1) Charges are bought against all 30 individuals and my FB feed does not shut up about EVVILLLL Tories.
2) Charges are bought against some of the individuals, but people on my FB feed still refer to the 30 cheating EVVILLLL Tories.
3) No charges are bought, but by FB feed says they were guilty and it's all a cover-up by EVVILLLL Tories.
This generally makes my FB feed unreadable at times.
It'll be interesting to see if the rumours involving the charges posted on here in the last week were accurate.
Sounds like we've got the same friends.......
I'm baffled at how many otherwise reasonable Facebook friends of mine have revealed themselves as enthusiastic disciples of Corbyn.
“Because half-a-dozen grasshoppers under a fern make the field ring with their importunate chink, whilst thousands of great cattle, reposed beneath the shadow of the British oak, chew the cud and are silent, pray do not imagine that those who make the noise are the only inhabitants of the field; that of course they are many in number; or that, after all, they are other than the little shrivelled, meagre, hopping, though loud and troublesome insects of the hour." - Edmund Burke
On FB, the Tories keep very quiet (almost universally) but I have 6-8 friends who post Left wing political stuff fairly regularly, and a few apolitical 'centrists' who live in London who certainly dress to the Left, with lots of criticism of the Tories and the NHS etc.
There is nothing more tedious. Except perhaps babies.
Yes I have a number of very left wing friends who post all sorts of extreme stuff. There is absolutely no point commenting as I have a few times, as you will then be subject to abuse a bit like the momentum bunch - you either agree or you must be a Tory or UKIP. There are also the public sector bores who incessantly post that their part of the public sector does not receive enough money, aside from that I don't see any real political comments, and I must assume that if the opinion polls are right then rest are voting conservative in large numbers.
I am not on Facebook, so don't totally understand how it works; but if people are posting a load of stuff that you don't want to read and are also abusive, can't you just unfollow them?
It is possible to unfollow but offline I like the guy. I've just learnt don't bother commenting and just scroll past on the feed. I don't know what he thinks he is achieving apart from preaching to the converted. I only find it abusive as they are so unsubtle politically. I am politically pretty central and despite having voted Lib Dem most of my adult life, I can see the pros and cons on all parties. However I cannot think of anyone of my friends ever posting a pro Tory article , therefore I don't get to comment on those.
The letter recommending Comey's firing from Rosenstein is spectacular.
Wow. You weren't kidding. Thank you @JosiasJessop for the link.
That being said:
(1) I think Comey was in an impossible situation where there was no 'good' choice;
(2) No matter what he had or had not done, and separately from the question of whether the actual decision was right, Trump's method of firing him - by a note through a third party - was utterly wrong and completely reprehensible. It should have been in a personal meeting. If that was the way he ran his businesses no wonder they kept getting into trouble.
The letter is pretty stupid in that any principled case for firing the FBI director ought also to address the issues that to do so is almost without precedent, and fire one who is in the process of conducting an investigation into the president's associates utterly beyond any political norms. That it doesn't even consider these issues, let alone provide a rationale renders its appeal to "regaining the public trust" utterly ridiculous.
If there is a way to undo the state invite to Trump HMG would be well advised to find it. If not, it should be delayed for as long as humanly possible. He is not a friend we should be looking to cultivate.
The letter recommending Comey's firing from Rosenstein is spectacular.
Wow. You weren't kidding. Thank you @JosiasJessop for the link.
That being said:
(1) I think Comey was in an impossible situation where there was no 'good' choice;
(2) No matter what he had or had not done, and separately from the question of whether the actual decision was right, Trump's method of firing him - by a note through a third party - was utterly wrong and completely reprehensible. It should have been in a personal meeting. If that was the way he ran his businesses no wonder they kept getting into trouble.
The letter is pretty stupid in that any principled case for firing the FBI director ought also to address the issues that to do so is almost without precedent, and fire one who is in the process of conducting an investigation into the president's associates utterly beyond any political norms. That it doesn't even consider these issues, let alone provide a rationale renders its appeal to "regaining the public trust" utterly ridiculous.
The FBI was internally up in arms at the failure of its leadership to take the Clinton evidence to trial. Comey, it seems, bowed to pressure not to prosecute Clinton - and thereby lost his internal mandate. He then, bizarrely, decided to re-open the case late in the campaign - thereby losing all Democrat support as this certainly helped Clinton lose some support. And Republican support was completely gone because he had compelling evidence to prosecute Clinton but didn't, and in fact closed the case. So he has scored a huge threefer in utterly pissing off everyone. The Deputy Director's letter recommending he had to go was right. Having received such letters from the Director and Deputy Director at Justice what could Trump do but fire Comey?
1) Charges are bought against all 30 individuals and my FB feed does not shut up about EVVILLLL Tories.
2) Charges are bought against some of the individuals, but people on my FB feed still refer to the 30 cheating EVVILLLL Tories.
3) No charges are bought, but by FB feed says they were guilty and it's all a cover-up by EVVILLLL Tories.
This generally makes my FB feed unreadable at times.
It'll be interesting to see if the rumours involving the charges posted on here in the last week were accurate.
(4) deactivate your FB account for the next 5 weeks
You won't miss much.
Only 5 weeks? Why do people have these things at all?
Good morning, David. Indeed you once again ask the key question. Five/ten years ago I was assured that I would be committing social suicide/isolating myself from the real world/self destruct by declining to sign up to Facebook. I resisted. Many years on I am still a Facebook refusenik. If people want to contact me, they can call or email.
Or chat to you on PB at your convenience.
I had a court case last Friday where FB entries have probably won it for us. They came from the other side, inevitably.
I remember being told, many years ago, never send anything in an e-mail that you don't want to hear read out in open court.
Yep. Especially when it's posted on someone else's website. The internet has no delete button.
As I said last week when the Macron hacking story broke, if I were in charge of IT for a political party I'd be seriously looking at dusting off the old conference call equipment and fax machines for the most sensitive conversations. The email server would need to be hiding behind a vpn and the firewall would be run by a 24/7 team of ex-GCHQ and MI6 guys. It's no longer a case of if you're hacked, but when you're hacked.
In a magnificent example of incompetence, human beings have decided that constant surveillance is not sonething from 1984 to be feared, but rather something to be embraced.
Including PB ramblings in that too...
Absolutely. Facebook is undoubtedly the world's biggest ever invasion of privacy, yet has found more than a billion willing participants.
Young people especially just don't seem to care about privacy any more, not until they graduate and realise that potential employers don't want to read about drug use and sexual promiscuity.
George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four was not supposed to be an instruction manual.
The letter recommending Comey's firing from Rosenstein is spectacular.
It certainly is. You rarely see something so blunt and concise. I take @ydoethur's point about Trump not handling it well but that is a compelling argument.
It's kind of ruined by Trump's letter and the timing is frankly laughable.
Can’t help thinking Crick has overplayed this from the beginning and suspect there will be few, if any prosecutions, but examples must be made, it's time to re-erect the Tyburn Tree.
FPT.OT. When I was an assistant photographer I had to take something to Red Star which was a parcel service run by British Rail.
I walked into a scruffy office with a counter and on the other side was a man in uniform sitting on a wooden chair reading a newspaper. He glanced up and saw me with my parcel and went back to his fag and his newspaper. After several minutes he carefully folded his paper stood up and said "Is this what you're sending....."
I was an ardent lefty back then and I loathed the Tories but I don't want to go back to those days and I'm afraid that's what Corbyn spells to me and many who were alive in the 70's.
His time has gone and though I sympathise with his ideals the thought of service and the related problems with the unions in those days makes me shiver.
