politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why the Tories could be being complacent over Jeremy Corbyn

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why the Tories could be being complacent over Jeremy Corbyn

Much comment has been passed this week on David Cameron’s falling ratings.  He now ranks behind Jeremy Corbyn on favourability ratings with YouGov.  “How low he has sunk” is the usual comment, and it is true.

Read the full story here

HYUFD

Corbyn's ideal scenario is

1. The UK votes Remain by the narrowest of margins
2. Some Tory Leave voters shift to UKIP
3. The Tories pick Osborne after Osborne manages to exclude Boris from the final ballot

Even Corbyn could win then. Admittedly a combination of all 3 is unlikely

rcs1000

FPT:

david_herdson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Casino_Royale said:

I am still deeply embarrassed by the Fall of Singapore.

No matter how many times I read that story, it's just one incompetent blunder after another combined with supreme arrogance.

Probably we never could have 'held' there for good, particularly with resources stretched elsewhere and such a limited airforce, but was a terrible disgrace to British arms.

I've often said The Fall of Singapore is the UK's second most shameful episode in British Military History.

We effectively sent troops over there, just so they could surrender and be captured by the Japanese.

That's not true: Churchill expected them to fight. It was the general in command who let the side down.

Perhaps their position was ultimately untenable to the attack that was launched but if so, there's no disgrace in defeat; there is disgrace in an unforced surrender.

My understanding is that it was to do with water. The Japanese had captured the reservoir that supplied Singapore, and without fresh water it could not survive.

rcs1000

SeanT said:

fpt re Erdogan


Germans on Twitter are claiming that in previous cases, Germany has refused to apply this law. Yet for Erdogan, Frau Merkel has made an exception.

I don't know if that is true, but if it is, then this is explosive. Even if it isn't true, the optics are hideous for her. I agree with MaxPB downthread that she is surely in the endstage of her career. Too many howling errors and bizarre misjudgements. She's lost it, as Thatcher did.

According to Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung this morning, this is the first time (in recent history) there has been an official complaint from a foreign head of state.

MarkHopkins

SeanT said:

fpt re Erdogan


Germans on Twitter are claiming that in previous cases, Germany has refused to apply this law. Yet for Erdogan, Frau Merkel has made an exception.

I don't know if that is true, but if it is, then this is explosive. Even if it isn't true, the optics are hideous for her. I agree with MaxPB downthread that she is surely in the endstage of her career. Too many howling errors and bizarre misjudgements. She's lost it, as Thatcher did.

If true (about the previous cases), I agree with you on the rest.

Barnesian

Corbyn's big negative is that he is not a good speaker. And he doesn't look like a smooth PR type which we now associate with PM material.

If he could speak and project himself like Cameron he would be a winner. His policies and values in general are more popular than the Tories.

TheScreamingEagles

If Labour replace Corbyn before 2020 with someone you can't describe as a terrorist sympathiser (yes I'm thinking of Dan Jarvis) then the Tories are screwed

MaxPB

TheScreamingEagles said:

If Labour replace Corbyn before 2020 with someone you can't describe as a terrorist sympathiser (yes I'm thinking of Dan Jarvis) then the Tories are screwed

If the Tory party elects Osborne as the successor to Dave then we are screwed, even against Corbyn, as the above graphic shows.

rcs1000

SeanT said:

rcs1000 said:

SeanT said:

fpt re Erdogan


Germans on Twitter are claiming that in previous cases, Germany has refused to apply this law. Yet for Erdogan, Frau Merkel has made an exception.

I don't know if that is true, but if it is, then this is explosive. Even if it isn't true, the optics are hideous for her. I agree with MaxPB downthread that she is surely in the endstage of her career. Too many howling errors and bizarre misjudgements. She's lost it, as Thatcher did.

According to Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung this morning, this is the first time (in recent history) there has been an official complaint from a foreign head of state.

But would Erdogan have bothered complaining - and risked all this embarrassment - if he hadn't got secret agreement from Merkel that the case would, at least, be heard?

There must be a strong suspicion of this. It's all part of the refugee *deal*.

I think it has to be heard if he complains, and Mrs Merkel has nothing to do with it. But I'm not an expert.

Surely Erdogan is going to end up the victim of the Streisland Syndrome? Far, far more people will now see the video than if he'd shut up.

john_zims

Four years from a GE and people are getting worked up about opinion polls that proved to be worthless only 12 months ago.

MaxPB

SeanT said:

fpt re Erdogan


Germans on Twitter are claiming that in previous cases, Germany has refused to apply this law. Yet for Erdogan, Frau Merkel has made an exception.

I don't know if that is true, but if it is, then this is explosive. Even if it isn't true, the optics are hideous for her. I agree with MaxPB downthread that she is surely in the endstage of her career. Too many howling errors and bizarre misjudgements. She's lost it, as Thatcher did.

If that is true and not just a twitterism then she is royally screwed. Honestly the government should have ruled this as arcane and told Erdogan to fuck off, problem is that Germany has just handed over a €6bn bribe so he polices his external border with Europe, they don't want that money to go to waste by allowing him to be insulted and him opening up the border again.

MyBurningEars

There's a sympathy-seeking piece on BBC news at the moment: "The canal boat dwellers told to keep moving or face eviction"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-36046323

Am I being a complete b****rd for having absolutely no sympathy?

They don't want to/can't pay the fees for a permanent mooring, so are going for the cheap option of claiming to be navigating somewhere. But because they want to stay in one place for work or childrens' schooling, they would rather stay at the free moorings for people on the move - and just go back and forth between the free moorings along a stretch to stay in the area.

Even the report states that Published [Canal and Rivers Trust] guidance to boaters specifically states: "Unacceptable reasons for staying longer than 14 days in a neighbourhood or locality are a need to stay within commuting distance of a place of work or of study (eg a school or college)."

Maybe I'm getting hard of heart but this is pretty weak sob story.

saddo

Key points for me:

Boundary changes mean Labour need bigger swing than Blair got to even get a minimum majority and that ain't going to happen

Tories are split at the moment but have 4 years to pull back together

Tories reason to be is to win elections, hence will pick a leader who will win ie if Ossie looks bad, no chance of winning

Tories want Corbyn in position until 2020 so are holding off attacking him until 2018/19

Tories will have so much dirt on Corbyn, McDonnell to use from 2018/9 onwards that they can destroy them easily

World getting a scarier place. Party strongest on security will win, and that will never be a Labour party run by a pacifist

Labour controlled by Momentum will have loony policies by the bucket load and bonkers extreme lefty candidates

Stark_Dawning

Merkel is now, quite justifiably, an international figure of ridicule and contempt. Germany appears to be going through some kind of psychosis; France is flirting with the Far-Right. The rest of Europe will soon be looking towards Britain as the only sane major European power left. Take control Dave! We need your steady hand on the tiller. The EU could become our second Empire.

FeersumEnjineeya

rcs1000 said:

SeanT said:

rcs1000 said:

SeanT said:

fpt re Erdogan


Germans on Twitter are claiming that in previous cases, Germany has refused to apply this law. Yet for Erdogan, Frau Merkel has made an exception.

I don't know if that is true, but if it is, then this is explosive. Even if it isn't true, the optics are hideous for her. I agree with MaxPB downthread that she is surely in the endstage of her career. Too many howling errors and bizarre misjudgements. She's lost it, as Thatcher did.

According to Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung this morning, this is the first time (in recent history) there has been an official complaint from a foreign head of state.

But would Erdogan have bothered complaining - and risked all this embarrassment - if he hadn't got secret agreement from Merkel that the case would, at least, be heard?

There must be a strong suspicion of this. It's all part of the refugee *deal*.

I think it has to be heard if he complains, and Mrs Merkel has nothing to do with it. But I'm not an expert.

