FWIW I would tell the DUP to go fuck themselves and dare them to vote down a QS and let Corbyn in.
The problem with that is that the government would be at risk of the DUP voting against them without warning on every single piece of legislation.
Yes in theory, but in practice how many DUP MPs want another election and a Labour government?
Most of them would be safe I'd have thought (Their majorities outside Belfast are quite healthy). OTOH About 60 Tories would lose their seat if an election was held today.
May should have brought Gove back in as Justice Secretary. Since she has brought him back anyway in the face of inevitable (unfounded) criticism it should at least have been to a job where he was widely praised for his work by all sides of the House and importantly by the prison service itself.
Too senior a position I suspect. Plus - Defra has to do some serious thinking and reimagining of what Brexit means. Arguably a bigger change for them than any other department.
Michael Gove - like him or loathe him - is a dreamer and this kind of challenge gives him a chance to shine and invest his energy in the May project.
It is unbelievable that Gove was not sent back to Justice. He had the confidence of the legal profession and the prison service in what is now one of the most difficult jobs in government. Truss was a lightweight no mark, Grayling before her was a disaster. Hopefully his day will come again.
I think she broadly wants Brexit campaigners to be running offices that will be most impacted by Brexit?
There are parallels. But the difference is the Brexit clock which probably makes the option of putting Labour in as a minority and then watching them implode rather unlikely...
The problem is that I don't see any realistic way in which a Con (or Con-led) government doesn't implode sooner or later either. Hence, if it were done when 'tis done, then 'twere well it were done quickly. Better for the Tories to get out on their own terms and bring down Labour at a time of their choosing than vice versa.
On Brexit, Starmer's a capable guy and most Tories could sign up to Corbyn's view of Brexit, at least as far as a constitutional settlement goes. One'd hope it wouldn't be too hard to pick up the thread later on.
I see the same dynamic right now, post same-sex marriage.
I think it's incredibly unlikely the LGBT community will notice any difference in government policy.
In the end all sorts of MP's believe all sorts of things but Parliament won't be revisiting any of these subjects.... They'll have more than enough to be getting on with.
There are parallels. But the difference is the Brexit clock which probably makes the option of putting Labour in as a minority and then watching them implode rather unlikely...
The problem is that I don't see any realistic way in which a Con (or Con-led) government doesn't implode sooner or later either. Hence, if it were done when 'tis done, then 'twere well it were done quickly. Better for the Tories to get out on their own terms and bring down Labour at a time of their choosing than vice versa.
On Brexit, Starmer's a capable guy and most Tories could sign up to Corbyn's view of Brexit, at least as far as a constitutional settlement goes. One'd hope it wouldn't be too hard to pick up the thread later on.
Time always offers at least a little hope. Right now they would be slaughtered.
Understandably, not many people have noticed that Beppe Grillo's lot did very badly in the Italian mayoral elections yesterday. No candidates through to the second round in any of the big cities. The populist tide continues to ebb in Europe.
The relative strength and stability of Italian politics is a sore point for some.
Principally the 40% of young Italians who are unemployed.
There are parallels. But the difference is the Brexit clock which probably makes the option of putting Labour in as a minority and then watching them implode rather unlikely...
The problem is that I don't see any realistic way in which a Con (or Con-led) government doesn't implode sooner or later either. Hence, if it were done when 'tis done, then 'twere well it were done quickly. Better for the Tories to get out on their own terms and bring down Labour at a time of their choosing than vice versa.
On Brexit, Starmer's a capable guy and most Tories could sign up to Corbyn's view of Brexit, at least as far as a constitutional settlement goes. One'd hope it wouldn't be too hard to pick up the thread later on.
May should have brought Gove back in as Justice Secretary. Since she has brought him back anyway in the face of inevitable (unfounded) criticism it should at least have been to a job where he was widely praised for his work by all sides of the House and importantly by the prison service itself.
Too senior a position I suspect. Plus - Defra has to do some serious thinking and reimagining of what Brexit means. Arguably a bigger change for them than any other department.
Michael Gove - like him or loathe him - is a dreamer and this kind of challenge gives him a chance to shine and invest his energy in the May project.
It is unbelievable that Gove was not sent back to Justice. He had the confidence of the legal profession and the prison service in what is now one of the most difficult jobs in government. Truss was a lightweight no mark, Grayling before her was a disaster. Hopefully his day will come again.
I think she broadly wants Brexit campaigners to be running offices that will be most impacted by Brexit?
Arguably MOJ is seriously impacted by Brexit though. ECJ, great repeal bill etc. Makes the actual appointment for MOJ very curious + confusing.
I think there is little alternative but for May to resign and her successor call another election. I understand all the arguments about how disruptive this would be but I don't see the planned arrangements as stable and we are simply delaying the inevitable.
Thanks,
Well, you might be right. However, the Article 50 clock is ticking, which is a complicating factor.
I'm not sure I can take another day of this. Yet alone two years.
It's embarrassing, depressing, emasculating and humiliating.
I do feel for you, honestly.
But equally honestly, I'm loving every last minute of this.
Just so as we are all clear on the facts, can anybody here tell us what would be, technically speaking and politics aside, the earliest date by which we could have another election?
I have a feeling it may just be the optimum date for the Conservatives, but it would be nice to know anyway.
Feck knows. Is the FTPA actually in operation as there is no House of Commons in session?
If it is then, Commons has to meet, and pass no confidence iirc.
Has Theresa May got a death wish? And if so, does she also have super powers in her stare that prevent anyone in the Tory cabinet from reasoning with her?
There are parallels. But the difference is the Brexit clock which probably makes the option of putting Labour in as a minority and then watching them implode rather unlikely...