Is this the first Right Wing thing you've ever said, Roger?
Nick P had written a piece on why the McDonnell amendment was worth voting for and it made me reflect on why Corbyn is unelectable even for a lefty.
You could never call the CONSERVATIVE party progressive but in spite of them we've moved on since Corbyn's nirvana.
Nick's piece was well written, but the only reason the McDonnell amendment is proposed is to make sure there's always a hard-left Corbynite on the leadership ballot, for the hard-left Corbynite £3 members to vote for, over the wishes of the Parliamentary Labour Party.
I agree. The point I think he overlooked is that the hard left candidate would always win because of the new rules and more importantly it's essential that whoever is chosen has the support of their MPs
I've just looked at my FB page and it is spookily like Mr Meeks'. However there was some 'news' item about an outrage being sparked by the Mays appearance on TV. Supposedly they mentioned "boy's and girl's jobs"
I didn't see the prgramme, but I assume it's fake news. Even the liberated Danes still have that. "Of course men and women are equal here," one Danish woman told me. "But when it's raining, and I want something heavy taken out or brought in ... what else are men for?"
I've said it before, but a reminder, there are constabularies who have sent files to the cps when a visit by the battle bus has been recorded as a national expense, and that cost if transferred to the local campaign still keeps the candidate under their spending limit. I can see no situation where such incidents would warrant prosecution.
I would have thought that was a point in favour of the others under investigation as it's evidence that the classification as national spend wasn't done deliberately with the knowledge that the local limit was in danger of being breached.
1) Charges are bought against all 30 individuals and my FB feed does not shut up about EVVILLLL Tories.
2) Charges are bought against some of the individuals, but people on my FB feed still refer to the 30 cheating EVVILLLL Tories.
3) No charges are bought, but by FB feed says they were guilty and it's all a cover-up by EVVILLLL Tories.
This generally makes my FB feed unreadable at times.
It'll be interesting to see if the rumours involving the charges posted on here in the last week were accurate.
(4) deactivate your FB account for the next 5 weeks
You won't miss much.
Only 5 weeks? Why do people have these things at all?
Good morning, David. Indeed you once again ask the key question. Five/ten years ago I was assured that I would be committing social suicide/isolating myself from the real world/self destruct by declining to sign up to Facebook. I resisted. Many years on I am still a Facebook refusenik. If people want to contact me, they can call or email.
Or chat to you on PB at your convenience.
I had a court case last Friday where FB entries have probably won it for us. They came from the other side, inevitably.
I remember being told, many years ago, never send anything in an e-mail that you don't want to hear read out in open court.
Yep. Especially when it's posted on someone else's website. The internet has no delete button.
snip
In a magnificent example of incompetence, human beings have decided that constant surveillance is not sonething from 1984 to be feared, but rather something to be embraced.
Including PB ramblings in that too...
Absolutely. Facebook is undoubtedly the world's biggest ever invasion of privacy, yet has found more than a billion willing participants.
Young people especially just don't seem to care about privacy any more, not until they graduate and realise that potential employers don't want to read about drug use and sexual promiscuity.
George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four was not supposed to be an instruction manual.
Other day, Yougov found that (iirc) 20% of young people would be happy to have every single minute of their entire lives recorded by video camera. So, yes, I think a generational thing is going on here.
1) Charges are bought against all 30 individuals and my FB feed does not shut up about EVVILLLL Tories.
2) Charges are bought against some of the individuals, but people on my FB feed still refer to the 30 cheating EVVILLLL Tories.
3) No charges are bought, but by FB feed says they were guilty and it's all a cover-up by EVVILLLL Tories.
This generally makes my FB feed unreadable at times.
It'll be interesting to see if the rumours involving the charges posted on here in the last week were accurate.
Sounds like we've got the same friends.......
I'm baffled at how many otherwise reasonable Facebook friends of mine have revealed themselves as enthusiastic disciples of Corbyn.
“Because half-a-dozen grasshoppers under a fern make the field ring with their importunate chink, whilst thousands of great cattle, reposed beneath the shadow of the British oak, chew the cud and are silent, pray do not imagine that those who make the noise are the only inhabitants of the field; that of course they are many in number; or that, after all, they are other than the little shrivelled, meagre, hopping, though loud and troublesome insects of the hour." - Edmund Burke
But we are the people of England; and we have not spoken yet.
The letter recommending Comey's firing from Rosenstein is spectacular.
And equally disingenuous, at least in the timing. It has little to do with Clinton's emails and everything to do with the FBI's investigations into Russian links to the Trump team. Also interesting that the dismissal letter doesn't mention Comey's egregious fault, which was to misrepresent the numbers and nature of Clinton's emails to a recent congressional committee.
FPT.OT. When I was an assistant photographer I had to take something to Red Star which was a parcel service run by British Rail.
I walked into a scruffy office with a counter and on the other side was a man in uniform sitting on a wooden chair reading a newspaper. He glanced up and saw me with my parcel and went back to his fag and his newspaper. After several minutes he carefully folded his paper stood up and said "Is this what you're sending....."
I was an ardent lefty back then and I loathed the Tories but I don't want to go back to those days and I'm afraid that's what Corbyn spells to me and many who were alive in the 70's.
His time has gone and though I sympathise with his ideals the thought of service and the related problems with the unions in those days makes me shiver.
Is this the first Right Wing thing you've ever said, Roger?
Nick P had written a piece on why the McDonnell amendment was worth voting for and it made me reflect on why Corbyn is unelectable even for a lefty.
You could never call the CONSERVATIVE party progressive but in spite of them we've moved on since Corbyn's nirvana.
Nick's piece was well written, but the only reason the McDonnell amendment is proposed is to make sure there's always a hard-left Corbynite on the leadership ballot, for the hard-left Corbynite £3 members to vote for, over the wishes of the Parliamentary Labour Party.
I agree. The point I think he overlooked is that the hard left candidate would always win because of the new rules and more importantly it's essential that whoever is chosen has the support of their MPs
"The point I think he overlooked is that the hard left candidate would always win"
June the eighth is going to be hilarious, it would be even better if Tim Farron got decapitated from his seat by the tories
Not sure it is too good for the long term health of our democracy to pretty much wipe out the Liberal strand of political thought, especially as the social democratic one is also in the process of being obliterated.
FPT.OT. When I was an assistant photographer I had to take something to Red Star which was a parcel service run by British Rail.
I walked into a scruffy office with a counter and on the other side was a man in uniform sitting on a wooden chair reading a newspaper. He glanced up and saw me with my parcel and went back to his fag and his newspaper. After several minutes he carefully folded his paper stood up and said "Is this what you're sending....."
I was an ardent lefty back then and I loathed the Tories but I don't want to go back to those days and I'm afraid that's what Corbyn spells to me and many who were alive in the 70's.
His time has gone and though I sympathise with his ideals the thought of service and the related problems with the unions in those days makes me shiver.
Is this the first Right Wing thing you've ever said, Roger?
Nick P had written a piece on why the McDonnell amendment was worth voting for and it made me reflect on why Corbyn is unelectable even for a lefty.
You could never call the CONSERVATIVE party progressive but in spite of them we've moved on since Corbyn's nirvana.
Nick's piece was well written, but the only reason the McDonnell amendment is proposed is to make sure there's always a hard-left Corbynite on the leadership ballot, for the hard-left Corbynite £3 members to vote for, over the wishes of the Parliamentary Labour Party.