Surely Erdogan is going to end up the victim of the Streisland Syndrome? Far, far more people will now see the video than if he'd shut up.

Indeed. It's hard to see how Merkel could have done otherwise. As she says, it is the job of the courts, not the government, to interpret the law. She simply doesn't have the power to prevent the case from being heard.

Pulpstar

On topic: Not sure - it'd take an astounding leap to go from giving "mildly red Ed" a trouncing to putting the full fat version in in 5 years.

But the British public can be unpredictable at times.

Terrible polling for George at any rate.

welshowl

MarkHopkins said:

SeanT said:

fpt re Erdogan


Germans on Twitter are claiming that in previous cases, Germany has refused to apply this law. Yet for Erdogan, Frau Merkel has made an exception.

I don't know if that is true, but if it is, then this is explosive. Even if it isn't true, the optics are hideous for her. I agree with MaxPB downthread that she is surely in the endstage of her career. Too many howling errors and bizarre misjudgements. She's lost it, as Thatcher did.

If true (about the previous cases), I agree with you on the rest.

Which, if true, whatever the minutiae of the detail of the application of an 1871 law (designed to protect the Kaiser's relatives?) will look appalling:-

Merkel has brain fade in Summer 2015 decides to invite in all and sundry from all points S East, other countries refuse to fall in behind her attempted diktat to take in large numbers of those she's encouraged, gets domestic grief when inevitably problems arise, early 2016 starts realising it's unworkable, kowtows to Turkey in desperation to stem the flow she's helped make worse, and then gives the nod (apparently) to some comedian going to trial for making fun of Turkey's leader because the poor leader is allegedly upset.

Her spin doctor must be a jibbering wreck.

Casino_Royale

TheScreamingEagles said:

If Labour replace Corbyn before 2020 with someone you can't describe as a terrorist sympathiser (yes I'm thinking of Dan Jarvis) then the Tories are screwed

Why would Labour do something sensible like that?

Barnesian

TheScreamingEagles said:

If Labour replace Corbyn before 2020 with someone you can't describe as a terrorist sympathiser (yes I'm thinking of Dan Jarvis) then the Tories are screwed

To describe Corbyn as a terrorist sympathiser is so OTT it will get no traction except with Tory extremists. It is so out of kilter with the man we are getting to know and love.

Casino_Royale

MaxPB said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

If Labour replace Corbyn before 2020 with someone you can't describe as a terrorist sympathiser (yes I'm thinking of Dan Jarvis) then the Tories are screwed

If the Tory party elects Osborne as the successor to Dave then we are screwed, even against Corbyn, as the above graphic shows.

I am enjoying the schadenfreude of Osborne.

I shouldn't, but I am.

david_herdson

On topic, no, Labour under Corbyn will be unelectable as long as the Conservatives have someone even vaguely credible - not least because they will already be PM. Gove or Osborne would beat Corbyn despite their personal ratings because they are PM material and he isn't.

That doesn't mean the Conservatives should indulge in five years of infighting - the electorate does have limits to its tolerance - but being in the middle of one of those periods of infighting right now is not a representative place for the whole of the parliament.

TCPoliticalBetting

It is quite clear from the polls that Osborne is toxic and needs to leave the Government. If he had any sense he would be arranging his exit and his next career outside politics. The Government needs a new Chancellor of the Exchequer who carries less political baggage.

david_herdson

rcs1000 said:

FPT:

david_herdson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Casino_Royale said:

I am still deeply embarrassed by the Fall of Singapore.

No matter how many times I read that story, it's just one incompetent blunder after another combined with supreme arrogance.

Probably we never could have 'held' there for good, particularly with resources stretched elsewhere and such a limited airforce, but was a terrible disgrace to British arms.

I've often said The Fall of Singapore is the UK's second most shameful episode in British Military History.

We effectively sent troops over there, just so they could surrender and be captured by the Japanese.

That's not true: Churchill expected them to fight. It was the general in command who let the side down.

Perhaps their position was ultimately untenable to the attack that was launched but if so, there's no disgrace in defeat; there is disgrace in an unforced surrender.

My understanding is that it was to do with water. The Japanese had captured the reservoir that supplied Singapore, and without fresh water it could not survive.

Then you fight to the last drop. Or you go out and counter-attack to retake the reservoir if it's that important.

TCPoliticalBetting

HYUFD said:

Corbyn's ideal scenario is
1. The UK votes Remain by the narrowest of margins
2. Some Tory Leave voters shift to UKIP
3. The Tories pick Osborne after Osborne manages to exclude Boris from the final ballot
Even Corbyn could win then. Admittedly a combination of all 3 is unlikely

The MPs are just not going to pick Osborne as he will lose many of them their seats at the GE. This will be the factor upper most in their minds.

MarqueeMark

john_zims said:

Four years from a GE and people are getting worked up about opinion polls that proved to be worthless only 12 months ago.

Quite.

Indigo

Barnesian said:

If he could speak and project himself like Cameron he would be a winner. His policies and values in general are more popular than the Tories.

I think that is a stretch. His policies and value might be more popular with the sort of politically engaged types that can be bothered to fill in political surveys (and the associated 20 minutes of drivel on their toothpaste preferences). But he isn't going to get elected by the man in the street until he can shake of his security risk and terrorist sympathiser image.

I am even more sceptical about mid term opinion polls than I am about pre-GE polls. Only the very politically engaged is going to be remotely interested, even the fair weather political geeks will have lost interest for another few years. Plus these "next prime minister" polls are a harmless way of registering a vote of discontent with your party or leader without actually risking getting the wrong chap in power. This might apply both ways with Labour voter being dissatisfied with Corbyn and Tories with Osbrown. Likely to get more accurate results flipping a coin.

MarkHopkins

Casino_Royale said:

MaxPB said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

If Labour replace Corbyn before 2020 with someone you can't describe as a terrorist sympathiser (yes I'm thinking of Dan Jarvis) then the Tories are screwed

If the Tory party elects Osborne as the successor to Dave then we are screwed, even against Corbyn, as the above graphic shows.

I am enjoying the schadenfreude of Osborne.

I shouldn't, but I am.

Someone should go up to him and say: "Do you want a career or do you want to support Remain?"

david_herdson

FeersumEnjineeya said:

rcs1000 said:

SeanT said:

rcs1000 said:

SeanT said:

fpt re Erdogan


Germans on Twitter are claiming that in previous cases, Germany has refused to apply this law. Yet for Erdogan, Frau Merkel has made an exception.

I don't know if that is true, but if it is, then this is explosive. Even if it isn't true, the optics are hideous for her. I agree with MaxPB downthread that she is surely in the endstage of her career. Too many howling errors and bizarre misjudgements. She's lost it, as Thatcher did.

According to Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung this morning, this is the first time (in recent history) there has been an official complaint from a foreign head of state.

But would Erdogan have bothered complaining - and risked all this embarrassment - if he hadn't got secret agreement from Merkel that the case would, at least, be heard?

There must be a strong suspicion of this. It's all part of the refugee *deal*.

I think it has to be heard if he complains, and Mrs Merkel has nothing to do with it. But I'm not an expert.

Surely Erdogan is going to end up the victim of the Streisland Syndrome? Far, far more people will now see the video than if he'd shut up.

Indeed. It's hard to see how Merkel could have done otherwise. As she says, it is the job of the courts, not the government, to interpret the law. She simply doesn't have the power to prevent the case from being heard.

Could she not put it to the parliament to repeal the law?

Pulpstar

Re: Erdogan,

Has Merkel said she found it 'personally offensive' "persönlich beleidigend" ?

rcs1000

david_herdson said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

rcs1000 said:

SeanT said:

rcs1000 said:

SeanT said:

fpt re Erdogan


Germans on Twitter are claiming that in previous cases, Germany has refused to apply this law. Yet for Erdogan, Frau Merkel has made an exception.

