I certainly think Justin124 merits a ban for his comments on the last thread.
Pure filth, the likes we haven't seem on here for a long long time.
It has been deleted
Assuming you're talking about amputations, Hitler, "lying bitches", and polonium, then the comments are all still there. If that's the moderate stuff that wasn't deleted, then, well, I'm not sure what to say...
Speaking as an egregiously offensive bastard, I'm all agog to know what Justin said that was SO bad, to shock so many?
I was out walking the Sussex bluebell woods all day - and very very beautiful they were. Perfect Spring weather. Lovely.
He said Theresa May should eat a polonium pill and he hoped she went blind and lost a few limbs as a result of her diabetes.
I certainly think Justin124 merits a ban for his comments on the last thread.
Pure filth, the likes we haven't seem on here for a long long time.
It has been deleted
Assuming you're talking about amputations, Hitler, "lying bitches", and polonium, then the comments are all still there. If that's the moderate stuff that wasn't deleted, then, well, I'm not sure what to say...
Speaking as an egregiously offensive bastard, I'm all agog to know what Justin said that was SO bad, to shock so many?
I was out walking the Sussex bluebell woods all day - and very very beautiful they were. Perfect Spring weather. Lovely.
He said Theresa May should eat a polonium pill and he hoped she went blind and lost a few limbs as a result of her diabetes.
Eek. Yes. Possibly a line crossed there. Tho I'm sure I've done worse.
That was just this afternoon...This morning it was jezza and a heart attack and last night killing tories...It was red ken-esque bants...
Straight away yesterday the media were hooked on this idea of voters not wanting a GE and voter fatigue. Now when have we seen the media being totally out of step with the rest of the country...innocent face..
the pundits are a lttle out of touch atm
they said there couldnt be an early election and Mrs May was indecisive - wrong on both accounts it seems
If they said there couldn't be one they were factually wrong, if they said there wouldn't be one they just called it wrong (if someone merely said she had no power to call one they were right and still are, she did not call one, parliament did, albeit at her urging).
But they definitely were not wrong on her being indecisive - if she is not indecisive and changed her mind in a month on seeking an early GE, then she lied about wanting to seek one before! So is she a liar, or is she indecisive?
And no, I don't expect her to face electoral consequences either way, but she was not decisive on this issue, she said repeatedly we were not having one, now we are.
ROFL
shes a politician
I find it little short of amazing that people on a politics site expect politicians to be archbishops.
Alan , di d you see my response to your scurilous post , is our bet on.
malc I didnt
but youre on
would you like to pay up now ? :-)
Like taking candy off a baby
Ive doubled up malc as JPJ2 was laughing as you hid in the heather so I took him on too :-)
so thats £20 Salmond loses his seat proceeds to the site
none of your dodgy scottish notes either :-)
real money !
At 2:1 exchange rate there is no way you are getting Scottish notes
I certainly think Justin124 merits a ban for his comments on the last thread.
Pure filth, the likes we haven't seem on here for a long long time.
It has been deleted
Assuming you're talking about amputations, Hitler, "lying bitches", and polonium, then the comments are all still there. If that's the moderate stuff that wasn't deleted, then, well, I'm not sure what to say...
Speaking as an egregiously offensive bastard, I'm all agog to know what Justin said that was SO bad, to shock so many?
I was out walking the Sussex bluebell woods all day - and very very beautiful they were. Perfect Spring weather. Lovely.
He said Theresa May should eat a polonium pill and he hoped she went blind and lost a few limbs as a result of her diabetes.
And he won't live it down quickly. PB has a long memory...
Indeed some PBers have such amazing powers of memory they can remember all my screen names!
Barely had the Prime Minister shut the door of Number 10 behind her than the SNP leader was beating a path to the nearest BBC camera.
She can’t get someone halfway competent to run Scotland’s schools but she knows where to find Brian Taylor and a microphone in a pinch.
Miss Sturgeon pronounced Theresa May guilty of a ‘huge political miscalculation’ for calling an early general election. This means one of two things: 1) Theresa May made a huge political miscalculation in calling an early election, or 2) Nicola Sturgeon does not want a general election at this moment in time.
Oh dear oh dear, you are down to scrabbling in the gutter already. Desperate times.
Oh dear oh dear. Both Malc and Nicola out of touch with the Scottish electorate who are in favour of the GE (net +17). Heck, even SNP voters are in favour - but by a much smaller margin- I wonder why? I they were awfully keen on votes?
I wonder if the SNP will mention IndyRef2 anywhere in their manifesto ?
What is stopping Labour MPs simply saying en masse that they will not put forward Corbyn as PM candidate and instead will be campaigning on the intention to install Dan Jarvis in as PM should they win the election.
Basically the PLP hijacks the party. Undemocratic, sure, but would it turn out so badly for them afterwards? If they are already going to face a slaughter, why not try this gamble?
Edit: Because Corbyn will almost certainly not step down after his loss, he hasn't finished remaking the party
I certainly think Justin124 merits a ban for his comments on the last thread.
Pure filth, the likes we haven't seem on here for a long long time.
It has been deleted
Assuming you're talking about amputations, Hitler, "lying bitches", and polonium, then the comments are all still there. If that's the moderate stuff that wasn't deleted, then, well, I'm not sure what to say...
Speaking as an egregiously offensive bastard, I'm all agog to know what Justin said that was SO bad, to shock so many?
I was out walking the Sussex bluebell woods all day - and very very beautiful they were. Perfect Spring weather. Lovely.
He said Theresa May should eat a polonium pill and he hoped she went blind and lost a few limbs as a result of her diabetes.
Eek. Yes. Possibly a line crossed there. Tho I'm sure I've done worse.
That as just this afternoon...This morning it was jezza and a heart attack and last night killing tories...It was red ken-esque bants...
Last night I said no such thing. I have never spoken about killing Tories - Tony Blair is a different matter.
This Progressive Alliance suggested by Nicola is clever politics as she wants a big conservative win and knows that Lynton Crosby will already have Corbyn and Farron as puppets on Nicola's string.
Looks like the campaign with less than a few hours old is following the last one with Miliband in Salmonds pocket. Corbyn has already had to deny a Progressive Alliance with the SNP and Theresa May has used puppets in her presentation in Bolton.
I certainly think Justin124 merits a ban for his comments on the last thread.
Pure filth, the likes we haven't seem on here for a long long time.
It has been deleted
Assuming you're talking about amputations, Hitler, "lying bitches", and polonium, then the comments are all still there. If that's the moderate stuff that wasn't deleted, then, well, I'm not sure what to say...
Speaking as an egregiously offensive bastard, I'm all agog to know what Justin said that was SO bad, to shock so many?
I was out walking the Sussex bluebell woods all day - and very very beautiful they were. Perfect Spring weather. Lovely.
He said Theresa May should eat a polonium pill and he hoped she went blind and lost a few limbs as a result of her diabetes.
And he won't live it down quickly. PB has a long memory...
Indeed some PBers have such amazing powers of memory they can remember all my screen names!
You make it too easy. We also remember that you've been warned this is your last
Cable was bloody useless in the coalition. All their supposed wisdom and he got the square root of fuck all done. In comparison beaker the former park ranger was very harshly treated to lose their seat. Him and Webb are big losses for the lib dems.
I was fond of Norman Baker too. (And Lamb is OK.)
The rest, not so much.
I met Norman lamb, I was impressed. His heart was really in the right place during the coalition and he put in place some things relating to people with learning difficulties which have gone largely unnoticed and hopefully made some real differences to people lives.
He was like the anti-chuka...Much better in person and really sincere / knew his stuff.
I have only ever met one LibDem MP. I was seriously unimpressed.
Not that I have ever met more than a couple of other MPs of any party, but those others have had at least some sort of presence.
I went to Uni with a now retired-from-politics Liberal "Shadow Minister". Jesus he was mediocre in every sense. A decent enough bloke, and very well meaning, but.... a total anorak. Zero charisma, super geeky, not especially bright. I met him once at the Commons for a drink and he just seemed bored, and depressed, by how boring it all was, and he was already quite boring in himself.
No. Labour's factions are at war with each other (the Far Left particularly loathes the Blairites.) Association with Corbynite Labour is electorally toxic to the Liberal Democrats, whose main hope is to profit from Remainer sentiment against Tory incumbents in parts of the South. And the rotten smell of a "Progressive" Government propped up by Scottish Nationalism (something that most English voters distrust if not despise) hangs over all efforts to construct such a thing.
The progressive alliance is a comfort blanket for anti-Tories who don't want to put in the many years of hard work rebuilding trust, and painful compromises with the electorate over policy, needed to win a General Election. It assumes that having unpopular policies and a very unpopular leader is something that can easily be overcome, if only the various niche or weak parties arrayed against the Conservatives merely agreed a slate of unity candidates. That's bollocks.
A centre-left revival will come either when Labour regains credibility, or is gradually and methodically wiped out by an alternative Opposition that possesses it. There are no convenient shortcuts to this end.
Interesting pieces on Sluggerotoole about Sinn Fein trying to create an anti-Brexit alliance in Northern Ireland.
