Labour's manifesto is so barmy that'll end in a huge economic downturn. We all know who that affects the most.
There is literally nothing positive to say about Labour and its leader. For christs sake we're looking at Abbot as home Secretary and McDonnell as chancellor. We'll have an army and military hardware Corbyn would never touch. We'll have so called peace envoys that no-one will pay attention to. Unions will strike at will. Companies will begin to lay off workers due to ever increasing overheads and an increasingly inflexible labour market.
To top it off, we'll have a Prime Minister incapable of leading.
We get that whatever happens. Irrespective of the size of May's majority she is damaged goods from now on.
I think that's probably right and will continue to be the case even if, against the odds, she succeeds in achieving a landslide victory on 8 June. Her judgement was already in question well before the start of the GE campaign and I suspect she's feeling painfully bruised and battered herself, possibly even to the extent of looking for an out if and when an opportunity presents itself. But who might succeed her - it's difficult to think of anyone in the Tory Cabinet who's up to the task. The only person who readily springs to mind is that chap who gave up his seat in the HoC and retired from active politics last year.
Anybody who says "yes, how awful, blame the terrorists but it's also our fault" I would interpret as them meaning "it's our fault", and would be appalled by it.
But where does he say it's our fault?
He says the blame is with the terrorists.
He just thinks we'd be safer if we stopped invading/bombing other countries. That doesn't mean we are responsible for terrorism.
You obviously cannot read the invisible ink. They can.
Yes. The last sentence effectively says we will support our armed forces and foreign office only if they ''engage with the world'' to surrender to aggression.
He says that there "will" be more police. But that the intelligence authorities "should" get more resources. Why the difference. Why doesn't he say that they "will" get more resources?
He still has a fight with McDonnell to get the funds, so can't say "will".....
Anybody who says "yes, how awful, blame the terrorists but it's also our fault" I would interpret as them meaning "it's our fault", and would be appalled by it.
But where does he say it's our fault?
After the "but".
I'm not seeing it sorry. Okay we'll have to agree to disagree.
"causes cannot be reduced to foreign policy decisions alone", i.e. our foreign policy decisions are the major cause, i.e. it's our fault.
Extrapolating would have given the independence campaign a win; extrapolating would have taken Melenchon into the French run off. Sometimes, poll surges do peak, or reverse.
Almost always, in fact. Firstly, it's reversion to the mean. Secondly, if you've made progress you've inevitably had the low-hanging fruit and it gets harder.
There are exceptions of course. The Canadian Liberals in 2015 pretty much had a straight line ascent from a month out, but overtaking the NPD and emerging as unarguably the alternative suddenly opened up such a rich vein of votes, whereas there isn't much way Labour can make progress now except by direct Tory-Labour switching.
With the Tories moves on the Triple Lock, Dementia Tax & WFA etc. - the SNP new have ample opportunity to appeal to the main demographic group which it struggles to reach. I think the SNP will spend a fair bit of the next fortnight presenting itself as the "pensioners friend" - here we go:
Labour's manifesto is so barmy that'll end in a huge economic downturn. We all know who that affects the most.
There is literally nothing positive to say about Labour and its leader. For christs sake we're looking at Abbot as home Secretary and McDonnell as chancellor. We'll have an army and military hardware Corbyn would never touch. We'll have so called peace envoys that no-one will pay attention to. Unions will strike at will. Companies will begin to lay off workers due to ever increasing overheads and an increasingly inflexible labour market.
To top it off, we'll have a Prime Minister incapable of leading.
We get that whatever happens. Irrespective of the size of May's majority she is damaged goods from now on.
I think that's probably right and will continue to be the case even if, against the odds, she succeeds in achieving a landslide victory on 8 June. Her judgement was already in question well before the start of the GE campaign and I suspect she's feeling painfully bruised and battered herself, possibly even to the extent of looking for an out if and when an opportunity presents itself. But who might succeed her - it's difficult to think of anyone in the Tory Cabinet who's up to the task. The only person who readily springs to mind is that chap who gave up his seat in the HoC and retired from active politics last year.
At least it's not the one who gave up his seat in the HoC and retired from active politics this year....
Mr. Quidder, cheers. Looking to hedge my 7 on Con seats 350-374 but it's unexpectedly awkward because the band above is only 2.87 and the Betfair Exchange bands are 50 seats wide.
For those who want to read for themselves - John Rentoul has a transcript of the section on terrorism and foreign policy.
Utter flim-flam, written by a committee, and meaning precisely nothing.
We discussed the Tory campaign strategy yesterday Richard.
Other way round, surely. The problem with the Tory manifesto seems to have been that it wasn't flim-flam written by a committee.
Given your Milliband-proofing advice last time around (fortunately unnecessary) what do you consider would be Corbyn (or more accurately McDonnell) proofing advice?
Yes. The last sentence effectively says we will support our armed forces and foreign office only if they ''engage with the world'' to surrender to aggression.
He says that there "will" be more police. But that the intelligence authorities "should" get more resources. Why the difference. Why doesn't he say that they "will" get more resources?
I think he promised more police in manifesto but didn't promise more money to intelligence authorities.
Anybody who says "yes, how awful, blame the terrorists but it's also our fault" I would interpret as them meaning "it's our fault", and would be appalled by it.
But where does he say it's our fault?
After the "but".
I'm not seeing it sorry. Okay we'll have to agree to disagree.
