Jezza had a chance, upon election, to transform the Labour Party well short of becoming Tory-lite
Renounce and apologise for perviously held extreme views (he is now head of a mainstream party), promise an ethical approach to government, and declare himself willing to govern for everyone,
But then of course that wouldn't have been Jeremy.
I'm very concerned about the sort of country we're becoming if people are worried that shopkeepers are growing beards, that sounds flippant but its a serious point. I said on here yesterday that reprisals are inevitable, I might be wrong but its unlikely that Sean T will take direct action, in 1 or 2 places I wouldn't be so sure.
We are in troubled times and there will be people who say Brexit is the catalyst to violence against foreigners when it is not connected in any way. There will be dozens of reports of "racist" attacks which I find abhorrent, but if Islamists choose to murder children and nothing is "seen" to be done, there will be problems.
BNP, Britain First etc will be whipping people up into a frenzy, it is unconnected to Brexit in every way.
Ah, you are falling into the trap that our "Betters" live in - that we are 30 seconds away from a pogrom, complete with pitchforks and torches.
I think events in the last few years have demonstrated a ridiculous high bar for such a thing to happen.
No, I'm saying that there will be a rise in attacks on foreign people and that Remainers will blame it on Brexit. It has nothing to do with Brexit, its to do with foreigners blowing up concerts.
*foreigners* ?
Brown people.
The people you probably won't live with or near,am I right brompy ?
I think Alastair is assuming too much when he suggests that this election is going to be determined by response to security concerns following the atrocity at Manchester. That certainly did not appear to be the case back in October 1974 when the Guildford pub bombings took place a mere five days before polling day. Why should it be different now - given that we are looking at a two week gap? I don't share the view either that the election 'should' be about Brexit.It is not for any PM to decide the basis on which people cast their votes, and whilst Theresa May called the election with that issue at the forefront of her own calculations , she has discovered - as did Ted Heath before her in February 1974 - that other issues gain the attention of voters as the campaign develops. This had ceased to be the Brexit election even before this tragic event. Personally I am not surprised at that because the subject remains far too technical for the vast majority of voters - regardless of how they voted in last year's Referendum.Contrary to some expectations , I seriously doubt that the focus will return to Brexit by polling day.
The latest migration statistics are published today. How will that feed into the campaign?
Not sure how much attention they'll get, but they will be interesting. I know there are quite big margins of error around the figures, but was the fall last quarter just a blip?
I won't pursue the personal debate further as I can't imagine it's of general interest, but it's certainly true that lots of Labour members who are not always left-wing will not vote to replace Corbyn after a possible election defeat unless someone offers an attractive alternative. To write all of us off as deluded zealots misses the point and is self-defeating for centrists. Anyway, we have an election to fight now: time to worry about what happens next thereafter.
In the meantime, there's an interesting discussion here of the challenges faced by voters and MPs in our electronic age:
At first skim, I think they're right about the problem, but I don't instantly see that their dashboards etc. solve it. But perhaps I've not studied it enough?
It certainly is of general interest, Nick. Can you explain to me why Jezza should remain in post if - as is likely - he presides over a defeat and a reduction in Labour seats? Is there even a precedent for such behaviour?
Nick doesn’t deserve this ferocious interrogation by all and sundry.
I asked a perfectly reasonable question. Since when was debate 'interrogation'? You are treading the same line as ThreeQuidder who accused me of bullying Moniker by asking him to forecast an election result instead of dog whistling.
Fuck off, Bob. I haven't even posted since last night.
I think the PM can close down this debate about police numbers before Labour really get going, by just saying there is going to be a "review" after the election.
I am not sure the PM should close it down.
It looks like a huge mistake by Labour to me, tantamount to trying to “blame” Theresa for the attack.
Labour need to get the focus off police & security asap, and onto anything else.
Disagree. I'm with Karl Rove (G W Bush's election guru) on this one. Labour needs to attack Tories' and specifically Theresa May's perceived strengths, and particularly here as May's roles as Prime Minister and Home Secretary are directly relevant. This means the cuts to police numbers, the failure to stop Abedi after multiple warnings from different sources, failure to monitor travel to and return from terrorist hotspots, threats to stop sharing intelligence as part of Brexit, and yes, failure to control non-EU immigration.
In short, Labour needs to attack and destroy any impression that Theresa May and a Conservative government make Britain safe.
I guess we’ll see. It looks like a God-awful mistake.
Just because someone says to a reporter that they know that some neighbours reported Abedi does not constitute strong evidence. Or indeed, any evidence.
Do we really know that there were “multiple warnings from different sources”?
And even if there were, trying to stick that on Theresa looks like a smear.
In fact the mistake looks very like Healey’s “glorifying in the Falklands War” comment which caused the 83 election to be fought in exactly the wrong arena for Labour.
It wasn't that long ago that the Brexiteers on here were rimming themselves over how the UK's peerless intelligence and counter terrorism expertise would be a massive bargaining chip in the Brexit negotiations. Now its seems we can't stop a istishhadi half wit who's ALREADY KNOWN to the security services from blowing up an Ariane Grande concert in Britain's third worst city.
Dura Ace, you've been in uncommonly fine spirits since those kids were slaughtered in Manchester.
Morning all. Very pleased to see information is no longer being shared with the US. Wouldn't be a bad policy generally, the states are a busted flush, cooperation with China and the East is the way forward. Unshackle from the yee haw boys and a lot of the hatred dissipates. I hope America soon elects an isolationist and disappears up its own backside. The world would instantly be a safer place.
