1 week and 34 minutes ago, the Exit Poll came out. The world was no longer the same place.
How many people voted for Corbyn thinking he had no chance of winning? Conversely, how many soft Tories decided not to support May because they didn't want her to win an enormous majority? It could be very different if Corbyn is a serious option for office.
How come there's been a further bounce for Labour in the polls since the election, even after it became clear he was a serious contender for office, then?
Do I use my 3 quid vote for Kendall, who I'd quite like to see make a fist of it and do a good job of holding the govt to account - or Corbyn, who makes Ed Miliband look like Margaret Thatcher..?
Also, from a betting perspective, what chance there's now an organised campaign from rightwingers or UKIP to get Corbyn elected?
You could always vote for Corybn as first prefs,a nd Kendell second.
I think there's a pretty broad consensus among members that Jeremy isn't really going to be the leader, but that it would have been wrong to exclude the left from a voice on the ballot.
Agree with that Nick, but have they thought through what might happen given that the ballot is effectively open to the public - including those who may not have the best wishes of the Labour party in mind?
Are you suggesting that I don't have the best wishes of the Labour Party in mind? Withdraw that, Sir! At once!
Among others.
I recall reading several other similar posts from PB rightwingers around that time but cba spending more than 5 mins searching.
There were lots of Tories who thought it would be a great wheeze to manipulate the opposition's leadership election - I wonder if they are feeling quite so smug now
If May (the PM) goes very soon then things should stabilise enough for this parliament to run through until next May (the month). I honestly think that's the very earliest that the British people will tolerate another GE.
If - heaven forbid - the Tories are to govern for another term, it can only be in 2022. Labour will win easily an early election. I can see May lurching from disaster to disaster like Brown. There are the triple stenches of incompetence, corruption, and malignity surrounding the current Tory party, which will take some time to subside.
Corruption?
Don't argue. We need a few more lefties on the site so please don't challenge them during their full on CiF rants. Poor old @Big_john_Owls has had to carry the torch virtually single-handed to date.
1 week and 34 minutes ago, the Exit Poll came out. The world was no longer the same place.
How many people voted for Corbyn thinking he had no chance of winning? Conversely, how many soft Tories decided not to support May because they didn't want her to win an enormous majority? It could be very different if Corbyn is a serious option for office.
Indeed.
Plus a Corbyn who was expected to be a possible PM would have his policies and associates checked with far greater rigour.
Conversely, how many people voted for TMay because she was the only game in town? The other option being a coalition with Corbyn in the SNP's pocket, and so on?
Now that's proven demonstrably false and Corbyn may be the one with the best chance of a majority next time round, how many will go Labour this time round?
TMay's been proven the weak and wobbly one, the one who led us into a coalition of chaos. Labour's pitch next time round will simply be - why not give us a try?
1 week and 34 minutes ago, the Exit Poll came out. The world was no longer the same place.
How many people voted for Corbyn thinking he had no chance of winning? Conversely, how many soft Tories decided not to support May because they didn't want her to win an enormous majority? It could be very different if Corbyn is a serious option for office.
Indeed.
Plus a Corbyn who was expected to be a possible PM would have his policies and associates checked with far greater rigour.
You're right. If the media had made the effort to mention his terrorist connections this time he'd never have got so far. I can't believe it was all kept so quiet.
1 week and 34 minutes ago, the Exit Poll came out. The world was no longer the same place.
How many people voted for Corbyn thinking he had no chance of winning? Conversely, how many soft Tories decided not to support May because they didn't want her to win an enormous majority? It could be very different if Corbyn is a serious option for office.
How many voted for May in the belief she would be best PM? After today, there will be fewer. Also, there are that small, but important group who like to associate with the winner. Political "glory hunters". No, I can't comprehend that either, but they do exist!
May won't fight another election as Tory leader. I think everyone agrees on that. But she could be in Downing Street for another 3 or 4 years.
I don't think she can last to the autumn conference.
As long times in politics go, the last 168 hours must have been among the longest. Is there anyone who really believes the Tories can do another 259 of these?
One thing that puzzles me is the sense of necessity around Brexit. To a non-believer it looks like the UKIP party is over. The Tories don't have to shore up that flank now, surely? UKIP has no meaningful existence and provided the Tories are no more pro-European than Labour the issue has lost its electoral potency. It's too early for a party to say they won't do it, but by now a more measured, long-term approach which might include revocation of article 50 until we have a strong and stable government seems completely viable.
UKIP - As someone once said, they haven't gone away you know...
Exactly. If there was any attempt to actually renege on leaving the EU, UKIP, in one form or another would be back all the stronger. All those people who maybe reluctantly voted Leave, unsure whether they were doing the right thing, would be back as fervent Leavers.
You don't give people a vote and they ignore it because you think you know better.
Are you sure enough people care? I'm not saying you're wrong, but is there any evidence either way? The referendum came off the back of over a decade of carefully nurtured grievance, fanned by Cameron to win in 2015. For obvious reasons, the normal technique of blaming all failings of British government on the EU stopped last June. The campaign became "we must have Brexit, and only I can do it well" rather than "the EU is ruining our country". How easy will it be to rev the electorate up to to the point of once again believing that EU exit is more important than the domestic issues that we are dealing with?
The poll posted up earlier today had 70% saying Brexit should go ahead. That is not to agree with May's vision of Brexit nor the way she has insisted on a hard version but in the end that is a lot of people to convince that politicians should abandon a vote that a large majority think should be honoured.
1 week and 34 minutes ago, the Exit Poll came out. The world was no longer the same place.
How many people voted for Corbyn thinking he had no chance of winning? Conversely, how many soft Tories decided not to support May because they didn't want her to win an enormous majority? It could be very different if Corbyn is a serious option for office.
How many voted for May in the belief she would be best PM? After today, there will be fewer. Also, there are that small, but important group who like to associate with the winner. Political "glory hunters". No, I can't comprehend that either, but they do exist!
May won't fight another election as Tory leader. I think everyone agrees on that. But she could be in Downing Street for another 3 or 4 years.
Her career is dead, so getting her to carry on is the sensible option for now. Force the Labour front bench back to what they were calling work. Conversely Labour need to keep up the pressure to stop their support from ebbing away as the day to day work of politics begins again.
And in the background Davidson is building her stock up north to make a grab before the next election, and someone will be being groomed by Corbyn to replace him.
1 week and 34 minutes ago, the Exit Poll came out. The world was no longer the same place.
How many people voted for Corbyn thinking he had no chance of winning? Conversely, how many soft Tories decided not to support May because they didn't want her to win an enormous majority? It could be very different if Corbyn is a serious option for office.
How come there's been a further bounce for Labour in the polls since the election, even after it became clear he was a serious contender for office, then?
Because there isn't an election this week.
Firstly, **ANECDOTE ALERT**, but from my experience there is generally an assumption that there's going to be another election very soon.
But secondly, it's still not clear to me why if people were only voting Corbyn because they thought he would never be PM, why they would now be saying they're prepared to vote Labour in even greater numbers even now that it's clear he can become PM.
1 week and 34 minutes ago, the Exit Poll came out. The world was no longer the same place.
How many people voted for Corbyn thinking he had no chance of winning? Conversely, how many soft Tories decided not to support May because they didn't want her to win an enormous majority? It could be very different if Corbyn is a serious option for office.
Indeed.
Plus a Corbyn who was expected to be a possible PM would have his policies and associates checked with far greater rigour.
You're right. If the media had made the effort to mention his terrorist connections this time he'd never have got so far. I can't believe it was all kept so quiet.
Er... you mean the media forgot to mention it, like this?:
1 week and 34 minutes ago, the Exit Poll came out. The world was no longer the same place.
How many people voted for Corbyn thinking he had no chance of winning? Conversely, how many soft Tories decided not to support May because they didn't want her to win an enormous majority? It could be very different if Corbyn is a serious option for office.
Indeed.
Plus a Corbyn who was expected to be a possible PM would have his policies and associates checked with far greater rigour.
Maybe the Daily Mail can devote 30 pages on the evil Jeremy Corbyn instead of the mere 18 they did on election day. That's the trouble of trying to portray every Labour leader as Stalin reborn, eventually people stop listening.
1 week and 34 minutes ago, the Exit Poll came out. The world was no longer the same place.
How many people voted for Corbyn thinking he had no chance of winning? Conversely, how many soft Tories decided not to support May because they didn't want her to win an enormous majority? It could be very different if Corbyn is a serious option for office.
How come there's been a further bounce for Labour in the polls since the election, even after it became clear he was a serious contender for office, then?
Because people are reacting to May's misjudgment over the election. By definition, that wasn't apparent until the results were known. If you go into an election expecting to increase your majority and you end up losing it you're inevitably going to look like a fool and therefore lose even more support afterwards. It's irrelevant because May won't face the voters again, except in her own constituency.
So Corbyn's successful campaign has nothing to do with it. It's all about the voters punishing May for insufficiently many of them voting for her. Err, right.
1 week and 34 minutes ago, the Exit Poll came out. The world was no longer the same place.
How many people voted for Corbyn thinking he had no chance of winning? Conversely, how many soft Tories decided not to support May because they didn't want her to win an enormous majority? It could be very different if Corbyn is a serious option for office.
How many voted for May in the belief she would be best PM? After today, there will be fewer. Also, there are that small, but important group who like to associate with the winner. Political "glory hunters". No, I can't comprehend that either, but they do exist!
May won't fight another election as Tory leader. I think everyone agrees on that. But she could be in Downing Street for another 3 or 4 years.
Agreed. There seems to be a delusion growing that Corbyn's result was a fluke. He is a good campaigner. You can continue to believe hundreds of thousands voted for him because he couldn't win. The evidence for this is scanty, at best.
1 week and 34 minutes ago, the Exit Poll came out. The world was no longer the same place.
How many people voted for Corbyn thinking he had no chance of winning? Conversely, how many soft Tories decided not to support May because they didn't want her to win an enormous majority? It could be very different if Corbyn is a serious option for office.