IMO, Alliance and SDLP would be crucified if they aligned themselves with Sinn Fein. Alliance support in pro-Union constituencies would collapse, and Unionist tactical voting for SDLP in South Down and Foyle to keep out Sinn Fein would vanish.
Been for dinner, has Justin kill'em all short Straws managed to go an hour without wishing death on anybody?
At least I have been impartial - can you claim that?
Are you impartial in wishing death and dismemberment on your friends as well as your enemies?
I have not wished death on anyone!
You said May deserved a polonium pill.
There may well be an antidote for that by now.No - it was all about suffering -which is supposed to be so good for the soul.May knows all about suffering , given how much of it she and the Government she represents has imposed on poor vulnerable people since 2010. She has effectively provided us with a Masterclass of the Nasty Party at play.
Justin:
We've had lots of good arguments on history over the last couple of years. Can I refer you to a statement by a Labour chancellor in days of yore:
Sky just announced that US House of Representatives Speaker, Paul Ryan, said today, on a visit to London, that the US is ready to forge a new bi-lateral trade deal with the UK as soon as possible.
This is the same man pushing for a Border Adjustment Tax which - in effect - would then chuck a 20% tax on all imports.
Cable was bloody useless in the coalition. All their supposed wisdom and he got the square root of fuck all done. In comparison beaker the former park ranger was very harshly treated to lose their seat. Him and Webb are big losses for the lib dems.
I was fond of Norman Baker too. (And Lamb is OK.)
The rest, not so much.
I met Norman lamb, I was impressed. His heart was really in the right place during the coalition and he put in place some things relating to people with learning difficulties which have gone largely unnoticed and hopefully made some real differences to people lives.
He was like the anti-chuka...Much better in person and really sincere / knew his stuff.
I have only ever met one LibDem MP. I was seriously unimpressed.
Not that I have ever met more than a couple of other MPs of any party, but those others have had at least some sort of presence.
I went to Uni with a now retired-from-politics Liberal "Shadow Minister". Jesus he was mediocre in every sense. A decent enough bloke, and very well meaning, but.... a total anorak. Zero charisma, super geeky, not especially bright. I met him once at the Commons for a drink and he just seemed bored, and depressed, by how boring it all was, and he was already quite boring in himself.
What is stopping Labour MPs simply saying en masse that they will not put forward Corbyn as PM candidate and instead will be campaigning on the intention to install Dan Jarvis in as PM should they win the election.
Basically the PLP hijacks the party. Undemocratic, sure, but would it turn out so badly for them afterwards? If they are already going to face a slaughter, why not try this gamble?
Edit: Because Corbyn will almost certainly not step down after his loss, he hasn't finished remaking the party
Good idea, I was wondering along these lines. Only thing is it will give Corbyn ANOTHER excuse for the defeat.
That said, I disagree with it being undemocratic – Vote for us, get Jarvis – perfectly acceptable (if unlikely) campaign line.
Libs may well do better than forecast. 55 seats in 2010 means they have form. Labour demise could mean they get 70 seats
That is a very commendable first effort, beating ChrisA’s 50 LD seats.
But, it dwarfs WilliamGlenn’s spectacle of 150 LD MPs.
My guess is that they’ll get ~10 MPs.
No gains at all?
Not Edinburgh West nor Fife NE nor Dumbartonshire East?
Not even in leafy SW London? Or the hearts of Remainia? And no benefit from Labour being down 5 percentage points or more, while the LDs have increased their vote share by 50%?
I reckon 12 seats in the minimum.
They have 8 seats plus Richmond. I expect they will lose Carshalton & Southport. And possibly Ceredigion where the MP has been mired in election expenses scandal.
I expect they will gain two seats in London (say Twickenham and Sutton). The University seats are mainly in the hands of fervent Remainer Labour MPs, except Bath. I think they will probably take Bath.
I think they will gain one, perhaps two of their old Scottish redoubts.
That makes 11., possibly 12.
Cambridge and the egregious Mr Huppert -- he’s got a tough fight on, in my opinion.
Would you like a bet on Ceredigion and Cambridge?
£50 from me to you if the LDs lose both, £50 from you to me if they win both. Nothing in the event of one win and one loss.
Whatever his tenure as editor of the Evening Standard has in store, history is unlikely to be kind to Osborne, and not just because the referendum campaign went so badly wrong. He marketed himself as a one-nation Conservative, yet targeted the poor for spending cuts. He made deficit reduction the acid test of his chancellorship, yet austerity will continue deep into a third parliament. He said he would sort out Britain’s structural problems, but will leave parliament with the economy as dependent on debt and low-skill, low-productivity jobs as it has ever been. Those failures helped create the conditions for Brexit – and for his political demise.
Straight away yesterday the media were hooked on this idea of voters not wanting a GE and voter fatigue. Now when have we seen the media being totally out of step with the rest of the country...innocent face..
the pundits are a lttle out of touch atm
they said there couldnt be an early election and Mrs May was indecisive - wrong on both accounts it seems
If they said there couldn't be one they were factually wrong, if they said there wouldn't be one they just called it wrong (if someone merely said she had no power to call one they were right and still are, she did not call one, parliament did, albeit at her urging).
But they definitely were not wrong on her being indecisive - if she is not indecisive and changed her mind in a month on seeking an early GE, then she lied about wanting to seek one before! So is she a liar, or is she indecisive?
And no, I don't expect her to face electoral consequences either way, but she was not decisive on this issue, she said repeatedly we were not having one, now we are.
ROFL
shes a politician
I find it little short of amazing that people on a politics site expect politicians to be archbishops.
Alan , di d you see my response to your scurilous post , is our bet on.
malc I didnt
but youre on
would you like to pay up now ? :-)
Like taking candy off a baby
Ive doubled up malc as JPJ2 was laughing as you hid in the heather so I took him on too :-)
so thats £20 Salmond loses his seat proceeds to the site
none of your dodgy scottish notes either :-)
real money !
At 2:1 exchange rate there is no way you are getting Scottish notes
Libs may well do better than forecast. 55 seats in 2010 means they have form. Labour demise could mean they get 70 seats
That is a very commendable first effort, beating ChrisA’s 50 LD seats.
But, it dwarfs WilliamGlenn’s spectacle of 150 LD MPs.
My guess is that they’ll get ~10 MPs.
No gains at all?
Not Edinburgh West nor Fife NE nor Dumbartonshire East?
Not even in leafy SW London? Or the hearts of Remainia? And no benefit from Labour being down 5 percentage points or more, while the LDs have increased their vote share by 50%?
I certainly think Justin124 merits a ban for his comments on the last thread.
Pure filth, the likes we haven't seem on here for a long long time.
It has been deleted
Assuming you're talking about amputations, Hitler, "lying bitches", and polonium, then the comments are all still there. If that's the moderate stuff that wasn't deleted, then, well, I'm not sure what to say...
Speaking as an egregiously offensive bastard, I'm all agog to know what Justin said that was SO bad, to shock so many?
I was out walking the Sussex bluebell woods all day - and very very beautiful they were. Perfect Spring weather. Lovely.
He said Theresa May should eat a polonium pill and he hoped she went blind and lost a few limbs as a result of her diabetes.
And he won't live it down quickly. PB has a long memory...
Indeed some PBers have such amazing powers of memory they can remember all my screen names!
You make it too easy. We also remember that you've been warned this is your last
What is stopping Labour MPs simply saying en masse that they will not put forward Corbyn as PM candidate and instead will be campaigning on the intention to install Dan Jarvis in as PM should they win the election.
Basically the PLP hijacks the party. Undemocratic, sure, but would it turn out so badly for them afterwards? If they are already going to face a slaughter, why not try this gamble?
Edit: Because Corbyn will almost certainly not step down after his loss, he hasn't finished remaking the party
Good idea, I was wondering along these lines. Only thing is it will give Corbyn ANOTHER excuse for the defeat.
That said, I disagree with it being undemocratic – Vote for us, get Jarvis – perfectly acceptable (if unlikely) campaign line.
Well I just meant internally undemocratic within the Labour Party, in that it tramples over the wishes of the Corbynistas, but I am ok with that
Sky just announced that US House of Representatives Speaker, Paul Ryan, said today, on a visit to London, that the US is ready to forge a new bi-lateral trade deal with the UK as soon as possible.
This is the same man pushing for a Border Adjustment Tax which - in effect - would then chuck a 20% tax on all imports.
Cable was bloody useless in the coalition. All their supposed wisdom and he got the square root of fuck all done. In comparison beaker the former park ranger was very harshly treated to lose their seat. Him and Webb are big losses for the lib dems.
I was fond of Norman Baker too. (And Lamb is OK.)
The rest, not so much.
I met Norman lamb, I was impressed. His heart was really in the right place during the coalition and he put in place some things relating to people with learning difficulties which have gone largely unnoticed and hopefully made some real differences to people lives.
He was like the anti-chuka...Much better in person and really sincere / knew his stuff.
I have only ever met one LibDem MP. I was seriously unimpressed.
Not that I have ever met more than a couple of other MPs of any party, but those others have had at least some sort of presence.
I went to Uni with a now retired-from-politics Liberal "Shadow Minister". Jesus he was mediocre in every sense. A decent enough bloke, and very well meaning, but.... a total anorak. Zero charisma, super geeky, not especially bright. I met him once at the Commons for a drink and he just seemed bored, and depressed, by how boring it all was, and he was already quite boring in himself.