This would be the same China hacking us? India, Japan, South Korea maybe but the idea we will ever have a special relationship with Communist China is absurd
I think the PM can close down this debate about police numbers before Labour really get going, by just saying there is going to be a "review" after the election.
I am not sure the PM should close it down.
It looks like a huge mistake by Labour to me, tantamount to trying to “blame” Theresa for the attack.
Labour need to get the focus off police & security asap, and onto anything else.
Disagree. I'm with Karl Rove (G W Bush's election guru) on this one. Labour needs to attack Tories' and specifically Theresa May's perceived strengths, and particularly here as May's roles as Prime Minister and Home Secretary are directly relevant. This means the cuts to police numbers, the failure to stop Abedi after multiple warnings from different sources, failure to monitor travel to and return from terrorist hotspots, threats to stop sharing intelligence as part of Brexit, and yes, failure to control non-EU immigration.
In short, Labour needs to attack and destroy any impression that Theresa May and a Conservative government make Britain safe.
I guess we’ll see. It looks like a God-awful mistake.
Just because someone says to a reporter that they know that some neighbours reported Abedi does not constitute strong evidence. Or indeed, any evidence.
Do we really know that there were “multiple warnings from different sources”?
And even if there were, trying to stick that on Theresa looks like a smear.
In fact the mistake looks very like Healey’s “glorifying in the Falklands War” comment which caused the 83 election to be fought in exactly the wrong arena for Labour.
It wasn't that long ago that the Brexiteers on here were rimming themselves over how the UK's peerless intelligence and counter terrorism expertise would be a massive bargaining chip in the Brexit negotiations. Now its seems we can't stop a istishhadi half wit who's ALREADY KNOWN to the security services from blowing up an Ariane Grande concert in Britain's third worst city.
Given that there are a few thousand of these shitbags, restricting them to two major attacks in twelve years is pretty good.
I'm very concerned about the sort of country we're becoming if people are worried that shopkeepers are growing beards, that sounds flippant but its a serious point. I said on here yesterday that reprisals are inevitable, I might be wrong but its unlikely that Sean T will take direct action, in 1 or 2 places I wouldn't be so sure.
We are in troubled times and there will be people who say Brexit is the catalyst to violence against foreigners when it is not connected in any way. There will be dozens of reports of "racist" attacks which I find abhorrent, but if Islamists choose to murder children and nothing is "seen" to be done, there will be problems.
BNP, Britain First etc will be whipping people up into a frenzy, it is unconnected to Brexit in every way.
Ah, you are falling into the trap that our "Betters" live in - that we are 30 seconds away from a pogrom, complete with pitchforks and torches.
I think events in the last few years have demonstrated a ridiculous high bar for such a thing to happen.
No, I'm saying that there will be a rise in attacks on foreign people and that Remainers will blame it on Brexit. It has nothing to do with Brexit, its to do with foreigners blowing up concerts.
*foreigners* ?
Brown people.
The people you probably won't live with or near,am I right brompy ?
Depends on which of my three homes you're talking about. ;-)
It certainly is of general interest, Nick. Can you explain to me why Jezza should remain in post if - as is likely - he presides over a defeat and a reduction in Labour seats? Is there even a precedent for such behaviour?
Nick doesn’t deserve this ferocious interrogation by all and sundry.
Thanks, YBard! I don't think my personal views matter much at this point except insofar as they explify the sort of party members whom centrists should be trying to win over. We haven't lost yet, but should we do so, I'll need to be convinced that someone else would have done better and, more important, that they'll do bett next time. And by "do better" I mean not just win, but make us feel it's worth winning.
Yep - as I said, a lot of Labour members have never needed or directly benefited from a Labour government and don't particularly mind Tory ones. They are privileged enough to be able to put ideology above pragmatism. For that reason, among other things, the UK is now leaving the EU.
I think the PM can close down this debate about police numbers before Labour really get going, by just saying there is going to be a "review" after the election.
I am not sure the PM should close it down.
It looks like a huge mistake by Labour to me, tantamount to trying to “blame” Theresa for the attack.
Labour need to get the focus off police & security asap, and onto anything else.
Disagree. I'm with Karl Rove (G W Bush's election guru) on this one. Labour needs to attack Tories' and specifically Theresa May's perceived strengths, and particularly here as May's roles as Prime Minister and Home Secretary are directly relevant. This means the cuts to police numbers, the failure to stop Abedi after multiple warnings from different sources, failure to monitor travel to and return from terrorist hotspots, threats to stop sharing intelligence as part of Brexit, and yes, failure to control non-EU immigration.
In short, Labour needs to attack and destroy any impression that Theresa May and a Conservative government make Britain safe.
I guess we’ll see. It looks like a God-awful mistake.
Just because someone says to a reporter that they know that some neighbours reported Abedi does not constitute strong evidence. Or indeed, any evidence.
Do we really know that there were “multiple warnings from different sources”?
And even if there were, trying to stick that on Theresa looks like a smear.
In fact the mistake looks very like Healey’s “glorifying in the Falklands War” comment which caused the 83 election to be fought in exactly the wrong arena for Labour.
It wasn't that long ago that the Brexiteers on here were rimming themselves over how the UK's peerless intelligence and counter terrorism expertise would be a massive bargaining chip in the Brexit negotiations. Now its seems we can't stop a istishhadi half wit who's ALREADY KNOWN to the security services from blowing up an Ariane Grande concert in Britain's third worst city.
He may have been a half-wit, but it does look as though he has the edge on you.
Try learning about “hypothesis testing”, then try “false positive rate” and then “false negative rate”
There is a trade-off between false positives and false negatives.