Indeed.
Plus a Corbyn who was expected to be a possible PM would have his policies and associates checked with far greater rigour.
Maybe the Daily Mail can devote 30 pages on the evil Jeremy Corbyn instead of the mere 18 they did on election day. That's the trouble of trying to portray every Labour leader as Stalin reborn, eventually people stop listening.
UKIP - As someone once said, they haven't gone away you know...
Exactly. If there was any attempt to actually renege on leaving the EU, UKIP, in one form or another would be back all the stronger. All those people who maybe reluctantly voted Leave, unsure whether they were doing the right thing, would be back as fervent Leavers.
You don't give people a vote and they ignore it because you think you know better.
Are you sure enough people care? I'm not saying you're wrong, but is there any evidence either way? The referendum came off the back of over a decade of carefully nurtured grievance, fanned by Cameron to win in 2015. For obvious reasons, the normal technique of blaming all failings of British government on the EU stopped last June. The campaign became "we must have Brexit, and only I can do it well" rather than "the EU is ruining our country". How easy will it be to rev the electorate up to to the point of once again believing that EU exit is more important than the domestic issues that we are dealing with?
The poll posted up earlier today had 70% saying Brexit should go ahead. That is not to agree with May's vision of Brexit nor the way she has insisted on a hard version but in the end that is a lot of people to convince that politicians should abandon a vote that a large majority think should be honoured.
That's definitely one interpretation - and it's a valid one.
Two other interpretations are - we had the vote and I respect it, even though I despise it. But... were the option of a second referundm to come up again, I would vigorously fight to remain in the EU. Unlikely but possible.
The other - the vast majority of people want a have-your-cake-and-eat-it Brexit. One where we get to cherry pick the bits of the EU we like while discarding the others on the way out. We would be the English person on mainland Europe pointing at the bits on the menu we want and asking for them in a very loud voice. I'm rather worried that this is what the '70%' are in favour of.
1 week and 34 minutes ago, the Exit Poll came out. The world was no longer the same place.
How many people voted for Corbyn thinking he had no chance of winning? Conversely, how many soft Tories decided not to support May because they didn't want her to win an enormous majority? It could be very different if Corbyn is a serious option for office.
Indeed.
Plus a Corbyn who was expected to be a possible PM would have his policies and associates checked with far greater rigour.
You're right. If the media had made the effort to mention his terrorist connections this time he'd never have got so far. I can't believe it was all kept so quiet.
1 week and 34 minutes ago, the Exit Poll came out. The world was no longer the same place.
How many people voted for Corbyn thinking he had no chance of winning? Conversely, how many soft Tories decided not to support May because they didn't want her to win an enormous majority? It could be very different if Corbyn is a serious option for office.
Indeed.
Plus a Corbyn who was expected to be a possible PM would have his policies and associates checked with far greater rigour.
Conversely, how many people voted for TMay because she was the only game in town? The other option being a coalition with Corbyn in the SNP's pocket, and so on?
Now that's proven demonstrably false and Corbyn may be the one with the best chance of a majority next time round, how many will go Labour this time round?
TMay's been proven the weak and wobbly one, the one who led us into a coalition of chaos. Labour's pitch next time round will simply be - why not give us a try?
And they may well win.
May won't be leading the Tories into another election campaign, so that bolt has been shot.
Corbyn's intoxicated with the attention at the moment, but he is the same person he has always been, and all of his very obvious failings still exist. Nothing will change that, no matter how many people he hugs.
1 week and 34 minutes ago, the Exit Poll came out. The world was no longer the same place.
How many people voted for Corbyn thinking he had no chance of winning? Conversely, how many soft Tories decided not to support May because they didn't want her to win an enormous majority? It could be very different if Corbyn is a serious option for office.
How come there's been a further bounce for Labour in the polls since the election, even after it became clear he was a serious contender for office, then?
Because people are reacting to May's misjudgment over the election. By definition, that wasn't apparent until the results were known. If you go into an election expecting to increase your majority and you end up losing it you're inevitably going to look like a fool and therefore lose even more support afterwards. It's irrelevant because May won't face the voters again, except in her own constituency.
So Corbyn's successful campaign has nothing to do with it. It's all about the voters punishing May for insufficiently many of them voting for her. Err, right.
I don't think I said that. Anyway, the next election will probably be Boris v Clive Lewis.
1 week and 34 minutes ago, the Exit Poll came out. The world was no longer the same place.
How many people voted for Corbyn thinking he had no chance of winning? Conversely, how many soft Tories decided not to support May because they didn't want her to win an enormous majority? It could be very different if Corbyn is a serious option for office.
Indeed.
Plus a Corbyn who was expected to be a possible PM would have his policies and associates checked with far greater rigour.
Maybe the Daily Mail can devote 30 pages on the evil Jeremy Corbyn instead of the mere 18 they did on election day. That's the trouble of trying to portray every Labour leader as Stalin reborn, eventually people stop listening.
Daily Mail and the Sun are now politically bust.
Newspapers are politically bust. This realisation caused Murdoch to storm out of his exit poll party. All that money wasted on obsolete mind-control technology.
That's definitely one interpretation - and it's a valid one.
Two other interpretations are - we had the vote and I respect it, even though I despise it. But... were the option of a second referundm to come up again, I would vigorously fight to remain in the EU. Unlikely but possible.
The other - the vast majority of people want a have-your-cake-and-eat-it Brexit. One where we get to cherry pick the bits of the EU we like while discarding the others on the way out. We would be the English person on mainland Europe pointing at the bits on the menu we want and asking for them in a very loud voice. I'm rather worried that this is what the '70%' are in favour of.
I have no idea. I have a clear aspiration for what I want Brexit to be like but I suspect mine is the minority view now - or at least is not one that will be articulated by politicians as they all seem to have jumped on the end to FoM bandwagon. So I am not going to sit here and try and second guess what most people want from Brexit. I have my own very basic hierarchy of good and bad with EFTA as the best case and staying in the EU as the worst. I would not necessarily welcome a hard Brexit but it would still be better than staying in. Everyone has their own nuances so I would never claim to speak for the majority on this. I am not sure there is a majority either way when it comes to the detail.
1 week and 34 minutes ago, the Exit Poll came out. The world was no longer the same place.
How many people voted for Corbyn thinking he had no chance of winning? Conversely, how many soft Tories decided not to support May because they didn't want her to win an enormous majority? It could be very different if Corbyn is a serious option for office.
How many voted for May in the belief she would be best PM? After today, there will be fewer. Also, there are that small, but important group who like to associate with the winner. Political "glory hunters". No, I can't comprehend that either, but they do exist!
May won't fight another election as Tory leader. I think everyone agrees on that. But she could be in Downing Street for another 3 or 4 years.
Her career is dead, so getting her to carry on is the sensible option for now. Force the Labour front bench back to what they were calling work. Conversely Labour need to keep up the pressure to stop their support from ebbing away as the day to day work of politics begins again.
And in the background Davidson is building her stock up north to make a grab before the next election, and someone will be being groomed by Corbyn to replace him.
I thought Davidson might have fought one of the Edinburgh seats on 8th June, and she probably would have won if she'd done so, and then been in position to take over from May.
If May (the PM) goes very soon then things should stabilise enough for this parliament to run through until next May (the month). I honestly think that's the very earliest that the British people will tolerate another GE.
If - heaven forbid - the Tories are to govern for another term, it can only be in 2022. Labour will win easily an early election. I can see May lurching from disaster to disaster like Brown. There are the triple stenches of incompetence, corruption, and malignity surrounding the current Tory party, which will take some time to subside.
Corruption?
Don't argue. We need a few more lefties on the site so please don't challenge them during their full on CiF rants. Poor old @Big_john_Owls has had to carry the torch virtually single-handed to date.
By "full on CiF rants", I take it you mean views which don't accord with accepted PB wisdom?
Such as Labour floor of 25%? Labour below 100 seats? Corbyn will never win leadership? Corbyn will never win leadership (again)? We have a strong economy, all is well, Tory landslide nailed on? etc., etc.
1 week and 34 minutes ago, the Exit Poll came out. The world was no longer the same place.
How many people voted for Corbyn thinking he had no chance of winning? Conversely, how many soft Tories decided not to support May because they didn't want her to win an enormous majority? It could be very different if Corbyn is a serious option for office.
Indeed.
Plus a Corbyn who was expected to be a possible PM would have his policies and associates checked with far greater rigour.
You're right. If the media had made the effort to mention his terrorist connections this time he'd never have got so far. I can't believe it was all kept so quiet.
Er... you mean the media forgot to mention it, like this?:
Its the economic policies which were ignored with all the IRA stuff.
1 week and 34 minutes ago, the Exit Poll came out. The world was no longer the same place.
How many people voted for Corbyn thinking he had no chance of winning? Conversely, how many soft Tories decided not to support May because they didn't want her to win an enormous majority? It could be very different if Corbyn is a serious option for office.
Indeed.
Plus a Corbyn who was expected to be a possible PM would have his policies and associates checked with far greater rigour.
Conversely, how many people voted for TMay because she was the only game in town? The other option being a coalition with Corbyn in the SNP's pocket, and so on?
Now that's proven demonstrably false and Corbyn may be the one with the best chance of a majority next time round, how many will go Labour this time round?
TMay's been proven the weak and wobbly one, the one who led us into a coalition of chaos. Labour's pitch next time round will simply be - why not give us a try?
And they may well win.
May won't be leading the Tories into another election campaign, so that bolt has been shot.
Corbyn's intoxicated with the attention at the moment, but he is the same person he has always been, and all of his very obvious failings still exist. Nothing will change that, no matter how many people he hugs.
I would like to think that, but I certainly wouldn't bet on it.
The more I see, the more I feel that Corbyn has 'the common touch'. The more people see of him, the more they warm to him.
Look under the hood and he's a nasty terrorist-loving Stalinist. But how many people actually scratch beneath the surface?
