Still having a British hating US President will mean with Brexit we will have an easy time doing a trade deal with America right?
I mean they might elect another one in November.
Or we could up with a US President hated by the British. Own goal on a spectacular scale.
Ah now I understand why Cameron has been going around calling Trump a knob to anyone that would listen a couple of months ago. Its not that he was virtue signalling at all. He was emulating Cortes, now he can say to leave "now the next American president really hates us, so much for your bilateral trade agreement with the USA"
The FT also makes it clear that this was and is a political decision. Merkel could have refused the Turkish request.
Merkel has historically done a nice line in giving vain men enough rope to hang themselves. I wouldn't take her apparent indulgence of Erdogan at face value.
You keep pushing this line, but it is complete rubbish.
'Merkel's gone mad' seems to be the most popular piece of groupthink of the year.
The opinion polling in Germany suggests that it's shared to some degree by the electorate there as well.
Given how slavishly pro-Merkel they have been for the past few years that article must have been painful to write. The whole first paragraph is dedicated to shitting on the comedian and essentially saying "he's wrong" without saying.
Note that Spiegel published that BEFORE she allowed the prosecution.
Judging by social media a lot of the German liberal left has turned on Merkel (in that moderate German way). They liked her when she was Mama Merkel embracing the Fugees, but they don't like the image of her kowtowing to autocrats, and muzzling free speech.
Also a sharply critical article in the New York Times. That will hurt.
@Sean_F At the same time in April 2011, the Conservatives were polling 36% or so. Labour may be in a worse position than 2011 but so are the Conservatives. Everyone is noticing that Labour has deteriorated but for some reason no one is noticing that the Conservatives have deteriorated badly too, even though the evidence is right in front of us.
As I've kept saying, if Labour beat the Tories in the national voteshare in the local elections (which, before I'm accused of being cocky, I still don't think is at all certain), then there will have been a swing to Labour as compared to this point in the last electoral cycle; the Tories beat Labour by 1% in 2011.
And if there has been a swing to Labour in 2016 compared to 2011, then it follows to expect a swing to Labour in 2020 compared to 2015.
I think it's a fool's errand extrapolating local election results into a general election scenario. I'm sure there are plenty of examples where opposition parties have done well in local elections and then been mauled at the ensuing general election. Didn't it happen to Hague, and also Miliband? People are not choosing a national government or a PM in council elections, they are voting for a party and local issues (I doubt even the leader of the party has much influence in their vote either).
People always project what they wish to be, or what they wish to happen, onto opinion polls, which are snapshots of the public mood, and should never be treated as predictors. That is the road to despair (ask Mr Miliband for confirmation).
An Opposition really needs to consistently manage leads of 10% or so in NEV to be a contender in the general election.
In MID-TERM they need to be managing leads of 10% or more, but not just a year into a government's term, when there is always atleast a bit of a honeymoon effect still lingering. Since 1983, the first set of local elections in a cycle has literally ALWAYS been better for the incumbent government than any of the later years prior to a General Election (the 1979-83 cycle was an exception, because the Falklands meant the Tories did much better in the 1982 locals than they'd done in 1980).
As you pointed out in a later post, even in the 1992-97 electoral cycle, Labour won the first set of local elections by "only" 8%. And that was even after Black Wednesday.
@Danny565 We'll have to see how Labour do in the locals (They seem to have picked up slightly in the last couple of weeks as Dave has gone down the toilet).
If they want to form the next Gov't, a decent lead would be neccesary I'd say.
The Merkel story is fascinating in a morbid sort of way.
It does raise some questions: - When are the next elections where the electorate could loosen her grip on power? - What other mechanisms could lead to Merkel being removed? - Are there any signs of that happening? - How likely is that to happen?
It seems to me, no matter how disliked these decisions are, she is pretty firmly set in place for the moment. But that could well be more to do with my ignorance of German politics than with reality.
@Danny565 We'll have to see how Labour do in the locals (They seem to have picked up slightly in the last couple of weeks as Dave has gone down the toilet).
If they want to form the next Gov't, a decent lead would be neccesary I'd say.
Oh well, Labour FORMING a government is a different matter They have practically zero chance of getting a majority in 2020, and fairly slim chance of being the biggest party.
But I'm mainly responding to the people who've been complacently assuming that the Tories have another majority in the bag, or even more laughably a guaranteed landslide in 2020. If there's any swing to Labour in 2016 as compared to 2011, then that strongly suggests a hung parliament in 2020 since the Tory majority can't withstand a swing to Labour of even 1%.
@Danny565 We'll have to see how Labour do in the locals (They seem to have picked up slightly in the last couple of weeks as Dave has gone down the toilet).
If they want to form the next Gov't, a decent lead would be neccesary I'd say.
Oh well, Labour FORMING a government is a different matter They have practically zero chance of getting a majority in 2020, and fairly slim chance of being the biggest party.
But I'm mainly responding to the people who've been complacently assuming that the Tories have another majority in the bag, or even more laughably a guaranteed landslide in 2020. If there's any swing to Labour in 2016 as compared to 2011, then that strongly suggests a hung parliament in 2020 since the Tory majority can't withstand a swing to Labour of even 1%.
The FT also makes it clear that this was and is a political decision. Merkel could have refused the Turkish request.
Merkel has historically done a nice line in giving vain men enough rope to hang themselves. I wouldn't take her apparent indulgence of Erdogan at face value.
You keep pushing this line, but it is complete rubbish.
'Merkel's gone mad' seems to be the most popular piece of groupthink of the year.
The opinion polling in Germany suggests that it's shared to some degree by the electorate there as well.
Given how slavishly pro-Merkel they have been for the past few years that article must have been painful to write. The whole first paragraph is dedicated to shitting on the comedian and essentially saying "he's wrong" without saying.
Note that Spiegel published that BEFORE she allowed the prosecution.
Judging by social media a lot of the German liberal left has turned on Merkel (in that moderate German way). They liked her when she was Mama Merkel embracing the Fugees, but they don't like the image of her kowtowing to autocrats, and muzzling free speech.
Also a sharply critical article in the New York Times. That will hurt.
@Danny565 We'll have to see how Labour do in the locals (They seem to have picked up slightly in the last couple of weeks as Dave has gone down the toilet).
If they want to form the next Gov't, a decent lead would be neccesary I'd say.
Oh well, Labour FORMING a government is a different matter They have practically zero chance of getting a majority in 2020, and fairly slim chance of being the biggest party.
But I'm mainly responding to the people who've been complacently assuming that the Tories have another majority in the bag, or even more laughably a guaranteed landslide in 2020. If there's any swing to Labour in 2016 as compared to 2011, then that strongly suggests a hung parliament in 2020 since the Tory majority can't withstand a swing to Labour of even 1%.
Er, boundary changes?