"causes cannot be reduced to foreign policy decisions alone", i.e. our foreign policy decisions are the major cause, i.e. it's our fault.
It does not mean anything of the sort. You have lost the argument if you are peddling such distortions.
For those who want to read for themselves - John Rentoul has a transcript of the section on terrorism and foreign policy.
Even if I agreed with the speech, I don't believe for a moment that Jeremy "CND/STW/IRA" Corbyn is being sincere. Nothing in his past suggest that he is, quite the opposite, and that goes for his cronies as well. If people are taken in by this act more fool them.
I have not seen the PB Tories in such turmoil probably ever.
Imagine Enoch Powell (or whoever your greatest political bugbear is) was a heartbeat away from taking power and transforming the country in his image. You'd be shitting yourself too.
As I mentioned earlier, Kosovo shows it's more complex than that. People who want to feel ill about us will find some reason, even when we're trying to help.
My argument is not that simplistic either. (As an aside, is Kosovo a source of Islamic terrorists?)
Jeremy Corbyn helped found Stop the War and sat on its executive committee when it issued this statement in 2004:
“The Stop the War Coalition (StWC) reaffirms its call for an end to the occupation, the return of all British troops in Iraq to this country and recognises once more the legitimacy of the struggle of Iraqis, by whatever means they find necessary, to secure such ends”
Andrew Neil should ask him what was meant by this.
I have not seen the PB Tories in such turmoil probably ever.
Imagine Enoch Powell (or whoever your greatest political bugbear is) was a heartbeat away from taking power and transforming the country in his image. You'd be shitting yourself too.
Yes. The last sentence effectively says we will support our armed forces and foreign office only if they ''engage with the world'' to surrender to aggression.
He says that there "will" be more police. But that the intelligence authorities "should" get more resources. Why the difference. Why doesn't he say that they "will" get more resources?
The difference is Abbotnomics. The police officers will only be paid about £1.50 an hour so it's easy to promise there will be more of them.
Jeremy Corbyn helped found Stop the War and sat on its executive committee when it issued this statement in 2004:
“The Stop the War Coalition (StWC) reaffirms its call for an end to the occupation, the return of all British troops in Iraq to this country and recognises once more the legitimacy of the struggle of Iraqis, by whatever means they find necessary, to secure such ends”
Andrew Neil should ask him what was meant by this.
From what I can read, he is questioning the legitimacy of the invasion. After all, it did not have the sanction of the UN.
Events have proved that he was right and the Bliar's wrong. Most people in Britain will agree with that.
I have not seen the PB Tories in such turmoil probably ever.
Imagine Enoch Powell (or whoever your greatest political bugbear is) was a heartbeat away from taking power and transforming the country in his image. You'd be shitting yourself too.
He is a 66 year old man. White beard and harmless. Chill out or go and lie in the sun.
i have heard a couple of reports now from young people who have received a fake post on facebook saying tories are going to privatise NHS and doctors appointments will cost £50 a time or something . anybody else heard of this because they believed it . had heard a labour group got caught doing the nhs one and had to bring it down but not sure if they have?
Labour's manifesto is so barmy that'll end in a huge economic downturn. We all know who that affects the most.
There is literally nothing positive to say about Labour and its leader. For christs sake we're looking at Abbot as home Secretary and McDonnell as chancellor. We'll have an army and military hardware Corbyn would never touch. We'll have so called peace envoys that no-one will pay attention to. Unions will strike at will. Companies will begin to lay off workers due to ever increasing overheads and an increasingly inflexible labour market.
To top it off, we'll have a Prime Minister incapable of leading.
We get that whatever happens. Irrespective of the size of May's majority she is damaged goods from now on.
I think that's probably right and will continue to be the case even if, against the odds, she succeeds in achieving a landslide victory on 8 June. Her judgement was already in question well before the start of the GE campaign and I suspect she's feeling painfully bruised and battered herself, possibly even to the extent of looking for an out if and when an opportunity presents itself. But who might succeed her - it's difficult to think of anyone in the Tory Cabinet who's up to the task. The only person who readily springs to mind is that chap who gave up his seat in the HoC and retired from active politics last year.
At least it's not the one who gave up his seat in the HoC and retired from active politics this year....
Indeed so ..... loyalty is everything in politics.
I don't think anyone has a scooby how it will play out. There are zillions of possibilities.
Right now there is a very strong possibility it will be Impasse Brexit. From what I've read it sounds like the EU will demand €100bn on June 12th; the PM will be forced to say No.
Stalemate.
It's going to drag on. Even if Mrs May walked away, she or her successor will have to come back to the table
Nope. She's been very clear that she's content to Leave with no deal.
Which is as it should be if she wants to get a good deal, of course.
Except, it's not going to work that way. As I said, the EU will still be there, a deal will still need to be done
Nope, we can leave without a deal.
Sure, that's possible, although I don't think it's likely. We'll need to agree basic arrangements on things like aviation and nuclear waste processing. There will be quite bit of pressure applied to both parties as approach the cliff edge. My point is that walking away doesn't resolve anything. At some point Theresa May or her successor will decide we need to work with the EU. In which case all Theresa May will have done by reading away is to waste time and unnecessarily damage the UK's economy and interests. Mrs May isn't stupid. She knows this.
For those who want to read for themselves - John Rentoul has a transcript of the section on terrorism and foreign policy.
Utter flim-flam, written by a committee, and meaning precisely nothing.
We discussed the Tory campaign strategy yesterday Richard.
