Sounds like Jacob will get the Jezza treatment from the CPP if he becomes leader!
He needs to get into the last two before he could conceivably become leader. That means he needs support in Parliament too.
Presumably the Brexiteers will want to ensure they have one of their number in the final two.
That depends when the next leadership election is. If it's not until after we have Left the EU, then the distinction will become irrelevant.
True. If there's a transition deal in 2019 then I expect the next leadership election will be before that has expired.
Bernard Jenkin this morning saying that a transition deal should not inhibit the UK from signing free trade deals. What is it with some Brexiters? Is there a course they go on to learn how to be morons?
How is he wrong? Once we are out we are free to sign free trade deals. Giving that up as part of a transition is not ideal. We would in the transition have lost our ability to shape EU rules (limited as it was) without yet gaining our freedom we were seeking.
If a transition deal is in the form of a time limited trade deal then that shouldn't prevent us from seeking and signing other permanent deals.
We can't still be in the EU (= a transition deal) and have an FTA with a third party country at the same time as this would give rise to regulatory arbitrage.
But the reality is a transition deal will not take the form of still being in the EU, will it?
Of course it will. We will still be bound by all the contractual demands that exist now. That, surely, is the nature of a transition deal. No cliff edge. All things as is.
Why would we still be in the EU?
The "transition" part of the word "transition" is gone if there's no transitioning going on.
What do you imagine a transition deal will look like? A have cake and eat it transition? It means that we will continue to benefit from EU membership and be bound by the EU rules. Or it is not a transition. It is a leaving.
Sounds like Jacob will get the Jezza treatment from the CPP if he becomes leader!
He needs to get into the last two before he could conceivably become leader. That means he needs support in Parliament too.
Presumably the Brexiteers will want to ensure they have one of their number in the final two.
That depends when the next leadership election is. If it's not until after we have Left the EU, then the distinction will become irrelevant.
True. If there's a transition deal in 2019 then I expect the next leadership election will be before that has expired.
Bernard Jenkin this morning saying that a transition deal should not inhibit the UK from signing free trade deals. What is it with some Brexiters? Is there a course they go on to learn how to be morons?
Why should it? Provided that they don't come into effect before the end of the transition period there will be no issue with negotiating and signing while in transition (that's one of the primary benefits of having such a period)
Ah yes well of course. Provided they don't come into effect until after the transition period. I think that's fair to be able to negotiate. Not 100% sure that was what he was stating, though.
I didn't hear it either, but you said "signing" which is true, although possibly misleading.
A reality check: The Moggster does NOT stand a good chance if he gets into the final two. In fact, he would stand very little chance against almost any other possible candidate.
This is a membership that elected IDS... Surely anything is possible?
That was in opposition, and purely because of the EU issue. Contrary to popular belief on PB, the EU won't be a deciding factor after 2019; we'll have left. The issue will be closed, for better or worse.
A reality check: The Moggster does NOT stand a good chance if he gets into the final two. In fact, he would stand very little chance against almost any other possible candidate.
This is a membership that elected IDS... Surely anything is possible?
That was in opposition, and purely because of the EU issue. Contrary to popular belief on PB, the EU won't be an issue after 2019; we'll have left. The issue will be closed.
Not if we're starting a two year "transition"... Surely the membership will want to elect a Brexiteer to make sure that come 2021 there's no backsliding?
A reality check: The Moggster does NOT stand a good chance if he gets into the final two. In fact, he would stand very little chance against almost any other possible candidate.
This is a membership that elected IDS... Surely anything is possible?
That was in opposition, and purely because of the EU issue. Contrary to popular belief on PB, the EU won't be a deciding factor after 2019; we'll have left. The issue will be closed, for better or worse.
Popular belief on PB doesn't even understand the current wings of the Tory party: it's not those who voted Leave vs those who voted Remain; it's those who want to implement the referendum result vs those who don't.
Lee was a traitor. He had taken an oath to the Republic and broke it by serving with the South.
This is really simple.
I have no idea what I am supposed to have been quoting (mid or otherwise) of Kevin O'Higgins.
He had resigned his commission on refusing the command of the Union army. That ended his oath to the Union.
Moreover his oath as a member of the Virginia militia was to defend Virginia.
Can you not see how your points don't measure up or to be exact, apply rather better to you?
I have no time for the far right protesters but if there was one thing guaranteed to inflame the South in the US it is trying to remove a statue of one of their most iconic figures, General Robert E Lee especially as many have pointed out he was personally anti slavery anyway
I was not a big fan of Obama TBH. But he was right when he said that slavery was America's original sin. Its consequences are being played out on the streets of Virginia.
You realise he was just quoting the West Wing?
Lord Marbury : "The darkness in our sunshine, the shadow in our souls, the biblical sins of the fathers. For Americans, it's slavery. Slavery is your original sin. That and your unfortunate history with your aborigines." Toby : "Native Americans." Lord Marbury : "For the English, it's Ireland."
So? Does that make it less correct?
No, but it does make him less insightful.
Why? You can still have a deep understanding of something, and a perception of it, even if it's been said before. Otherwise there would be precious little room left to be insightful.
In this context @Cyclefree was praising him, and implying that he had come up with the phrase. I pointed out that he had just lifted it from a TV script.
What he said was certainly arguable - and, I think, a useful concept to introduce to the debate.
Errr, Slavery being referred to as America's Original Sin predates the West Wing.
Not if we're starting a two year "transition"... Surely the membership will want to elect a Brexiteer to make sure that come 2021 there's no backsliding?
We'll know what we are transitioning to. What will matter is not Remain vs Leave - that horse will have definitely bolted - but who can best articulate a vision for our post-EU future.
A reality check: The Moggster does NOT stand a good chance if he gets into the final two. In fact, he would stand very little chance against almost any other possible candidate.
This is a membership that elected IDS... Surely anything is possible?
That was in opposition, and purely because of the EU issue. Contrary to popular belief on PB, the EU won't be a deciding factor after 2019; we'll have left. The issue will be closed, for better or worse.
I'm far from convinced that the average Conservative member is saner now than they were in 2001. All the evidence points to the contrary.
“He is not the modern face of the Tory party that we are desperate, or I am certainly and colleagues are certainly desperate, to prove is out there.”
Says more about her than him frankly.
Quite.
That, and the fact that she thinks her say is of such value that a threat to flounce off will be met with anything but laughter.
Yes, because the Brexit loons of the Conservative party are keen for it to become a narrower and less inclusive party.
Evidence ?
We've had Soubry and Allen threaten to flounce out over the weekend if things don't go their way - suggests the tiny Europhile rump are the ones with a problem.
LOL. And who pi**ed off before the referendum? The Euroloons to UKIP. They actually flounced and have seriously damaged the party.
A healthy Conservative party, just a like a healthy Labour party, needs to appeal to as broad a constituency as possible.
That 'flouncing' helped get us a referendum - which has produced a fantastic result for the country.
(Snip)
You are counting your chickens before the eggs have been laid, yet alone hatched.
Though I hope you're correct.
But we're talking about the good of the Conservative Party here, not the country. The two are often coincident, but need not be.
Lee was a traitor. He had taken an oath to the Republic and broke it by serving with the South.
This is really simple.
I have no idea what I am supposed to have been quoting (mid or otherwise) of Kevin O'Higgins.
