic of gavrinnis, from the celtic Enid Blyton of Ouessant to the end of the world noominess of ile de sein. Superbe
I had my first oyster in Dinard in 1987.
I'd like to report it was the start of a lifelong enthusiasm. I quite like the idea of oysters. But sadly not: not really for me.
Oysters are very marmite. The nigel Farage of seafoods
The last edition of the Economist before the election backs Labour. It also indicates the fragility of prediction. In a single short article it predicts both of these: Tories 76, and Tories 117. At the same time it refers to its recent prediction (last week!) of Tories 185.
We are three sleeps off polling day and no-one knows anything much. This is remarkable
I think John Curtice will have a tough gig on Thursday, though at the end of it we will still admire his wisdom and clarity. Expect lots of caveats at 10 pm.
The problem everyone has is that 19-25% is the knife edge point for Tory seats. 25% and the Tories are likely to have 150-180 seats. 24% and it's going to be below 150, 20% or below and it's 60 or less...
and until we get the exit poll no-one will have a clue and even the exit poll may not help as that reflects how people vote based on previous elections and if the Tory voters don't turn up because there is no chance in the constituencies of those polling stations you could still have "shy" Tory voters elsewhere...
Iain Dale on X raising the prospect of Mandy as FS
Surely a very short tenure as Lab will be abolishing the HoL toot sweet.
I think some time ago (April?) I suggested HoL would be Quick, Quick, Slow, Slow, which works aspirationally and to BFONT the rump Tories
- First months
Hereditaries OUT (I'd say totally gone by Christmas). Retirement age (maybe) 50 Labour working piers IN. A few others IN, but no Tories since they have been relatively stuffing them in for years like a Labrador and sausages, and there are ~100 Tory MPs. Minimal Honours for Rishi 'because reform is being conisered'.
then reconsider the thing over 12-18 months during 1st term:
Retirement age (maybe as part of transition) Longer term reform.
The thing is that the House of Lords works, and I don't see how an elected second chamber helps.
Retirement age and the ability to remove voting rights so that the House of Lords represents roughly the make up of the commons (i.e. the governing party have a majority in the house) would be as far as I would want to go..
An elected second chamber would open a whole set of issues and probably not actual solve any...
The House of Lords doesn't work. In recent years in particular, but arguably for some time, the Commons has produced a large quantity of very poor law, and the Lords had done little to improve the law created, or to slow the passage of the most egregious pieces of bad law.
One of the problems we have is that the party system is too strong, and so the Executive of a party with a majority in the Commons is too strong, because MPs are unable or unwilling to assert themselves.
Reform of the Lords could help to provide a corrective to this. An elected second chamber, if elected by a proportional system that made a single-party majority less likely, might be a step forward.
I don't think it's really helped, but I also don't think it's hurted.
It's helped the Lib Dems get into the news in a way they may not otherwise have done.
Whether the Lib Dems would have got the same amount of news coverage without the stunts is the great unknown (but I seriously doubt it, Nigel is news, the Lib Dems aren't really)..
The NYT is reporting that Biden is relying heavily for advice on his son, Hunter Biden, as Joe regards his son - the convicted villain and crack addict - as “the smartest man I know”
That’s it in a nutshell isn’t it. The democrats are saying the choice in 2024 is a country run by a convicted felon Trump, and a country run by another convicted felon, Hunter Biden, who is also a crack addict with a gun problem, but it’s ok because he’ll be working alongside Jill Biden a retired au pair, as the president himself will be juddering in a corner shouting “bomb China bomb China” and they don’t know whether to ignore him
Time for your nap?
Time for my oysters old boy. I’m in Dinard and it’s HIDEOUS
Only joking. It’s lovely. As all these towns are
I'm slumming it on Razor Clams wokked in olive oil, today
I’m doing what I promised myself. A dozen cancales with Chablis in dinard. It’s a reward for all the work I’ve done with week haring around Brittany’s islands
The oysters are excellent, just a couple of notches below those in ushant, but great
What a trip. I can absolutely recommend a road trip around four or five different Breton islands. They are all brilliantly different: from the opulence of belle ile to the the Neolithic of gavrinnis, from the celtic Enid Blyton of Ouessant to the end of the world noominess of ile de sein. Superbe
I had my first oyster in Dinard in 1987.
I'd like to report it was the start of a lifelong enthusiasm. I quite like the idea of oysters. But sadly not: not really for me.
I'm really not a fan of fish. There is a particular flavour I don't like. There is quite a lot I find ok, but nothing that excites me. As a foodie I find that very frustrating. I look at it and think I really want to like it.
Gosh! Poor you.
I'm far from being the most adventurous of eaters, but when I think of the variety encompassed by just mackerel, cod, salmon, trout and monkfish, and the different ways to prepare and cook them. What a loss.
Yes very frustrating and I am very adventurous regarding food. I will eat most things. I keep trying fishy stuff and keep going nah. It is very disappointing particularly if I am at a seafood place.
@IainDale Rumours persist that David Lammy won't be Foreign Secretary. Douglas Alexander is the name being mentioned most, with David Miliband also a possibility. There is a third option that I haven't seen anyone put forward.
A ton of election material landed on the doormat this morning! LibDems, Labour, Conservatives, Reform, Greens, even the SDP!
The SDP seem to have been more prominent in this election than any since 1992. They're not only standing in my constituency (Wythenshawe and Sale East) but have been actively campaigning.
The SDP leaflet appears to be pure Gender Crit / TERF from top to bottom. Which is a little weird.
I really dislike Theresa May's politics in many respects, but as a person she seems alright. I like to see former PMs who don't think that the daily grind of politics is beneath them.
One of the reasons I ended up voting for Labour in this election, was for Ed Miliband to be in charge of energy and climate in the next Cabinet. I didn't vote for his local candidate at GE 2015, but I think he has a real interest in this area of policy, and I hope good will come of his time as a Cabinet Minister.
I agree. Whilst her politics are not mine, she comes across as a decent public servant.
Agreed and genuinely pained to see the direction her Party has travelled
I also think this country would have been better off economically had they voted for her Brexit deal.
Whilst I agree about her Brexit version, she really was an awful PM and Home Secretary. She was a Twin set and Pearls version of Patel or Braverman, authoritarian in the extreme and responsible for a huge amount of misery for a lot of innocent people. I was delighted when she fell, even if far less delighted with the choice of successor.
In any traditional Conservative government, May occupies a position similar to Sunak. On the bus, but to the right of that bus.
At the moment, both of them are somewhere on the left, probably hanging on to the outside for grim life. I'm sure some people see that change as a good thing, but I struggle to ee it myself.
No one forced May to send out vans telling immigrants to go home. No one forced her to develop a culture at the Home Office that led to the Windrush scandal. This was all in the Cameron/Coalition years - held up by many to be a period of centralism at least as far as social issues are concerned - and was entirely self inflicted.