Other way round, surely. The problem with the Tory manifesto seems to have been that it wasn't flim-flam written by a committee.
They could have used the Lib Dem one minus the 2nd ref, penny on tax and IHT reversal plus a couple more cuts... Some great soft focus sheep and kids in it.
I have not seen the PB Tories in such turmoil probably ever.
Imagine Enoch Powell (or whoever your greatest political bugbear is) was a heartbeat away from taking power and transforming the country in his image. You'd be shitting yourself too.
He is a 66 year old man. White beard and harmless. Chill out or go and lie in the sun.
What an absurd line of argument.
Norman Tebbit is 86. Disabled wife. Must be harmless. Make him PM.
Extrapolating would have given the independence campaign a win; extrapolating would have taken Melenchon into the French run off. Sometimes, poll surges do peak, or reverse.
Almost always, in fact. Firstly, it's reversion to the mean. Secondly, if you've made progress you've inevitably had the low-hanging fruit and it gets harder.
There are exceptions of course. The Canadian Liberals in 2015 pretty much had a straight line ascent from a month out, but overtaking the NPD and emerging as unarguably the alternative suddenly opened up such a rich vein of votes, whereas there isn't much way Labour can make progress now except by direct Tory-Labour switching.
Certainly. The latest Yougov poll has the Greens on 1%, compared to 4% in 2015, and Labour have also taken a chunk off the Lib Dems and Plaid. Labour's problem is that the Greens tend to be strong where Labour is already strong.
As I mentioned earlier, Kosovo shows it's more complex than that. People who want to feel ill about us will find some reason, even when we're trying to help.
My argument is not that simplistic either. (As an aside, is Kosovo a source of Islamic terrorists?)
But my main point is that NATO intervened and stopped the conflict. Many Islamists say that not only did we intervene too late (on which they may have a point), but also that we only intervened when they were near victory, and we grabbed their glory. That is almost certainly rubbish.
So we find ourselves in a position where before we intervened, we were turning our backs to the deaths of the Muslims in Kosovo (and hate would develop from that). When we did intervene, we were grabbing their victory.
We cannot win with such extremists mindsets, and they will find reasons to hate whatever we do, or don't do.
Please don't be under any illusions that Corbyn's foreign policy will stop people who want to hate us from hating us. They'll always find reasons.
Jeremy Corbyn helped found Stop the War and sat on its executive committee when it issued this statement in 2004:
“The Stop the War Coalition (StWC) reaffirms its call for an end to the occupation, the return of all British troops in Iraq to this country and recognises once more the legitimacy of the struggle of Iraqis, by whatever means they find necessary, to secure such ends”
Andrew Neil should ask him what was meant by this.
They are siding with the very same Sunni terrorists who make up the bulk of Islamic State in Iraq today.
I have not seen the PB Tories in such turmoil probably ever.
Imagine Enoch Powell (or whoever your greatest political bugbear is) was a heartbeat away from taking power and transforming the country in his image. You'd be shitting yourself too.
He is a 66 year old man. White beard and harmless. Chill out or go and lie in the sun.
I have not seen the PB Tories in such turmoil probably ever.
Imagine Enoch Powell (or whoever your greatest political bugbear is) was a heartbeat away from taking power and transforming the country in his image. You'd be shitting yourself too.
He is a 66 year old man. White beard and harmless. Chill out or go and lie in the sun.
Nice trolling.
He's a harmless old man who would lead us to 5 million unemployed and the biggest slump of a western economy ever to trouble the record books.
I have not seen the PB Tories in such turmoil probably ever.
Imagine Enoch Powell (or whoever your greatest political bugbear is) was a heartbeat away from taking power and transforming the country in his image. You'd be shitting yourself too.
He is a 66 year old man. White beard and harmless. Chill out or go and lie in the sun.
What an absurd line of argument.
Norman Tebbit is 86. Disabled wife. Must be harmless. Make him PM.
Augusto Pinochet, 1973. 58 year old man. White moustache and harmless.
I have not seen the PB Tories in such turmoil probably ever.
Imagine Enoch Powell (or whoever your greatest political bugbear is) was a heartbeat away from taking power and transforming the country in his image. You'd be shitting yourself too.
He is a 66 year old man. White beard and harmless. Chill out or go and lie in the sun.
66? Check. White beard? Check. Harmless? Hell no!
Enjoy the sun? I'll be lucky to sleep before election day if the Tories don't get their fat arses into gear and start widening the gap.
I have not seen the PB Tories in such turmoil probably ever.
Imagine Enoch Powell (or whoever your greatest political bugbear is) was a heartbeat away from taking power and transforming the country in his image. You'd be shitting yourself too.
He is a 66 year old man. White beard and harmless. Chill out or go and lie in the sun.
Like Keyser Soze, he is the Devil.
One of cinemas darkest characters and an excellent film
I have not seen the PB Tories in such turmoil probably ever.
Imagine Enoch Powell (or whoever your greatest political bugbear is) was a heartbeat away from taking power and transforming the country in his image. You'd be shitting yourself too.
He is a 66 year old man. White beard and harmless. Chill out or go and lie in the sun.
66? Check. White beard? Check. Harmless? Hell no!
Enjoy the sun? I'll be lucky to sleep before election day if the Tories don't get their fat arses into gear and start widening the gap.
I have not seen the PB Tories in such turmoil probably ever.
Nothing that some slightly better polls at the weekend allied to a bit more hard work by the leading advocates in selling the Tory case wouldn't be able to resolve. I suspect too many of them felt this election would fall into their laps.