He had resigned his commission on refusing the command of the Union army. That ended his oath to the Union.
Moreover his oath as a member of the Virginia militia was to defend Virginia.
Can you not see how your points don't measure up or to be exact, apply rather better to you?
I have no time for the far right protesters but if there was one thing guaranteed to inflame the South in the US it is trying to remove a statue of one of their most iconic figures, General Robert E Lee especially as many have pointed out he was personally anti slavery anyway
I was not a big fan of Obama TBH. But he was right when he said that slavery was America's original sin. Its consequences are being played out on the streets of Virginia.
You realise he was just quoting the West Wing?
Lord Marbury : "The darkness in our sunshine, the shadow in our souls, the biblical sins of the fathers. For Americans, it's slavery. Slavery is your original sin. That and your unfortunate history with your aborigines." Toby : "Native Americans." Lord Marbury : "For the English, it's Ireland."
The idea is a great deal older than that. Senator Charles Sumner, opposing Texas’ admission to the union, as a slave state, in 1845:
“Slavery, we are speciously told by those who seek to defend it, is not our original sin. It was entailed upon us, so we are instructed, by our ancestors; and the responsibility is often, with exultation, thrown upon the mother country...”
“He is not the modern face of the Tory party that we are desperate, or I am certainly and colleagues are certainly desperate, to prove is out there.”
Says more about her than him frankly.
Quite.
That, and the fact that she thinks her say is of such value that a threat to flounce off will be met with anything but laughter.
Yes, because the Brexit loons of the Conservative party are keen for it to become a narrower and less inclusive party.
Evidence ?
We've had Soubry and Allen threaten to flounce out over the weekend if things don't go their way - suggests the tiny Europhile rump are the ones with a problem.
LOL. And who pi**ed off before the referendum? The Euroloons to UKIP. They actually flounced and have seriously damaged the party.
A healthy Conservative party, just a like a healthy Labour party, needs to appeal to as broad a constituency as possible.
Eh?
UKIP have no MPs. They forced a democratic decision that resulted in the Tory vote share returning to mid 40s. How has that seriously damaged the party?
You appear to have forgotten Carswell and the TPD ...
You also appear to have forgotten than the Conservatives had rather more MPs three months ago, and are now led by a deeply damaged leader that has led to the current threader talking about who will replace her.
“He is not the modern face of the Tory party that we are desperate, or I am certainly and colleagues are certainly desperate, to prove is out there.”
Says more about her than him frankly.
Quite.
That, and the fact that she thinks her say is of such value that a threat to flounce off will be met with anything but laughter.
Yes, because the Brexit loons of the Conservative party are keen for it to become a narrower and less inclusive party.
Evidence ?
We've had Soubry and Allen threaten to flounce out over the weekend if things don't go their way - suggests the tiny Europhile rump are the ones with a problem.
LOL. And who pi**ed off before the referendum? The Euroloons to UKIP. They actually flounced and have seriously damaged the party.
A healthy Conservative party, just a like a healthy Labour party, needs to appeal to as broad a constituency as possible.
Eh?
UKIP have no MPs. They forced a democratic decision that resulted in the Tory vote share returning to mid 40s. How has that seriously damaged the party?
You appear to have forgotten Carswell and the TPD ...
You also appear to have forgotten than the Conservatives had rather more MPs three months ago, and are now led by a deeply damaged leader that has led to the current threader talking about who will replace her.
Yep, serious damage to the party.
Not caused by anything other than May's campaign strategy.
Lee was a traitor. He had taken an oath to the Republic and broke it by serving with the South.
This is really simple.
I have no idea what I am supposed to have been quoting (mid or otherwise) of Kevin O'Higgins.
He had resigned his commission on refusing the command of the Union army. That ended his oath to the Union.
Moreover his oath as a member of the Virginia militia was to defend Virginia.
Can you not see how your points don't measure up or to be exact, apply rather better to you?
I have no time for the far right protesters but if there was one thing guaranteed to inflame the South in the US it is trying to remove a statue of one of their most iconic figures, General Robert E Lee especially as many have pointed out he was personally anti slavery anyway
I was not a big fan of Obama TBH. But he was right when he said that slavery was America's original sin. Its consequences are being played out on the streets of Virginia.
You realise he was just quoting the West Wing?
Lord Marbury : "The darkness in our sunshine, the shadow in our souls, the biblical sins of the fathers. For Americans, it's slavery. Slavery is your original sin. That and your unfortunate history with your aborigines." Toby : "Native Americans." Lord Marbury : "For the English, it's Ireland."
So? Does that make it less correct?
No, but it does make him less insightful.
Why? You can still have a deep understanding of something, and a perception of it, even if it's been said before. Otherwise there would be precious little room left to be insightful.
In this context @Cyclefree was praising him, and implying that he had come up with the phrase. I pointed out that he had just lifted it from a TV script.
What he said was certainly arguable - and, I think, a useful concept to introduce to the debate.
Errr, Slavery being referred to as America's Original Sin predates the West Wing.
And very two-edged: the point about *original* sin being that you can't do anything about it, so why bother trying?
I think the point about original sin is that it taints all of Adam's descendants - and slavery bedevils political discussions and race relations in the US today
Lee was a traitor. He had taken an oath to the Republic and broke it by serving with the South.
This is really simple.
I have no idea what I am supposed to have been quoting (mid or otherwise) of Kevin O'Higgins.
He had resigned his commission on refusing the command of the Union army. That ended his oath to the Union.
Moreover his oath as a member of the Virginia militia was to defend Virginia.
Can you not see how your points don't measure up or to be exact, apply rather better to you?
I have no time for the far right protesters but if there was one thing guaranteed to inflame the South in the US it is trying to remove a statue of one of their most iconic figures, General Robert E Lee especially as many have pointed out he was personally anti slavery anyway
I was not a big fan of Obama TBH. But he was right when he said that slavery was America's original sin. Its consequences are being played out on the streets of Virginia.
You realise he was just quoting the West Wing?
Lord Marbury : "The darkness in our sunshine, the shadow in our souls, the biblical sins of the fathers. For Americans, it's slavery. Slavery is your original sin. That and your unfortunate history with your aborigines." Toby : "Native Americans." Lord Marbury : "For the English, it's Ireland."
The idea is a great deal older than that. Senator Charles Sumner, opposing Texas’ admission to the union, as a slave state, in 1845:
“Slavery, we are speciously told by those who seek to defend it, is not our original sin. It was entailed upon us, so we are instructed, by our ancestors; and the responsibility is often, with exultation, thrown upon the mother country...”
I am more cynical about Obama's interest in Senatorial debates from the 1840s than you...
A reality check: The Moggster does NOT stand a good chance if he gets into the final two. In fact, he would stand very little chance against almost any other possible candidate.
This is a membership that elected IDS... Surely anything is possible?
That was in opposition, and purely because of the EU issue. Contrary to popular belief on PB, the EU won't be a deciding factor after 2019; we'll have left. The issue will be closed, for better or worse.
Popular belief on PB doesn't even understand the current wings of the Tory party: it's not those who voted Leave vs those who voted Remain; it's those who want to implement the referendum result vs those who don't.
How many people who campaigned for Leave are in the latter category?
Lee was a traitor. He had taken an oath to the Republic and broke it by serving with the South.
This is really simple.