I don't know if that is true, but if it is, then this is explosive. Even if it isn't true, the optics are hideous for her. I agree with MaxPB downthread that she is surely in the endstage of her career. Too many howling errors and bizarre misjudgements. She's lost it, as Thatcher did.

According to Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung this morning, this is the first time (in recent history) there has been an official complaint from a foreign head of state.

But would Erdogan have bothered complaining - and risked all this embarrassment - if he hadn't got secret agreement from Merkel that the case would, at least, be heard?

There must be a strong suspicion of this. It's all part of the refugee *deal*.

I think it has to be heard if he complains, and Mrs Merkel has nothing to do with it. But I'm not an expert.

Surely Erdogan is going to end up the victim of the Streisland Syndrome? Far, far more people will now see the video than if he'd shut up.

Indeed. It's hard to see how Merkel could have done otherwise. As she says, it is the job of the courts, not the government, to interpret the law. She simply doesn't have the power to prevent the case from being heard.

Could she not put it to the parliament to repeal the law?

One would hope she will. But even if she did, you cannot retroactively change the law.

weejonnie

TCPoliticalBetting said:

HYUFD said:

Corbyn's ideal scenario is
1. The UK votes Remain by the narrowest of margins
2. Some Tory Leave voters shift to UKIP
3. The Tories pick Osborne after Osborne manages to exclude Boris from the final ballot
Even Corbyn could win then. Admittedly a combination of all 3 is unlikely

The MPs are just not going to pick Osborne as he will lose many of them their seats at the GE. This will be the factor upper most in their minds.

"Do you want a career or do you want to vote for Osborne?"

rcs1000

SeanT said:

rcs1000 said:

SeanT said:

rcs1000 said:

SeanT said:

fpt re Erdogan


Germans on Twitter are claiming that in previous cases, Germany has refused to apply this law. Yet for Erdogan, Frau Merkel has made an exception.

I don't know if that is true, but if it is, then this is explosive. Even if it isn't true, the optics are hideous for her. I agree with MaxPB downthread that she is surely in the endstage of her career. Too many howling errors and bizarre misjudgements. She's lost it, as Thatcher did.

According to Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung this morning, this is the first time (in recent history) there has been an official complaint from a foreign head of state.

But would Erdogan have bothered complaining - and risked all this embarrassment - if he hadn't got secret agreement from Merkel that the case would, at least, be heard?

There must be a strong suspicion of this. It's all part of the refugee *deal*.

I think it has to be heard if he complains, and Mrs Merkel has nothing to do with it. But I'm not an expert.

Surely Erdogan is going to end up the victim of the Streisland Syndrome? Far, far more people will now see the video than if he'd shut up.

Would Germany have allowed a prosecution of a comedian who insulted Kim Jong Un? Even if he did formally complain?

I somehow doubt it. But when it comes to Erdogan, yes. So it is, in part, a political decision.

I think the German legal system works like this:

1. A complain is recieved
2. A state prosecutor is appointed
3. They investigate and decide if there is a case to answer

I think we're at stage 2. I think we would still get to stage 2 with Kim Jong Il.

welshowl

FeersumEnjineeya said:

rcs1000 said:

SeanT said:

rcs1000 said:

SeanT said:

fpt re Erdogan


Germans on Twitter are claiming that in previous cases, Germany has refused to apply this law. Yet for Erdogan, Frau Merkel has made an exception.

I don't know if that is true, but if it is, then this is explosive. Even if it isn't true, the optics are hideous for her. I agree with MaxPB downthread that she is surely in the endstage of her career. Too many howling errors and bizarre misjudgements. She's lost it, as Thatcher did.

According to Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung this morning, this is the first time (in recent history) there has been an official complaint from a foreign head of state.

But would Erdogan have bothered complaining - and risked all this embarrassment - if he hadn't got secret agreement from Merkel that the case would, at least, be heard?

There must be a strong suspicion of this. It's all part of the refugee *deal*.

I think it has to be heard if he complains, and Mrs Merkel has nothing to do with it. But I'm not an expert.

Surely Erdogan is going to end up the victim of the Streisland Syndrome? Far, far more people will now see the video than if he'd shut up.

Indeed. It's hard to see how Merkel could have done otherwise. As she says, it is the job of the courts, not the government, to interpret the law. She simply doesn't have the power to prevent the case from being heard.

Do you think Erdogan was wise to pursue this? As has been pointed out on here way more are now going to google some obscure German comedian's witterings than would ever have been the case, and I personally struggle to see how Erdogan and or Turkey come out of this in a better position in the minds of the Western world, than if he's just stayed stumm. Maybe that's not important to him in which case fair enough (from his viewpoint, so to speak), but I doubt it's a great move.

Is Kim Kong Un next in the queue if somebody mocks his barber's skill on German Friday night telly? Going to look great for Merkel if some other German comedian does that, and Kim Jong Un did officially complain. What does Merkel do then? Mega popcorn all round.

Stark_Dawning

Don't write off Ozzy. I seem to remember that Gordon didn't poll particularly well when chancellor, but then experienced a poll surge when he replaced Tone. All new PMs get a honeymoon. Dave will probably time his departure to give his successor the optimal time span before the GE. George might just do this!

TheScreamingEagles

Barnesian said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

If Labour replace Corbyn before 2020 with someone you can't describe as a terrorist sympathiser (yes I'm thinking of Dan Jarvis) then the Tories are screwed

To describe Corbyn as a terrorist sympathiser is so OTT it will get no traction except with Tory extremists. It is so out of kilter with the man we are getting to know and love.

It's not about the facts, it's about preconceptions.

There's a reason why Corbyn is considered a risk to national security by the voters.

TCPoliticalBetting

Re: the Lavery scandal.
On R4 WATO Classic piece of stupidity from Frances O'Grady Head of TUC. "Heads of unions are accountable to their members". She ignores the fact that the union only has 6 members and hundreds of thousands of pounds are being controlled by it.....

Frances then goes on to try and divert the argument onto the "Heads of large corporations" a typical oh look over there its worse, now lets change the subject.

david_herdson

rcs1000 said:

david_herdson said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

rcs1000 said:

SeanT said:

rcs1000 said:

SeanT said:

fpt re Erdogan


Germans on Twitter are claiming that in previous cases, Germany has refused to apply this law. Yet for Erdogan, Frau Merkel has made an exception.

I don't know if that is true, but if it is, then this is explosive. Even if it isn't true, the optics are hideous for her. I agree with MaxPB downthread that she is surely in the endstage of her career. Too many howling errors and bizarre misjudgements. She's lost it, as Thatcher did.

According to Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung this morning, this is the first time (in recent history) there has been an official complaint from a foreign head of state.

But would Erdogan have bothered complaining - and risked all this embarrassment - if he hadn't got secret agreement from Merkel that the case would, at least, be heard?

There must be a strong suspicion of this. It's all part of the refugee *deal*.

I think it has to be heard if he complains, and Mrs Merkel has nothing to do with it. But I'm not an expert.

Surely Erdogan is going to end up the victim of the Streisland Syndrome? Far, far more people will now see the video than if he'd shut up.

Indeed. It's hard to see how Merkel could have done otherwise. As she says, it is the job of the courts, not the government, to interpret the law. She simply doesn't have the power to prevent the case from being heard.

Could she not put it to the parliament to repeal the law?

One would hope she will. But even if she did, you cannot retroactively change the law.

Can you prosecute someone for a law that has since been repealed?

MaxPB

FeersumEnjineeya said:

rcs1000 said:

SeanT said:

rcs1000 said:

SeanT said:

fpt re Erdogan


Germans on Twitter are claiming that in previous cases, Germany has refused to apply this law. Yet for Erdogan, Frau Merkel has made an exception.