Labour's manifesto is so barmy that'll end in a huge economic downturn. We all know who that affects the most.
There is literally nothing positive to say about Labour and its leader. For christs sake we're looking at Abbot as home Secretary and McDonnell as chancellor. We'll have an army and military hardware Corbyn would never touch. We'll have so called peace envoys that no-one will pay attention to. Unions will strike at will. Companies will begin to lay off workers due to ever increasing overheads and an increasingly inflexible labour market.
To top it off, we'll have a Prime Minister incapable of leading.
We get that whatever happens. Irrespective of the size of May's majority she is damaged goods from now on.
Not if she can somehow conjure a three figure majority from this mess. All the gaffes and stupidities will be forgiven and forgotten.
But, that looks increasingly unlikely.
Look at this graph of YouGov VI halfway down the article.
Extrapolate the trend of the gentle Tory decline and the firm Labour surge. Another ten days of this will see Labour on about 43 and Tories on about 39.
And Jeremy Corbyn will probably be in Downing Street, supported by Nicola Sturgeon.
"Extrapolate the trend" is about the dumbest thing one can do with an opinion poll series.
Other than take the latest poll as gospel even if not backed up by other evidence.
Talk me through that. Extrapolating the trend of the Brexit polls from several weeks before the vote would have given you the correct outcome. A LEAVE win.
It's almost the same for Indyref. They started way behind, then there was turning point (like the Tory manifesto) - the 2nd TV debate. I'm still not sure why that turned the campaign, but it did. From then the huge NO leads gradually declined. In this case extrapolation would have showed you it was gonna be a lot narrower than almost anyone expected. And so it was.
Because Darling received a huge kicking and gave undecideds a reason to trust Salmond who would be the one leading an independent Scotland.
There was also the release of possibly the worst ever British political TV spot "The Woman Who Made Up Her Mind" also on the day of the second debate. It was the first TV spot I have overheard people talking about - in awed tones about it's utter awfulness
As I mentioned earlier, Kosovo shows it's more complex than that. People who want to feel ill about us will find some reason, even when we're trying to help.
My argument is not that simplistic either. (As an aside, is Kosovo a source of Islamic terrorists?)
But my main point is that NATO intervened and stopped the conflict. Many Islamists say that not only did we intervene too late (on which they may have a point), but also that we only intervened when they were near victory, and we grabbed their glory. That is almost certainly rubbish.
So we find ourselves in a position where before we intervened, we were turning our backs to the deaths of the Muslims in Kosovo (and hate would develop from that). When we did intervene, we were grabbing their victory.
We cannot win with such extremists mindsets, and they will find reasons to hate whatever we do, or don't do.
Please don't be under any illusions that Corbyn's foreign policy will stop people who want to hate us from hating us. They'll always find reasons.
Indeed. Look at this list of all the terrorist incidents around the world just this month.
i have heard a couple of reports now from young people who have received a fake post on facebook saying tories are going to privatise NHS and doctors appointments will cost £50 a time or something . anybody else heard of this because they believed it . had heard a labour group got caught doing the nhs one and had to bring it down but not sure if they have?
At least they didn't paint in on the side of a bus.
I have not seen the PB Tories in such turmoil probably ever.
Nothing that some slightly better polls at the weekend allied to a bit more hard work by the leading advocates in selling the Tory case wouldn't be able to resolve. I suspect too many of them felt this election would fall into their laps.
Thing is, it would have done. It took a really special blend of naivety, idiot cunning, self-importance and otherworldliness to get us to here from where we started.
I have not seen the PB Tories in such turmoil probably ever.
Imagine Enoch Powell (or whoever your greatest political bugbear is) was a heartbeat away from taking power and transforming the country in his image. You'd be shitting yourself too.
He is a 66 year old man. White beard and harmless. Chill out or go and lie in the sun.
Was there another YouGov poll before this last one ? They seem to say the Tory position and May's ratings actually improved. Improved compared to what ?
I don't think the Tory mood on here is because they seriously think Corbyn will seize power and turn Britain into a communist state or whatever.
If he did get largest party status (still hugely unlikely) he doesn't command enough of his own MPs to get much through. And I'll say it again, the mood on the ground remains decent Tory majority but less than believed last week.
I think what we're seeing is embarrassment from people who were oh so confident a few days ago that they were the SAS, but turn out to be Dad's Army like everyone else. They believed their hype just a bit too much, and really thought Crosby was a genius, May was Boudicca, and Corbyn couldn't tie his shoelaces safely without adult supervision. None of those things were quite as true as they thought.
They'll come through this and be insufferable by June 9th. But, for now, it'd take a heart of stone not to laugh.
Presumably no more polls are due until tomorrow evening, linked to the Sunday newspapers. I did think that YouGov (or their clients) might have commissioned a quickie to prove or disprove yesterday's findings which came as something of a bolt from the blue, sorry red. I also have a kind of theory that the unbelievably awful tragedy in Manchester might possibly have reduced the Tories' ratings, not for any related reason, but simply on account of it making everyone feel so very sad and therefore disinclined towards considering matters of a political nature.
The vast majority were in the developing world (so nothing to do with western foreign policy) and the vast majority can be linked to Islamism
Well clearly all of those countries have made foreign policy mistakes, we just need to figure out what, blame the governments, and absolve the terrorist murders.
Errr, sorry it must be the heat, I was thinking like a Labour supporter for a moment.