I have no idea what I am supposed to have been quoting (mid or otherwise) of Kevin O'Higgins.
He had resigned his commission on refusing the command of the Union army. That ended his oath to the Union.
Moreover his oath as a member of the Virginia militia was to defend Virginia.
Can you not see how your points don't measure up or to be exact, apply rather better to you?
I have no time for the far right protesters but if there was one thing guaranteed to inflame the South in the US it is trying to remove a statue of one of their most iconic figures, General Robert E Lee especially as many have pointed out he was personally anti slavery anyway
I was not a big fan of Obama TBH. But he was right when he said that slavery was America's original sin. Its consequences are being played out on the streets of Virginia.
You realise he was just quoting the West Wing?
Lord Marbury : "The darkness in our sunshine, the shadow in our souls, the biblical sins of the fathers. For Americans, it's slavery. Slavery is your original sin. That and your unfortunate history with your aborigines." Toby : "Native Americans." Lord Marbury : "For the English, it's Ireland."
Lord Marbury doesn't half talk nonsense about Ireland - probably because the script was written by an American.
Mr. Meeks, I thought the question of historical figures and statues was a more nuanced and interesting debate than "Murdering people with cars is wrong."
For the record: murdering people with cars is wrong.
It's remarkable how pbers are more interested in historical debates about statues than about neo-Nazis killing people.
Because we all agree that neo-Nazis (or anyone) killing people is a bad thing?
There's rather more to it than that.
The way in which extreme rightwing views have been allowed into the mainstream so that the weekend's events are now unsurprising is surely worth more discussion.
Popular belief on PB doesn't even understand the current wings of the Tory party: it's not those who voted Leave vs those who voted Remain; it's those who want to implement the referendum result vs those who don't.
That is also true - and the latter group is small.
A reality check: The Moggster does NOT stand a good chance if he gets into the final two. In fact, he would stand very little chance against almost any other possible candidate.
This is a membership that elected IDS... Surely anything is possible?
That was in opposition, and purely because of the EU issue. Contrary to popular belief on PB, the EU won't be a deciding factor after 2019; we'll have left. The issue will be closed, for better or worse.
I'm far from convinced that the average Conservative member is saner now than they were in 2001. All the evidence points to the contrary.
Exactly. I am astounded that a party that I always viewed as being at least sensible (if a bit heartless) has become such a collection of fantasists. The transformation is incredible. I can also understand James Chapman's drive for the "Democrats" simply because there is nowhere for centrist voters to go. Labour is way out to the left and the Tories are charging right.
It's remarkable how pbers are more interested in historical debates about statues than about neo-Nazis killing people.
Because we all agree that neo-Nazis (or anyone) killing people is a bad thing?
There's rather more to it than that.
The way in which extreme rightwing views have been allowed into the mainstream so that the weekend's events are now unsurprising is surely worth more discussion.
Popular belief on PB doesn't even understand the current wings of the Tory party: it's not those who voted Leave vs those who voted Remain; it's those who want to implement the referendum result vs those who don't.
That is also true - and the latter group is small.
Small, and uncannily congruent with the group of people who understand the implications.
“He is not the modern face of the Tory party that we are desperate, or I am certainly and colleagues are certainly desperate, to prove is out there.”
Says more about her than him frankly.
Quite.
That, and the fact that she thinks her say is of such value that a threat to flounce off will be met with anything but laughter.
Yes, because the Brexit loons of the Conservative party are keen for it to become a narrower and less inclusive party.
Evidence ?
We've had Soubry and Allen threaten to flounce out over the weekend if things don't go their way - suggests the tiny Europhile rump are the ones with a problem.
LOL. And who pi**ed off before the referendum? The Euroloons to UKIP. They actually flounced and have seriously damaged the party.
A healthy Conservative party, just a like a healthy Labour party, needs to appeal to as broad a constituency as possible.
Eh?
UKIP have no MPs. They forced a democratic decision that resulted in the Tory vote share returning to mid 40s. How has that seriously damaged the party?
You appear to have forgotten Carswell and the TPD ...
You also appear to have forgotten than the Conservatives had rather more MPs three months ago, and are now led by a deeply damaged leader that has led to the current threader talking about who will replace her.
Yep, serious damage to the party.
Not caused by anything other than May's campaign strategy.
And if the Conservatives believe that, they'll lose worse next time. May's campaign was poor, but IMO not as poor as people make it. It's an excuse for the disaster, and only a very partial one.
A reality check: The Moggster does NOT stand a good chance if he gets into the final two. In fact, he would stand very little chance against almost any other possible candidate.
Disagree entirely.
c/f Cameron
Though, the reality is the chances of there being a member wide election whilst in Govt. are slim.
Precisely - c/f Cameron. You have hit the nail on the head.
Also, I think there will be a full member-wide election this time. I think the most likely scenario is Theresa May bowing out with grace in 2019, having delivered Brexit (in nominal terms at least). She'll probably remain as caretaker leader and PM whilst we have the leadership contest.
I'd be amazed if the Tory membership shunned a Rees-Mogg leadership given the choice. Let's face it, Brexit is going to disappoint and they'll be desperate for something fantastical and revolutionary to put in its place. Mogg fits the bill. Abolishing income tax and high-rise tower blocks - he represents an annulment of the post-war consensus that the vast majority of the hard Right crave. Mogg will be their Trump.
Mrs C, I half-agree. There is plenty of room for a new party. However, Chapman's approach (silly tweets aside) is to make it a wholly EU-phile party, both aping the Lib Dems *and* massively reducing its potential reach.
A new party could work. The Eurosausage Party is perhaps not the optimal approach.
Mr. Meeks, I thought the question of historical figures and statues was a more nuanced and interesting debate than "Murdering people with cars is wrong."
For the record: murdering people with cars is wrong.
Popular belief on PB doesn't even understand the current wings of the Tory party: it's not those who voted Leave vs those who voted Remain; it's those who want to implement the referendum result vs those who don't.
That is also true - and the latter group is small.
“He is not the modern face of the Tory party that we are desperate, or I am certainly and colleagues are certainly desperate, to prove is out there.”
Says more about her than him frankly.
Quite.
That, and the fact that she thinks her say is of such value that a threat to flounce off will be met with anything but laughter.
Yes, because the Brexit loons of the Conservative party are keen for it to become a narrower and less inclusive party.
Evidence ?
We've had Soubry and Allen threaten to flounce out over the weekend if things don't go their way - suggests the tiny Europhile rump are the ones with a problem.
LOL. And who pi**ed off before the referendum? The Euroloons to UKIP. They actually flounced and have seriously damaged the party.
A healthy Conservative party, just a like a healthy Labour party, needs to appeal to as broad a constituency as possible.
Eh?
UKIP have no MPs. They forced a democratic decision that resulted in the Tory vote share returning to mid 40s. How has that seriously damaged the party?
You appear to have forgotten Carswell and the TPD ...
You also appear to have forgotten than the Conservatives had rather more MPs three months ago, and are now led by a deeply damaged leader that has led to the current threader talking about who will replace her.
Yep, serious damage to the party.
Not caused by anything other than May's campaign strategy.
And if the Conservatives believe that, they'll lose worse next time. May's campaign was poor, but IMO not as poor as people make it. It's an excuse for the disaster, and only a very partial one.
The "disaster" of winning the election?