The problem is that I don't see any realistic way in which a Con (or Con-led) government doesn't implode sooner or later either. Hence, if it were done when 'tis done, then 'twere well it were done quickly. Better for the Tories to get out on their own terms and bring down Labour at a time of their choosing than vice versa.
On Brexit, Starmer's a capable guy and most Tories could sign up to Corbyn's view of Brexit, at least as far as a constitutional settlement goes. One'd hope it wouldn't be too hard to pick up the thread later on.
I cannot see them repealing gay marriage or civil partnerships or increasing the age of consent for homosexual activity or any legal activity for that matter. I don't see the problem, people are getting worked into a frenzy about nothing.
Are you LGBT yourself? If not then you shouldn't presume on the behalf of others about how to feel about this deal.
I'm gay and have no problems with the deal. Indeed I'd expect if anything the liberal toryism to rub off onto the DUP. You need to calm down.
They'd better get a bloody move on. Ascot next week and she won't miss that for anything.
Not till the afternoon though. Queen's Speech at 9am?
And she'll be done with the speaking inside fifteen minutes. Even allowing some extra time for all the walking up and down in fancy dress, she'll make it there by lunchtime.
They'd better get a bloody move on. Ascot next week and she won't miss that for anything.
Not till the afternoon though. Queen's Speech at 9am?
After she's been up all nite studying form, David? Give the old girl a break.
Does the Queen actually have to deliver the Queen's Speech? I seem to remember Charles deputising for the D-Day 65th anniversary when it clashed with Ascot - couldn't he be given the speaking practice?
1. Not having to worry about their kids tuition fees.
2. Not letting Theresa The House Stealer steal their inheritances.
It is kind of worrying for labour as well, despite the big lead with the middle aged tories still got a 2.5% lead overall. Suggests Tories don't need to make head way with the young, just close the gap with this group first.
The blank cheque that May sought for Brexit was not a good thing. She now has to look beyond the narrow interests of one part of the Tory party.
Ssnip It's an unmitigated disaster for the country. There's no getting away from this. It's likely to turn out to be the most catastrophic election result of modern times.
Well there IS a way out of this mess. But it would require putting the interests of the country ahead of the interests of the Conservative Party. Something they seem adverse to in recent times.
If May were to go back to the Palace and tell Lizzie that the country needs a government that commands either a majority or a firm coalition and that the only way this might be achieved is to have another election, then there is a way out of the mess that May is responsible for.
Who knows, if they got their act together and put forward a half decent campaign and adjusted their manifesto, the Tories might even come out of it with a majority. Failing that, at least we could be left with a Labour government that is not fettered by a minor Party form Northern Ireland.
And for the avoidance of doubt, I am neither a Labour or Corbyn supporter.
There's no guarantee that the result would be significantly different, it might work if May resigned and the Tories were led by someone different, maybe Hammond?
It is one of these situations when, if things are not working, then why not try something else? It may not work either but what we have now is not looking good.
If changing to Hammond would work then I would say "Do it" but it does not solve the issue of being in a minority govt.
It would not surprise me if we had three elections in quick succession: the one we just had, the next one putting Corbyn in as a minority govt and then another one to put a govt in with a proper majority.
It rather looks like a minority labour government is a nailed on certainty.
I think we've reached peak nonsense now.
Labour are 6% ahead in the polls, the tories are in meltdown, no majority and facing multiple intractible, irresolvable problems.
= no confidence vote = election = new government. Probability is that labour will not get a majority.
There are parallels. But the difference is the Brexit clock which probably makes the option of putting Labour in as a minority and then watching them implode rather unlikely...
The problem is that I don't see any realistic way in which a Con (or Con-led) government doesn't implode sooner or later either. Hence, if it were done when 'tis done, then 'twere well it were done quickly. Better for the Tories to get out on their own terms and bring down Labour at a time of their choosing than vice versa.
On Brexit, Starmer's a capable guy and most Tories could sign up to Corbyn's view of Brexit, at least as far as a constitutional settlement goes. One'd hope it wouldn't be too hard to pick up the thread later on.
What about an Autumn election with a new Con leader?
You mean the Conservatives lose to a weak Labour led coalition then come back with a massive majority just ten months later? Hmm. It would require Labour's active participation in its own downfall. Not impossible. Also there's that Brexit clock - tick tock, tick tock, tick tock...
I think there is little alternative but for May to resign and her successor call another election. I understand all the arguments about how disruptive this would be but I don't see the planned arrangements as stable and we are simply delaying the inevitable.
Thanks,
Well, you might be right. However, the Article 50 clock is ticking, which is a complicating factor.
I'm not sure I can take another day of this. Yet alone two years.
It's embarrassing, depressing, emasculating and humiliating.
I do feel for you, honestly.
But equally honestly, I'm loving every last minute of this.
Just so as we are all clear on the facts, can anybody here tell us what would be, technically speaking and politics aside, the earliest date by which we could have another election?
I have a feeling it may just be the optimum date for the Conservatives, but it would be nice to know anyway.
I suppose it's possible that after Outlawries and the rest of it on Monday 19th, there could immediately be a "there shall be an early parliamentary general election" motion. Dissolution could follow immediately, followed by 25 working days until the election, so the first available Thursday is 27th July.
Every now and again it hits me just how reckless May was and the cosmic scale of her mistake. The timing of this election was negligent in the extreme.
Yes. Even more remarkable when we thought we were getting a safe pair of hands to steady the ship after the EU referendum.
If this goes badly, really badly, you could end up with a Parliamentary Conservative Party smaller than the current Parliamentary Liberal Party.
Seriously.
I think May should go in the near future. However, I think your assertion that the Tories could end up as 12 seats is a bit silly. Whoever the Tory leader might be they do have an advantage in solidifying their vote in Corbyn. He obviously motivates Labour voters but it is likely he repels Tory ones to the ballot box as well. I think the electorate has done its classic "don't know" answer at the election, just like in 1974 when asked a similar question. If the Tories were up against someone like Blair, then they should worry. I don't see Corbyn increasing his vote much further, if there was another election and the Tories lost and Labour won it, I think it would be down to Tory stay at home voters. But as I say I don't think Corbyn can grow his vote much more.