Appearances matter. Corbyn looks like a decent, humble guy trying to sort out the country's problems, the Tories look like cartoon vampires plotting how to keep the wealthy and elite in control of the country.
To reiterate, I am not saying that is my view, but I am saying that is easily how the lens of the next election, which may come sooner rather than later, may be viewed.
1 week and 34 minutes ago, the Exit Poll came out. The world was no longer the same place.
How many people voted for Corbyn thinking he had no chance of winning? Conversely, how many soft Tories decided not to support May because they didn't want her to win an enormous majority? It could be very different if Corbyn is a serious option for office.
How come there's been a further bounce for Labour in the polls since the election, even after it became clear he was a serious contender for office, then?
Because people are reacting to May's misjudgment over the election. By definition, that wasn't apparent until the results were known. If you go into an election expecting to increase your majority and you end up losing it you're inevitably going to look like a fool and therefore lose even more support afterwards. It's irrelevant because May won't face the voters again, except in her own constituency.
So Corbyn's successful campaign has nothing to do with it. It's all about the voters punishing May for insufficiently many of them voting for her. Err, right.
I don't think I said that. Anyway, the next election will probably be Boris v Clive Lewis.
Where's the evidence that Boris would be more of a vote-winner than May?
I certainly don't think he would do as well as her in the North (generally viewed as another pea from the Cameron/Osborne pod up here), though to be fair it might be different in London where Boris does have some past election-winning form.
1 week and 34 minutes ago, the Exit Poll came out. The world was no longer the same place.
How many people voted for Corbyn thinking he had no chance of winning? Conversely, how many soft Tories decided not to support May because they didn't want her to win an enormous majority? It could be very different if Corbyn is a serious option for office.
How come there's been a further bounce for Labour in the polls since the election, even after it became clear he was a serious contender for office, then?
Because people are reacting to May's misjudgment over the election. By definition, that wasn't apparent until the results were known. If you go into an election expecting to increase your majority and you end up losing it you're inevitably going to look like a fool and therefore lose even more support afterwards. It's irrelevant because May won't face the voters again, except in her own constituency.
So Corbyn's successful campaign has nothing to do with it. It's all about the voters punishing May for insufficiently many of them voting for her. Err, right.
The evidence is clear regarding the polling figures, including YouGov and Survation figures. Pre Tory manifesto and post Tory manifesto figures could not be clearer. Yes, Corbyn appeared to have a successful campaign, but the real damage done to the Tories was the manifesto.
A decent manifesto would have seen the Tories home comfortably, no matter how good Corbyn performed on the stump.
1 week and 34 minutes ago, the Exit Poll came out. The world was no longer the same place.
How many people voted for Corbyn thinking he had no chance of winning? Conversely, how many soft Tories decided not to support May because they didn't want her to win an enormous majority? It could be very different if Corbyn is a serious option for office.
How come there's been a further bounce for Labour in the polls since the election, even after it became clear he was a serious contender for office, then?
Because people are reacting to May's misjudgment over the election. By definition, that wasn't apparent until the results were known. If you go into an election expecting to increase your majority and you end up losing it you're inevitably going to look like a fool and therefore lose even more support afterwards. It's irrelevant because May won't face the voters again, except in her own constituency.
So Corbyn's successful campaign has nothing to do with it. It's all about the voters punishing May for insufficiently many of them voting for her. Err, right.
To clarify, I was talking about the two polls since the election showing Labour in the lead. A lot of that is down to voters reacting to May's misjudgement in calling the election, I think. Corbyn's popularity is part of it as well.
God I'm on the Westway now. First of all Grenfell Tower stands out eerily dark on its own. Second of all there are dozens of similar blocks of flats all around.
This is one thing which doesn't make sense to me.
We're told that cladding was installed so the millionaires in the posh houses would have their view enhanced.
But they haven't installed cladding on every tower block in the area surely ?
I thought the principal reason for the cladding was to improve insulation, and for weatherproofing. It is quite common, and several blocks in Leicester have been reskinned this way.
Can't help feeling that we will find some global warming crap at the root of this. It was more important to reduce heat loss than to worry about whether we were creating a chimney.
1 week and 34 minutes ago, the Exit Poll came out. The world was no longer the same place.
How many people voted for Corbyn thinking he had no chance of winning? Conversely, how many soft Tories decided not to support May because they didn't want her to win an enormous majority? It could be very different if Corbyn is a serious option for office.
How come there's been a further bounce for Labour in the polls since the election, even after it became clear he was a serious contender for office, then?
Because people are reacting to May's misjudgment over the election. By definition, that wasn't apparent until the results were known. If you go into an election expecting to increase your majority and you end up losing it you're inevitably going to look like a fool and therefore lose even more support afterwards. It's irrelevant because May won't face the voters again, except in her own constituency.
So Corbyn's successful campaign has nothing to do with it. It's all about the voters punishing May for insufficiently many of them voting for her. Err, right.
I don't think I said that. Anyway, the next election will probably be Boris v Clive Lewis.
Where's the evidence that Boris would be more of a vote-winner than May?
I certainly don't think he would do as well as her in the North (generally viewed as another pea from the Cameron/Osborne pod up here), though to be fair it might be different in London where Boris does have some past election-winning form.
The northern towns that voted Leave didn't seem to find him that repellent
If May (the PM) goes very soon then things should stabilise enough for this parliament to run through until next May (the month). I honestly think that's the very earliest that the British people will tolerate another GE.
If - heaven forbid - the Tories are to govern for another term, it can only be in 2022. Labour will win easily an early election. I can see May lurching from disaster to disaster like Brown. There are the triple stenches of incompetence, corruption, and malignity surrounding the current Tory party, which will take some time to subside.
Corruption?
Don't argue. We need a few more lefties on the site so please don't challenge them during their full on CiF rants. Poor old @Big_john_Owls has had to carry the torch virtually single-handed to date.
By "full on CiF rants", I take it you mean views which don't accord with accepted PB wisdom?
Such as Labour floor of 25%? Labour below 100 seats? Corbyn will never win leadership? Corbyn will never win leadership (again)? We have a strong economy, all is well, Tory landslide nailed on? etc., etc.
1 week and 34 minutes ago, the Exit Poll came out. The world was no longer the same place.
How many people voted for Corbyn thinking he had no chance of winning? Conversely, how many soft Tories decided not to support May because they didn't want her to win an enormous majority? It could be very different if Corbyn is a serious option for office.
How come there's been a further bounce for Labour in the polls since the election, even after it became clear he was a serious contender for office, then?
Because people are reacting to May's misjudgment over the election. By definition, that wasn't apparent until the results were known. If you go into an election expecting to increase your majority and you end up losing it you're inevitably going to look like a fool and therefore lose even more support afterwards. It's irrelevant because May won't face the voters again, except in her own constituency.
So Corbyn's successful campaign has nothing to do with it. It's all about the voters punishing May for insufficiently many of them voting for her. Err, right.
I don't think I said that. Anyway, the next election will probably be Boris v Clive Lewis.
Where's the evidence that Boris would be more of a vote-winner than May?
I certainly don't think he would do as well as her in the North (generally viewed as another pea from the Cameron/Osborne pod up here), though to be fair it might be different in London where Boris does have some past election-winning form.
Two Mayoralty successes in a largely Labour city for starters??
1 week and 34 minutes ago, the Exit Poll came out. The world was no longer the same place.
How many people voted for Corbyn thinking he had no chance of winning? Conversely, how many soft Tories decided not to support May because they didn't want her to win an enormous majority? It could be very different if Corbyn is a serious option for office.
Indeed.
Plus a Corbyn who was expected to be a possible PM would have his policies and associates checked with far greater rigour.
You're right. If the media had made the effort to mention his terrorist connections this time he'd never have got so far. I can't believe it was all kept so quiet.
Er... you mean the media forgot to mention it, like this?:
1 week and 34 minutes ago, the Exit Poll came out. The world was no longer the same place.
How many people voted for Corbyn thinking he had no chance of winning? Conversely, how many soft Tories decided not to support May because they didn't want her to win an enormous majority? It could be very different if Corbyn is a serious option for office.
How come there's been a further bounce for Labour in the polls since the election, even after it became clear he was a serious contender for office, then?
Because there isn't an election this week.
Firstly, **ANECDOTE ALERT**, but from my experience there is generally an assumption that there's going to be another election very soon.
But secondly, it's still not clear to me why if people were only voting Corbyn because they thought he would never be PM, why they would now be saying they're prepared to vote Labour in even greater numbers even now that it's clear he can become PM.
On the first point, that seems to be true, in my experience. I was last night and pointed out that CON have a (tiny) majority in GB assuming the two NI parties stay out of matters (which may yet be the case), so what's the mechanism for an election? Brushed away, everyone said there would be one. They might be right. Who knows?
Second point, yes, that's what I am struggling with too. My sense is the Corbyn surge is real. What I don't know is how sustainable it is.
1 week and 34 minutes ago, the Exit Poll came out. The world was no longer the same place.
How many people voted for Corbyn thinking he had no chance of winning? Conversely, how many soft Tories decided not to support May because they didn't want her to win an enormous majority? It could be very different if Corbyn is a serious option for office.
How come there's been a further bounce for Labour in the polls since the election, even after it became clear he was a serious contender for office, then?
Because people are reacting to May's misjudgment over the election. By definition, that wasn't apparent until the results were known. If you go into an election expecting to increase your majority and you end up losing it you're inevitably going to look like a fool and therefore lose even more support afterwards. It's irrelevant because May won't face the voters again, except in her own constituency.
So Corbyn's successful campaign has nothing to do with it. It's all about the voters punishing May for insufficiently many of them voting for her. Err, right.
I don't think I said that. Anyway, the next election will probably be Boris v Clive Lewis.
Where's the evidence that Boris would be more of a vote-winner than May?