What happened is that May made two mistakes: she didn't do any debates and she trusted the people to accept there were some hard decisions to be made.
[snip]. Labour is way out to the left and the Tories are charging right.
In what way are the Tories 'charging right'? I don't see that at all, if anything Theresa May has taken a position rather to the left of Cameron and Osborne, although the election result means she won't be able to achieve anything much.
It's remarkable how pbers are more interested in historical debates about statues than about neo-Nazis killing people.
Because we all agree that neo-Nazis (or anyone) killing people is a bad thing?
There's rather more to it than that.
The way in which extreme rightwing views have been allowed into the mainstream so that the weekend's events are now unsurprising is surely worth more discussion.
It's remarkable how pbers are more interested in historical debates about statues than about neo-Nazis killing people.
Because we all agree that neo-Nazis (or anyone) killing people is a bad thing?
There's rather more to it than that.
The way in which extreme rightwing views have been allowed into the mainstream so that the weekend's events are now unsurprising is surely worth more discussion.
Sure, but at the moment any discussion is met by accusations of racism of being closet neo-Nazis or Brexiteers, so difficult to have an interesting debate.
It's remarkable how pbers are more interested in historical debates about statues than about neo-Nazis killing people.
Because we all agree that neo-Nazis (or anyone) killing people is a bad thing?
There's rather more to it than that.
The way in which extreme rightwing views have been allowed into the mainstream so that the weekend's events are now unsurprising is surely worth more discussion.
It's remarkable how pbers are more interested in historical debates about statues than about neo-Nazis killing people.
Because we all agree that neo-Nazis (or anyone) killing people is a bad thing?
Charles from last night: "Basically turning up to shout aggressively at a bunch of thick tattooed blokes on steroids is unlikely to promote peace and harmony. If you tried that in my local you'd deserve everything you got"
So Nazis killing people is a bad thing, but the women who was killed deserved it for protesting?
A reality check: The Moggster does NOT stand a good chance if he gets into the final two. In fact, he would stand very little chance against almost any other possible candidate.
This is a membership that elected IDS... Surely anything is possible?
That was in opposition, and purely because of the EU issue. Contrary to popular belief on PB, the EU won't be a deciding factor after 2019; we'll have left. The issue will be closed, for better or worse.
I'm far from convinced that the average Conservative member is saner now than they were in 2001. All the evidence points to the contrary.
Exactly. I am astounded that a party that I always viewed as being at least sensible (if a bit heartless) has become such a collection of fantasists. The transformation is incredible. I can also understand James Chapman's drive for the "Democrats" simply because there is nowhere for centrist voters to go. Labour is way out to the left and the Tories are charging right.
How are they "charging right"?
I can't think of a single radical policy they have at the moment. (disregarding Brexit which was forced on them by the public)
It's remarkable how pbers are more interested in historical debates about statues than about neo-Nazis killing people.
Because we all agree that neo-Nazis (or anyone) killing people is a bad thing?
There's rather more to it than that.
The way in which extreme rightwing views have been allowed into the mainstream so that the weekend's events are now unsurprising is surely worth more discussion.
Coming next from Brendan O'Neill: Why The Jews Had It Coming To Them.
Yes, that's any extremely dark piece by Brendan. The Charlottesville incidents have reflected very badly on his man Trump, so I guess he's just lashing out.
It's remarkable how pbers are more interested in historical debates about statues than about neo-Nazis killing people.
Because we all agree that neo-Nazis (or anyone) killing people is a bad thing?
There's rather more to it than that.
The way in which extreme rightwing views have been allowed into the mainstream so that the weekend's events are now unsurprising is surely worth more discussion.
Brendan O'Neill doesn't half talk some shite. The idea that white supremacy is some new thing in America that is a reaction to divisive safe spacing liberal blah blah blah is such transparently obvious bollocks that I can't even begin to start taking it apart.
A reality check: The Moggster does NOT stand a good chance if he gets into the final two. In fact, he would stand very little chance against almost any other possible candidate.
This is a membership that elected IDS... Surely anything is possible?
That was in opposition, and purely because of the EU issue. Contrary to popular belief on PB, the EU won't be a deciding factor after 2019; we'll have left. The issue will be closed, for better or worse.
I'm far from convinced that the average Conservative member is saner now than they were in 2001. All the evidence points to the contrary.
Exactly. I am astounded that a party that I always viewed as being at least sensible (if a bit heartless) has become such a collection of fantasists. The transformation is incredible. I can also understand James Chapman's drive for the "Democrats" simply because there is nowhere for centrist voters to go. Labour is way out to the left and the Tories are charging right.
How are they "charging right"?
I can't think of a single radical policy they have at the moment. (disregarding Brexit which was forced on them by the public)
That also works if you omit the word "radical". Bunch of directionless puddings.
Still waiting for someone to give a decent analysis of why an intelligent chap who is is an excellent communicator with well founded political beliefs shouldn't be Con leader.
“He is not the modern face of the Tory party that we are desperate, or I am certainly and colleagues are certainly desperate, to prove is out there.”
Says more about her than him frankly.
Quite.
That, and the fact that she thinks her say is of such value that a threat to flounce off will be met with anything but laughter.
Yes, because the Brexit loons of the Conservative party are keen for it to become a narrower and less inclusive party.
Evidence ?
We've had Soubry and Allen threaten to flounce out over the weekend if things don't go their way - suggests the tiny Europhile rump are the ones with a problem.
LOL. And who pi**ed off before the referendum? The Euroloons to UKIP. They actually flounced and have seriously damaged the party.
A healthy Conservative party, just a like a healthy Labour party, needs to appeal to as broad a constituency as possible.
Eh?
UKIP have no MPs. They forced a democratic decision that resulted in the Tory vote share returning to mid 40s. How has that seriously damaged the party?
You appear to have forgotten Carswell and the TPD ...
You also appear to have forgotten than the Conservatives had rather more MPs three months ago, and are now led by a deeply damaged leader that has led to the current threader talking about who will replace her.
Yep, serious damage to the party.
Not caused by anything other than May's campaign strategy.
And if the Conservatives believe that, they'll lose worse next time. May's campaign was poor, but IMO not as poor as people make it. It's an excuse for the disaster, and only a very partial one.
The "disaster" of winning the election?
What happened is that May made two mistakes: she didn't do any debates and she trusted the people to accept there were some hard decisions to be made.
I refer you to my previous post. It was far more complex - and interesting - than that. Blaming May for the loss is only partially true.
Still waiting for someone to give a decent analysis of why an intelligent chap who is is an excellent communicator with well founded political beliefs shouldn't be Con leader.
"Cos he's posh n Brexit" is about it so far.
Because he looks like the sort of person who wears sock suspenders.
Still waiting for someone to give a decent analysis of why an intelligent chap who is is an excellent communicator with well founded political beliefs shouldn't be Con leader.
"Cos he's posh n Brexit" is about it so far.
Because he looks like the sort of person who wears sock suspenders.
With such dazzling political insight it is no wonder Remainers lost the referendum.
While Trump is rightly getting it in the neck for failing to disavow a load of white supremacists, with a statement that he could have cut and paste from Jezza's response to Venezuela, we now have this...
A reality check: The Moggster does NOT stand a good chance if he gets into the final two. In fact, he would stand very little chance against almost any other possible candidate.
This is a membership that elected IDS... Surely anything is possible?