My prediction for Theresa May is that she'll spend a few years doing something like Churchwarden of her Church of England Parish (which is a surprisingly big job in a lot of cases), or other pivotal role in the local community.
Our last-but-two churchwarden was the retired Quartermaster-General to the Forces. At one point the diocese decided it wanted to amalgamate our parish with a few neighbouring ones. Lt Gen Sir Retired Quartermaster-General was not having any of it. I don't know exactly what transpired in the negotiations but let's just say we are still a single parish.
15 odd years ago I carefully ensured that the parish I was Deanery Synod rep on was kept well away from the merger plans - did take a bit of work but it's remained that way through 2 further consolidation attempts (the fact it contains over 1/3 of the towns population makes it a difficult argument to combat).
Given that Church attendances are falling, as are the numbers describing themselves as CofE, and consequently costs per parishioner are riser, was that really in the best interests of the organisation?
And Good Morning everyone.
Another manifestation of the same problem we have with government in the West right now.
We're used to certain things happening- in this case, a vicar in every parish- and haven't enquired too much into what made those things happen. Not enough people are offering themselves for ordination and not enough people are putting enough in the plate (or tax efficient standing orders, please!) to pay the bills.
And it's much easier to say that They Should Keep Things How They Have Been than to acknowledge that that depended on circumstances that are no longer sustainable and that now is when we all have to collectively pay our way. Much easier to pretend that the problem could be solved by cutting diversity officers archdeacons.
See also France- how much of the failure of Macron is because people like the idea of cutting taxes and lowering the pension age?
In France at least the state funds the maintenance and repair of their historic churches and cathedrals. We have 4 parish churches in our rural benefice which is about the maximum viable, alternating services over the month between them.
In the C of E it is rare that one church alone has a big enough congregation to be self sustaining alone, although a few evangelical churches in the bigger cities and towns manage it. Cathedrals also still get reasonable attendance and tourist income too
The question is the provision of a National Church.
If there was no NHS, the richest areas and people would do fine with a mixture of payment and insurance. The poorer people and areas would suffer. Harley Street would flourish.
In parvo, the CoE is just the same. If left alone, the prosperous will do fine. The neglected, poor, deprived will wither.
The question is what we want. Whether the CoE is Waitrose - it's there for the prosperous - or the NHS (in theory) - it's a national service for all.
But at the moment we expect 11 old ladies and a dog to fund a national service, and raise a million to mend the roof. That can't survive, and the old ladies are getting older.
On this you either watch from the side, or dive in Penny Mordaunt style and lose a couple of hours.
The last edition of the Economist before the election backs Labour. It also indicates the fragility of prediction. In a single short article it predicts both of these: Tories 76, and Tories 117. At the same time it refers to its recent prediction (last week!) of Tories 185.
We are three sleeps off polling day and no-one knows anything much. This is remarkable
I think John Curtice will have a tough gig on Thursday, though at the end of it we will still admire his wisdom and clarity. Expect lots of caveats at 10 pm.
Friday off work and (literal) popcorn at the ready. Wine order to be delivered today
Iain Dale on X raising the prospect of Mandy as FS
Surely a very short tenure as Lab will be abolishing the HoL toot sweet.
I think some time ago (April?) I suggested HoL would be Quick, Quick, Slow, Slow, which works aspirationally and to BFONT the rump Tories
- First months
Hereditaries OUT (I'd say totally gone by Christmas). Retirement age (maybe) 50 Labour working piers IN. A few others IN, but no Tories since they have been relatively stuffing them in for years like a Labrador and sausages, and there are ~100 Tory MPs. Minimal Honours for Rishi 'because reform is being conisered'.
then reconsider the thing over 12-18 months during 1st term:
Retirement age (maybe as part of transition) Longer term reform.
The thing is that the House of Lords works, and I don't see how an elected second chamber helps.
Retirement age and the ability to remove voting rights so that the House of Lords represents roughly the make up of the commons (i.e. the governing party have a majority in the house) would be as far as I would want to go..
An elected second chamber would open a whole set of issues and probably not actual solve any...
The House of Lords doesn't work. In recent years in particular, but arguably for some time, the Commons has produced a large quantity of very poor law, and the Lords had done little to improve the law created, or to slow the passage of the most egregious pieces of bad law.
One of the problems we have is that the party system is too strong, and so the Executive of a party with a majority in the Commons is too strong, because MPs are unable or unwilling to assert themselves.
Reform of the Lords could help to provide a corrective to this. An elected second chamber, if elected by a proportional system that made a single-party majority less likely, might be a step forward.
And with such a mandate the upper house would seek to block, not merely revise, Commons legislation
I don't think it's really helped, but I also don't think it's hurted.
It's helped the Lib Dems get into the news in a way they may not otherwise have done.
Whether the Lib Dems would have got the same amount of news coverage without the stunts is the great unknown (but I seriously doubt it, Nigel is news, the Lib Dems aren't really)..
Ed Davey's stunt-laden campaign is fine for a party chasing around 50 seats.
Interestingly, I think if Starmer had done exactly the same stunts it would have backfired big time and Labour would be in trouble - the media etc. would be all over the 'not very prime ministerial' agenda. (And yes, I know it worked for Boris, but he's one of a kind).
The last edition of the Economist before the election backs Labour. It also indicates the fragility of prediction. In a single short article it predicts both of these: Tories 76, and Tories 117. At the same time it refers to its recent prediction (last week!) of Tories 185.
We are three sleeps off polling day and no-one knows anything much. This is remarkable
I think John Curtice will have a tough gig on Thursday, though at the end of it we will still admire his wisdom and clarity. Expect lots of caveats at 10 pm.
Friday off work and (literal) popcorn at the ready. Wine order to be delivered today
Have Friday mostly off myself, but for an invite to lunch with colleagues in Town. Thursday night in a hotel with room service, and strong wifi, beckons!
Iain Dale on X raising the prospect of Mandy as FS
Surely a very short tenure as Lab will be abolishing the HoL toot sweet.
I think some time ago (April?) I suggested HoL would be Quick, Quick, Slow, Slow, which works aspirationally and to BFONT the rump Tories
- First months
Hereditaries OUT (I'd say totally gone by Christmas). Retirement age (maybe) 50 Labour working piers IN. A few others IN, but no Tories since they have been relatively stuffing them in for years like a Labrador and sausages, and there are ~100 Tory MPs. Minimal Honours for Rishi 'because reform is being conisered'.
then reconsider the thing over 12-18 months during 1st term:
Retirement age (maybe as part of transition) Longer term reform.
The thing is that the House of Lords works, and I don't see how an elected second chamber helps.
Retirement age and the ability to remove voting rights so that the House of Lords represents roughly the make up of the commons (i.e. the governing party have a majority in the house) would be as far as I would want to go..
An elected second chamber would open a whole set of issues and probably not actual solve any...
The House of Lords doesn't work. In recent years in particular, but arguably for some time, the Commons has produced a large quantity of very poor law, and the Lords had done little to improve the law created, or to slow the passage of the most egregious pieces of bad law.