I don't know if that is true, but if it is, then this is explosive. Even if it isn't true, the optics are hideous for her. I agree with MaxPB downthread that she is surely in the endstage of her career. Too many howling errors and bizarre misjudgements. She's lost it, as Thatcher did.

According to Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung this morning, this is the first time (in recent history) there has been an official complaint from a foreign head of state.

But would Erdogan have bothered complaining - and risked all this embarrassment - if he hadn't got secret agreement from Merkel that the case would, at least, be heard?

There must be a strong suspicion of this. It's all part of the refugee *deal*.

I think it has to be heard if he complains, and Mrs Merkel has nothing to do with it. But I'm not an expert.

Surely Erdogan is going to end up the victim of the Streisland Syndrome? Far, far more people will now see the video than if he'd shut up.

Indeed. It's hard to see how Merkel could have done otherwise. As she says, it is the job of the courts, not the government, to interpret the law. She simply doesn't have the power to prevent the case from being heard.

Instructed the President to issue a pardon to the "offending" comedian. Erdogan wouldn't have been happy, which is why she hasn't done it.

Richard_Nabavi

This is the German criminal code.

http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_stgb/englisch_stgb.html#p1035

The relevant bits seem to be:

(1) Whosoever insults a foreign head of state, or, with respect to his position, a member of a foreign government who is in Germany in his official capacity, or a head of a foreign diplomatic mission who is accredited in the Federal territory shall be liable to imprisonment not exceeding three years or a fine, in case of a slanderous insult to imprisonment from three months to five years.
...
Section 104a
Conditions for prosecution

Offences under this chapter shall only be prosecuted if the Federal Republic of Germany maintains diplomatic relations with the other state, reciprocity is guaranteed and was also guaranteed at the time of the offence, a request to prosecute by the foreign government exists, and the Federal Government authorises the prosecution.

For that matter, there seem to be some other rather eyebrow-raising provisions in the code.

HYUFD

Stark_Dawning said:

Don't write off Ozzy. I seem to remember that Gordon didn't poll particularly well when chancellor, but then experienced a poll surge when he replaced Tone. All new PMs get a honeymoon. Dave will probably time his departure to give his successor the optimal time span before the GE. George might just do this!

Gordon Brown won 29% in 2010, the second lowest percentage of any Labour leader since the war and as chancellor he polled significantly higher than Osborne is doing

Stark_Dawning

MarqueeMark said:

john_zims said:

Four years from a GE and people are getting worked up about opinion polls that proved to be worthless only 12 months ago.

Quite.

We were all predicting Cameron's doom just last week. Where is he now?

HYUFD

TCPoliticalBetting said:

HYUFD said:

Corbyn's ideal scenario is
1. The UK votes Remain by the narrowest of margins
2. Some Tory Leave voters shift to UKIP
3. The Tories pick Osborne after Osborne manages to exclude Boris from the final ballot
Even Corbyn could win then. Admittedly a combination of all 3 is unlikely

The MPs are just not going to pick Osborne as he will lose many of them their seats at the GE. This will be the factor upper most in their minds.

Depends on how much that is balanced by the powers of patronage and thoughts of who is going to win

HYUFD

david_herdson said:

On topic, no, Labour under Corbyn will be unelectable as long as the Conservatives have someone even vaguely credible - not least because they will already be PM. Gove or Osborne would beat Corbyn despite their personal ratings because they are PM material and he isn't.

That doesn't mean the Conservatives should indulge in five years of infighting - the electorate does have limits to its tolerance - but being in the middle of one of those periods of infighting right now is not a representative place for the whole of the parliament.

That is your opinion of who is PM material, the voters clearly do not think Osborne is PM material

Bromptonaut

Barnesian said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

If Labour replace Corbyn before 2020 with someone you can't describe as a terrorist sympathiser (yes I'm thinking of Dan Jarvis) then the Tories are screwed

To describe Corbyn as a terrorist sympathiser is so OTT it will get no traction except with Tory extremists. It is so out of kilter with the man we are getting to know and love.

We will see Zac Goldsmith fail using exactly that tactic against Sadiq Khan.

MaxPB

TCPoliticalBetting said:

Re: the Lavery scandal.
On R4 WATO Classic piece of stupidity from Frances O'Grady Head of TUC. "Heads of unions are accountable to their members". She ignores the fact that the union only has 6 members and hundreds of thousands of pounds are being controlled by it.....

Frances then goes on to try and divert the argument onto the "Heads of large corporations" a typical oh look over there its worse, now lets change the subject.

And in the case of BP the shareholders just gave the large corporation a very bloody nose over exorbitant executive pay.

Indigo

HYUFD said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

HYUFD said:

Corbyn's ideal scenario is
1. The UK votes Remain by the narrowest of margins
2. Some Tory Leave voters shift to UKIP
3. The Tories pick Osborne after Osborne manages to exclude Boris from the final ballot
Even Corbyn could win then. Admittedly a combination of all 3 is unlikely

The MPs are just not going to pick Osborne as he will lose many of them their seats at the GE. This will be the factor upper most in their minds.

Depends on how much that is balanced by the powers of patronage and thoughts of who is going to win

If they don't pick Osborne he has no powers of patronage, and so isnt a threat, its the safe move if you have someone prone to making threats. It's a secret ballot so it's not like there will be any personal comeback, everyone will assure him of their support, and then vote for someone else.

Plato_Says

I see 5 more arrested under terrorism, 4 Birmingham - one at Gatwick. Linked to Belgian/French attacks.

Remain must be delighted.

Danny565

People rightly saying that the headline voting intention polls proved to be worthless in the last Parliament.

However, did Miliband EVER trail Cameron on the "best PM" ratings, even at the height of the Omnishambles?

AlastairMeeks

@FeersumEnjineeya Welcome - great name. I trust you know a friendly ant.

Barnesian

TheScreamingEagles said:

Barnesian said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

If Labour replace Corbyn before 2020 with someone you can't describe as a terrorist sympathiser (yes I'm thinking of Dan Jarvis) then the Tories are screwed

To describe Corbyn as a terrorist sympathiser is so OTT it will get no traction except with Tory extremists. It is so out of kilter with the man we are getting to know and love.

It's not about the facts, it's about preconceptions.

There's a reason why Corbyn is considered a risk to national security by the voters.

Voters had no preconceptions about Corbyn when he first got on the ballot as Labour Leader. No-one knew him. The next few months were full of "terrorist sympathiser" stuff from the Tory Right which no doubt impacted on some voters' views of Corbyn. But as he gets better known as his own man, a man of integrity and decent values, those preconcpetions will change.

TCPoliticalBetting

HYUFD said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

HYUFD said:

Corbyn's ideal scenario is
1. The UK votes Remain by the narrowest of margins
2. Some Tory Leave voters shift to UKIP
3. The Tories pick Osborne after Osborne manages to exclude Boris from the final ballot
Even Corbyn could win then. Admittedly a combination of all 3 is unlikely

The MPs are just not going to pick Osborne as he will lose many of them their seats at the GE. This will be the factor upper most in their minds.

Depends on how much that is balanced by the powers of patronage and thoughts of who is going to win

I disagree. Getting yourself back in and the party back in power is the main issue. Who can achieve that is the question. No point in patronage from a chap who will end your MP career in 3 or 4 years time.

MaxPB

Richard_Nabavi said:

This is the German criminal code.

http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_stgb/englisch_stgb.html#p1035

The relevant bits seem to be:

(1) Whosoever insults a foreign head of state, or, with respect to his position, a member of a foreign government who is in Germany in his official capacity, or a head of a foreign diplomatic mission who is accredited in the Federal territory shall be liable to imprisonment not exceeding three years or a fine, in case of a slanderous insult to imprisonment from three months to five years.
...
Section 104a
Conditions for prosecution

Offences under this chapter shall only be prosecuted if the Federal Republic of Germany maintains diplomatic relations with the other state, reciprocity is guaranteed and was also guaranteed at the time of the offence, a request to prosecute by the foreign government exists, and the Federal Government authorises the prosecution.