Many in the Labour party said the same on Corbyn second election to be leader of the Labour Party.On another point who were the conservatives on here who voted for Corbyn as Labour leader ?They told us at the time it was a jolly good wheeze.
Every now and again it hits me just how reckless May was and the cosmic scale of her mistake. The timing of this election was negligent in the extreme.
Yes. Even more remarkable when we thought we were getting a safe pair of hands to steady the ship after the EU referendum.
If this goes badly, really badly, you could end up with a Parliamentary Conservative Party smaller than the current Parliamentary Liberal Party.
Seriously.
I think the Liberal Party still exists down in Cornwall somewhere (anti EU, pro free market competition, pro free trade) but not in parliament.
Every now and again it hits me just how reckless May was and the cosmic scale of her mistake. The timing of this election was negligent in the extreme.
Yes. Even more remarkable when we thought we were getting a safe pair of hands to steady the ship after the EU referendum.
Mother Theresa to Lady Macbeth in the blink of an eye.
Unlike 1923, the Conservatives in practice have a blocking vote. On what principles would they use it or not use it?
Being cynical, the principle of giving Corbyn enough time to prove how useless he is at anything other than campaiging, dressed up as 'giving his government a chance to prove itself'. The precise trigger next April/May could be Brexit or Budget, or - if circumstances permit - some more populist reason.
Far easier to change leader in opposition (unlike in 1923, when Baldwin similarly screwed up, though Baldwin had much more understanding of the human side of politics).
Every now and again it hits me just how reckless May was and the cosmic scale of her mistake. The timing of this election was negligent in the extreme.
Yes. Even more remarkable when we thought we were getting a safe pair of hands to steady the ship after the EU referendum.
If this goes badly, really badly, you could end up with a Parliamentary Conservative Party smaller than the current Parliamentary Liberal Party.
Seriously.
I think the Liberal Party still exists down in Cornwall somewhere (anti EU, pro free market competition, pro free trade) but not in parliament.
I'm sure I read they lost their last councillors in May?
They'd better get a bloody move on. Ascot next week and she won't miss that for anything.
Not till the afternoon though. Queen's Speech at 9am?
And she'll be done with the speaking inside fifteen minutes. Even allowing some extra time for all the walking up and down in fancy dress, she'll make it there by lunchtime.
Apparently, it's going to be a dress-down QS - car rather than carriage etc - so there might well not be so much fancy dress on show anyway.
I see the same dynamic right now, post same-sex marriage.
So the trick is not appointing DUP people to various govt posts, but appointing torys who the DUP would be entirely comfortable with?
We have been duped DUPed
Any deal would not be about government appointments or any aspects of social legislation of that kind. It would neither be wanted or offered. There are some incredibly silly comments on here today.
I think there is little alternative but for May to resign and her successor call another election. I understand all the arguments about how disruptive this would be but I don't see the planned arrangements as stable and we are simply delaying the inevitable.
Thanks,
Well, you might be right. However, the Article 50 clock is ticking, which is a complicating factor.
I'm not sure I can take another day of this. Yet alone two years.
It's embarrassing, depressing, emasculating and humiliating.
I do feel for you, honestly.
But equally honestly, I'm loving every last minute of this.
Just so as we are all clear on the facts, can anybody here tell us what would be, technically speaking and politics aside, the earliest date by which we could have another election?
I have a feeling it may just be the optimum date for the Conservatives, but it would be nice to know anyway.
I suppose it's possible that after Outlawries and the rest of it on Monday 19th, there could immediately be a "there shall be an early parliamentary general election" motion. Dissolution could follow immediately, followed by 25 working days until the election, so the first available Thursday is 27th July.
I think.
There has to be a Queen's Speech first I think.
Parliament meets tomorrow (13th). The first day or two is swearing in, oaths and Speaker stuff.
There are parallels. But the difference is the Brexit clock which probably makes the option of putting Labour in as a minority and then watching them implode rather unlikely...
The problem is that I don't see any realistic way in which a Con (or Con-led) government doesn't implode sooner or later either. Hence, if it were done when 'tis done, then 'twere well it were done quickly. Better for the Tories to get out on their own terms and bring down Labour at a time of their choosing than vice versa.
On Brexit, Starmer's a capable guy and most Tories could sign up to Corbyn's view of Brexit, at least as far as a constitutional settlement goes. One'd hope it wouldn't be too hard to pick up the thread later on.
Two observations:
1) The Conservatives have spent years saying how dangerous and incompetent Jeremy Corbyn is. Voluntarily to let him into Number 10 would baffle those who agreed with that.
2) You can back Labour at evens on Betfair for most seats at the next election. Looks good value to me.
Every now and again it hits me just how reckless May was and the cosmic scale of her mistake. The timing of this election was negligent in the extreme.
Yes. Even more remarkable when we thought we were getting a safe pair of hands to steady the ship after the EU referendum.
Yes I would like to know when the decision was made for the snap election and the real reasoning behind that decision.I am sure someone will tell us.
Hmmm, I have a theory that a great deal of the SNP-to-Con switchers were due to Brexit not Independence. I think this could be a risky strategy for Ruth.
Every now and again it hits me just how reckless May was and the cosmic scale of her mistake. The timing of this election was negligent in the extreme.
Yes. Even more remarkable when we thought we were getting a safe pair of hands to steady the ship after the EU referendum.