At University I knew Gavin Barwell, Kwasi Kwarteng, Lucy Frazer and Tristram Hunt all well.
Kwasi is the only one with a genuinely first rate intelligence.
Cable was bloody useless in the coalition. All their supposed wisdom and he got the square root of fuck all done. In comparison beaker the former park ranger was very harshly treated to lose their seat. Him and Webb are big losses for the lib dems.
I was fond of Norman Baker too. (And Lamb is OK.)
The rest, not so much.
I met Norman lamb, I was impressed. His heart was really in the right place during the coalition and he put in place some things relating to people with learning difficulties which have gone largely unnoticed and hopefully made some real differences to people lives.
He was like the anti-chuka...Much better in person and really sincere / knew his stuff.
I have only ever met one LibDem MP. I was seriously unimpressed.
Not that I have ever met more than a couple of other MPs of any party, but those others have had at least some sort of presence.
I went to Uni with a now retired-from-politics Liberal "Shadow Minister". Jesus he was mediocre in every sense. A decent enough bloke, and very well meaning, but.... a total anorak. Zero charisma, super geeky, not especially bright. I met him once at the Commons for a drink and he just seemed bored, and depressed, by how boring it all was, and he was already quite boring in himself.
Barely had the Prime Minister shut the door of Number 10 behind her than the SNP leader was beating a path to the nearest BBC camera.
She can’t get someone halfway competent to run Scotland’s schools but she knows where to find Brian Taylor and a microphone in a pinch.
Miss Sturgeon pronounced Theresa May guilty of a ‘huge political miscalculation’ for calling an early general election. This means one of two things: 1) Theresa May made a huge political miscalculation in calling an early election, or 2) Nicola Sturgeon does not want a general election at this moment in time.
Oh dear oh dear, you are down to scrabbling in the gutter already. Desperate times.
Oh dear oh dear. Both Malc and Nicola out of touch with the Scottish electorate who are in favour of the GE (net +17). Heck, even SNP voters are in favour - but by a much smaller margin- I wonder why? I they were awfully keen on votes?
I wonder if the SNP will mention IndyRef2 anywhere in their manifesto ?
Or bury it on page 27 in the small print and omit it entirely from the "easy read" one?
Do you think they'll mention their EU policy (what is it today?) or currency plans too?
I can absolutely see the point of specific, targeted interventions to combat disease and famine. What I object to is the back-to-front setting of an arbitrary, high financial yearly target and finding projects to hit the target, bearing in mind that tax is other peoples' money (including other, comparatively poor peoples' money). Any well-off person advocating high government expenditure on overseas aid who does not voluntarily pay a significant proportion of his own income to one of the numerous and excellent charities providing third world relief of one sort or another, needs to examine the moral coherence of his position. I am not of course making any assumptions nor impliedly asking you to tell me what your personal position is on this.
Toby Ord, Research Fellow at Oxford University studied the economics of Overseas aid. One of his findings was:
"If you add up all the aid that all OECD countries have given since they started counting it in 1960, and then assume that the only thing that this aid has achieved was the eradication of smallpox, then the whole thing would still be a bargain, costing less than half what the UK National Health Service spends on average to save a life."
To address your point directly. For many years I and a small group of fellow Geologists have directly supported a medical clinic in a slum on the outskirts of Kampala. The money we provide basically runs the clinic and its immunisation and pre and post natal facilities. I do not donate via any of the established charities since I believe they spend too much money on their own organisations and not enough on the front line.
Whatever his tenure as editor of the Evening Standard has in store, history is unlikely to be kind to Osborne, and not just because the referendum campaign went so badly wrong. He marketed himself as a one-nation Conservative, yet targeted the poor for spending cuts. He made deficit reduction the acid test of his chancellorship, yet austerity will continue deep into a third parliament. He said he would sort out Britain’s structural problems, but will leave parliament with the economy as dependent on debt and low-skill, low-productivity jobs as it has ever been. Those failures helped create the conditions for Brexit – and for his political demise.
Not sure if it is unfair or not, but I always take it he was the brains of the Osb/Cam duo, and in addition to his own failings I blame him for EUref, and FTPA, either of which earns him an immortal place in the rock n roll hall of wankerdom. A Master Strategist indeed.
No. Labour's factions are at war with each other (the Far Left particularly loathes the Blairites.) Association with Corbynite Labour is electorally toxic to the Liberal Democrats, whose main hope is to profit from Remainer sentiment against Tory incumbents in parts of the South. And the rotten smell of a "Progressive" Government propped up by Scottish Nationalism (something that most English voters distrust if not despise) hangs over all efforts to construct such a thing.
The progressive alliance is a comfort blanket for anti-Tories who don't want to put in the many years of hard work rebuilding trust, and painful compromises with the electorate over policy, needed to win a General Election. It assumes that having unpopular policies and a very unpopular leader is something that can easily be overcome, if only the various niche or weak parties arrayed against the Conservatives merely agreed a slate of unity candidates. That's bollocks.
A centre-left revival will come either when Labour regains credibility, or is gradually and methodically wiped out by an alternative Opposition that possesses it. There are no convenient shortcuts to this end.
Interesting pieces on Sluggerotoole about Sinn Fein trying to create an anti-Brexit alliance in Northern Ireland.
IMO, Alliance and SDLP would be crucified if they aligned themselves with Sinn Fein. Alliance support in pro-Union constituencies would collapse, and Unionist tactical voting for SDLP in South Down and Foyle to keep out Sinn Fein would vanish.
Chris Donnelly is a shinner who cant accept everyonr else hates them.
What is stopping Labour MPs simply saying en masse that they will not put forward Corbyn as PM candidate and instead will be campaigning on the intention to install Dan Jarvis in as PM should they win the election.
Basically the PLP hijacks the party. Undemocratic, sure, but would it turn out so badly for them afterwards? If they are already going to face a slaughter, why not try this gamble?
Edit: Because Corbyn will almost certainly not step down after his loss, he hasn't finished remaking the party
Good idea, I was wondering along these lines. Only thing is it will give Corbyn ANOTHER excuse for the defeat.
That said, I disagree with it being undemocratic – Vote for us, get Jarvis – perfectly acceptable (if unlikely) campaign line.
Well I just meant internally undemocratic within the Labour Party, in that it tramples over the wishes of the Corbynistas, but I am ok with that
The Corbynistas themselves are the ultimate anti-democrats – they seek to impose their nutcase politicians on millions of Labour voters
Cable was bloody useless in the coalition. All their supposed wisdom and he got the square root of fuck all done. In comparison beaker the former park ranger was very harshly treated to lose their seat. Him and Webb are big losses for the lib dems.
I was fond of Norman Baker too. (And Lamb is OK.)
The rest, not so much.
I met Norman lamb, I was impressed. His heart was really in the right place during the coalition and he put in place some things relating to people with learning difficulties which have gone largely unnoticed and hopefully made some real differences to people lives.
He was like the anti-chuka...Much better in person and really sincere / knew his stuff.
I have only ever met one LibDem MP. I was seriously unimpressed.
Not that I have ever met more than a couple of other MPs of any party, but those others have had at least some sort of presence.
I went to Uni with a now retired-from-politics Liberal "Shadow Minister". Jesus he was mediocre in every sense. A decent enough bloke, and very well meaning, but.... a total anorak. Zero charisma, super geeky, not especially bright. I met him once at the Commons for a drink and he just seemed bored, and depressed, by how boring it all was, and he was already quite boring in himself.
At University I knew Gavin Barwell, Kwasi Kwarteng, Lucy Frazer and Tristram Hunt all well.
Kwasi is the only one with a genuinely first rate intelligence.
(None of them were idiots, I'd add. Lucy was a bright, dedicated, hardworker and you'd be pleased to have her as your MP. Gavin was a sincere guy, who went into politics for all the right reasons. Tristram was... in Footlights very briefly. I would add that Kwasi is the only one of the four that I've stayed in touch with.)
I can absolutely see the point of specific, targeted interventions to combat disease and famine. What I object to is the back-to-front setting of an arbitrary, high financial yearly target and finding projects to hit the target, bearing in mind that tax is other peoples' money (including other, comparatively poor peoples' money). Any well-off person advocating high government expenditure on overseas aid who does not voluntarily pay a significant proportion of his own income to one of the numerous and excellent charities providing third world relief of one sort or another, needs to examine the moral coherence of his position. I am not of course making any assumptions nor impliedly asking you to tell me what your personal position is on this.
Toby Ord, Research Fellow at Oxford University studied the economics of Overseas aid. One of his findings was:
"If you add up all the aid that all OECD countries have given since they started counting it in 1960, and then assume that the only thing that this aid has achieved was the eradication of smallpox, then the whole thing would still be a bargain, costing less than half what the UK National Health Service spends on average to save a life."
To address your point directly. For many years I and a small group of fellow Geologists have directly supported a medical clinic in a slum on the outskirts of Kampala. The money we provide basically runs the clinic and its immunisation and pre and post natal facilities. I do not donate via any of the established charities since I believe they spend too much money on their own organisations and not enough on the front line.