That was in opposition, and purely because of the EU issue. Contrary to popular belief on PB, the EU won't be a deciding factor after 2019; we'll have left. The issue will be closed, for better or worse.
I'm far from convinced that the average Conservative member is saner now than they were in 2001. All the evidence points to the contrary.
Exactly. I am astounded that a party that I always viewed as being at least sensible (if a bit heartless) has become such a collection of fantasists. The transformation is incredible. I can also understand James Chapman's drive for the "Democrats" simply because there is nowhere for centrist voters to go. Labour is way out to the left and the Tories are charging right.
How are they "charging right"?
I can't think of a single radical policy they have at the moment. (disregarding Brexit which was forced on them by the public)
That also works if you omit the word "radical". Bunch of directionless puddings.
Agree completely. Which is why I don't understand this "charging right" idea.
They're right in the middle of the soggy middle ground swamp at the moment and its taking us nowhere.
“He is not the modern face of the Tory party that we are desperate, or I am certainly and colleagues are certainly desperate, to prove is out there.”
Says more about her than him frankly.
Quite.
That, and the fact that she thinks her say is of such value that a threat to flounce off will be met with anything but laughter.
Yes, because the Brexit loons of the Conservative party are keen for it to become a narrower and less inclusive party.
Evidence ?
We've had Soubry and Allen threaten to flounce out over the weekend if things don't go their way - suggests the tiny Europhile rump are the ones with a problem.
LOL. And who pi**ed off before the referendum? The Euroloons to UKIP. They actually flounced and have seriously damaged the party.
A healthy Conservative party, just a like a healthy Labour party, needs to appeal to as broad a constituency as possible.
Eh?
UKIP have no MPs. They forced a democratic decision that resulted in the Tory vote share returning to mid 40s. How has that seriously damaged the party?
You appear to have forgotten Carswell and the TPD ...
You also appear to have forgotten than the Conservatives had rather more MPs three months ago, and are now led by a deeply damaged leader that has led to the current threader talking about who will replace her.
Yep, serious damage to the party.
Not caused by anything other than May's campaign strategy.
And if the Conservatives believe that, they'll lose worse next time. May's campaign was poor, but IMO not as poor as people make it. It's an excuse for the disaster, and only a very partial one.
The "disaster" of winning the election?
What happened is that May made two mistakes: she didn't do any debates and she trusted the people to accept there were some hard decisions to be made.
I refer you to my previous post. It was far more complex - and interesting - than that. Blaming May for the loss is only partially true.
Well, your last post said "they'll lose worse next time", which implies that they lost last time. Which isn't true.
Lee was a traitor. He had taken an oath to the Republic and broke it by serving with the South.
This is really simple.
I have no idea what I am supposed to have been quoting (mid or otherwise) of Kevin O'Higgins.
He had resigned his commission on refusing the command of the Union army. That ended his oath to the Union.
Moreover his oath as a member of the Virginia militia was to defend Virginia.
Can you not see how your points don't measure up or to be exact, apply rather better to you?
I have no time for the far right protesters but if there was one thing guaranteed to inflame the South in the US it is trying to remove a statue of one of their most iconic figures, General Robert E Lee especially as many have pointed out he was personally anti slavery anyway
I was not a big fan of Obama TBH. But he was right when he said that slavery was America's original sin. Its consequences are being played out on the streets of Virginia.
You realise he was just quoting the West Wing?
Lord Marbury : "The darkness in our sunshine, the shadow in our souls, the biblical sins of the fathers. For Americans, it's slavery. Slavery is your original sin. That and your unfortunate history with your aborigines." Toby : "Native Americans." Lord Marbury : "For the English, it's Ireland."
The idea is a great deal older than that. Senator Charles Sumner, opposing Texas’ admission to the union, as a slave state, in 1845:
“Slavery, we are speciously told by those who seek to defend it, is not our original sin. It was entailed upon us, so we are instructed, by our ancestors; and the responsibility is often, with exultation, thrown upon the mother country...”
I am more cynical about Obama's interest in Senatorial debates from the 1840s than you...
Still waiting for someone to give a decent analysis of why an intelligent chap who is is an excellent communicator with well founded political beliefs shouldn't be Con leader.
"Cos he's posh n Brexit" is about it so far.
Because he looks like the sort of person who wears sock suspenders.
With such dazzling political insight it is no wonder Remainers lost the referendum.
Being white, male and posh is 3 strikes too many for some.
Face it if JRM was in the LDs he'd be a shoe in with that CV - although perhaps too young.
It's remarkable how pbers are more interested in historical debates about statues than about neo-Nazis killing people.
Because we all agree that neo-Nazis (or anyone) killing people is a bad thing?
There's rather more to it than that.
The way in which extreme rightwing views have been allowed into the mainstream so that the weekend's events are now unsurprising is surely worth more discussion.
Brendan O'Neill doesn't half talk some shite. The idea that white supremacy is some new thing in America that is a reaction to divisive safe spacing liberal blah blah blah is such transparently obvious bollocks that I can't even begin to start taking it apart.
It defeats itself.
He's just a parody now. When something terrible is done by a rightwinger, he just comes out with the same crap blaming the left.
Still waiting for someone to give a decent analysis of why an intelligent chap who is is an excellent communicator with well founded political beliefs shouldn't be Con leader.
"Cos he's posh n Brexit" is about it so far.
Because he looks like the sort of person who wears sock suspenders.
With such dazzling political insight it is no wonder Remainers lost the referendum.
Being white, male and posh is 3 strikes too many for some.
Face it if JRM was in the LDs he'd be a shoe in with that CV - although perhaps too young.
Surely hasn't predicted a sufficient number of recessions, either?
Still waiting for someone to give a decent analysis of why an intelligent chap who is is an excellent communicator with well founded political beliefs shouldn't be Con leader.
"Cos he's posh n Brexit" is about it so far.
Because he looks like the sort of person who wears sock suspenders.
He used to turn up to junk trips in Hong Kong in a tweed jacket, cords, tie and scarf. In Hong Kong.
[snip]. Labour is way out to the left and the Tories are charging right.
In what way are the Tories 'charging right'? I don't see that at all, if anything Theresa May has taken a position rather to the left of Cameron and Osborne, although the election result means she won't be able to achieve anything much.
In that case, perhaps I am charging left, but not as fast as Labour?
It's remarkable how pbers are more interested in historical debates about statues than about neo-Nazis killing people.
Because we all agree that neo-Nazis (or anyone) killing people is a bad thing?
Charles from last night: "Basically turning up to shout aggressively at a bunch of thick tattooed blokes on steroids is unlikely to promote peace and harmony. If you tried that in my local you'd deserve everything you got"
So Nazis killing people is a bad thing, but the women who was killed deserved it for protesting?
No: what I said, not what you think I said.
Counter-protests are almost always counter-productive and tend to lead to violence. There are many people who go on them who do not intend this to be the case, but unfortunately they are often hijacked by anarchists and other people spoiling for a fight.
I'm not trying to defend the alleged murderer's actions in any way, whatsoever. I have asked whether the riot - which was in part caused by the counter protesters - was a contributory factor to *this* particular murder. (I suspect that, if not this time, then he would have done the same thing on a future occasion unless he was locked up beforehand.)
But I doubt we will agree, so I suggest we stop boring people.
[snip]. Labour is way out to the left and the Tories are charging right.