Those could go either way, I wouldn't bet on a 650 or a 600 seat parliament at the next GE right now.
Cameron has expended his political capital on Europe, to no effect.
@britainelects 23m23 minutes ago Undecided voters // On who you DON'T trust re: the EU: N Farage: 67% D Cameron: 60% J Corbyn: 54% B Johnson: 53% N Sturgeon: 53%
He is now less trusted on the referendum than Johnson or Corbyn. And he was meant to be a key figure for REMAIN. And the polling is neck and neck.
Hmm.
What's with the Sturgeon rating? I can't recall hearing her say anything about it.
The SNP are as unpopular in the rest of the UK, as the Tories are in Scotland. No surprise she scores badly in a UK wide poll.
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.
You forget what the chilling effect of being under investigation for a criminal offence has, not just on this person but on others. Not to mention the fear that someone may choose to take the law into their own hands and apply some form of summary justice. Not unjustified, frankly, in the light of recent events.
No - the Germans have been utterly craven and it will come back to bite them.
Cameron has expended his political capital on Europe, to no effect.
@britainelects 23m23 minutes ago Undecided voters // On who you DON'T trust re: the EU: N Farage: 67% D Cameron: 60% J Corbyn: 54% B Johnson: 53% N Sturgeon: 53%
He is now less trusted on the referendum than Johnson or Corbyn. And he was meant to be a key figure for REMAIN. And the polling is neck and neck.
Hmm.
What's with the Sturgeon rating? I can't recall hearing her say anything about it.
If St. Nicola says Elvis is to be found on the moon, that will believed too by 82% of the population !
Merkel appears to have sacrificed free speech in order to save the EU-Turkey migrant deal, which was in turn a result of the migrant problem she helped create. - die dumme Kuh.
And yet it is in our interests, according to some, to remain in a union with such a country. Well, it's a point of view.
"Despite the developments in the US, some parts of Canada continued to drive on the left until shortly after the Second World War. The territory controlled by the French (from Quebec to Louisiana) drove on the right, but the territory occupied by the English (British Columbia, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland) kept left. British Columbia and the Atlantic provinces switched to the right in the 1920s in order to conform with the rest of Canada and the USA. Newfoundland drove on the left until 1947, and joined Canada in 1949."
The German left comes from a liberal and socialist tradition of resistance to tyranny established since 1848. The German right... does not. Ergo Erdogan is more worrying for one side than the other Sometimes left-wingers are more in the right than right-wingers. No complex virtue-signally rationalisations needed
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.
If a poll were to ask "Do you think Jeremy Corbyn is a terrorist sympathiser or is friendly with terrorists?", what percentage do you think would answer yes? My guess is a very small minority - mainly Tory activists.
Trotting out old pictures of Corbyn alongside Gerry Adams, or video of him arguing for a trial rather than summary execution for Bin Laden will not convince people that he is a terrorist sympathiser. It might convince voters that the people who keep repeating "terrorist sympathiser" are either right-wingers with a bee in their bonnet or paid up members of the Tory election machine.
There's more than old pictures to trot out. There's 30 years worth of material: stuff that Corbyn has said and done. What's been trotted out now is the start. Not the totality of it.
The question for the British people will be: Do you want this man who over 30 years or more has supported/associated with people who have attacked or want to attack or have approved of attacks on Britain and British people to be in charge of the security of you, your family and this country?
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 .
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
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.
You forget what the chilling effect of being under investigation for a criminal offence has, not just on this person but on others. Not to mention the fear that someone may choose to take the law into their own hands and apply some form of summary justice. Not unjustified, frankly, in the light of recent events.
No - the Germans have been utterly craven and it will come back to bite them.
Böhmermann read the poem on his show, Neo Magazin Royale, on 31 March. He sat in front of a Turkish flag, beside a small portrait of Erdogan, and announced that what he was about to read was ‘slander’. And he was right. In the poem, he referred to Erdogan as, among other things, a man whose ‘body matter smelled so bad that it was worse than a pig’s fart’. Other lines included, ‘What he loves is f##king goats / while stomping on minority votes’; ‘At night, instead of sleep, he has oral sex with sheep’; and ‘Erdogan is not just thick, he’s a man with a very small dick’. Turkish subtitles were included.
So I think it fairly certain that the provocation was entirely intentional in breaking the law. A stupid law, but there it is, even stupid laws are laws.
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
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.
You forget what the chilling effect of being under investigation for a criminal offence has, not just on this person but on others. Not to mention the fear that someone may choose to take the law into their own hands and apply some form of summary justice. Not unjustified, frankly, in the light of recent events.
No - the Germans have been utterly craven and it will come back to bite them.
See here:
"Böhmermann himself has not commented on the affair since the programme was aired last Thursday. Cologne authorities have confirmed that the comedian and his family are under police protection."
@Danny565 We'll have to see how Labour do in the locals (They seem to have picked up slightly in the last couple of weeks as Dave has gone down the toilet).
If they want to form the next Gov't, a decent lead would be neccesary I'd say.
Oh well, Labour FORMING a government is a different matter They have practically zero chance of getting a majority in 2020, and fairly slim chance of being the biggest party.
But I'm mainly responding to the people who've been complacently assuming that the Tories have another majority in the bag, or even more laughably a guaranteed landslide in 2020. If there's any swing to Labour in 2016 as compared to 2011, then that strongly suggests a hung parliament in 2020 since the Tory majority can't withstand a swing to Labour of even 1%.
Er, boundary changes?
Boundary changes or no boundary changes on this week's yougov it will be a Labour minority government backed up by the SNP, boundary changes are of little use to the Tories if they continue to lose voters to UKIP
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.
If a poll were to ask "Do you think Jeremy Corbyn is a terrorist sympathiser or is friendly with terrorists?", what percentage do you think would answer yes? My guess is a very small minority - mainly Tory activists.
Trotting out old pictures of Corbyn alongside Gerry Adams, or video of him arguing for a trial rather than summary execution for Bin Laden will not convince people that he is a terrorist sympathiser. It might convince voters that the people who keep repeating "terrorist sympathiser" are either right-wingers with a bee in their bonnet or paid up members of the Tory election machine.
There's more than old pictures to trot out. There's 30 years worth of material: stuff that Corbyn has said and done. What's been trotted out now is the start. Not the totality of it.
The question for the British people will be: Do you want this man who over 30 years or more has supported/associated with people who have attacked or want to attack or have approved of attacks on Britain and British people to be in charge of the security of you, your family and this country?
Do you think Gerry Adams would swing many votes from Labour to Conservative? Honest question. Maybe it's a generational difference.
So the Tories are on the slide..Cameron is hated..Corbyn will be the next PM..and the Polls are all correct..unlike at the GE..when will PBers ever learn...
Still having a British hating US President will mean with Brexit we will have an easy time doing a trade deal with America right?