I agree. The point I think he overlooked is that the hard left candidate would always win because of the new rules and more importantly it's essential that whoever is chosen has the support of their MPs
Yes, we have seen what happens when the leadership and the PLP are pulling in different directions, and it's not good. That the vote is a physical poll on the floor of conference, of delegates selected at physical meetings, should mean it will fall.
If it passes, the lunatics will have taken over the asylum, the moderate centre-left will need to find a new home either with the LDs or some form of SDP2.
June the eighth is going to be hilarious, it would be even better if Tim Farron got decapitated from his seat by the tories
Not sure it is too good for the long term health of our democracy to pretty much wipe out the Liberal strand of political thought, especially as the social democratic one is also in the process of being obliterated.
Category error. Lib Dems =\= the Liberal strand of political thought.
On FB, the Tories keep very quiet (almost universally) but I have 6-8 friends who post Left wing political stuff fairly regularly, and a few apolitical 'centrists' who live in London who certainly dress to the Left, with lots of criticism of the Tories and the NHS etc.
There is nothing more tedious. Except perhaps babies.
Yes I have a number of very left wing friends who post all sorts of extreme stuff. There is absolutely no point commenting as I have a few times, as you will then be subject to abuse a bit like the momentum bunch - you either agree or you must be a Tory or UKIP. There are also the public sector bores who incessantly post that their part of the public sector does not receive enough money, aside from that I don't see any real political comments, and I must assume that if the opinion polls are right then rest are voting conservative in large numbers.
I am not on Facebook, so don't totally understand how it works; but if people are posting a load of stuff that you don't want to read and are also abusive, can't you just unfollow them?
Most of Facebook tends to be photos of family and holidays, trips out etc political posting is a minority and on Instagram (also Facebook owned) virtually non existent. It is Twitter where most of the political posts take place
TBH I think that is what annoys me most about people using Facebook for politics. - I read PB for a range of opinions.
This is why it is a struggle for left of centre to cut through on social media. They cut ties with anyone who doesn't think like them, and therefore they are eternally surprised to find out a large part of the population doesn't care about their issues or agree with them.
On FB, the Tories keep very quiet (almost universally) but I have 6-8 friends who post Left wing political stuff fairly regularly, and a few apolitical 'centrists' who live in London who certainly dress to the Left, with lots of criticism of the Tories and the NHS etc.
There is nothing more tedious. Except perhaps babies.
Yes I have a number of very left wing friends who post all sorts of extreme stuff. There is absolutely no point commenting as I have a few times, as you will then be subject to abuse a bit like the momentum bunch - you either agree or you must be a Tory or UKIP. There are also the public sector bores who incessantly post that their part of the public sector does not receive enough money, aside from that I don't see any real political comments, and I must assume that if the opinion polls are right then rest are voting conservative in large numbers.
I am not on Facebook, so don't totally understand how it works; but if people are posting a load of stuff that you don't want to read and are also abusive, can't you just unfollow them?
Social media is quite left wing in terms of commentary. It's the opposite of The Times comment sections.
Other day, Yougov found that (iirc) 20% of young people would be happy to have every single minute of their entire lives recorded by video camera. So, yes, I think a generational thing is going on here.
TSE linked to a story about a woman getting jiggy with a series of dogs the other day. The evidence was a number of memory sticks in her house containing recordings of the whole thing in 1080p video. There was a father/daughter incest case in Manchester a couple of years ago where the parties exchanged texts showing their naughty bits to each other.
Given the choice the police are bound to prosecute the low hanging fruit where evidence like that is available, and the moral of the story is that you can do whatever you fecking want these days provided you do it off camera.
The letter recommending Comey's firing from Rosenstein is spectacular.
And equally disingenuous, at least in the timing. It has little to do with Clinton's emails and everything to do with the FBI's investigations into Russian links to the Trump team. Also interesting that the dismissal letter doesn't mention Comey's egregious fault, which was to misrepresent the numbers and nature of Clinton's emails to a recent congressional committee.
Coney was due to testify infront of a senate committee tomorrow.
On FB, the Tories keep very quiet (almost universally) but I have 6-8 friends who post Left wing political stuff fairly regularly, and a few apolitical 'centrists' who live in London who certainly dress to the Left, with lots of criticism of the Tories and the NHS etc.
There is nothing more tedious. Except perhaps babies.
Yes I have a number of very left wing friends who post all sorts of extreme stuff. There is absolutely no point commenting as I have a few times, as you will then be subject to abuse a bit like the momentum bunch - you either agree or you must be a Tory or UKIP. There are also the public sector bores who incessantly post that their part of the public sector does not receive enough money, aside from that I don't see any real political comments, and I must assume that if the opinion polls are right then rest are voting conservative in large numbers.
I am not on Facebook, so don't totally understand how it works; but if people are posting a load of stuff that you don't want to read and are also abusive, can't you just unfollow them?
Most of Facebook tends to be photos of family and holidays, trips out etc political posting is a minority and on Instagram (also Facebook owned) virtually non existent. It is Twitter where most of the political posts take place
TBH I think that is what annoys me most about people using Facebook for politics. - I read PB for a range of opinions.
This is why it is a struggle for left of centre to cut through on social media. They cut ties with anyone who doesn't think like them, and therefore they are eternally surprised to find out a large part of the population doesn't care about their issues or agree with them.
Agreed totally. I have a friend who is convinced via his social media interaction that a hard left progressive movement is about to sweep all before it.
1) Charges are bought against all 30 individuals and my FB feed does not shut up about EVVILLLL Tories.
2) Charges are bought against some of the individuals, but people on my FB feed still refer to the 30 cheating EVVILLLL Tories.
3) No charges are bought, but by FB feed says they were guilty and it's all a cover-up by EVVILLLL Tories.
This generally makes my FB feed unreadable at times.
It'll be interesting to see if the rumours involving the charges posted on here in the last week were accurate.
Those options look spot on. If it close to the first than the second, it could run as a study and have impact, if it close to 2 than 1 I doubt it will play for long. If it is 3, it's actually easier to moan about rigged systems.
FPT.OT. When I was an assistant photographer I had to take something to Red Star which was a parcel service run by British Rail.
I walked into a scruffy office with a counter and on the other side was a man in uniform sitting on a wooden chair reading a newspaper. He glanced up and saw me with my parcel and went back to his fag and his newspaper. After several minutes he carefully folded his paper stood up and said "Is this what you're sending....."
I was an ardent lefty back then and I loathed the Tories but I don't want to go back to those days and I'm afraid that's what Corbyn spells to me and many who were alive in the 70's.
His time has gone and though I sympathise with his ideals the thought of service and the related problems with the unions in those days makes me shiver.
Is this the first Right Wing thing you've ever said, Roger?
Nick P had written a piece on why the McDonnell amendment was worth voting for and it made me reflect on why Corbyn is unelectable even for a lefty.
You could never call the CONSERVATIVE party progressive but in spite of them we've moved on since Corbyn's nirvana.
Nick's piece was well written, but the only reason the McDonnell amendment is proposed is to make sure there's always a hard-left Corbynite on the leadership ballot, for the hard-left Corbynite £3 members to vote for, over the wishes of the Parliamentary Labour Party.
I agree. The point I think he overlooked is that the hard left candidate would always win because of the new rules and more importantly it's essential that whoever is chosen has the support of their MPs
"The point I think he overlooked is that the hard left candidate would always win"
Overlooked? Or liked?
Nick was a Blairite who even supported Iraq. I wouldn't call him hard left
Off topic but re the Labour announcement about tax rises to pay for education.
Do the tories not need to come up with something more than the mantra that "education spending is at record levels"? It's sounding less and less convincing
Our local paper has stuff about education cuts, equivalent to 5 full time teachers at a local school.