I have not seen the PB Tories in such turmoil probably ever.
Nothing that some slightly better polls at the weekend allied to a bit more hard work by the leading advocates in selling the Tory case wouldn't be able to resolve. I suspect too many of them felt this election would fall into their laps.
1282nd. We might be in a position to refine the Swingback Theory before too long. "If a government calls an early election before its mid-term nadir, swingback will be in the opposite direction".
I have not seen the PB Tories in such turmoil probably ever.
Imagine Enoch Powell (or whoever your greatest political bugbear is) was a heartbeat away from taking power and transforming the country in his image. You'd be shitting yourself too.
He is a 66 year old man. White beard and harmless. Chill out or go and lie in the sun.
Like Keyser Soze, he is the Devil.
One of cinemas darkest characters and an excellent film
I spoke to the writer at Sundance one year. Sadly, he said there were no plans to bring the character back....
I have not seen the PB Tories in such turmoil probably ever.
Imagine Enoch Powell (or whoever your greatest political bugbear is) was a heartbeat away from taking power and transforming the country in his image. You'd be shitting yourself too.
He is a 66 year old man. White beard and harmless. Chill out or go and lie in the sun.
66? Check. White beard? Check. Harmless? Hell no!
Enjoy the sun? I'll be lucky to sleep before election day if the Tories don't get their fat arses into gear and start widening the gap.
66? I don't think so. Jeremy Bernard Corbyn (/ˈkɔːrbɪn/; born 26 May 1949) It's his birthday!
Jeremy Corbyn helped found Stop the War and sat on its executive committee when it issued this statement in 2004:
“The Stop the War Coalition (StWC) reaffirms its call for an end to the occupation, the return of all British troops in Iraq to this country and recognises once more the legitimacy of the struggle of Iraqis, by whatever means they find necessary, to secure such ends”
Andrew Neil should ask him what was meant by this.
From what I can read, he is questioning the legitimacy of the invasion. After all, it did not have the sanction of the UN.
Events have proved that he was right and the Bliar's wrong. Most people in Britain will agree with that.
I would be asking the Irish peace broker why he didn't vote to support the peace treaty? Was it because his preferred outcome was a united ireland. And then I would ask him to name an Irish atrocity by the republicans that he condemned without qualification? He cannot do that without qualifying his answer.
I have not seen the PB Tories in such turmoil probably ever.
Imagine Enoch Powell (or whoever your greatest political bugbear is) was a heartbeat away from taking power and transforming the country in his image. You'd be shitting yourself too.
He is a 66 year old man. White beard and harmless. Chill out or go and lie in the sun.
66? Check. White beard? Check. Harmless? Hell no!
Enjoy the sun? I'll be lucky to sleep before election day if the Tories don't get their fat arses into gear and start widening the gap.
He's actually 68 today. But agreed - he is not simply a harmless old man any more. He matters now.
I have not seen the PB Tories in such turmoil probably ever.
Imagine Enoch Powell (or whoever your greatest political bugbear is) was a heartbeat away from taking power and transforming the country in his image. You'd be shitting yourself too.
He is a 66 year old man. White beard and harmless. Chill out or go and lie in the sun.
What an absurd line of argument.
Norman Tebbit is 86. Disabled wife. Must be harmless. Make him PM.
Augusto Pinochet, 1973. 58 year old man. White moustache and harmless.
Javier Bardem ironically in a film called 'No Country for Old Men'!
I have come to the conclusion that I know fuck all about British politics. The only consolation is that no one else knows anything, either.
I cannot think of a serious commentator who predicted that we'd end up here, with Labour on 38 - 38!! - and on trend to take away the Tory majority. Only the maddest of Corbynista predicted that, and they also think the Zios organised 9/11, and reiki works.
The one thing I did get right, unfortunately, was my instant reaction to the Tory manifesto - OMFG disaster - and then my sudden temptation to vote for Corbyn. I made the same shift as millions of Brits. But I shifted back and I am utterly unsure as to whether my fellow citizens will follow me.
I know nussing. I am from Barthelona.
Agreed. I am almost getting the point where I think somebody is listening to my thoughts and then making the one thing I never thought would happen happen. I find the Labour surge hard to credit, but I'd love to think it was true. But only up to a point. The Tories just losing their majority but having to carry on in government would be my ideal scenario. But the way things are going a Lib Dem landslide might be as likely as anything else.
I don't think the Tory mood on here is because they seriously think Corbyn will seize power and turn Britain into a communist state or whatever.
If he did get largest party status (still hugely unlikely) he doesn't command enough of his own MPs to get much through. And I'll say it again, the mood on the ground remains decent Tory majority but less than believed last week.
I think what we're seeing is embarrassment from people who were oh so confident a few days ago that they were the SAS, but turn out to be Dad's Army like everyone else. They believed their hype just a bit too much, and really thought Crosby was a genius, May was Boudicca, and Corbyn couldn't tie his shoelaces safely without adult supervision. None of those things were quite as true as they thought.
They'll come through this and be insufferable by June 9th. But, for now, it'd take a heart of stone not to laugh.
I make a promise here and now that I will not gloat if the Tories win. I will be hugely relieved, but nothing more than that.
How can any serious Tory supporter gloat after beating Jeremy Corbyn? It should be like clubbing a seal puppy to death.
I have not seen the PB Tories in such turmoil probably ever.