I certainly don't think he would do as well as her in the North (generally viewed as another pea from the Cameron/Osborne pod up here), though to be fair it might be different in London where Boris does have some past election-winning form.
The northern towns that voted Leave didn't seem to find him that repellent
That's like saying Islington and Hackney must have secretly loved Cameron just because they voted Remain!!
Boris is seen as a muppet by most of the people I know, whether they voted Leave or Remain.
That's definitely one interpretation - and it's a valid one.
Two other interpretations are - we had the vote and I respect it, even though I despise it. But... were the option of a second referundm to come up again, I would vigorously fight to remain in the EU. Unlikely but possible.
The other - the vast majority of people want a have-your-cake-and-eat-it Brexit. One where we get to cherry pick the bits of the EU we like while discarding the others on the way out. We would be the English person on mainland Europe pointing at the bits on the menu we want and asking for them in a very loud voice. I'm rather worried that this is what the '70%' are in favour of.
I have no idea. I have a clear aspiration for what I want Brexit to be like but I suspect mine is the minority view now - or at least is not one that will be articulated by politicians as they all seem to have jumped on the end to FoM bandwagon. So I am not going to sit here and try and second guess what most people want from Brexit. I have my own very basic hierarchy of good and bad with EFTA as the best case and staying in the EU as the worst. I would not necessarily welcome a hard Brexit but it would still be better than staying in. Everyone has their own nuances so I would never claim to speak for the majority on this. I am not sure there is a majority either way when it comes to the detail.
Agree.
We are sitting here reading tea leaves, when all that can be said with certainty is that 4% more people want to leave the EU than want to remain.
That to me suggests a compromise is in order, which would probably look like EEA/EFTA with the option of either rejoining as a full member or moving further apart in a decade or so.
It's the political equivalent of saying "I'm into you, I'm just not *that* into you".
I can't see the EU being happy with that compromise, though .The reason they didn't offer further compromises or a better 'deal' than Cameron's was that if the UK gets it, a lot of other countries would want it. And that goes against the ever closer union they cherish as a religion.
Note the reported extra cost of specifying fire resistant panels for the building - a few thousand pounds.
How come we have different safety standards to Germany?
Sovereignty.
Been on the Medicinals?
It's obviously not because of Brexit, do you know why?
Housing standards vary around the world. Our government sets ours and always has. Sovereignty.
The safety aspect of the panels was apparently not considered by the planning committee. They were only concerned with the appearance of the panels.
From the planning decision on application PP/12/04097 /Q18:
"3. Detailed drawings or samples of materials as appropriate, in respect of the following, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the relevant part of the work is begun and the works shall not be carried out other than in accordance with the details so approved and shall thereafter be so maintained: · Materials to be used on the external faces of the building(s); Reason – To accord with the development plan by ensuring that the character and appearance of the area are preserved and living conditions of those living near the development suitably protected."
1 week and 34 minutes ago, the Exit Poll came out. The world was no longer the same place.
How many people voted for Corbyn thinking he had no chance of winning? Conversely, how many soft Tories decided not to support May because they didn't want her to win an enormous majority? It could be very different if Corbyn is a serious option for office.
Indeed.
Plus a Corbyn who was expected to be a possible PM would have his policies and associates checked with far greater rigour.
Conversely, how many people voted for TMay because she was the only game in town? The other option being a coalition with Corbyn in the SNP's pocket, and so on?
Now that's proven demonstrably false and Corbyn may be the one with the best chance of a majority next time round, how many will go Labour this time round?
TMay's been proven the weak and wobbly one, the one who led us into a coalition of chaos. Labour's pitch next time round will simply be - why not give us a try?
And they may well win.
May won't be leading the Tories into another election campaign, so that bolt has been shot.
Corbyn's intoxicated with the attention at the moment, but he is the same person he has always been, and all of his very obvious failings still exist. Nothing will change that, no matter how many people he hugs.
I would like to think that, but I certainly wouldn't bet on it.
The more I see, the more I feel that Corbyn has 'the common touch'. The more people see of him, the more they warm to him.
Look under the hood and he's a nasty terrorist-loving Stalinist. But how many people actually scratch beneath the surface?
Appearances matter. Corbyn looks like a decent, humble guy trying to sort out the country's problems, the Tories look like cartoon vampires plotting how to keep the wealthy and elite in control of the country.
To reiterate, I am not saying that is my view, but I am saying that is easily how the lens of the next election, which may come sooner rather than later, may be viewed.
Corbyn = High Sparrow...
The growing narrative of the Grenfell inferno is London in microcosm. In one of the wealthiest boroughs in the wealthiest city the have-nots and the have-yachts live side by side.
Reminds me a bit of the brilliant decision of this Canadian female scientist to ban thalidomide in the United States in 1962 while European governments continued to allow it to be prescribed.
1 week and 34 minutes ago, the Exit Poll came out. The world was no longer the same place.
How many people voted for Corbyn thinking he had no chance of winning? Conversely, how many soft Tories decided not to support May because they didn't want her to win an enormous majority? It could be very different if Corbyn is a serious option for office.
How come there's been a further bounce for Labour in the polls since the election, even after it became clear he was a serious contender for office, then?
Because people are reacting to May's misjudgment over the election. By definition, that wasn't apparent until the results were known. If you go into an election expecting to increase your majority and you end up losing it you're inevitably going to look like a fool and therefore lose even more support afterwards. It's irrelevant because May won't face the voters again, except in her own constituency.
So Corbyn's successful campaign has nothing to do with it. It's all about the voters punishing May for insufficiently many of them voting for her. Err, right.
I don't think I said that. Anyway, the next election will probably be Boris v Clive Lewis.
Where's the evidence that Boris would be more of a vote-winner than May?
I certainly don't think he would do as well as her in the North (generally viewed as another pea from the Cameron/Osborne pod up here), though to be fair it might be different in London where Boris does have some past election-winning form.
The northern towns that voted Leave didn't seem to find him that repellent
That's like saying Islington and Hackney must have secretly loved Cameron just because they voted Remain!!
Boris is seen as a muppet by most of the people I know, whether they voted Leave or Remain.
Not really, it's like saying they weren't so repelled by him that they wouldn't vote for him
1 week and 34 minutes ago, the Exit Poll came out. The world was no longer the same place.
How many people voted for Corbyn thinking he had no chance of winning? Conversely, how many soft Tories decided not to support May because they didn't want her to win an enormous majority? It could be very different if Corbyn is a serious option for office.
How come there's been a further bounce for Labour in the polls since the election, even after it became clear he was a serious contender for office, then?
Because people are reacting to May's misjudgment over the election. By definition, that wasn't apparent until the results were known. If you go into an election expecting to increase your majority and you end up losing it you're inevitably going to look like a fool and therefore lose even more support afterwards. It's irrelevant because May won't face the voters again, except in her own constituency.
So Corbyn's successful campaign has nothing to do with it. It's all about the voters punishing May for insufficiently many of them voting for her. Err, right.
I don't think I said that. Anyway, the next election will probably be Boris v Clive Lewis.
Where's the evidence that Boris would be more of a vote-winner than May?
I certainly don't think he would do as well as her in the North (generally viewed as another pea from the Cameron/Osborne pod up here), though to be fair it might be different in London where Boris does have some past election-winning form.
That's the problem for the Tories. They need a PM candidate who could hold Mansfield and Putney at the same time. Difficult.
As long times in politics go, the last 168 hours must have been among the longest. Is there anyone who really believes the Tories can do another 259 of these?
One thing that puzzles me is the sense of necessity around Brexit. To a non-believer it looks like the UKIP party is over. The Tories don't have to shore up that flank now, surely? UKIP has no meaningful existence and provided the Tories are no more pro-European than Labour the issue has lost its electoral potency. It's too early for a party to say they won't do it, but by now a more measured, long-term approach which might include revocation of article 50 until we have a strong and stable government seems completely viable.
UKIP - As someone once said, they haven't gone away you know...
Exactly. If there was any attempt to actually renege on leaving the EU, UKIP, in one form or another would be back all the stronger. All those people who maybe reluctantly voted Leave, unsure whether they were doing the right thing, would be back as fervent Leavers.
You don't give people a vote and they ignore it because you think you know better.
Are you sure enough people care? I'm not saying you're wrong, but is there any evidence either way? The referendum came off the back of over a decade of carefully nurtured grievance, fanned by Cameron to win in 2015. For obvious reasons, the normal technique of blaming all failings of British government on the EU stopped last June. The campaign became "we must have Brexit, and only I can do it well" rather than "the EU is ruining our country". How easy will it be to rev the electorate up to to the point of once again believing that EU exit is more important than the domestic issues that we are dealing with?
The poll posted up earlier today had 70% saying Brexit should go ahead. That is not to agree with May's vision of Brexit nor the way she has insisted on a hard version but in the end that is a lot of people to convince that politicians should abandon a vote that a large majority think should be honoured.
70% think Brexit needs to go ahead but slightly more than half* now think Brexit is a mistake. So you have that interesting 20%* who think something needs to be done, but any particular course of action will make things worse.
Reminds me a bit of the brilliant decision of this Canadian female scientist to ban thalidomide in the United States in 1962 while European governments continued to allow it to be prescribed.
That's definitely one interpretation - and it's a valid one.
Two other interpretations are - we had the vote and I respect it, even though I despise it. But... were the option of a second referundm to come up again, I would vigorously fight to remain in the EU. Unlikely but possible.
The other - the vast majority of people want a have-your-cake-and-eat-it Brexit. One where we get to cherry pick the bits of the EU we like while discarding the others on the way out. We would be the English person on mainland Europe pointing at the bits on the menu we want and asking for them in a very loud voice. I'm rather worried that this is what the '70%' are in favour of.