I mean they might elect another one in November.
Suits me. I wouldn't touch a new trade deal with the US with a barge pole, and I can't think why a plurality of PBers still seem naive enough to think it's a good idea.
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.
If a poll were to ask "Do you think Jeremy Corbyn is a terrorist sympathiser or is friendly with terrorists?", what percentage do you think would answer yes? My guess is a very small minority - mainly Tory activists.
Trotting out old pictures of Corbyn alongside Gerry Adams, or video of him arguing for a trial rather than summary execution for Bin Laden will not convince people that he is a terrorist sympathiser. It might convince voters that the people who keep repeating "terrorist sympathiser" are either right-wingers with a bee in their bonnet or paid up members of the Tory election machine.
There's more than old pictures to trot out. There's 30 years worth of material: stuff that Corbyn has said and done. What's been trotted out now is the start. Not the totality of it.
The question for the British people will be: Do you want this man who over 30 years or more has supported/associated with people who have attacked or want to attack or have approved of attacks on Britain and British people to be in charge of the security of you, your family and this country?
I seem to remember Nelson Mandela was a terrorist too ! Martin McGuiness was invited by the Queen for lunch and Charlie shook hands with Gerry Adams.
Jeremy Corbyn only did it a few years earlier. Perhaps he was more correct.
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
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.
You forget what the chilling effect of being under investigation for a criminal offence has, not just on this person but on others. Not to mention the fear that someone may choose to take the law into their own hands and apply some form of summary justice. Not unjustified, frankly, in the light of recent events.
No - the Germans have been utterly craven and it will come back to bite them.
See here:
"Böhmermann himself has not commented on the affair since the programme was aired last Thursday. Cologne authorities have confirmed that the comedian and his family are under police protection."
So the Tories are on the slide..Cameron is hated..Corbyn will be the next PM..and the Polls are all correct..unlike at the GE..when will PBers ever learn...
Cameron will not be leading the Tories at the next election unlike the last election and now he and Osborne have backed Remain there is a clear shift to UKIP which will only cement if there is a narrow Remain vote, which looks most likely, at the next election there will be no need to vote Tory to get a referendum, you voted Tory and they then did everything in their power to get remain, so Eurosceptics are much more likely to stick with UKIP as a result
Corbyn is not heading for a majority but a hung parliament of some form is much more likely and the more Tories move to UKIP the greater the chance of a Corbyn premiership
Merkel appears to have sacrificed free speech in order to save the EU-Turkey migrant deal, which was in turn a result of the migrant problem she helped create. - die dumme Kuh.
And yet it is in our interests, according to some, to remain in a union with such a country. Well, it's a point of view.
And this is what the referendum should be all about. Not arguing over +/-1% of GDP.
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.
If a poll were to ask "Do you think Jeremy Corbyn is a terrorist sympathiser or is friendly with terrorists?", what percentage do you think would answer yes? My guess is a very small minority - mainly Tory activists.
Trotting out old pictures of Corbyn alongside Gerry Adams, or video of him arguing for a trial rather than summary execution for Bin Laden will not convince people that he is a terrorist sympathiser. It might convince voters that the people who keep repeating "terrorist sympathiser" are either right-wingers with a bee in their bonnet or paid up members of the Tory election machine.
There's more than old pictures to trot out. There's 30 years worth of material: stuff that Corbyn has said and done. What's been trotted out now is the start. Not the totality of it.
The question for the British people will be: Do you want this man who over 30 years or more has supported/associated with people who have attacked or want to attack or have approved of attacks on Britain and British people to be in charge of the security of you, your family and this country?
I seem to remember Nelson Mandela was a terrorist too ! Martin McGuiness was invited by the Queen for lunch and Charlie shook hands with Gerry Adams.
Jeremy Corbyn only did it a few years earlier. Perhaps he was more correct.
He did it because he agreed with them - and at a time when they were killing British citizens.
The Queen did it because her government advised her to and when McGuinness and Adams had agreed to stop killing British citizens.
So the Tories are on the slide..Cameron is hated..Corbyn will be the next PM..and the Polls are all correct..unlike at the GE..when will PBers ever learn...
Cameron will not be leading the Tories at the next election unlike the last election and now he and Osborne have backed Remain there is a clear shift to UKIP which will only cement if there is a narrow Remain vote, which looks most likely, at the next election there will be no need to vote Tory to get a referendum, you voted Tory and they then did everything in their power to get remain, so Eurosceptics are much more likely to stick with UKIP as a result
Hmm. I suspect any drift on the right to UKIP will be tempered by 10000s of middle englanders marching resolutely to the polling station to stop Corbyn and McDonnell getting their hands on the Treasury and tax policy, and the nuclear codes.
Once we leave the EU we can crack on with some real reform, reduce the size of both houses by half and abolish county councils. The savings will be immense and nobody will notice other than the jobsworths counting beans. They can go and get a proper job, the Poles manage to.
Good luck with that. Not sure why you think the EU is holding back parliamentary reform.
I never said it is, I've no idea why you made that up.
Then why say we can make the reforms mention once we leave the EU if leaving the EU has no bearing whatsoever on whether we undertake the reforms?
There will not be the same exodus of Tory eurosceptics to UKIP as there was of Labour Yes voters to the SNP but already 10% of 2015 Tory voters are backing UKIP in this week's yougov and under FPTP Corbyn could get into Downing Street on just 34% if the Tory vote splits
Once we leave the EU we can crack on with some real reform, reduce the size of both houses by half and abolish county councils. The savings will be immense and nobody will notice other than the jobsworths counting beans. They can go and get a proper job, the Poles manage to.
Good luck with that. Not sure why you think the EU is holding back parliamentary reform.
I never said it is, I've no idea why you made that up.
Then why say we can make the reforms mention once we leave the EU if leaving the EU has no bearing whatsoever on whether we undertake the reforms?
Also, to blackburn63, what is the rationale behind abolishing councils?
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.
If a poll were to ask "Do you think Jeremy Corbyn is a terrorist sympathiser or is friendly with terrorists?", what percentage do you think would answer yes? My guess is a very small minority - mainly Tory activists.
Trotting out old pictures of Corbyn alongside Gerry Adams, or video of him arguing for a trial rather than summary execution for Bin Laden will not convince people that he is a terrorist sympathiser. It might convince voters that the people who keep repeating "terrorist sympathiser" are either right-wingers with a bee in their bonnet or paid up members of the Tory election machine.
There's more than old pictures to trot out. There's 30 years worth of material: stuff that Corbyn has said and done. What's been trotted out now is the start. Not the totality of it.
The question for the British people will be: Do you want this man who over 30 years or more has supported/associated with people who have attacked or want to attack or have approved of attacks on Britain and British people to be in charge of the security of you, your family and this country?