One of the problems we have is that the party system is too strong, and so the Executive of a party with a majority in the Commons is too strong, because MPs are unable or unwilling to assert themselves.
Reform of the Lords could help to provide a corrective to this. An elected second chamber, if elected by a proportional system that made a single-party majority less likely, might be a step forward.
I see the key benefits of the Lords as being:
1 - It is NOT the same as the Commons, and 2 - it can provide a longer term stabiliser mechanism, 3 - It gives a wider range of expertise, and more less-connected-to-party-politics knowledge / wisdom.
Reform will depend on Sir Keir correctly shafting the bias-to-Conservatives, but being wise enough not to go too far, and perhaps leaving a cautious tendency in place.
I've just updated the UK-Elect links page, which contains lots of links to election related websites. Some of the linked sites may be new to some people: https://www.ukelect.co.uk/HTML/links.html
The last edition of the Economist before the election backs Labour. It also indicates the fragility of prediction. In a single short article it predicts both of these: Tories 76, and Tories 117. At the same time it refers to its recent prediction (last week!) of Tories 185.
We are three sleeps off polling day and no-one knows anything much. This is remarkable
I think John Curtice will have a tough gig on Thursday, though at the end of it we will still admire his wisdom and clarity. Expect lots of caveats at 10 pm.
Just over 81 hours to go.
I got 81 hours to flow I got 81 hours to go 'Cause if you like me lemme know Let me in da studio I got 81 hours before I got to go Did you see me on the video 'oh no' Did you see me on the video 'oh no' So if you like me lemme know Let me in da studio
I don't think it's really helped, but I also don't think it's hurted.
It's helped the Lib Dems get into the news in a way they may not otherwise have done.
Whether the Lib Dems would have got the same amount of news coverage without the stunts is the great unknown (but I seriously doubt it, Nigel is news, the Lib Dems aren't really)..
Ed Davey's stunt-laden campaign is fine for a party chasing around 50 seats.
Interestingly, I think if Starmer had done exactly the same stunts it would have backfired big time and Labour would be in trouble - the media etc. would be all over the 'not very prime ministerial' agenda. (And yes, I know it worked for Boris, but he's one of a kind).
Davey is following the Thorpe 1974 strategy when he leapt off hovercraft etc
Interesting Lib Dem Voice piece from last week about placards being stolen.
One of the comments:
I’ve had 6 signs removed, so far from my front garden, the last two actually screwed to the stakes were ripped off, which must have taken quite some effort, the stakes remain being rather large to carry away!
The most important one facing the main road remains, it’s out of arm’s reach.
Across our constituency Romsey and Southampton North we have had 50-100 removed, often the same sites repeatedly, at quite a cost! I guess they are touching a raw nerve with our opponents.
Many people think the polls / MRPs will underestimate the ‘Shy Tories’.
But if it’s such a widely held belief… then you would think that the pollsters would factor that in themselves (which they often do!)
If anything I think it’s more likely that pollsters would overestimate Shy Tories, given for how many previous recent elections they’ve been a thing - than underestimate them?
The last edition of the Economist before the election backs Labour. It also indicates the fragility of prediction. In a single short article it predicts both of these: Tories 76, and Tories 117. At the same time it refers to its recent prediction (last week!) of Tories 185.
We are three sleeps off polling day and no-one knows anything much. This is remarkable
I think John Curtice will have a tough gig on Thursday, though at the end of it we will still admire his wisdom and clarity. Expect lots of caveats at 10 pm.
Friday off work and (literal) popcorn at the ready. Wine order to be delivered today
Full bodied red? Hopefully like the next government!
The last edition of the Economist before the election backs Labour. It also indicates the fragility of prediction. In a single short article it predicts both of these: Tories 76, and Tories 117. At the same time it refers to its recent prediction (last week!) of Tories 185.
We are three sleeps off polling day and no-one knows anything much. This is remarkable
I think John Curtice will have a tough gig on Thursday, though at the end of it we will still admire his wisdom and clarity. Expect lots of caveats at 10 pm.
Just over 81 hours to go.
Rick Wakeman's King Arthur lasts seven and a half minutes. So it's about 650 plays of that until the exit poll. (I do not recommend this as a strategy).
As for not knowing much... We know enough to expect that the Conservatives will have their worst election result that anyone (with the possible exception of @JackW) can remember. Nobody really knows how the models work for those numbers of votes... but in many ways, it's not that important.
I really dislike Theresa May's politics in many respects, but as a person she seems alright. I like to see former PMs who don't think that the daily grind of politics is beneath them.
One of the reasons I ended up voting for Labour in this election, was for Ed Miliband to be in charge of energy and climate in the next Cabinet. I didn't vote for his local candidate at GE 2015, but I think he has a real interest in this area of policy, and I hope good will come of his time as a Cabinet Minister.
I agree. Whilst her politics are not mine, she comes across as a decent public servant.
A mixed bag. She campaigned against institutionalised racism, and for GRC Reform, but was also behind the "Hostile Environment" and Windrush scandal.
Better than most recent Tory Prime Ministers isn't a very high bar.
She was the worst. Her “red line” speech - entirely unwanted - made sure Brexit would be hideously painful and costly
Nah, your hero Farage did that - along with the other Europhobes - when they did not set what Brexit meant for the referendum. A central lie that led to this mess.
As ever with you, it's someone else's fault.
Believe it or not I partly agree with you here
A failure to define Brexit before the referendum WAS a fundamental error, but the responsibility lies not with Farage - he’s a blustering populist who was never in charge and therefore decided nothing. PM Cameron should have imposed this stipulation
The whole vote was a shambolic disgrace. We should have had a formal national discussion about what Brexit might mean on both sides. We should have had a two stage vote. Remain or Leave, then, if Leave - what kind
Cameron fucked the whole thing, just as he fucked the “renegotiations” and then lost the vote with his ineptitude. Quite why @TSE worships him escapes me. A mediocrity
There's zero way Cameron could have defined what Brexit meant. And if he had, then Farage and the Europhobes within the party would have railed against it, whatever it was. He could only give his side of the argument.
I LOL at you calling Cameron inept. I mean, the Europhobes have hardly shone, have they? A bunch of nasty incompetent fuckwits.
You really have become a bitter and twisted sad old man these days JJ. It's a shame as you used to be reasonably sensible.
???
Given what the Europhobes have done to the country and democracy in the country, a little anger is in order.
But bitter and twisted? Nah. That's projection.
Why should I be bitter and twisted. I pretty much got what I wanted and am still delighted compared to how things would have been if we had stayed in. I spite of the efforts of teh politicians on both sides deocracy is far stronger in this country than many parts of your beloved EU. It is you who have degenerated into a sad old moaner.
Where on Earth do you get the idea that I love the EU? And that's your problem: anyone who isn't totally against the EU is, in your eyes, someone who loves the EU. There can be no middle ground.
Britain could have been a success in the EU. It could have been a failure in the EU. It could have been a success outside the EU, or a failure outside the EU.