I am not saying I agree with jacking up business taxes - especially with Brexit looming - but the tories just burying their heads in the sand about education funding and not even bothering to sensibly engage with the argument is pretty rubbish.
given today is conspiracy theory day thanks to our friend Mr Trump - are they in fact aiming for a nice 70-80 majority and no more, to try and keep Corbyn in place? Worried they might be doing too well, winning too easily, so are being deliberately piss poor for a bit?
I have never had a conversation on this subject with a single person that I know. In fact, I don't think I have ever heard anyone mention it. The MP expenses story broke at the perfect time - just after the crash while the world was in turmoil, everyone felt vulnerable and the Labour government was pretty much a busted flush that everyone knew was on its way out. That's why it got so much traction. None of those circumstances exist now. Whatever happens, it will make no difference to anything except to the careers and personal lives of anyone affected.
I think Labour can get some mileage from the message 'Now we know why May called the election.' It would also help them to make TM's honesty - or lack of - a campaign issue - ie 'her compulsive aversion to telling the truth'.
On FB, the Tories keep very quiet (almost universally) but I have 6-8 friends who post Left wing political stuff fairly regularly, and a few apolitical 'centrists' who live in London who certainly dress to the Left, with lots of criticism of the Tories and the NHS etc.
There is nothing more tedious. Except perhaps babies.
Yes I have a number of very left wing friends who post all sorts of extreme stuff. There is absolutely no point commenting as I have a few times, as you will then be subject to abuse a bit like the momentum bunch - you either agree or you must be a Tory or UKIP. There are also the public sector bores who incessantly post that their part of the public sector does not receive enough money, aside from that I don't see any real political comments, and I must assume that if the opinion polls are right then rest are voting conservative in large numbers.
I am not on Facebook, so don't totally understand how it works; but if people are posting a load of stuff that you don't want to read and are also abusive, can't you just unfollow them?
Most of Facebook tends to be photos of family and holidays, trips out etc political posting is a minority and on Instagram (also Facebook owned) virtually non existent. It is Twitter where most of the political posts take place
TBH I think that is what annoys me most about people using Facebook for politics. - I read PB for a range of opinions.
This is why it is a struggle for left of centre to cut through on social media. They cut ties with anyone who doesn't think like them, and therefore they are eternally surprised to find out a large part of the population doesn't care about their issues or agree with them.
Agreed totally. I have a friend who is convinced via his social media interaction that a hard left progressive movement is about to sweep all before it.
Can we get some of these guys on Betfair please? That 1.05 on the Tory majority could do with being a little longer
On FB, the Tories keep very quiet (almost universally) but I have 6-8 friends who post Left wing political stuff fairly regularly, and a few apolitical 'centrists' who live in London who certainly dress to the Left, with lots of criticism of the Tories and the NHS etc.
There is nothing more tedious. Except perhaps babies.
Yes I have a number of very left wing friends who post all sorts of extreme stuff. There is absolutely no point commenting as I have a few times, as you will then be subject to abuse a bit like the momentum bunch - you either agree or you must be a Tory or UKIP. There are also the public sector bores who incessantly post that their part of the public sector does not receive enough money, aside from that I don't see any real political comments, and I must assume that if the opinion polls are right then rest are voting conservative in large numbers.
I am not on Facebook, so don't totally understand how it works; but if people are posting a load of stuff that you don't want to read and are also abusive, can't you just unfollow them?
Most of Facebook tends to be photos of family and holidays, trips out etc political posting is a minority and on Instagram (also Facebook owned) virtually non existent. It is Twitter where most of the political posts take place
TBH I think that is what annoys me most about people using Facebook for politics. - I read PB for a range of opinions.
This is why it is a struggle for left of centre to cut through on social media. They cut ties with anyone who doesn't think like them, and therefore they are eternally surprised to find out a large part of the population doesn't care about their issues or agree with them.
Agreed totally. I have a friend who is convinced via his social media interaction that a hard left progressive movement is about to sweep all before it.
Can we get some of these guys on Betfair please? That 1.05 on the Tory majority could do with being a little longer
FPT.OT. When I was an assistant photographer I had to take something to Red Star which was a parcel service run by British Rail.
I walked into a scruffy office with a counter and on the other side was a man in uniform sitting on a wooden chair reading a newspaper. He glanced up and saw me with my parcel and went back to his fag and his newspaper. After several minutes he carefully folded his paper stood up and said "Is this what you're sending....."
I was an ardent lefty back then and I loathed the Tories but I don't want to go back to those days and I'm afraid that's what Corbyn spells to me and many who were alive in the 70's.
His time has gone and though I sympathise with his ideals the thought of service and the related problems with the unions in those days makes me shiver.
Is this the first Right Wing thing you've ever said, Roger?
Nick P had written a piece on why the McDonnell amendment was worth voting for and it made me reflect on why Corbyn is unelectable even for a lefty.
You could never call the CONSERVATIVE party progressive but in spite of them we've moved on since Corbyn's nirvana.
Nick's piece was well written, but the only reason the McDonnell amendment is proposed is to make sure there's always a hard-left Corbynite on the leadership ballot, for the hard-left Corbynite £3 members to vote for, over the wishes of the Parliamentary Labour Party.
I agree. The point I think he overlooked is that the hard left candidate would always win because of the new rules and more importantly it's essential that whoever is chosen has the support of their MPs
"The point I think he overlooked is that the hard left candidate would always win"
Overlooked? Or liked?
Nick was a Blairite who even supported Iraq. I wouldn't call him hard left
None of the others work! There is only bobajobPB these days. I'd be keen to hear from other 'multiple screen namers' - if Tissue Price's dark past is revealed in Don Valley I fear for his chances!!
FPT.OT. When I was an assistant photographer I had to take something to Red Star which was a parcel service run by British Rail.
I walked into a scruffy office with a counter and on the other side was a man in uniform sitting on a wooden chair reading a newspaper. He glanced up and saw me with my parcel and went back to his fag and his newspaper. After several minutes he carefully folded his paper stood up and said "Is this what you're sending....."
I was an ardent lefty back then and I loathed the Tories but I don't want to go back to those days and I'm afraid that's what Corbyn spells to me and many who were alive in the 70's.
His time has gone and though I sympathise with his ideals the thought of service and the related problems with the unions in those days makes me shiver.
Is this the first Right Wing thing you've ever said, Roger?
Nick P had written a piece on why the McDonnell amendment was worth voting for and it made me reflect on why Corbyn is unelectable even for a lefty.
You could never call the CONSERVATIVE party progressive but in spite of them we've moved on since Corbyn's nirvana.
Nick's piece was well written, but the only reason the McDonnell amendment is proposed is to make sure there's always a hard-left Corbynite on the leadership ballot, for the hard-left Corbynite £3 members to vote for, over the wishes of the Parliamentary Labour Party.
I agree. The point I think he overlooked is that the hard left candidate would always win because of the new rules and more importantly it's essential that whoever is chosen has the support of their MPs
"The point I think he overlooked is that the hard left candidate would always win"
Overlooked? Or liked?
Nick was a Blairite who even supported Iraq. I wouldn't call him hard left
Crick's mis-representing of how journalists were supposedly telling the Tories their questions in advance in order to be picked seemingly was because he wasn't being picked.....
A low moment for an excellent journalist. Did he at Least apologise?
I have never had a conversation on this subject with a single person that I know. In fact, I don't think I have ever heard anyone mention it. The MP expenses story broke at the perfect time - just after the crash while the world was in turmoil, everyone felt vulnerable and the Labour government was pretty much a busted flush that everyone knew was on its way out. That's why it got so much traction. None of those circumstances exist now. Whatever happens, it will make no difference to anything except to the careers and personal lives of anyone affected.
