I am coming to the view that May is both wholly indecisive and wholly ruthless, which is a peculiar and unsettling combination. She isn't another Iron Lady; she's more a sort of Iron David Miliband.
That's a genuinely original and left field suggestion.
If hypothetically it was a Tory 15 point win then I'd say that takes Labour towards the 160, 170 mark. They would lose anything with a sub 8k majority in the Midlands and North East I suspect, as well as seats everywhere outside of London where they hold a 4k majority. Everything points to Lab voter efficiency being really poor, and a lack of work targetting the people that matter in the marginals.
Of course there is a long way to go before anything like a 15 point lead is guaranteed. It could just as easily be 7 points, 10 points or 20 points!
Countries that are critical of Israel still get hit by terrorists. Israel's existence is a pretext, rather than a real grievance.
It is not their existence but their refusal to accept UN resolutions that causes many in the Arab world (and the world in general) to feel there are double standards. The grievance is very real.
I heard a rare intelligent discussion between Saeb Erekat and Tzipi Livni on French TV. Erekat pointed to the impossibility of getting the Palestinians to recognise Israel's borders including their right to Jerusalem (promised to them by God 3000 years ago) before talks could start while ignoring Israel's refusal to recognise Palestine at all.
Having said that their agreement on many issues was hopeful.
It is their existence. Some will point to Israeli failings and behaviour and there are no doubt legitimate grievances. That Israel was itself a state founded on terrorism is one of history's ironies but irrelevant now.
The incompatible facts are: (1) a significant group of Arabs do not accept Israel's right to exist; (2) Israel, in order to give itself physical security, imposes restrictions on Arabs that contravene expected norms of polite society. The two feed directly to each other. Throwing God into the mix doesn't help either.
It's true of most ethnic conflicts. The weaker group may very well have legitimate grievances against the stronger group, but what ultimately rankles with them is the very presence of the stronger group. Substantial numbers of the weaker group want the State to be destroyed, not reformed.
I'm getting slightly worried Labour might manage around 200 seats. That could lead to Corbyn staying on - And that really would be a travesty for democracy.
Absolutely meaningless figures, the Labour force figures were unaffordable and done on a basis of a massive and ever increasing deficit. Tory force figures have been with a reducing deficit.
Only if Labour was prioritising the force in an affordable and sustainable way without a deficit would it be meaningful.
The authorities response to this attack is rather different than previous ones.
She quickly changed "likely" to "possible". The authorities don't know if he acted alone and are taking precautions in case he wasn't. "Likely" means probable >50%. "Possible" means > 0%. In practice >10% say.
When the dust settles from this attack and the politics restarts May would do well to publically state she is briefing both 'the leader of the opposition Jeremy Corbyn and the shadow home secretary Diane Abbott' on our national security. That will help focus minds like nothing else. Even if you believe in Corbyn's ideology even the most hardened momentum supporters must have doubts regarding Corbyn and Abbott leading the fight on terror in these dark days.
Entirely agree with this, I'm no fan of Amber Rudd, but the thought of Diane Abbott being in her position right now is chilling. People need to understand and see that that is the reality of the tories not gaining a majority
Oh yes as a leave voter I found Rudd somewhat grating during the referendum debates, however she does have a brain and like many politicians her greatest strength is not being Diane Abbott.
Absolutely meaningless figures, the Labour force figures were unaffordable and done on a basis of a massive and ever increasing deficit. Tory force figures have been with a reducing deficit.
Only if Labour was prioritising the force in an affordable and sustainable way without a deficit would it be meaningful.
Also worth bearing in mind that crime rates are lower than in 2011 (and much lower than in 2003 when the series begins).
I'm getting slightly worried Labour might manage around 200 seats. That could lead to Corbyn staying on - And that really would be a travesty for democracy.
Leader model extrapolation yields ~ 17% lead. Local election ~ 19.5% lead.
In my view a Tory lead of 15% will see Lab sub 200
What should be the labour uo line? I backed under 177.5 at EVS
I genuinely have no idea on this one now, sorry
I'll settle for 177!
Has so much changed since sub 150 seemed likely?
Hmm Well the leads are definitely lower, and I think the Labour destruction was a bit overcooked in the early days. That is not to say it won't happen - a 16% lead for the Tories on election night is tough to predict exactly how that makes the Labour total be affected. The one thing that keeps Labour up is the abject performance from the LDs thus far.
I think I've messed up slightly on my Lab seat band bets, but constituency wise I'm reasonably confident of value in most cases. Except Cardiff Central - that's become a small tar pit.
I'm in favour of the govt backdating £27k tuition fees to 2012 @ current interest rates (6.1%) for all living graduates.
If it's not fair for non-graduates to subsidise graduates, it's monumentally unfair to wallop new graduates and let existing ones off the hook.
The tories have ripped up the generational covenant.
It would be monumentally unfair to charge people for something they were never told they would be charged for either.
I was amongst the first to go to university paying fees after Tony Blair introduced fees. We felt hard done by, my parents generation had got grants and free university, I got loans and fees. But I've paid my loan repayments and fees over time as due. When I look at what has changed since I now realise I was not hardly done by - but I never agreed to take on debts of £27k fees either and they are not due. I've paid my fees.
The tories have already rewritten the terms of post 2012 student loans to massively increase the amount new graduates pay back. With respect - your loan (and mine!) are nothing compared to the deal the post-2012 graduates got.
Didn't the government retrospectively change loan terms? So students took a loan under one set of circumstances and then discovered the terms and conditions had changed later?
They have racked up the interest. One reason amongst several that mean I will give Fox jr his inheritance early, in part.
If wanting a retrospective graduate tax, why not simply up the higher rate of income tax. Many will be graduates, but others will have benefited from graduates indirectly.
The people who got it all for nothing should pay, not the ones who were given nothing.
You appear to belong to the intermediate group of students which had to pay fees but at a much more modest rate than has been demanded of more recent undergraduates. I was really seeking to address the frequently advanced point that it is wrong fror the minority who attend university to be subsidised by those who do not. That argument had much more force back in my day - I graduated in 1976 - when 5% - 7% enrolled on degree courses .We were much more an elitist greatly privileged cohort than has been true of students of the last twenty years.We also benefitted from obtaining degree qualifications which had much more real value than those awarded in recent years.Rampant grade inflation and changes to methods of assessment have made it far easier to achieve a given class of degree than was true in the past - a 2.1 has long become the norm such that students who fail to reach that level often feel they have rather wasted their time whereas back in the 60s and 70s most students ended up with a 2.2 and were really chuffed if they managed a 2.1.This is very couterinuitive in that undergraduates are nothing like the elitist group they once where - so if standards were being maintained the average degree class ought to have dipped..Despite this they are expected to pay a great deal of money and incur significant debt for qualifications which are worth a lot less in real terms to those awarded to their parents or grandparents.In these circumstances , asking the fortunate privileged few - my generation - to make a contribution via - say -a Personal Allowance £1,000 pa lower than for non graduates seems fair and reasonable.
Indeed I am of that intermediate generation, though your generation went in on an agreed basis too: Get into university on merit, get educated and then when you've left you will repay your education through the tax system if you're in a highly paid job.
If you graduated in 1976 then you have been employed for 41 years already. How much tax have you paid over those 41 years? You've probably repaid your uni costs many, many times over already - something today's generation won't necessarily via the tax system precisely because they're not getting the highly paid jobs that your generation did.