I have no idea. I have a clear aspiration for what I want Brexit to be like but I suspect mine is the minority view now - or at least is not one that will be articulated by politicians as they all seem to have jumped on the end to FoM bandwagon. So I am not going to sit here and try and second guess what most people want from Brexit. I have my own very basic hierarchy of good and bad with EFTA as the best case and staying in the EU as the worst. I would not necessarily welcome a hard Brexit but it would still be better than staying in. Everyone has their own nuances so I would never claim to speak for the majority on this. I am not sure there is a majority either way when it comes to the detail.
I think that's the point. Say 70pc want tax cuts - but 35pc want them funded by lower spending and 35pc want higher taxes for other people. It's a recipe for stasis. There needs to be a majority for a particular type of Brexit and given that, at the very least, the 52pc in favour included "economically literate constitutional sovereignty Brexit" and "1950s a bit xenophobic ban the immigrants and fuck the economic consequences Brexit" (two completely incompatible positions) it seems mathematically improbable that there has been a majority for any specific Brexit. So it's reasonable to conclude that 70pc poll will subside quickly when offered a menu of real world options.
Note the reported extra cost of specifying fire resistant panels for the building - a few thousand pounds.
How come we have different safety standards to Germany?
Sovereignty.
Been on the Medicinals?
It's obviously not because of Brexit, do you know why?
Housing standards vary around the world. Our government sets ours and always has. Sovereignty.
Oh the partisan point scoring pricks are out in full force #blameculture
Point scoring and blame culture? A hundred-odd people were cremated alive in a state-run tower block in a supposedly first-world country two days ago. If that's not a political matter, I don't know what is.
1 week and 34 minutes ago, the Exit Poll came out. The world was no longer the same place.
How many people voted for Corbyn thinking he had no chance of winning? Conversely, how many soft Tories decided not to support May because they didn't want her to win an enormous majority? It could be very different if Corbyn is a serious option for office.
How come there's been a further bounce for Labour in the polls since the election, even after it became clear he was a serious contender for office, then?
Because there isn't an election this week.
Firstly, **ANECDOTE ALERT**, but from my experience there is generally an assumption that there's going to be another election very soon.
But secondly, it's still not clear to me why if people were only voting Corbyn because they thought he would never be PM, why they would now be saying they're prepared to vote Labour in even greater numbers even now that it's clear he can become PM.
On the first point, that seems to be true, in my experience. I was last night and pointed out that CON have a (tiny) majority in GB assuming the two NI parties stay out of matters (which may yet be the case), so what's the mechanism for an election? Brushed away, everyone said there would be one. They might be right. Who knows?
Second point, yes, that's what I am struggling with too. My sense is the Corbyn surge is real. What I don't know is how sustainable it is.
Plus a Corbyn who was expected to be a possible PM would have his policies and associates checked with far greater rigour.
Conversely, how many people voted for TMay because she was the only game in town? The other option being a coalition with Corbyn in the SNP's pocket, and so on?
Now that's proven demonstrably false and Corbyn may be the one with the best chance of a majority next time round, how many will go Labour this time round?
TMay's been proven the weak and wobbly one, the one who led us into a coalition of chaos. Labour's pitch next time round will simply be - why not give us a try?
And they may well win.
May won't be leading the Tories into another election campaign, so that bolt has been shot.
Corbyn's intoxicated with the attention at the moment, but he is the same person he has always been, and all of his very obvious failings still exist. Nothing will change that, no matter how many people he hugs.
I would like to think that, but I certainly wouldn't bet on it.
The more I see, the more I feel that Corbyn has 'the common touch'. The more people see of him, the more they warm to him.
Look under the hood and he's a nasty terrorist-loving Stalinist. But how many people actually scratch beneath the surface?
Appearances matter. Corbyn looks like a decent, humble guy trying to sort out the country's problems, the Tories look like cartoon vampires plotting how to keep the wealthy and elite in control of the country.
To reiterate, I am not saying that is my view, but I am saying that is easily how the lens of the next election, which may come sooner rather than later, may be viewed.
Corbyn = High Sparrow...
The growing narrative of the Grenfell inferno is London in microcosm. In one of the wealthiest boroughs in the wealthiest city the have-nots and the have-yachts live side by side.
Agree 100%. And I think that narrative will get considerably stronger if it turns out that some of those flats were occupied by 4,5,6 people to each bedroom in truly awful conditions, while a few hundred yards down the road, great houses lay empty because rich people (many of them foreigners - how we love to hate foreigners, on both sides of the divide) used them as investment vehicles.
Protests turning into riots would not surprise me if that was the case.
If May (the PM) goes very soon then things should stabilise enough for this parliament to run through until next May (the month). I honestly think that's the very earliest that the British people will tolerate another GE.
If - heaven forbid - the Tories are to govern for another term, it can only be in 2022. Labour will win easily an early election. I can see May lurching from disaster to disaster like Brown. There are the triple stenches of incompetence, corruption, and malignity surrounding the current Tory party, which will take some time to subside.
Corruption?
Don't argue. We need a few more lefties on the site so please don't challenge them during their full on CiF rants. Poor old @Big_john_Owls has had to carry the torch virtually single-handed to date.
By "full on CiF rants", I take it you mean views which don't accord with accepted PB wisdom?
Such as Labour floor of 25%? Labour below 100 seats? Corbyn will never win leadership? Corbyn will never win leadership (again)? We have a strong economy, all is well, Tory landslide nailed on? etc., etc.
Those CiF rants?
No. That's political punditry.
I mean the Tories are evil baby-eaters CiF rants.
Fair enough. Maybe I lost it and directed it at you. Mea culpa, I apologise. Am getting increasingly annoyed by the idea that Corbyn was a fluke, and that somehow next time it will be different, because ....reasons. I don't want JC in power (cos of the shadowy forces behind him), but the idea that everything is fine and will be sorted by a better leader, a better campaign, or, more ludicrously, more shit poured over the Labour Party is simply deluded. The Tory Party needs to be seen as on people's side. And that needs some long-term thinking.
1 week and 34 minutes ago, the Exit Poll came out. The world was no longer the same place.
How many people voted for Corbyn thinking he had no chance of winning? Conversely, how many soft Tories decided not to support May because they didn't want her to win an enormous majority? It could be very different if Corbyn is a serious option for office.
How come there's been a further bounce for Labour in the polls since the election, even after it became clear he was a serious contender for office, then?
Because people are reacting to May's misjudgment over the election. By definition, that wasn't apparent until the results were known. If you go into an election expecting to increase your majority and you end up losing it you're inevitably going to look like a fool and therefore lose even more support afterwards. It's irrelevant because May won't face the voters again, except in her own constituency.
So Corbyn's successful campaign has nothing to do with it. It's all about the voters punishing May for insufficiently many of them voting for her. Err, right.
I don't think I said that. Anyway, the next election will probably be Boris v Clive Lewis.
Where's the evidence that Boris would be more of a vote-winner than May?
I certainly don't think he would do as well as her in the North (generally viewed as another pea from the Cameron/Osborne pod up here), though to be fair it might be different in London where Boris does have some past election-winning form.
The northern towns that voted Leave didn't seem to find him that repellent
That's like saying Islington and Hackney must have secretly loved Cameron just because they voted Remain!!
Boris is seen as a muppet by most of the people I know, whether they voted Leave or Remain.
Not really, it's like saying they weren't so repelled by him that they wouldn't vote for him
But people in Islington and Hackney always were repelled by Cameron, and never voted for him to be PM......but they still voted for Remain, despite Cameron being one of the main poster-boys for it. I don't see how Northern working-class people voting Leave, but disliking Boris, is any different to that.
I genuinely think Brexit was something where most people decided on the issues, not their opinions of the politicians on either side.
Note the reported extra cost of specifying fire resistant panels for the building - a few thousand pounds.
How come we have different safety standards to Germany?
Sovereignty.
Been on the Medicinals?
It's obviously not because of Brexit, do you know why?
Housing standards vary around the world. Our government sets ours and always has. Sovereignty.
Oh the partisan point scoring pricks are out in full force #blameculture
Point scoring and blame culture? A hundred-odd people were cremated alive in a state-run tower block in a supposedly first-world country two days ago. If that's not a political matter, I don't know what is.
If there is going to be another election soon then
1) May must not under any circumstances fight it 2) ofTories should fight it on soft brexit, because that is what most people want.
Boris cannot be the soft brexit leader therefore that leaves Hammond, whilst he had a bad budget he is allowed one mistake and he will be more believable as a soft brexiteer.
The reality is that Corbyn (if he stays leader and Labour don't implode in the meantime) may well have the support to become PM. There is zero evidence that the consequences won't be disastrous for both his party and (more importantly) the country.
However people probably misrepresent the consequences of borrowing funded splurges. In the short term they are likely to appear sustainable and generate economic booms. Disastrous in the medium term - but the medium term probably won't turn up quite as soon as people expect.
If May (the PM) goes very soon then things should stabilise enough for this parliament to run through until next May (the month). I honestly think that's the very earliest that the British people will tolerate another GE.
If - heaven forbid - the Tories are to govern for another term, it can only be in 2022. Labour will win easily an early election. I can see May lurching from disaster to disaster like Brown. There are the triple stenches of incompetence, corruption, and malignity surrounding the current Tory party, which will take some time to subside.
Corruption?
Don't argue. We need a few more lefties on the site so please don't challenge them during their full on CiF rants. Poor old @Big_john_Owls has had to carry the torch virtually single-handed to date.
By "full on CiF rants", I take it you mean views which don't accord with accepted PB wisdom?
Such as Labour floor of 25%? Labour below 100 seats? Corbyn will never win leadership? Corbyn will never win leadership (again)? We have a strong economy, all is well, Tory landslide nailed on? etc., etc.
Those CiF rants?
No. That's political punditry.
I mean the Tories are evil baby-eaters CiF rants.
Fair enough. Maybe I lost it and directed it at you. Mea culpa, I apologise. Am getting increasingly annoyed by the idea that Corbyn was a fluke, and that somehow next time it will be different, because ....reasons. I don't want JC in power (cos of the shadowy forces behind him), but the idea that everything is fine and will be sorted by a better leader, a better campaign, or, more ludicrously, more shit poured over the Labour Party is simply deluded. The Tory Party needs to be seen as on people's side. And that needs some long-term thinking.