That is utterly admirable (and please let me repeat, I was expressly not challenging you for that kind of information).
Whatever his tenure as editor of the Evening Standard has in store, history is unlikely to be kind to Osborne, and not just because the referendum campaign went so badly wrong. He marketed himself as a one-nation Conservative, yet targeted the poor for spending cuts. He made deficit reduction the acid test of his chancellorship, yet austerity will continue deep into a third parliament. He said he would sort out Britain’s structural problems, but will leave parliament with the economy as dependent on debt and low-skill, low-productivity jobs as it has ever been. Those failures helped create the conditions for Brexit – and for his political demise.
Not sure if it is unfair or not, but I always take it he was the brains of the Osb/Cam duo, and in addition to his own failings I blame him for EUref, and FTPA, either of which earns him an immortal place in the rock n roll hall of wankerdom. A Master Strategist indeed.
Typical fluff quote from The Guardian. They can't see any positives from a Conservative.
Cable was bloody useless in the coalition. All their supposed wisdom and he got the square root of fuck all done. In comparison beaker the former park ranger was very harshly treated to lose their seat. Him and Webb are big losses for the lib dems.
I was fond of Norman Baker too. (And Lamb is OK.)
The rest, not so much.
I met Norman lamb, I was impressed. His heart was really in the right place during the coalition and he put in place some things relating to people with learning difficulties which have gone largely unnoticed and hopefully made some real differences to people lives.
He was like the anti-chuka...Much better in person and really sincere / knew his stuff.
I have only ever met one LibDem MP. I was seriously unimpressed.
Not that I have ever met more than a couple of other MPs of any party, but those others have had at least some sort of presence.
I went to Uni with a now retired-from-politics Liberal "Shadow Minister". Jesus he was mediocre in every sense. A decent enough bloke, and very well meaning, but.... a total anorak. Zero charisma, super geeky, not especially bright. I met him once at the Commons for a drink and he just seemed bored, and depressed, by how boring it all was, and he was already quite boring in himself.
At University I knew Gavin Barwell, Kwasi Kwarteng, Lucy Frazer and Tristram Hunt all well.
Kwasi is the only one with a genuinely first rate intelligence.
(None of them were idiots, I'd add. Lucy was a bright, dedicated, hardworker and you'd be pleased to have her as your MP. Gavin was a sincere guy, who went into politics for all the right reasons. Tristram was... in Footlights very briefly. I would add that Kwasi is the only one of the four that I've stayed in touch with.)
'in Footlights very briefly' - love it.
Kwasi always comes across very well on radio/tv too - why oh why has he not been promoted yet?
Sky just announced that US House of Representatives Speaker, Paul Ryan, said today, on a visit to London, that the US is ready to forge a new bi-lateral trade deal with the UK as soon as possible.
This is the same man pushing for a Border Adjustment Tax which - in effect - would then chuck a 20% tax on all imports.
Excluding UK bilateral deal
In which case, the US will be leaving the World Trade Organisation. The only reason why the BTA was acceptable previously was because it was non-discriminatory.
I'm sure most of the above valid points were also made by the Tories who were against a GE this year. 1974 GE was distorted by the Liberals fielding candidates in all constituencies (the polls didn't factor that in). Also, Wilson was a formidable campaigner and Labour had quite a few credible heavyweights in its stock. Heath was nowhere near as popular as a PM compared with May.
Barely had the Prime Minister shut the door of Number 10 behind her than the SNP leader was beating a path to the nearest BBC camera.
She can’t get someone halfway competent to run Scotland’s schools but she knows where to find Brian Taylor and a microphone in a pinch.
Miss Sturgeon pronounced Theresa May guilty of a ‘huge political miscalculation’ for calling an early general election. This means one of two things: 1) Theresa May made a huge political miscalculation in calling an early election, or 2) Nicola Sturgeon does not want a general election at this moment in time.
Oh dear oh dear, you are down to scrabbling in the gutter already. Desperate times.
Oh dear oh dear. Both Malc and Nicola out of touch with the Scottish electorate who are in favour of the GE (net +17). Heck, even SNP voters are in favour - but by a much smaller margin- I wonder why? I they were awfully keen on votes?
I wonder if the SNP will mention IndyRef2 anywhere in their manifesto ?
Or bury it on page 27 in the small print and omit it entirely from the "easy read" one?
Do you think they'll mention their EU policy (what is it today?) or currency plans too?
Hardly matters whether the IndyRef2 is in the easy-read version, does it, after Ms Sturgeon has been so public about her intentions?
I don’t if this has been commented on upthread, but I’ve been doing a lot more interesting (ahem) things this afternoon. Chiefly a meeting of the Wine Appreciation Group to which I belong where our leader produced, among some quite quite drinkable budget sparkling wines, one of the nastiest I’ve ever tasted; a sparkling red Shiraz. Reminded me of raspberrryade.
Anyone returning to the fold, after the meeting I was discussing matters with a friend, another Remainer, and we bothn agreed that we didn’t feel the country was ‘coming together’. We felt surrounded by triumphalist Leavers. I’ve been a ‘left' voter all my life and I’ve never experienced the same feeling.
And I’ve been voting a long time. I remember Feb. 1974 when we had a “Who Governs” election and the response of the electorate was “whoever does, it’s not you’ to Heath, who’d called the election.
History repeats itself first as farce, then as tragedy; I suspect therefore that we can expect a farcical result.
Sky just announced that US House of Representatives Speaker, Paul Ryan, said today, on a visit to London, that the US is ready to forge a new bi-lateral trade deal with the UK as soon as possible.
This is the same man pushing for a Border Adjustment Tax which - in effect - would then chuck a 20% tax on all imports.
Excluding UK bilateral deal
In which case, the US will be leaving the World Trade Organisation. The only reason why the BTA was acceptable previously was because it was non-discriminatory.
Do you think that Trump may just disregard the WTO
Libs may well do better than forecast. 55 seats in 2010 means they have form. Labour demise could mean they get 70 seats
That is a very commendable first effort, beating ChrisA’s 50 LD seats.
But, it dwarfs WilliamGlenn’s spectacle of 150 LD MPs.
My guess is that they’ll get ~10 MPs.
No gains at all?
Not Edinburgh West nor Fife NE nor Dumbartonshire East?
Not even in leafy SW London? Or the hearts of Remainia? And no benefit from Labour being down 5 percentage points or more, while the LDs have increased their vote share by 50%?
I reckon 12 seats in the minimum.
I can't see how they won't gain seats. they got 9 when they got no votes. Local by-elections show they have a chance. more than 20 nailed on.
Would you like to say exactly which 20+ seats are nailed-on LibDem gains ?
Libs may well do better than forecast. 55 seats in 2010 means they have form. Labour demise could mean they get 70 seats
That is a very commendable first effort, beating ChrisA’s 50 LD seats.
But, it dwarfs WilliamGlenn’s spectacle of 150 LD MPs.
My guess is that they’ll get ~10 MPs.
No gains at all?
Not Edinburgh West nor Fife NE nor Dumbartonshire East?
Not even in leafy SW London? Or the hearts of Remainia? And no benefit from Labour being down 5 percentage points or more, while the LDs have increased their vote share by 50%?
I reckon 12 seats in the minimum.
They have 8 seats plus Richmond. I expect they will lose Carshalton & Southport. And possibly Ceredigion where the MP has been mired in election expenses scandal.
I expect they will gain two seats in London (say Twickenham and Sutton). The University seats are mainly in the hands of fervent Remainer Labour MPs, except Bath. I think they will probably take Bath.
I think they will gain one, perhaps two of their old Scottish redoubts.
That makes 11., possibly 12.
Cambridge and the egregious Mr Huppert -- he’s got a tough fight on, in my opinion.
Would you like a bet on Ceredigion and Cambridge?
£50 from me to you if the LDs lose both, £50 from you to me if they win both. Nothing in the event of one win and one loss.
Ceredigion: I will wait to see who is the Plaid Cymru candidate.
Cambridge: I think I can get better odds than evens that Huppert will lose.
Libs may well do better than forecast. 55 seats in 2010 means they have form. Labour demise could mean they get 70 seats
That is a very commendable first effort, beating ChrisA’s 50 LD seats.
But, it dwarfs WilliamGlenn’s spectacle of 150 LD MPs.
My guess is that they’ll get ~10 MPs.
No gains at all?
Not Edinburgh West nor Fife NE nor Dumbartonshire East?
Not even in leafy SW London? Or the hearts of Remainia? And no benefit from Labour being down 5 percentage points or more, while the LDs have increased their vote share by 50%?
I reckon 12 seats in the minimum.
I can't see how they won't gain seats. they got 9 when they got no votes. Local by-elections show they have a chance. more than 20 nailed on.
Would you like to say exactly which 20+ seats are nailed-on LibDem gains ?
No. Labour's factions are at war with each other (the Far Left particularly loathes the Blairites.) Association with Corbynite Labour is electorally toxic to the Liberal Democrats, whose main hope is to profit from Remainer sentiment against Tory incumbents in parts of the South. And the rotten smell of a "Progressive" Government propped up by Scottish Nationalism (something that most English voters distrust if not despise) hangs over all efforts to construct such a thing.