I think the difference with the MPs expenses was that that was personal greed, stealing from the taxpayer to line their own pockets. It is really disgraceful more of them didn't go to jail for it. In contrast these are somewhat pettifogging rules that most people don't even know exist let alone understand with no obvious personal benefit at all (except getting elected potentially but the causation of that is extremely uncertain).
The next Parliament is going to be seriously busy with Brexit related legislation but I do hope they find time to revisit this.
Agreed. It's a farce no matter if none are charged, and needs a review.
1) Charges are bought against all 30 individuals and my FB feed does not shut up about EVVILLLL Tories.
2) Charges are bought against some of the individuals, but people on my FB feed still refer to the 30 cheating EVVILLLL Tories.
3) No charges are bought, but by FB feed says they were guilty and it's all a cover-up by EVVILLLL Tories.
This generally makes my FB feed unreadable at times.
It'll be interesting to see if the rumours involving the charges posted on here in the last week were accurate.
(4) deactivate your FB account for the next 5 weeks
You won't miss much.
Only 5 weeks? Why do people have these things at all?
Good morning, David. Indeed you once again ask the key question. Five/ten years ago I was assured that I would be committing social suicide/isolating myself from the real world/self destruct by declining to sign up to Facebook. I resisted. Many years on I am still a Facebook refusenik. If people want to contact me, they can call or email.
Or chat to you on PB at your convenience.
I had a court case last Friday where FB entries have probably won it for us. They came from the other side, inevitably.
I remember being told, many years ago, never send anything in an e-mail that you don't want to hear read out in open court.
With my students, it's 'never post a photograph online you wouldn't be completely happy to explain to your grandmother.'
The longer their polling stays flat at bes, the more plausible it seems. I may not bother voting for them even out of sympathy, there seems so little point.
I've just looked at my FB page and it is spookily like Mr Meeks'. However there was some 'news' item about an outrage being sparked by the Mays appearance on TV. Supposedly they mentioned "boy's and girl's jobs"
I didn't see the prgramme, but I assume it's fake news. Even the liberated Danes still have that. "Of course men and women are equal here," one Danish woman told me. "But when it's raining, and I want something heavy taken out or brought in ... what else are men for?"
That sounds like conforming to modern stereotypes to me :-D .
Off topic but re the Labour announcement about tax rises to pay for education.
Do the tories not need to come up with something more than the mantra that "education spending is at record levels"? It's sounding less and less convincing
Our local paper has stuff about education cuts, equivalent to 5 full time teachers at a local school.
I am not saying I agree with jacking up business taxes - especially with Brexit looming - but the tories just burying their heads in the sand about education funding and not even bothering to sensibly engage with the argument is pretty rubbish.
given today is conspiracy theory day thanks to our friend Mr Trump - are they in fact aiming for a nice 70-80 majority and no more, to try and keep Corbyn in place? Worried they might be doing too well, winning too easily, so are being deliberately piss poor for a bit?
Have you seen the staff lists at schools now. My daughter is going to the same Primary School I left 20 odd years ago. It had 8 staff when I was there, now there are over 40!!
The letter recommending Comey's firing from Rosenstein is spectacular.
Wow. You weren't kidding. Thank you @JosiasJessop for the link.
That being said:
(1) I think Comey was in an impossible situation where there was no 'good' choice;
(2) No matter what he had or had not done, and separately from the question of whether the actual decision was right, Trump's method of firing him - by a note through a third party - was utterly wrong and completely reprehensible. It should have been in a personal meeting. If that was the way he ran his businesses no wonder they kept getting into trouble.
The letter is pretty stupid in that any principled case for firing the FBI director ought also to address the issues that to do so is almost without precedent, and fire one who is in the process of conducting an investigation into the president's associates utterly beyond any political norms. That it doesn't even consider these issues, let alone provide a rationale renders its appeal to "regaining the public trust" utterly ridiculous.
Actually the letter claimed Coney was fired for unnecessarily explaining why the investigation into Clinton was dropped last summer.
Assuming there's a rational ulterior motive to Comey's sacking, their most likely immediate objective is less to replace Comey by someone they think is better, than to disrupt the FBI by decapitation and not replacing the head for a while. In that way they can distract the FBI from its investigations into Trump and Russia
Off topic but re the Labour announcement about tax rises to pay for education.
Do the tories not need to come up with something more than the mantra that "education spending is at record levels"? It's sounding less and less convincing
Our local paper has stuff about education cuts, equivalent to 5 full time teachers at a local school.
I am not saying I agree with jacking up business taxes - especially with Brexit looming - but the tories just burying their heads in the sand about education funding and not even bothering to sensibly engage with the argument is pretty rubbish.
given today is conspiracy theory day thanks to our friend Mr Trump - are they in fact aiming for a nice 70-80 majority and no more, to try and keep Corbyn in place? Worried they might be doing too well, winning too easily, so are being deliberately piss poor for a bit?
Have you seen the staff lists at schools now. My daughter is going to the same Primary School I left 20 odd years ago. It had 8 staff when I was there, now there are over 40!!
Only a valid comparison if you give us the number of pupils then and now.
How many people know that Bennett is deputy pm of NZ, not the UK, given that you can only see the Union flag bit of those flags? In the 1997 campaign there was a headline "Major charged with wife-beating" (can't remember exact offence) and CCHQ insisted on change to "UK army major..."
On FB, the Tories keep very quiet (almost universally) but I have 6-8 friends who post Left wing political stuff fairly regularly, and a few apolitical 'centrists' who live in London who certainly dress to the Left, with lots of criticism of the Tories and the NHS etc.
There is nothing more tedious. Except perhaps babies.
Yes I have a number of very left wing friends who post all sorts of extreme stuff. There is absolutely no point commenting as I have a few times, as you will then be subject to abuse a bit like the momentum bunch - you either agree or you must be a Tory or UKIP. There are also the public sector bores who incessantly post that their part of the public sector does not receive enough money, aside from that I don't see any real political comments, and I must assume that if the opinion polls are right then rest are voting conservative in large numbers.
I am not on Facebook, so don't totally understand how it works; but if people are posting a load of stuff that you don't want to read and are also abusive, can't you just unfollow them?
Most of Facebook tends to be photos of family and holidays, trips out etc political posting is a minority and on Instagram (also Facebook owned) virtually non existent. It is Twitter where most of the political posts take place
TBH I think that is what annoys me most about people using Facebook for politics. - I read PB for a range of opinions.
This is why it is a struggle for left of centre to cut through on social media. They cut ties with anyone who doesn't think like them, and therefore they are eternally surprised to find out a large part of the population doesn't care about their issues or agree with them.
Agreed totally. I have a friend who is convinced via his social media interaction that a hard left progressive movement is about to sweep all before it.
Can we get some of these guys on Betfair please? That 1.05 on the Tory majority could do with being a little longer
Well, quite!
Tell them that if they want to bet £100 on Corbyn being PM after the election, they can win £2,100. If they want to bet £100 on a Labour majority then they can win £6,400 all in less than a month.
They can become rich beyond their imagination if they want to bet against idiots like me, who stupidly thinks they're all wrong and there's going to be a Tory landslide!
I've just looked at my FB page and it is spookily like Mr Meeks'. However there was some 'news' item about an outrage being sparked by the Mays appearance on TV. Supposedly they mentioned "boy's and girl's jobs"
I didn't see the prgramme, but I assume it's fake news. Even the liberated Danes still have that. "Of course men and women are equal here," one Danish woman told me. "But when it's raining, and I want something heavy taken out or brought in ... what else are men for?"