I seem to remember Nelson Mandela was a terrorist too ! Martin McGuiness was invited by the Queen for lunch and Charlie shook hands with Gerry Adams.
Jeremy Corbyn only did it a few years earlier. Perhaps he was more correct.
He did it because he agreed with them - and at a time when they were killing British citizens.
The Queen did it because her government advised her to and when McGuinness and Adams had agreed to stop killing British citizens.
There is a difference. Quite a significant one.
There is no difference. It is only in your head !
I wonder what your position is on Menachem Begin and the Irgun blowing up King David Hotel in Jerusalem killing 108 British soldiers. On the other hand, don't bother. I know your answer.
So the Tories are on the slide..Cameron is hated..Corbyn will be the next PM..and the Polls are all correct..unlike at the GE..when will PBers ever learn...
Cameron will not be leading the Tories at the next election unlike the last election and now he and Osborne have backed Remain there is a clear shift to UKIP which will only cement if there is a narrow Remain vote, which looks most likely, at the next election there will be no need to vote Tory to get a referendum, you voted Tory and they then did everything in their power to get remain, so Eurosceptics are much more likely to stick with UKIP as a result
Not so much a shift to UKIP as a kippers or kipper waverers that lent the Tories their votes because they trusted Cameron over the referendum, and now found that was a ... mistake.
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.
If a poll were to ask "Do you think Jeremy Corbyn is a terrorist sympathiser or is friendly with terrorists?", what percentage do you think would answer yes? My guess is a very small minority - mainly Tory activists.
Trotting out old pictures of Corbyn alongside Gerry Adams, or video of him arguing for a trial rather than summary execution for Bin Laden will not convince people that he is a terrorist sympathiser. It might convince voters that the people who keep repeating "terrorist sympathiser" are either right-wingers with a bee in their bonnet or paid up members of the Tory election machine.
There's more than old pictures to trot out. There's 30 years worth of material: stuff that Corbyn has said and done. What's been trotted out now is the start. Not the totality of it.
The question for the British people will be: Do you want this man who over 30 years or more has supported/associated with people who have attacked or want to attack or have approved of attacks on Britain and British people to be in charge of the security of you, your family and this country?
Do you think Gerry Adams would swing many votes from Labour to Conservative? Honest question. Maybe it's a generational difference.
It's not just Gerry Adams though. It's all the Islamist friends or associates Corbyn has. And while Islamist terrorism is a risk then I think it could hurt Labour. The risk of having someone like Corbyn and McDonnell in charge of Labour is that it creates - or risks creating - a perception that Labour is soft on terrorism. If I were a Labour supporter of the SO type that would worry me. And it seems to worry a number of Labour MPs too.
I think Labour has made a very bad mistake in going with the angle it has on the EU. The reason it has backed remain (according to Mr Corbyn yesterday) is that the Tories would destroy the rights of working people if we left the EU.
However, if that were the case, then it is logical for Labour to want to leave, as they would be in power for a generation as the last line of Workforce defence - their whole reason for being would become instantly relevant. The old war would be back on and they would win it.
So either they don't believe that they say about the tories, or they think they are totally unelectable, no matter what the Tories do.
It sounds like a total admission of defeat for socialism.
There's more than old pictures to trot out. There's 30 years worth of material: stuff that Corbyn has said and done. What's been trotted out now is the start. Not the totality of it.
The question for the British people will be: Do you want this man who over 30 years or more has supported/associated with people who have attacked or want to attack or have approved of attacks on Britain and British people to be in charge of the security of you, your family and this country?
I seem to remember Nelson Mandela was a terrorist too ! Martin McGuiness was invited by the Queen for lunch and Charlie shook hands with Gerry Adams.
Jeremy Corbyn only did it a few years earlier. Perhaps he was more correct.
He did it because he agreed with them - and at a time when they were killing British citizens.
The Queen did it because her government advised her to and when McGuinness and Adams had agreed to stop killing British citizens.
There is a difference. Quite a significant one.
There is no difference. It is only in your head !
I wonder what your position is on Menachem Begin and the Irgun blowing up King David Hotel in Jerusalem killing 108 British soldiers. On the other hand, don't bother. I know your answer.
No - don't assume that you know what I think.
I can't begin to understand someone who does not understand the difference between shaking someone's hand when they are a terrorist and when you support their aims and doing so when they have stopped being a terrorist.
I don't know what position I'm supposed to have on the incident you mention. It was a brutal incident carried out by the Irgun, which was a terrorist organisation. Many other brutalities were carried out by the Irgun, including the kidnapping and hanging of two British soldiers.
HYFUD..You are making the mistake of believing the Polls..they are bullshit..
The polls had comfortable Tory leads a month or two ago and have been adjusted post election. There has been no net shift from Tory to Labour, the latest yougov has the Tories actually picking up 3% of Labour voters and Labour only picking up 2% of Tories, there has been some further shift of the few remaining LDs to Labour, 17% but the big shift has been from Tory to UKIP, 10% of 2015 Tories making that shift and the main reason for that is Cameron and Osborne's backing for the Remain campaign
I think Labour has made a very bad mistake in going with the angle it has on the EU. The reason it has backed remain (according to Mr Corbyn yesterday) is that the Tories would destroy the rights of working people if we left the EU.
However, if that were the case, then it is logical for Labour to want to leave, as they would be in power for a generation as the last line of Workforce defence - their whole reason for being would become instantly relevant. The old war would be back on and they would win it.
So either they don't believe that they say about the tories, or they think they are totally unelectable, no matter what the Tories do.
It sounds like a total admission of defeat for socialism.
It's a difficult line to take. Both in itself (we want British workers to suffer for a while...) and in the communication of the nuance of the position (we want British workers to suffer for a while and then we'll save them...).
Your point makes perfect sense but I don't think the current Labour Party is up to the job of either element.
So the Tories are on the slide..Cameron is hated..Corbyn will be the next PM..and the Polls are all correct..unlike at the GE..when will PBers ever learn...
Cameron will not be leading the Tories at the next election unlike the last election and now he and Osborne have backed Remain there is a clear shift to UKIP which will only cement if there is a narrow Remain vote, which looks most likely, at the next election there will be no need to vote Tory to get a referendum, you voted Tory and they then did everything in their power to get remain, so Eurosceptics are much more likely to stick with UKIP as a result
Hmm. I suspect any drift on the right to UKIP will be tempered by 10000s of middle englanders marching resolutely to the polling station to stop Corbyn and McDonnell getting their hands on the Treasury and tax policy, and the nuclear codes.
As I have pointed out the Tories have barely lost any voters to Labour even in the latest polling and have actually made a slight net gain, but that is outweighted by the losses to UKIP
Clearly this was a deliberate act to break a stupid law, and thereby force a critical re-examination of the law.
