I'd be 99% confident Labour would hold Sheffield Hallam in a general election, but I suspect the LibDems would have a chance in a mid-term byelection. They'd be able to find some local issue (dog muck covering a particular road, etc.) to latch onto.
I'd be 99% confident Labour would hold Sheffield Hallam in a general election, but I suspect the LibDems would have a chance in a mid-term byelection. They'd be able to find some local issue (dog muck covering a particular road, etc.) to latch onto.
The trees
The Labour council are cutting them down and it is causing real anger.
I think if there a by election, I'd go campaign for Clegg or another Lib Dem candidate, and I think I wouldn't be the only Tory activist to do so.
But with Clegg gone, how many of the Hallam Tory voters that Clegg borrowed would return home - especially after their unhappy experience with their current twat of an MP?
Hallam was Tory until 1997 yes.
A constituency where roughly 2 in 3 voted Remain does not look particularly fertile ground for the May incarnation of the Conservative party.
Even in June some Remain seats voted Tory and now May is making concessions on money and citizens rights for a FTA some voters who voted for Clegg could consider the Tories if Clegg does not stand again.
If Clegg does stand and there is a by election he is the most likely anti Labour option though.
Dream on. The Conservatives are giving no reasons for Remain voters to consider them. Only those Remain voters with a historical blind tribal loyalty continue to cling to them. Bit by bit, however, they are drifting away.
And the Tories are going to get hammered in the local elections in London next year for that very reason.
The 2014 London local elections were so good for Labour, that I suspect there's not much more to gain.
People said that about this year's general election, how there was little scope for further Labour gains in London because 2015 was already "so good" for them, but there was a further big swing to them anyway.
In 2014 Labour got 37% of the vote - the latest London yougov put them at no less than 53%. The Tories got 26% last time - now yougov has them at 29. If the results are anywhere close to those numbers the Tories will be reduced to Wandsworth and a handful of outer boroughs.
I think if there a by election, I'd go campaign for Clegg or another Lib Dem candidate, and I think I wouldn't be the only Tory activist to do so.
But with Clegg gone, how many of the Hallam Tory voters that Clegg borrowed would return home - especially after their unhappy experience with their current twat of an MP?
Hallam was Tory until 1997 yes.
A constituency where roughly 2 in 3 voted Remain does not look particularly fertile ground for the May incarnation of the Conservative party.
Even in June some Remain seats voted Tory and now May is making concessions on money and citizens rights for a FTA some voters who voted for Clegg could consider the Tories if Clegg does not stand again.
If Clegg does stand and there is a by election he is the most likely anti Labour option though.
Dream on. The Conservatives are giving no reasons for Remain voters to consider them. Only those Remain voters with a historical blind tribal loyalty continue to cling to them. Bit by bit, however, they are drifting away.
Remain/Brexit is far from the sole determinant of why people vote as they do. You can still be a Tory Remainer who thinks Corbyn would be a disaster and the LibDems are risible.
Indeed. In June the Tories won back 70% Remain Richmond Park but lost 65% Leave Dagenham.
(Although they did see a 23,000 vote majority reduced to 45. So I don't think they can be too proud. Of course, had any other Conservative been the candidate, I suspect it would have been a comfortable hold.)
Nonetheless it was still a Tory hold which should have been a LD gain if the vote had gone in line with the referendum as it did in the by election. Lewes, Cheltenham and Tunbridge Wells and Guildford were also LD targets which voted Remain the Tories held. Though of course the Tories won far fewer Labour Leave seats than they were expecting to too.
I don't think anyone (with the possible exception of Alistair Meeks or William Glenn) is suggesting that Remain/Brexit is going to be the sole determinant of people's vote. If I lived in Richmond Park, I would have abstained, simply because Zac is such a monumental penis.
I think if there a by election, I'd go campaign for Clegg or another Lib Dem candidate, and I think I wouldn't be the only Tory activist to do so.
But with Clegg gone, how many of the Hallam Tory voters that Clegg borrowed would return home - especially after their unhappy experience with their current twat of an MP?
Hallam was Tory until 1997 yes.
A constituency where roughly 2 in 3 voted Remain does not look particularly fertile ground for the May incarnation of the Conservative party.
Even in June some Remain seats voted Tory and now May is making concessions on money and citizens rights for a FTA some voters who voted for Clegg could consider the Tories if Clegg does not stand again.
If Clegg does stand and there is a by election he is the most likely anti Labour option though.
Dream on. The Conservatives are giving no reasons for Remain voters to consider them. Only those Remain voters with a historical blind tribal loyalty continue to cling to them. Bit by bit, however, they are drifting away.
Remain/Brexit is far from the sole determinant of why people vote as they do. You can still be a Tory Remainer who thinks Corbyn would be a disaster and the LibDems are risible.
"We hate you and think you're crazy, now vote for us because the other lot are crazier" is not a particularly compelling pitch.
Keep digging. It doesn't need a much bigger hole to inter the remains of your credibility.
My credibility is of no account. The Conservatives' willingness to incinerate any chance of any support from a large chunk of the electorate by being as abusive as possible to them in pursuit of the hardest possible Brexit is, however, rather more important.
You'll have evidence for that abuse then?
The country took a decision; the government is implementing it. There may be (indeed, are being) votes swung on how well it's implemented but I that's a different matter and is more an aspect of politic-as-usual: how well the government does its job.
"citizens of nowhere" "crush the saboteurs" "treachery"
That do for starters?
Try that again, with terms that resonate outside of Islington...
I think if there a by election, I'd go campaign for Clegg or another Lib Dem candidate, and I think I wouldn't be the only Tory activist to do so.
But with Clegg gone, how many of the Hallam Tory voters that Clegg borrowed would return home - especially after their unhappy experience with their current twat of an MP?
Hallam was Tory until 1997 yes.
A constituency where roughly 2 in 3 voted Remain does not look particularly fertile ground for the May incarnation of the Conservative party.
Even in June some Remain seats voted Tory and now May is making concessions on money and citizens rights for a FTA some voters who voted for Clegg could consider the Tories if Clegg does not stand again.
If Clegg does stand and there is a by election he is the most likely anti Labour option though.
Dream on. The Conservatives are giving no reasons for Remain voters to consider them. Only those Remain voters with a historical blind tribal loyalty continue to cling to them. Bit by bit, however, they are drifting away.
I think that is very true. In parallel I know some young people who don't regard Brexit as so much a poor policy choice and more a sign of bad character if not positively evil intent. They seem to disapprove of the Tories even more strongly than some people used to of Fatcher when I was a young person. I get the impression that they would vote for absolutely anyone to get rid of the people behind it. There may not be many of them, and they may not turn out to have any significant impact. But I do think the Tories have managed to create some highly motivated enemies.
I think if there a by election, I'd go campaign for Clegg or another Lib Dem candidate, and I think I wouldn't be the only Tory activist to do so.
But with Clegg gone, how many of the Hallam Tory voters that Clegg borrowed would return home - especially after their unhappy experience with their current twat of an MP?
Hallam was Tory until 1997 yes.
A constituency where roughly 2 in 3 voted Remain does not look particularly fertile ground for the May incarnation of the Conservative party.
Even in June some Remain seats voted Tory and now May is making concessions on money and citizens rights for a FTA some voters who voted for Clegg could consider the Tories if Clegg does not stand again.
If Clegg does stand and there is a by election he is the most likely anti Labour option though.
Dream on. The Conservatives are giving no reasons for Remain voters to consider them. Only those Remain voters with a historical blind tribal loyalty continue to cling to them. Bit by bit, however, they are drifting away.
Remain/Brexit is far from the sole determinant of why people vote as they do. You can still be a Tory Remainer who thinks Corbyn would be a disaster and the LibDems are risible.
"We hate you and think you're crazy, now vote for us because the other lot are crazier" is not a particularly compelling pitch.
Keep digging. It doesn't need a much bigger hole to inter the remains of your credibility.
My credibility is of no account. The Conservatives' willingness to incinerate any chance of any support from a large chunk of the electorate by being as abusive as possible to them in pursuit of the hardest possible Brexit is, however, rather more important.
Back in the day, there were people who supported joining the Euro, who nonetheless voted Conservative.
Attitudes towards Brexit are a big determinant of voting intention, but by no means the only one.
Back in the day, there were people who supported joining the Euro who were Conservative cabinet ministers!