For that matter, there seem to be some other rather eyebrow-raising provisions in the code.

"and the Federal Government authorises the prosecution"

Seems to be very key here and since Merkel is head of the federal government it stands to reason she could have refused to authorise it. Looking very bad for her at the moment.

TCPoliticalBetting

Stark_Dawning said:

MarqueeMark said:

john_zims said:

Four years from a GE and people are getting worked up about opinion polls that proved to be worthless only 12 months ago.

Quite.

We were all predicting Cameron's doom just last week. Where is he now?

In the departure lounge, demob happy.

TCPoliticalBetting

weejonnie said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

HYUFD said:

Corbyn's ideal scenario is
1. The UK votes Remain by the narrowest of margins
2. Some Tory Leave voters shift to UKIP
3. The Tories pick Osborne after Osborne manages to exclude Boris from the final ballot
Even Corbyn could win then. Admittedly a combination of all 3 is unlikely

The MPs are just not going to pick Osborne as he will lose many of them their seats at the GE. This will be the factor upper most in their minds.

"Do you want a career or do you want to vote for Osborne?"

Osborne will not know who votes for him or not.

Richard_Nabavi

MaxPB said:

"and the Federal Government authorises the prosecution"

Seems to be very key here and since Merkel is head of the federal government it stands to reason she could have refused to authorise it. Looking very bad for her at the moment.

Yes, it does look as though the government has complete discretion in the matter, unless there is some presumption in German law about how they are supposed to exercise that discretion.

TCPoliticalBetting

MaxPB said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

Re: the Lavery scandal.
On R4 WATO Classic piece of stupidity from Frances O'Grady Head of TUC. "Heads of unions are accountable to their members". She ignores the fact that the union only has 6 members and hundreds of thousands of pounds are being controlled by it.....

Frances then goes on to try and divert the argument onto the "Heads of large corporations" a typical oh look over there its worse, now lets change the subject.

And in the case of BP the shareholders just gave the large corporation a very bloody nose over exorbitant executive pay.

Yes and the head of the IOD criticised BP. The Head of the TUC ignores the matter and attacks corporations.... Different standards.

david_herdson

HYUFD said:

david_herdson said:

On topic, no, Labour under Corbyn will be unelectable as long as the Conservatives have someone even vaguely credible - not least because they will already be PM. Gove or Osborne would beat Corbyn despite their personal ratings because they are PM material and he isn't.

That doesn't mean the Conservatives should indulge in five years of infighting - the electorate does have limits to its tolerance - but being in the middle of one of those periods of infighting right now is not a representative place for the whole of the parliament.

That is your opinion of who is PM material, the voters clearly do not think Osborne is PM material

No, it's my opinion of what I think would be the voters' opinion once a change of PM had taken place.

FWIW, I think Osborne would be a crap PM.

FeersumEnjineeya

AlastairMeeks said:

@FeersumEnjineeya Welcome - great name. I trust you know a friendly ant.

Thanks. I'll know my Ergates when I find her

DavidL

Surely the Tory confidence arises principally because they are now 98 seats ahead of Labour with a boundary change to come which should enhance that lead to maybe 110.

Switches of 100 seats in 1 election are rare. DC almost managed it in 2010 and Blair did in 97. But unless Corbyn is suddenly going to morph into T Blair or the SNP suddenly fold their tents it is hard to see anyone other than the Tories as the largest party after the next election, probably by a large enough margin to make another government really difficult to put together.

The fact that Corbyn is crap is really just a bonus.

Cyclefree

FPT: re the German decision to prosecute a satirist at the behest of Erdogan:-

An utter disgrace.

Now imagine being subject to QMV on home affairs issues, including press freedom, with a group of countries with similar laws and who impose an EU wide law making such satire a crime. Think it might not happen? Why wouldn't it? With greater integration that is the risk.

All that "We are Charlie" was for the birds.

And if this gets done for Erdogan, well, some will be asking, why not for Mohammed?

This is what happens when you don't understand the principles you claim to espouse, when you don't live the principles you claim to espouse, when you don't stand up for the principles you claim to espouse and when you put yourself in a position where you are reliant on the goodwill of a people or a country who don't give a fig for your country, your principles or your values. This is what happens when you lack courage.

FrankBooth

Came across this very good piece from the much maligned Guardian last year on Muslim apostasy.

http://www.theguardian.com/global/2015/may/17/losing-their-religion-british-ex-muslims-non-believers-hidden-crisis-faith

TheScreamingEagles

Barnesian said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Barnesian said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

If Labour replace Corbyn before 2020 with someone you can't describe as a terrorist sympathiser (yes I'm thinking of Dan Jarvis) then the Tories are screwed

To describe Corbyn as a terrorist sympathiser is so OTT it will get no traction except with Tory extremists. It is so out of kilter with the man we are getting to know and love.

It's not about the facts, it's about preconceptions.

There's a reason why Corbyn is considered a risk to national security by the voters.

Voters had no preconceptions about Corbyn when he first got on the ballot as Labour Leader. No-one knew him. The next few months were full of "terrorist sympathiser" stuff from the Tory Right which no doubt impacted on some voters' views of Corbyn. But as he gets better known as his own man, a man of integrity and decent values, those preconcpetions will change.

It's not just the Tory right. You don't think things like this will be mentioned a lot by the Tories during the 2020 general election campaign?

A former Labour defence secretary has said Jeremy Corbyn is a threat to national security

https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/social-affairs/politics/news/68700/jeremy-corbyn-threat-national-security-says-lord-hutton

CarlottaVance

The Moggster monsters Obama:

https://www.politicshome.com/news/europe/eu-institutions/news/73795/jacob-rees-mogg-attacks-barack-obama-over-ira-thatcher-bomb

Cyclefree

Barnesian said:

Corbyn's big negative is that he is not a good speaker. And he doesn't look like a smooth PR type which we now associate with PM material.

If he could speak and project himself like Cameron he would be a winner. His policies and values in general are more popular than the Tories.

Yeah, of course: being friendly with terrorists is definitely popular with the British.

rcs1000

I think I am wrong on the German issue. Mrs Merkel should have refused the prosecution.

That being said: I would bet the investigating judge will find there is no case to be answered. (Which he will decide in about 18 months time, after a full consideration of the evidence.)

foxinsoxuk

Plato_Says said:

I see 5 more arrested under terrorism, 4 Birmingham - one at Gatwick. Linked to Belgian/French attacks.

Remain must be delighted.

Cross border policing working well it seems.

Indigo

Bromptonaut said:

Barnesian said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

If Labour replace Corbyn before 2020 with someone you can't describe as a terrorist sympathiser (yes I'm thinking of Dan Jarvis) then the Tories are screwed

To describe Corbyn as a terrorist sympathiser is so OTT it will get no traction except with Tory extremists. It is so out of kilter with the man we are getting to know and love.

We will see Zac Goldsmith fail using exactly that tactic against Sadiq Khan.

If the press had photos of SK on the platform at marxist rallies, and sharing the stage with various dubious people, and if he had appointed a known, on the record IRA supporter as his second in command, it might have been more successful. If there was anything like this:

It can be disclosed that for seven years running, while the IRA “armed struggle” was at its height, Mr Corbyn attended and spoke at official republican commemorations to honour dead IRA terrorists, IRA “prisoners of war” and the active “soldiers of the IRA.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/11924431/Revealed-Jeremy-Corbyn-and-John-McDonnells-close-IRA-links.html

Kahn would be dead in the water. But there isn't.