To stop every attack would involve generating numerous false positives.
Morning all. Very pleased to see information is no longer being shared with the US. Wouldn't be a bad policy generally, the states are a busted flush, cooperation with China and the East is the way forward. Unshackle from the yee haw boys and a lot of the hatred dissipates. I hope America soon elects an isolationist and disappears up its own backside. The world would instantly be a safer place.
This would be the same China hacking us? India, Japan, South Korea maybe but the idea we will ever have a special relationship with Communist China is absurd
Morning all. Very pleased to see information is no longer being shared with the US. Wouldn't be a bad policy generally, the states are a busted flush, cooperation with China and the East is the way forward. Unshackle from the yee haw boys and a lot of the hatred dissipates. I hope America soon elects an isolationist and disappears up its own backside. The world would instantly be a safer place.
This would be the same China hacking us? India, Japan, South Korea maybe but the idea we will ever have a special relationship with Communist China is absurd
We will have no choice.
Why? India and Japan and the US are all democratic free societies unlike China
It certainly is of general interest, Nick. Can you explain to me why Jezza should remain in post if - as is likely - he presides over a defeat and a reduction in Labour seats? Is there even a precedent for such behaviour?
Nick doesn’t deserve this ferocious interrogation by all and sundry.
Thanks, YBard! I don't think my personal views matter much at this point except insofar as they explify the sort of party members whom centrists should be trying to win over. We haven't lost yet, but should we do so, I'll need to be convinced that someone else would have done better and, more important, that they'll do bett next time. And by "do better" I mean not just win, but make us feel it's worth winning.
Did you feel it was worth winning in 1997, 2001, 2005?
I'm very concerned about the sort of country we're becoming if people are worried that shopkeepers are growing beards, that sounds flippant but its a serious point. I said on here yesterday that reprisals are inevitable, I might be wrong but its unlikely that Sean T will take direct action, in 1 or 2 places I wouldn't be so sure.
We are in troubled times and there will be people who say Brexit is the catalyst to violence against foreigners when it is not connected in any way. There will be dozens of reports of "racist" attacks which I find abhorrent, but if Islamists choose to murder children and nothing is "seen" to be done, there will be problems.
BNP, Britain First etc will be whipping people up into a frenzy, it is unconnected to Brexit in every way.
Ah, you are falling into the trap that our "Betters" live in - that we are 30 seconds away from a pogrom, complete with pitchforks and torches.
I think events in the last few years have demonstrated a ridiculous high bar for such a thing to happen.
No, I'm saying that there will be a rise in attacks on foreign people and that Remainers will blame it on Brexit. It has nothing to do with Brexit, its to do with foreigners blowing up concerts.
*foreigners* ?
Brown people.
The people you probably won't live with or near,am I right brompy ?
Depends on which of my three homes you're talking about. ;-)
It's the condo in Juan Les Pins I think he's referring to. As you only use the chateau in the Lot during the winter, I doubt it's that.
It certainly is of general interest, Nick. Can you explain to me why Jezza should remain in post if - as is likely - he presides over a defeat and a reduction in Labour seats? Is there even a precedent for such behaviour?
Nick doesn’t deserve this ferocious interrogation by all and sundry.
Thanks, YBard! I don't think my personal views matter much at this point except insofar as they explify the sort of party members whom centrists should be trying to win over. We haven't lost yet, but should we do so, I'll need to be convinced that someone else would have done better and, more important, that they'll do bett next time. And by "do better" I mean not just win, but make us feel it's worth winning.
Yep - as I said, a lot of Labour members have never needed or directly benefited from a Labour government and don't particularly mind Tory ones. They are privileged enough to be able to put ideology above pragmatism. For that reason, among other things, the UK is now leaving the EU.
Exactly which is why I think Labour are more likely to hold Hampstead and Kilburn than Walsall North
This is what it is to live in a democracy under attack. We disagree on the extent of the danger and what should be done, but we are all on the same side.
Or are we? This brings us to the rank unsuitability of Jeremy Corbyn to be prime minister and the fact that a once great party like Labour can seriously propose him as the person who could, in a matter of weeks, be chairing meetings of the government’s Cobra emergency committee.
Almost without fail, Corbyn has expressed support for this country’s enemies, opposed British military deployments overseas, or sided with assorted fringe elements who say we deserve what we get. The man is by no reasonable definition a patriot. He is quite simply unfit to hold office.
This is not new. It's why the Tories were always going to win big. Labour members were warned time and again. On here, I had rows with Nick Palmer and others about it. Not only has their self-indulgence gifted the Tories a landslide, it has denied the country an opposition at a time when one has never been more needed. The next sane Labour leader - if there ever is another one - should make his/her first act a fulsome apology for the party's abdication from responsibility since 2015.
While they are at it, they should probably apologise for the Iraq War and the 2008 bust as well. Nobody is as good or as bad as partisans paint them, but we are still living with and paying for both of those epic cock ups. If Labour will not say sorry it will continue to look like they aren't, which is toxic.
That Moeen Ali was sporting a particularly handsome beard, at Headingley yesterday. His use of a cricket bat like a scimitar to smash several boundaries and put South Africa to the sword will worry some.
This is what it is to live in a democracy under attack. We disagree on the extent of the danger and what should be done, but we are all on the same side.
Or are we? This brings us to the rank unsuitability of Jeremy Corbyn to be prime minister and the fact that a once great party like Labour can seriously propose him as the person who could, in a matter of weeks, be chairing meetings of the government’s Cobra emergency committee.