Similar in some ways to a deliberate act conceivable in the UK to deliberately insult a race/religion in order to force scruitiny of our laws that restrict free speech by restricting comments likely to offend.
In many ways it shows a more robust attitude to the right of free speech than we have in the UK. He is pretty certain to be a cause celebre, and I only wish that our lazy self satisfied satirists had as much gumption.
In light of Charlie Hebdo, Danish Cartoonists and Dutch filmakers as well as Glaswegian shopkeepers being killed or threatened a police guard seems eminently justified.
So the Tories are on the slide..Cameron is hated..Corbyn will be the next PM..and the Polls are all correct..unlike at the GE..when will PBers ever learn...
Cameron will not be leading the Tories at the next election unlike the last election and now he and Osborne have backed Remain there is a clear shift to UKIP which will only cement if there is a narrow Remain vote, which looks most likely, at the next election there will be no need to vote Tory to get a referendum, you voted Tory and they then did everything in their power to get remain, so Eurosceptics are much more likely to stick with UKIP as a result
Not so much a shift to UKIP as a kippers or kipper waverers that lent the Tories their votes because they trusted Cameron over the referendum, and now found that was a ... mistake.
That is it, for those Kippers Cameron and particularly Osborne are Judas
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.
If a poll were to ask "Do you think Jeremy Corbyn is a terrorist sympathiser or is friendly with terrorists?", what percentage do you think would answer yes? My guess is a very small minority - mainly Tory activists.
Trotting out old pictures of Corbyn alongside Gerry Adams, or video of him arguing for a trial rather than summary execution for Bin Laden will not convince people that he is a terrorist sympathiser. It might convince voters that the people who keep repeating "terrorist sympathiser" are either right-wingers with a bee in their bonnet or paid up members of the Tory election machine.
There's more than old pictures to trot out. There's 30 years worth of material: stuff that Corbyn has said and done. What's been trotted out now is the start. Not the totality of it.
The question for the British people will be: Do you want this man who over 30 years or more has supported/associated with people who have attacked or want to attack or have approved of attacks on Britain and British people to be in charge of the security of you, your family and this country?
I seem to remember Nelson Mandela was a terrorist too ! Martin McGuiness was invited by the Queen for lunch and Charlie shook hands with Gerry Adams.
Jeremy Corbyn only did it a few years earlier. Perhaps he was more correct.
He did it because he agreed with them - and at a time when they were killing British citizens.
The Queen did it because her government advised her to and when McGuinness and Adams had agreed to stop killing British citizens.
There is a difference. Quite a significant one.
There is no difference. It is only in your head !
I wonder what your position is on Menachem Begin and the Irgun blowing up King David Hotel in Jerusalem killing 108 British soldiers. On the other hand, don't bother. I know your answer.
It was an appalling act of terrorism. I wonder, what were you expecting Cyclefree to say?
HYFUD..Stop quoting the polls..they have absolutely no idea....just like the GE...
Actually, overall slightly more of the final polls had the Tories ahead than Labour before the GE even if they were totally out on the margin. The point is the shift from Tory to UKIP which is obvious
got a Holyrood election flyer through the door. Including Party logo and printers note (i.e. Promoted by Joe Bloggs on behalf of Party X) here are total mentions of each party
That needs a companion "£100 better off" question to compare.
"Would you vote REMAIN for £1,000?" "Yes" "How about £5.00?" "What do you think I am?" "I know what you are - all we're doing now is haggling over the price."
There's more than old pictures to trot out. There's 30 years worth of material: stuff that Corbyn has said and done. What's been trotted out now is the start. Not the totality of it.
The question for the British people will be: Do you want this man who over 30 years or more has supported/associated with people who have attacked or want to attack or have approved of attacks on Britain and British people to be in charge of the security of you, your family and this country?
I seem to remember Nelson Mandela was a terrorist too ! Martin McGuiness was invited by the Queen for lunch and Charlie shook hands with Gerry Adams.
Jeremy Corbyn only did it a few years earlier. Perhaps he was more correct.
He did it because he agreed with them - and at a time when they were killing British citizens.
The Queen did it because her government advised her to and when McGuinness and Adams had agreed to stop killing British citizens.
There is a difference. Quite a significant one.
There is no difference. It is only in your head !
I wonder what your position is on Menachem Begin and the Irgun blowing up King David Hotel in Jerusalem killing 108 British soldiers. On the other hand, don't bother. I know your answer.
No - don't assume that you know what I think.
I can't begin to understand someone who does not understand the difference between shaking someone's hand when they are a terrorist and when you support their aims and doing so when they have stopped being a terrorist.
I don't know what position I'm supposed to have on the incident you mention. It was a brutal incident carried out by the Irgun, which was a terrorist organisation. Many other brutalities were carried out by the Irgun, including the kidnapping and hanging of two British soldiers.
Yep when they're fighting us, we fight them. Whoever they are and for whatever cause.
When they've given up fighting us we can take a view as to whether to extend the hand if not of friendship then reconciliation. Or not.
What we can't do and what should disqualify us from office is to extend the hand of friendship while they are still fighting us. (And negotiating with them while they are fighting us is not extending the hand of friendship.)
HYFUD..Stop quoting the polls..they have absolutely no idea....just like the GE...
Actually, overall slightly more of the final polls had the Tories ahead than Labour before the GE even if they were totally out on the margin. The point is the shift from Tory to UKIP which is obvious
Understandable given the focus on the EU in recent months (and for a few more months). Whether it continues afterwards is another matter.
HYFUD..Stop quoting the polls..they have absolutely no idea....just like the GE...
Actually, overall slightly more of the final polls had the Tories ahead than Labour before the GE even if they were totally out on the margin. The point is the shift from Tory to UKIP which is obvious
Understandable given the focus on the EU in recent months (and for a few more months). Whether it continues afterwards is another matter.
It certainly will if it is a narrow Remain and Leave voters feel betrayed
got a Holyrood election flyer through the door. Including Party logo and printers note (i.e. Promoted by Joe Bloggs on behalf of Party X) here are total mentions of each party
Clearly this was a deliberate act to break a stupid law, and thereby force a critical re-examination of the law.
Similar in some ways to a deliberate act conceivable in the UK to deliberately insult a race/religion in order to force scruitiny of our laws that restrict free speech by restricting comments likely to offend.
In many ways it shows a more robust attitude to the right of free speech than we have in the UK. He is pretty certain to be a cause celebre, and I only wish that our lazy self satisfied satirists had as much gumption.
In light of Charlie Hebdo, Danish Cartoonists and Dutch filmakers as well as Glaswegian shopkeepers being killed or threatened a police guard seems eminently justified.
Yes.
But you're obscuring the issue. Merkel still made a terrible error. As Mark Steyn says in that link downthread, even if Erdogan loses the case he's won the war, as he's proved that satirising him is risky and costly, and maybe even potentially lethal. Will Germans satirise him any more?