Completely off topic: my new company is now in existence. Very exciting! I will have to go and find some work now.......
Good luck, it’s always a little daunting the day you decide to work for yourself but it’s usually the right decision and I’m sure you will be successful.
I shall be selling my investigative skills and the talks (and workshops) I have been delivering on banking culture and conduct for some years now. They are - and I realise I am boasting - bloody good - since I don’t mince my words and don’t talk like a lawyer (very poor communicators most of them when it comes to anything other than pure law) - and much needed. If the financial sector does not pull its socks up, it won’t be for want of trying on my part.
And I am planning to expand into other areas, which I’d already started in a small way.
I have no idea whether anyone will be interested. But sometimes you just have to try rather than wonder “what if?”, don’t you?
I think if there a by election, I'd go campaign for Clegg or another Lib Dem candidate, and I think I wouldn't be the only Tory activist to do so.
But with Clegg gone, how many of the Hallam Tory voters that Clegg borrowed would return home - especially after their unhappy experience with their current twat of an MP?
Hallam was Tory until 1997 yes.
A constituency where roughly 2 in 3 voted Remain does not look particularly fertile ground for the May incarnation of the Conservative party.
Even in June some Remain seats voted Tory and now May is making concessions on money and citizens rights for a FTA some voters who voted for Clegg could consider the Tories if Clegg does not stand again.
If Clegg does stand and there is a by election he is the most likely anti Labour option though.
Dream on. The Conservatives are giving no reasons for Remain voters to consider them. Only those Remain voters with a historical blind tribal loyalty continue to cling to them. Bit by bit, however, they are drifting away.
And the Tories are going to get hammered in the local elections in London next year for that very reason.
The 2014 London local elections were so good for Labour, that I suspect there's not much more to gain.
People said that about this year's general election, how there was little scope for further Labour gains in London because 2015 was already "so good" for them, but there was a further big swing to them anyway.
In 2014 Labour got 37% of the vote - the latest London yougov put them at no less than 53%. The Tories got 26% last time - now yougov has them at 29. If the results are anywhere close to those numbers the Tories will be reduced to Wandsworth and a handful of outer boroughs.
The Green Party polls far better in London local elections than in Parliamentary elections, mostly at the expense of Labour.
I am beginning to wonder if we will actually leave.
Consider:
1) The talks are going nowhere - we are more than a quarter of the way through the A50 period and agreement has not yet been reached on even the three "first stage" topics, let alone the much more complex transition arrangements; 2) The government has all but conceded that it cannot get the repeal bill through Parliament in its current form and seems to have no idea what to do next; 3) Work has not yet started on the many new systems, agencies and procedures (immigration, customs, air safety etc etc etc) that would be required in the case of a hard exit. The chances of any of this work being complete by March 2019 are zero.
Leaving is therefore not practically possible in the time available. The politics have not yet caught up with the realities of the situation.
My prediction FWIW:
1. December will see agreement on moving to the next stage, on the basis that Britain accepts that the final bill will be substantially more than £20 bn and the EU27 agree that discussion in principle of the transition period is now urgent. The rights of foreign citizens issue will be largely settled and some sort of Irish fudge will be envisaged. People will generally see all this as significant progress and the pressure on May will ease for a while.
2. Details will prove really hard, and we'll have a more serious crunch around the middle of 2018. Best case outcome could be agreement in principle on both £££s and transition and on extending the A50 process by one year ("stopping the clock"). Worst case would be UK government collapse and suspension of negotiations while that's resolved.
It is very hard to see May surviving the compromises and retreats that you (correctly) envisage. Political crisis must be odds on I think.
Not even clear May can get the Great Repeal Bill through at the moment. So, yes, crisis is looming I think.
Maybe that's her strategy; just let everything twist in the wind until it's too late and even the thickest fucking leaver (I'm talking C4 vox pop on the streets of West Yorkshire levels) realises Brexit is impossible.
A little too intricate and nefarious a plan to have been pulled off or even attempted.
Why? Kicking the can down the road until you can make the problem go away is the oldest strategy in the world.
I don't think she'd be capable of pulling it off. It's a competence issue.
I think if there a by election, I'd go campaign for Clegg or another Lib Dem candidate, and I think I wouldn't be the only Tory activist to do so.
But with Clegg gone, how many of the Hallam Tory voters that Clegg borrowed would return home - especially after their unhappy experience with their current twat of an MP?
Hallam was Tory until 1997 yes.
A constituency where roughly 2 in 3 voted Remain does not look particularly fertile ground for the May incarnation of the Conservative party.
Even in June some Remain seats voted Tory and now May is making concessions on money and citizens rights for a FTA some voters who voted for Clegg could consider the Tories if Clegg does not stand again.
If Clegg does stand and there is a by election he is the most likely anti Labour option though.
Dream on. The Conservatives are giving no reasons for Remain voters to consider them. Only those Remain voters with a historical blind tribal loyalty continue to cling to them. Bit by bit, however, they are drifting away.
I think that is very true. In parallel I know some young people who don't regard Brexit as so much a poor policy choice and more a sign of bad character if not positively evil intent. They seem to disapprove of the Tories even more strongly than some people used to of Fatcher when I was a young person. I get the impression that they would vote for absolutely anyone to get rid of the people behind it. There may not be many of them, and they may not turn out to have any significant impact. But I do think the Tories have managed to create some highly motivated enemies.
People who would view support for Brexit as a sign of a bad character would never have voted Conservative if you paid them.
I think if there a by election, I'd go campaign for Clegg or another Lib Dem candidate, and I think I wouldn't be the only Tory activist to do so.
But with Clegg gone, how many of the Hallam Tory voters that Clegg borrowed would return home - especially after their unhappy experience with their current twat of an MP?
Hallam was Tory until 1997 yes.
A constituency where roughly 2 in 3 voted Remain does not look particularly fertile ground for the May incarnation of the Conservative party.
Even in June some Remain seats voted Tory and now May is making concessions on money and citizens rights for a FTA some voters who voted for Clegg could consider the Tories if Clegg does not stand again.
If Clegg does stand and there is a by election he is the most likely anti Labour option though.
Dream on. The Conservatives are giving no reasons for Remain voters to consider them. Only those Remain voters with a historical blind tribal loyalty continue to cling to them. Bit by bit, however, they are drifting away.
And the Tories are going to get hammered in the local elections in London next year for that very reason.
The 2014 London local elections were so good for Labour, that I suspect there's not much more to gain.
People said that about this year's general election, how there was little scope for further Labour gains in London because 2015 was already "so good" for them, but there was a further big swing to them anyway.
In 2014 Labour got 37% of the vote - the latest London yougov put them at no less than 53%. The Tories got 26% last time - now yougov has them at 29. If the results are anywhere close to those numbers the Tories will be reduced to Wandsworth and a handful of outer boroughs.
It is worth remembering that London opinion polls underestimate independents and local issue groups. Lab (37) + Con (26) + LD (10) + UKIP (10) was only 83% of the vote last time. I would expect a similar proportion for independents next time around, with most of the Lab and Con gains coming from UKIP.
I think if there a by election, I'd go campaign for Clegg or another Lib Dem candidate, and I think I wouldn't be the only Tory activist to do so.
But with Clegg gone, how many of the Hallam Tory voters that Clegg borrowed would return home - especially after their unhappy experience with their current twat of an MP?
Hallam was Tory until 1997 yes.
A constituency where roughly 2 in 3 voted Remain does not look particularly fertile ground for the May incarnation of the Conservative party.
Even in June some Remain seats voted Tory and now May is making concessions on money and citizens rights for a FTA some voters who voted for Clegg could consider the Tories if Clegg does not stand again.
If Clegg does stand and there is a by election he is the most likely anti Labour option though.
Dream on. The Conservatives are giving no reasons for Remain voters to consider them. Only those Remain voters with a historical blind tribal loyalty continue to cling to them. Bit by bit, however, they are drifting away.
And the Tories are going to get hammered in the local elections in London next year for that very reason.
The 2014 London local elections were so good for Labour, that I suspect there's not much more to gain.
People said that about this year's general election, how there was little scope for further Labour gains in London because 2015 was already "so good" for them, but there was a further big swing to them anyway.
In 2014 Labour got 37% of the vote - the latest London yougov put them at no less than 53%. The Tories got 26% last time - now yougov has them at 29. If the results are anywhere close to those numbers the Tories will be reduced to Wandsworth and a handful of outer boroughs.