A better leader, a better manifesto, and a better campaign is pretty much all that is required.
And yes, Corbyn's success was a fluke.
I keep saying it - look at the polling figures pre and post Tory manifesto. A decent manifesto and we would not be having any of these conversations, May would be basking in the limelight with a commanding majority, and the PLP would have gone straight for Corbyn's throat.
Everything changed after that manifesto launch. Also bear in mind that the Tories were only 8 seats short of a majority in spite of the worst campaign in their history.
Note the reported extra cost of specifying fire resistant panels for the building - a few thousand pounds.
How come we have different safety standards to Germany?
Sovereignty.
Been on the Medicinals?
It's obviously not because of Brexit, do you know why?
Housing standards vary around the world. Our government sets ours and always has. Sovereignty.
Oh the partisan point scoring pricks are out in full force #blameculture
Point scoring and blame culture? A hundred-odd people were cremated alive in a state-run tower block in a supposedly first-world country two days ago. If that's not a political matter, I don't know what is.
How many?!
The general consensus is that the government is holding off on announcing the death toll and because of the severity of the fire, the true toll may never be known.
But it is believed nobody on the top three floors survived, there were supposedly 600 people, by official estimates, living in the building, meaning there would have been 30 people on each floor. A death toll of 100+ seems very likely, even if it hasn't been announced yet.
If there is going to be another election soon then
1) May must not under any circumstances fight it 2) ofTories should fight it on soft brexit, because that is what most people want.
Boris cannot be the soft brexit leader therefore that leaves Hammond, whilst he had a bad budget he is allowed one mistake and he will be more believable as a soft brexiteer.
This election was not fought on Brexit. Neither will the next one. It's the economy, my friend.
Note the reported extra cost of specifying fire resistant panels for the building - a few thousand pounds.
How come we have different safety standards to Germany?
Sovereignty.
Been on the Medicinals?
It's obviously not because of Brexit, do you know why?
Housing standards vary around the world. Our government sets ours and always has. Sovereignty.
Oh the partisan point scoring pricks are out in full force #blameculture
Point scoring and blame culture? A hundred-odd people were cremated alive in a state-run tower block in a supposedly first-world country two days ago. If that's not a political matter, I don't know what is.
Yes I know what happened, I read the news. Save the 'explanation in simple terms to emphasise the seriousness of it' schtick for someone else
Foxinsox is trying to score a Remain vs leave point out of it, I just asked a question out of curiosity
Note the reported extra cost of specifying fire resistant panels for the building - a few thousand pounds.
How come we have different safety standards to Germany?
Sovereignty.
And an obsession with not giving people too much "free stuff" paid for by "somebody else".
That's okay then - perhaps you'd like to get your own cheque book out.
Just head down to your local tax office / local government finance dept / hospital / school - they'll happily take your donation.
Very happy to, if you meet me there.
Not willing to do so on your own, I am surprised.
But I'll tell you what if OGH puts up the donate button I'll stick £100 in it and you can do likewise.
OGH can then transfer our combined monies to somewhere suitable.
It's a very poor rhetorical gambit to request that anyone proposing greater society-wide redistribution make a non-compulsory non-society-wide contribution. Rather misses the point.
I don't know what OGH is, but I'm happy to match your £100 donation, perhaps to the Grenfell Tower fund?
If there is going to be another election soon then
1) May must not under any circumstances fight it 2) ofTories should fight it on soft brexit, because that is what most people want.
Boris cannot be the soft brexit leader therefore that leaves Hammond, whilst he had a bad budget he is allowed one mistake and he will be more believable as a soft brexiteer.
This election was not fought on Brexit. Neither will the next one. It's the economy, my friend.
It wasn't the economy in this election. It was Dementia tax, triple lock and WFP.
If there is going to be another election soon then
1) May must not under any circumstances fight it 2) ofTories should fight it on soft brexit, because that is what most people want.
Boris cannot be the soft brexit leader therefore that leaves Hammond, whilst he had a bad budget he is allowed one mistake and he will be more believable as a soft brexiteer.
This election was not fought on Brexit. Neither will the next one. It's the economy, my friend.
The economy at the moment is interlinked with Brexit
If there is going to be another election soon then
1) May must not under any circumstances fight it 2) ofTories should fight it on soft brexit, because that is what most people want.
Boris cannot be the soft brexit leader therefore that leaves Hammond, whilst he had a bad budget he is allowed one mistake and he will be more believable as a soft brexiteer.
This election was not fought on Brexit. Neither will the next one. It's the economy, my friend.
It wasn't the economy in this election. It was Dementia tax, triple lock and WFP.
Which are all connected to the economy ie tax and spend
If there is going to be another election soon then
1) May must not under any circumstances fight it 2) ofTories should fight it on soft brexit, because that is what most people want.
Boris cannot be the soft brexit leader therefore that leaves Hammond, whilst he had a bad budget he is allowed one mistake and he will be more believable as a soft brexiteer.
This election was not fought on Brexit. Neither will the next one. It's the economy, my friend.
It wasn't the economy in this election. It was Dementia tax, triple lock and WFP.
Which are all connected to the economy ie tax and spend
Indeed, but it wasn't overtly about the economy, hence the disappearing acts of both Hammond and McDonnell. The dementia tax was terrible politics rather than bad economics.
Everything changed after that manifesto launch. Also bear in mind that the Tories were only 8 seats short of a majority in spite of the worst campaign in their history.
I was visiting my grandad, with my aunt, on the day that Theresa May announced the election, and my aunt's remark was that "There isn't any alternative to May".
The manifesto certainly did damage to the Tories, but Corbyn had done a lot to convince people that he was a realistic alternative before then.
It wasn't the economy in this election. It was Dementia tax, triple lock and WFP.
So while Corbyn promised free owls and sweeties for all and sundry, the Tories basically looked their base square in the eye ..... and told them to go fk themselves.
In retrospect, the result doesn't seem so surprising.
1 week and 34 minutes ago, the Exit Poll came out. The world was no longer the same place.
How many people voted for Corbyn thinking he had no chance of winning? Conversely, how many soft Tories decided not to support May because they didn't want her to win an enormous majority? It could be very different if Corbyn is a serious option for office.
How come there's been a further bounce for Labour in the polls since the election, even after it became clear he was a serious contender for office, then?
t afterwards. It's irrelevant because May won't face the voters again, except in her own constituency.
So Corbyn's successful campaign has nothing to do with it. It's all about the voters punishing May for insufficiently many of them voting for her. Err, right.
I don't think I said that. Anyway, the next election will probably be Boris v Clive Lewis.
Where's the evidence that Boris would be more of a vote-winner than May?
I certainly don't think he would do as well as her in the North (generally viewed as another pea from the Cameron/Osborne pod up here), though to be fair it might be different in London where Boris does have some past election-winning form.
The northern towns that voted Leave didn't seem to find him that repellent
That's like saying Islington and Hackney must have secretly loved Cameron just because they voted Remain!!
Boris is seen as a muppet by most of the people I know, whether they voted Leave or Remain.
Not really, it's like saying they weren't so repelled by him that they wouldn't vote for him
But people in Islington and Hackney always were repelled by Cameron, and never voted for him to be PM......but they still voted for Remain, despite Cameron being one of the main poster-boys for it. I don't see how Northern working-class people voting Leave, but disliking Boris, is any different to that.
I genuinely think Brexit was something where most people decided on the issues, not their opinions of the politicians on either side.
Hopefully.
I said they 'weren't repelled', you equated that with 'secretly loved', we don't need to use those kind of tactics we aren't on question time
If there is going to be another election soon then
1) May must not under any circumstances fight it 2) ofTories should fight it on soft brexit, because that is what most people want.
Boris cannot be the soft brexit leader therefore that leaves Hammond, whilst he had a bad budget he is allowed one mistake and he will be more believable as a soft brexiteer.
This election was not fought on Brexit. Neither will the next one. It's the economy, my friend.
That doesn't mean that wasn't what people were voting in. Why do you think Putney almost went Labour and Kensington did and half of ukip (many of whom were ex libdem) also went to labour.
People want to stay in the single market but May gave the impression she was prepared to crash out of it.
Everything changed after that manifesto launch. Also bear in mind that the Tories were only 8 seats short of a majority in spite of the worst campaign in their history.
I was visiting my grandad, with my aunt, on the day that Theresa May announced the election, and my aunt's remark was that "There isn't any alternative to May".
The manifesto certainly did damage to the Tories, but Corbyn had done a lot to convince people that he was a realistic alternative before then.
Had he? Labour was polling 25% at the start of the election campaign, had lost Copeland in a by-election, and the Tories had a Mayoralty success in the West Midlands and Teeside.
If May (the PM) goes very soon then things should stabilise enough for this parliament to run through until next May (the month). I honestly think that's the very earliest that the British people will tolerate another GE.
If - heaven forbid - the Tories are to govern for another term, it can only be in 2022. Labour will win easily an early election. I can see May lurching from disaster to disaster like Brown. There are the triple stenches of incompetence, corruption, and malignity surrounding the current Tory party, which will take some time to subside.
Corruption?
Don't argue. We need a few more lefties on the site so please don't challenge them during their full on CiF rants. Poor old @Big_john_Owls has had to carry the torch virtually single-handed to date.
By "full on CiF rants", I take it you mean views which don't accord with accepted PB wisdom?
Such as Labour floor of 25%? Labour below 100 seats? Corbyn will never win leadership? Corbyn will never win leadership (again)? We have a strong economy, all is well, Tory landslide nailed on? etc., etc.
Those CiF rants?
No. That's political punditry.
I mean the Tories are evil baby-eaters CiF rants.