The progressive alliance is a comfort blanket for anti-Tories who don't want to put in the many years of hard work rebuilding trust, and painful compromises with the electorate over policy, needed to win a General Election. It assumes that having unpopular policies and a very unpopular leader is something that can easily be overcome, if only the various niche or weak parties arrayed against the Conservatives merely agreed a slate of unity candidates. That's bollocks.
A centre-left revival will come either when Labour regains credibility, or is gradually and methodically wiped out by an alternative Opposition that possesses it. There are no convenient shortcuts to this end.
Interesting pieces on Sluggerotoole about Sinn Fein trying to create an anti-Brexit alliance in Northern Ireland.
IMO, Alliance and SDLP would be crucified if they aligned themselves with Sinn Fein. Alliance support in pro-Union constituencies would collapse, and Unionist tactical voting for SDLP in South Down and Foyle to keep out Sinn Fein would vanish.
Exactly the problem. The "Progressive Alliance" idea is rooted in the myth that all the Labour, Lib Dem and Green voters in any given constituency in England will unite around a single candidate representing those three parties, when in fact you can imagine a sizeable chunk of their voters splintering off in various directions at the very idea. Labour voters wanting nothing to do with their erstwhile Coalition opponents in the yellows. Lib Dem voters wanting nothing to do with Corbyn. All manner of voters wanting no part of a pact likely to be dependent on Scots and Welsh Nationalism (and, consequently, special pleading for more and more sweeties funded out of their pay packets) for its majority in Parliament.
It's simply an invitation for sizeable defections to the Tories and Ukip - whom. lest we forget, polled a combined 55% of all the votes cast in England even in GE2015, when Corbyn was still a back bench obscurity.
Libs may well do better than forecast. 55 seats in 2010 means they have form. Labour demise could mean they get 70 seats
That is a very commendable first effort, beating ChrisA’s 50 LD seats.
But, it dwarfs WilliamGlenn’s spectacle of 150 LD MPs.
My guess is that they’ll get ~10 MPs.
No gains at all?
Not Edinburgh West nor Fife NE nor Dumbartonshire East?
Not even in leafy SW London? Or the hearts of Remainia? And no benefit from Labour being down 5 percentage points or more, while the LDs have increased their vote share by 50%?
I reckon 12 seats in the minimum.
10 seats is one gain.
Net. Maybe they lose a couple, gain 3.
I don't think they'll lose Carshalton & Wallington because there's a big Labour (and a smaller Green) vote to squeeze.
Southport will be tougher, as it was a Leave voting area, and as the Conservatives can hope to eat into the sizeable UKIP vote, but I'd still make them narrow favourites to hold on.
Other than those two, which seats do you see as vulnerable?
Chuka Umunna @ChukaUmunna Theresa May is a disgrace-she called an Election because she rejects the idea of an Opposition in our democracy.We are not some dictatorship
Er, Chuka luv, dictators don't usually call elections.....
This Progressive Alliance suggested by Nicola is clever politics as she wants a big conservative win and knows that Lynton Crosby will already have Corbyn and Farron as puppets on Nicola's string.
Looks like the campaign with less than a few hours old is following the last one with Miliband in Salmonds pocket. Corbyn has already had to deny a Progressive Alliance with the SNP and Theresa May has used puppets in her presentation in Bolton.
Used puppets?
'Show me where the nasty, Hamas supporting, RA loving socialist touched you'
Libs may well do better than forecast. 55 seats in 2010 means they have form. Labour demise could mean they get 70 seats
That is a very commendable first effort, beating ChrisA’s 50 LD seats.
But, it dwarfs WilliamGlenn’s spectacle of 150 LD MPs.
My guess is that they’ll get ~10 MPs.
No gains at all?
Not Edinburgh West nor Fife NE nor Dumbartonshire East?
Not even in leafy SW London? Or the hearts of Remainia? And no benefit from Labour being down 5 percentage points or more, while the LDs have increased their vote share by 50%?
I reckon 12 seats in the minimum.
I can't see how they won't gain seats. they got 9 when they got no votes. Local by-elections show they have a chance. more than 20 nailed on.
Would you like to say exactly which 20+ seats are nailed-on LibDem gains ?
Could they lose Southport
Yes. It's a (marginally) Leave voting area, which they won on barely more than 30% of the vote last time.
But there's a student vote to eat into, and the Labour Party is likely to go backwards to their benefit.
I'd make it 55% chance for the LDs, 45% for the Conservatives.
Gina Miller should stand. She is erudite, intelligent, telegenic and (it has to be said) beautiful. What better poster girl for Remain could there be? Let her stand against May as convenor of a one-off Anti Brexit Alliance. The Tories would still win. But at least it might make a temporary tussle of it.
Has anyone ever met a politician who HAS really impressed them?
The only one I can recall is Thatcher. About a year after she resigned, I encountered her at some party for F W De Klerk. She radiated historicity. She knew she had changed the country, even if you loathed her.
On several occasions I watched Tim Eggar and his extraordinary ability to work a room. Damn, he was good. He would slide into a group, have some banter, then slide away again such that people enjoyed his contribution but nobody felt offended when he moved on. A real skill in politics.
Early canvassing (from a few Labour pals) here in Wimbledon suggests the LDs are looking strong here. Outside chance of winning maybe with Labour likely to be pushed from second to third.
Two years ago you predicted Labour had an outside chance of gaining Wimbledon.
Sky just announced that US House of Representatives Speaker, Paul Ryan, said today, on a visit to London, that the US is ready to forge a new bi-lateral trade deal with the UK as soon as possible.
This is the same man pushing for a Border Adjustment Tax which - in effect - would then chuck a 20% tax on all imports.
Excluding UK bilateral deal
In which case, the US will be leaving the World Trade Organisation. The only reason why the BTA was acceptable previously was because it was non-discriminatory.
Do you think that Trump may just disregard the WTO
It will be a sad day for the world if the WTO is effectively dismantled. It's the only global organisation that can genuinely hold its hand up and say it has contributed to prosperity and development around the world.
Chuka Umunna @ChukaUmunna Theresa May is a disgrace-she called an Election because she rejects the idea of an Opposition in our democracy.We are not some dictatorship
Er, Chuka luv, dictators don't usually call elections.....
Libs may well do better than forecast. 55 seats in 2010 means they have form. Labour demise could mean they get 70 seats
That is a very commendable first effort, beating ChrisA’s 50 LD seats.
But, it dwarfs WilliamGlenn’s spectacle of 150 LD MPs.
My guess is that they’ll get ~10 MPs.
No gains at all?
Not Edinburgh West nor Fife NE nor Dumbartonshire East?
Not even in leafy SW London? Or the hearts of Remainia? And no benefit from Labour being down 5 percentage points or more, while the LDs have increased their vote share by 50%?
I reckon 12 seats in the minimum.
I can't see how they won't gain seats. they got 9 when they got no votes. Local by-elections show they have a chance. more than 20 nailed on.
Would you like to say exactly which 20+ seats are nailed-on LibDem gains ?
Could they lose Southport
Yes. It's a (marginally) Leave voting area, which they won on barely more than 30% of the vote last time.
But there's a student vote to eat into, and the Labour Party is likely to go backwards to their benefit.
I'd make it 55% chance for the LDs, 45% for the Conservatives.
Sky just announced that US House of Representatives Speaker, Paul Ryan, said today, on a visit to London, that the US is ready to forge a new bi-lateral trade deal with the UK as soon as possible.
This is the same man pushing for a Border Adjustment Tax which - in effect - would then chuck a 20% tax on all imports.
Excluding UK bilateral deal
In which case, the US will be leaving the World Trade Organisation. The only reason why the BTA was acceptable previously was because it was non-discriminatory.
Do you think that Trump may just disregard the WTO
It will be a sad day for the world if the WTO is effectively dismantled. It's the only global organisation that can genuinely hold its hand up and say it has contributed to prosperity and development around the world.
Chuka Umunna @ChukaUmunna Theresa May is a disgrace-she called an Election because she rejects the idea of an Opposition in our democracy.We are not some dictatorship
Er, Chuka luv, dictators don't usually call elections.....
I have never understood why some people rate him.
Agreed. Far too smooth to be effective in the post Blair age.
Chuka Umunna @ChukaUmunna Theresa May is a disgrace-she called an Election because she rejects the idea of an Opposition in our democracy.We are not some dictatorship
Er, Chuka luv, dictators don't usually call elections.....
Libs may well do better than forecast. 55 seats in 2010 means they have form. Labour demise could mean they get 70 seats
That is a very commendable first effort, beating ChrisA’s 50 LD seats.
But, it dwarfs WilliamGlenn’s spectacle of 150 LD MPs.
My guess is that they’ll get ~10 MPs.
No gains at all?
Not Edinburgh West nor Fife NE nor Dumbartonshire East?
Not even in leafy SW London? Or the hearts of Remainia? And no benefit from Labour being down 5 percentage points or more, while the LDs have increased their vote share by 50%?
I reckon 12 seats in the minimum.
10 seats is one gain.
Net. Maybe they lose a couple, gain 3.
I don't think they'll lose Carshalton & Wallington because there's a big Labour (and a smaller Green) vote to squeeze.