Those were all options; sadly, we've headed towards the latter option. That's largely down to Brexit, the Brexiteers and the Europhobes. Being outside the EU meant more than what was good for the country.
What a stupid comment. So according to you Britain could have been a success outside the EU but we aren't because of Brexit - your words not mine. So how do we be a success outside the EU without having left the EU?
And yet, your continual use of the term Europhobe makes very clear your view of the EU. I mean I understand your desperate need to moan about everything but at some point you are going to have to accept - just like the rest of us - that you can't always get your own way all the time. Stop sulking and grow up.
I think you need to read what I said again. To explain further:
Yes, Britain could have been a success out of the EU. But the *form* of Brexit that the referendum gave us - or the form the Brexiteers insisted on - has made it rather a failure so far (*). Likewise, IMV we could have been a success in the EU, or a failure.
Because much more depends on what *we* as a country decide to do than any external dependencies or criticalities. Membership or not of the EU was not, and is not, anywhere near the main factor in the country's success or not. It's either makes success harder or easier, depending on your viewpoint.
We chose a Brexit that has been harmful to the country so far. And that's down to the Brexiteers.
As for your last paragraph: as far as I'm aware I've never called for a second referendum, or never called for brexit to be reversed, or anything like that. I don't particularly have a 'my own way' when it comes to Brexit: but I am free to criticise what's happened.
(*) I am perfectly willing to admit that it may be a success in the longer term - but I currently see little sign of that.
If the democrats proceed with Biden they are basically saying
1. It’s ok to lie about the most serious things in politics: like the mental state of the president
2. We think it’s ok to lie even when everyone knows we’re lying so we will do it again
3. We seriously want you to vote for a demented President because that’s more important than the security of the USA
4. We are too feeble to tell an old man to retire
5. For the next four years the country will be run by retired nanny Jill Biden and maybe her friend in the coffee shop
If the Republicans proceed with Trump they are basically saying:
1. It's OK for the president to lie about absolutely everything. 2. Who probably is actually insane. 3. Who has led an insurrection against the democratic institutions of his country. 4. Who has plausibly been in the pay of a country hostile to the United States 5. Who has a realistic possibility of being a convicted felon.
Yes. Why do you keep making this irrelevant and childish point? We all know the above which is why it is really important Trump loses. But if the Dems persist with Biden, then Trump almost certainly wins
I am pointing out that if Biden is 7 out of 10 unfit to be president then Trump is 10 out of 10 unfit. Yes the important thing is to select a Democrat to avoid the worse candidate being elected. But the reason for doing so is because Trump is worse, not because Biden also has issues.
Another pretty damning argument from Bill Ackman (he’s a billionaire finance dude who does some TV punditry etc)
“keep finding articles today which say dismissively that Biden had a bad debate, but, the articles go on to say, so did Obama and others and they were able to recover and win the office.
The issue, however, was not that @POTUS Biden had a bad debate. Rather, in just a few minutes, the entire world, including all of our enemies became definitively aware, if they were not already, that the President of the United States is not fit for office, let alone a second term.
This is not just an issue of Biden’s fitness for office. It is an issue of national security.
We know from the rally the day after the debate that Biden is still capable of reading from a teleprompter. But being president of the United States requires more than reading words written by others. Leadership requires world class executive function, which in Biden’s case is clearly profoundly impaired.
If China invades Taiwan tomorrow, how comfortable do you feel with our Commander in Chief?
I would not be surprised that the DNC called for an early debate because it was concerned that Biden was deteriorating rapidly and sooner was better than later. It figured that with a friendly moderator, no @RobertKennedyJr, no audience, silenced microphones, and six days of prep at Camp David, he could make it through, or as @FLOTUS Jill Biden explained: ‘Joe you did such a great job! You answered every question!’
Some of a president’s most important decisions must come when he is awakened at 3am when disaster or a threat emerges suddenly. Our enemies will strike when we are most vulnerable.
How is this not incredibly frightening?
Now explain to me how anyone can continue to support Biden for a second term.”
I do think that one of the reasons the Dems are refusing to stop Biden rerunning is any suggestion that he is unfit for office in the future would beg the question - is he fit now? And then the issue becomes the 25th Amendment. I think it may be correct that the 25th should be invoked, but that creates its own problems...
Everyone can see the problem; Leon's posts are just waffly statements of the obvious. The problem they, and by extension we, have is the lack of a realisable plan B. Hopefully they are working on one.
I mean reasonable plan B would have been to allow a primary to happen. This conference would have been a great big Ode to Biden, congratulating him for saving American democracy from Trump in 2020 and doing an okay job as POTUS (from the view of Democrats) on policy. It would have been his swansong, and then he could have passed the torch onto a successor. The Dems refused to do that - that is part of the reason so many people are both shocked and angry, because this has been clear for so long and the party still didn't do its duty to the country and (arguably) the world.
The only thing to do now is Biden should resign and retire - Kamala becomes POTUS and Biden releases his delegates at the conference and then the conference sorts it out. That will be messy - but it will be less messy than losing to Trump. That could lead to any number of people becoming the nominee - from Newsom to (sigh) Clinton - but at the moment that seems less risky then the risk of continuing to run Biden.
Even now Biden is polling better than Kamala v Trump, Newsom is a slimy coastal liberal elitist Trump would beat easily in the rustbelt. Hillary lost the rustbelt swing states only Biden won back in 2020
The thing is that if Biden slips I don't trust he has the energy to run a campaign that could bounce back. Basically any other candidate would at least be able to be on stages and TV and do the job of persuading voters to vote for them. So I think anyone who can stand on a stage and make a clear argument why abortion rights are such a big issue, something Biden failed to do the other night!, they would be polling better than Biden.
And hypothetical polling is always difficult. I don't disagree that Trump does seem to have an edge - people have rose tinted glasses about the Trump economy and don't want to think about Covid / lockdown and so blame Biden for the impact of it. But generic democrat tends to be more popular than Trump or the GOP as a whole.
The rustbelt swing states won't be won on abortion rights, pro choice voters for whom that is a top issue will be voting Dem regardless.
They will be won by bluecollar voters concerned about manufacturing jobs who voted for Trump in 2016 but Biden in 2020 and suburban independents
Women live in the rust belt too - in fact they live everywhere...
I suggest anyone doommongering or chicken littling about Biden, or offering their 0.01 cents-worth on possible successors, should read both before they give their thoughts.
My delivery effort so far. Each one of those sheets represents a delivery walk.
Mmm. Do you think it's worthwhile? I know homes who've had 4 LD leaflets delivered together on the same day (and lots of homes to have 2-3). They are not reading them.
I really dislike Theresa May's politics in many respects, but as a person she seems alright. I like to see former PMs who don't think that the daily grind of politics is beneath them.
One of the reasons I ended up voting for Labour in this election, was for Ed Miliband to be in charge of energy and climate in the next Cabinet. I didn't vote for his local candidate at GE 2015, but I think he has a real interest in this area of policy, and I hope good will come of his time as a Cabinet Minister.