Fair enough. Maybe I lost it and directed it at you. Mea culpa, I apologise. Am getting increasingly annoyed by the idea that Corbyn was a fluke, and that somehow next time it will be different, because ....reasons. I don't want JC in power (cos of the shadowy forces behind him), but the idea that everything is fine and will be sorted by a better leader, a better campaign, or, more ludicrously, more shit poured over the Labour Party is simply deluded. The Tory Party needs to be seen as on people's side. And that needs some long-term thinking.
A better leader, a better manifesto, and a better campaign is pretty much all that is required.
And yes, Corbyn's success was a fluke.
I keep saying it - look at the polling figures pre and post Tory manifesto. A decent manifesto and we would not be having any of these conversations, May would be basking in the limelight with a commanding majority, and the PLP would have gone straight for Corbyn's throat.
Everything changed after that manifesto launch. Also bear in mind that the Tories were only 8 seats short of a majority in spite of the worst campaign in their history.
The manifesto was important, because the scales fell from people's eyes. There really was no plan other than Corbyn. No ideas or plan. Just look Corbyn.
If there is going to be another election soon then
1) May must not under any circumstances fight it 2) ofTories should fight it on soft brexit, because that is what most people want.
Boris cannot be the soft brexit leader therefore that leaves Hammond, whilst he had a bad budget he is allowed one mistake and he will be more believable as a soft brexiteer.
This election was not fought on Brexit. Neither will the next one. It's the economy, my friend.
It wasn't the economy in this election. It was Dementia tax, triple lock and WFP.
Which are all connected to the economy ie tax and spend
Indeed, but it wasn't overtly about the economy, hence the disappearing acts of both Hammond and McDonnell. The dementia tax was terrible politics rather than bad economics.
In economic terms it was an attempt to find a way to pay for rising social care costs which was politically disastrous, the Tories should have stuck to Hammond's moves towards increasing National Insurance which proved far less damaging in the polls
Note the reported extra cost of specifying fire resistant panels for the building - a few thousand pounds.
How come we have different safety standards to Germany?
Sovereignty.
Been on the Medicinals?
It's obviously not because of Brexit, do you know why?
Housing standards vary around the world. Our government sets ours and always has. Sovereignty.
Oh the partisan point scoring pricks are out in full force #blameculture
Point scoring and blame culture? A hundred-odd people were cremated alive in a state-run tower block in a supposedly first-world country two days ago. If that's not a political matter, I don't know what is.
Foxinsox is trying to score a Remain vs leave point out of it, I just asked a question out of curiosity
I thought his point was both droll and accurate. Yes, it was a thinly veiled Brexit dig, but it also highlighted the point that sovereignty isn't always a great deal of its consequences are that the experiences and expertise of other nations are ignored or unavailable. The British don't know everything, and a certain amount of collaboration is healthy. It appears these fires have happened before elsewhere and measures taken.
Recent events also suggest that our counter-terrorists could have learned something from the Italians.
It wasn't the economy in this election. It was Dementia tax, triple lock and WFP.
So while Corbyn promised free owls and sweeties for all and sundry, the Tories basically looked their base square in the eye ..... and told them to go fk themselves.
In retrospect, the result doesn't seem so surprising.
Indeed. But they still got nearly 43%. Now imagine what they would have achieved with a decent manifesto and a confident PM.
Note the reported extra cost of specifying fire resistant panels for the building - a few thousand pounds.
How come we have different safety standards to Germany?
Sovereignty.
Been on the Medicinals?
It's obviously not because of Brexit, do you know why?
Housing standards vary around the world. Our government sets ours and always has. Sovereignty.
Oh the partisan point scoring pricks are out in full force #blameculture
Point scoring and blame culture? A hundred-odd people were cremated alive in a state-run tower block in a supposedly first-world country two days ago. If that's not a political matter, I don't know what is.
Foxinsox is trying to score a Remain vs leave point out of it, I just asked a question out of curiosity
I thought his point was both droll and accurate. Yes, it was a thinly veiled Brexit dig, but it also highlighted the point that sovereignty isn't always a great deal of its consequences are that the experiences and expertise of other nation's are ignored or unavailable. The British don't know everything, and a certain amount of collaboration is healthy.
Recent events also suggest that our counter-terrorists could have learned something from the Italians.
Everything changed after that manifesto launch. Also bear in mind that the Tories were only 8 seats short of a majority in spite of the worst campaign in their history.
I was visiting my grandad, with my aunt, on the day that Theresa May announced the election, and my aunt's remark was that "There isn't any alternative to May".
The manifesto certainly did damage to the Tories, but Corbyn had done a lot to convince people that he was a realistic alternative before then.
Had he? Labour was polling 25% at the start of the election campaign, had lost Copeland in a by-election, and the Tories had a Mayoralty success in the West Midlands and Teeside.
"Before then" = Between the announcement of the election and the Tory manifesto launch.
If there is going to be another election soon then
1) May must not under any circumstances fight it 2) ofTories should fight it on soft brexit, because that is what most people want.
Boris cannot be the soft brexit leader therefore that leaves Hammond, whilst he had a bad budget he is allowed one mistake and he will be more believable as a soft brexiteer.
This election was not fought on Brexit. Neither will the next one. It's the economy, my friend.
It wasn't the economy in this election. It was Dementia tax, triple lock and WFP.
If there is going to be another election soon then
1) May must not under any circumstances fight it 2) ofTories should fight it on soft brexit, because that is what most people want.
Boris cannot be the soft brexit leader therefore that leaves Hammond, whilst he had a bad budget he is allowed one mistake and he will be more believable as a soft brexiteer.
This election was not fought on Brexit. Neither will the next one. It's the economy, my friend.
It wasn't the economy in this election. It was Dementia tax, triple lock and WFP.
Which is the economy. Your point?
My point is it wasn't fought on traditional economic grounds. There was nothing about job creation, or business growth, or investor confidence. There was a startling lack of macro economic scrutiny, partly because nobody but nobody took Labour's fantasy manifesto seriously.
The Tory manifesto was atrocious politics rather than bad economics.
Note the reported extra cost of specifying fire resistant panels for the building - a few thousand pounds.
How come we have different safety standards to Germany?
Sovereignty.
Been on the Medicinals?
It's obviously not because of Brexit, do you know why?
Housing standards vary around the world. Our government sets ours and always has. Sovereignty.
Oh the partisan point scoring pricks are out in full force #blameculture
Point scoring and blame culture? A hundred-odd people were cremated alive in a state-run tower block in a supposedly first-world country two days ago. If that's not a political matter, I don't know what is.
Foxinsox is trying to score a Remain vs leave point out of it, I just asked a question out of curiosity
I thought his point was both droll and accurate. Yes, it was a thinly veiled Brexit dig, but it also highlighted the point that sovereignty isn't always a great deal of its consequences are that the experiences and expertise of other nations are ignored or unavailable. The British don't know everything, and a certain amount of collaboration is healthy. It appears these fires have happened before elsewhere and measures taken.
Recent events also suggest that our counter-terrorists could have learned something from the Italians.
Eh, we had coroner's reports and recommendations for a review that sat on a Minister's desk for four years. This didn't happen because we were too proud to listen to foreigners.
Maybe it happened because of an ideological aversion to regulation. Or perhaps because of penny-pinching brought about by austerity. Or maybe the Minister in question genuinely had more important matters to attend to.
If there is going to be another election soon then
1) May must not under any circumstances fight it 2) ofTories should fight it on soft brexit, because that is what most people want.
Boris cannot be the soft brexit leader therefore that leaves Hammond, whilst he had a bad budget he is allowed one mistake and he will be more believable as a soft brexiteer.
This election was not fought on Brexit. Neither will the next one. It's the economy, my friend.
It wasn't the economy in this election. It was Dementia tax, triple lock and WFP.
Which are all connected to the economy ie tax and spend
Indeed, but it wasn't overtly about the economy, hence the disappearing acts of both Hammond and McDonnell. The dementia tax was terrible politics rather than bad economics.
In economic terms it was an attempt to find a way to pay for rising social care costs which was politically disastrous, the Tories should have stuck to Hammond's moves towards increasing National Insurance which proved far less damaging in the polls
Osborne had boxed them into a corner by destroying the "Death Tax". Not a great idea to permanently poison a policy you might need in the future. One should be nice to ideas on the way up...
If there is going to be another election soon then
1) May must not under any circumstances fight it 2) ofTories should fight it on soft brexit, because that is what most people want.
Boris cannot be the soft brexit leader therefore that leaves Hammond, whilst he had a bad budget he is allowed one mistake and he will be more believable as a soft brexiteer.
This election was not fought on Brexit. Neither will the next one. It's the economy, my friend.
It wasn't the economy in this election. It was Dementia tax, triple lock and WFP.
Which are all connected to the economy ie tax and spend
Indeed, but it wasn't overtly about the economy, hence the disappearing acts of both Hammond and McDonnell. The dementia tax was terrible politics rather than bad economics.
In economic terms it was an attempt to find a way to pay for rising social care costs which was politically disastrous, the Tories should have stuck to Hammond's moves towards increasing National Insurance which proved far less damaging in the polls
Osborne had boxed them into a corner by destroying the "Death Tax". Not a great idea to permanently poison a policy you might need in the future. One should be nice to ideas on the way up...
The 'Death Tax' was always going to be poison, National Insurance was a far more sensible way of paying for social care in my view
Note the reported extra cost of specifying fire resistant panels for the building - a few thousand pounds.
How come we have different safety standards to Germany?
Sovereignty.
And an obsession with not giving people too much "free stuff" paid for by "somebody else".
That's okay then - perhaps you'd like to get your own cheque book out.
Just head down to your local tax office / local government finance dept / hospital / school - they'll happily take your donation.
Very happy to, if you meet me there.
Not willing to do so on your own, I am surprised.
But I'll tell you what if OGH puts up the donate button I'll stick £100 in it and you can do likewise.
OGH can then transfer our combined monies to somewhere suitable.
It's a very poor rhetorical gambit to request that anyone proposing greater society-wide redistribution make a non-compulsory non-society-wide contribution. Rather misses the point.