The fact that she thought it was reasonable to say "now is not the time" to the SNP because of A50, then call an election was, in hindsight the first sign of madness
1. Not having to worry about their kids tuition fees.
2. Not letting Theresa The House Stealer steal their inheritances.
It is kind of worrying for labour as well, despite the big lead with the middle aged tories still got a 2.5% lead overall. Suggests Tories don't need to make head way with the young, just close the gap with this group first.
The Tories need to take on board one notion: stop scaring the damned horses!
The level uncertainty --> fear amongst the core vote last week was real. People thought they would have to sell their house next week, thought the pension was being frozen. Have bold ideas that grasp the nettle of serious social problems for sure, but work out how the hell you sell it first, work out how you respond to your enemies' attack lines, show it will be worth the pain. None of that was in place.
I think there is little alternative but for May to resign and her successor call another election. I understand all the arguments about how disruptive this would be but I don't see the planned arrangements as stable and we are simply delaying the inevitable.
Thanks,
Well, you might be right. However, the Article 50 clock is ticking, which is a complicating factor.
I'm not sure I can take another day of this. Yet alone two years.
It's embarrassing, depressing, emasculating and humiliating.
I do feel for you, honestly.
But equally honestly, I'm loving every last minute of this.
Just so as we are all clear on the facts, can anybody here tell us what would be, technically speaking and politics aside, the earliest date by which we could have another election?
I have a feeling it may just be the optimum date for the Conservatives, but it would be nice to know anyway.
Feck knows. Is the FTPA actually in operation as there is no House of Commons in session?
If it is then, Commons has to meet, and pass no confidence iirc.
Then wait 14 days.
Then start the usual GE process.
A dissolution motion would be faster, as it was this time. But even going down that route, you'd still be hitting school holidays for the GE date were the new parliament called as soon as possible, and a dissolution motion passed on day 1. The longer election timetable these days sees to that.
They'd better get a bloody move on. Ascot next week and she won't miss that for anything.
Not till the afternoon though. Queen's Speech at 9am?
After she's been up all nite studying form, David? Give the old girl a break.
Does the Queen actually have to deliver the Queen's Speech? I seem to remember Charles deputising for the D-Day 65th anniversary when it clashed with Ascot - couldn't he be given the speaking practice?
Nope, the Lord Chancellor gave the speech in the 1960s when Queen was indisposed with pregnancies/giving birth
There are parallels. But the difference is the Brexit clock which probably makes the option of putting Labour in as a minority and then watching them implode rather unlikely...
The problem is that I don't see any realistic way in which a Con (or Con-led) government doesn't implode sooner or later either. Hence, if it were done when 'tis done, then 'twere well it were done quickly. Better for the Tories to get out on their own terms and bring down Labour at a time of their choosing than vice versa.
On Brexit, Starmer's a capable guy and most Tories could sign up to Corbyn's view of Brexit, at least as far as a constitutional settlement goes. One'd hope it wouldn't be too hard to pick up the thread later on.
Article 50. May triggered Article 50 and then called an election. Think about it. Unless the Conservatives are willing to trash the country, it will have to deal with Article 50. There isn't time for another election which likely won't deliver a more coherent result anyway.
I cannot see them repealing gay marriage or civil partnerships or increasing the age of consent for homosexual activity or any legal activity for that matter. I don't see the problem, people are getting worked into a frenzy about nothing.
Are you LGBT yourself? If not then you shouldn't presume on the behalf of others about how to feel about this deal.
I'm gay and have no problems with the deal. Indeed I'd expect if anything the liberal toryism to rub off onto the DUP. You need to calm down.
Seconded. I am sick and tired of people like TSE claiming to know how gay people feel about things like this when they have no idea whatsoever.
The only gay people upset are those on the left, who use their sexuality to go up a rung on the ladder of oppression. The rest of us are getting on with life.
Hmmm, I have a theory that a great deal of the SNP-to-Con switchers were due to Brexit not Independence. I think this could be a risky strategy for Ruth.
Banff and Buchan was the only Scottish seat to vote for Brexit I think. It is why I tipped it at 11-2 after the value on alot of others had dissapeared.
Every now and again it hits me just how reckless May was and the cosmic scale of her mistake. The timing of this election was negligent in the extreme.
Yes. Even more remarkable when we thought we were getting a safe pair of hands to steady the ship after the EU referendum.
If this goes badly, really badly, you could end up with a Parliamentary Conservative Party smaller than the current Parliamentary Liberal Party.
Seriously.
I think the Liberal Party still exists down in Cornwall somewhere (anti EU, pro free market competition, pro free trade) but not in parliament.
I'm sure I read they lost their last councillors in May?
I think there is little alternative but for May to resign and her successor call another election. I understand all the arguments about how disruptive this would be but I don't see the planned arrangements as stable and we are simply delaying the inevitable.
Thanks,
Well, you might be right. However, the Article 50 clock is ticking, which is a complicating factor.
I'm not sure I can take another day of this. Yet alone two years.
It's embarrassing, depressing, emasculating and humiliating.
I do feel for you, honestly.
But equally honestly, I'm loving every last minute of this.
Just so as we are all clear on the facts, can anybody here tell us what would be, technically speaking and politics aside, the earliest date by which we could have another election?
I have a feeling it may just be the optimum date for the Conservatives, but it would be nice to know anyway.
I suppose it's possible that after Outlawries and the rest of it on Monday 19th, there could immediately be a "there shall be an early parliamentary general election" motion. Dissolution could follow immediately, followed by 25 working days until the election, so the first available Thursday is 27th July.
I think.
There has to be a Queen's Speech first I think.
Parliament meets tomorrow (13th). The first day or two is swearing in, oaths and Speaker stuff.
Monday (next week) is supposed to be the QS.
Yes, I was assuming State Opening and Queen's Speech on the 19th, immediately followed by Outlawries etc. and then the "there shall be an early parliamentary general election" motion. I don't think a debate on the QS is technically required BICBW.