Doubt it. And so yet another of our precious freedoms is undermined. Slowly but surely.
It's hideous. And Merkel must take some of the blame. Stupid COW.
She is free to sue me, if she is reading pb right now.
Presumably the poor German chap will be able to call that awful Turkish chap as a witness and put him in the stand. "Mr Erdogan, do you, or have yiu ever fkkd a goat ?" .
It is a good job no extradition treaty exists that allows us to be sent to foreign jurisdictions with such appalling laws without recourse to the protection of the English courts.
Presumably the poor German chap will be able to call that awful Turkish chap as a witness and put him in the stand. "Mr Erdogan, do you, or have yiu ever fkkd a goat ?" .
It is a good job no extradition treaty exists that allows us to be sent to foreign jurisdictions with such appalling laws without recourse to the protection of the English courts.
May be wrong, but I doubt heads of state/government can be compelled to give evidence.
"Angela Merkel, has been criticised by members of her cabinet after acceding to a request from Ankara to prosecute a comedian who read out an offensive poem about the Turkish president, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan."
Clearly this was a deliberate act to break a stupid law, and thereby force a critical re-examination of the law.
Similar in some ways to a deliberate act conceivable in the UK to deliberately insult a race/religion in order to force scruitiny of our laws that restrict free speech by restricting comments likely to offend.
In many ways it shows a more robust attitude to the right of free speech than we have in the UK. He is pretty certain to be a cause celebre, and I only wish that our lazy self satisfied satirists had as much gumption.
In light of Charlie Hebdo, Danish Cartoonists and Dutch filmakers as well as Glaswegian shopkeepers being killed or threatened a police guard seems eminently justified.
Yes.
But you're obscuring the issue. Merkel still made a terrible error. As Mark Steyn says in that link downthread, even if Erdogan loses the case he's won the war, as he's proved that satirising him is risky and costly, and maybe even potentially lethal. Will Germans satirise him any more?
Doubt it. And so yet another of our precious freedoms is undermined. Slowly but surely.
It's hideous. And Merkel must take some of the blame. Stupid COW.
She is free to sue me, if she is reading pb right now.
Lethal? Has the guy been threatened?
He's under police protection. That is where we have got to in 2016 (and frankly for some time now): people who say what they want need to have police protection because others are so bloody precious about themselves or some person they believe in that we cannot assume that someone somewhere may not use violence against the person speaking their mind.
There's more than old pictures to trot out. There's 30 years worth of material: stuff that Corbyn has said and done. What's been trotted out now is the start. Not the totality of it.
The question for the British people will be: Do you want this man who over 30 years or more has supported/associated with people who have attacked or want to attack or have approved of attacks on Britain and British people to be in charge of the security of you, your family and this country?
I seem to remember Nelson Mandela was a terrorist too ! Martin McGuiness was invited by the Queen for lunch and Charlie shook hands with Gerry Adams.
Jeremy Corbyn only did it a few years earlier. Perhaps he was more correct.
He did it because he agreed with them - and at a time when they were killing British citizens.
The Queen did it because her government advised her to and when McGuinness and Adams had agreed to stop killing British citizens.
There is a difference. Quite a significant one.
There is no difference. It is only in your head !
I wonder what your position is on Menachem Begin and the Irgun blowing up King David Hotel in Jerusalem killing 108 British soldiers. On the other hand, don't bother. I know your answer.
No - don't assume that you know what I think.
I can't begin to understand someone who does not understand the difference between shaking someone's hand when they are a terrorist and when you support their aims and doing so when they have stopped being a terrorist.
I don't know what position I'm supposed to have on the incident you mention. It was a brutal incident carried out by the Irgun, which was a terrorist organisation. Many other brutalities were carried out by the Irgun, including the kidnapping and hanging of two British soldiers.
Yep when they're fighting us, we fight them. Whoever they are and for whatever cause.
When they've given up fighting us we can take a view as to whether to extend the hand if not of friendship then reconciliation. Or not.
What we can't do and what should disqualify us from office is to extend the hand of friendship while they are still fighting us. (And negotiating with them while they are fighting us is not extending the hand of friendship.)
What if "they" are "us". Adams was, correct me if I am wrong, a British subject.
Interesting to note that the most and least ethnically diverse parts of Britain are the only pro-Remain areas according to this poll. London is about 40% white British and Scotland about 96%. All other areas are somewhere in between.
Clearly this was a deliberate act to break a stupid law, and thereby force a critical re-examination of the law.
Similar in some ways to a deliberate act conceivable in the UK to deliberately insult a race/religion in order to force scruitiny of our laws that restrict free speech by restricting comments likely to offend.
In many ways it shows a more robust attitude to the right of free speech than we have in the UK. He is pretty certain to be a cause celebre, and I only wish that our lazy self satisfied satirists had as much gumption.
In light of Charlie Hebdo, Danish Cartoonists and Dutch filmakers as well as Glaswegian shopkeepers being killed or threatened a police guard seems eminently justified.
Yes.
But you're obscuring the issue. Merkel still made a terrible error. As Mark Steyn says in that link downthread, even if Erdogan loses the case he's won the war, as he's proved that satirising him is risky and costly, and maybe even potentially lethal. Will Germans satirise him any more?
Doubt it. And so yet another of our precious freedoms is undermined. Slowly but surely.
It's hideous. And Merkel must take some of the blame. Stupid COW.
She is free to sue me, if she is reading pb right now.
Lethal? Has the guy been threatened?
He's under police protection. That is where we have got to in 2016 (and frankly for some time now): people who say what they want need to have police protection because others are so bloody precious about themselves or some person they believe in that we cannot assume that someone somewhere may not use violence against the person speaking their mind.
Interesting to note that the most and least ethnically diverse parts of Britain are the only pro-Remain areas according to this poll.
Indeed, somewhat contradictory though linked to Scottish cultural identity but enough to give Remain the narrowest of leads overall
My hunch is that although Remain will win in Scotland it'll be rather closer than most of the Scottish political establishment are expecting. I recall that when Dimbleby asked the QT audience in Dundee a few weeks ago whether anyone was in favour of Leave he was surprised by how many hands went up.
There's more than old pictures to trot out. There's 30 years worth of material: stuff that Corbyn has said and done. What's been trotted out now is the start. Not the totality of it.
The question for the British nd this country?
I seem to remember Nelson Mandela was a terrorist too ! Martin McGuiness was invited by the Queen for lunch and Charlie shook hands with Gerry Adams.
Jeremy Corbyn only did it a few years earlier. Perhaps he was more correct.
He did it because he agreed with them - and at a time when they were killing British citizens.
The Queen did it because her government advised her to and when McGuinness and Adams had agreed to stop killing British citizens.
There is a difference. Quite a significant one.
There is no difference. It is only in your head !