Khan has pissed off Wandsworth by approving a big development without local consent but at most the Tories would maybe lose Wandsworth and perhaps Kensington and Chelsea and Kingston Upon Thames and Barnet (though unlikely because of the Jewish vote) but gain Havering. Labour already hold Croydon, Redbridge, Merton etc.
If the Tories suffer losses they are likely to be more extensive in the Home Counties to the LDs on a nimby platform.
I think if there a by election, I'd go campaign for Clegg or another Lib Dem candidate, and I think I wouldn't be the only Tory activist to do so.
But with Clegg gone, how many of the Hallam Tory voters that Clegg borrowed would return home - especially after their unhappy experience with their current twat of an MP?
Hallam was Tory until 1997 yes.
A constituency where roughly 2 in 3 voted Remain does not look particularly fertile ground for the May incarnation of the Conservative party.
Even in June some Remain seats voted Tory and now May is making concessions on money and citizens rights for a FTA some voters who voted for Clegg could consider the Tories if Clegg does not stand again.
If Clegg does stand and there is a by election he is the most likely anti Labour option though.
Dream on. The Conservatives are giving no reasons for Remain voters to consider them. Only those Remain voters with a historical blind tribal loyalty continue to cling to them. Bit by bit, however, they are drifting away.
I think that is very true. In parallel I know some young people who don't regard Brexit as so much a poor policy choice and more a sign of bad character if not positively evil intent. They seem to disapprove of the Tories even more strongly than some people used to of Fatcher when I was a young person. I get the impression that they would vote for absolutely anyone to get rid of the people behind it. There may not be many of them, and they may not turn out to have any significant impact. But I do think the Tories have managed to create some highly motivated enemies.
People who would view support for Brexit as a sign of a bad character would never have voted Conservative if you paid them.
Are you sure about that? It is worth remembering that 2015 is only two years ago and a lot of us gave the European question not a thought when we cast our votes in it. I was vaguely aware the Conservatives had promised a referendum, but didn't think that they would win, that they would go through with it if they did and I sure as heck didn't think the outcome would be to vote out. Is it really that improbable that people who might have voted Conservative prior to Brexit will have shifted their view since it?
I think if there a by election, I'd go campaign for Clegg or another Lib Dem candidate, and I think I wouldn't be the only Tory activist to do so.
But with Clegg gone, how many of the Hallam Tory voters that Clegg borrowed would return home - especially after their unhappy experience with their current twat of an MP?
Hallam was Tory until 1997 yes.
A constituency where roughly 2 in 3 voted Remain does not look particularly fertile ground for the May incarnation of the Conservative party.
Even in June some Remain seats voted Tory and now May is making concessions on money and citizens rights for a FTA some voters who voted for Clegg could consider the Tories if Clegg does not stand again.
If Clegg does stand and there is a by election he is the most likely anti Labour option though.
Dream on. The Conservatives are giving no reasons for Remain voters to consider them. Only those Remain voters with a historical blind tribal loyalty continue to cling to them. Bit by bit, however, they are drifting away.
I think that is very true. In parallel I know some young people who don't regard Brexit as so much a poor policy choice and more a sign of bad character if not positively evil intent. They seem to disapprove of the Tories even more strongly than some people used to of Fatcher when I was a young person. I get the impression that they would vote for absolutely anyone to get rid of the people behind it. There may not be many of them, and they may not turn out to have any significant impact. But I do think the Tories have managed to create some highly motivated enemies.
People who would view support for Brexit as a sign of a bad character would never have voted Conservative if you paid them.
Are you sure about that? It is worth remembering that 2015 is only two years ago and a lot of us gave the European question not a thought when we cast our votes in it. I was vaguely aware the Conservatives had promised a referendum, but didn't think that they would win, that they would go through with it if they did and I sure as heck didn't think the outcome would be to vote out. Is it really that improbable that people who might have voted Conservative prior to Brexit will have shifted their view since it?
I find it particularly amusing that the point is being argued by someone who actually defected over the strength of his views on the evilness of the EU.
A constituency where roughly 2 in 3 voted Remain does not look particularly fertile ground for the May incarnation of the Conservative party.
Even in June some Remain seats voted Tory and now May is making concessions on money and citizens rights for a FTA some voters who voted for Clegg could consider the Tories if Clegg does not stand again.
If Clegg does stand and there is a by election he is the most likely anti Labour option though.
Dream on. The Conservatives are giving no reasons for Remain voters to consider them. Only those Remain voters with a historical blind tribal loyalty continue to cling to them. Bit by bit, however, they are drifting away.
Remain/Brexit is far from the sole determinant of why people vote as they do. You can still be a Tory Remainer who thinks Corbyn would be a disaster and the LibDems are risible.
"We hate you and think you're crazy, now vote for us because the other lot are crazier" is not a particularly compelling pitch.
Keep digging. It doesn't need a much bigger hole to inter the remains of your credibility.
My credibility is of no account. The Conservatives' willingness to incinerate any chance of any support from a large chunk of the electorate by being as abusive as possible to them in pursuit of the hardest possible Brexit is, however, rather more important.
You'll have evidence for that abuse then?
The country took a decision; the government is implementing it. There may be (indeed, are being) votes swung on how well it's implemented but I that's a different matter and is more an aspect of politics-as-usual: how well the government does its job.
"citizens of nowhere" "crush the saboteurs" "treachery"
That do for starters?
Not really. Those are isolated quotes, at least one of which wasn't even from the Party. As for 'citizen of nowhere', it was probably badly worded given the perception that might result and the potential for misinterpretation but was at least logically and historically accurate.
If the Conservatives were really being "as abusive as possible", that language, and stronger, would be coming out constantly from the top. It doesn't and it isn't.
I'd be 99% confident Labour would hold Sheffield Hallam in a general election, but I suspect the LibDems would have a chance in a mid-term byelection. They'd be able to find some local issue (dog muck covering a particular road, etc.) to latch onto.
Hmm. You don't think that there might be a more relevant local issue?
If the Conservatives were really being "as abusive as possible", that language, and stronger, would be coming out constantly from the top. It doesn't and it isn't.
But that's only because the people at the top are guilty of 'sabotage' and should be sacked for their crimes against the nation.
If the Conservatives were really being "as abusive as possible", that language, and stronger, would be coming out constantly from the top. It doesn't and it isn't.
But that's only because the people at the top are guilty of 'sabotage' and should be sacked for their crimes against the nation.
But with Clegg gone, how many of the Hallam Tory voters that Clegg borrowed would return home - especially after their unhappy experience with their current twat of an MP?
Hallam was Tory until 1997 yes.
A constituency where roughly 2 in 3 voted Remain does not look particularly fertile ground for the May incarnation of the Conservative party.
Even in June some Remain seats voted Tory and now May is making concessions on money and citizens rights for a FTA some voters who voted for Clegg could consider the Tories if Clegg does not stand again.
If Clegg does stand and there is a by election he is the most likely anti Labour option though.
Dream on. The Conservatives are giving no reasons for Remain voters to consider them. Only those Remain voters with a historical blind tribal loyalty continue to cling to them. Bit by bit, however, they are drifting away.
I think that is very true. In parallel I know some young people who don't regard Brexit as so much a poor policy choice and more a sign of bad character if not positively evil intent. They seem to disapprove of the Tories even more strongly than some people used to of Fatcher when I was a young person. I get the impression that they would vote for absolutely anyone to get rid of the people behind it. There may not be many of them, and they may not turn out to have any significant impact. But I do think the Tories have managed to create some highly motivated enemies.
People who would view support for Brexit as a sign of a bad character would never have voted Conservative if you paid them.
Are you sure about that? It is worth remembering that 2015 is only two years ago and a lot of us gave the European question not a thought when we cast our votes in it. I was vaguely aware the Conservatives had promised a referendum, but didn't think that they would win, that they would go through with it if they did and I sure as heck didn't think the outcome would be to vote out. Is it really that improbable that people who might have voted Conservative prior to Brexit will have shifted their view since it?
Interesting that some of those who might view support for Brexit as evidence of “bad character” do not take the view that turning a blind eye to or supporting anti-semites within your own party might also be viewed as evidence of “bad character” or, at the very least, curious judgment.