Imagine Enoch Powell (or whoever your greatest political bugbear is) was a heartbeat away from taking power and transforming the country in his image. You'd be shitting yourself too.
He is a 66 year old man. White beard and harmless. Chill out or go and lie in the sun.
66? Check. White beard? Check. Harmless? Hell no!
Enjoy the sun? I'll be lucky to sleep before election day if the Tories don't get their fat arses into gear and start widening the gap.
66? I don't think so. Jeremy Bernard Corbyn (/ˈkɔːrbɪn/; born 26 May 1949) It's his birthday!
So he'll only be 73 in 2022, when he leads Labour into the "one more push" election...
Nawaz' tweets emphasise why Corbyn is so so wrong on this.
Was a Nawaz a terrorist himself or just a sympathiser ?
He was a member of Hizb ut-Tahrir, and helped recruit for them. (Source Wikipedia)
He now works against such evil, I'd say there is no one better placed to know the mindset.
There can be no-one better placed, but that doesn't make him definitely right. It is clear from this forum that nobody knows anything about UK politics even though we all live here and follow it closely. Why should Nawaz be any better informed about his own mileau?
Jeremy Corbyn helped found Stop the War and sat on its executive committee when it issued this statement in 2004:
“The Stop the War Coalition (StWC) reaffirms its call for an end to the occupation, the return of all British troops in Iraq to this country and recognises once more the legitimacy of the struggle of Iraqis, by whatever means they find necessary, to secure such ends”
Andrew Neil should ask him what was meant by this.
From what I can read, he is questioning the legitimacy of the invasion. After all, it did not have the sanction of the UN.
Events have proved that he was right and the Bliar's wrong. Most people in Britain will agree with that.
I would be asking the Irish peace broker why he didn't vote to support the peace treaty? Was it because his preferred outcome was a united ireland. And then I would ask him to name an Irish atrocity by the republicans that he condemned without qualification? He cannot do that without qualifying his answer.
If you repeat a lie a thousand times, it does not become the truth. As was proven this morning and on other days,
CORBYN supported the GOOD FRIDAY agreement. So stop peddling lies !
Even that stonkingly disastrous result would leave Labour short 28 of a majority, with SNP on 53. Can't believe I'm counting on the SNP to rein in Corbyn's craziness!
A small Labour majority would require something like Con 34-35 with Lab 45-46.
Let's hope May can stop punching her own voters in the face and starting attacking Labour's crazy policies instead.
Was there another YouGov poll before this last one ? They seem to say the Tory position and May's ratings actually improved. Improved compared to what ?
There was a poll of approval ratings for May, Corbyn, the Conservatives and Labour, on 23rd May, and 24th and 25th May, which showed a shift back to May and the Conservatives. If Yougov polled voting intention on 23rd, they didn't release the figures.
I have not seen the PB Tories in such turmoil probably ever.
Imagine Enoch Powell (or whoever your greatest political bugbear is) was a heartbeat away from taking power and transforming the country in his image. You'd be shitting yourself too.
He is a 66 year old man. White beard and harmless. Chill out or go and lie in the sun.
66? Check. White beard? Check. Harmless? Hell no!
Enjoy the sun? I'll be lucky to sleep before election day if the Tories don't get their fat arses into gear and start widening the gap.
66? I don't think so. Jeremy Bernard Corbyn (/ˈkɔːrbɪn/; born 26 May 1949) It's his birthday!
So he'll only be 73 in 2022, when he leads Labour into the "one more push" election...
As I said before, Tories need to ignore Corbyn's speech - it sounded perfectly reasonable.
As I said, the speech is a trap for the Tories. It is anodyne and reasonable, but it is designed to get the right wing press up in a froth - but when poel actually read/hear the speech they'll go "But that's perfectly reasonable"
As I said before, Tories need to ignore Corbyn's speech - it sounded perfectly reasonable.
Go after his previous remarks. His strange friends. His inability to slot ISIS or order a shoot to kill. Ignore this speech.
So what do they do? Go heavily on this speech, fucking idiots.
The way they are playing this election, the Tories are headed for a deserved defeat.
Virtue signalling poll of the worst type, of course people will say that, it's the give love a chance position. The key question is whether we should become isolationist and if the electorate support that.
I don't think the Tory mood on here is because they seriously think Corbyn will seize power and turn Britain into a communist state or whatever.
If he did get largest party status (still hugely unlikely) he doesn't command enough of his own MPs to get much through. And I'll say it again, the mood on the ground remains decent Tory majority but less than believed last week.
I think what we're seeing is embarrassment from people who were oh so confident a few days ago that they were the SAS, but turn out to be Dad's Army like everyone else. They believed their hype just a bit too much, and really thought Crosby was a genius, May was Boudicca, and Corbyn couldn't tie his shoelaces safely without adult supervision. None of those things were quite as true as they thought.
They'll come through this and be insufferable by June 9th. But, for now, it'd take a heart of stone not to laugh.
I make a promise here and now that I will not gloat if the Tories win. I will be hugely relieved, but nothing more than that.
How can any serious Tory supporter gloat after beating Jeremy Corbyn? It should be like clubbing a seal puppy to death.
Currently it seems more like after extensively promising that you weren't going to club the seal puppy to death you state that you will, get the seal puppy to agree to the process then sit back and do nothing while the seal puppy tools up and then you start sending out panicked emails to your friends saying this seal puppy could kill you.
I don't think the Tory mood on here is because they seriously think Corbyn will seize power and turn Britain into a communist state or whatever.