In what way are the Tories 'charging right'? I don't see that at all, if anything Theresa May has taken a position rather to the left of Cameron and Osborne, although the election result means she won't be able to achieve anything much.
Flailing around to the Brexit result as it may have been, kite flying as it may have been, and misinterpreted as it may have been, looking to record the number of foreign employees in the state, bringing back hunting and grammar schools, and indeed Brexit itself have all been interpreted as a move "right".
Lee was a traitor. He had taken an oath to the Republic and broke it by serving with the South.
This is really simple.
I have no idea what I am supposed to have been quoting (mid or otherwise) of Kevin O'Higgins.
He had resigned his commission on refusing the command of the Union army. That ended his oath to the Union.
Moreover his oath as a member of the Virginia militia was to defend Virginia.
Can you not see how your points don't measure up or to be exact, apply rather better to you?
I have no time for the far right protesters but if there was one thing guaranteed to inflame the South in the US it is trying to remove a statue of one of their most iconic figures, General Robert E Lee especially as many have pointed out he was personally anti slavery anyway
I was not a big fan of Obama TBH. But he was right when he said that slavery was America's original sin. Its consequences are being played out on the streets of Virginia.
You realise he was just quoting the West Wing?
Lord Marbury : "The darkness in our sunshine, the shadow in our souls, the biblical sins of the fathers. For Americans, it's slavery. Slavery is your original sin. That and your unfortunate history with your aborigines." Toby : "Native Americans." Lord Marbury : "For the English, it's Ireland."
The idea is a great deal older than that. Senator Charles Sumner, opposing Texas’ admission to the union, as a slave state, in 1845:
“Slavery, we are speciously told by those who seek to defend it, is not our original sin. It was entailed upon us, so we are instructed, by our ancestors; and the responsibility is often, with exultation, thrown upon the mother country...”
I am more cynical about Obama's interest in Senatorial debates from the 1840s than you...
I'm willing to admit you're more cynicalrealistic...
Still waiting for someone to give a decent analysis of why an intelligent chap who is is an excellent communicator with well founded political beliefs shouldn't be Con leader.
"Cos he's posh n Brexit" is about it so far.
Because he looks like the sort of person who wears sock suspenders.
With such dazzling political insight it is no wonder Remainers lost the referendum.
Being white, male and posh is 3 strikes too many for some.
Face it if JRM was in the LDs he'd be a shoe in with that CV - although perhaps too young.
Nothing wrong with being white, male and posh. Though it's ironic that Dave's critics on the hard Right never shied away from using his poshness against him (price of milk etc.). Mogg's problem is that he seems to inhabit a pre-war pastoral English fantasy. It reminds me of Marie Antoinette pretending to be a shepherdess. Jezza will love it as it will make him look like a man of the people.
Still waiting for someone to give a decent analysis of why an intelligent chap who is is an excellent communicator with well founded political beliefs shouldn't be Con leader.
"Cos he's posh n Brexit" is about it so far.
Because he looks like the sort of person who wears sock suspenders.
With such dazzling political insight it is no wonder Remainers lost the referendum.
Being white, male and posh is 3 strikes too many for some.
I can cope with the "white, male and posh" bit. What worries me about him is his apparent disconnection from the reality of everyday life. Scrapping income tax? It is a wonderful concept but politically and financially it is going nowhere. His other utterances in the past seem to put him somewhere in the social equivalent of the 1930s.
[snip]. Labour is way out to the left and the Tories are charging right.
In what way are the Tories 'charging right'? I don't see that at all, if anything Theresa May has taken a position rather to the left of Cameron and Osborne, although the election result means she won't be able to achieve anything much.
In that case, perhaps I am charging left, but not as fast as Labour?
There seems to be an idea that actually implementing the referendum result is a right-wing idea, which leads to those who think it should be ignored to call themselves "centrists".
It's remarkable how pbers are more interested in historical debates about statues than about neo-Nazis killing people.
Because we all agree that neo-Nazis (or anyone) killing people is a bad thing?
Charles from last night: "Basically turning up to shout aggressively at a bunch of thick tattooed blokes on steroids is unlikely to promote peace and harmony. If you tried that in my local you'd deserve everything you got"
So Nazis killing people is a bad thing, but the women who was killed deserved it for protesting?
No: what I said, not what you think I said.
Counter-protests are almost always counter-productive and tend to lead to violence. There are many people who go on them who do not intend this to be the case, but unfortunately they are often hijacked by anarchists and other people spoiling for a fight.
I'm not trying to defend the alleged murderer's actions in any way, whatsoever. I have asked whether the riot - which was in part caused by the counter protesters - was a contributory factor to *this* particular murder. (I suspect that, if not this time, then he would have done the same thing on a future occasion unless he was locked up beforehand.)
But I doubt we will agree, so I suggest we stop boring people.
[snip]. Labour is way out to the left and the Tories are charging right.
In what way are the Tories 'charging right'? I don't see that at all, if anything Theresa May has taken a position rather to the left of Cameron and Osborne, although the election result means she won't be able to achieve anything much.
In that case, perhaps I am charging left, but not as fast as Labour?
There seems to be an idea that actually implementing the referendum result is a right-wing idea, which leads to those who think it should be ignored to call themselves "centrists".
It is not the implementation of the result, although it is not being implemented at all well, but the accompanying rhetoric that gets airtime seems to be predominately from the more extreme wing of the party.
[snip]. Labour is way out to the left and the Tories are charging right.
In what way are the Tories 'charging right'? I don't see that at all, if anything Theresa May has taken a position rather to the left of Cameron and Osborne, although the election result means she won't be able to achieve anything much.
Flailing around to the Brexit result as it may have been, kite flying as it may have been, and misinterpreted as it may have been, looking to record the number of foreign employees in the state, bringing back hunting and grammar schools, and indeed Brexit itself have all been interpreted as a move "right".
[snip]. Labour is way out to the left and the Tories are charging right.
In what way are the Tories 'charging right'? I don't see that at all, if anything Theresa May has taken a position rather to the left of Cameron and Osborne, although the election result means she won't be able to achieve anything much.
In that case, perhaps I am charging left, but not as fast as Labour?
There seems to be an idea that actually implementing the referendum result is a right-wing idea, which leads to those who think it should be ignored to call themselves "centrists".
It is not the implementation of the result, although it is not being implemented at all well, but the accompanying rhetoric that gets airtime seems to be predominately from the more extreme wing of the party.
"Seems to be" allows for an awful lot of confirmation bias, to be fair.
Flailing around to the Brexit result as it may have been, kite flying as it may have been, and misinterpreted as it may have been, looking to record the number of foreign employees in the state, bringing back hunting and grammar schools, and indeed Brexit itself have all been interpreted as a move "right".
Against that, we've had talk of more regulation of electricity prices, a big emphasis on the 'JAMs', the proposed changes to social care, proposals to reduce payments to wealthy pensioners, changes to make National Insurance more equitable, vague proposals to increase worker participation in company boards, proposals to curb executive pay, and so on. Overall, it's certainly not a lurch to the right; perhaps a smidgen of a move rightwards on social issues but a move slightly leftwards on economic issues.
Of course, it's largely academic now, since most of Theresa May's programme has been abandoned..
Still waiting for someone to give a decent analysis of why an intelligent chap who is is an excellent communicator with well founded political beliefs shouldn't be Con leader.