Meanwhile, some actual news is occurring (this is the start of a twitter thread). Out of deference to Mike, I won't comment directly and suggest others don't either:
However, the report a few years ago by the Parliamentary Commission on Banking Standards had a very good section on how very senior executives at banks could not be held responsible for things they did not know about. And that, therefore, they made damn sure not to know about stuff. That has changed. Now, if someone who reports to you does something wrong or does not act or escalate, the question people like me ask is “You were in charge. Why did you not know”.
That report is, and I know I sound geeky, is a very good read. Lots and lots of lessons for lots of people, not just bankers, to learn.
Totally off-topic, but the ICO has given the Tories a very slight slap on the wrist over their marketing campaign after a Ch4 investigation but will take no further action this time:
Must say I am surprised. I thought when I heard about it that it all sounded very dodgy, but it looks as though Ch4 put something of a spin on the facts.
I think if there a by election, I'd go campaign for Clegg or another Lib Dem candidate, and I think I wouldn't be the only Tory activist to do so.
But with Clegg gone, how many of the Hallam Tory voters that Clegg borrowed would return home - especially after their unhappy experience with their current twat of an MP?
Hallam was Tory until 1997 yes.
A constituency where roughly 2 in 3 voted Remain does not look particularly fertile ground for the May incarnation of the Conservative party.
Even in June some Remain seats voted Tory and now May is making concessions on money and citizens rights for a FTA some voters who voted for Clegg could consider the Tories if Clegg does not stand again.
If Clegg does stand and there is a by election he is the most likely anti Labour option though.
Dream on. The Conservatives are giving no reasons for Remain voters to consider them. Only those Remain voters with a historical blind tribal loyalty continue to cling to them. Bit by bit, however, they are drifting away.
Remain/Brexit is far from the sole determinant of why people vote as they do. You can still be a Tory Remainer who thinks Corbyn would be a disaster and the LibDems are risible.
"We hate you and think you're crazy, now vote for us because the other lot are crazier" is not a particularly compelling pitch.
Keep digging. It doesn't need a much bigger hole to inter the remains of your credibility.
My credibility is of no account. The Conservatives' willingness to incinerate any chance of any support from a large chunk of the electorate by being as abusive as possible to them in pursuit of the hardest possible Brexit is, however, rather more important.
Back in the day, there were people who supported joining the Euro, who nonetheless voted Conservative.
Attitudes towards Brexit are a big determinant of voting intention, but by no means the only one.
Back in the day, there were people who supported joining the Euro who were Conservative cabinet ministers!
LOL at the argument that being against immigration is some kind of underdog position. Newspapers such as the DM, The Sun etc all run articles questioning immigration and have done for years. We’ve seen the polling on the matter. It was one of the big reasons why Brexit happened.
By contrast Corbyn received criticism from pretty much most major news organisations. I happened to agree (and still do) with some of that criticism, but you can hardly compare Corbyn and the immigration issue. It’s been a continual narrative in British politics for years echoed by mainstream politicians.
Also, I’m really interested in the idea that being anti-immigration is a liberal position. It reminds me of when Amol Rajan implied George Osborne was a liberal and rightly got dragged for it.
And if centrists at large are fans of Douglas Murray/entertain his arguments then they have even less of a chance than I originally thought of regaining significant influence in the Labour Party. One of the reasons Corbyn did well was that he did not try to out Conservative the Conservatives, or out UKIP UKIP. Anything which doesn’t help Labour to distinguish themselves from the Conservative Party in a meaningful way will be a dead end for centrists. I also think the public at large would like two clear choices, and not one party trying to be a ‘lite’ version of the other.
Re Sanders, I wouldn’t totally dismiss him. There’s a few people that have been thought of as unelectable that have gone on to prove that they aren’t in the last year or so.
Totally off-topic, but the ICO has given the Tories a very slight slap on the wrist over their marketing campaign after a Ch4 investigation but will take no further action this time:
Must say I am surprised. I thought when I heard about it that it all sounded very dodgy, but it looks as though Ch4 put something of a spin on the facts.
Whilst also ignoring the push polling being done by Labour at the same time. Perish the thought that C4 news might have an agenda of their own to push... *looks at Mr Snow*
That's the story we were discussing on here yesterday - I have to say I didn't realise it was this recent from what I had read.
He has of course denied it is as reported.
However, this looks a much more immediate threat to his future than inappropriate online comments. The police were involved, and he must have been asked about it at his selection meeting, surely? If so, what did he say?
The BBC and the Sun have got hold of it, and the complainant has been giving interviews. The optics are pretty bad.
I have to say, if her story is substantiated I think @rcs1000 would lose any bets against a by-election.
Completely off topic: my new company is now in existence. Very exciting! I will have to go and find some work now.......
Good luck, it’s always a little daunting the day you decide to work for yourself but it’s usually the right decision and I’m sure you will be successful.
I shall be selling my investigative skills and the talks (and workshops) I have been delivering on banking culture and conduct for some years now. They are - and I realise I am boasting - bloody good - since I don’t mince my words and don’t talk like a lawyer (very poor communicators most of them when it comes to anything other than pure law) - and much needed. If the financial sector does not pull its socks up, it won’t be for want of trying on my part.
And I am planning to expand into other areas, which I’d already started in a small way.
I have no idea whether anyone will be interested. But sometimes you just have to try rather than wonder “what if?”, don’t you?
I’ve a meeting next week with someone who may be interested in your services, they’re already paying for mine in IT security. Forex traders. Will PM you.
That's the story we were discussing on here yesterday - I have to say I didn't realise it was this recent from what I had read.
He has of course denied it is as reported.
However, this looks a much more immediate threat to his future than inappropriate online comments. The police were involved, and he must have been asked about it at his selection meeting, surely? If so, what did he say?
The BBC and the Sun have got hold of it, and the complainant has been giving interviews. The optics are pretty bad.
I have to say, if her story is substantiated I think @rcs1000 would lose any bets against a by-election.
I think Guido played this quite cleverly. Even though he covered the nightclub incident some time ago, he went with the historical stuff yesterday to force the issue onto the agenda, got the fake 'I have changed' stuff on the record and then hit again with the more recent allegations.
The victim of his abusive language has made a decent job of her media interviews and looks far more credible than O'Mara.
He won't go - but he is screwed his own future nonetheless
That's the story we were discussing on here yesterday - I have to say I didn't realise it was this recent from what I had read.
He has of course denied it is as reported.
However, this looks a much more immediate threat to his future than inappropriate online comments. The police were involved, and he must have been asked about it at his selection meeting, surely? If so, what did he say?
The BBC and the Sun have got hold of it, and the complainant has been giving interviews. The optics are pretty bad.
I have to say, if her story is substantiated I think @rcs1000 would lose any bets against a by-election.
AIUI yesterday’s story was of online comments from 15 years ago, for which he apologised and said he was obviously completely different now.
Today’s story is that his apology was clearly bollocks and he hasn’t changed at all. The complainant’s testimony is compelling and if it can be stood up then he’s in big trouble.
Still don’t think he’ll resign as an MP though, being an obnoxious c*** isn’t illegal.
Who is this O'Mara of whom you speak? Is it Scarlett O'Mara to whom Rhett Butler once memorably said:" Frankly ,my dear, I don't give a damn, you ugly bitch" ?
When the total reaches that number, it's quite clear that the amendments are nothing to do with improving the legislation and all to do with halting Brexit through disengenuous trench warfare.
That's the story we were discussing on here yesterday - I have to say I didn't realise it was this recent from what I had read.
He has of course denied it is as reported.
However, this looks a much more immediate threat to his future than inappropriate online comments. The police were involved, and he must have been asked about it at his selection meeting, surely? If so, what did he say?
The BBC and the Sun have got hold of it, and the complainant has been giving interviews. The optics are pretty bad.
I have to say, if her story is substantiated I think @rcs1000 would lose any bets against a by-election.
AIUI yesterday’s story was of online comments from 15 years ago, for which he apologised and said he was obviously completely different now.
Today’s story is that his apology was clearly bollocks and he hasn’t changed at all. The complainant’s testimony is compelling and if it can be stood up then he’s in big trouble.
Still don’t think he’ll resign as an MP though, being an obnoxious c*** isn’t illegal.
iirc Newsnight stayed clear of recent allegations last night and debated growing up born digital and what happens if you change as you get older and can't delete stuff you said at 18 or whatever.
This new story makes all that irrelevant potentially.
When the total reaches that number, it's quite clear that the amendments are nothing to do with improving the legislation and all to do with halting Brexit through disengenuous trench warfare.