I agree. Whilst her politics are not mine, she comes across as a decent public servant.
A mixed bag. She campaigned against institutionalised racism, and for GRC Reform, but was also behind the "Hostile Environment" and Windrush scandal.
Better than most recent Tory Prime Ministers isn't a very high bar.
She was the worst. Her “red line” speech - entirely unwanted - made sure Brexit would be hideously painful and costly
Nah, your hero Farage did that - along with the other Europhobes - when they did not set what Brexit meant for the referendum. A central lie that led to this mess.
As ever with you, it's someone else's fault.
Believe it or not I partly agree with you here
A failure to define Brexit before the referendum WAS a fundamental error, but the responsibility lies not with Farage - he’s a blustering populist who was never in charge and therefore decided nothing. PM Cameron should have imposed this stipulation
The whole vote was a shambolic disgrace. We should have had a formal national discussion about what Brexit might mean on both sides. We should have had a two stage vote. Remain or Leave, then, if Leave - what kind
Cameron fucked the whole thing, just as he fucked the “renegotiations” and then lost the vote with his ineptitude. Quite why @TSE worships him escapes me. A mediocrity
There's zero way Cameron could have defined what Brexit meant. And if he had, then Farage and the Europhobes within the party would have railed against it, whatever it was. He could only give his side of the argument.
I LOL at you calling Cameron inept. I mean, the Europhobes have hardly shone, have they? A bunch of nasty incompetent fuckwits.
You really have become a bitter and twisted sad old man these days JJ. It's a shame as you used to be reasonably sensible.
???
Given what the Europhobes have done to the country and democracy in the country, a little anger is in order.
But bitter and twisted? Nah. That's projection.
Why should I be bitter and twisted. I pretty much got what I wanted and am still delighted compared to how things would have been if we had stayed in. I spite of the efforts of teh politicians on both sides deocracy is far stronger in this country than many parts of your beloved EU. It is you who have degenerated into a sad old moaner.
Where on Earth do you get the idea that I love the EU? And that's your problem: anyone who isn't totally against the EU is, in your eyes, someone who loves the EU. There can be no middle ground.
Britain could have been a success in the EU. It could have been a failure in the EU. It could have been a success outside the EU, or a failure outside the EU.
Those were all options; sadly, we've headed towards the latter option. That's largely down to Brexit, the Brexiteers and the Europhobes. Being outside the EU meant more than what was good for the country.
And that's your problem: anyone who isn't totally pro the EU is, in your eyes, someone who hates es the EU. The irrefutable evidence for this is your use of the word "europhobe" in three successive posts.
No, that's not what I'm saying. If anything, I'd throw that back at the Breixteers, who often called Cameron a Europhile. He wasn't: he was Eurosceptc; as was I.
If you create only two camps in your mind: those who against the EU and those who are for it, then there is no room for the middle ground. And in this case, it's the eurosceptics.
If I'm not to use 'Europhobes' for those who campaigned for Brexit, what term should I use?
A ton of election material landed on the doormat this morning! LibDems, Labour, Conservatives, Reform, Greens, even the SDP!
The SDP seem to have been more prominent in this election than any since 1992. They're not only standing in my constituency (Wythenshawe and Sale East) but have been actively campaigning.
The SDP leaflet appears to be pure Gender Crit / TERF from top to bottom. Which is a little weird.
yeah I expect they've been receiving some of that culture war funding that we are never allowed to mention
I really dislike Theresa May's politics in many respects, but as a person she seems alright. I like to see former PMs who don't think that the daily grind of politics is beneath them.
One of the reasons I ended up voting for Labour in this election, was for Ed Miliband to be in charge of energy and climate in the next Cabinet. I didn't vote for his local candidate at GE 2015, but I think he has a real interest in this area of policy, and I hope good will come of his time as a Cabinet Minister.
I agree. Whilst her politics are not mine, she comes across as a decent public servant.
A mixed bag. She campaigned against institutionalised racism, and for GRC Reform, but was also behind the "Hostile Environment" and Windrush scandal.
Better than most recent Tory Prime Ministers isn't a very high bar.
She was the worst. Her “red line” speech - entirely unwanted - made sure Brexit would be hideously painful and costly
Nah, your hero Farage did that - along with the other Europhobes - when they did not set what Brexit meant for the referendum. A central lie that led to this mess.
As ever with you, it's someone else's fault.
Believe it or not I partly agree with you here
A failure to define Brexit before the referendum WAS a fundamental error, but the responsibility lies not with Farage - he’s a blustering populist who was never in charge and therefore decided nothing. PM Cameron should have imposed this stipulation
The whole vote was a shambolic disgrace. We should have had a formal national discussion about what Brexit might mean on both sides. We should have had a two stage vote. Remain or Leave, then, if Leave - what kind
Cameron fucked the whole thing, just as he fucked the “renegotiations” and then lost the vote with his ineptitude. Quite why @TSE worships him escapes me. A mediocrity
There's zero way Cameron could have defined what Brexit meant. And if he had, then Farage and the Europhobes within the party would have railed against it, whatever it was. He could only give his side of the argument.
I LOL at you calling Cameron inept. I mean, the Europhobes have hardly shone, have they? A bunch of nasty incompetent fuckwits.
You really have become a bitter and twisted sad old man these days JJ. It's a shame as you used to be reasonably sensible.
???
Given what the Europhobes have done to the country and democracy in the country, a little anger is in order.
But bitter and twisted? Nah. That's projection.
Why should I be bitter and twisted. I pretty much got what I wanted and am still delighted compared to how things would have been if we had stayed in. I spite of the efforts of teh politicians on both sides deocracy is far stronger in this country than many parts of your beloved EU. It is you who have degenerated into a sad old moaner.
Where on Earth do you get the idea that I love the EU? And that's your problem: anyone who isn't totally against the EU is, in your eyes, someone who loves the EU. There can be no middle ground.
Britain could have been a success in the EU. It could have been a failure in the EU. It could have been a success outside the EU, or a failure outside the EU.
Those were all options; sadly, we've headed towards the latter option. That's largely down to Brexit, the Brexiteers and the Europhobes. Being outside the EU meant more than what was good for the country.
What a stupid comment. So according to you Britain could have been a success outside the EU but we aren't because of Brexit - your words not mine. So how do we be a success outside the EU without having left the EU?
And yet, your continual use of the term Europhobe makes very clear your view of the EU. I mean I understand your desperate need to moan about everything but at some point you are going to have to accept - just like the rest of us - that you can't always get your own way all the time. Stop sulking and grow up.
I think you need to read what I said again. To explain further:
Yes, Britain could have been a success out of the EU. But the *form* of Brexit that the referendum gave us - or the form the Brexiteers insisted on - has made it rather a failure so far (*). Likewise, IMV we could have been a success in the EU, or a failure.