I can assure you that many graduates of my generation did not end up in particularly high paid jobs - far from it. Many became schoolteachers or HEOs/SEOs in the Civil Service etc - earning enough for a comfortable existence but never paying higher rates of Income Tax. They would certainly have earned less than Heating Engineers and Plumbers who had often left school at 15 or 16.
If the community/mosque alerted the authorities as soon as there was a behaviour change in someone I think a lot of these atrocities could be prevented.
I'm dubious about "scrutiny" of routine religious activity (it sounds like a really boring job with doubtful benefits), but I do agree that, as a Muslim interviewed on Radio 4 yesterday said, it needs to be a priority to encourage people to argue with and if necessary report friends who are flirting with violent activity.
That is so utterly against our instincts that it needs a conscious effort. We've surely all met people who admitted to actually committing some sort of offence and it didn't cross our minds to ring the police about it. And it's not easy to judge when intent is serious. If you had a friend who said "I'd seriously like to shoot that [name a politician], maybe I will one day", you'd probably tell him to stop talking bollocks, but would you dial 999? And if you were in an ethnic group some of whom feel marginalised and under pressure, wouldn't that make it even harder? And if everyone reported every repellent comment, wouldn't that overwhelm the police and also make us too much of a Stasi society?
Perhaps we need something like Childline where people can discuss behaviour by friends and relatives that worries them and whether it's reached the point that the police need to be called in? I honestly don't know what's best - it's just a suggestion.
A thoughtful reply, thanks Nick.
I think the task would be a lot easier if the isolatist nature of muslim communities could be removed. As I said in a subsequent post, no go areas and Sharia courts being regarded as 'normal' is an anathema to normal British society
Are there actually no go areas in Britain? No go to who? The police? Are there Sharia courts?
No go to women, blacks, and gays. No longer bobby's on the beat so the police element doesn't exist. In closed 'communities' Sharia can be the rule of law and there's no recourse to British law because the 'community' is closed. I'll also extend this to the disgusting practice of FGM
People always claim there are no-go areas but when asked to name some they either 1) can't name them 2) are disproved by journalists etc actually going to named places and proving there were no such things.
I'm in favour of the govt backdating £27k tuition fees to 2012 @ current interest rates (6.1%) for all living graduates.
If it's not fair for non-graduates to subsidise graduates, it's monumentally unfair to wallop new graduates and let existing ones off the hook.
The tories have ripped up the generational covenant.
It would be monumentally unfair to charge people for something they were never told they would be charged for either.
I was amongst the first to go to university paying fees after Tony Blair introduced fees. We felt hard done by, my parents generation had got grants and free university, I got loans and fees. But I've paid my loan repayments and fees over time as due. When I look at what has changed since I now realise I was not hardly done by - but I never agreed to take on debts of £27k fees either and they are not due. I've paid my fees.
asking the fortunate privileged few - my generation - to make a contribution via - say -a Personal Allowance £1,000 pa lower than for non graduates seems fair and reasonable.
How are you going to confirm how workers are graduates or non-graduates? Is there a database somewhere with that information? Whats the cut-off in terms of age. I was also one of the first years to pay fees (Thanks Tony) but my wife who's a year older didn't.
Seems a very expensive excerise, and won't raise a huge amount.
The current setup saves the treasury a gigantic amount. It could well be that when the post-2012 book with the frozen threshold is sold off - even after accounting for bad loans (economically inactive graduates) - the government will actually make a profit.
When the dust settles from this attack and the politics restarts May would do well to publically state she is briefing both 'the leader of the opposition Jeremy Corbyn and the shadow home secretary Diane Abbott' on our national security. That will help focus minds like nothing else. Even if you believe in Corbyn's ideology even the most hardened momentum supporters must have doubts regarding Corbyn and Abbott leading the fight on terror in these dark days.
The choice is between the party that have cut 20000 police and God knows how much of the army whilst the threat level was severe & want further cuts to emergency services. The same party that ,tell the police they are scaremongering the NHS they have to make £22bn of cuts. Saw record levels of net migration made Libya a terrorist haven.
Or Corbyn who was on the right side of the argument on all that.
I would attack May big time have you seen her record her "crying wolf" speech to the police in 2015 her immigration record.
One of the interesting things about this campaign is that Corbyn has been industriously ditching some of his principles. He has abandoned opposition to Trident, rowed back on his oft-repeated pacifism, and distanced himself from people he used to call friends. He has also consistently flip-flopped on Europe.
Anyone would think he was a normal politician or something - one who really does want to win. The Marx he currently most resembles is Groucho.
The funniest change has been his support for wealthy pensioners keeping the Winter Fuel Allowance.
SNIP
SNIP
.
Voluntary action will only ever raise peanuts, as you know full well.
.
I'm not mathematically inept, by the way. I was replying to a suggestion for a retrospective tax on 60s-80s graduates to repay their education not to the future funding of tertiary education.
How exactly are you going to work out how people in their 50s-70s went to university or not?
I think it would be fairer to increase income tax on all those who have benefited, not only from a University education, but from all the opportunities the UK provides. An increase to 45% on those earning over £80K and to 50% on those earning over £150K would seem fair.
Indeed I am of that intermediate generation, though your generation went in on an agreed basis too: Get into university on merit, get educated and then when you've left you will repay your education through the tax system if you're in a highly paid job.
If you graduated in 1976 then you have been employed for 41 years already. How much tax have you paid over those 41 years? You've probably repaid your uni costs many, many times over already - something today's generation won't necessarily via the tax system precisely because they're not getting the highly paid jobs that your generation did.
I can assure you that many graduates of my generation did not end up in particularly high paid jobs - far from it. Many became schoolteachers or HEOs/SEOs in the Civil Service etc - earning enough for a comfortable existence but never paying higher rates of Income Tax. They would certainly have earned less than Heating Engineers and Plumbers who had often left school at 15 or 16.
But school teachers will have contributed to society through other means too. Besides why would it be equitable to belatedly start taxing a school teacher more than a heating engineer or plumber then based on their decisions nearly half a century ago?
I hope with the current security situation, the police service aren't still hosing money against the wall trying to penetrate environmental protesters who just want to hang a banner on a power station chimney.
Incidentally, with all of the coal plants due to be turned off by 2025, it looks like the protesters were ahead of the game.
I'm getting slightly worried Labour might manage around 200 seats. That could lead to Corbyn staying on - And that really would be a travesty for democracy.
Leader model extrapolation yields ~ 17% lead. Local election ~ 19.5% lead.
In my view a Tory lead of 15% will see Lab sub 200
What should be the labour uo line? I backed under 177.5 at EVS
I genuinely have no idea on this one now, sorry
I'll settle for 177!
Has so much changed since sub 150 seemed likely?
Hmm Well the leads are definitely lower, and I think the Labour destruction was a bit overcooked in the early days. That is not to say it won't happen - a 16% lead for the Tories on election night is tough to predict exactly how that makes the Labour total be affected. The one thing that keeps Labour up is the abject performance from the LDs thus far.
I think I've messed up slightly on my Lab seat band bets, but constituency wise I'm reasonably confident of value in most cases. Except Cardiff Central - that's become a small tar pit.
If the combined share of the Conservatives and Labour is well above 80%, then even a fairly small lead (say 5% or 6%) could generate a big lead in terms of seats. A 15% lead (say 49% to 34%) would generate a humungous lead in terms of seats.