Almost without fail, Corbyn has expressed support for this country’s enemies, opposed British military deployments overseas, or sided with assorted fringe elements who say we deserve what we get. The man is by no reasonable definition a patriot. He is quite simply unfit to hold office.
This is not new. It's why the Tories were always going to win big. Labour members were warned time and again. On here, I had rows with Nick Palmer and others about it. Not only has their self-indulgence gifted the Tories a landslide, it has denied the country an opposition at a time when one has never been more needed. The next sane Labour leader - if there ever is another one - should make his/her first act a fulsome apology for the party's abdication from responsibility since 2015.
While they are at it, they should probably apologise for the Iraq War and the 2008 bust as well. Nobody is as good or as bad as partisans paint them, but we are still living with and paying for both of those epic cock ups. If Labour will not say sorry it will continue to look like they aren't, which is toxic.
Ed Miliband did the former and fat lot of good it did him
This is what it is to live in a democracy under attack. We disagree on the extent of the danger and what should be done, but we are all on the same side.
Or are we? This brings us to the rank unsuitability of Jeremy Corbyn to be prime minister and the fact that a once great party like Labour can seriously propose him as the person who could, in a matter of weeks, be chairing meetings of the government’s Cobra emergency committee.
Almost without fail, Corbyn has expressed support for this country’s enemies, opposed British military deployments overseas, or sided with assorted fringe elements who say we deserve what we get. The man is by no reasonable definition a patriot. He is quite simply unfit to hold office.
This is not new. It's why the Tories were always going to win big. Labour members were warned time and again. On here, I had rows with Nick Palmer and others about it. Not only has their self-indulgence gifted the Tories a landslide, it has denied the country an opposition at a time when one has never been more needed. The next sane Labour leader - if there ever is another one - should make his/her first act a fulsome apology for the party's abdication from responsibility since 2015.
While they are at it, they should probably apologise for the Iraq War and the 2008 bust as well. Nobody is as good or as bad as partisans paint them, but we are still living with and paying for both of those epic cock ups. If Labour will not say sorry it will continue to look like they aren't, which is toxic.
Ed Miliband did the former and fat lot of good it did him
Is that Ed 'we didn't spend too much money' Miliband?
I think Alastair is assuming too much when he suggests that this election is going to be determined by response to security concerns following the atrocity at Manchester. That certainly did not appear to be the case back in October 1974 when the Guildford pub bombings took place a mere five days before polling day. Why should it be different now - given that we are looking at a two week gap? I don't share the view either that the election 'should' be about Brexit.It is not for any PM to decide the basis on which people cast their votes, and whilst Theresa May called the election with that issue at the forefront of her own calculations , she has discovered - as did Ted Heath before her in February 1974 - that other issues gain the attention of voters as the campaign develops. This had ceased to be the Brexit election even before this tragic event. Personally I am not surprised at that because the subject remains far too technical for the vast majority of voters - regardless of how they voted in last year's Referendum.Contrary to some expectations , I seriously doubt that the focus will return to Brexit by polling day.
The movement of 2015 UKIP voters to 2017 Tory voters is the biggest story of this election
That Moeen Ali was sporting a particularly handsome beard, at Headingley yesterday. His use of a cricket bat like a scimitar to smash several boundaries and put South Africa to the sword will worry some.
But have you ever seen him without one?
This young England U19 captain from a decade ago?
Hm, not to unexpected over a decade timescale.
Anyway, I was just messing around, had hoped the emojis would have given that away
Actually lots of PBers said that the bearded one should be grassed up. Obviously that included a lot of the hard-right semi racists, but also several people who do not fall into such a category. The odd thing about the exchange was that SeanT himself came across as relatively liberal.
This is what it is to live in a democracy under attack. We disagree on the extent of the danger and what should be done, but we are all on the same side.
Or are we? This brings us to the rank unsuitability of Jeremy Corbyn to be prime minister and the fact that a once great party like Labour can seriously propose him as the person who could, in a matter of weeks, be chairing meetings of the government’s Cobra emergency committee.
Almost without fail, Corbyn has expressed support for this country’s enemies, opposed British military deployments overseas, or sided with assorted fringe elements who say we deserve what we get. The man is by no reasonable definition a patriot. He is quite simply unfit to hold office.
This is not new. It's why the Tories were always going to win big. Labour members were warned time and again. On here, I had rows with Nick Palmer and others about it. Not only has their self-indulgence gifted the Tories a landslide, it has denied the country an opposition at a time when one has never been more needed. The next sane Labour leader - if there ever is another one - should make his/her first act a fulsome apology for the party's abdication from responsibility since 2015.
While they are at it, they should probably apologise for the Iraq War and the 2008 bust as well. Nobody is as good or as bad as partisans paint them, but we are still living with and paying for both of those epic cock ups. If Labour will not say sorry it will continue to look like they aren't, which is toxic.
To be fair, Jeremy did apologise for the Iraq War.
I agree the apologies are needed -- but being a politician means never having to say sorry.
Well, at least sorry for the things you did, you can say sorry for the Irish Famine.
Morning all. Very pleased to see information is no longer being shared with the US. Wouldn't be a bad policy generally, the states are a busted flush, cooperation with China and the East is the way forward. Unshackle from the yee haw boys and a lot of the hatred dissipates. I hope America soon elects an isolationist and disappears up its own backside. The world would instantly be a safer place.
This would be the same China hacking us? India, Japan, South Korea maybe but the idea we will ever have a special relationship with Communist China is absurd
We will have no choice.