Because much more depends on what *we* as a country decide to do than any external dependencies or criticalities. Membership or not of the EU was not, and is not, anywhere near the main factor in the country's success or not. It's either makes success harder or easier, depending on your viewpoint.
We chose a Brexit that has been harmful to the country so far. And that's down to the Brexiteers.
As for your last paragraph: as far as I'm aware I've never called for a second referendum, or never called for brexit to be reversed, or anything like that. I don't particularly have a 'my own way' when it comes to Brexit: but I am free to criticise what's happened.
(*) I am perfectly willing to admit that it may be a success in the longer term - but I currently see little sign of that.
Cameron ran away and the form of Brexit was chosen by a Remainer who never even tried to understand what actually drove the Leave campaign. Your desperate attemps to paint Leavers as Europhobes simply shows you don't understand it either.
And even after all of that we are still in a better place than we would have been had we stayed in.
My delivery effort so far. Each one of those sheets represents a delivery walk.
Mmm. Do you think it's worthwhile? I know homes who've had 4 LD leaflets delivered together on the same day (and lots of homes to have 2-3). They are not reading them.
Nick, hardly anyone reads leaflets, that's why you need a lot of them. You know this.
I really dislike Theresa May's politics in many respects, but as a person she seems alright. I like to see former PMs who don't think that the daily grind of politics is beneath them.
One of the reasons I ended up voting for Labour in this election, was for Ed Miliband to be in charge of energy and climate in the next Cabinet. I didn't vote for his local candidate at GE 2015, but I think he has a real interest in this area of policy, and I hope good will come of his time as a Cabinet Minister.
I agree. Whilst her politics are not mine, she comes across as a decent public servant.
A mixed bag. She campaigned against institutionalised racism, and for GRC Reform, but was also behind the "Hostile Environment" and Windrush scandal.
Better than most recent Tory Prime Ministers isn't a very high bar.
She was the worst. Her “red line” speech - entirely unwanted - made sure Brexit would be hideously painful and costly
Nah, your hero Farage did that - along with the other Europhobes - when they did not set what Brexit meant for the referendum. A central lie that led to this mess.
As ever with you, it's someone else's fault.
Believe it or not I partly agree with you here
A failure to define Brexit before the referendum WAS a fundamental error, but the responsibility lies not with Farage - he’s a blustering populist who was never in charge and therefore decided nothing. PM Cameron should have imposed this stipulation
The whole vote was a shambolic disgrace. We should have had a formal national discussion about what Brexit might mean on both sides. We should have had a two stage vote. Remain or Leave, then, if Leave - what kind
Cameron fucked the whole thing, just as he fucked the “renegotiations” and then lost the vote with his ineptitude. Quite why @TSE worships him escapes me. A mediocrity
There's zero way Cameron could have defined what Brexit meant. And if he had, then Farage and the Europhobes within the party would have railed against it, whatever it was. He could only give his side of the argument.
I LOL at you calling Cameron inept. I mean, the Europhobes have hardly shone, have they? A bunch of nasty incompetent fuckwits.
You really have become a bitter and twisted sad old man these days JJ. It's a shame as you used to be reasonably sensible.
???
Given what the Europhobes have done to the country and democracy in the country, a little anger is in order.
But bitter and twisted? Nah. That's projection.
Why should I be bitter and twisted. I pretty much got what I wanted and am still delighted compared to how things would have been if we had stayed in. I spite of the efforts of teh politicians on both sides deocracy is far stronger in this country than many parts of your beloved EU. It is you who have degenerated into a sad old moaner.
Where on Earth do you get the idea that I love the EU? And that's your problem: anyone who isn't totally against the EU is, in your eyes, someone who loves the EU. There can be no middle ground.
Britain could have been a success in the EU. It could have been a failure in the EU. It could have been a success outside the EU, or a failure outside the EU.
Those were all options; sadly, we've headed towards the latter option. That's largely down to Brexit, the Brexiteers and the Europhobes. Being outside the EU meant more than what was good for the country.
What a stupid comment. So according to you Britain could have been a success outside the EU but we aren't because of Brexit - your words not mine. So how do we be a success outside the EU without having left the EU?
And yet, your continual use of the term Europhobe makes very clear your view of the EU. I mean I understand your desperate need to moan about everything but at some point you are going to have to accept - just like the rest of us - that you can't always get your own way all the time. Stop sulking and grow up.
I think you need to read what I said again. To explain further:
Yes, Britain could have been a success out of the EU. But the *form* of Brexit that the referendum gave us - or the form the Brexiteers insisted on - has made it rather a failure so far (*). Likewise, IMV we could have been a success in the EU, or a failure.
Because much more depends on what *we* as a country decide to do than any external dependencies or criticalities. Membership or not of the EU was not, and is not, anywhere near the main factor in the country's success or not. It's either makes success harder or easier, depending on your viewpoint.
We chose a Brexit that has been harmful to the country so far. And that's down to the Brexiteers.
As for your last paragraph: as far as I'm aware I've never called for a second referendum, or never called for brexit to be reversed, or anything like that. I don't particularly have a 'my own way' when it comes to Brexit: but I am free to criticise what's happened.
(*) I am perfectly willing to admit that it may be a success in the longer term - but I currently see little sign of that.
Cameron ran away and the form of Brexit was chosen by a Remainer who never even tried to understand what actually drove the Leave campaign. Your desperate attemps to paint Leavers as Europhobes simply shows you don't understand it either.
And even after all of that we are still in a better place than we would have been had we stayed in.
I really, really doubt your last line. As for a 'remainer' choosing Brexit: I wasn't aware that Johnson - who after all got Brexit done - was a remainer.
I also don't paint all leave *voters* as Europhobes. There would have been many eurosceptics who fell on that side of the fence. But the people who drove the leave campaign are certainly europhobes.
My delivery effort so far. Each one of those sheets represents a delivery walk.
Mmm. Do you think it's worthwhile? I know homes who've had 4 LD leaflets delivered together on the same day (and lots of homes to have 2-3). They are not reading them.
Nick, hardly anyone reads leaflets, that's why you need a lot of them. You know this.
We put any leaflets we get before an election onto a sideboard, and then generally go through them again a few days before the vote. The comparison between them can be quite funny.
Interesting Lib Dem Voice piece from last week about placards being stolen.
One of the comments:
I’ve had 6 signs removed, so far from my front garden, the last two actually screwed to the stakes were ripped off, which must have taken quite some effort, the stakes remain being rather large to carry away!
The most important one facing the main road remains, it’s out of arm’s reach.
Across our constituency Romsey and Southampton North we have had 50-100 removed, often the same sites repeatedly, at quite a cost! I guess they are touching a raw nerve with our opponents.
Yes, same here, with Labour signs (LibDem and Green signs in the same road untouched). We replace them with a shrug, but it's irritating.
Same here - had to replace a LibDem diamond in my village last week (and took advantage of the situation to make it much more visible) and there's one in Wantage that's been vandalised four times (the house-owner was setting up a camera last I heard to catch the bugger).