Southport will be tougher, as it was a Leave voting area, and as the Conservatives can hope to eat into the sizeable UKIP vote, but I'd still make them narrow favourites to hold on.
Other than those two, which seats do you see as vulnerable?
The Labour vote in Carshalton is very working-class - it will less profitable for the LibDems than the Labour vote in the Richmond and Kingston boroughs.
Southport might give an indication on LibDem personal votes.
Libs may well do better than forecast. 55 seats in 2010 means they have form. Labour demise could mean they get 70 seats
That is a very commendable first effort, beating ChrisA’s 50 LD seats.
But, it dwarfs WilliamGlenn’s spectacle of 150 LD MPs.
My guess is that they’ll get ~10 MPs.
No gains at all?
Not Edinburgh West nor Fife NE nor Dumbartonshire East?
Not even in leafy SW London? Or the hearts of Remainia? And no benefit from Labour being down 5 percentage points or more, while the LDs have increased their vote share by 50%?
I reckon 12 seats in the minimum.
10 seats is one gain.
Net. Maybe they lose a couple, gain 3.
I don't think they'll lose Carshalton & Wallington because there's a big Labour (and a smaller Green) vote to squeeze.
Southport will be tougher, as it was a Leave voting area, and as the Conservatives can hope to eat into the sizeable UKIP vote, but I'd still make them narrow favourites to hold on.
Other than those two, which seats do you see as vulnerable?
Hasn’t Brake been in trouble locally with favourable property deals from Sutton council to a company he directs ? Guido was banging on about it a while back. I don’t know Carshalton, so I am happy to take advice from local experts.
Ceredigion I do know well. The 2015 election was very dirty, with Mark Williams (now exposed as a election expenses fraudster by the Electoral Commission) smearing the Plaid Cymru candidate as a fascist. I don’t think what we have learned since 2015 has improved Mark’s chances.
Why do/did people hate the FTPA so much? As much as it annoyed me during the Coalition years, it strikes me as a generally good principle that PMs cannot cut and run at the time of their own choosing.
Libs may well do better than forecast. 55 seats in 2010 means they have form. Labour demise could mean they get 70 seats
That is a very commendable first effort, beating ChrisA’s 50 LD seats.
But, it dwarfs WilliamGlenn’s spectacle of 150 LD MPs.
My guess is that they’ll get ~10 MPs.
No gains at all?
Not Edinburgh West nor Fife NE nor Dumbartonshire East?
Not even in leafy SW London? Or the hearts of Remainia? And no benefit from Labour being down 5 percentage points or more, while the LDs have increased their vote share by 50%?
I reckon 12 seats in the minimum.
I can't see how they won't gain seats. they got 9 when they got no votes. Local by-elections show they have a chance. more than 20 nailed on.
Would you like to say exactly which 20+ seats are nailed-on LibDem gains ?
Could they lose Southport
Yes. It's a (marginally) Leave voting area, which they won on barely more than 30% of the vote last time.
But there's a student vote to eat into, and the Labour Party is likely to go backwards to their benefit.
I'd make it 55% chance for the LDs, 45% for the Conservatives.
Nope , astonishingly the Conservatives came 3rd behind Labour in the 2016 locals , the Lib Dems won every seat and led the Conservatives by 5,500 votes
Libs may well do better than forecast. 55 seats in 2010 means they have form. Labour demise could mean they get 70 seats
That is a very commendable first effort, beating ChrisA’s 50 LD seats.
But, it dwarfs WilliamGlenn’s spectacle of 150 LD MPs.
My guess is that they’ll get ~10 MPs.
No gains at all?
Not Edinburgh West nor Fife NE nor Dumbartonshire East?
Not even in leafy SW London? Or the hearts of Remainia? And no benefit from Labour being down 5 percentage points or more, while the LDs have increased their vote share by 50%?
I reckon 12 seats in the minimum.
10 seats is one gain.
Net. Maybe they lose a couple, gain 3.
I don't think they'll lose Carshalton & Wallington because there's a big Labour (and a smaller Green) vote to squeeze.
Southport will be tougher, as it was a Leave voting area, and as the Conservatives can hope to eat into the sizeable UKIP vote, but I'd still make them narrow favourites to hold on.
Other than those two, which seats do you see as vulnerable?
The Labour vote in Carshalton is very working-class - it will less profitable for the LibDems than the Labour vote in the Richmond and Kingston boroughs.
Southport might give an indication on LibDem personal votes.
Southport was Liberal for a long time, even before Pugh. Alongside O&S and Montgomery, it's probably the most Liberal return constituency outside the SW.
This Progressive Alliance suggested by Nicola is clever politics as she wants a big conservative win and knows that Lynton Crosby will already have Corbyn and Farron as puppets on Nicola's string.
Looks like the campaign with less than a few hours old is following the last one with Miliband in Salmonds pocket. Corbyn has already had to deny a Progressive Alliance with the SNP and Theresa May has used puppets in her presentation in Bolton.
Oh absolutely, this is an obvious angle for the SNP to pursue. They know they're unpopular outside their own borders, and therefore any talk of such a pact acts as contagion against the Tories' opponents elsewhere. And the stronger the Tories get, the better their "stuck with an endless string of right-wing Governments we didn't vote for" argument plays at home. Which, in turn, is helpful to the SNP's independence drive, which is ultimately all they care about.
The Conservatives South of the Border, for their part, can use the SNP as a stick with which to beat their opponents at every single General Election until one of the following occurs:
1. Enough Scots get fed up of the SNP for the Scottish opposition to stage a big revival. The principal beneficiaries of such a thing look set to be the Conservatives, which would make their position in Parliament more secure. 2. Scotland becomes independent. That particular reservoir of leftist opposition MPs in the House of Commons is then permanently removed, which would make the Tories' position in Parliament much more secure. 3. An Opposition emerges in England which is strong enough either to win an outright majority without Scottish votes and/or to challenge for a position of real strength in Scotland, or - if obliged to turn to the SNP for support - capable of being trusted not to fall victim to puppetry. This looks to be a very long way off.
Overall, the Scottish situation works very strongly in favour of Conservative HQ in London. If Scotland does go then whichever poor sod is Prime Minister at the time will probably be required to fall on his or her sword, but other than that it's a real advantage.
English hatin', Jew Baitin', Republican Homophobes
This is what Farron said today on the subject of whether being gay was a sin:
Mr Farron replied: "I do not. And I tell you what, I am very proud to have gone through the lobby behind him in the coalition government where the Liberal Democrats introduced gay marriage, equal marriage, and indeed did not go as far as it should have done in terms of recognising transgender rights.
"However, there is much more to be done, and if we campaign in this election, as we will, for an open, tolerant, united society, then we need to make sure that we do not in any way be complacent about LGBT rights, not just here, but in other parts of the world."
Bloody LDs, crap at homophobia. You need kippers for that, or at least the turnip taliban.
Gina Miller should stand. She is erudite, intelligent, telegenic and (it has to be said) beautiful. What better poster girl for Remain could there be? Let her stand against May as convenor of a one-off Anti Brexit Alliance. The Tories would still win. But at least it might make a temporary tussle of it.
you mean shes a hot bitch as you progressives would phrase it ?
Libs may well do better than forecast. 55 seats in 2010 means they have form. Labour demise could mean they get 70 seats
That is a very commendable first effort, beating ChrisA’s 50 LD seats.
But, it dwarfs WilliamGlenn’s spectacle of 150 LD MPs.
My guess is that they’ll get ~10 MPs.
No gains at all?
Not Edinburgh West nor Fife NE nor Dumbartonshire East?
Not even in leafy SW London? Or the hearts of Remainia? And no benefit from Labour being down 5 percentage points or more, while the LDs have increased their vote share by 50%?
I reckon 12 seats in the minimum.
I can't see how they won't gain seats. they got 9 when they got no votes. Local by-elections show they have a chance. more than 20 nailed on.
Would you like to say exactly which 20+ seats are nailed-on LibDem gains ?
Could they lose Southport
Yes. It's a (marginally) Leave voting area, which they won on barely more than 30% of the vote last time.
But there's a student vote to eat into, and the Labour Party is likely to go backwards to their benefit.
I'd make it 55% chance for the LDs, 45% for the Conservatives.
Nope , astonishingly the Conservatives came 3rd behind Labour in the 2016 locals , the Lib Dems won every seat and led the Conservatives by 5,500 votes
Which wards make up the constituency and what were the vote shares? That certainly indicates that the LDs have decent local organisation (which together with the Hanretty Remain/Leave estimates) should certainly make them favourites in the seat.
English hatin', Jew Baitin', Republican Homophobes
This is what Farron said today on the subject of whether being gay was a sin:
Mr Farron replied: "I do not. And I tell you what, I am very proud to have gone through the lobby behind him in the coalition government where the Liberal Democrats introduced gay marriage, equal marriage, and indeed did not go as far as it should have done in terms of recognising transgender rights.
"However, there is much more to be done, and if we campaign in this election, as we will, for an open, tolerant, united society, then we need to make sure that we do not in any way be complacent about LGBT rights, not just here, but in other parts of the world."
Bloody LDs, crap at homophobia. You need kippers for that, or at least the turnip taliban.