I wonder what your position is on Menachem Begin and the Irgun blowing up King David Hotel in Jerusalem killing 108 British soldiers. On the other hand, don't bother. I know your answer.
No - don't assume that you know what I think.
I can't begin to understand someone who does not understand the difference between shaking someone's hand when they are a terrorist and when you support their aims and doing so when they have stopped being a terrorist.
I don't know what position I'm supposed to have on the incident you mention. It was a brutal incident carried out by the Irgun, which was a terrorist organisation. Many other brutalities were carried out by the Irgun, including the kidnapping and hanging of two British soldiers.
Yep when they're fighting us, we fight them. Whoever they are and for whatever cause.
When they've given up fighting us we can take a view as to whether to extend the hand if not of friendship then reconciliation. Or not.
What we can't do and what should disqualify us from office is to extend the hand of friendship while they are still fighting us. (And negotiating with them while they are fighting us is not extending the hand of friendship.)
What if "they" are "us". Adams was, correct me if I am wrong, a British subject.
PIRA sought to achieve their objective of altering the behaviour of the British State via a terror campaign and hence PIRA were the target of the British State.
Interesting to note that the most and least ethnically diverse parts of Britain are the only pro-Remain areas according to this poll.
Indeed, somewhat contradictory though linked to Scottish cultural identity but enough to give Remain the narrowest of leads overall
My hunch is that although Remain will win in Scotland it'll be rather closer than most of the Scottish political establishment are expecting. I recall that when Dimbleby asked the QT audience in Dundee a few weeks ago whether anyone was in favour of Leave he was surprised by how many hands went up.
Perhaps, but it could be crucial in tipping the UK over the line for Remain
@Danny565 We'll have to see how Labour do in the locals (They seem to have picked up slightly in the last couple of weeks as Dave has gone down the toilet).
If they want to form the next Gov't, a decent lead would be neccesary I'd say.
Oh well, Labour FORMING a government is a different matter They have practically zero chance of getting a majority in 2020, and fairly slim chance of being the biggest party.
But I'm mainly responding to the people who've been complacently assuming that the Tories have another majority in the bag, or even more laughably a guaranteed landslide in 2020. If there's any swing to Labour in 2016 as compared to 2011, then that strongly suggests a hung parliament in 2020 since the Tory majority can't withstand a swing to Labour of even 1%.
Er, boundary changes?
Boundary changes or no boundary changes on this week's yougov it will be a Labour minority government backed up by the SNP, boundary changes are of little use to the Tories if they continue to lose voters to UKIP
Not an echo, more a faint trace of something said years past.
Indeed. But Dave doesnt have any more referendums to offer the Kippers in 2020, and they wouldn't trust him on it if he did. In Europe, Out of power, that might start to look like a miscalculation.
A very odd decision of Leave to say they would spend the money they save from the EU on the NHS. Such nonsense is the quickest way to lose trust. The sort of thing you'd expect from Ed Miliband though at least you might believe the aspiration if it was him. The idea that such a move by Johnson and Gove is even a possibility is plain ridiculous.
OT. Go see 'Eye in the Sky'. A film made for PBers. Political technical British and an extremely good film.
So the Tories are on the slide..Cameron is hated..Corbyn will be the next PM..and the Polls are all correct..unlike at the GE..when will PBers ever learn...
Cameron will not be leading the Tories at the next election unlike the last election and now he and Osborne have backed Remain there is a clear shift to UKIP which will only cement if there is a narrow Remain vote, which looks most likely, at the next election there will be no need to vote Tory to get a referendum, you voted Tory and they then did everything in their power to get remain, so Eurosceptics are much more likely to stick with UKIP as a result
Not so much a shift to UKIP as a kippers or kipper waverers that lent the Tories their votes because they trusted Cameron over the referendum, and now found that was a ... mistake.
Cameron gave the people a vote on the EU, as he promised. Was that a mistake?
A very odd decision of Leave to say they would spend the money they save from the EU on the NHS. Such nonsense is the quickest way to lose trust. The sort of thing you'd expect from Ed Miliband though at least you might believe the aspiration if it was him. The idea that such a move by Johnson and Gove is even a possibility is plain ridiculous.
OT. Go see 'Eye in the Sky'. A film made for PBers. Political technical British and an extremely good film.
Interesting to note that the most and least ethnically diverse parts of Britain are the only pro-Remain areas according to this poll.
Indeed, somewhat contradictory though linked to Scottish cultural identity but enough to give Remain the narrowest of leads overall
My hunch is that although Remain will win in Scotland it'll be rather closer than most of the Scottish political establishment are expecting. I recall that when Dimbleby asked the QT audience in Dundee a few weeks ago whether anyone was in favour of Leave he was surprised by how many hands went up.
Qt audiences aren't selected to be a random sample of the location, they are selected to being politically diverse.
One of the questions they ask on the application form is if you are a Leave, remain or don't know. So dimbelby would have known exactly what proportion of the audience was leavers before he asked.
Re: being 'better off' all Leave have to do is stick a card through everyone's doors quoting the Chairman of BSE saying that Leave would mean higher wages.
It's been raining hard, and non stop, for the last seven hours, here in old Camden Town.
Seven hours straight, like a monsoon.
I didn't realise Glasgow was monsoon country.
You're getting the same crap? I can't remember ceaseless hard rain like this.
I can't speak for Glasgow as I live now in cold dry windy Edinburgh but every day is continuous downpour day in Glasgow.
It was a difficult recalibration for me when I moved to Edinburgh. People complaining about torrential rain for levels of rainfall that barely registered as "wet, maybe I can go without a coat" when I lived on the west coast.
That needs a companion "£100 better off" question to compare.
"Would you vote REMAIN for £1,000?" "Yes" "How about £5.00?" "What do you think I am?" "I know what you are - all we're doing now is haggling over the price."
It's deeply sad that all many people care about is an extra fiver in their pocket, but they all have a vote.
So the Tories are on the slide..Cameron is hated..Corbyn will be the next PM..and the Polls are all correct..unlike at the GE..when will PBers ever learn...
Cameron will not be leading the Tories at the next election unlike the last election and now he and Osborne have backed Remain there is a clear shift to UKIP which will only cement if there is a narrow Remain vote, which looks most likely, at the next election there will be no need to vote Tory to get a referendum, you voted Tory and they then did everything in their power to get remain, so Eurosceptics are much more likely to stick with UKIP as a result
Not so much a shift to UKIP as a kippers or kipper waverers that lent the Tories their votes because they trusted Cameron over the referendum, and now found that was a ... mistake.
Cameron gave the people a vote on the EU, as he promised. Was that a mistake?
Don't ask me, ask those 10% that are polling for the Kipper not the Tories. It doesnt matter why they are, the mistake was not anticipating it and potentially losing the next election as a result.