I cannot see them repealing gay marriage or civil partnerships or increasing the age of consent for homosexual activity or any legal activity for that matter. I don't see the problem, people are getting worked into a frenzy about nothing.
Are you LGBT yourself? If not then you shouldn't presume on the behalf of others about how to feel about this deal.
I'm gay and have no problems with the deal. Indeed I'd expect if anything the liberal toryism to rub off onto the DUP. You need to calm down.
Seconded. I am sick and tired of people like TSE claiming to know how gay people feel about things like this when they have no idea whatsoever.
The only gay people upset are those on the left, who use their sexuality to go up a rung on the ladder of oppression. The rest of us are getting on with life.
I see the same dynamic right now, post same-sex marriage.
So the trick is not appointing DUP people to various govt posts, but appointing torys who the DUP would be entirely comfortable with?
We have been duped DUPed
Any deal would not be about government appointments or any aspects of social legislation of that kind. It would neither be wanted or offered. There are some incredibly silly comments on here today.
There is not exactly stunning logic seeping out of Downing St either. Or had you not noticed?
I'd go minority government. Cut VAT in half for a three month period to boost the economy. Put together a plan to build 1million new homes. Leave corporation tax untouched. Come up with 2 or 3 seriously business friendly policies. Start negotiating Brexit in a grown-up, open manner. And put on really really really disciplined front through the summer. Then go back to the country.
The opposition will cry foul but political opportunism is perfectly justifiable given the current clusterf*ck. Just imagine what a summer of uncertainty followed by a sharp drop in business confidence and a nasty recession would do... There'd be blood on the Tory carpets.
... and then a Corbyn govt would be a serious possibility.
I cannot see them repealing gay marriage or civil partnerships or increasing the age of consent for homosexual activity or any legal activity for that matter. I don't see the problem, people are getting worked into a frenzy about nothing.
Are you LGBT yourself? If not then you shouldn't presume on the behalf of others about how to feel about this deal.
I'm gay and have no problems with the deal. Indeed I'd expect if anything the liberal toryism to rub off onto the DUP. You need to calm down.
Seconded. I am sick and tired of people like TSE claiming to know how gay people feel about things like this when they have no idea whatsoever.
The only gay people upset are those on the left, who use their sexuality to go up a rung on the ladder of oppression. The rest of us are getting on with life.
You're sick of people like TSE claiming to know how gay people feel, because you think that's your prerogative?
I cannot see them repealing gay marriage or civil partnerships or increasing the age of consent for homosexual activity or any legal activity for that matter. I don't see the problem, people are getting worked into a frenzy about nothing.
Are you LGBT yourself? If not then you shouldn't presume on the behalf of others about how to feel about this deal.
I'm gay and have no problems with the deal. Indeed I'd expect if anything the liberal toryism to rub off onto the DUP. You need to calm down.
Seconded. I am sick and tired of people like TSE claiming to know how gay people feel about things like this when they have no idea whatsoever.
The only gay people upset are those on the left, who use their sexuality to go up a rung on the ladder of oppression. The rest of us are getting on with life.
1. Not having to worry about their kids tuition fees.
2. Not letting Theresa The House Stealer steal their inheritances.
It is kind of worrying for labour as well, despite the big lead with the middle aged tories still got a 2.5% lead overall. Suggests Tories don't need to make head way with the young, just close the gap with this group first.
The Tories need to take on board one notion: stop scaring the damned horses!
The level uncertainty --> fear amongst the core vote last week was real. People thought they would have to sell their house next week, thought the pension was being frozen. Have bold ideas that grasp the nettle of serious social problems for sure, but work out how the hell you sell it first, work out how you respond to your enemies' attack lines, show it will be worth the pain. None of that was in place.
They weren't good ideas. It's not easy to sell a turd, nor should it be the objective. The objective should be to produce something other than turd. This isn't a game.
1. Not having to worry about their kids tuition fees.
2. Not letting Theresa The House Stealer steal their inheritances.
It is kind of worrying for labour as well, despite the big lead with the middle aged tories still got a 2.5% lead overall. Suggests Tories don't need to make head way with the young, just close the gap with this group first.
The Tories need to take on board one notion: stop scaring the damned horses!
The level uncertainty --> fear amongst the core vote last week was real. People thought they would have to sell their house next week, thought the pension was being frozen. Have bold ideas that grasp the nettle of serious social problems for sure, but work out how the hell you sell it first, work out how you respond to your enemies' attack lines, show it will be worth the pain. None of that was in place.
They weren't good ideas. It's not easy to sell a turd, nor should it be the objective. The objective should be to produce something other than turd. This isn't a game.
Davidson not an MP of course. Diminishes her influence relative to the DUP for example.
Davidson is 13 Scottish MPs - which rather raises her influence relative to the DUP.
Ruth Davidson is the 21C Henry Dundas, a Scottish politician who dominated the Whig* Party in the 18C with his large block of Scottish MPs ruthlessly managed with patronage.
Can we not have a national government whilst the Brexit negotiations are being done, I'm serious - it is bigger than any one party.
Starmer and Davis working together...
Problem is that Davis gives every impression of winging it while Starmer is steeped in detail. Can't see how that works. You are right though: we need a cross-party approach and a strategy that is based on what Andrew Adonis laid out in the Standard today:
If Corbyn will not play ball - and I agree with others that he is unlikely to - then other Labour MPs are just going to have to bite the bullet and rebel. The vast majority are not going to want to see their constituents impoverished on the back of Tory incompetence.
May was always boring and unblessed with original thoughts; no change there before the calling of the GE or now after it.
Regardless of her personality failings, the GE should nevertheless have been a cake-walk. But that silly manifesto gave her natural supporters a collective black eye and in turn gave the media - who hitherto had been lamenting a ponderously boring campaign - something to get their teeth into.