Libs may well do better than forecast. 55 seats in 2010 means they have form. Labour demise could mean they get 70 seats
That is a very commendable first effort, beating ChrisA’s 50 LD seats.
But, it dwarfs WilliamGlenn’s spectacle of 150 LD MPs.
My guess is that they’ll get ~10 MPs.
No gains at all?
Not Edinburgh West nor Fife NE nor Dumbartonshire East?
Not even in leafy SW London? Or the hearts of Remainia? And no benefit from Labour being down 5 percentage points or more, while the LDs have increased their vote share by 50%?
I reckon 12 seats in the minimum.
10 seats is one gain.
Net. Maybe they lose a couple, gain 3.
I don't think they'll lose Carshalton & Wallington because there's a big Labour (and a smaller Green) vote to squeeze.
Southport will be tougher, as it was a Leave voting area, and as the Conservatives can hope to eat into the sizeable UKIP vote, but I'd still make them narrow favourites to hold on.
Other than those two, which seats do you see as vulnerable?
Hasn’t Brake been in trouble locally with favourable property deals from Sutton council to a company he directs ? Guido was banging on about it a while back. I don’t know Carshalton, so I am happy to take advice from local experts.
Ceredigion I do know well. The 2015 election was very dirty, with Mark Williams (now exposed as a election expenses fraudster by the Electoral Commission) smearing the Plaid Cymru candidate as a fascist. I don’t think what we have learned since 2015 has improved Mark’s chances.
Southport looks a goner to me.
The remaining seats look safe.
What about North Norfolk? Lamb has a 4,000 majority but there are over 8,000 Ukip votes to mine. Local authority area (broadly coterminous with the constituency if I'm not mistaken) has a relatively high average age (47,) and voted 59:41 to Leave.
Libs may well do better than forecast. 55 seats in 2010 means they have form. Labour demise could mean they get 70 seats
That is a very commendable first effort, beating ChrisA’s 50 LD seats.
But, it dwarfs WilliamGlenn’s spectacle of 150 LD MPs.
My guess is that they’ll get ~10 MPs.
No gains at all?
Not Edinburgh West nor Fife NE nor Dumbartonshire East?
Not even in leafy SW London? Or the hearts of Remainia? And no benefit from Labour being down 5 percentage points or more, while the LDs have increased their vote share by 50%?
I reckon 12 seats in the minimum.
I can't see how they won't gain seats. they got 9 when they got no votes. Local by-elections show they have a chance. more than 20 nailed on.
Would you like to say exactly which 20+ seats are nailed-on LibDem gains ?
Could they lose Southport
Yes. It's a (marginally) Leave voting area, which they won on barely more than 30% of the vote last time.
But there's a student vote to eat into, and the Labour Party is likely to go backwards to their benefit.
I'd make it 55% chance for the LDs, 45% for the Conservatives.
Nope , astonishingly the Conservatives came 3rd behind Labour in the 2016 locals , the Lib Dems won every seat and led the Conservatives by 5,500 votes
Which wards make up the constituency and what were the vote shares? That certainly indicates that the LDs have decent local organisation (which together with the Hanretty Remain/Leave estimates) should certainly make them favourites in the seat.
Ainsdale , Birkdale , Cambridge , Dukes , Kew , Meols and Norwood . It is first time ever LDems have won all 7
English hatin', Jew Baitin', Republican Homophobes
This is what Farron said today on the subject of whether being gay was a sin:
Mr Farron replied: "I do not. And I tell you what, I am very proud to have gone through the lobby behind him in the coalition government where the Liberal Democrats introduced gay marriage, equal marriage, and indeed did not go as far as it should have done in terms of recognising transgender rights.
"However, there is much more to be done, and if we campaign in this election, as we will, for an open, tolerant, united society, then we need to make sure that we do not in any way be complacent about LGBT rights, not just here, but in other parts of the world."
Bloody LDs, crap at homophobia. You need kippers for that, or at least the turnip taliban.
Should Corbyn have to step down on health grounds in the run up to 8th June - does Watson become leader pending a new leadership contest. What impact, if any would this have on Labor support levels ?
Why do/did people hate the FTPA so much? As much as it annoyed me during the Coalition years, it strikes me as a generally good principle that PMs cannot cut and run at the time of their own choosing.
But as May has just shown, it doesn't prevent that at all.
Libs may well do better than forecast. 55 seats in 2010 means they have form. Labour demise could mean they get 70 seats
That is a very commendable first effort, beating ChrisA’s 50 LD seats.
But, it dwarfs WilliamGlenn’s spectacle of 150 LD MPs.
My guess is that they’ll get ~10 MPs.
No gains at all?
Not Edinburgh West nor Fife NE nor Dumbartonshire East?
Not even in leafy SW London? Or the hearts of Remainia? And no benefit from Labour being down 5 percentage points or more, while the LDs have increased their vote share by 50%?
I reckon 12 seats in the minimum.
10 seats is one gain.
Net. Maybe they lose a couple, gain 3.
I don't think they'll lose Carshalton & Wallington because there's a big Labour (and a smaller Green) vote to squeeze.
Southport will be tougher, as it was a Leave voting area, and as the Conservatives can hope to eat into the sizeable UKIP vote, but I'd still make them narrow favourites to hold on.
Other than those two, which seats do you see as vulnerable?
The Labour vote in Carshalton is very working-class - it will less profitable for the LibDems than the Labour vote in the Richmond and Kingston boroughs.
Southport might give an indication on LibDem personal votes.
Southport was Liberal for a long time, even before Pugh. Alongside O&S and Montgomery, it's probably the most Liberal return constituency outside the SW.
I have to disagree.
Southport was won only four times by the Liberals (1906, 1923, 1987 and 1997) in the twenty century.
Libs may well do better than forecast. 55 seats in 2010 means they have form. Labour demise could mean they get 70 seats
That is a very commendable first effort, beating ChrisA’s 50 LD seats.
But, it dwarfs WilliamGlenn’s spectacle of 150 LD MPs.
My guess is that they’ll get ~10 MPs.
No gains at all?
Not Edinburgh West nor Fife NE nor Dumbartonshire East?
Not even in leafy SW London? Or the hearts of Remainia? And no benefit from Labour being down 5 percentage points or more, while the LDs have increased their vote share by 50%?
I reckon 12 seats in the minimum.
10 seats is one gain.
Net. Maybe they lose a couple, gain 3.
I don't think they'll lose Carshalton & Wallington because there's a big Labour (and a smaller Green) vote to squeeze.
Southport will be tougher, as it was a Leave voting area, and as the Conservatives can hope to eat into the sizeable UKIP vote, but I'd still make them narrow favourites to hold on.
Other than those two, which seats do you see as vulnerable?
Hasn’t Brake been in trouble locally with favourable property deals from Sutton council to a company he directs ? Guido was banging on about it a while back. I don’t know Carshalton, so I am happy to take advice from local experts.
Ceredigion I do know well. The 2015 election was very dirty, with Mark Williams (now exposed as a election expenses fraudster by the Electoral Commission) smearing the Plaid Cymru candidate as a fascist. I don’t think what we have learned since 2015 has improved Mark’s chances.
Southport looks a goner to me.
The remaining seats look safe.
What about North Norfolk? Lamb has a 4,000 majority but there are over 8,000 Ukip votes to mine. Local authority area (broadly coterminous with the constituency if I'm not mistaken) has a relatively high average age (47,) and voted 59:41 to Leave.
That is a good point. I’d be genuinely sorry if Lamb lost, but he looks vulnerable.
Why do/did people hate the FTPA so much? As much as it annoyed me during the Coalition years, it strikes me as a generally good principle that PMs cannot cut and run at the time of their own choosing.
But as May has just shown, it doesn't prevent that at all.
But that is because Corbyn was too thick to seek to outmanouvre her!
Should Corbyn have to step down on health grounds in the run up to 8th June - does Watson become leader pending a new leadership contest. What impact, if any would this have on Labor support levels ?
There are probably emergency provisions which deal with thatIf he stood down after the locals I suspect a new leader could be appointed - ie not Watson as caretaker.
Libs may well do better than forecast. 55 seats in 2010 means they have form. Labour demise could mean they get 70 seats
That is a very commendable first effort, beating ChrisA’s 50 LD seats.
But, it dwarfs WilliamGlenn’s spectacle of 150 LD MPs.
My guess is that they’ll get ~10 MPs.
No gains at all?
Not Edinburgh West nor Fife NE nor Dumbartonshire East?
Not even in leafy SW London? Or the hearts of Remainia? And no benefit from Labour being down 5 percentage points or more, while the LDs have increased their vote share by 50%?
I reckon 12 seats in the minimum.
I can't see how they won't gain seats. they got 9 when they got no votes. Local by-elections show they have a chance. more than 20 nailed on.
Would you like to say exactly which 20+ seats are nailed-on LibDem gains ?
Could they lose Southport
Yes. It's a (marginally) Leave voting area, which they won on barely more than 30% of the vote last time.
But there's a student vote to eat into, and the Labour Party is likely to go backwards to their benefit.
I'd make it 55% chance for the LDs, 45% for the Conservatives.