My delivery effort so far. Each one of those sheets represents a delivery walk.
Mmm. Do you think it's worthwhile? I know homes who've had 4 LD leaflets delivered together on the same day (and lots of homes to have 2-3). They are not reading them.
See my reply to you yesterday on the 4 a day delivery @NickPalmer where I explained what happened to cause that and it is sadly unavoidable that it will happen very occasionally. It is not deliberate.
Yes most people don't read them. Many last the 10 seconds from the mat to the bin, but it is the impact it has. If asked most people think they have had less than they have actually had and it tells them who the challenger is here (wherever here is) and they are serious.
Re that pile of cover sheets - I assume you don't think they went to the same roads do you? Even LDs don't deliver that much. That is for all over Guildford.
The NYT is reporting that Biden is relying heavily for advice on his son, Hunter Biden, as Joe regards his son - the convicted villain and crack addict - as “the smartest man I know”
That’s it in a nutshell isn’t it. The democrats are saying the choice in 2024 is a country run by a convicted felon Trump, and a country run by another convicted felon, Hunter Biden, who is also a crack addict with a gun problem, but it’s ok because he’ll be working alongside Jill Biden a retired au pair, as the president himself will be juddering in a corner shouting “bomb China bomb China” and they don’t know whether to ignore him
Time for your nap?
Time for my oysters old boy. I’m in Dinard and it’s HIDEOUS
Only joking. It’s lovely. As all these towns are
I'm slumming it on Razor Clams wokked in olive oil, today
I’m doing what I promised myself. A dozen cancales with Chablis in dinard. It’s a reward for all the work I’ve done with week haring around Brittany’s islands
The oysters are excellent, just a couple of notches below those in ushant, but great
What a trip. I can absolutely recommend a road trip around four or five different Breton islands. They are all brilliantly different: from the opulence of belle ile to the the Neolithic of gavrinnis, from the celtic Enid Blyton of Ouessant to the end of the world noominess of ile de sein. Superbe
I had my first oyster in Dinard in 1987.
I'd like to report it was the start of a lifelong enthusiasm. I quite like the idea of oysters. But sadly not: not really for me.
I'm really not a fan of fish. There is a particular flavour I don't like. There is quite a lot I find ok, but nothing that excites me. As a foodie I find that very frustrating. I look at it and think I really want to like it.
How can you “not like fish”
That’s like saying “I’m not in favour of sex” or “I can’t abide a mountain” or “I prefer not to move my arms in the afternoon”
I'm sorry @leon I wish I did. I really want to. As you know from discussions before I am a foodie so it is very frustrating. The really annoying thing is I like rubbish fish. So I will eat battered cod, fish fingers, tinned salmon and tinned tuna, but I can do without it. I also like crab, lobster, scallops, langoustines, smoked salmon, etc, but really I can live without them as well. They will never be my first choice.
And good quality fresh fish has an underlying taste that I find unpleasant. People have suggested to me trying things like shark which is more meaty. It is, but with that underlying taste still.
I'll enjoy eating just about any other animal (and any part of that animal) or vegetable and it is with huge regret that I just can't get on with fish. I mean it looks lovely.
My delivery effort so far. Each one of those sheets represents a delivery walk.
Mmm. Do you think it's worthwhile? I know homes who've had 4 LD leaflets delivered together on the same day (and lots of homes to have 2-3). They are not reading them.
Nick, hardly anyone reads leaflets, that's why you need a lot of them. You know this.
They note who it is from in the 15 seconds between the front door and the recycling bin. That's enough.
This* is a dangerous myth for Conservatives to believe.
When Johnson announced his resignation in July 2022 the Tories had made huge losses and were on course to win only 211 seats in a general election, which would have been the fifth heaviest defeat in their 190 year history. https://x.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1807710509782782326
*On the day Boris was removed from office we were between 2-4 p behind in the polls.
The most effective part of the campaign so far has been Boris columns in the @DailyMailUK and the letters he’s written and videos he’s made for candidates.
This mess is 100pc owned by Sunak and those of you who advocated for BJ to be removed and replaced with Sunak.
As for Fraser Nelson, who seems determined to make an utter prick of himself during this GE, why exactly should Boris come back and pound the pavements on behalf of the man who knifed him, and then shat all over his NI bill and publicly bitched about 'the psychodramas' of previous leaders? The chutzpa of Nelson to blame Borises relative absence from this campaign for the crushing defeat soon to be experienced by the Sunakites is really remarkable.
Another pretty damning argument from Bill Ackman (he’s a billionaire finance dude who does some TV punditry etc)
“keep finding articles today which say dismissively that Biden had a bad debate, but, the articles go on to say, so did Obama and others and they were able to recover and win the office.
The issue, however, was not that @POTUS Biden had a bad debate. Rather, in just a few minutes, the entire world, including all of our enemies became definitively aware, if they were not already, that the President of the United States is not fit for office, let alone a second term.
This is not just an issue of Biden’s fitness for office. It is an issue of national security.
We know from the rally the day after the debate that Biden is still capable of reading from a teleprompter. But being president of the United States requires more than reading words written by others. Leadership requires world class executive function, which in Biden’s case is clearly profoundly impaired.
If China invades Taiwan tomorrow, how comfortable do you feel with our Commander in Chief?
I would not be surprised that the DNC called for an early debate because it was concerned that Biden was deteriorating rapidly and sooner was better than later. It figured that with a friendly moderator, no @RobertKennedyJr, no audience, silenced microphones, and six days of prep at Camp David, he could make it through, or as @FLOTUS Jill Biden explained: ‘Joe you did such a great job! You answered every question!’
Some of a president’s most important decisions must come when he is awakened at 3am when disaster or a threat emerges suddenly. Our enemies will strike when we are most vulnerable.
How is this not incredibly frightening?
Now explain to me how anyone can continue to support Biden for a second term.”
I do think that one of the reasons the Dems are refusing to stop Biden rerunning is any suggestion that he is unfit for office in the future would beg the question - is he fit now? And then the issue becomes the 25th Amendment. I think it may be correct that the 25th should be invoked, but that creates its own problems...
Everyone can see the problem; Leon's posts are just waffly statements of the obvious. The problem they, and by extension we, have is the lack of a realisable plan B. Hopefully they are working on one.
Except that YET AGAIN I was saying all this about a year before everyone else on PB - Biden is senile and getting worse. With honourable exceptions - like @kle4 and @Luckyguy1983 - everyone else on PB was saying Nah shut up, you’re a trumpite, he’s just got a stutter
One day soon I will dig up these excruciatingly embarrassing remarks
If I were you, I wouldn’t be encouraging PB’ers to go looking for excruciatingly embarrassing past remarks.
Interesting Lib Dem Voice piece from last week about placards being stolen.
One of the comments:
I’ve had 6 signs removed, so far from my front garden, the last two actually screwed to the stakes were ripped off, which must have taken quite some effort, the stakes remain being rather large to carry away!