Interesting to note that the most and least ethnically diverse parts of Britain are the only pro-Remain areas according to this poll.
Indeed, somewhat contradictory though linked to Scottish cultural identity but enough to give Remain the narrowest of leads overall
My hunch is that although Remain will win in Scotland it'll be rather closer than most of the Scottish political establishment are expecting. I recall that when Dimbleby asked the QT audience in Dundee a few weeks ago whether anyone was in favour of Leave he was surprised by how many hands went up.
Qt audiences aren't selected to be a random sample of the location, they are selected to being politically diverse.
One of the questions they ask on the application form is if you are a Leave, remain or don't know. So dimbelby would have known exactly what proportion of the audience was leavers before he asked.
Well, to an extent. I lied and pretended to be a leftie so that I could guarantee getting my QT spot (many many) years ago.
Comments
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-_and_left-hand_traffic
As you pointed out in a later post, even in the 1992-97 electoral cycle, Labour won the first set of local elections by "only" 8%. And that was even after Black Wednesday.
If they want to form the next Gov't, a decent lead would be neccesary I'd say.
It does raise some questions:
- When are the next elections where the electorate could loosen her grip on power?
- What other mechanisms could lead to Merkel being removed?
- Are there any signs of that happening?
- How likely is that to happen?
It seems to me, no matter how disliked these decisions are, she is pretty firmly set in place for the moment. But that could well be more to do with my ignorance of German politics than with reality.
But I'm mainly responding to the people who've been complacently assuming that the Tories have another majority in the bag, or even more laughably a guaranteed landslide in 2020. If there's any swing to Labour in 2016 as compared to 2011, then that strongly suggests a hung parliament in 2020 since the Tory majority can't withstand a swing to Labour of even 1%.
No - the Germans have been utterly craven and it will come back to bite them.
http://tinyurl.com/z5g6u99
@PpollingNumbers First GOP Race in the 17 states that have not yet voted:
Trump 51%
Cruz 21%
Kasich 14%
"Despite the developments in the US, some parts of Canada continued to drive on the left until shortly after the Second World War. The territory controlled by the French (from Quebec to Louisiana) drove on the right, but the territory occupied by the English (British Columbia, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland) kept left. British Columbia and the Atlantic provinces switched to the right in the 1920s in order to conform with the rest of Canada and the USA. Newfoundland drove on the left until 1947, and joined Canada in 1949."
http://www.worldstandards.eu/cars/driving-on-the-left/
The German right... does not.
Ergo Erdogan is more worrying for one side than the other
Sometimes left-wingers are more in the right than right-wingers. No complex virtue-signally rationalisations needed
The question for the British people will be: Do you want this man who over 30 years or more has supported/associated with people who have attacked or want to attack or have approved of attacks on Britain and British people to be in charge of the security of you, your family and this country?
From: http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/germanys-unfunny-attack-on-the-freedom-to-mock/18241#.VxEUOfdwbqB
So I think it fairly certain that the provocation was entirely intentional in breaking the law. A stupid law, but there it is, even stupid laws are laws.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/04/any_claim_that_donald_trump_has_lost_momentum_is_ending.html
Honest question. Maybe it's a generational difference.
Jeremy Corbyn only did it a few years earlier. Perhaps he was more correct.
https://www.rt.com/uk/335995-german-comedians-britain-brexit/
It's as though Remain cannot digest the fact that a lot of people are already worse off.
The Queen did it because her government advised her to and when McGuinness and Adams had agreed to stop killing British citizens.
There is a difference. Quite a significant one.
I wonder what your position is on Menachem Begin and the Irgun blowing up King David Hotel in Jerusalem killing 108 British soldiers. On the other hand, don't bother. I know your answer.
However, if that were the case, then it is logical for Labour to want to leave, as they would be in power for a generation as the last line of Workforce defence - their whole reason for being would become instantly relevant. The old war would be back on and they would win it.
So either they don't believe that they say about the tories, or they think they are totally unelectable, no matter what the Tories do.
It sounds like a total admission of defeat for socialism.
Anyway 23 days left
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00t9sk3/election-2015-1-election-2015-part-1
I can't begin to understand someone who does not understand the difference between shaking someone's hand when they are a terrorist and when you support their aims and doing so when they have stopped being a terrorist.
I don't know what position I'm supposed to have on the incident you mention. It was a brutal incident carried out by the Irgun, which was a terrorist organisation. Many other brutalities were carried out by the Irgun, including the kidnapping and hanging of two British soldiers.
Your point makes perfect sense but I don't think the current Labour Party is up to the job of either element.
Clearly this was a deliberate act to break a stupid law, and thereby force a critical re-examination of the law.
Similar in some ways to a deliberate act conceivable in the UK to deliberately insult a race/religion in order to force scruitiny of our laws that restrict free speech by restricting comments likely to offend.
In many ways it shows a more robust attitude to the right of free speech than we have in the UK. He is pretty certain to be a cause celebre, and I only wish that our lazy self satisfied satirists had as much gumption.
In light of Charlie Hebdo, Danish Cartoonists and Dutch filmakers as well as Glaswegian shopkeepers being killed or threatened a police guard seems eminently justified.
SNP: 14
Labour: 10
Lib Dem: 2
Conservatives: 4
Greens: 0
Do you want to make a guess at who it is for?
"Yes"
"How about £5.00?"
"What do you think I am?"
"I know what you are - all we're doing now is haggling over the price."
When they've given up fighting us we can take a view as to whether to extend the hand if not of friendship then reconciliation. Or not.
What we can't do and what should disqualify us from office is to extend the hand of friendship while they are still fighting us. (And negotiating with them while they are fighting us is not extending the hand of friendship.)
Ruth: 11
Nicola: 1
Corbyn: 2
Kezia: 0
Willie: 0
It is a good job no extradition treaty exists that allows us to be sent to foreign jurisdictions with such appalling laws without recourse to the protection of the English courts.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/apr/15/angela-merkel-agrees-prosecution-comedian-erdogan-poem
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/0e8rm3xhr2/GMB_Results_160414_UndecidedVoters_Website.pdf
It doesn't matter who its members were or are.
Any sight of the SKY coverage that night - I've still to experience that delight... an unknown unseen pleasure awaited.
OT. Go see 'Eye in the Sky'. A film made for PBers. Political technical British and an extremely good film.
Edit: 92% humidity in the middle of the day, its 84% now at 1am
Cameron gave the people a vote on the EU, as he promised. Was that a mistake?
One of the questions they ask on the application form is if you are a Leave, remain or don't know. So dimbelby would have known exactly what proportion of the audience was leavers before he asked.
It was a difficult recalibration for me when I moved to Edinburgh. People complaining about torrential rain for levels of rainfall that barely registered as "wet, maybe I can go without a coat" when I lived on the west coast.
Leave must work with that.