That all transpired to give Corbyn some much-needed momentum just as that clever strategy by Watson and co to rally wavering voters into preventing a BIG Tory majority was starting to work.
This was one big Downing Street fuck up. Not some magic trick by Corbyn, or some reaction to Brexit, or anything else...
1. Not having to worry about their kids tuition fees.
2. Not letting Theresa The House Stealer steal their inheritances.
It is kind of worrying for labour as well, despite the big lead with the middle aged tories still got a 2.5% lead overall. Suggests Tories don't need to make head way with the young, just close the gap with this group first.
The Tories need to take on board one notion: stop scaring the damned horses!
The level uncertainty --> fear amongst the core vote last week was real. People thought they would have to sell their house next week, thought the pension was being frozen. Have bold ideas that grasp the nettle of serious social problems for sure, but work out how the hell you sell it first, work out how you respond to your enemies' attack lines, show it will be worth the pain. None of that was in place.
They weren't good ideas. It's not easy to sell a turd, nor should it be the objective. The objective should be to produce something other than turd. This isn't a game.
Sorting out the social care mess that both parties have contributed to in recent years by inaction from fear of public reaction[*] is not a bad idea.
I hear that instead of resurrecting fox hunting , the Conservatives are going to introduce goat hunting with hounds to avoid future delays in delivering Queens speeches .
There are parallels. But the difference is the Brexit clock which probably makes the option of putting Labour in as a minority and then watching them implode rather unlikely...
The problem is that I don't see any realistic way in which a Con (or Con-led) government doesn't implode sooner or later either. Hence, if it were done when 'tis done, then 'twere well it were done quickly. Better for the Tories to get out on their own terms and bring down Labour at a time of their choosing than vice versa.
On Brexit, Starmer's a capable guy and most Tories could sign up to Corbyn's view of Brexit, at least as far as a constitutional settlement goes. One'd hope it wouldn't be too hard to pick up the thread later on.
Time always offers at least a little hope. Right now they would be slaughtered.
The advantage of the FTPA to the Tories is that if Corbyn were to accept the request to form a govt - and he would - he couldn't then cut for an early election solely on his / Labour's initiative. The Tories could block a dissolution motion, for example on the nominal grounds that the parliament hadn't been given a change.
I cannot see them repealing gay marriage or civil partnerships or increasing the age of consent for homosexual activity or any legal activity for that matter. I don't see the problem, people are getting worked into a frenzy about nothing.
Are you LGBT yourself? If not then you shouldn't presume on the behalf of others about how to feel about this deal.
I'm gay and have no problems with the deal. Indeed I'd expect if anything the liberal toryism to rub off onto the DUP. You need to calm down.
Seconded. I am sick and tired of people like TSE claiming to know how gay people feel about things like this when they have no idea whatsoever.
The only gay people upset are those on the left, who use their sexuality to go up a rung on the ladder of oppression. The rest of us are getting on with life.
Oh hun, oh hun.
I know a lot of gay people, I spent a lot of my adult life in The Village.
In a few weeks time, I am going to be best man at a same sex wedding, which isn't the first time I've had that honour.
Because I've spent a lot of time with gay people since the late 90s, I've seen first hand the homophobic abuse they've received and I've received because they thought I was gay too (I think it was the red shoes that did it).
Fortunately that has became rare as the country has become more tolerant.
They and I are worried all this hard work could be undone with the DUP wagging the Tory tail.
Less than 20 years ago, The Sun ran a front page asking if the country was run by a gay mafia, and a terrorist was targeting gay people in London.
So yeah, I know nothing about how the LGBTI people feel, and you can get fucked you fucking twat.
You mean the Conservatives lose to a weak Labour led coalition then come back with a massive majority just ten months later? Hmm. It would require Labour's active participation in its own downfall. Not impossible. Also there's that Brexit clock - tick tock, tick tock, tick tock...
I do.
(I must admit, I also love participating in a forum where I can write a number and a one word question and so many people know what I mean).
There are parallels. But the difference is the Brexit clock which probably makes the option of putting Labour in as a minority and then watching them implode rather unlikely...
The problem is that I don't see any realistic way in which a Con (or Con-led) government doesn't implode sooner or later either. Hence, if it were done when 'tis done, then 'twere well it were done quickly. Better for the Tories to get out on their own terms and bring down Labour at a time of their choosing than vice versa.
On Brexit, Starmer's a capable guy and most Tories could sign up to Corbyn's view of Brexit, at least as far as a constitutional settlement goes. One'd hope it wouldn't be too hard to pick up the thread later on.
Two observations:
1) The Conservatives have spent years saying how dangerous and incompetent Jeremy Corbyn is. Voluntarily to let him into Number 10 would baffle those who agreed with that.
2) You can back Labour at evens on Betfair for most seats at the next election. Looks good value to me.
1. The people seem to disagree, and will likely now continue to disagree unless the case is proven. So it must be proven.
2. Much more likely if Lab in oppn at the next election than if they've been in govt for 6-12 months.
They'd better get a bloody move on. Ascot next week and she won't miss that for anything.
Not till the afternoon though. Queen's Speech at 9am?
And she'll be done with the speaking inside fifteen minutes. Even allowing some extra time for all the walking up and down in fancy dress, she'll make it there by lunchtime.
Apparently, it's going to be a dress-down QS - car rather than carriage etc - so there might well not be so much fancy dress on show anyway.
I cannot see them repealing gay marriage or civil partnerships or increasing the age of consent for homosexual activity or any legal activity for that matter. I don't see the problem, people are getting worked into a frenzy about nothing.
Are you LGBT yourself? If not then you shouldn't presume on the behalf of others about how to feel about this deal.
I'm gay and have no problems with the deal. Indeed I'd expect if anything the liberal toryism to rub off onto the DUP. You need to calm down.