Even for a partisan an outrage would be hard to sustain. They said it, but it was clearly lighthearted, and she is PM, a traditional boy job if ever there was one.
The tv appearance was gentle pablum full of cliche, and they seemed normal, boring but pleasant.
Off topic but re the Labour announcement about tax rises to pay for education.
Do the tories not need to come up with something more than the mantra that "education spending is at record levels"? It's sounding less and less convincing
Our local paper has stuff about education cuts, equivalent to 5 full time teachers at a local school.
I am not saying I agree with jacking up business taxes - especially with Brexit looming - but the tories just burying their heads in the sand about education funding and not even bothering to sensibly engage with the argument is pretty rubbish.
given today is conspiracy theory day thanks to our friend Mr Trump - are they in fact aiming for a nice 70-80 majority and no more, to try and keep Corbyn in place? Worried they might be doing too well, winning too easily, so are being deliberately piss poor for a bit?
Have you seen the staff lists at schools now. My daughter is going to the same Primary School I left 20 odd years ago. It had 8 staff when I was there, now there are over 40!!
Only a valid comparison if you give us the number of pupils then and now.
Maybe a third more. Certainly not 5 times as many.
I've just looked at my FB page and it is spookily like Mr Meeks'. However there was some 'news' item about an outrage being sparked by the Mays appearance on TV. Supposedly they mentioned "boy's and girl's jobs"
I didn't see the prgramme, but I assume it's fake news. Even the liberated Danes still have that. "Of course men and women are equal here," one Danish woman told me. "But when it's raining, and I want something heavy taken out or brought in ... what else are men for?"
I haven't seen it either, but I assumed it was mildly ironic as PM hasn't exactly been a "girl's job" historically.
On FB, the Tories keep very quiet (almost universally) but I have 6-8 friends who post Left wing political stuff fairly regularly, and a few apolitical 'centrists' who live in London who certainly dress to the Left, with lots of criticism of the Tories and the NHS etc.
There is nothing more tedious. Except perhaps babies.
Yes I have a number of very left wing friends who post all sorts of extreme stuff. There is absolutely no point commenting as I have a few times, as you will then be subject to abuse a bit like the momentum bunch - you either agree or you must be a Tory or UKIP. There are also the public sector bores who incessantly post that their part of the public sector does not receive enough money, aside from that I don't see any real political comments, and I must assume that if the opinion polls are right then rest are voting conservative in large numbers.
I am not on Facebook, so don't totally understand how it works; but if people are posting a load of stuff that you don't want to read and are also abusive, can't you just unfollow them?
Most of Facebook tends to be photos of family and holidays, trips out etc political posting is a minority and on Instagram (also Facebook owned) virtually non existent. It is Twitter where most of the political posts take place
TBH I think that is what annoys me most about people using Facebook for politics. - I read PB for a range of opinions.
This is why it is a struggle for left of centre to cut through on social media. They cut ties with anyone who doesn't think like them, and therefore they are eternally surprised to find out a large part of the population doesn't care about their issues or agree with them.
Agreed totally. I have a friend who is convinced via his social media interaction that a hard left progressive movement is about to sweep all before it.
Can we get some of these guys on Betfair please? That 1.05 on the Tory majority could do with being a little longer
Well, quite!
Tell them that if they want to bet £100 on Corbyn being PM after the election, they can win £2,100. If they want to bet £100 on a Labour majority then they can win £6,400 all in less than a month.
They can become rich beyond their imagination if they want to bet against idiots like me, who stupidly thinks they're all wrong and there's going to be a Tory landslide!
I would, but my reticence to agree the revolution is here is already testing the friendship
June the eighth is going to be hilarious, it would be even better if Tim Farron got decapitated from his seat by the tories
Not sure it is too good for the long term health of our democracy to pretty much wipe out the Liberal strand of political thought, especially as the social democratic one is also in the process of being obliterated.
Category error. Lib Dems =\= the Liberal strand of political thought.
Nick Clegg was on TV yesterday explaining why the proposal to cap energy prices was bad economics and he was supporting free markets with competition. Neither Conservatives nor Labour are supporting capitalism any more.
Worst for people than twitter or Facebook is Snapchat. Not only because of all the naughty stuff that people send each other in the incorrect presumption it can't be captured but increasingly da kidz "snap" their day with little regard for who they capture along the way.
Mr. Sandpit, relatively pleased with the little I stuck on UKIP, at 1.66, to get under 10%.
Not sure if they're standing in Morley & Outwood. Incumbent Conservative has a majority of just over 400, but I think UKIP got thousands of votes last time, so they might stand. If not, could help Andrea Jenkyns quite a bit.
The biggest pool of voters that Lib Dems could fish in to get switchers are Conservative remainers.
So it is strange that Lib Dems are going out of their way to alienate these votes by forming a 'Progressive Alliance' with Corbyn Labour and the only party to the left of Corbyn, the Greens.
Worst for people than twitter or Facebook is Snapchat. Not only because of all the naughty stuff that people send each other in the incorrect presumption it can't be captured but increasingly da kidz "snap" their day with little regard for who they capture along the way.
Never mind social media. We carry phones that track everywhere we go, and increasingly we have voice-activated smart devices in our homes which, by definition, are listening to everything we say.
"One potential scenario is for the MPs to resign the Labour whip and become independents grouped together in the Commons under the Progressives banner.
They could then rejoin the Parliamentary Labour Party once Mr Corbyn had been replaced with a leader they supported."
How does that work, if they aren't a party they can't be the official opposition. If they are a party they will be expelled from Labour. If they leave they're unlikely to be welcomed back.
"One potential scenario is for the MPs to resign the Labour whip and become independents grouped together in the Commons under the Progressives banner.
They could then rejoin the Parliamentary Labour Party once Mr Corbyn had been replaced with a leader they supported."
How does that work, if they aren't a party they can't be the official opposition. If they are a party they will be expelled from Labour. If they leave they're unlikely to be welcomed back.
Indeed. It might precipitate a situation where the SNP are designed facto HM opposition
On FB, the Tories keep very quiet (almost universally) but I have 6-8 friends who post Left wing political stuff fairly regularly, and a few apolitical 'centrists' who live in London who certainly dress to the Left, with lots of criticism of the Tories and the NHS etc.
There is nothing more tedious. Except perhaps babies.
Yes I have a number of very left wing friends who post all sorts of extreme stuff. There is absolutely no point commenting as I have a few times, as you will then be subject to abuse a bit like the momentum bunch - you either agree or you must be a Tory or UKIP. There are also the public sector bores who incessantly post that their part of the public sector does not receive enough money, aside from that I don't see any real political comments, and I must assume that if the opinion polls are right then rest are voting conservative in large numbers.
I am not on Facebook, so don't totally understand how it works; but if people are posting a load of stuff that you don't want to read and are also abusive, can't you just unfollow them?
Most of Facebook tends to be photos of family and holidays, trips out etc political posting is a minority and on Instagram (also Facebook owned) virtually non existent. It is Twitter where most of the political posts take place
TBH I think that is what annoys me most about people using Facebook for politics. - I read PB for a range of opinions.
This is why it is a struggle for left of centre to cut through on social media. They cut ties with anyone who doesn't think like them, and therefore they are eternally surprised to find out a large part of the population doesn't care about their issues or agree with them.
Agreed totally. I have a friend who is convinced via his social media interaction that a hard left progressive movement is about to sweep all before it.
Can we get some of these guys on Betfair please? That 1.05 on the Tory majority could do with being a little longer
Well, quite!