"Cos he's posh n Brexit" is about it so far.
Because he looks like the sort of person who wears sock suspenders.
With such dazzling political insight it is no wonder Remainers lost the referendum.
Being white, male and posh is 3 strikes too many for some.
Face it if JRM was in the LDs he'd be a shoe in with that CV - although perhaps too young.
Nothing wrong with being white, male and posh. Though it's ironic that Dave's critics on the hard Right never shied away from using his poshness against him (price of milk etc.). Mogg's problem is that he seems to inhabit a pre-war pastoral English fantasy. It reminds me of Marie Antoinette pretending to be a shepherdess. Jezza will love it as it will make him look like a man of the people.
Jezza living in a cold war pastoral Soviet fantasy nearly won him the election.
Flailing around to the Brexit result as it may have been, kite flying as it may have been, and misinterpreted as it may have been, looking to record the number of foreign employees in the state, bringing back hunting and grammar schools, and indeed Brexit itself have all been interpreted as a move "right".
Against that, we've had talk of more regulation of electricity prices, a big emphasis on the 'JAMs', the proposed changes to social care, proposals to reduce payments to wealthy pensioners, changes to make National Insurance more equitable, vague proposals to increase worker participation in company boards, proposals to curb executive pay, and so on. Overall, it's certainly not a lurch to the right; perhaps a smidgen of a move rightwards on social issues but a move slightly leftwards on economic issues.
Of course, it's largely academic now, since most of Theresa May's programme has been abandoned..
I don't think the JAMs idea lasted to the election, did it?
Still waiting for someone to give a decent analysis of why an intelligent chap who is is an excellent communicator with well founded political beliefs shouldn't be Con leader.
"Cos he's posh n Brexit" is about it so far.
Because he looks like the sort of person who wears sock suspenders.
With such dazzling political insight it is no wonder Remainers lost the referendum.
Being white, male and posh is 3 strikes too many for some.
I can cope with the "white, male and posh" bit. What worries me about him is his apparent disconnection from the reality of everyday life. Scrapping income tax? It is a wonderful concept but politically and financially it is going nowhere. His other utterances in the past seem to put him somewhere in the social equivalent of the 1930s.
I googled JRM and scrapping income tax and came up with nothing.
It's remarkable how pbers are more interested in historical debates about statues than about neo-Nazis killing people.
Because we all agree that neo-Nazis (or anyone) killing people is a bad thing?
There's rather more to it than that.
The way in which extreme rightwing views have been allowed into the mainstream so that the weekend's events are now unsurprising is surely worth more discussion.
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
I'm fairly confident that the governor is exaggerating. After the Iraq drawdown police forces across America have been given all sorts of surplus military equipment. Tiny little police forces in the middle of nowhere can have weapons and vehicles that would more commonly be used for war-fighting thanks to the 1033 program.
Lee was a traitor. He had taken an oath to the Republic and broke it by serving with the South.
This is really simple.
I have no idea what I am supposed to have been quoting (mid or otherwise) of Kevin O'Higgins.
He had resigned his commission on refusing the command of the Union army. That ended his oath to the Union.
Moreover his oath as a member of the Virginia militia was to defend Virginia.
Can you not see how your points don't measure up or to be exact, apply rather better to you?
I have no time for the far right protesters but if there was one thing guaranteed to inflame the South in the US it is trying to remove a statue of one of their most iconic figures, General Robert E Lee especially as many have pointed out he was personally anti slavery anyway
I was not a big fan of Obama TBH. But he was right when he said that slavery was America's original sin. Its consequences are being played out on the streets of Virginia.
You realise he was just quoting the West Wing?
Lord Marbury : "The darkness in our sunshine, the shadow in our souls, the biblical sins of the fathers. For Americans, it's slavery. Slavery is your original sin. That and your unfortunate history with your aborigines." Toby : "Native Americans." Lord Marbury : "For the English, it's Ireland."
The idea is a great deal older than that. Senator Charles Sumner, opposing Texas’ admission to the union, as a slave state, in 1845:
“Slavery, we are speciously told by those who seek to defend it, is not our original sin. It was entailed upon us, so we are instructed, by our ancestors; and the responsibility is often, with exultation, thrown upon the mother country...”
I am more cynical about Obama's interest in Senatorial debates from the 1840s than you...
I'm willing to admit you're more cynicalrealistic...
fixed it for ya
I'll concede that man who confuses his own prejudices with realism is probably not a cynic; certainly not a sceptic.
It's remarkable how pbers are more interested in historical debates about statues than about neo-Nazis killing people.
Because we all agree that neo-Nazis (or anyone) killing people is a bad thing?
There's rather more to it than that.
The way in which extreme rightwing views have been allowed into the mainstream so that the weekend's events are now unsurprising is surely worth more discussion.
In an act of Socialist solidarity I have eaten my Cameroon banana. I've now moved on to a pair of greengages that appear to have no political affiliation, except for their obvious, er, greenness.
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
I'm fairly confident that the governor is exaggerating. After the Iraq drawdown police forces across America have been given all sorts of surplus military equipment. Tiny little police forces in the middle of nowhere can have weapons and vehicles that would more commonly be used for war-fighting thanks to the 1033 program.
The second amendment does not of course stipulate what kind of arms. That has by long-standing convention been left to the State. This is why you don't see privately owned tanks on lawns and thermonuclear devices at the bottom of suburban gardens. The State in its wisdom draws a line on what arms it will and will not allow its citizens to bear. Most sensible and civilised States do likewise, although there is huge variation in where that line is drawn from State to State.
In Europe, we tend to be a bit shocked at the type of arsenals allowed to US citizens by its government. In doing so, we are apt to forget the Nation's history and its right for self-determination. There are no votes in Gun Control in the USA. Nothing's going to change any time soon.
Still waiting for someone to give a decent analysis of why an intelligent chap who is is an excellent communicator with well founded political beliefs shouldn't be Con leader.
"Cos he's posh n Brexit" is about it so far.
Because he looks like the sort of person who wears sock suspenders.
With such dazzling political insight it is no wonder Remainers lost the referendum.
Being white, male and posh is 3 strikes too many for some.
Face it if JRM was in the LDs he'd be a shoe in with that CV - although perhaps too young.
Nothing wrong with being white, male and posh. Though it's ironic that Dave's critics on the hard Right never shied away from using his poshness against him (price of milk etc.). Mogg's problem is that he seems to inhabit a pre-war pastoral English fantasy. It reminds me of Marie Antoinette pretending to be a shepherdess. Jezza will love it as it will make him look like a man of the people.
Jezza living in a cold war pastoral Soviet fantasy nearly won him the election.
Jacob Rees Mogg v Jeremy Corbyn would give you the choice of either returning to the 1950s or the 1970s
It's remarkable how pbers are more interested in historical debates about statues than about neo-Nazis killing people.
Because we all agree that neo-Nazis (or anyone) killing people is a bad thing?
There's rather more to it than that.
The way in which extreme rightwing views have been allowed into the mainstream so that the weekend's events are now unsurprising is surely worth more discussion.
Brendan O'Neill doesn't half talk some shite. The idea that white supremacy is some new thing in America that is a reaction to divisive safe spacing liberal blah blah blah is such transparently obvious bollocks that I can't even begin to start taking it apart.