It's contemptible.
...and in entirely within the rights of a sovereign parliament.
Oh, btw if this incident means that Jared O’Mara won’t be getting into the shadow cabinet anytime soon then that only be good news for everyone. I still have no idea as to why Labour thought he’d make a good MP. This hardly the first time he’s looked like an idiot (although this is the first time when it’s clearly been about misogynistic and homophobic comments).
When the total reaches that number, it's quite clear that the amendments are nothing to do with improving the legislation and all to do with halting Brexit through disengenuous trench warfare.
I think if there a by election, I'd go campaign for Clegg or another Lib Dem candidate, and I think I wouldn't be the only Tory activist to do so.
TINO
Come on screaming,you haven't a good word for your party and now you campaign for another party.
Is this against Tory rules on membership ?
It would be. Of course, if TSE or anyone else did campaign for another party, it'd have to be proven and somebody would have to be interested enough to do something about it. I remember one Tory member once signing another party's nomination but no action was taken because the activist was unknown to the public and the disciplinary case wouldn't have been worth the effort or publicity.
That's the story we were discussing on here yesterday - I have to say I didn't realise it was this recent from what I had read.
He has of course denied it is as reported.
However, this looks a much more immediate threat to his future than inappropriate online comments. The police were involved, and he must have been asked about it at his selection meeting, surely? If so, what did he say?
The BBC and the Sun have got hold of it, and the complainant has been giving interviews. The optics are pretty bad.
I have to say, if her story is substantiated I think @rcs1000 would lose any bets against a by-election.
I think Guido played this quite cleverly. Even though he covered the nightclub incident some time ago, he went with the historical stuff yesterday to force the issue onto the agenda, got the fake 'I have changed' stuff on the record and then hit again with the more recent allegations.
The victim of his abusive language has made a decent job of her media interviews and looks far more credible than O'Mara.
He won't go - but he is screwed his own future nonetheless
Guido did indeed cover the nightclub incident weeks ago, and the fact that O'Mara didn't see it coming is possibly more damning than the allegations themselves. He's clearly thick as well as offensive.
Edit: though you're right, he won't go. Being stupid doesn't disqualify anyone from being an MP either, sadly.
That's the story we were discussing on here yesterday - I have to say I didn't realise it was this recent from what I had read.
He has of course denied it is as reported.
However, this looks a much more immediate threat to his future than inappropriate online comments. The police were involved, and he must have been asked about it at his selection meeting, surely? If so, what did he say?
The BBC and the Sun have got hold of it, and the complainant has been giving interviews. The optics are pretty bad.
I have to say, if her story is substantiated I think @rcs1000 would lose any bets against a by-election.
AIUI yesterday’s story was of online comments from 15 years ago, for which he apologised and said he was obviously completely different now.
Today’s story is that his apology was clearly bollocks and he hasn’t changed at all. The complainant’s testimony is compelling and if it can be stood up then he’s in big trouble.
Still don’t think he’ll resign as an MP though, being an obnoxious c*** isn’t illegal.
By 'we' I meant PB. One or two Labour commentators were defending him because it was only words and it was a long time ago, then I pointed out there were accusations of actual violence against him or at any rate his staff.
Imagine how many by-elections there would have to be if it *were* illegal - Kensington, Buckingham, Wokingham, Hayes and Harlington, Camberwell and Peckham, Salford, Surrey Heath...
When the total reaches that number, it's quite clear that the amendments are nothing to do with improving the legislation and all to do with halting Brexit through disengenuous trench warfare.
It's contemptible.
Or that the legislation is that bad.
The Times reported even Leaver Tory MPs had huge concerns about the bill.
I thought the referendum was about the sovereignty of Parliament, why are you scared of Parliamenty sovereignty?
That's the story we were discussing on here yesterday - I have to say I didn't realise it was this recent from what I had read.
He has of course denied it is as reported.
However, this looks a much more immediate threat to his future than inappropriate online comments. The police were involved, and he must have been asked about it at his selection meeting, surely? If so, what did he say?
The BBC and the Sun have got hold of it, and the complainant has been giving interviews. The optics are pretty bad.
I have to say, if her story is substantiated I think @rcs1000 would lose any bets against a by-election.
I think Guido played this quite cleverly. Even though he covered the nightclub incident some time ago, he went with the historical stuff yesterday to force the issue onto the agenda, got the fake 'I have changed' stuff on the record and then hit again with the more recent allegations.
The victim of his abusive language has made a decent job of her media interviews and looks far more credible than O'Mara.
He won't go - but he is screwed his own future nonetheless
Guido did indeed cover the nightclub incident weeks ago, and the fact that O'Mara didn't see it coming is possibly more damning than the allegations themselves. He's clearly thick as well as offensive.
Edit: though you're right, he won't go. Being stupid doesn't disqualify anyone from being an MP either, sadly.
The combination of being thick and a foul-mouthed bigot is toxic.
I think if there a by election, I'd go campaign for Clegg or another Lib Dem candidate, and I think I wouldn't be the only Tory activist to do so.
TINO
Come on screaming,you haven't a good word for your party and now you campaign for another party.
Is this against Tory rules on membership ?
The Daily Mail encouraged Tory voters in Hallam to vote Labour in May.
So kindly fornicate off.
If we do so, can we use a piano? I've never considered this aspect before yesterday and it sounds intriguing although as I noted the organ would always be my instrument of choice.
For a first timer, would it be better to use a virginal?
I am going to get my coat as I'm off to see my father. Have a good afternoon.
As a younger person, I think this is partially true, but there are a number of factors that contribute more widely to mistrust and anger towards the Tories over Brexit. Firstly, there's the obvious cultural abhorrence. There's a sense, that the Tories have actively fostered since the referendum, that Brexit is a culture war being fought by the old against the young. It's fostered by stuff like the "citizens of nowhere" stuff, but by the demeanour, arguments and language used by leading Tory Brexiteers - you've got the likes of Boris, Rees-Mogg, Davis, Redwood, and Hannan everywhere talking about nationalism in a way that's utterly alien to people who grew up in the 1990s and 2000s - and worse, dismissing contrary views as unpatriotic. For many younger metropolitan people, cultural pride in Britain isn't Our Island Story, it's Island Records, and it feels like Brexit is a certain section of the Tory Party imposing their identity while cutting off their more cosmopolitan idea of their country. A common meme joke on Twitter is just the words "Brexit Britain" with a picture of something hideously naff.
That's obviously not the biggest consideration though. Most younger people really just want to get on with life. The main source of anger is that Brexit has postponed paradise indefinitely through a needless act of vandalism. If you graduated university in 2010, you'll be approaching 30 and have spent your entire fully working life living under austerity and will be earning less than you thought in less secure employment than you thought. You also work longer hours than previous generations. You weren't thrilled about this, but maybe it was necessary after the crash. You might even have voted Tory as they'd cut the deficit quicker and then perhaps the good times would return. Brexit has totally wiped that out, as even if it isn't a catastrophe, by the time we've done deals and the economy's readjusted that's the best part of another decade of poor wage growth and instability for a policy we didn't much like anyway. You blame the Tory Party for all this, as they created this mess by appeasing lunatics like Redwood, Leadsom et al with the referendum and then failing to win it. Permanent austerity thanks to Brexit is a lot less excusable than as a temporary measure.
Lastly, it's taken away the economic stability argument for avoiding Corbyn. The Tories' best argument against a Labour government making huge promises are stability and caution - Burke's distaste for revolutions if you will. You may not appreciate stern parenting now, but will in the long run. But many younger people see Brexiteers' fanaticism and see a group of people who have decided to bet the family fortune on a trip to Monte Carlo. So, having seen that, aren't going to take any lectures on prudence or the dangers of economic extremism.
You set in train a revolution, you are always going to get a backlash, and it won't necessarily be rational.
I think if there a by election, I'd go campaign for Clegg or another Lib Dem candidate, and I think I wouldn't be the only Tory activist to do so.
TINO
Come on screaming,you haven't a good word for your party and now you campaign for another party.
Is this against Tory rules on membership ?
The Daily Mail encouraged Tory voters in Hallam to vote Labour in May.
So kindly fornicate off.
If we do so, can we use a piano? I've never considered this aspect before yesterday and it sounds intriguing although as I noted the organ would always be my instrument of choice.
For a first timer, would it be better to use a virginal?