He is only saying what many on both sides believe to be the truth. He doesn't imply that it was in any way caused by the government, merely that its timing is electorally helpful. Many Conservatives (you included, perhaps?) will no doubt agree with him and think the same way.
I'm rather boring. I think it makes no difference. I thought May would win big before the bomb. I think May will win big now. Had there not been a bomb, I think May would have won big.
I didn't even think the cock-up over the Dementia Tax would make any difference, in the final analysis. Although watching the PB Tory bedwetting over it was as entertaining as ever!
I find it incomprehensible how those on the left are trying to say that the prime minister is using this for political advantage when people have just lost love ones, children and parents. governments first priority is keeping this country safe and to try and accuse the Prime Minister of playing politics is just sick. Mark Seniors comment yesterday was deplorable. if Labour hadn't picked a leader who is so weak on defending this country and keeping it safe then what is happening at the moment wouldn't be an issue in the general election campaign quite frankly they brought this on themselves by picking such a weak pathetic useless leader who wouldn't even defend this nation or go to war without Russia and Chinas permission at the United Nations. Labour are only reaping what they have sown
What was deplorable of my comment last night ?
All of it, you disgraceful excuse for a human.
Ah another pb conservative with nothing to contribute but personal abuse .
I voted Lib Dem in the 2015 general election, you tit.
I'll quote what @kle4 said (though in my case I have voted Tory (and Labour, and Green, etc. in the past):
And I'll remind your partisan arse that I've never voted Tory (though I have been considering it this time around, in a small part because of how horrible people like you are to people like me who have voted LD but dare to criticise them sometimes), and you act like a paranoid conspiracy loony when you ascribe the motivations of those who attack you entirely to partisan attack, which given how partisan you are is silly.
The current setup saves the treasury a gigantic amount. It could well be that when the post-2012 book with the frozen threshold is sold off - even after accounting for bad loans (economically inactive graduates) - the government will actually make a profit.
The t&c's of plan 2 loans really are that bad.
You're assuming the government won't make the decision to sell off below par there !
No go to women, blacks, and gays. No longer bobby's on the beat so the police element doesn't exist. In closed 'communities' Sharia can be the rule of law and there's no recourse to British law because the 'community' is closed. I'll also extend this to the disgusting practice of FGM
Do you have evidence no go zones exist? Where are they?
I ask because I remember people were talking about Birmingham, Woolwich and Luton as no go zones... Which came as a surprise to me and many others...
Whilst this is true this is against a back drop of falling crime, of which a greater proportion of crime in online crime. We need better skilled police, technically competent, better equipped to fight the digital crimes of the 21st century. If I were a politician I would be looking to run pilot schemes with the big tech companies for interning (in the work sense) suitable engineers.
He's not really a Trot, even if did sign the hilarious early day motion in 1988 calling for the rehabilitation of Leon Trotsky. If he were, he'd be loyal to some Trot organisation. That's what entrism is all about.
It is entirely legitimate to ask of a candidate for PM whether his previously expressed views and actions and failures to act - especially for someone whose USP is meant to be his consistently held principles - show him to have the right character and judgment for PM, especially with regard to security issues.
.........You are essentially saying that a third of the population are a security risk.......
Don't put words in my mouth. I have not said that. I do think there are very serious questions to be asked of Corbyn, his Shadow Chancellor and his Shadow Home Secretary. It is legitimate to do so, in an election campaign above all.
If only those who voted him their leader - twice - had listened to those who warned that having such people in the leadership would cause problems for what used to be a decent party. If only.
Saying "you are essentially saying" made it absolutely clear that I was not quoting you but interpreting what you said and stating what I believe to be the logically associated idea. And I'm right. If you think Jeremy Corbyn is a security risk, then you should also think that if he gets voted into office then that would be a major security risk to this country. And he can't vote himself into office.
I don't know whether you are a Tory, LibDem or something else, but the Tories are certainly full of hate and many have probably convinced themselves that their propaganda is true, and phrases such as "Jihadi Jezza" have been heard. It is such people that are a risk to the country's security. It is as if they're taking the piss. When they say "let us stand united against terrorism" they don't mean what they say. Terrorists should not be allowed to influence this election. Do you agree? Because you don't seem to. I would have nothing but praise for Theresa May if she invited Jeremy Corbyn and Tim Farron to join an inner cabinet right now, and if the three of them agreed that all three will stay there regardless of who is the prime minister in a fortnight's time.
#manchesterattack Bomber thought to have been a 'mule' using device built by someone else. More Govt announcements expected today.
I have this horrible feeling that they might have no idea by who or where the bomb was made, that the bomber came back from Libya with simply a place and time memorised. He takes the bomb, is given a quick explanation of how to set it off, and there was no other contact. It would make finding the source of the bomb extremely difficult if the source has good "tradecraft", hopefully they don't
I hope with the current security situation, the police service aren't still hosing money against the wall trying to penetrate environmental protesters who just want to hang a banner on a power station chimney.
Incidentally, with all of the coal plants due to be turned off by 2025, it looks like the protesters were ahead of the game.
Frack Off were chained to the railings as my daughter arrived for work.
The authorities response to this attack is rather different than previous ones.
She quickly changed "likely" to "possible". The authorities don't know if he acted alone and are taking precautions in case he wasn't. "Likely" means probable >50%. "Possible" means > 0%. In practice >10% say.
See Frank Gardner twitter....it is clear from the reaction of the May / government they have intelligence suggesting something more worrying than a single Islamist nutter.
I am coming to the view that May is both wholly indecisive and wholly ruthless, which is a peculiar and unsettling combination. She isn't another Iron Lady; she's more a sort of Iron David Miliband.
You're entirely right.
Her entire raison d'etre has been the construction and will now become the preservation of her "big tent" coalition. Any policy or idea which seems to annoy the coalition will be dropped like the proverbial hot potato and the Minister forced into a grovelling climb-down.
None of that matters - all that matters is the preservation and continuation of Theresa May as Prime Minister and leader of the Conservative Party.
Eventually, her political career, like all others, will end in failure but whether she is defeated from without or within is hard to gauge at this time.
I think it's really bad that the election campaign is still suspended with no indication of a re-start time. It seems OTT. I'm starting to think, have her advisers suggested doing this for a small party political advantage?
43 years ago, the Guildford pub bombings occurred *5 days* before a general election. Then, as now, we had a Tory governmment but I can't remember there being a prolonged suspension:
The campaign should restart this afternoon. I agree that the indefinite restart time is absurd, and counterproductive. Millions commuted to work as normal today, as they did yesterday in the wake of the bomb.
The LibDem local campaign has restarted with leafleting but not canvassing yet.
I'm getting slightly worried Labour might manage around 200 seats. That could lead to Corbyn staying on - And that really would be a travesty for democracy.
Leader model extrapolation yields ~ 17% lead. Local election ~ 19.5% lead.
In my view a Tory lead of 15% will see Lab sub 200
What should be the labour uo line? I backed under 177.5 at EVS
I genuinely have no idea on this one now, sorry
I'll settle for 177!
Has so much changed since sub 150 seemed likely?
Hmm Well the leads are definitely lower, and I think the Labour destruction was a bit overcooked in the early days. That is not to say it won't happen - a 16% lead for the Tories on election night is tough to predict exactly how that makes the Labour total be affected. The one thing that keeps Labour up is the abject performance from the LDs thus far.