The most important one facing the main road remains, it’s out of arm’s reach.
Across our constituency Romsey and Southampton North we have had 50-100 removed, often the same sites repeatedly, at quite a cost! I guess they are touching a raw nerve with our opponents.
Yes, same here, with Labour signs (LibDem and Green signs in the same road untouched). We replace them with a shrug, but it's irritating.
Same here - had to replace a LibDem diamond in my village last week (and took advantage of the situation to make it much more visible) and there's one in Wantage that's been vandalised four times (the house-owner was setting up a camera last I heard to catch the bugger).
Has anyone thought to keep them within the boundary of the property displaying them? All the lib dem diamonds I've seen stick out into public space, though not as bad as Reform fly-posting on street signs.
Interesting Lib Dem Voice piece from last week about placards being stolen.
One of the comments:
I’ve had 6 signs removed, so far from my front garden, the last two actually screwed to the stakes were ripped off, which must have taken quite some effort, the stakes remain being rather large to carry away!
The most important one facing the main road remains, it’s out of arm’s reach.
Across our constituency Romsey and Southampton North we have had 50-100 removed, often the same sites repeatedly, at quite a cost! I guess they are touching a raw nerve with our opponents.
Yes, same here, with Labour signs (LibDem and Green signs in the same road untouched). We replace them with a shrug, but it's irritating.
Same here - had to replace a LibDem diamond in my village last week (and took advantage of the situation to make it much more visible) and there's one in Wantage that's been vandalised four times (the house-owner was setting up a camera last I heard to catch the bugger).
Has anyone thought to keep them within the boundary of the property displaying them? All the lib dem diamonds I've seen stick out into public space, though not as bad as Reform fly-posting on street signs.
The ones I put up always stay within their boundary. Possibly because I’m a bit obsessive about following the law.
Comments
Retirement age and the ability to remove voting rights so that the House of Lords represents roughly the make up of the commons (i.e. the governing party have a majority in the house) would be as far as I would want to go..
An elected second chamber would open a whole set of issues and probably not actual solve any...
And yet, your continual use of the term Europhobe makes very clear your view of the EU. I mean I understand your desperate need to moan about everything but at some point you are going to have to accept - just like the rest of us - that you can't always get your own way all the time. Stop sulking and grow up.
Doubtful.
Everyone else has about 7
I never entirely trust oysters in hot countries, and yet some of them are brilliant. Namibia. Louisiana. I’ve had superb oysters in Sri Lanka!
Mauritius, mmmno
I don't think it's really helped, but I also don't think it's hurted.
and until we get the exit poll no-one will have a clue and even the exit poll may not help as that reflects how people vote based on previous elections and if the Tory voters don't turn up because there is no chance in the constituencies of those polling stations you could still have "shy" Tory voters elsewhere...
One of the problems we have is that the party system is too strong, and so the Executive of a party with a majority in the Commons is too strong, because MPs are unable or unwilling to assert themselves.
Reform of the Lords could help to provide a corrective to this. An elected second chamber, if elected by a proportional system that made a single-party majority less likely, might be a step forward.
Whether the Lib Dems would have got the same amount of news coverage without the stunts is the great unknown (but I seriously doubt it, Nigel is news, the Lib Dems aren't really)..
Really interesting, but I'm sitting this out.
Interestingly, I think if Starmer had done exactly the same stunts it would have backfired big time and Labour would be in trouble - the media etc. would be all over the 'not very prime ministerial' agenda.
(And yes, I know it worked for Boris, but he's one of a kind).
Lab 42% (+1 on 2019)
Con 22% (-14)
Reform 14%
Plaid 9% (-1)
Lib Dem (-2)
The Conservatives might hold 3 or 4 seats on those numbers.
1 - It is NOT the same as the Commons, and
2 - it can provide a longer term stabiliser mechanism,
3 - It gives a wider range of expertise, and more less-connected-to-party-politics knowledge / wisdom.
Reform will depend on Sir Keir correctly shafting the bias-to-Conservatives, but being wise enough not to go too far, and perhaps leaving a cautious tendency in place.
NEW THREAD
I got 81 hours to go
'Cause if you like me lemme know
Let me in da studio
I got 81 hours before I got to go
Did you see me on the video 'oh no'
Did you see me on the video 'oh no'
So if you like me lemme know
Let me in da studio
But if it’s such a widely held belief… then you would think that the pollsters would factor that in themselves (which they often do!)
If anything I think it’s more likely that pollsters would overestimate Shy Tories, given for how many previous recent elections they’ve been a thing - than underestimate them?
As for not knowing much... We know enough to expect that the Conservatives will have their worst election result that anyone (with the possible exception of @JackW) can remember. Nobody really knows how the models work for those numbers of votes... but in many ways, it's not that important.
Yes, Britain could have been a success out of the EU. But the *form* of Brexit that the referendum gave us - or the form the Brexiteers insisted on - has made it rather a failure so far (*). Likewise, IMV we could have been a success in the EU, or a failure.
Because much more depends on what *we* as a country decide to do than any external dependencies or criticalities. Membership or not of the EU was not, and is not, anywhere near the main factor in the country's success or not. It's either makes success harder or easier, depending on your viewpoint.
We chose a Brexit that has been harmful to the country so far. And that's down to the Brexiteers.
As for your last paragraph: as far as I'm aware I've never called for a second referendum, or never called for brexit to be reversed, or anything like that. I don't particularly have a 'my own way' when it comes to Brexit: but I am free to criticise what's happened.
(*) I am perfectly willing to admit that it may be a success in the longer term - but I currently see little sign of that.
Who is being childish in their points?
https://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2024/Pres/Maps/Jun29.html#item-1
https://electoral-vote.com/
I suggest anyone doommongering or chicken littling about Biden, or offering their 0.01 cents-worth on possible successors, should read both before they give their thoughts.
If you create only two camps in your mind: those who against the EU and those who are for it, then there is no room for the middle ground. And in this case, it's the eurosceptics.
If I'm not to use 'Europhobes' for those who campaigned for Brexit, what term should I use?
And even after all of that we are still in a better place than we would have been had we stayed in.
I also don't paint all leave *voters* as Europhobes. There would have been many eurosceptics who fell on that side of the fence. But the people who drove the leave campaign are certainly europhobes.
Yes most people don't read them. Many last the 10 seconds from the mat to the bin, but it is the impact it has. If asked most people think they have had less than they have actually had and it tells them who the challenger is here (wherever here is) and they are serious.
Re that pile of cover sheets - I assume you don't think they went to the same roads do you? Even LDs don't deliver that much. That is for all over Guildford.
And good quality fresh fish has an underlying taste that I find unpleasant. People have suggested to me trying things like shark which is more meaty. It is, but with that underlying taste still.
I'll enjoy eating just about any other animal (and any part of that animal) or vegetable and it is with huge regret that I just can't get on with fish. I mean it looks lovely.
All the lib dem diamonds I've seen stick out into public space, though not as bad as Reform fly-posting on street signs.