It defeats itself.
Just the left reaping what they have sowen, and they don't like it and like you are in denial.
Its a natural consequence of the BS the left have been propagating for decades, and finally the right have decided ok we'll play you at your game. Lefties are now crying foul now as their tactics are being used against them. The Trump presidency being one manifestation of this.
I don't like the results, but its amusing watching the Left & their establishment lose their collective minds.
Still waiting for someone to give a decent analysis of why an intelligent chap who is is an excellent communicator with well founded political beliefs shouldn't be Con leader.
"Cos he's posh n Brexit" is about it so far.
Because he looks like the sort of person who wears sock suspenders.
With such dazzling political insight it is no wonder Remainers lost the referendum.
Being white, male and posh is 3 strikes too many for some.
Face it if JRM was in the LDs he'd be a shoe in with that CV - although perhaps too young.
Nothing wrong with being white, male and posh. Though it's ironic that Dave's critics on the hard Right never shied away from using his poshness against him (price of milk etc.). Mogg's problem is that he seems to inhabit a pre-war pastoral English fantasy. It reminds me of Marie Antoinette pretending to be a shepherdess. Jezza will love it as it will make him look like a man of the people.
Jezza living in a cold war pastoral Soviet fantasy nearly won him the election.
Jacob Rees Mogg v Jeremy Corbyn would give you the choice of either returning to the 1950s or the 1970s
a) Looks generous b) Indicates that Lads have no idea who will win.
Evens shows this market is for PR not profit. No bookie will make money offering evens on the toss of a coin. Betting on an actual coin toss in cricket matches is 10/11 each of two.
In an act of Socialist solidarity I have eaten my Cameroon banana. I've now moved on to a pair of greengages that appear to have no political affiliation, except for their obvious, er, greenness.
"no political affiliation..." Not entirely, as too many greengages will definitely lead to a dose of the trots...
In Europe, we tend to be a bit shocked at the type of arsenals allowed to US citizens by its government. In doing so, we are apt to forget the Nation's history and its right for self-determination. There are no votes in Gun Control in the USA. Nothing's going to change any time soon.
I don't dispute that citizens can be heavily armed, I simply think that the claim that the State Police are out-gunned is likely to be an exaggeration. American police have been given a huge amount of surplus military hardware, and are also recipients of billions of dollars of funding for equipment since the formation of the DHS. The ongoing militarization of American policing has been a hot topic for many years now.
a) Looks generous b) Indicates that Lads have no idea who will win.
Evens shows this market is for PR not profit. No bookie will make money offering evens on the toss of a coin. Betting on an actual coin toss in cricket matches is 10/11 each of two.
Wouldn't they make money on sweeping the field though?
“He is not the modern face of the Tory party that we are desperate, or I am certainly and colleagues are certainly desperate, to prove is out there.”
Says more about her than him frankly.
Quite.
That, and the fact that she thinks her say is of such value that a threat to flounce off will be met with anything but laughter.
Yes, because the Brexit loons of the Conservative party are keen for it to become a narrower and less inclusive party.
Evidence ?
We've had Soubry and Allen threaten to flounce out over the weekend if things don't go their way - suggests the tiny Europhile rump are the ones with a problem.
LOL. And who pi**ed off before the referendum? The Euroloons to UKIP. They actually flounced and have seriously damaged the party.
A healthy Conservative party, just a like a healthy Labour party, needs to appeal to as broad a constituency as possible.
I can remember, however, frequently being told at various points "why don't you sod off, and join UKIP?" So, I did, for a time.
Comments
Woohoo!
https://socialtextjournal.org/original-sin-slavery-and-american-innocence/
And very two-edged: the point about *original* sin being that you can't do anything about it, so why bother trying?
Though I hope you're correct.
But we're talking about the good of the Conservative Party here, not the country. The two are often coincident, but need not be.
Senator Charles Sumner, opposing Texas’ admission to the union, as a slave state, in 1845:
“Slavery, we are speciously told by those who seek to defend it, is not our original sin. It was entailed upon us, so we are instructed, by our ancestors; and the responsibility is often, with exultation, thrown upon the mother country...”
You also appear to have forgotten than the Conservatives had rather more MPs three months ago, and are now led by a deeply damaged leader that has led to the current threader talking about who will replace her.
Yep, serious damage to the party.
For the record: murdering people with cars is wrong.
The way in which extreme rightwing views have been allowed into the mainstream so that the weekend's events are now unsurprising is surely worth more discussion.
A new party could work. The Eurosausage Party is perhaps not the optimal approach.
Same way saying that the people who decided to remove the statues are the same as the violent Nazis.
Short version: google it.
What happened is that May made two mistakes: she didn't do any debates and she trusted the people to accept there were some hard decisions to be made.
https://twitter.com/MorrisF1/status/886250350948364288
Anyway, I must be off.
Thanks, Edmund!
"Basically turning up to shout aggressively at a bunch of thick tattooed blokes on steroids is unlikely to promote peace and harmony. If you tried that in my local you'd deserve everything you got"
So Nazis killing people is a bad thing, but the women who was killed deserved it for protesting?
I can't think of a single radical policy they have at the moment.
(disregarding Brexit which was forced on them by the public)
It defeats itself.
"Cos he's posh n Brexit" is about it so far.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/aug/14/australias-deputy-pm-barnaby-joyce-revealed-to-be-a-new-zealander
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/14/labour-mp-aide-john-mcdonnell-condemned-wishing-fidel-castro/
They're right in the middle of the soggy middle ground swamp at the moment and its taking us nowhere.
Face it if JRM was in the LDs he'd be a shoe in with that CV - although perhaps too young.
Counter-protests are almost always counter-productive and tend to lead to violence. There are many people who go on them who do not intend this to be the case, but unfortunately they are often hijacked by anarchists and other people spoiling for a fight.
I'm not trying to defend the alleged murderer's actions in any way, whatsoever. I have asked whether the riot - which was in part caused by the counter protesters - was a contributory factor to *this* particular murder. (I suspect that, if not this time, then he would have done the same thing on a future occasion unless he was locked up beforehand.)
But I doubt we will agree, so I suggest we stop boring people.
What next? A Blairite satsuma?
Of course, we all know that in Tezzie, the Tories picked a lemon.
89 likes on facebook: https://www.facebook.com/demarcationdesign/
31 followers on Twitter: https://twitter.com/DMRCTN_Design
And 23 on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/demarcationdesign/
So, still a way to go.....
Of course, it's largely academic now, since most of Theresa May's programme has been abandoned..
Did you mean Stamp Duty ?
A native English fruit that's a bit up itself...
http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2017/08/14/hammond-gets-into-bed-with-the-brexit-headbangers
In Europe, we tend to be a bit shocked at the type of arsenals allowed to US citizens by its government. In doing so, we are apt to forget the Nation's history and its right for self-determination. There are no votes in Gun Control in the USA. Nothing's going to change any time soon.
Its a natural consequence of the BS the left have been propagating for decades, and finally the right have decided ok we'll play you at your game. Lefties are now crying foul now as their tactics are being used against them. The Trump presidency being one manifestation of this.
I don't like the results, but its amusing watching the Left & their establishment lose their collective minds.
a) Looks generous
b) Indicates that Lads have no idea who will win.
Not entirely, as too many greengages will definitely lead to a dose of the trots...