Seconded. I am sick and tired of people like TSE claiming to know how gay people feel about things like this when they have no idea whatsoever.
The only gay people upset are those on the left, who use their sexuality to go up a rung on the ladder of oppression. The rest of us are getting on with life.
Oh hun, oh hun.
I know a lot of gay people, I spent a lot of my adult life in The Village.
In a few weeks time, I am going to be best man at a same sex wedding, which isn't the first time I've had that honour.
Because I've spent a lot of time with gay people since the late 90s, I've seen first hand the homophobic abuse they've received and I've received because they thought I was gay too (I think it was the red shoes that did it).
Fortunately that has became rare as the country has become more tolerant.
They and I are worried all this hard work could be undone with the DUP wagging the Tory tail.
Less than 20 years ago, The Sun ran a front page asking if the country was run by a gay mafia, and a terrorist was targeting gay people in London.
So yeah, I know nothing, and you get fucked you fucking twat.
1. Not having to worry about their kids tuition fees.
2. Not letting Theresa The House Stealer steal their inheritances.
It is kind of worrying for labour as well, despite the big lead with the middle aged tories still got a 2.5% lead overall. Suggests Tories don't need to make head way with the young, just close the gap with this group first.
The Tories need to take on board one notion: stop scaring the damned horses!
The level uncertainty --> fear amongst the core vote last week was real. People thought they would have to sell their house next week, thought the pension was being frozen. Have bold ideas that grasp the nettle of serious social problems for sure, but work out how the hell you sell it first, work out how you respond to your enemies' attack lines, show it will be worth the pain. None of that was in place.
They weren't good ideas. It's not easy to sell a turd, nor should it be the objective. The objective should be to produce something other than turd. This isn't a game.
Sorting out the social care mess that both parties have contributed to in recent years by inaction from fear of public reaction[*] is not a bad idea.
[*] Quite justified, in the end...
Sorting it out is a great idea. Random catastrophic estate taxes on families unlucky to have a demented member isn't much of a solution. In fact, it's pretty much the definition of not sorting it out: leaving everyone is exposed to their own catastrophic risks is what happens *without* government.
We have already agreed as a society not to do this for cancer. The Tory policy highlighted to unaware voters that we do it for dementia and, quite understandably, they balked.
I cannot see them repealing gay marriage or civil partnerships or increasing the age of consent for homosexual activity or any legal activity for that matter. I don't see the problem, people are getting worked into a frenzy about nothing.
Are you LGBT yourself? If not then you shouldn't presume on the behalf of others about how to feel about this deal.
I'm gay and have no problems with the deal. Indeed I'd expect if anything the liberal toryism to rub off onto the DUP. You need to calm down.
Seconded. I am sick and tired of people like TSE claiming to know how gay people feel about things like this when they have no idea whatsoever.
The only gay people upset are those on the left, who use their sexuality to go up a rung on the ladder of oppression. The rest of us are getting on with life.
Oh hun, oh hun.
I know a lot of gay people, I spent a lot of my adult life in The Village.
In a few weeks time, I am going to be best man at a same sex wedding, which isn't the first time I've had that honour.
Because I've spent a lot of time with gay people since the late 90s, I've seen first hand the homophobic abuse they've received and I've received because they thought I was gay too (I think it was the red shoes that did it).
Fortunately that has became rare as the country has become more tolerant.
They and I are worried all this hard work could be undone with the DUP wagging the Tory tail.
Less than 20 years ago, The Sun ran a front page asking if the country was run by a gay mafia, and a terrorist was targeting gay people in London.
So yeah, I know nothing about how the LGBTI people feel, and you can get fucked you fucking twat.
They'd better get a bloody move on. Ascot next week and she won't miss that for anything.
Not till the afternoon though. Queen's Speech at 9am?
After she's been up all nite studying form, David? Give the old girl a break.
Does the Queen actually have to deliver the Queen's Speech? I seem to remember Charles deputising for the D-Day 65th anniversary when it clashed with Ascot - couldn't he be given the speaking practice?
Yes she does. If she cannot be present in person - like every Queen's Speech which prorogues Parliament - then it is done by Royal Commission. Does Prince Charles still have a seat in the Lords? If he does then he could be one of the five Commissioners.
1. Not having to worry about their kids tuition fees.
2. Not letting Theresa The House Stealer steal their inheritances.
It is kind of worrying for labour as well, despite the big lead with the middle aged tories still got a 2.5% lead overall. Suggests Tories don't need to make head way with the young, just close the gap with this group first.
The Tories need to take on board one notion: stop scaring the damned horses!
The level uncertainty --> fear amongst the core vote last week was real. People thought they would have to sell their house next week, thought the pension was being frozen. Have bold ideas that grasp the nettle of serious social problems for sure, but work out how the hell you sell it first, work out how you respond to your enemies' attack lines, show it will be worth the pain. None of that was in place.
They weren't good ideas. It's not easy to sell a turd, nor should it be the objective. The objective should be to produce something other than turd. This isn't a game.
Sorting out the social care mess that both parties have contributed to in recent years by inaction from fear of public reaction[*] is not a bad idea.
[*] Quite justified, in the end...
Sorting it out is a great idea. Random catastrophic estate taxes on families unlucky to have a demented member isn't much of a solution. In fact, it's pretty much the definition of not sorting it out: leaving everyone is exposed to their own catastrophic risks is what happens *without* government.
We have already agreed as a society not to do this for cancer. The Tory policy highlighted to unaware voters that we do it for dementia and, quite understandably, they balked.
I do hope that the Left are now going to be arguing just as forcefully against all forms of inheritance and death taxes. After all they are almost identical in their aim to the social care proposals except they take from everyone irrespective of dementia and give back to no one.