If he did get largest party status (still hugely unlikely) he doesn't command enough of his own MPs to get much through. And I'll say it again, the mood on the ground remains decent Tory majority but less than believed last week.
I think what we're seeing is embarrassment from people who were oh so confident a few days ago that they were the SAS, but turn out to be Dad's Army like everyone else. They believed their hype just a bit too much, and really thought Crosby was a genius, May was Boudicca, and Corbyn couldn't tie his shoelaces safely without adult supervision. None of those things were quite as true as they thought.
They'll come through this and be insufferable by June 9th. But, for now, it'd take a heart of stone not to laugh.
A thoroughly typical bit of PBlefty passive aggression: you won't engage a specific PBtory over a specific post, because you accurately judge that the vast majority of PB tories are both right about everything, and much brighter than you are, so you try a scattergun approach against a group of "people" (i.e., strawmen) saying things which were never actually said "a few days ago". A very courageous approach.
Also, it's bollocks. It did not need hype to think that a landslide was pretty much nailed on, it just required May to be a third-rate politician or better, which it turns out she isn't.
How ludicrous is it be discussing a Labour victory when they went into the election 20 points down and 3/4 of their own MPs don't support the leader?! Something else is going on here
As I said before, Tories need to ignore Corbyn's speech - it sounded perfectly reasonable.
Go after his previous remarks. His strange friends. His inability to slot ISIS or order a shoot to kill. Ignore this speech.
So what do they do? Go heavily on this speech, fucking idiots.
The way they are playing this election, the Tories are headed for a deserved defeat.
Help us, Andrew Neil......you're our only hope...
LOL! All the talk of supporting terrorism is bullshit. People are just worried he'll tax them to death. It'll come down to whether there are more haves or have nots.
As I said before, Tories need to ignore Corbyn's speech - it sounded perfectly reasonable.
Go after his previous remarks. His strange friends. His inability to slot ISIS or order a shoot to kill. Ignore this speech.
So what do they do? Go heavily on this speech, fucking idiots.
The way they are playing this election, the Tories are headed for a deserved defeat.
Do you think the Labour electoral machine did not have this checked out before ?
Of course they did. It makes total sense. And the Tories are walking straight into the trap, thus throwing away one of their few remaining trump cards.
The line to take should be this "Today Jeremy Corbyn sounded very reasonable, and he makes some pertinent points about interventions gone wrong, however, this is the same man who calls Hamas his friends, who thinks the death of Bin Laden is a tragedy, who refuses to order a drone strike on the leader of ISIS, and who wouldn't permit a shoot to kill against terrorists like the one in Manchester. Corbyn simply cannot be trusted. He is a hypocrite."
Instead, they are attacking the speech, and calling it "monstrous".
Halfwits.
Haven't heard the speech, and foreign policy bores me rigid so probably won't. But if the Tories are saying it is monstrous I'll assume it was reasonable.
The West always feels a need to interfere because of the pressure from its liberal conscience. Blair was able to manipulate opinion against Iraq because Saddam was a brutal dictator who kept order by terror. That he happened to be a secular, equal opportunities dictator was ignored. And as such he verged on run-of-the mill.
I was against the Iraq war and happily voted for Charlie because I couldn't see what marked him out as special. There was Mugabe, the Jongs, and most Middle East countries. It felt more like a Bush reprisal tactic
Of course, the Umma dislike any Muslim deaths, no matter how inflicted. Being Christian I feel a bond with the Copts, but I also feel a bond with the Yazidis and Kurds.
But Jezza is being disingenuous here. What seems to distinguish the victims of terrorist attacks recently is the presence in the country of a large and growing Muslim population. Think Belgium and Sweden - not renowned for being aggressive Crusaders..
99.999% of Muslims may be just as outraged as we are, but a few will always believe that any attack on any Muslim is an attack on them. Even if it is a well-meaning attempt to relieve suffering.
Blair may not come into that category, but some others did. Yet how quickly people forget the clamour for action in Yugoslavia, any action.
IS want to kill us because they hate our way of life. We're not in Afghanistan because of material gain. The liberal left will say it's because we need to educate women.
Jezza dislikes war, unless it's against us, and that last bit is his Achilles heel. He elevates other groups because of that. Israel is aggressive in defence, probably too aggressive, but making Hamas into the saints is the work of a lunatic.
People are perfectly entitled to vote for Jezza, but I never will. I'm the same age, and I suspect when I was seventeen, I might have liked him. Not now.
Comments
There are exceptions of course. The Canadian Liberals in 2015 pretty much had a straight line ascent from a month out, but overtaking the NPD and emerging as unarguably the alternative suddenly opened up such a rich vein of votes, whereas there isn't much way Labour can make progress now except by direct Tory-Labour switching.
https://www.snp.org/dont_let_the_tories_cut_your_pension
They will link this in to look out we've protected the Disabled, Tuition fees, Prescription Charges etc etc
They dilute the purity and clarity of the vision. Which is often, perhaps normally, wise.
“The Stop the War Coalition (StWC) reaffirms its call for an end to the occupation, the return of all British troops in Iraq to this country and recognises once more the legitimacy of the struggle of Iraqis, by whatever means they find necessary, to secure such ends”
Andrew Neil should ask him what was meant by this.
Events have proved that he was right and the Bliar's wrong. Most people in Britain will agree with that.