Nope , astonishingly the Conservatives came 3rd behind Labour in the 2016 locals , the Lib Dems won every seat and led the Conservatives by 5,500 votes
Which wards make up the constituency and what were the vote shares? That certainly indicates that the LDs have decent local organisation (which together with the Hanretty Remain/Leave estimates) should certainly make them favourites in the seat.
Ainsdale , Birkdale , Cambridge , Dukes , Kew , Meols and Norwood . It is first time ever LDems have won all 7
Vote share approx
LD 39% Lab 21% Con 20% UKIP 12% Green 8%
Are Montgomery or Brecon and Radnor vulnerable to being retaken? Both would have voted Leave. (This area is historically as much Liberal as Tory, although it's small c conservative).
Oxford West and Abingdon boundaries may have been messed around with, I was told, making it a safer Tory seat. But could it still be vulnerable? It voted Remain.
Is there any obligation on Corbyn to resign if he does lose 100 or 150 seats?
Seriously, we are used to red-eyed losers resigning on election night. But, Labour’s problems got far worse when a tearful EdM resigned after the election in 2015.
I could imagine Jeremy may stay on to stabilise the ship.
Why do/did people hate the FTPA so much? As much as it annoyed me during the Coalition years, it strikes me as a generally good principle that PMs cannot cut and run at the time of their own choosing.
But as May has just shown, it doesn't prevent that at all.
But that is because Corbyn was too thick to seek to outmanouvre her!
I don't know. You can argue Corbyn missed a trick with the semantics (he should have pushed for a vote of no confidence) but I struggle to see situations where a LOTO could legitimately argue against going to the country given the opposition's whole role is, you know, to seek to form a government (I suppose there would be some limited circumstances, e.g. a government seeking an election six months to a year before one was scheduled or very early into a new term, but that's about it).
English hatin', Jew Baitin', Republican Homophobes
This is what Farron said today on the subject of whether being gay was a sin:
Mr Farron replied: "I do not. And I tell you what, I am very proud to have gone through the lobby behind him in the coalition government where the Liberal Democrats introduced gay marriage, equal marriage, and indeed did not go as far as it should have done in terms of recognising transgender rights.
"However, there is much more to be done, and if we campaign in this election, as we will, for an open, tolerant, united society, then we need to make sure that we do not in any way be complacent about LGBT rights, not just here, but in other parts of the world."
Bloody LDs, crap at homophobia. You need kippers for that, or at least the turnip taliban.
Is there any obligation on Corbyn to resign if he does lose 100 or 150 seats?
Seriously, we are used to red-eyed losers resigning on election night. But, Labour’s problems got far worse when a tearful EdM resigned after the election in 2015.
I could imagine Jeremy may stay on to stabilise the ship.
Comments
https://twitter.com/LBC/status/854752121505415168
Basically the PLP hijacks the party. Undemocratic, sure, but would it turn out so badly for them afterwards? If they are already going to face a slaughter, why not try this gamble?
Edit: Because Corbyn will almost certainly not step down after his loss, he hasn't finished remaking the party
Looks like the campaign with less than a few hours old is following the last one with Miliband in Salmonds pocket. Corbyn has already had to deny a Progressive Alliance with the SNP and Theresa May has used puppets in her presentation in Bolton.
IMO, Alliance and SDLP would be crucified if they aligned themselves with Sinn Fein. Alliance support in pro-Union constituencies would collapse, and Unionist tactical voting for SDLP in South Down and Foyle to keep out Sinn Fein would vanish.
That said, I disagree with it being undemocratic – Vote for us, get Jarvis – perfectly acceptable (if unlikely) campaign line.
£50 from me to you if the LDs lose both, £50 from you to me if they win both. Nothing in the event of one win and one loss.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/19/george-osborne-history-will-not-be-kind-to-a-man-whose-flaws-led-to-brexit?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
Net. Maybe they lose a couple, gain 3.
That's a keeper!
Kwasi is the only one with a genuinely first rate intelligence.
Do you think they'll mention their EU policy (what is it today?) or currency plans too?
"If you add up all the aid that all OECD countries have given since they started counting it in 1960, and then assume that the only thing that this aid has achieved was the eradication of smallpox, then the whole thing would still be a bargain, costing less than half what the UK National Health Service spends on average to save a life."
To address your point directly. For many years I and a small group of fellow Geologists have directly supported a medical clinic in a slum on the outskirts of Kampala. The money we provide basically runs the clinic and its immunisation and pre and post natal facilities. I do not donate via any of the established charities since I believe they spend too much money on their own organisations and not enough on the front line.
Apparently without realising that Con + UKIP has secured 49% or 50+% of the vote in every opinion poll this year
Kwasi always comes across very well on radio/tv too - why oh why has he not been promoted yet?
(not that I think it will!)
Anyone returning to the fold, after the meeting I was discussing matters with a friend, another Remainer, and we bothn agreed that we didn’t feel the country was ‘coming together’. We felt surrounded by triumphalist Leavers.
I’ve been a ‘left' voter all my life and I’ve never experienced the same feeling.
And I’ve been voting a long time. I remember Feb. 1974 when we had a “Who Governs” election and the response of the electorate was “whoever does, it’s not you’ to Heath, who’d called the election.
History repeats itself first as farce, then as tragedy; I suspect therefore that we can expect a farcical result.
Cambridge: I think I can get better odds than evens that Huppert will lose.
It's simply an invitation for sizeable defections to the Tories and Ukip - whom. lest we forget, polled a combined 55% of all the votes cast in England even in GE2015, when Corbyn was still a back bench obscurity.
Southport will be tougher, as it was a Leave voting area, and as the Conservatives can hope to eat into the sizeable UKIP vote, but I'd still make them narrow favourites to hold on.
Other than those two, which seats do you see as vulnerable?
Theresa May is a disgrace-she called an Election because she rejects the idea of an Opposition in our democracy.We are not some dictatorship
Er, Chuka luv, dictators don't usually call elections.....
'Show me where the nasty, Hamas supporting, RA loving socialist touched you'
But there's a student vote to eat into, and the Labour Party is likely to go backwards to their benefit.
I'd make it 55% chance for the LDs, 45% for the Conservatives.
Instead they increased their majority to 26%:
Apparently it's the wrong type of election.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hS57I6swXcc
Southport might give an indication on LibDem personal votes.
Ceredigion I do know well. The 2015 election was very dirty, with Mark Williams (now exposed as a election expenses fraudster by the Electoral Commission) smearing the Plaid Cymru candidate as a fascist. I don’t think what we have learned since 2015 has improved Mark’s chances.
Southport looks a goner to me.
The remaining seats look safe.
Why do/did people hate the FTPA so much? As much as it annoyed me during the Coalition years, it strikes me as a generally good principle that PMs cannot cut and run at the time of their own choosing.
The Conservatives South of the Border, for their part, can use the SNP as a stick with which to beat their opponents at every single General Election until one of the following occurs:
1. Enough Scots get fed up of the SNP for the Scottish opposition to stage a big revival. The principal beneficiaries of such a thing look set to be the Conservatives, which would make their position in Parliament more secure.
2. Scotland becomes independent. That particular reservoir of leftist opposition MPs in the House of Commons is then permanently removed, which would make the Tories' position in Parliament much more secure.
3. An Opposition emerges in England which is strong enough either to win an outright majority without Scottish votes and/or to challenge for a position of real strength in Scotland, or - if obliged to turn to the SNP for support - capable of being trusted not to fall victim to puppetry. This looks to be a very long way off.
Overall, the Scottish situation works very strongly in favour of Conservative HQ in London. If Scotland does go then whichever poor sod is Prime Minister at the time will probably be required to fall on his or her sword, but other than that it's a real advantage.
Mr Farron replied: "I do not. And I tell you what, I am very proud to have gone through the lobby behind him in the coalition government where the Liberal Democrats introduced gay marriage, equal marriage, and indeed did not go as far as it should have done in terms of recognising transgender rights.
"However, there is much more to be done, and if we campaign in this election, as we will, for an open, tolerant, united society, then we need to make sure that we do not in any way be complacent about LGBT rights, not just here, but in other parts of the world."
Bloody LDs, crap at homophobia. You need kippers for that, or at least the turnip taliban.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/19/bbc-itv-collision-course-theresa-may-say-will-hold-televised/
Vote share approx
LD 39%
Lab 21%
Con 20%
UKIP 12%
Green 8%
I wonder how the benefits people found out ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUJBawlHh0M
Why was it an off-limits point of theology with Cathy Newman, and suddenly answerable in the HoC?
Southport was won only four times by the Liberals (1906, 1923, 1987 and 1997) in the twenty century.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southport_(UK_Parliament_constituency)
It really doesn't compare to the likes of Berwick, Ceredigion, Colne Valley, Isle of Wight or much of rural Scotland as a Lib stronghold.
Oxford West and Abingdon boundaries may have been messed around with, I was told, making it a safer Tory seat. But could it still be vulnerable? It voted Remain.
Seriously, we are used to red-eyed losers resigning on election night. But, Labour’s problems got far worse when a tearful EdM resigned after the election in 2015.
I could imagine Jeremy may stay on to stabilise the ship.
Personal beliefs are irrelevant, it is policy that matters.