Why? India and Japan and the US are all democratic free societies unlike China
We live in the world. Thus is the world. China will be the world superpower.
•Net long-term international migration was estimated to be +248,000 in 2016, down 84,000 from 2015 (statistically significant); immigration was estimated to be 588,000 and emigration 339,000.
•The net migration change was driven by a statistically significant increase in emigration up 40,000 from 2015, mainly EU citizens (117,000, up 31,000 from 2015) and a decrease of 43,000 in immigration (not statistically significant).
•EU8 citizens have partly driven the changes with a fall in immigration (down 25,000) to 48,000 and a rise in emigration (up 16,000) to 43,000 in 2016 (both statistically significant changes); this resulted in the smallest net migration estimate (+5,000) for the EU8 since joining the EU in 2004.
It's no surprise folk like me think Brexit is going to be a disaster. Though with 11 months hard evidence rather than opinion I feel that more strongly than I did on June 23rd last year. The issue is we're a democracy and most folk don't agree with me. May is not being dishonest or conning anyone. The Conservative manifesto contains some startling and disturbing clarity on how hard Brexit will be, the scale of the tax rises and benefit cuts to come. The evidence is the electorate is not currently bothered. So who can really blame her for taking the offered landslide while it's there before the **** hits the fan ?
I asked a perfectly reasonable question. Since when was debate 'interrogation'? You are treading the same line as ThreeQuidder who accused me of bullying Moniker by asking him to forecast an election result instead of dog whistling.
I think YBard was commenting on the series of questions, some of which were more sharply phrased that your perfectly reasonable one. I'm grateful to him, and bored with debating about myself, so I imagine everyone else is even more so. But happy to debate the party! Perhaps best done after the election, though, or at least after a few new polls.
I'm very concerned about the sort of country we're becoming if people are worried that shopkeepers are growing beards, that sounds flippant but its a serious point. I said on here yesterday that reprisals are inevitable, I might be wrong but its unlikely that Sean T will take direct action, in 1 or 2 places I wouldn't be so sure.
We are in troubled times and there will be people who say Brexit is the catalyst to violence against foreigners when it is not connected in any way. There will be dozens of reports of "racist" attacks which I find abhorrent, but if Islamists choose to murder children and nothing is "seen" to be done, there will be problems.
BNP, Britain First etc will be whipping people up into a frenzy, it is unconnected to Brexit in every way.
Ah, you are falling into the trap that our "Betters" live in - that we are 30 seconds away from a pogrom, complete with pitchforks and torches.
I think events in the last few years have demonstrated a ridiculous high bar for such a thing to happen.
No, I'm saying that there will be a rise in attacks on foreign people and that Remainers will blame it on Brexit. It has nothing to do with Brexit, its to do with foreigners blowing up concerts.
*foreigners* ?
Perception is important. Keep wringing your hands and go into a pub on a council estate, you'll soon get my point.
If you have brown skin you'll never be perceived as British, is that what you're saying? Just want to be clear on this
Free to choose says offensive things from time to time, but I feel you are searching for reasons to be offended more than necessary.
Not at all. Simply giving him an opportunity to clarify his views. Isn't that why he's here?
Careful, ThreeQuidder will pop up shortly and accuse you of bullying FreeToChoose, vulnerable snowflake that he is.
Seriously, Bob, fuck right off and leave me alone.
You can be happy BJO. You've achieved your goal of " rubbing the people's noses in it ". With knobs on.
Why would anyone be happy May was sacking exactly the type of resources we require?
I can imagine the scene: May strides imperiously into the room, followed by an array of white-clad snivelling, sycophantic underlings. She looks at the crowd in front of her as the last notes of the Imperial March fade out.
She picks out a cowering, quivering figure: "You!" she commands. "Y... yes?" "What do you do?" "I'm ... I'm an explosives dog handler, ma'am." "You're fired. Be'gone!" "But ma'am ..." She glares at the man, who starts putting his fingers around his tightening collar. "Just feel glad you are leaving with your life!"
The latest migration statistics are published today. How will that feed into the campaign?
Look night on perfect for the government to me.
Falling enough for the Brexiteers to stick with the government and not drift back to UKIP - but not so much that the remainers are suddenly going to go away.
Did anyone else hear Humphrys interviewing Nuttall this morning? He asked him if he was "on a suicide mission". Is he just a moron, or an utter c*nt as well?
The latest migration statistics are published today. How will that feed into the campaign?
Look night on perfect for the government to me.
Falling enough for the Brexiteers to stick with the government and not drift back to UKIP - but not so much that the remainers are suddenly going to go away.
I'm very concerned about the sort of country we're becoming if people are worried that shopkeepers are growing beards, that sounds flippant but its a serious point. I said on here yesterday that reprisals are inevitable, I might be wrong but its unlikely that Sean T will take direct action, in 1 or 2 places I wouldn't be so sure.
We are in troubled times and there will be people who say Brexit is the catalyst to violence against foreigners when it is not connected in any way. There will be dozens of reports of "racist" attacks which I find abhorrent, but if Islamists choose to murder children and nothing is "seen" to be done, there will be problems.
BNP, Britain First etc will be whipping people up into a frenzy, it is unconnected to Brexit in every way.
Ah, you are falling into the trap that our "Betters" live in - that we are 30 seconds away from a pogrom, complete with pitchforks and torches.
I think events in the last few years have demonstrated a ridiculous high bar for such a thing to happen.
No, I'm saying that there will be a rise in attacks on foreign people and that Remainers will blame it on Brexit. It has nothing to do with Brexit, its to do with foreigners blowing up concerts.