Norman Tebbit is 86. Disabled wife. Must be harmless. Make him PM.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamism_and_Islamic_terrorism_in_the_Balkans#Kosovo
But my main point is that NATO intervened and stopped the conflict. Many Islamists say that not only did we intervene too late (on which they may have a point), but also that we only intervened when they were near victory, and we grabbed their glory. That is almost certainly rubbish.
So we find ourselves in a position where before we intervened, we were turning our backs to the deaths of the Muslims in Kosovo (and hate would develop from that). When we did intervene, we were grabbing their victory.
We cannot win with such extremists mindsets, and they will find reasons to hate whatever we do, or don't do.
Please don't be under any illusions that Corbyn's foreign policy will stop people who want to hate us from hating us. They'll always find reasons.
He's a harmless old man who would lead us to 5 million unemployed and the biggest slump of a western economy ever to trouble the record books.
Enjoy the sun? I'll be lucky to sleep before election day if the Tories don't get their fat arses into gear and start widening the gap.
I think Farron is a bit too much like May. Both are prone to make policy decisions without properly consulting the rest of the party.
With Farron it is an annoyance, after all we are in opposition. With May it is a more serious fault as she makes decisions for the whole country.
Most of the recent polls have this at less than 50%. It used to be well above 50% until a week ago
There was also the release of possibly the worst ever British political TV spot "The Woman Who Made Up Her Mind" also on the day of the second debate. It was the first TV spot I have overheard people talking about - in awed tones about it's utter awfulness
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLAewTVmkAU
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_May_2017
The vast majority were in the developing world (so nothing to do with western foreign policy) and the vast majority can be linked to Islamism
We are an island off the North Western coast of Europe.
Do you think the UK should be prosecuted for military action that doesn't receive UN approval?
Good luck selling that on the doorstep.
What Corbyn majority do you predict?
If he did get largest party status (still hugely unlikely) he doesn't command enough of his own MPs to get much through. And I'll say it again, the mood on the ground remains decent Tory majority but less than believed last week.
I think what we're seeing is embarrassment from people who were oh so confident a few days ago that they were the SAS, but turn out to be Dad's Army like everyone else. They believed their hype just a bit too much, and really thought Crosby was a genius, May was Boudicca, and Corbyn couldn't tie his shoelaces safely without adult supervision. None of those things were quite as true as they thought.
They'll come through this and be insufferable by June 9th. But, for now, it'd take a heart of stone not to laugh.
I also have a kind of theory that the unbelievably awful tragedy in Manchester might possibly have reduced the Tories' ratings, not for any related reason, but simply on account of it making everyone feel so very sad and therefore disinclined towards considering matters of a political nature.
Errr, sorry it must be the heat, I was thinking like a Labour supporter for a moment.
Inadvertently declaring themselves to be aged below 20 got them a joining fee of a quid.
Jeremy Bernard Corbyn (/ˈkɔːrbɪn/; born 26 May 1949)
It's his birthday!
How can any serious Tory supporter gloat after beating Jeremy Corbyn? It should be like clubbing a seal puppy to death.
CORBYN supported the GOOD FRIDAY agreement. So stop peddling lies !
(with Scottish figures in brackets)
Con: 37 (20)
Lab: 44 (30)
Lib: 8 (5)
UKIP: 4 (1)
Green: 3 (1)
SNP: (42)
Even that stonkingly disastrous result would leave Labour short 28 of a majority, with SNP on 53. Can't believe I'm counting on the SNP to rein in Corbyn's craziness!
A small Labour majority would require something like Con 34-35 with Lab 45-46.
Let's hope May can stop punching her own voters in the face and starting attacking Labour's crazy policies instead.
Maybe Corbyn is smart to have made his speech.
As the UKIP vote has drifted away, a significant portion of it has gone back to Labour, and a larger portion has switched to the Tories.
new thread
Also, it's bollocks. It did not need hype to think that a landslide was pretty much nailed on, it just required May to be a third-rate politician or better, which it turns out she isn't.
The West always feels a need to interfere because of the pressure from its liberal conscience. Blair was able to manipulate opinion against Iraq because Saddam was a brutal dictator who kept order by terror. That he happened to be a secular, equal opportunities dictator was ignored. And as such he verged on run-of-the mill.
I was against the Iraq war and happily voted for Charlie because I couldn't see what marked him out as special. There was Mugabe, the Jongs, and most Middle East countries. It felt more like a Bush reprisal tactic
Of course, the Umma dislike any Muslim deaths, no matter how inflicted. Being Christian I feel a bond with the Copts, but I also feel a bond with the Yazidis and Kurds.
But Jezza is being disingenuous here. What seems to distinguish the victims of terrorist attacks recently is the presence in the country of a large and growing Muslim population. Think Belgium and Sweden - not renowned for being aggressive Crusaders..
99.999% of Muslims may be just as outraged as we are, but a few will always believe that any attack on any Muslim is an attack on them. Even if it is a well-meaning attempt to relieve suffering.
Blair may not come into that category, but some others did. Yet how quickly people forget the clamour for action in Yugoslavia, any action.
IS want to kill us because they hate our way of life. We're not in Afghanistan because of material gain. The liberal left will say it's because we need to educate women.
Jezza dislikes war, unless it's against us, and that last bit is his Achilles heel. He elevates other groups because of that. Israel is aggressive in defence, probably too aggressive, but making Hamas into the saints is the work of a lunatic.
People are perfectly entitled to vote for Jezza, but I never will. I'm the same age, and I suspect when I was seventeen, I might have liked him. Not now.