Tell them that if they want to bet £100 on Corbyn being PM after the election, they can win £2,100. If they want to bet £100 on a Labour majority then they can win £6,400 all in less than a month.
They can become rich beyond their imagination if they want to bet against idiots like me, who stupidly thinks they're all wrong and there's going to be a Tory landslide!
No need to bet - with Jeremy they will be getting 'our money' back from you soon anyway come the reckoning.
"One potential scenario is for the MPs to resign the Labour whip and become independents grouped together in the Commons under the Progressives banner.
They could then rejoin the Parliamentary Labour Party once Mr Corbyn had been replaced with a leader they supported."
How does that work, if they aren't a party they can't be the official opposition. If they are a party they will be expelled from Labour. If they leave they're unlikely to be welcomed back.
Yeah I don't get it either. Either leave, presumably as they think they'd lose a contest agaibst him, or stay and fight. I guess if they sit as indys they might get suspended rather than expelled and they'd hope Corbyn goes and they can come back suspensions lifted?
Yeah, because Tom Watson is such a lovely cuddly guy, no Labour supporters would ever consider deserting him for Theresa May's winning juggernaut.....
Election night might be a chance for the beeb to dust off their amusing 1997 landslide graphic and show the bigwigs getting buried
If the polls at correct I think it is going to be a long night of despair for the beebers. Unlike 1997 no bubbly bottles littering the hallways and fun to be had at big names losing their seats.
The biggest pool of voters that Lib Dems could fish in to get switchers are Conservative remainers.
So it is strange that Lib Dems are going out of their way to alienate these votes by forming a 'Progressive Alliance' with Corbyn Labour and the only party to the left of Corbyn, the Greens.
Correct - I'm one such Con remainer and it's a strong repellant. Mind you doesn't matter anyway here in the paradise of the Bercow republic.
The biggest pool of voters that Lib Dems could fish in to get switchers are Conservative remainers.
So it is strange that Lib Dems are going out of their way to alienate these votes by forming a 'Progressive Alliance' with Corbyn Labour and the only party to the left of Corbyn, the Greens.
The green cooperation is particularly worrying. But it makes sense as the LDs don't want to be in the centre, they want to be properly of the left.
As I understand it, the MPs concerned will be notified by the CPS at 10.30 am. If they are cleared, I guess news from their personal fb and twitter accounts will start breaking shortly after that...?
The biggest pool of voters that Lib Dems could fish in to get switchers are Conservative remainers.
So it is strange that Lib Dems are going out of their way to alienate these votes by forming a 'Progressive Alliance' with Corbyn Labour and the only party to the left of Corbyn, the Greens.
Correct - I'm one such Con remainer and it's a strong repellant. Mind you doesn't matter anyway here in the paradise of the Bercow republic.
Fancy a vote swap with me.
I'll vote Clegg for you if you spoil your ballot by writing 'Bercow is a knob'
On FB, the Tories keep very quiet (almost universally) but I have 6-8 friends who post Left wing political stuff fairly regularly, and a few apolitical 'centrists' who live in London who certainly dress to the Left, with lots of criticism of the Tories and the NHS etc.
There is nothing more tedious. Except perhaps babies.
Yes I have a number of very left wing friends who post all sorts of extreme stuff. There is absolutely no point commenting as I have a few times, as you will then be subject to abuse a bit like the momentum bunch - you either agree or you must be a Tory or UKIP. There are also the public sector bores who incessantly post that their part of the public sector does not receive enough money, aside from that I don't see any real political comments, and I must assume that if the opinion polls are right then rest are voting conservative in large numbers.
I am not on Facebook, so don't totally understand how it works; but if people are posting a load of stuff that you don't want to read and are also abusive, can't you just unfollow them?
Social media is quite left wing in terms of commentary. It's the opposite of The Times comment sections.
Yes, perhaps mainly because the average age is younger, but Southam is right - if you have "friends" whom you find tiresome, the solution is entirely in your hands. It's like a leftie buying the Mail and getting annoyed by what it says.Of course, you might like your friends for other reasons, in whic case put up with their opinions, shrug.
But I do think that having a range oif opinions to glance at is a useful corrective. I used to know a Danish Supreme Court judge who would ONLY read newspapers whose opinions he disliked, in order to correct his own tendency to self-confirmation, but that can get a bit depressing. As in most things, a balance is a good idea.
Sell UKIP vote share! They're going to be lucky to field candidates in 10% of the seats at this rate.
It messes up the polls too - it looks hard how they'd get, say, the 8 seen in some polls, when they're not standing in many places, so either that vote stays home or goes somewhere else no matter the polls.
The biggest pool of voters that Lib Dems could fish in to get switchers are Conservative remainers.
So it is strange that Lib Dems are going out of their way to alienate these votes by forming a 'Progressive Alliance' with Corbyn Labour and the only party to the left of Corbyn, the Greens.
Correct - I'm one such Con remainer and it's a strong repellant. Mind you doesn't matter anyway here in the paradise of the Bercow republic.
Fancy a vote swap with me.
I'll vote Clegg for you if you spoil your ballot by writing 'Bercow is a knob'
except I've got money on the Tory at 16-1 in Sheffield Hallam.....
Sell UKIP vote share! They're going to be lucky to field candidates in 10% of the seats at this rate.
It messes up the polls too - it looks hard how they'd get, say, the 8 seen in some polls, when they're not standing in many places, so either that vote stays home or goes somewhere else no matter the polls.
I'm still sticking with UKIP achieving < 3% of the vote....
The biggest pool of voters that Lib Dems could fish in to get switchers are Conservative remainers.
So it is strange that Lib Dems are going out of their way to alienate these votes by forming a 'Progressive Alliance' with Corbyn Labour and the only party to the left of Corbyn, the Greens.
Correct - I'm one such Con remainer and it's a strong repellant. Mind you doesn't matter anyway here in the paradise of the Bercow republic.
Fancy a vote swap with me.
I'll vote Clegg for you if you spoil your ballot by writing 'Bercow is a knob'
If you marked a box and wrote that you wouldn't spoil the ballot would you? There'd be a clear indication and they couldn't identify from that statement.
The biggest pool of voters that Lib Dems could fish in to get switchers are Conservative remainers.
So it is strange that Lib Dems are going out of their way to alienate these votes by forming a 'Progressive Alliance' with Corbyn Labour and the only party to the left of Corbyn, the Greens.
Correct - I'm one such Con remainer and it's a strong repellant. Mind you doesn't matter anyway here in the paradise of the Bercow republic.
Fancy a vote swap with me.
I'll vote Clegg for you if you spoil your ballot by writing 'Bercow is a knob'
except I've got money on the Tory at 16-1 in Sheffield Hallam.....
The biggest pool of voters that Lib Dems could fish in to get switchers are Conservative remainers.
So it is strange that Lib Dems are going out of their way to alienate these votes by forming a 'Progressive Alliance' with Corbyn Labour and the only party to the left of Corbyn, the Greens.
They aren't. The Lib Dems have stood down for Caroline Lucas and there might be one or two "campaign less hard than we would otherwise" places, but in general they're resisting attempts for alliances - so much so that the Greens have now given up asking them on the national level.
TBH I think this is pretty shortsighted. Oxfordshire CC will be a Conservative+Independent coalition this time, same as it has been for the last four years. If the Lib Dems and Labour had focused their campaigning a bit more smartly we would be looking at an LD+Labour coalition right now, but there were several divisions (such as Chipping Norton) where they campaigned against each other, letting the Conservatives through.