I also assume that if and when they get into power they will immediately scrap the current arrangement whereby people are exposed to "catastrophic estate taxes on families unlucky to have a demented member" with the added pain that they only get to keep £23K rather than £100K of the estate. A policy devised by Labour.
Following on from the principles of the Conservative election campaign the Jacobite News Network can exclusively reveal that the goat for the Queen's Speech velum will be found from a ritually slaughtered billy goat and undertaken by an ISIS cleric and to be shown live on CBeebies
In accordance with the royal status of the event Prince George and Princess Charlotte will be "blooded". and then taken to the House of Commons public gallery to watch the debate on the Fox Hunting and Bear Baiting Bill. Buckingham Palace has announced however that the children will be in bed by 7:30pm and so will miss the following debate on the Zoo (Slaughter of Elephants) Ivory Bill.
Comments
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/may/23/fifty-years-gay-liberation-uk-barely-four-1967-act
I see the same dynamic right now, post same-sex marriage.
it were done quickly. Better for the Tories to get out on their own terms and bring down Labour at a time of their choosing than vice versa.
On Brexit, Starmer's a capable guy and most Tories could sign up to Corbyn's view of Brexit, at least as far as a constitutional settlement goes. One'd hope it wouldn't be too hard to pick up the thread later on.
In the end all sorts of MP's believe all sorts of things but Parliament won't be revisiting any of these subjects.... They'll have more than enough to be getting on with.
http://www.italy24.ilsole24ore.com/art/business-and-economy/2017-01-13/youth-unemployment-italy-double-the-european-average--190938.php?uuid=ADucuWYC
We have been duped DUPed
If it is then, Commons has to meet, and pass no confidence iirc.
Then wait 14 days.
Then start the usual GE process.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-AUBlW5EWnI
I think.
https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/874292223868899328
https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/874292348393574400
I think the Liberal Party still exists down in Cornwall somewhere (anti EU, pro free market competition, pro free trade) but not in parliament.
Who'd have guessed?
Far easier to change leader in opposition (unlike in 1923, when Baldwin similarly screwed up, though Baldwin had much more understanding of the human side of politics).
Can we not have a national government whilst the Brexit negotiations are being done, I'm serious - it is bigger than any one party.
Starmer and Davis working together...
Parliament meets tomorrow (13th). The first day or two is swearing in, oaths and Speaker stuff.
Monday (next week) is supposed to be the QS.
1) The Conservatives have spent years saying how dangerous and incompetent Jeremy Corbyn is. Voluntarily to let him into Number 10 would baffle those who agreed with that.
2) You can back Labour at evens on Betfair for most seats at the next election. Looks good value to me.
Can't see it myself...
The Tories need to take on board one notion: stop scaring the damned horses!
The level uncertainty --> fear amongst the core vote last week was real. People thought they would have to sell their house next week, thought the pension was being frozen. Have bold ideas that grasp the nettle of serious social problems for sure, but work out how the hell you sell it first, work out how you respond to your enemies' attack lines, show it will be worth the pain. None of that was in place.
Pottery Barn rules, I'm afraid.
The only gay people upset are those on the left, who use their sexuality to go up a rung on the ladder of oppression. The rest of us are getting on with life.
Edit. He was Tory.
http://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/there-are-two-crucial-things-we-need-to-make-this-a-sane-brexit-a3562946.html
If Corbyn will not play ball - and I agree with others that he is unlikely to - then other Labour MPs are just going to have to bite the bullet and rebel. The vast majority are not going to want to see their constituents impoverished on the back of Tory incompetence.
May was always boring and unblessed with original thoughts; no change there before the calling of the GE or now after it.
Regardless of her personality failings, the GE should nevertheless have been a cake-walk. But that silly manifesto gave her natural supporters a collective black eye and in turn gave the media - who hitherto had been lamenting a ponderously boring campaign - something to get their teeth into.
That all transpired to give Corbyn some much-needed momentum just as that clever strategy by Watson and co to rally wavering voters into preventing a BIG Tory majority was starting to work.
This was one big Downing Street fuck up. Not some magic trick by Corbyn, or some reaction to Brexit, or anything else...
[*] Quite justified, in the end...
I know a lot of gay people, I spent a lot of my adult life in The Village.
In a few weeks time, I am going to be best man at a same sex wedding, which isn't the first time I've had that honour.
Because I've spent a lot of time with gay people since the late 90s, I've seen first hand the homophobic abuse they've received and I've received because they thought I was gay too (I think it was the red shoes that did it).
Fortunately that has became rare as the country has become more tolerant.
They and I are worried all this hard work could be undone with the DUP wagging the Tory tail.
Less than 20 years ago, The Sun ran a front page asking if the country was run by a gay mafia, and a terrorist was targeting gay people in London.
So yeah, I know nothing about how the LGBTI people feel, and you can get fucked you fucking twat.
(I must admit, I also love participating in a forum where I can write a number and a one word question and so many people know what I mean).
2. Much more likely if Lab in oppn at the next election than if they've been in govt for 6-12 months.
NEW THREAD
We have already agreed as a society not to do this for cancer. The Tory policy highlighted to unaware voters that we do it for dementia and, quite understandably, they balked.
I also assume that if and when they get into power they will immediately scrap the current arrangement whereby people are exposed to "catastrophic estate taxes on families unlucky to have a demented member" with the added pain that they only get to keep £23K rather than £100K of the estate. A policy devised by Labour.
Or are you all just fucking hypocrites?
In accordance with the royal status of the event Prince George and Princess Charlotte will be "blooded". and then taken to the House of Commons public gallery to watch the debate on the Fox Hunting and Bear Baiting Bill. Buckingham Palace has announced however that the children will be in bed by 7:30pm and so will miss the following debate on the Zoo (Slaughter of Elephants) Ivory Bill.
Developing story ....