I think I've messed up slightly on my Lab seat band bets, but constituency wise I'm reasonably confident of value in most cases. Except Cardiff Central - that's become a small tar pit.
If the combined share of the Conservatives and Labour is well above 80%, then even a fairly small lead (say 5% or 6%) could generate a big lead in terms of seats. A 15% lead (say 49% to 34%) would generate a humungous lead in terms of seats.
One of the interesting things about this campaign is that Corbyn has been industriously ditching some of his principles. He has abandoned opposition to Trident, rowed back on his oft-repeated pacifism, and distanced himself from people he used to call friends. He has also consistently flip-flopped on Europe.
On the EU and Trident, you are right. But pacifism? When was Jeremy Corbyn ever a pacifist? A pacifist is someone who believes that war is never justified. "Oft-repeated"? That's never been his position.
One of the interesting things about this campaign is that Corbyn has been industriously ditching some of his principles. He has abandoned opposition to Trident, rowed back on his oft-repeated pacifism, and distanced himself from people he used to call friends. He has also consistently flip-flopped on Europe.
Anyone would think he was a normal politician or something - one who really does want to win. The Marx he currently most resembles is Groucho.
The funniest change has been his support for wealthy pensioners keeping the Winter Fuel Allowance.
SNIP
SNIP
.
Voluntary action will only ever raise peanuts, as you know full well.
.
I'm not mathematically inept, by the way. I was replying to a suggestion for a retrospective tax on 60s-80s graduates to repay their education not to the future funding of tertiary education.
How exactly are you going to work out how people in their 50s-70s went to university or not?
I think it would be fairer to increase income tax on all those who have benefited, not only from a University education, but from all the opportunities the UK provides. An increase to 45% on those earning over £80K and to 50% on those earning over £150K would seem fair.
Income tax is already 60% on earnings between £100,000 and £121,200.
As soon as your earnings exceed £100,000, the government starts to withdraw the tax-free personal allowance — currently the first £10,600 of your earnings, on which no tax is levied.
Pound by pound it is taken away, with the effect of adding an extra 20 per cent in tax on income between £100,000 and £121,200. This is on top of the “higher” rate of 40 per cent tax that is already due.
#manchesterattack Bomber thought to have been a 'mule' using device built by someone else. More Govt announcements expected today.
I have this horrible feeling that they might have no idea by who or where the bomb was made, that the bomber came back from Libya with simply a place and time memorised. He takes the bomb, is given a quick explanation of how to set it off, and there was no other contact. It would make finding the source of the bomb extremely difficult if the source has good "tradecraft", hopefully they don't
That was the most worrying revelation of the Panorama special looking at terrorist attacks across Europe. They had the testimony of an ISIS terrorist who bottled his planned attack.
He arrived back in Belgium, was basically told phone this number, he was then messaged an address of a car park and the reg of a car. When he arrived it was full stocked with everything he needed.
I think it's really bad that the election campaign is still suspended with no indication of a re-start time. It seems OTT. I'm starting to think, have her advisers suggested doing this for a small party political advantage?
43 years ago, the Guildford pub bombings occurred *5 days* before a general election. Then, as now, we had a Tory governmment but I can't remember there being a prolonged suspension:
The campaign should restart this afternoon. I agree that the indefinite restart time is absurd, and counterproductive. Millions commuted to work as normal today, as they did yesterday in the wake of the bomb.
The LibDem local campaign has restarted with leafleting but not canvassing yet.
The local Lib Dem campaign does not restart until tomorrow.
I think it's really bad that the election campaign is still suspended with no indication of a re-start time. It seems OTT. I'm starting to think, have her advisers suggested doing this for a small party political advantage?
43 years ago, the Guildford pub bombings occurred *5 days* before a general election. Then, as now, we had a Tory governmment but I can't remember there being a prolonged suspension:
The campaign should restart this afternoon. I agree that the indefinite restart time is absurd, and counterproductive. Millions commuted to work as normal today, as they did yesterday in the wake of the bomb.
The LibDem local campaign has restarted with leafleting but not canvassing yet.
The local Lib Dem campaign does not restart until tomorrow.
No, local campaigns can re-start today (although many are waiting until tomorrow).
When the dust settles from this attack and the politics restarts May would do well to publically state she is briefing both 'the leader of the opposition Jeremy Corbyn and the shadow home secretary Diane Abbott' on our national security. That will help focus minds like nothing else. Even if you believe in Corbyn's ideology even the most hardened momentum supporters must have doubts regarding Corbyn and Abbott leading the fight on terror in these dark days.
The choice is between the party that have cut 20000 police and God knows how much of the army whilst the threat level was severe & want further cuts to emergency services. The same party that ,tell the police they are scaremongering the NHS they have to make £22bn of cuts. Saw record levels of net migration made Libya a terrorist haven.
Or Corbyn who was on the right side of the argument on all that.
I would attack May big time have you seen her record her "crying wolf" speech to the police in 2015 her immigration record.
One of the interesting things about this campaign is that Corbyn has been industriously ditching some of his principles. He has abandoned opposition to Trident, rowed back on his oft-repeated pacifism, and distanced himself from people he used to call friends. He has also consistently flip-flopped on Europe.
On the EU and Trident, you are right. But pacifism? When was Jeremy Corbyn ever a pacifist? A pacifist is someone who believes that war is never justified. "Oft-repeated"? That's never been his position.
You are entirely correct. While he opposes all wars by the Brits and Americans he encourages and endorses wars against us. He is a traitor not a pacifist.
The current setup saves the treasury a gigantic amount. It could well be that when the post-2012 book with the frozen threshold is sold off - even after accounting for bad loans (economically inactive graduates) - the government will actually make a profit.
The t&c's of plan 2 loans really are that bad.
You're assuming the government won't make the decision to sell off below par there !
Fair point!
I'm assuming a competitive bidding process though.
Financial institutions like pension funds will be biting the governments hand off to get the Plan 2 student loan book. It makes for an incredible inflation-protected asset.
They've been perfectly designed to make the treasury money.
Will the Kipper manifesto include the death penalty for suicide bombers?
That's not actually as bad a suggestion as you make out, if you include attempted suicide bombers (some suicide bombs fail to explode).
But not much of a deterrent, especially against successful suicide bombers
No but if you believe in the death penalty it's an apt punishment for those that somehow survive.
The death penalty makes things worse.
Failed suicide bombers were already facing the very real death penalty of a successful suicide bombing. These people believe quite literally they will ascend to paradise on death. For them, the death penalty is an incentive not a deterrent.
Absolutely meaningless figures, the Labour force figures were unaffordable and done on a basis of a massive and ever increasing deficit. Tory force figures have been with a reducing deficit.
Only if Labour was prioritising the force in an affordable and sustainable way without a deficit would it be meaningful.
Increased numbers don't always translate into better outcomes. Whats happened to crime since the reduction of the police force?
The authorities response to this attack is rather different than previous ones.
She quickly changed "likely" to "possible". The authorities don't know if he acted alone and are taking precautions in case he wasn't. "Likely" means probable >50%. "Possible" means > 0%. In practice >10% say.
See Frank Gardner twitter....it is clear from the reaction of the May / government they have intelligence suggesting something more worrying than a single Islamist nutter.
Nevertheless, Rudd changed "likely" to "possible". It's the nuance I'm pointing out.