I don't know what OGH is, but I'm happy to match your £100 donation, perhaps to the Grenfell Tower fund?
OGH is Mike Smithson - the bloke who owns this website. OGH stands for Our Genial Host.
After previous elections he has installed a donate button so that grateful PBers can make a contribution to his costs.
I'm quite happy to therefore donate £100 to Mike with a request that he donates it to something suitable, Bedford hospital for example.
My general point is extremely valid - its easy to demand extra government spending on X, Y or Z. I see a lot less enthusiasm to actually pay more to achieve that spending. And if people aren't willing to pay more themselves then their extra spending demands tend to be little more than ways of benefiting themselves at the expense of others. This applies to me as well - I'm very willing for other people to pay more tax for things which I believe would benefit society as a whole.
Note the reported extra cost of specifying fire resistant panels for the building - a few thousand pounds.
How come we have different safety standards to Germany?
Sovereignty.
Been on the Medicinals?
It's obviously not because of Brexit, do you know why?
Housing standards vary around the world. Our government sets ours and always has. Sovereignty.
Oh the partisan point scoring pricks are out in full force #blameculture
Point scoring and blame culture? A hundred-odd people were cremated alive in a state-run tower block in a supposedly first-world country two days ago. If that's not a political matter, I don't know what is.
Foxinsox is trying to score a Remain vs leave point out of it, I just asked a question out of curiosity
I thought his point was both droll and accurate. Yes, it was a thinly veiled Brexit dig, but it also highlighted the point that sovereignty isn't always a great deal of its consequences are that the experiences and expertise of other nations are ignored or unavailable. The British don't know everything, and a certain amount of collaboration is healthy. It appears these fires have happened before elsewhere and measures taken.
Recent events also suggest that our counter-terrorists could have learned something from the Italians.
Eh, we had coroner's reports and recommendations for a review that sat on a Minister's desk for four years. This didn't happen because we were too proud to listen to foreigners.
Maybe it happened because of an ideological aversion to regulation. Or perhaps because of penny-pinching brought about by austerity. Or maybe the Minister in question genuinely had more important matters to attend to.
I said nothing about pride but, in addition to the possibilities you list, it is also true that we ignored bans placed on recently introduced building materials in, at least, America and Germany.
If there is going to be another election soon then
1) May must not under any circumstances fight it 2) ofTories should fight it on soft brexit, because that is what most people want.
Boris cannot be the soft brexit leader therefore that leaves Hammond, whilst he had a bad budget he is allowed one mistake and he will be more believable as a soft brexiteer.
This election was not fought on Brexit. Neither will the next one. It's the economy, my friend.
It wasn't the economy in this election. It was Dementia tax, triple lock and WFP.
Comments
Now that's proven demonstrably false and Corbyn may be the one with the best chance of a majority next time round, how many will go Labour this time round?
TMay's been proven the weak and wobbly one, the one who led us into a coalition of chaos. Labour's pitch next time round will simply be - why not give us a try?
And they may well win.
Conversely Labour need to keep up the pressure to stop their support from ebbing away as the day to day work of politics begins again.
And in the background Davidson is building her stock up north to make a grab before the next election, and someone will be being groomed by Corbyn to replace him.
But secondly, it's still not clear to me why if people were only voting Corbyn because they thought he would never be PM, why they would now be saying they're prepared to vote Labour in even greater numbers even now that it's clear he can become PM.
Two other interpretations are - we had the vote and I respect it, even though I despise it. But... were the option of a second referundm to come up again, I would vigorously fight to remain in the EU. Unlikely but possible.
The other - the vast majority of people want a have-your-cake-and-eat-it Brexit. One where we get to cherry pick the bits of the EU we like while discarding the others on the way out. We would be the English person on mainland Europe pointing at the bits on the menu we want and asking for them in a very loud voice. I'm rather worried that this is what the '70%' are in favour of.
Corbyn's intoxicated with the attention at the moment, but he is the same person he has always been, and all of his very obvious failings still exist. Nothing will change that, no matter how many people he hugs.
It's obviously not because of Brexit, do you know why?
It's not Brexit obviously, why is it?
Such as Labour floor of 25%?
Labour below 100 seats?
Corbyn will never win leadership?
Corbyn will never win leadership (again)?
We have a strong economy, all is well, Tory landslide nailed on?
etc., etc.
Those CiF rants?
The more I see, the more I feel that Corbyn has 'the common touch'. The more people see of him, the more they warm to him.
Look under the hood and he's a nasty terrorist-loving Stalinist. But how many people actually scratch beneath the surface?
Appearances matter. Corbyn looks like a decent, humble guy trying to sort out the country's problems, the Tories look like cartoon vampires plotting how to keep the wealthy and elite in control of the country.
To reiterate, I am not saying that is my view, but I am saying that is easily how the lens of the next election, which may come sooner rather than later, may be viewed.
Corbyn = High Sparrow...
I certainly don't think he would do as well as her in the North (generally viewed as another pea from the Cameron/Osborne pod up here), though to be fair it might be different in London where Boris does have some past election-winning form.
A decent manifesto would have seen the Tories home comfortably, no matter how good Corbyn performed on the stump.
Just head down to your local tax office / local government finance dept / hospital / school - they'll happily take your donation.
I mean the Tories are evil baby-eaters CiF rants.
Second point, yes, that's what I am struggling with too. My sense is the Corbyn surge is real. What I don't know is how sustainable it is.
Boris is seen as a muppet by most of the people I know, whether they voted Leave or Remain.
We are sitting here reading tea leaves, when all that can be said with certainty is that 4% more people want to leave the EU than want to remain.
That to me suggests a compromise is in order, which would probably look like EEA/EFTA with the option of either rejoining as a full member or moving further apart in a decade or so.
It's the political equivalent of saying "I'm into you, I'm just not *that* into you".
I can't see the EU being happy with that compromise, though .The reason they didn't offer further compromises or a better 'deal' than Cameron's was that if the UK gets it, a lot of other countries would want it. And that goes against the ever closer union they cherish as a religion.
From the planning decision on application PP/12/04097 /Q18:
"3. Detailed drawings or samples of materials as appropriate, in respect of the
following, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local
Planning Authority before the relevant part of the work is begun and the
works shall not be carried out other than in accordance with the details so
approved and shall thereafter be so maintained:
· Materials to be used on the external faces of the building(s);
Reason – To accord with the development plan by ensuring that the character and appearance of the area are preserved and living conditions of those living near the development suitably protected."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frances_Oldham_Kelsey
The Tories and May's popularity will take another dive in months to come.
FWIW I'm in that group.
* Edit. These percentages are likely to increase.
You then tried to make sarcastic partisan points out of the fire, oh well takes all sorts
Protests turning into riots would not surprise me if that was the case.
Am getting increasingly annoyed by the idea that Corbyn was a fluke, and that somehow next time it will be different, because ....reasons.
I don't want JC in power (cos of the shadowy forces behind him), but the idea that everything is fine and will be sorted by a better leader, a better campaign, or, more ludicrously, more shit poured over the Labour Party is simply deluded.
The Tory Party needs to be seen as on people's side. And that needs some long-term thinking.
I genuinely think Brexit was something where most people decided on the issues, not their opinions of the politicians on either side.
1) May must not under any circumstances fight it
2) ofTories should fight it on soft brexit, because that is what most people want.
Boris cannot be the soft brexit leader therefore that leaves Hammond, whilst he had a bad budget he is allowed one mistake and he will be more believable as a soft brexiteer.
But I'll tell you what if OGH puts up the donate button I'll stick £100 in it and you can do likewise.
OGH can then transfer our combined monies to somewhere suitable.
However people probably misrepresent the consequences of borrowing funded splurges. In the short term they are likely to appear sustainable and generate economic booms. Disastrous in the medium term - but the medium term probably won't turn up quite as soon as people expect.
And yes, Corbyn's success was a fluke.
I keep saying it - look at the polling figures pre and post Tory manifesto. A decent manifesto and we would not be having any of these conversations, May would be basking in the limelight with a commanding majority, and the PLP would have gone straight for Corbyn's throat.
Everything changed after that manifesto launch. Also bear in mind that the Tories were only 8 seats short of a majority in spite of the worst campaign in their history.
But it is believed nobody on the top three floors survived, there were supposedly 600 people, by official estimates, living in the building, meaning there would have been 30 people on each floor. A death toll of 100+ seems very likely, even if it hasn't been announced yet.
Foxinsox is trying to score a Remain vs leave point out of it, I just asked a question out of curiosity
I don't know what OGH is, but I'm happy to match your £100 donation, perhaps to the Grenfell Tower fund?
The manifesto certainly did damage to the Tories, but Corbyn had done a lot to convince people that he was a realistic alternative before then.
In retrospect, the result doesn't seem so surprising.
I said they 'weren't repelled', you equated that with 'secretly loved', we don't need to use those kind of tactics we aren't on question time
People want to stay in the single market but May gave the impression she was prepared to crash out of it.
Recent events also suggest that our counter-terrorists could have learned something from the Italians.
The Tory manifesto was atrocious politics rather than bad economics.
Maybe it happened because of an ideological aversion to regulation. Or perhaps because of penny-pinching brought about by austerity. Or maybe the Minister in question genuinely had more important matters to attend to.
After previous elections he has installed a donate button so that grateful PBers can make a contribution to his costs.
I'm quite happy to therefore donate £100 to Mike with a request that he donates it to something suitable, Bedford hospital for example.
My general point is extremely valid - its easy to demand extra government spending on X, Y or Z. I see a lot less enthusiasm to actually pay more to achieve that spending. And if people aren't willing to pay more themselves then their extra spending demands tend to be little more than ways of benefiting themselves at the expense of others. This applies to me as well - I'm very willing for other people to pay more tax for things which I believe would benefit society as a whole.
Tories need to think of something positive to offer, but cannot.
If that's not the economy what is?