FeersumEnjineeya

Richard_Nabavi said:

MaxPB said:

"and the Federal Government authorises the prosecution"

Seems to be very key here and since Merkel is head of the federal government it stands to reason she could have refused to authorise it. Looking very bad for her at the moment.

Yes, it does look as though the government has complete discretion in the matter, unless there is some presumption in German law about how they are supposed to exercise that discretion.

It would be interesting to hear of any previous requests to prosecute that have refused by the the federal government. Perhaps SeanT's twitterers could oblige?

rcs1000

As an aside, according the FT Mr Erdogan has also launched a private prosecution against Mr Böhmermann over the poem.

Danny565

DavidL said:

Surely the Tory confidence arises principally because they are now 98 seats ahead of Labour with a boundary change to come which should enhance that lead to maybe 110.

Switches of 100 seats in 1 election are rare. DC almost managed it in 2010 and Blair did in 97. But unless Corbyn is suddenly going to morph into T Blair or the SNP suddenly fold their tents it is hard to see anyone other than the Tories as the largest party after the next election, probably by a large enough margin to make another government really difficult to put together.

The fact that Corbyn is crap is really just a bonus.

But it's far from certain that the boundary changes are even going to go through. Even on the most favourable changes, a cut of 50 MPs will mean some Tory MPs losing their seats, and it seems a bit naive to expect anyone to vote themselves into redundancy.

TOPPING

saddo said:

Key points for me:

Boundary changes mean Labour need bigger swing than Blair got to even get a minimum majority and that ain't going to happen

Tories are split at the moment but have 4 years to pull back together

Tories reason to be is to win elections, hence will pick a leader who will win ie if Ossie looks bad, no chance of winning

Tories want Corbyn in position until 2020 so are holding off attacking him until 2018/19

Tories will have so much dirt on Corbyn, McDonnell to use from 2018/9 onwards that they can destroy them easily

World getting a scarier place. Party strongest on security will win, and that will never be a Labour party run by a pacifist

Labour controlled by Momentum will have loony policies by the bucket load and bonkers extreme lefty candidates

That pretty much sums it up. But what on earth are we going to debate after EURef?

MaxPB

Richard_Nabavi said:

MaxPB said:

"and the Federal Government authorises the prosecution"

Seems to be very key here and since Merkel is head of the federal government it stands to reason she could have refused to authorise it. Looking very bad for her at the moment.

Yes, it does look as though the government has complete discretion in the matter, unless there is some presumption in German law about how they are supposed to exercise that discretion.

Even in that case an exception could surely be made for a law dating back to Kingdom of Prussia.

Cyclefree

rcs1000 said:

SeanT said:

rcs1000 said:

SeanT said:

fpt re Erdogan


Germans on Twitter are claiming that in previous cases, Germany has refused to apply this law. Yet for Erdogan, Frau Merkel has made an exception.

I don't know if that is true, but if it is, then this is explosive. Even if it isn't true, the optics are hideous for her. I agree with MaxPB downthread that she is surely in the endstage of her career. Too many howling errors and bizarre misjudgements. She's lost it, as Thatcher did.

According to Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung this morning, this is the first time (in recent history) there has been an official complaint from a foreign head of state.

But would Erdogan have bothered complaining - and risked all this embarrassment - if he hadn't got secret agreement from Merkel that the case would, at least, be heard?

There must be a strong suspicion of this. It's all part of the refugee *deal*.

I think it has to be heard if he complains, and Mrs Merkel has nothing to do with it. But I'm not an expert.

Surely Erdogan is going to end up the victim of the Streisland Syndrome? Far, far more people will now see the video than if he'd shut up.

I don't think he cares about that. He wants to be able to show who's boss. And he has. And instead of Germany telling him politely to stuff it they've paid the Danegeld. How much more will they have to pay? That price is not going to be just money. It will be the incremental loss of precious freedoms, including the freedom to satirise those in power, whether at home or abroad, or anyone who is prepared to bully the satirist.

TheScreamingEagles

TOPPING said:

saddo said:

Key points for me:

Boundary changes mean Labour need bigger swing than Blair got to even get a minimum majority and that ain't going to happen

Tories are split at the moment but have 4 years to pull back together

Tories reason to be is to win elections, hence will pick a leader who will win ie if Ossie looks bad, no chance of winning

Tories want Corbyn in position until 2020 so are holding off attacking him until 2018/19

Tories will have so much dirt on Corbyn, McDonnell to use from 2018/9 onwards that they can destroy them easily

World getting a scarier place. Party strongest on security will win, and that will never be a Labour party run by a pacifist

Labour controlled by Momentum will have loony policies by the bucket load and bonkers extreme lefty candidates

That pretty much sums it up. But what on earth are we going to debate after EURef?

Electoral reform.

TCPoliticalBetting

CarlottaVance said:

The Moggster monsters Obama:

https://www.politicshome.com/news/europe/eu-institutions/news/73795/jacob-rees-mogg-attacks-barack-obama-over-ira-thatcher-bomb

Obama is going to get attacked in many newspapers in the coming week over the many examples of his anti-UK actions and the actions of people around him. We are not Germany.

Danny565

Also, it's worth bearing in mind that, by 2020, no Tory leader except Cameron will even have got MORE THAN 200 SEATS in nearly 30 years #justsaying

rcs1000

Cyclefree said:

rcs1000 said:

SeanT said:

rcs1000 said:

SeanT said:

fpt re Erdogan


Germans on Twitter are claiming that in previous cases, Germany has refused to apply this law. Yet for Erdogan, Frau Merkel has made an exception.

I don't know if that is true, but if it is, then this is explosive. Even if it isn't true, the optics are hideous for her. I agree with MaxPB downthread that she is surely in the endstage of her career. Too many howling errors and bizarre misjudgements. She's lost it, as Thatcher did.

According to Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung this morning, this is the first time (in recent history) there has been an official complaint from a foreign head of state.

But would Erdogan have bothered complaining - and risked all this embarrassment - if he hadn't got secret agreement from Merkel that the case would, at least, be heard?

There must be a strong suspicion of this. It's all part of the refugee *deal*.

I think it has to be heard if he complains, and Mrs Merkel has nothing to do with it. But I'm not an expert.

Surely Erdogan is going to end up the victim of the Streisland Syndrome? Far, far more people will now see the video than if he'd shut up.

I don't think he cares about that. He wants to be able to show who's boss. And he has. And instead of Germany telling him politely to stuff it they've paid the Danegeld. How much more will they have to pay? That price is not going to be just money. It will be the incremental loss of precious freedoms, including the freedom to satirise those in power, whether at home or abroad, or anyone who is prepared to bully the satirist.

Surely what will happen in the real world is that Mrs Merkel will hand it over to an investigating judge, who will consider it for 18 months, and then decide not to prosecute.

DavidL

FeersumEnjineeya said:

rcs1000 said:

SeanT said:

rcs1000 said:

SeanT said:

fpt re Erdogan


Germans on Twitter are claiming that in previous cases, Germany has refused to apply this law. Yet for Erdogan, Frau Merkel has made an exception.

I don't know if that is true, but if it is, then this is explosive. Even if it isn't true, the optics are hideous for her. I agree with MaxPB downthread that she is surely in the endstage of her career. Too many howling errors and bizarre misjudgements. She's lost it, as Thatcher did.

According to Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung this morning, this is the first time (in recent history) there has been an official complaint from a foreign head of state.

But would Erdogan have bothered complaining - and risked all this embarrassment - if he hadn't got secret agreement from Merkel that the case would, at least, be heard?

There must be a strong suspicion of this. It's all part of the refugee *deal*.

I think it has to be heard if he complains, and Mrs Merkel has nothing to do with it. But I'm not an expert.

Surely Erdogan is going to end up the victim of the Streisland Syndrome? Far, far more people will now see the video than if he'd shut up.