*foreigners* ?
Brown people.
The people you probably won't live with or near,am I right brompy ?
Depends on which of my three homes you're talking about. ;-)
It's the condo in Juan Les Pins I think he's referring to. As you only use the chateau in the Lot during the winter, I doubt it's that.
Whereas the bedsit over the balti in Sparkbrook...
Would have some traction had it happened in Maidenhead. Not exactly the hotbed of Islamist terrorism.
Search dogs are almost useless for suicide bombers, they are intended to find bombs that have been planted at a venue. The problem we face is that this isn't the 1970s where an IRA bomber intends to get away, the suicide bomber will simply blow himself up at the first checkpoint or nearby. So no amount of barriers or searches or technology will stop a determined suicide bomber, the only thing that does work is to detect and catch them before they can act.
May was always going to get a huge majority. It's not as if voters ever saw Corbyn as credible.
Hopefully, though, we will get less bellicose language about our European friends from here on in. For friends they surely are. Our enemies do not sit in the Commission or in government offices in capital cities from Helsinki through Paris and Berlin to Athens. And as Alastair says in his very fine piece, security is not going to be a Brexit bargaining chip. Not least because we now know the Americans are less trustworthy than anyone. The Atlanticist fantasies of some of the more swivel-eyed right wing Brexiteers are dissolving into dust.
Every word of this. Disturbed particularly by how information has been leaked to the press in America.
The latest migration statistics are published today. How will that feed into the campaign?
Look night on perfect for the government to me.
Falling enough for the Brexiteers to stick with the government and not drift back to UKIP - but not so much that the remainers are suddenly going to go away.
Yeah, quite a big fall too, almost 100k
Very good news. Gives a boost to the home office after a difficult week, and will help shore up the UKIP movers.
Would have some traction had it happened in Maidenhead. Not exactly the hotbed of Islamist terrorism.
Search dogs are almost useless for suicide bombers, they are intended to find bombs that have been planted at a venue. The problem we face is that this isn't the 1970s where an IRA bomber intends to get away, the suicide bomber will simply blow himself up at the first checkpoint or nearby. So no amount of barriers or searches or technology will stop a determined suicide bomber, the only thing that does work is to detect and catch them before they can act.
You mean, they may have actually thought about who they were laying off and who they were keeping? No, it's not possible.
GDP growth last quarter revised down to +0.2%. Looks like we've gone from having the highest growth of the G7 to being the sick man. Happy days.
Same as Q1 2016. Hm, should this be filed under "because of Brexit" or "despite Brexit"
Pre Brexit uncertainty :-)
Although Easter 2016 was in Q1 but in Q2 in 2017, so we shall see.
Also interesting to see falling wages correlate with a fall in the amount of net migration to the UK. I'm sure that wasn't the way it was supposed to work out...
Morning all. Very pleased to see information is no longer being shared with the US. Wouldn't be a bad policy generally, the states are a busted flush, cooperation with China and the East is the way forward. Unshackle from the yee haw boys and a lot of the hatred dissipates. I hope America soon elects an isolationist and disappears up its own backside. The world would instantly be a safer place.
This would be the same China hacking us? India, Japan, South Korea maybe but the idea we will ever have a special relationship with Communist China is absurd
We will have no choice.
Why? India and Japan and the US are all democratic free societies unlike China
We live in the world. Thus is the world. China will be the world superpower.
It may be economic number 1, though even there India may ultimately overtake it but that does not mean it will be an ally of the UK, India and the US of the big 3 will be closer allies for us
Did anyone else hear Humphrys interviewing Nuttall this morning? He asked him if he was "on a suicide mission". Is he just a moron, or an utter c*nt as well?
Did anyone else hear Humphrys interviewing Nuttall this morning? He asked him if he was "on a suicide mission". Is he just a moron, or an utter c*nt as well?
Blimey. I missed that.
I presume Nuttall wasn't sharp enough to pick him up on it?
Did anyone else hear Humphrys interviewing Nuttall this morning? He asked him if he was "on a suicide mission". Is he just a moron, or an utter c*nt as well?
An unfortunate turn of phrase to be sure, nor even clever when interviewing a party leader.
YouGov are polling again. They're asking both a general who are you going to vote for and then asking again with named/partied candidates for your constituency.
Late to the discussion but a few comments on topic.
Firstly, an excellent piece from Alastair. I don't agree with it all but it's very good to read a well-argued piece from a left-of-centre perspective; he and it are a credit to the site.
And on the substance, and the point on which I dissent, the election is about Brexit but it's also about more than that. Most obviously, as Zac found in Richmond, elections are ultimately about whatever the public want them to be about, not what the politicians (or some of them) say it is.
But beyond that, this election, as with most elections, is about leadership. Who do you trust to lead the country. Sure, that means who do you trust to get the best deal for Britain on leaving the EU: who has the head for detail; who can master the competing dynamics and best work them to produce a favourable outcome; who is pragmatic enough to cut a deal where necessary but firm enough to stand solid over red line; indeed, who best understands what the red lines should be? But it also means leadership on the economy: who do you trust to deliver sustainable growth and employment, and not to crash the car from recklessness and under-maintenance? It means leadership on security: who do you trust to keep us as safe as possible while balancing that against essential liberties; who do you trust to oversee the security services and military? It means leadership on public services: who do you trust to act in the interests of the citizen and not client groups, while recognising that those client groups both might have legitimate points and are probably essential to delivering those services.