The authorities response to this attack is rather different than previous ones.
She quickly changed "likely" to "possible". The authorities don't know if he acted alone and are taking precautions in case he wasn't. "Likely" means probable >50%. "Possible" means > 0%. In practice >10% say.
See Frank Gardner twitter....it is clear from the reaction of the May / government they have intelligence suggesting something more worrying than a single Islamist nutter.
Nevertheless, Rudd changed "likely" to "possible". It's the nuance I'm pointing out.
Where did she change it? BBC still using her saying likely in their headline / top article.
I hope with the current security situation, the police service aren't still hosing money against the wall trying to penetrate environmental protesters who just want to hang a banner on a power station chimney.
Incidentally, with all of the coal plants due to be turned off by 2025, it looks like the protesters were ahead of the game.
As was Thatcher, ahead of the game, closing uneconomic coal mines which were bad for the environment and bad for the health of the work force.
That's not a sentence I thought I'd ever see myself writing.
Particularly parties like UKIP & the SNP who have not launched their manifestos yet - I expect the SNP will be out next. Labour & the Conservatives may pause for a day longer....but we keep calm & carry on!
He is only saying what many on both sides believe to be the truth. He doesn't imply that it was in any way caused by the government, merely that its timing is electorally helpful. Many Conservatives (you included, perhaps?) will no doubt agree with him and think the same way.
I'm rather boring. I think it makes no difference. I thought May would win big before the bomb. I think May will win big now. Had there not been a bomb, I think May would have won big.
I didn't even think the cock-up over the Dementia Tax would make any difference, in the final analysis. Although watching the PB Tory bedwetting over it was as entertaining as ever!
I find it incomprehensible how those on the left are trying to say that the prime minister is using this for political advantage when people have just lost love ones, children and parents. governments first priority is keeping this country safe and to try and accuse the Prime Minister of playing politics is just sick. Mark Seniors comment yesterday was deplorable. if Labour hadn't picked a leader who is so weak on defending this country and keeping it safe then what is happening at the moment wouldn't be an issue in the general election campaign quite frankly they brought this on themselves by picking such a weak pathetic useless leader who wouldn't even defend this nation or go to war without Russia and Chinas permission at the United Nations. Labour are only reaping what they have sown
What was deplorable of my comment last night ?
All of it, you disgraceful excuse for a human.
I read more abusive and offensive things about Corbyn and Abbott every single day on PB, but I assume that's acceptable because the PB Tory mafia approve of it. .
He's not really a Trot, even if did sign the hilarious early day motion in 1988 calling for the rehabilitation of Leon Trotsky. If he were, he'd be loyal to some Trot organisation. That's what entrism is all about.
It is entirely legitimate to ask of a candidate for PM whether his previously expressed views and actions and failures to act - especially for someone whose USP is meant to be his consistently held principles - show him to have the right character and judgment for PM, especially with regard to security issues.
.........You are essentially saying that a third of the population are a security risk.......
Don't put words in my mouth. I have not said that. I do think there are very serious questions to be asked of Corbyn, his Shadow Chancellor and his Shadow Home Secretary. It is legitimate to do so, in an election campaign above all.
If only those who voted him their leader - twice - had listened to those who warned that having such people in the leadership would cause problems for what used to be a decent party. If only.
Saying "you are essentially saying" made it absolutely clear that I was not quoting you but interpreting what you said and stating what I believe to be the logically associated idea. And I'm right. If you think Jeremy Corbyn is a security risk, then you should also think that if he gets voted into office then that would be a major security risk to this country. And he can't vote himself into office.
I don't know whether you are a Tory, LibDem or something else, but the Tories are certainly full of hate and many have probably convinced themselves that their propaganda is true, and phrases such as "Jihadi Jezza" have been heard. It is such people that are a risk to the country's security. It is as if they're taking the piss. When they say "let us stand united against terrorism" they don't mean what they say. Terrorists should not be allowed to influence this election. Do you agree? Because you don't seem to. I would have nothing but praise for Theresa May if she invited Jeremy Corbyn and Tim Farron to join an inner cabinet right now, and if the three of them agreed that all three will stay there regardless of who is the prime minister in a fortnight's time.
I don't recall the ludicrous suggestion that Jezza and the Hammer of the Poofs should be appointed to an "inner cabinet" being made prior to Monday. Surely in making it you are being influenced by terrorism?
I hope with the current security situation, the police service aren't still hosing money against the wall trying to penetrate environmental protesters who just want to hang a banner on a power station chimney.
Incidentally, with all of the coal plants due to be turned off by 2025, it looks like the protesters were ahead of the game.
Frack Off were chained to the railings as my daughter arrived for work.
He is only saying what many on both sides believe to be the truth. He doesn't imply that it was in any way caused by the government, merely that its timing is electorally helpful. Many Conservatives (you included, perhaps?) will no doubt agree with him and think the same way.
I'm rather boring. I think it makes no difference. I thought May would win big before the bomb. I think May will win big now. Had there not been a bomb, I think May would have won big.
I didn't even think the cock-up over the Dementia Tax would make any difference, in the final analysis. Although watching the PB Tory bedwetting over it was as entertaining as ever!
I find it incomprehensible how those on the left are trying to say that the prime minister is using this for political advantage when people have just lost love ones, children and parents. governments first priority is keeping this country safe and to try and accuse the Prime Minister of playing politics is just sick. Mark Seniors comment yesterday was deplorable. if Labour hadn't picked a leader who is so weak on defending this country and keeping it safe then what is happening at the moment wouldn't be an issue in the general election campaign quite frankly they brought this on themselves by picking such a weak pathetic useless leader who wouldn't even defend this nation or go to war without Russia and Chinas permission at the United Nations. Labour are only reaping what they have sown
What was deplorable of my comment last night ?
All of it, you disgraceful excuse for a human.
I read more abusive and offensive things about Corbyn and Abbott every single day on PB, but I assume that's acceptable because the PB Tory mafia approve of it. .
Some disappointing (being polite) things were said yesterday from all points of the compass. This site wasn't up to its usual standard. A handful of people need to calm down.
Could you break up your sentences a bit. It's difficult for people with dyslexia.
I'm stuggling to understand why you'd want Farron and Corbyn in an inner cabinet to defeat terrorism? If it's just to take away May's advantage brought about by the event in Manchester I can see some logic but I'm sure a better handicap system can be worked out. Wouldn't you have to invite Nuttall and Sturgeon and Wood and Adams too?
Either you don't have dyslexia or you are using some remarkable software. Anyway, I thought I'd said: the reasoning is that the terror attack should not be allowed to influence the election, and that there should be a joint campaign by all political leaders to encourage people to understand more about security. It will not do to say "MI5 stopped 23 attacks this year but we can't stop them all and the 24th one couldn't be stopped and blew lots of people up". It is true that security can't be perfect, but that kind of approach is not enough. There needs to be a mobilisation and more public education, and I support Theresa May's decision to give a larger role to the army. There would be a case for asking Sturgeon into the cabinet, yes. I am mostly thinking of parties who win a lot of seats at Westminster, so yes, there would be a case. Nuttall? Well he will probably have few seats, but bringing him into things in some lesser way or other would be fine. Wood and Adams? Adams's ROI citizenship is perhaps too important to him. National security means British security. Wood? There may be some way to bring her in on things. There is also the point regarding Corbyn and Farron that depending on how people vote, Corbyn could be prime minister and Farron could be a major government figure in coalition with one of the other parties. That is for voters to decide and not for terrorists to decide. Bringing them into the cabinet sends that message. Which is not to say that message sending is all it does. There needs to be more cooperation and understanding against terrorism right the way across society.