There is nothing more tedious. Except perhaps babies.
Yes I have a number of very left wing friends who post all sorts of extreme stuff. There is absolutely no point commenting as I have a few times, as you will then be subject to abuse a bit like the momentum bunch - you either agree or you must be a Tory or UKIP. There are also the public sector bores who incessantly post that their part of the public sector does not receive enough money, aside from that I don't see any real political comments, and I must assume that if the opinion polls are right then rest are voting conservative in large numbers.
I am not on Facebook, so don't totally understand how it works; but if people are posting a load of stuff that you don't want to read and are also abusive, can't you just unfollow them?
Most of Facebook tends to be photos of family and holidays, trips out etc political posting is a minority and on Instagram (also Facebook owned) virtually non existent. It is Twitter where most of the political posts take place
TBH I think that is what annoys me most about people using Facebook for politics. - I read PB for a range of opinions.
This is why it is a struggle for left of centre to cut through on social media. They cut ties with anyone who doesn't think like them, and therefore they are eternally surprised to find out a large part of the population doesn't care about their issues or agree with them.
Agreed totally. I have a friend who is convinced via his social media interaction that a hard left progressive movement is about to sweep all before it.
Can we get some of these guys on Betfair please? That 1.05 on the Tory majority could do with being a little longer
Well, quite!
Tell them that if they want to bet £100 on Corbyn being PM after the election, they can win £2,100. If they want to bet £100 on a Labour majority then they can win £6,400 all in less than a month.
They can become rich beyond their imagination if they want to bet against idiots like me, who stupidly thinks they're all wrong and there's going to be a Tory landslide!
No need to bet - with Jeremy they will be getting 'our money' back from you soon anyway come the reckoning.
LOL! But in the meantime we need all the Believers to put their money where their mouth is and get that 1.05 out to something sensible like 1.50
"One potential scenario is for the MPs to resign the Labour whip and become independents grouped together in the Commons under the Progressives banner.
They could then rejoin the Parliamentary Labour Party once Mr Corbyn had been replaced with a leader they supported."
How does that work, if they aren't a party they can't be the official opposition. If they are a party they will be expelled from Labour. If they leave they're unlikely to be welcomed back.
Leave Labour -> Form "progressive party" -> Corbyn goes -> Labour merges with "progressive party"
Since progressives and Labour have merged (like the Alliance merging to become Lib Dems) those who quit Labour are suddenly back in it.
Comments
- Edmund Burke
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/09/exclusive-100-moderate-labour-mps-form-breakaway-group-jeremy/
Young people especially just don't seem to care about privacy any more, not until they graduate and realise that potential employers don't want to read about drug use and sexual promiscuity.
George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four was not supposed to be an instruction manual.
Can’t help thinking Crick has overplayed this from the beginning and suspect there will be few, if any prosecutions, but examples must be made, it's time to re-erect the Tyburn Tree.
I didn't see the prgramme, but I assume it's fake news. Even the liberated Danes still have that. "Of course men and women are equal here," one Danish woman told me. "But when it's raining, and I want something heavy taken out or brought in ... what else are men for?"
"The point I think he overlooked is that the hard left candidate would always win"
Overlooked? Or liked?
If it passes, the lunatics will have taken over the asylum, the moderate centre-left will need to find a new home either with the LDs or some form of SDP2.
This is why it is a struggle for left of centre to cut through on social media. They cut ties with anyone who doesn't think like them, and therefore they are eternally surprised to find out a large part of the population doesn't care about their issues or agree with them.
Given the choice the police are bound to prosecute the low hanging fruit where evidence like that is available, and the moral of the story is that you can do whatever you fecking want these days provided you do it off camera.
The constituency voted Remain.
The Liberal Democrats increased their vote share in the constituency last week.
It's possible he loses, of course. But W&L is not one of the 3 LD seats where Con + UKIP > LD
Do the tories not need to come up with something more than the mantra that "education spending is at record levels"? It's sounding less and less convincing
Our local paper has stuff about education cuts, equivalent to 5 full time teachers at a local school.
I am not saying I agree with jacking up business taxes - especially with Brexit looming - but the tories just burying their heads in the sand about education funding and not even bothering to sensibly engage with the argument is pretty rubbish.
given today is conspiracy theory day thanks to our friend Mr Trump - are they in fact aiming for a nice 70-80 majority and no more, to try and keep Corbyn in place? Worried they might be doing too well, winning too easily, so are being deliberately piss poor for a bit?
Facebook 'friends' or actual friends?
None of the others work! There is only bobajobPB these days. I'd be keen to hear from other 'multiple screen namers' - if Tissue Price's dark past is revealed in Don Valley I fear for his chances!!
Assuming there's a rational ulterior motive to Comey's sacking, their most likely immediate objective is less to replace Comey by someone they think is better, than to disrupt the FBI by decapitation and not replacing the head for a while. In that way they can distract the FBI from its investigations into Trump and Russia
How many people know that Bennett is deputy pm of NZ, not the UK, given that you can only see the Union flag bit of those flags? In the 1997 campaign there was a headline "Major charged with wife-beating" (can't remember exact offence) and CCHQ insisted on change to "UK army major..."
If they want to bet £100 on a Labour majority then they can win £6,400 all in less than a month.
They can become rich beyond their imagination if they want to bet against idiots like me, who stupidly thinks they're all wrong and there's going to be a Tory landslide!
The tv appearance was gentle pablum full of cliche, and they seemed normal, boring but pleasant.
http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/politics/we-need-to-rid-ourselves-of-our-liberal-democrat-mp-ukip-not-standing-in-north-norfolk-and-urge-supporters-to-vote-conservative-to-unseat-norman-lamb-1-5010438
Nick Clegg was on TV yesterday explaining why the proposal to cap energy prices was bad economics and he was supporting free markets with competition. Neither Conservatives nor Labour are supporting capitalism any more.
Not sure if they're standing in Morley & Outwood. Incumbent Conservative has a majority of just over 400, but I think UKIP got thousands of votes last time, so they might stand. If not, could help Andrea Jenkyns quite a bit.
The biggest pool of voters that Lib Dems could fish in to get switchers are Conservative remainers.
So it is strange that Lib Dems are going out of their way to alienate these votes by forming a 'Progressive Alliance' with Corbyn Labour and the only party to the left of Corbyn, the Greens.
4 weeks and these idiots could be running the country.
They could then rejoin the Parliamentary Labour Party once Mr Corbyn had been replaced with a leader they supported."
How does that work, if they aren't a party they can't be the official opposition. If they are a party they will be expelled from Labour.
If they leave they're unlikely to be welcomed back.
Dream headline in the early hours of June 9th
'Salmond filleted and Lamb Roasted by the Tories'
I'll vote Clegg for you if you spoil your ballot by writing 'Bercow is a knob'
But I do think that having a range oif opinions to glance at is a useful corrective. I used to know a Danish Supreme Court judge who would ONLY read newspapers whose opinions he disliked, in order to correct his own tendency to self-confirmation, but that can get a bit depressing. As in most things, a balance is a good idea.
I'm also registered in Manchester Central.
I can vote Lucy Powell instead?
TBH I think this is pretty shortsighted. Oxfordshire CC will be a Conservative+Independent coalition this time, same as it has been for the last four years. If the Lib Dems and Labour had focused their campaigning a bit more smartly we would be looking at an LD+Labour coalition right now, but there were several divisions (such as Chipping Norton) where they campaigned against each other, letting the Conservatives through.
https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/862218498243743744
Since progressives and Labour have merged (like the Alliance merging to become Lib Dems) those who quit Labour are suddenly back in it.