And the choice on offer is May, Hammond, Davis and so on, on the one hand, and Corbyn, McDonnell, Abbott and co on the other. Those are the binary options. Certainly, other parties are available but none of them can win, so a vote for them is to delegate the most crucial decision to other voters.
Did anyone else hear Humphrys interviewing Nuttall this morning? He asked him if he was "on a suicide mission". Is he just a moron, or an utter c*nt as well?
Blimey. I missed that.
I presume Nuttall wasn't sharp enough to pick him up on it?
It was his first question. Nuttall sounded a bit shocked, I thought, but basically ignored it.
I've been predicting for some time that immigration would fall by using the simple method of being so unpleasant to foreigners that they would get the message. Clearly that's working.
I've been predicting for some time that immigration would fall by using the simple method of being so unpleasant to foreigners that they would get the message. Clearly that's working.
It lacks the elegance of your method of ensuring Brexit by telling most Brits they're racist scum.
I've been predicting for some time that immigration would fall by using the simple method of being so unpleasant to foreigners that they would get the message. Clearly that's working.
It lacks the elegance of your method of ensuring Brexit by telling most Brits they're racist scum.
I'm sorry that it upsets you so much to be reminded that Brexit was secured through xenophobic lies, but it's the essential reason why Brexit is the enduring disaster of the age for the country.
Late to the discussion but a few comments on topic.
Firstly, an excellent piece from Alastair. I don't agree with it all but it's very good to read a well-argued piece from a left-of-centre perspective; he and it are a credit to the site.
And on the substance, and the point on which I dissent, the election is about Brexit but it's also about more than that. Most obviously, as Zac found in Richmond, elections are ultimately about whatever the public want them to be about, not what the politicians (or some of them) say it is.
But beyond that, this election, as with most elections, is about leadership. Who do you trust to lead the country. Sure, that means who do you trust to get the best deal for Britain on leaving the EU: who has the head for detail; who can master the competing dynamics and best work them to produce a favourable outcome; who is pragmatic enough to cut a deal where necessary but firm enough to stand solid over red line; indeed, who best understands what the red lines should be? But it also means leadership on the economy: who do you trust to deliver sustainable growth and employment, and not to crash the car from recklessness and under-maintenance? It means leadership on security: who do you trust to keep us as safe as possible while balancing that against essential liberties; who do you trust to oversee the security services and military? It means leadership on public services: who do you trust to act in the interests of the citizen and not client groups, while recognising that those client groups both might have legitimate points and are probably essential to delivering those services.
And the choice on offer is May, Hammond, Davis and so on, on the one hand, and Corbyn, McDonnell, Abbott and co on the other. Those are the binary options. Certainly, other parties are available but none of them can win, so a vote for them is to delegate the most crucial decision to other voters.
The question I asked myself about this election is: who has the best instincts to deal with the unexpected? Manifesto pledges are all well and good but the unexpected always arises.
I didn't find it a difficult question to answer, to be honest.
I've been predicting for some time that immigration would fall by using the simple method of being so unpleasant to foreigners that they would get the message. Clearly that's working.
Who precisely is shocked at any of this information about identity and bombs, and did these maiden aunts think the forensic teams in the white coveralls shown on or in British media were painters and decorators?
I've been predicting for some time that immigration would fall by using the simple method of being so unpleasant to foreigners that they would get the message. Clearly that's working.
Late to the discussion but a few comments on topic.
Firstly, an excellent piece from Alastair. I don't agree with it all but it's very good to read a well-argued piece from a left-of-centre perspective; he and it are a credit to the site.
And on the substance, and the point on which I dissent, the election is about Brexit but it's also about more than that. Most obviously, as Zac found in Richmond, elections are ultimately about whatever the public want them to be about, not what the politicians (or some of them) say it is.
But beyond that, this election, as with most elections, is about leadership. Who do you trust to lead the country. Sure, that means who do you trust to get the best deal for Britain on leaving the EU: who has the head for detail; who can master the competing dynamics and best work them to produce a favourable outcome; who is pragmatic enough to cut a deal where necessary but firm enough to stand solid over red line; indeed, who best understands what the red lines should be? But it also means leadership on the economy: who do you trust to deliver sustainable growth and employment, and not to crash the car from recklessness and under-maintenance? It means leadership on security: who do you trust to keep us as safe as possible while balancing that against essential liberties; who do you trust to oversee the security services and military? It means leadership on public services: who do you trust to act in the interests of the citizen and not client groups, while recognising that those client groups both might have legitimate points and are probably essential to delivering those services.
And the choice on offer is May, Hammond, Davis and so on, on the one hand, and Corbyn, McDonnell, Abbott and co on the other. Those are the binary options. Certainly, other parties are available but none of them can win, so a vote for them is to delegate the most crucial decision to other voters.
The question I asked myself about this election is: who has the best instincts to deal with the unexpected? Manifesto pledges are all well and good but the unexpected always arises.
I didn't find it a difficult question to answer, to be honest.
I've been predicting for some time that immigration would fall by using the simple method of being so unpleasant to foreigners that they would get the message. Clearly that's working.
It lacks the elegance of your method of ensuring Brexit by telling most Brits they're racist scum.
I'm sorry that it upsets you so much to be reminded that Brexit was secured through xenophobic lies, but it's the essential reason why Brexit is the enduring disaster of the age for the country.
People whose lives were ruined by mass immigration don't need politicians to lie for them to vote against it
I've been predicting for some time that immigration would fall by using the simple method of being so unpleasant to foreigners that they would get the message. Clearly that's working.
It lacks the elegance of your method of ensuring Brexit by telling most Brits they're racist scum.