I am going to get my coat as I'm off to see my father. Have a good afternoon.
That's the story we were discussing on here yesterday - I have to say I didn't realise it was this recent from what I had read.
He has of course denied it is as reported.
However, this looks a much more immediate threat to his future than inappropriate online comments. The police were involved, and he must have been asked about it at his selection meeting, surely? If so, what did he say?
The BBC and the Sun have got hold of it, and the complainant has been giving interviews. The optics are pretty bad.
I have to say, if her story is substantiated I think @rcs1000 would lose any bets against a by-election.
He's not going to prison for being a cunt.
I could see the whip being removed, and him being expelled from the Labour Party, and him not attending the HoC.
But I can also see him sitting at home in his pyjamas, drinking a can of Tennants, and venting on various websites. All while collecting £75k p.a.
When the total reaches that number, it's quite clear that the amendments are nothing to do with improving the legislation and all to do with halting Brexit through disengenuous trench warfare.
As a younger person, I think this is partially true, but there are a number of factors that contribute more widely to mistrust and anger towards the Tories over Brexit. Firstly, there's the obvious cultural abhorrence. There's a sense, that the Tories have actively fostered since the referendum, that Brexit is a culture war being fought by the old against the young. It's fostered by stuff like the "citizens of nowhere" stuff, but by the demeanour, arguments and language used by leading Tory Brexiteers - you've got the likes of Boris, Rees-Mogg, Davis, Redwood, and Hannan everywhere talking about nationalism in a way that's utterly alien to people who grew up in the 1990s and 2000s - and worse, dismissing contrary views as unpatriotic. For many younger metropolitan people, cultural pride in Britain isn't Our Island Story, it's Island Records, and it feels like Brexit is a certain section of the Tory Party imposing their identity while cutting off their more cosmopolitan idea of their country. A common meme joke on Twitter is just the words "Brexit Britain" with a picture of something hideously naff.
That's obviously not the biggest consideration though. Most younger people really just want to get on with life. The main source of anger is that Brexit has postponed paradise indefinitely through a needless act of vandalism. If you graduated university in 2010, you'll be approaching 30 and have spent your entire fully working life living under austerity and will be earning less than you thought in less secure employment than you thought. You also work longer hours than previous generations. You weren't thrilled about this, but maybe it was.
snip
Lastly, it's taken away the economic stability argument for avoiding Corbyn. The Tories' best argument against a Labour government making huge promises are stability and caution - Burke's distaste for revolutions if you will. You may not appreciate stern parenting now, but will in the long run. But many younger people see Brexiteers' fanaticism and see a group of people who have decided to bet the family fortune on a trip to Monte Carlo. So, having seen that, aren't going to take any lectures on prudence or the dangers of economic extremism.
You set in train a revolution, you are always going to get a backlash, and it won't necessarily be rational.
As a younger person, I think this is partially true, but there are a number of factors that contribute more widely to mistrust and anger towards the Tories over Brexit. Firstly, there's the obvious cultural abhorrence. There's a sense, that the Tories have actively fostered since the referendum, that Brexit is a culture war being fought by the old against the young. It's fostered by stuff like the "citizens of nowhere" stuff, but by the demeanour, arguments and language used by leading Tory Brexiteers - you've got the likes of Boris, Rees-Mogg, Davis, Redwood, and Hannan everywhere talking about nationalism in a way that's utterly alien to people who grew up in the 1990s and 2000s - and worse, dismissing contrary views as unpatriotic. For many younger metropolitan people, cultural pride in Britain isn't Our Island Story, it's Island Records, and it feels like Brexit is a certain section of the Tory Party imposing their identity while cutting off their more cosmopolitan idea of their country. A common meme joke on Twitter is just the words "Brexit Britain" with a picture of something hideously naff.
snip
Lastly, it's taken away the economic stability argument for avoiding Corbyn. The Tories' best argument against a Labour government making huge promises are stability and caution - Burke's distaste for revolutions if you will. You may not appreciate stern parenting now, but will in the long run. But many younger people see Brexiteers' fanaticism and see a group of people who have decided to bet the family fortune on a trip to Monte Carlo. So, having seen that, aren't going to take any lectures on prudence or the dangers of economic extremism.
You set in train a revolution, you are always going to get a backlash, and it won't necessarily be rational.
"would not listen to logical warning or ethical appeal."
The more I understand about human cognition and sense-making, the more I realize that, in this sort of issue, the less meaning the logical and legal arguments have.
What is the point of holding a people to a legalistic argument, if their decision has nothing to do with the law? Or what is the point of reasoning with them (about economics, or any other 'objective' construct) if that is not what they feel?
Political issues - indeed, all decisions, whether we care to admit it or not - are about emotions and our overall sense of well-being about the future state that we envisage will result from our proposed action. Reason and legalities will not change these emotions nor our sense of future well-being. And that is a simple fact, the result of the structure and operation of the brain, where the neocortex does the conscious research and rational comparison of options (but limited to only 5-7 parameters) whereas the limbic brain is the arbiter of which option to pursue.
To change people's minds, or even to influence them, you need, as Cyclefree states, the empathy to understand their 'story', their explanation of the world, and their inner emotional state which leads them to make the decisions they make. Sticking to legalities and rationalizations of 'facts' results purely in talking past each other (Democrats and Republicans, Brexiters and Remainers, Madrid and Catalonia). Until you understand their story, you cannot then expand it to include the points you are trying to get them to see.
To me, this is what is so gob-smacking about the Catalonia issue. More than Brexit - where at least there are multiple versions of leave that are recognized rather than just one 'right way' - Madrid's response is completely detached from any understanding of what it is to be human. As MacNamara might have done, it is treating Catalonia and Catalonians as accounting units and refusing to even acknowledge the validity of their very human ambitions to autonomy, self-sufficiency and purpose.
@MrHarryCole: Three Labour mps including two frontbenchers now calling for proper investigtion in to O'Mara - but silence from Leader's office and HQ
There is no point in asking for a Labour investigation. They will just get Shami to do another of her specials. Though not sure what they will bribe her with this time.
When the total reaches that number, it's quite clear that the amendments are nothing to do with improving the legislation and all to do with halting Brexit through disengenuous trench warfare.
It's contemptible.
Or alternatively the bill is drafted so badly that it requires that number of amendments to make it coherent. Of course the number of amendments can also be related to the length of the bill.
Who is this O'Mara of whom you speak? Is it Scarlett O'Mara to whom Rhett Butler once memorably said:" Frankly ,my dear, I don't give a damn, you ugly bitch" ?
When the total reaches that number, it's quite clear that the amendments are nothing to do with improving the legislation and all to do with halting Brexit through disengenuous trench warfare.
It's contemptible.
Or alternatively the bill is drafted so badly that it requires that number of amendments to make it coherent. Of course the number of amendments can also be related to the length of the bill.
No reason both cannot be true, that it is very poorly drafted and people are tabling amendments to take the piss
As a younger person, I think this is partially true, but there are a number of factors that contribute more widely to mistrust and anger towards the Tories over Brexit. Firstly, there's the obvious cultural abhorrence. There's a sense, that the Tories have actively fostered since the referendum, that Brexit is a culture war being fought by the old against the young. It's fostered by stuff like the "citizens of nowhere" stuff, but by the demeanour, arguments and language used by leading Tory Brexiteers - you've got the likes of Boris, Rees-Mogg, Davis, Redwood, and Hannan everywhere talking about nationalism in a way that's utterly alien to people who grew up in the 1990s and 2000s - and worse, dismissing contrary views as unpatriotic. For many younger metropolitan people, cultural pride in Britain isn't Our Island Story, it's Island Records, and it feels like Brexit is a certain section of the Tory Party imposing their identity while cutting off their more cosmopolitan idea of their country. A common meme joke on Twitter is just the words "Brexit Britain" with a picture of something hideously naff.
That's obviously not the biggest consideration though. Most younger people really just want to get on with life. The main source of anger is that Brexit has postponed paradise indefinitely through a needless act of vandalism. If you graduated university in 2010, you'll be approaching 30 and have spent your entire fully working life living under austerity and will be earning less than you thought in less secure employment than you thought. You also work longer hours than previous generations. You weren't thrilled about this, but maybe it was.
snip
Lastly, it's taken away the economic stability argument for avoiding Corbyn. The Tories' best argument against a Labour government making huge promises are stability and caution - Burke's distaste for revolutions if you will. You may not appreciate stern parenting now, but will in the long run. But many younger people see Brexiteers' fanaticism and see a group of people who have decided to bet the family fortune on a trip to Monte Carlo. So, having seen that, aren't going to take any lectures on prudence or the dangers of economic extremism.