Indeed. It's hard to see how Merkel could have done otherwise. As she says, it is the job of the courts, not the government, to interpret the law. She simply doesn't have the power to prevent the case from being heard.

Are you an Iain M Banks fan by any chance?

TOPPING

foxinsoxuk said:

Plato_Says said:

I see 5 more arrested under terrorism, 4 Birmingham - one at Gatwick. Linked to Belgian/French attacks.

Remain must be delighted.

Cross border policing working well it seems.

I was genuinely pondering what was meant by the remark. Why would remainers be happy or was it a veiled insult (well of course it was), but I don't get it...?

AndyJS

I bet a case can be found where a German comedian insulted the Chinese or North Korean president and nothing was done about it as far as taking legal action was concerned.

MaxPB

rcs1000 said:

I think I am wrong on the German issue. Mrs Merkel should have refused the prosecution.

That being said: I would bet the investigating judge will find there is no case to be answered. (Which he will decide in about 18 months time, after a full consideration of the evidence.)

Tbh, if the Germans are going by the letter of the law, he may well end up in the slammer. Read back what Richard posted:

"Whosoever insults a foreign head of state, or, with respect to his position, a member of a foreign government who is in Germany in his official capacity, or a head of a foreign diplomatic mission who is accredited in the Federal territory shall be liable to imprisonment not exceeding three years or a fine, in case of a slanderous insult to imprisonment from three months to five years."

And it is quite clear that calling Erdogan (a foreign head of state) a goat fucker is slanderous, applying the law as it reads means he ends up in in prison for three to five years.

OldKingCole

TheScreamingEagles said:

TOPPING said:

saddo said:

Key points for me:

Boundary changes mean Labour need bigger swing than Blair got to even get a minimum majority and that ain't going to happen

Tories are split at the moment but have 4 years to pull back together

Tories reason to be is to win elections, hence will pick a leader who will win ie if Ossie looks bad, no chance of winning

Tories want Corbyn in position until 2020 so are holding off attacking him until 2018/19

Tories will have so much dirt on Corbyn, McDonnell to use from 2018/9 onwards that they can destroy them easily

World getting a scarier place. Party strongest on security will win, and that will never be a Labour party run by a pacifist

Labour controlled by Momentum will have loony policies by the bucket load and bonkers extreme lefty candidates

That pretty much sums it up. But what on earth are we going to debate after EURef?

Electoral reform.

The break up of the Conservative Party.

welshowl

SeanT said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

MaxPB said:

"and the Federal Government authorises the prosecution"

Seems to be very key here and since Merkel is head of the federal government it stands to reason she could have refused to authorise it. Looking very bad for her at the moment.

Yes, it does look as though the government has complete discretion in the matter, unless there is some presumption in German law about how they are supposed to exercise that discretion.

Some key German pundits on Twitter are speculating that she has blown it, and might have to resign.

I doubt she will, German politics isn't that volatile and exciting, but this is an awful moment for her. Twilight approaches.

Goettindaemmerung?

MaxPB

TheScreamingEagles said:

TOPPING said:

saddo said:

Key points for me:

Boundary changes mean Labour need bigger swing than Blair got to even get a minimum majority and that ain't going to happen

Tories are split at the moment but have 4 years to pull back together

Tories reason to be is to win elections, hence will pick a leader who will win ie if Ossie looks bad, no chance of winning

Tories want Corbyn in position until 2020 so are holding off attacking him until 2018/19

Tories will have so much dirt on Corbyn, McDonnell to use from 2018/9 onwards that they can destroy them easily

World getting a scarier place. Party strongest on security will win, and that will never be a Labour party run by a pacifist

Labour controlled by Momentum will have loony policies by the bucket load and bonkers extreme lefty candidates

That pretty much sums it up. But what on earth are we going to debate after EURef?

Electoral reform.

I hope you have a (few) thread on the merits of AV vs STV vs PR vs FPTP saved up!

Indigo

Danny565 said:

DavidL said:

Surely the Tory confidence arises principally because they are now 98 seats ahead of Labour with a boundary change to come which should enhance that lead to maybe 110.

Switches of 100 seats in 1 election are rare. DC almost managed it in 2010 and Blair did in 97. But unless Corbyn is suddenly going to morph into T Blair or the SNP suddenly fold their tents it is hard to see anyone other than the Tories as the largest party after the next election, probably by a large enough margin to make another government really difficult to put together.

The fact that Corbyn is crap is really just a bonus.

But it's far from certain that the boundary changes are even going to go through. Even on the most favourable changes, a cut of 50 MPs will mean some Tory MPs losing their seats, and it seems a bit naive to expect anyone to vote themselves into redundancy.

I am sure an attractive offer will be made to a number of old hands, seat in the Lords, job with the EU (assuming we are still in), directorships of quangos, the usual deal, and then those looking for a seat will be shuffled around ... unless they pissed off Dave and George over the EuRef, in which case they are out of luck, hence a fair number of late conversions to the remain cause after someone put the arm on them.

TOPPING

TheScreamingEagles said:

TOPPING said:

saddo said:

Key points for me:

Boundary changes mean Labour need bigger swing than Blair got to even get a minimum majority and that ain't going to happen

Tories are split at the moment but have 4 years to pull back together

Tories reason to be is to win elections, hence will pick a leader who will win ie if Ossie looks bad, no chance of winning

Tories want Corbyn in position until 2020 so are holding off attacking him until 2018/19

Tories will have so much dirt on Corbyn, McDonnell to use from 2018/9 onwards that they can destroy them easily

World getting a scarier place. Party strongest on security will win, and that will never be a Labour party run by a pacifist

Labour controlled by Momentum will have loony policies by the bucket load and bonkers extreme lefty candidates

That pretty much sums it up. But what on earth are we going to debate after EURef?

Electoral reform.

I think Mike said he had a slot for a post on it on June 21st. You'll still be editing, right? Oh, wait...

Plato_Says

Obama and his staff have been f-wits since Day 1.

Gift shop presents for Gordon/kids, iPod for Queen, sending back busts, the desk, blaming us for Libya... and on and on.

TCPoliticalBetting said:

CarlottaVance said:

The Moggster monsters Obama:

https://www.politicshome.com/news/europe/eu-institutions/news/73795/jacob-rees-mogg-attacks-barack-obama-over-ira-thatcher-bomb

Obama is going to get attacked in many newspapers in the coming week over the many examples of his anti-UK actions and the actions of people around him. We are not Germany.

welshowl

Danny565 said:

DavidL said:

Surely the Tory confidence arises principally because they are now 98 seats ahead of Labour with a boundary change to come which should enhance that lead to maybe 110.

Switches of 100 seats in 1 election are rare. DC almost managed it in 2010 and Blair did in 97. But unless Corbyn is suddenly going to morph into T Blair or the SNP suddenly fold their tents it is hard to see anyone other than the Tories as the largest party after the next election, probably by a large enough margin to make another government really difficult to put together.

The fact that Corbyn is crap is really just a bonus.

But it's far from certain that the boundary changes are even going to go through. Even on the most favourable changes, a cut of 50 MPs will mean some Tory MPs losing their seats, and it seems a bit naive to expect anyone to vote themselves into redundancy.

and into HoL one suspects.

AndyJS

Merkel has to go. A complete embarrassment to both Germany and Europe. But good news for the Leave campaign.

CarlottaVance

TCPoliticalBetting said:

CarlottaVance said:

The Moggster monsters Obama:

https://www.politicshome.com/news/europe/eu-institutions/news/73795/jacob-rees-mogg-attacks-barack-obama-over-ira-thatcher-bomb

Obama is going to get attacked in many newspapers in the coming week over the many examples of his anti-UK actions and the actions of people around him. We are not Germany.