No go to women, blacks, and gays. No longer bobby's on the beat so the police element doesn't exist. In closed 'communities' Sharia can be the rule of law and there's no recourse to British law because the 'community' is closed. I'll also extend this to the disgusting practice of FGM
Do you have evidence no go zones exist? Where are they?
I ask because I remember people were talking about Birmingham, Woolwich and Luton as no go zones... Which came as a surprise to me and many others...
Would you like to be a young woman in a short dress walking through theseareas alone at night?
That's not a sentence I thought I'd ever see myself writing.
Particularly parties like UKIP & the SNP who have not launched their manifestos yet - I expect the SNP will be out next. Labour & the Conservatives may pause for a day longer....but we keep calm & carry on!
Particularly as most of the postal votes have been sent out
To be honest the Tories ought to give the other parties a day's head start now - seeing as the situation has (this is just the situation as it is, no particular axe to grind here) been very favourable to May over the last few days
To be honest the Tories ought to give the other parties a day's head start now - seeing as the situation has (this is just the situation as it is, no particular axe to grind here) been very favourable to May over the last few days
The current setup saves the treasury a gigantic amount. It could well be that when the post-2012 book with the frozen threshold is sold off - even after accounting for bad loans (economically inactive graduates) - the government will actually make a profit.
The t&c's of plan 2 loans really are that bad.
You're assuming the government won't make the decision to sell off below par there !
Fair point!
I'm assuming a competitive bidding process though.
Financial institutions like pension funds will be biting the governments hand off to get the Plan 2 student loan book. It makes for an incredible inflation-protected asset.
They've been perfectly designed to make the treasury money.
Back in 1988 when student loans were first introduced, Thatcher tried to get the banks to make the loans. The banks, led by Lloyds, refused as the bad debt potential was horrific.
Thatcher was so annoyed that the leading banker, Lloyds CEO, Brian Pitman, did not get knighted until many years later.
That's not a sentence I thought I'd ever see myself writing.
Particularly parties like UKIP & the SNP who have not launched their manifestos yet - I expect the SNP will be out next. Labour & the Conservatives may pause for a day longer....but we keep calm & carry on!
I reckon they should all get on with it now, to be honest. Everyone else in the country is at work, and worked yesterday!
I am coming to the view that May is both wholly indecisive and wholly ruthless, which is a peculiar and unsettling combination. She isn't another Iron Lady; she's more a sort of Iron David Miliband.
You're entirely right.
Her entire raison d'etre has been the construction and will now become the preservation of her "big tent" coalition. Any policy or idea which seems to annoy the coalition will be dropped like the proverbial hot potato and the Minister forced into a grovelling climb-down.
None of that matters - all that matters is the preservation and continuation of Theresa May as Prime Minister and leader of the Conservative Party.
Eventually, her political career, like all others, will end in failure but whether she is defeated from without or within is hard to gauge at this time.
I think she'll quit mid-term after Brexit is implemented with a leadership election in summer 2019.
At that point she's made it to PM, she's won a landslide and she has framed the terms of our EU withdrawal. At her age and in imperfect health it doesn't get any better and she is self-aware enough to know she risks getting rumbled. Or perhaps rumbled once too often as she was over the NI changes and then again over social care. She is using up goodwill and her nine lives very rapidly. So why not leave office on a relative high?
She is a very odd fish indeed. She has the backbone to eviscerate Osborne and Gove, but as we have now seen several times, she has no appetite to defend a policy decision unpopular with the Daily Mail or even to stick with one (Remain) that she has professed. Like Blair, all her actual political views seem lightly held, but unlike Blair, she is prepared to be utterly brutal in despatching anyone who opposes or might thwart her.
Will the Kipper manifesto include the death penalty for suicide bombers?
That's not actually as bad a suggestion as you make out, if you include attempted suicide bombers (some suicide bombs fail to explode).
But not much of a deterrent, especially against successful suicide bombers
No but if you believe in the death penalty it's an apt punishment for those that somehow survive.
The death penalty makes things worse.
Failed suicide bombers were already facing the very real death penalty of a successful suicide bombing. These people believe quite literally they will ascend to paradise on death. For them, the death penalty is an incentive not a deterrent.
Leaving aside all the more usual arguments, which of course still stand.
I'm sure that ISIS trained the bomb maker, got him/her back into the UK, then gave him/her strict instructions that (s)he should only make one bomb.
Yeah, right.
There is another remote possibility, that he wasn't a suicide bomber.
Can you see him following instructions? Collect the bomb here. Deliver it to this point. Phone x number to confirm it is in position Move away and we will detonate fifteen minutes later.
Only problem is phone x number sets the bomb off, as he knows too much and has to be eliminated.
For the organisers it may be easier to recruit somewhat dim fanatics than suicidal fanatics who are eager to find a host of virgins, not even knowing if they are male of female virgins.
I hope with the current security situation, the police service aren't still hosing money against the wall trying to penetrate environmental protesters who just want to hang a banner on a power station chimney.
Incidentally, with all of the coal plants due to be turned off by 2025, it looks like the protesters were ahead of the game.
As was Thatcher, ahead of the game, closing uneconomic coal mines which were bad for the environment and bad for the health of the work force.
One of the interesting things about this campaign is that Corbyn has been industriously ditching some of his principles. He has abandoned opposition to Trident, rowed back on his oft-repeated pacifism, and distanced himself from people he used to call friends. He has also consistently flip-flopped on Europe.
Anyone would think he was a normal politician or something - one who really does want to win. The Marx he currently most resembles is Groucho.
The funniest change has been his support for wealthy pensioners keeping the Winter Fuel Allowance.
SNIP
SNIP
.
Voluntary action will only ever raise peanuts, as you know full well.
.
I'm not mathematically inept, by the way. I was replying to a suggestion for a retrospective tax on 60s-80s graduates to repay their education not to the future funding of tertiary education.
How exactly are you going to work out how people in their 50s-70s went to university or not?
I think it would be fairer to increase income tax on all those who have benefited, not only from a University education, but from all the opportunities the UK provides. An increase to 45% on those earning over £80K and to 50% on those earning over £150K would seem fair.
Income tax is already 60% on earnings between £100,000 and £121,200.
As soon as your earnings exceed £100,000, the government starts to withdraw the tax-free personal allowance — currently the first £10,600 of your earnings, on which no tax is levied.
Pound by pound it is taken away, with the effect of adding an extra 20 per cent in tax on income between £100,000 and £121,200. This is on top of the “higher” rate of 40 per cent tax that is already due.
I know about that trap. I was in it and increased my charitable donations so that they only cost 40% with the rest coming from the government (i.e. other tax payers).
I don't know whether it is incompetence or deliberate. Either way, it should be removed by applying a much gentler taper say from £80K to £150K which would in effect be an extra 5% on top of the 40% on a larger tax base. Then the 50% rate could kick in.
I'm sure that ISIS trained the bomb maker, got him/her back into the UK, then gave him/her strict instructions that (s)he should only make one bomb.
Yeah, right.
There is another remote possibility, that he wasn't a suicide bomber.