You set in train a revolution, you are always going to get a backlash, and it won't necessarily be rational.
Brilliant post.
Seconded.
I've voted Tory since 2001 (after a dalliance with the Yellow Peril - the mindless optimism of youth ). I guess I was pretty much a cameroon although I never thought of it in those terms. The Tory Party is transmogrifying (or should that be transmoggrifying) into something I do not like. It is regressing into the party of the 90s, and I increasingly find myself wanting no part in it.
If an election were held now, I'd probably abstain or spoil my paper.
As a younger person, I think this is partially true, but there are a number of factors that contribute more widely to mistrust and anger towards the Tories over Brexit. Firstly, there's the obvious cultural abhorrence. There's a sense, that the Tories have actively fostered since the referendum, that Brexit is a culture war being fought by the old against the young. It's fostered by stuff like the "citizens of nowhere" stuff, but by the demeanour, arguments and language used by leading Tory Brexiteers - you've got the likes of Boris, Rees-Mogg, Davis, Redwood, and Hannan everywhere talking about nationalism in a way that's utterly alien to people who grew up in the 1990s and 2000s - and worse, dismissing contrary views as unpatriotic. For many younger metropolitan people, cultural pride in Britain isn't Our Island Story, it's Island Records, and it feels like Brexit is a certain section of the Tory Party imposing their identity while cutting off their more cosmopolitan idea of their country. A common meme joke on Twitter is just the words "Brexit Britain" with a picture of something hideously naff.
That's obviously not the biggest consideration though. Most younger people really just want to get on with life. The main source of anger is that Brexit has postponed paradise indefinitely through a needless act of vandalism. If you graduated university in 2010, you'll be approaching 30 and have spent your entire fully working life living under austerity and will be earning less than you thought in less secure employment than you thought. You also work longer hours than previous generations. You weren't thrilled about this, but maybe it was.
snip
Lastly, it's taken away the economic stability argument for avoiding Corbyn. The Tories' best argument against a Labour government making huge promises are stability and caution - Burke's distaste for revolutions if you will. You may not appreciate stern parenting now, but will in the long run. But many younger people see Brexiteers' fanaticism and see a group of people who have decided to bet the family fortune on a trip to Monte Carlo. So, having seen that, aren't going to take any lectures on prudence or the dangers of economic extremism.
You set in train a revolution, you are always going to get a backlash, and it won't necessarily be rational.
That's the story we were discussing on here yesterday - I have to say I didn't realise it was this recent from what I had read.
He has of course denied it is as reported.
However, this looks a much more immediate threat to his future than inappropriate online comments. The police were involved, and he must have been asked about it at his selection meeting, surely? If so, what did he say?
The BBC and the Sun have got hold of it, and the complainant has been giving interviews. The optics are pretty bad.
I have to say, if her story is substantiated I think @rcs1000 would lose any bets against a by-election.
He's not going to prison for being a cunt.
I could see the whip being removed, and him being expelled from the Labour Party, and him not attending the HoC.
But I can also see him sitting at home in his pyjamas, drinking a can of Tennants, and venting on various websites. All while collecting £75k p.a.
Quite so. Guido may happily be saying 'it isn't going away' but it will , and people happily sit after having the whip withdrawn, if it even gets that far. Given the lds will hope to have a chance in a by election and Jared will vote with labour regardless, they won't want him to resign even if they do withdraw the whip.
If not for his own comments on resigning I don't think the possibility woukd have come up much.
As a younger person, I think this is partially true, but there are a number of factors that contribute more widely to mistrust and anger towards the Tories over Brexit. Firstly, there's the obvious cultural abhorrence. There's a sense, that the Tories have actively fostered since the referendum, that Brexit is a culture war being fought by the old against the young. It's fostered by stuff like the "citizens of nowhere" stuff, but by the demeanour, arguments and language used by leading Tory Brexiteers - you've got the likes of Boris, Rees-Mogg, Davis, Redwood, and Hannan everywhere talking about nationalism in a way that's utterly alien to people who grew up in the 1990s and 2000s - and worse, dismissing contrary views as unpatriotic. For many younger metropolitan people, cultural pride in Britain isn't Our Island Story, it's Island Records, and it feels like Brexit is a certain section of the Tory Party imposing their identity while cutting off their more cosmopolitan idea of their country. A common meme joke on Twitter is just the words "Brexit Britain" with a picture of something hideously naff.
That's obviously not the biggest consideration though. Most younger people really just want to get on with life. The main source of anger is that Brexit has postponed paradise indefinitely through a needless act of vandalism. If you graduated university in 2010, you'll be approaching 30 and have spent your entire fully working life living under austerity and will be earning less than you thought in less secure employment than you thought. You also work longer hours than previous generations. You weren't thrilled about this, but maybe it was.
snip
Lastly, it's taken away the economic stability argument for avoiding Corbyn. The Tories' best argument against a Labour government making huge promises are stability and caution - Burke's distaste for revolutions if you will. You may not appreciate stern parenting now, but will in the long run. But many younger people see Brexiteers' fanaticism and see a group of people who have decided to bet the family fortune on a trip to Monte Carlo. So, having seen that, aren't going to take any lectures on prudence or the dangers of economic extremism.
You set in train a revolution, you are always going to get a backlash, and it won't necessarily be rational.
Brilliant post.
No its not. Its fatuous garbage based on personal bigotry and ignorance.
Completely off topic: my new company is now in existence. Very exciting! I will have to go and find some work now.......
Good luck, it’s always a little daunting the day you decide to work for yourself but it’s usually the right decision and I’m sure you will be successful.
I shall be selling my investigative skills and the talks (and workshops) I have been delivering on banking culture and conduct for some years now. They are - and I realise I am boasting - bloody good - since I don’t mince my words and don’t talk like a lawyer (very poor communicators most of them when it comes to anything other than pure law) - and much needed. If the financial sector does not pull its socks up, it won’t be for want of trying on my part.
And I am planning to expand into other areas, which I’d already started in a small way.
I have no idea whether anyone will be interested. But sometimes you just have to try rather than wonder “what if?”, don’t you?
I’ve a meeting next week with someone who may be interested in your services, they’re already paying for mine in IT security. Forex traders. Will PM you.
But with Clegg gone, how many of the Hallam Tory voters that Clegg borrowed would return home - especially after their unhappy experience with their current twat of an MP?
Hallam was Tory until 1997 yes.
A constituency where roughly 2 in 3 voted Remain does not look particularly fertile ground for the May incarnation of the Conservative party.
Even in June some Remain seats voted Tory and now May is making concessions on money and citizens rights for a FTA some voters who voted for Clegg could consider the Tories if Clegg does not stand again.
If Clegg does stand and there is a by election he is the most likely anti Labour option though.
Dream on. The Conservatives are giving no reasons for Remain voters to consider them. Only those Remain voters with a historical blind tribal loyalty continue to cling to them. Bit by bit, however, they are drifting away.
People who would view support for Brexit as a sign of a bad character would never have voted Conservative if you paid them.
Are you sure about that? It is worth remembering that 2015 is only two years ago and a lot of us gave the European question not a thought when we cast our votes in it. I was vaguely aware the Conservatives had promised a referendum, but didn't think that they would win, that they would go through with it if they did and I sure as heck didn't think the outcome would be to vote out. Is it really that improbable that people who might have voted Conservative prior to Brexit will have shifted their view since it?
Interesting that some of those who might view support for Brexit as evidence of “bad character” do not take the view that turning a blind eye to or supporting anti-semites within your own party might also be viewed as evidence of “bad character” or, at the very least, curious judgment.
I am not a Labour Party member, and the people I am talking about aren't either. I was also surprised by the vehemence Brexit elicited. I regard it as a fairly normal political policy where I have an opinion but I see why others might disagree. My observation is that opposition to Brexit has become a hot button topic.
When the total reaches that number, it's quite clear that the amendments are nothing to do with improving the legislation and all to do with halting Brexit through disengenuous trench warfare.
It's contemptible.