I'm sorry that it upsets you so much to be reminded that Brexit was secured through xenophobic lies, but it's the essential reason why Brexit is the enduring disaster of the age for the country.
Your disdain for your country doesn't upset me. It just reinforces my belief that we're doing the right thing. Keep it up.
Those migration numbers are good for the Tories; they show that progress is being made, but there's more to do, so vote for the party you trust most on migration.
I don't know why they didn't just promise to restore all the pre-97 controls that New Labour axed (primary purpose, tracking outbound travellers etc). That would be a lot easier to sell on the doorstep than social care.
I've been predicting for some time that immigration would fall by using the simple method of being so unpleasant to foreigners that they would get the message. Clearly that's working.
Yup. People like foreign care workers have thought *screw it* why should I deal with this unpleasantness. I'll go *home* or to X country, earn a little less, pay a lot less for my housing and make a life for myself there.
Our elderly must now pay much higher wages to (often) lower quality *British* careworkers - which will involve liquidating their housing assets en masse.
Comments
I don't share the view either that the election 'should' be about Brexit.It is not for any PM to decide the basis on which people cast their votes, and whilst Theresa May called the election with that issue at the forefront of her own calculations , she has discovered - as did Ted Heath before her in February 1974 - that other issues gain the attention of voters as the campaign develops. This had ceased to be the Brexit election even before this tragic event. Personally I am not surprised at that because the subject remains far too technical for the vast majority of voters - regardless of how they voted in last year's Referendum.Contrary to some expectations , I seriously doubt that the focus will return to Brexit by polling day.
*Donald Trump's London based covert barber's intelligence operation.
https://www.trumpers.com/
Try learning about “hypothesis testing”, then try “false positive rate” and then “false negative rate”
There is a trade-off between false positives and false negatives.
To stop every attack would involve generating numerous false positives.
https://order-order.com/2017/05/25/8-us-intelligence-leaks-that-infuriated-british-government/
Anyway, I was just messing around, had hoped the emojis would have given that away
I agree the apologies are needed -- but being a politician means never having to say sorry.
Well, at least sorry for the things you did, you can say sorry for the Irish Famine.
•The net migration change was driven by a statistically significant increase in emigration up 40,000 from 2015, mainly EU citizens (117,000, up 31,000 from 2015) and a decrease of 43,000 in immigration (not statistically significant).
•EU8 citizens have partly driven the changes with a fall in immigration (down 25,000) to 48,000 and a rise in emigration (up 16,000) to 43,000 in 2016 (both statistically significant changes); this resulted in the smallest net migration estimate (+5,000) for the EU8 since joining the EU in 2004.
I wonder if you'll be so quick to report the Q2 GDP stats.
But, it's always silly to base a theory on a single piece of data.
She picks out a cowering, quivering figure: "You!" she commands.
"Y... yes?"
"What do you do?"
"I'm ... I'm an explosives dog handler, ma'am."
"You're fired. Be'gone!"
"But ma'am ..."
She glares at the man, who starts putting his fingers around his tightening collar. "Just feel glad you are leaving with your life!"
Falling enough for the Brexiteers to stick with the government and not drift back to UKIP - but not so much that the remainers are suddenly going to go away.
Although Easter 2016 was in Q1 but in Q2 in 2017, so we shall see.
Also interesting to see falling wages correlate with a fall in the amount of net migration to the UK. I'm sure that wasn't the way it was supposed to work out...
I presume Nuttall wasn't sharp enough to pick him up on it?
LOL!
Firstly, an excellent piece from Alastair. I don't agree with it all but it's very good to read a well-argued piece from a left-of-centre perspective; he and it are a credit to the site.
And on the substance, and the point on which I dissent, the election is about Brexit but it's also about more than that. Most obviously, as Zac found in Richmond, elections are ultimately about whatever the public want them to be about, not what the politicians (or some of them) say it is.
But beyond that, this election, as with most elections, is about leadership. Who do you trust to lead the country. Sure, that means who do you trust to get the best deal for Britain on leaving the EU: who has the head for detail; who can master the competing dynamics and best work them to produce a favourable outcome; who is pragmatic enough to cut a deal where necessary but firm enough to stand solid over red line; indeed, who best understands what the red lines should be? But it also means leadership on the economy: who do you trust to deliver sustainable growth and employment, and not to crash the car from recklessness and under-maintenance? It means leadership on security: who do you trust to keep us as safe as possible while balancing that against essential liberties; who do you trust to oversee the security services and military? It means leadership on public services: who do you trust to act in the interests of the citizen and not client groups, while recognising that those client groups both might have legitimate points and are probably essential to delivering those services.
And the choice on offer is May, Hammond, Davis and so on, on the one hand, and Corbyn, McDonnell, Abbott and co on the other. Those are the binary options. Certainly, other parties are available but none of them can win, so a vote for them is to delegate the most crucial decision to other voters.
And you could bear to be on the same side as Farage and the BNP but not Cameron and Osborne? Really?
I didn't find it a difficult question to answer, to be honest.
The Office for National Statistics said the change was driven by "a statistically significant" increase of 40,000 people leaving the country.
These were mostly EU citizens - 117,000 emigrated, up 31,000 from 2015.
I don't know why they didn't just promise to restore all the pre-97 controls that New Labour axed (primary purpose, tracking outbound travellers etc). That would be a lot easier to sell on the doorstep than social care.
Our elderly must now pay much higher wages to (often) lower quality *British* careworkers - which will involve liquidating their housing assets en masse.
That's what they voted for.