Can you see him following instructions? Collect the bomb here. Deliver it to this point. Phone x number to confirm it is in position Move away and we will detonate fifteen minutes later.
Only problem is phone x number sets the bomb off, as he knows too much and has to be eliminated.
For the organisers it may be easier to recruit somewhat dim fanatics than suicidal fanatics who are eager to find a host of virgins, not even knowing if they are male of female virgins.
Well he was a failed Salford uni student...so not the sharpest tool in the box....
I am coming to the view that May is both wholly indecisive and wholly ruthless, which is a peculiar and unsettling combination. She isn't another Iron Lady; she's more a sort of Iron David Miliband.
You're entirely right.
Her entire raison d'etre has been the construction and will now become the preservation of her "big tent" coalition. Any policy or idea which seems to annoy the coalition will be dropped like the proverbial hot potato and the Minister forced into a grovelling climb-down.
None of that matters - all that matters is the preservation and continuation of Theresa May as Prime Minister and leader of the Conservative Party.
Eventually, her political career, like all others, will end in failure but whether she is defeated from without or within is hard to gauge at this time.
I think she'll quit mid-term after Brexit is implemented with a leadership election in summer 2019.
At that point she's made it to PM, she's won a landslide and she has framed the terms of our EU withdrawal. At her age and in imperfect health it doesn't get any better and she is self-aware enough to know she risks getting rumbled. Or perhaps rumbled once too often as she was over the NI changes and then again over social care. She is using up goodwill and her nine lives very rapidly. So why not leave office on a relative high?
She is a very odd fish indeed. She has the backbone to eviscerate Osborne and Gove, but as we have now seen several times, she has no appetite to defend a policy decision unpopular with the Daily Mail or even to stick with one (Remain) that she has professed. Like Blair, all her actual political views seem lightly held, but unlike Blair, she is prepared to be utterly brutal in despatching anyone who opposes or might thwart her.
Or she is Stanley Baldwin and will be in power for ten years or more.
I am coming to the view that May is both wholly indecisive and wholly ruthless, which is a peculiar and unsettling combination. She isn't another Iron Lady; she's more a sort of Iron David Miliband.
You're entirely right.
Her entire raison d'etre has been the construction and will now become the preservation of her "big tent" coalition. Any policy or idea which seems to annoy the coalition will be dropped like the proverbial hot potato and the Minister forced into a grovelling climb-down.
None of that matters - all that matters is the preservation and continuation of Theresa May as Prime Minister and leader of the Conservative Party.
Eventually, her political career, like all others, will end in failure but whether she is defeated from without or within is hard to gauge at this time.
I think she'll quit mid-term after Brexit is implemented with a leadership election in summer 2019.
At that point she's made it to PM, she's won a landslide and she has framed the terms of our EU withdrawal. At her age and in imperfect health it doesn't get any better and she is self-aware enough to know she risks getting rumbled. Or perhaps rumbled once too often as she was over the NI changes and then again over social care. She is using up goodwill and her nine lives very rapidly. So why not leave office on a relative high?
She is a very odd fish indeed. She has the backbone to eviscerate Osborne and Gove, but as we have now seen several times, she has no appetite to defend a policy decision unpopular with the Daily Mail or even to stick with one (Remain) that she has professed. Like Blair, all her actual political views seem lightly held, but unlike Blair, she is prepared to be utterly brutal in despatching anyone who opposes or might thwart her.
I'm sure she'd like to perform a U-turn on Osborne and invite him back into the tent, but it's a bit too late. Cameron eviscerated himself. Too clever by half.
I'm sure that ISIS trained the bomb maker, got him/her back into the UK, then gave him/her strict instructions that (s)he should only make one bomb.
Yeah, right.
There is another remote possibility, that he wasn't a suicide bomber.
Can you see him following instructions? Collect the bomb here. Deliver it to this point. Phone x number to confirm it is in position Move away and we will detonate fifteen minutes later.
Only problem is phone x number sets the bomb off, as he knows too much and has to be eliminated.
For the organisers it may be easier to recruit somewhat dim fanatics than suicidal fanatics who are eager to find a host of virgins, not even knowing if they are male of female virgins.
Pretty much what happens in Casino Royale (the book, dunno about the film).
The authorities response to this attack is rather different than previous ones.
She quickly changed "likely" to "possible". The authorities don't know if he acted alone and are taking precautions in case he wasn't. "Likely" means probable >50%. "Possible" means > 0%. In practice >10% say.
See Frank Gardner twitter....it is clear from the reaction of the May / government they have intelligence suggesting something more worrying than a single Islamist nutter.
Nevertheless, Rudd changed "likely" to "possible". It's the nuance I'm pointing out.
Where did she change it? BBC still using her saying likely in their headline / top article.
I am coming to the view that May is both wholly indecisive and wholly ruthless, which is a peculiar and unsettling combination. She isn't another Iron Lady; she's more a sort of Iron David Miliband.
You're entirely right.
Her entire raison d'etre has been the construction and will now become the preservation of her "big tent" coalition. Any policy or idea which seems to annoy the coalition will be dropped like the proverbial hot potato and the Minister forced into a grovelling climb-down.
None of that matters - all that matters is the preservation and continuation of Theresa May as Prime Minister and leader of the Conservative Party.
Eventually, her political career, like all others, will end in failure but whether she is defeated from without or within is hard to gauge at this time.
I think she'll quit mid-term after Brexit is implemented with a leadership election in summer 2019.
At that point she's made it to PM, she's won a landslide and she has framed the terms of our EU withdrawal. At her age and in imperfect health it doesn't get any better and she is self-aware enough to know she risks getting rumbled. Or perhaps rumbled once too often as she was over the NI changes and then again over social care. She is using up goodwill and her nine lives very rapidly. So why not leave office on a relative high?
She is a very odd fish indeed. She has the backbone to eviscerate Osborne and Gove, but as we have now seen several times, she has no appetite to defend a policy decision unpopular with the Daily Mail or even to stick with one (Remain) that she has professed. Like Blair, all her actual political views seem lightly held, but unlike Blair, she is prepared to be utterly brutal in despatching anyone who opposes or might thwart her.
In the role of PM, she is both weirder and more interesting than she previously appeared.
I am coming to the view that May is both wholly indecisive and wholly ruthless, which is a peculiar and unsettling combination. She isn't another Iron Lady; she's more a sort of Iron David Miliband.
You're entirely right.
Her entire raison d'etre has been the construction and will now become the preservation of her "big tent" coalition. Any policy or idea which seems to annoy the coalition will be dropped like the proverbial hot potato and the Minister forced into a grovelling climb-down.
None of that matters - all that matters is the preservation and continuation of Theresa May as Prime Minister and leader of the Conservative Party.
Eventually, her political career, like all others, will end in failure but whether she is defeated from without or within is hard to gauge at this time.
I think she'll quit mid-term after Brexit is implemented with a leadership election in summer 2019.
At that point she's made it to PM, she's won a landslide and she has framed the terms of our EU withdrawal. At her age and in imperfect health it doesn't get any better and she is self-aware enough to know she risks getting rumbled. Or perhaps rumbled once too often as she was over the NI changes and then again over social care. She is using up goodwill and her nine lives very rapidly. So why not leave office on a relative high?