Actually not - have you looked at the amendments? There are 650 MPs, so after deducting Ministers etc., you have fewer than one amendment per MP, and the bulk of them are serious. Many relate to the same area (e.g. Henry VIII clauses) and propose different ways of solving the alleged defects: these are all being grouped and will debated in the same sessions. The timetale for the Committee is fixed (8 sitting days), so there could be a million amendments and it wouldn't delay Brexit by a second.
On this occasion I think you're not giving MPs reasonable credit. I'd expect a non-Ministerial MP to have at least one idea on this topic, rather than eye it idly and cxoncentrate on constituency potholes.
Comments
The Labour council are cutting them down and it is causing real anger.
I shall be selling my investigative skills and the talks (and workshops) I have been delivering on banking culture and conduct for some years now. They are - and I realise I am boasting - bloody good - since I don’t mince my words and don’t talk like a lawyer (very poor communicators most of them when it comes to anything other than pure law) - and much needed. If the financial sector does not pull its socks up, it won’t be for want of trying on my part.
And I am planning to expand into other areas, which I’d already started in a small way.
I have no idea whether anyone will be interested. But sometimes you just have to try rather than wonder “what if?”, don’t you?
Edit to add: the Greens last time got 10%!
If the Tories suffer losses they are likely to be more extensive in the Home Counties to the LDs on a nimby platform.
"Jihad" in Arabic means struggle...
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-41734079
Well the parent(s) are certainly setting up their kid for a life of struggle....
over the strength of his views on the evilness of the EU.
If the Conservatives were really being "as abusive as possible", that language, and stronger, would be coming out constantly from the top. It doesn't and it isn't.
https://order-order.com/2017/10/24/jared-called-ugly-bitch-8-months-ago/
However, the report a few years ago by the Parliamentary Commission on Banking Standards had a very good section on how very senior executives at banks could not be held responsible for things they did not know about. And that, therefore, they made damn sure not to know about stuff. That has changed. Now, if someone who reports to you does something wrong or does not act or escalate, the question people like me ask is “You were in charge. Why did you not know”.
That report is, and I know I sound geeky, is a very good read. Lots and lots of lessons for lots of people, not just bankers, to learn.
https://iconewsblog.org.uk/2017/10/23/when-political-market-research-crosses-the-line/
Must say I am surprised. I thought when I heard about it that it all sounded very dodgy, but it looks as though Ch4 put something of a spin on the facts.
By contrast Corbyn received criticism from pretty much most major news organisations. I happened to agree (and still do) with some of that criticism, but you can hardly compare Corbyn and the immigration issue. It’s been a continual narrative in British politics for years echoed by mainstream politicians.
Also, I’m really interested in the idea that being anti-immigration is a liberal position. It reminds me of when Amol Rajan implied George Osborne was a liberal and rightly got dragged for it.
And if centrists at large are fans of Douglas Murray/entertain his arguments then they have even less of a chance than I originally thought of regaining significant influence in the Labour Party. One of the reasons Corbyn did well was that he did not try to out Conservative the Conservatives, or out UKIP UKIP. Anything which doesn’t help Labour to distinguish themselves from the Conservative Party in a meaningful way will be a dead end for centrists. I also think the public at large would like two clear choices, and not one party trying to be a ‘lite’ version of the other.
Re Sanders, I wouldn’t totally dismiss him. There’s a few people that have been thought of as unelectable that have gone on to prove that they aren’t in the last year or so.
He has of course denied it is as reported.
However, this looks a much more immediate threat to his future than inappropriate online comments. The police were involved, and he must have been asked about it at his selection meeting, surely? If so, what did he say?
The BBC and the Sun have got hold of it, and the complainant has been giving interviews. The optics are pretty bad.
I have to say, if her story is substantiated I think @rcs1000 would lose any bets against a by-election.
The victim of his abusive language has made a decent job of her media interviews and looks far more credible than O'Mara.
He won't go - but he is screwed his own future nonetheless
Today’s story is that his apology was clearly bollocks and he hasn’t changed at all. The complainant’s testimony is compelling and if it can be stood up then he’s in big trouble.
Still don’t think he’ll resign as an MP though, being an obnoxious c*** isn’t illegal.
Come on screaming,you haven't a good word for your party and now you campaign for another party.
Is this against Tory rules on membership ?
It's contemptible.
This new story makes all that irrelevant potentially.
So kindly fornicate off.
Edit: though you're right, he won't go. Being stupid doesn't disqualify anyone from being an MP either, sadly.
Imagine how many by-elections there would have to be if it *were* illegal - Kensington, Buckingham, Wokingham, Hayes and Harlington, Camberwell and Peckham, Salford, Surrey Heath...
The Times reported even Leaver Tory MPs had huge concerns about the bill.
I thought the referendum was about the sovereignty of Parliament, why are you scared of Parliamenty sovereignty?
Farage has been saying the same thing this week. He doesn't "trust" parliament to vote the right way
For a first timer, would it be better to use a virginal?
I am going to get my coat as I'm off to see my father. Have a good afternoon.
That's obviously not the biggest consideration though. Most younger people really just want to get on with life. The main source of anger is that Brexit has postponed paradise indefinitely through a needless act of vandalism. If you graduated university in 2010, you'll be approaching 30 and have spent your entire fully working life living under austerity and will be earning less than you thought in less secure employment than you thought. You also work longer hours than previous generations. You weren't thrilled about this, but maybe it was necessary after the crash. You might even have voted Tory as they'd cut the deficit quicker and then perhaps the good times would return. Brexit has totally wiped that out, as even if it isn't a catastrophe, by the time we've done deals and the economy's readjusted that's the best part of another decade of poor wage growth and instability for a policy we didn't much like anyway. You blame the Tory Party for all this, as they created this mess by appeasing lunatics like Redwood, Leadsom et al with the referendum and then failing to win it. Permanent austerity thanks to Brexit is a lot less excusable than as a temporary measure.
Lastly, it's taken away the economic stability argument for avoiding Corbyn. The Tories' best argument against a Labour government making huge promises are stability and caution - Burke's distaste for revolutions if you will. You may not appreciate stern parenting now, but will in the long run. But many younger people see Brexiteers' fanaticism and see a group of people who have decided to bet the family fortune on a trip to Monte Carlo. So, having seen that, aren't going to take any lectures on prudence or the dangers of economic extremism.
You set in train a revolution, you are always going to get a backlash, and it won't necessarily be rational.
I could see the whip being removed, and him being expelled from the Labour Party, and him not attending the HoC.
But I can also see him sitting at home in his pyjamas, drinking a can of Tennants, and venting on various websites. All while collecting £75k p.a.
The more I understand about human cognition and sense-making, the more I realize that, in this sort of issue, the less meaning the logical and legal arguments have.
What is the point of holding a people to a legalistic argument, if their decision has nothing to do with the law? Or what is the point of reasoning with them (about economics, or any other 'objective' construct) if that is not what they feel?
Political issues - indeed, all decisions, whether we care to admit it or not - are about emotions and our overall sense of well-being about the future state that we envisage will result from our proposed action. Reason and legalities will not change these emotions nor our sense of future well-being. And that is a simple fact, the result of the structure and operation of the brain, where the neocortex does the conscious research and rational comparison of options (but limited to only 5-7 parameters) whereas the limbic brain is the arbiter of which option to pursue.
To change people's minds, or even to influence them, you need, as Cyclefree states, the empathy to understand their 'story', their explanation of the world, and their inner emotional state which leads them to make the decisions they make. Sticking to legalities and rationalizations of 'facts' results purely in talking past each other (Democrats and Republicans, Brexiters and Remainers, Madrid and Catalonia). Until you understand their story, you cannot then expand it to include the points you are trying to get them to see.
To me, this is what is so gob-smacking about the Catalonia issue. More than Brexit - where at least there are multiple versions of leave that are recognized rather than just one 'right way' - Madrid's response is completely detached from any understanding of what it is to be human. As MacNamara might have done, it is treating Catalonia and Catalonians as accounting units and refusing to even acknowledge the validity of their very human ambitions to autonomy, self-sufficiency and purpose.
I've voted Tory since 2001 (after a dalliance with the Yellow Peril - the mindless optimism of youth
If an election were held now, I'd probably abstain or spoil my paper.
If not for his own comments on resigning I don't think the possibility woukd have come up much.
On this occasion I think you're not giving MPs reasonable credit. I'd expect a non-Ministerial MP to have at least one idea on this topic, rather than eye it idly and cxoncentrate on constituency potholes.