Maybe he'll take out an injunction and we'll have to read about it in the American press.....

david_herdson

Bromptonaut said:

Barnesian said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

If Labour replace Corbyn before 2020 with someone you can't describe as a terrorist sympathiser (yes I'm thinking of Dan Jarvis) then the Tories are screwed

To describe Corbyn as a terrorist sympathiser is so OTT it will get no traction except with Tory extremists. It is so out of kilter with the man we are getting to know and love.

We will see Zac Goldsmith fail using exactly that tactic against Sadiq Khan.

Perhaps, however London is more Labourite than the UK as a whole, and Corbyn's connections to - for example - Sinn Fein in the 1980s are more overt than Khan's are to people nowadays. In any case, Corbyn has a refreshingly honest approach to these matters and would no doubt answer a question as to why it was a good thing that he fostered links with terrorist mouthpieces at a time when they were attacking this country.

runnymede

Cyclefree said:

FPT: re the German decision to prosecute a satirist at the behest of Erdogan:-

An utter disgrace.

Now imagine being subject to QMV on home affairs issues, including press freedom, with a group of countries with similar laws and who impose an EU wide law making such satire a crime. Think it might not happen? Why wouldn't it? With greater integration that is the risk.

All that "We are Charlie" was for the birds.

And if this gets done for Erdogan, well, some will be asking, why not for Mohammed?

This is what happens when you don't understand the principles you claim to espouse, when you don't live the principles you claim to espouse, when you don't stand up for the principles you claim to espouse and when you put yourself in a position where you are reliant on the goodwill of a people or a country who don't give a fig for your country, your principles or your values. This is what happens when you lack courage.

Exactly - why on earth would we want to be part of 'common area of criminal justice' with countries like this?

And the writing is on the wall in this area - this supposedly Conservative government has already opted in to a series of home affairs and justice measures and opened the door to even more judicial interference from the EU.

The pressure will be on for more of the same going forward - the EU has big plans in this area, which are no secret.

AndyJS

https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/720957342620262400

welshowl

Danny565 said:

Also, it's worth bearing in mind that, by 2020, no Tory leader except Cameron will even have got MORE THAN 200 SEATS in nearly 30 years #justsaying

And no Labour leader not called Blair has got more than about 35% since 1979, and nobody born after 1859 has been a Liberal PM.

[Deleted User]

Plato_Says said:

Obama and his staff have been f-wits since Day 1.

Gift shop presents for Gordon/kids, iPod for Queen, sending back busts, the desk, blamign us for Libya... and on and on.

TCPoliticalBetting said:

CarlottaVance said:

The Moggster monsters Obama:

https://www.politicshome.com/news/europe/eu-institutions/news/73795/jacob-rees-mogg-attacks-barack-obama-over-ira-thatcher-bomb

Obama is going to get attacked in many newspapers in the coming week over the many examples of his anti-UK actions and the actions of people around him. We are not Germany.

Yes - but it's his foreign and domestic record that makes him the f-wit. The only thing he's achieved domestically is to make medical cover a lot more expensive and his foreign record is even worse. His core progressive beliefs are simply at odds with the reality of the world we live in.

TheScreamingEagles

MaxPB said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TOPPING said:

saddo said:

Key points for me:

Boundary changes mean Labour need bigger swing than Blair got to even get a minimum majority and that ain't going to happen

Tories are split at the moment but have 4 years to pull back together

Tories reason to be is to win elections, hence will pick a leader who will win ie if Ossie looks bad, no chance of winning

Tories want Corbyn in position until 2020 so are holding off attacking him until 2018/19

Tories will have so much dirt on Corbyn, McDonnell to use from 2018/9 onwards that they can destroy them easily

World getting a scarier place. Party strongest on security will win, and that will never be a Labour party run by a pacifist

Labour controlled by Momentum will have loony policies by the bucket load and bonkers extreme lefty candidates

That pretty much sums it up. But what on earth are we going to debate after EURef?

Electoral reform.

I hope you have a (few) thread on the merits of AV vs STV vs PR vs FPTP saved up!

2016 could be the most exciting year in the history of PB we could see

1) Brexit
2) Cameron forced out as PM/Tory leader/A Tory leadership election
3) Labour ditching Corbyn
4) The SNP trying to schedule a second indy referendum because of 1)
5) The US Presidential race
6) A brokered Republican convention

MaxPB

Just got a message from a German friend in the CDU saying that this is the end of Merkel. He doesn't understand why she didn't hand it over to the justice department and have them say that prosecution would be in violation of EU law or something a few weeks down the line.

welshowl

TheScreamingEagles said:

MaxPB said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TOPPING said:

saddo said:

Key points for me:

Boundary changes mean Labour need bigger swing than Blair got to even get a minimum majority and that ain't going to happen

Tories are split at the moment but have 4 years to pull back together

Tories reason to be is to win elections, hence will pick a leader who will win ie if Ossie looks bad, no chance of winning

Tories want Corbyn in position until 2020 so are holding off attacking him until 2018/19

Tories will have so much dirt on Corbyn, McDonnell to use from 2018/9 onwards that they can destroy them easily

World getting a scarier place. Party strongest on security will win, and that will never be a Labour party run by a pacifist

Labour controlled by Momentum will have loony policies by the bucket load and bonkers extreme lefty candidates

That pretty much sums it up. But what on earth are we going to debate after EURef?

Electoral reform.

I hope you have a (few) thread on the merits of AV vs STV vs PR vs FPTP saved up!

2016 could be the most exciting year in the history of PB we could see

1) Brexit
2) Cameron forced out as PM/Tory leader/A Tory leadership election
3) Labour ditching Corbyn
4) The SNP trying to schedule a second indy referendum because of 1)
5) The US Presidential race
6) A brokered Republican convention

What about Welsh Assembly elections. Come on that's the biggy, surely.

HYUFD

TCPoliticalBetting said:

HYUFD said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

HYUFD said:

Corbyn's ideal scenario is
1. The UK votes Remain by the narrowest of margins
2. Some Tory Leave voters shift to UKIP
3. The Tories pick Osborne after Osborne manages to exclude Boris from the final ballot
Even Corbyn could win then. Admittedly a combination of all 3 is unlikely

The MPs are just not going to pick Osborne as he will lose many of them their seats at the GE. This will be the factor upper most in their minds.

Depends on how much that is balanced by the powers of patronage and thoughts of who is going to win

I disagree. Getting yourself back in and the party back in power is the main issue. Who can achieve that is the question. No point in patronage from a chap who will end your MP career in 3 or 4 years time.

If he is going to win the leadership regardless there is no point backing a losing horse even if more electable

david_herdson

Danny565 said:

Also, it's worth bearing in mind that, by 2020, no Tory leader except Cameron will even have got MORE THAN 200 SEATS in nearly 30 years #justsaying

Or, put another way, every Conservative leader not facing Blair in the last 40 years won.

TOPPING

david_herdson said:

Bromptonaut said:

Barnesian said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

If Labour replace Corbyn before 2020 with someone you can't describe as a terrorist sympathiser (yes I'm thinking of Dan Jarvis) then the Tories are screwed

To describe Corbyn as a terrorist sympathiser is so OTT it will get no traction except with Tory extremists. It is so out of kilter with the man we are getting to know and love.

We will see Zac Goldsmith fail using exactly that tactic against Sadiq Khan.

Perhaps, however London is more Labourite than the UK as a whole, and Corbyn's connections to - for example - Sinn Fein in the 1980s are more overt than Khan's are to people nowadays. In any case, Corbyn has a refreshingly honest approach to these matters and would no doubt answer a question as to why it was a good thing that he fostered links with terrorist mouthpieces at a time when they were attacking this country.

Plus, PIRA now, rightly or wrongly*, are seen as "ordinary decent terrorists". IS/AQ are seen as a different kettle of beans entirely, vastly less sympathy.

*note: wrongly