She is a very odd fish indeed. She has the backbone to eviscerate Osborne and Gove, but as we have now seen several times, she has no appetite to defend a policy decision unpopular with the Daily Mail or even to stick with one (Remain) that she has professed. Like Blair, all her actual political views seem lightly held, but unlike Blair, she is prepared to be utterly brutal in despatching anyone who opposes or might thwart her.
Or she is Stanley Baldwin and will be in power for ten years or more.
It's conceivable. I am guessing though that quitting when it suits her would hold more appeal than spending 10 years as PM. It is not, after all, as though she has any obvious policy agenda to implement that requires 10 years.
I'm sure that ISIS trained the bomb maker, got him/her back into the UK, then gave him/her strict instructions that (s)he should only make one bomb.
Yeah, right.
There is another remote possibility, that he wasn't a suicide bomber.
Can you see him following instructions? Collect the bomb here. Deliver it to this point. Phone x number to confirm it is in position Move away and we will detonate fifteen minutes later.
Only problem is phone x number sets the bomb off, as he knows too much and has to be eliminated.
For the organisers it may be easier to recruit somewhat dim fanatics than suicidal fanatics who are eager to find a host of virgins, not even knowing if they are male of female virgins.
Human societies generally have little problem finding young men prepared to give their lives for the glory of the King, Emperor or Caliph, whether or not virgins are involved.
I'm sure that ISIS trained the bomb maker, got him/her back into the UK, then gave him/her strict instructions that (s)he should only make one bomb.
Yeah, right.
There is another remote possibility, that he wasn't a suicide bomber.
Can you see him following instructions? Collect the bomb here. Deliver it to this point. Phone x number to confirm it is in position Move away and we will detonate fifteen minutes later.
Only problem is phone x number sets the bomb off, as he knows too much and has to be eliminated.
For the organisers it may be easier to recruit somewhat dim fanatics than suicidal fanatics who are eager to find a host of virgins, not even knowing if they are male of female virgins.
Pretty much what happens in Casino Royale (the book, dunno about the film).
Comments
Of course there is a long way to go before anything like a 15 point lead is guaranteed. It could just as easily be 7 points, 10 points or 20 points!
Has so much changed since sub 150 seemed likely?
Only if Labour was prioritising the force in an affordable and sustainable way without a deficit would it be meaningful.
https://twitter.com/LOS_Fisher/status/867328519562563584
For once, I agree with him.
I think I've messed up slightly on my Lab seat band bets, but constituency wise I'm reasonably confident of value in most cases. Except Cardiff Central - that's become a small tar pit.
The t&c's of plan 2 loans really are that bad.
Or Corbyn who was on the right side of the argument on all that.
I would attack May big time have you seen her record her "crying wolf" speech to the police in 2015 her immigration record.
Incidentally, with all of the coal plants due to be turned off by 2025, it looks like the protesters were ahead of the game.
Frank Gardner (@FrankRGardner)
#manchesterattack Bomber thought to have been a 'mule' using device built by someone else. More Govt announcements expected today.
I'll quote what @kle4 said (though in my case I have voted Tory (and Labour, and Green, etc. in the past):
And I'll remind your partisan arse that I've never voted Tory (though I have been considering it this time around, in a small part because of how horrible people like you are to people like me who have voted LD but dare to criticise them sometimes), and you act like a paranoid conspiracy loony when you ascribe the motivations of those who attack you entirely to partisan attack, which given how partisan you are is silly.
Where are they?
I ask because I remember people were talking about Birmingham, Woolwich and Luton as no go zones... Which came as a surprise to me and many others...
I don't know whether you are a Tory, LibDem or something else, but the Tories are certainly full of hate and many have probably convinced themselves that their propaganda is true, and phrases such as "Jihadi Jezza" have been heard. It is such people that are a risk to the country's security. It is as if they're taking the piss. When they say "let us stand united against terrorism" they don't mean what they say. Terrorists should not be allowed to influence this election. Do you agree? Because you don't seem to. I would have nothing but praise for Theresa May if she invited Jeremy Corbyn and Tim Farron to join an inner cabinet right now, and if the three of them agreed that all three will stay there regardless of who is the prime minister in a fortnight's time.
Her entire raison d'etre has been the construction and will now become the preservation of her "big tent" coalition. Any policy or idea which seems to annoy the coalition will be dropped like the proverbial hot potato and the Minister forced into a grovelling climb-down.
None of that matters - all that matters is the preservation and continuation of Theresa May as Prime Minister and leader of the Conservative Party.
Eventually, her political career, like all others, will end in failure but whether she is defeated from without or within is hard to gauge at this time.
That's not a sentence I thought I'd ever see myself writing.
As soon as your earnings exceed £100,000, the government starts to withdraw the tax-free personal allowance — currently the first £10,600 of your earnings, on which no tax is levied.
Pound by pound it is taken away, with the effect of adding an extra 20 per cent in tax on income between £100,000 and £121,200. This is on top of the “higher” rate of 40 per cent tax that is already due.
He arrived back in Belgium, was basically told phone this number, he was then messaged an address of a car park and the reg of a car. When he arrived it was full stocked with everything he needed.
It was like the Amazon Prime for terrorists.
That internet thingy perhaps?
Part of me thinks it must be a spoof though...
Yeah, right.
I'm assuming a competitive bidding process though.
Financial institutions like pension funds will be biting the governments hand off to get the Plan 2 student loan book. It makes for an incredible inflation-protected asset.
They've been perfectly designed to make the treasury money.
Failed suicide bombers were already facing the very real death penalty of a successful suicide bombing. These people believe quite literally they will ascend to paradise on death. For them, the death penalty is an incentive not a deterrent.
I read more abusive and offensive things about Corbyn and Abbott every single day on PB, but I assume that's acceptable because the PB Tory mafia approve of it. .
Why no Nuttall and Sturgeon, btw?
I guess it's cheaper than putting them in prison.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2020382/You-entering-Sharia-law-Britain-As-Islamic-extremists-declare-Sharia-law-zone-London-suburb-worrying-social-moral-implications.html
Thatcher was so annoyed that the leading banker, Lloyds CEO, Brian Pitman, did not get knighted until many years later.
At that point she's made it to PM, she's won a landslide and she has framed the terms of our EU withdrawal. At her age and in imperfect health it doesn't get any better and she is self-aware enough to know she risks getting rumbled. Or perhaps rumbled once too often as she was over the NI changes and then again over social care. She is using up goodwill and her nine lives very rapidly. So why not leave office on a relative high?
She is a very odd fish indeed. She has the backbone to eviscerate Osborne and Gove, but as we have now seen several times, she has no appetite to defend a policy decision unpopular with the Daily Mail or even to stick with one (Remain) that she has professed. Like Blair, all her actual political views seem lightly held, but unlike Blair, she is prepared to be utterly brutal in despatching anyone who opposes or might thwart her.
Can you see him following instructions?
Collect the bomb here.
Deliver it to this point.
Phone x number to confirm it is in position
Move away and we will detonate fifteen minutes later.
Only problem is phone x number sets the bomb off, as he knows too much and has to be eliminated.
For the organisers it may be easier to recruit somewhat dim fanatics than suicidal fanatics who are eager to find a host of virgins, not even knowing if they are male of female virgins.
I don't know whether it is incompetence or deliberate. Either way, it should be removed by applying a much gentler taper say from £80K to £150K which would in effect be an extra 5% on top of the 40% on a larger tax base. Then the 50% rate could kick in.
8th para