"Jeremy Corbyn has refused to endorse calls for the UK to follow the United States and impose tougher sanctions on Russia, describing it as a "huge player on the world stage"."
Well, there's a free pass for Putin - for anything.
Jeremy Corbyn. Unfit to be PM.
Corbyn is not PM now. If you think the current government should impose tougher sanctions or be declared unfit ... ah, but the former Foreign Secretary has been.
You can only be unfit to be PM if you are PM?
You can only impose sanctions if you are in government, which Corbyn is not. If the test for unfitness is tougher sanctions than those already imposed, then surely the government is unfit -- but since the former FS is Boris, that might not be a controversial view.
Despite not being in government he can still have a view on the matter.
The government has not imposed tougher sanctions than the government has imposed. If the test is whether sanctions should be tougher, then the government fails.
The government are clearly moving that way, otherwise the foreign secretary wouldn’t have made his speech.
I think the jury's very much still out on this bit:
Thus far, she’s successfully steered British Conservatives away from their destructive fantasies about Brexit to a settlement that is compatible with life in the 21st century, in the European Union’s immediate vicinity.
"Jeremy Corbyn has refused to endorse calls for the UK to follow the United States and impose tougher sanctions on Russia, describing it as a "huge player on the world stage"."
Well, there's a free pass for Putin - for anything.
Jeremy Corbyn. Unfit to be PM.
He must not get into 10 Downing Street. Brexit will be a cakewalk compared to leaving NATO and the end of our defence and intelligence relationship with the US.
It is not Labour policy to leave NATO or end our defence and intelligence relationship with the US. Is this the pb equivalent of push polling? Ascribe an absurd policy to your opponents and ask who will support it? Labour spent above the 2% guideline and it is the Conservatives who have decimated our armed forces.
How can they possibly treat us as a trusted partner when the head of government has made a career out of apologias for the Soviet/Russian government?
We might still be in NATO. There’s no way we’d be involved in meaningful discussions at the strategic level, because we couldn’t be trusted.
"Jeremy Corbyn has refused to endorse calls for the UK to follow the United States and impose tougher sanctions on Russia, describing it as a "huge player on the world stage"."
Well, there's a free pass for Putin - for anything.
Jeremy Corbyn. Unfit to be PM.
Corbyn is not PM now. If you think the current government should impose tougher sanctions or be declared unfit ... ah, but the former Foreign Secretary has been.
You can only be unfit to be PM if you are PM?
You can only impose sanctions if you are in government, which Corbyn is not. If the test for unfitness is tougher sanctions than those already imposed, then surely the government is unfit -- but since the former FS is Boris, that might not be a controversial view.
Despite not being in government he can still have a view on the matter.
The government has not imposed tougher sanctions than the government has imposed. If the test is whether sanctions should be tougher, then the government fails.
The government are clearly moving that way, otherwise the foreign secretary wouldn’t have made his speech.
Tbh from the bottom of the Telegraph article it looks like Hunt is already stepping back a bit so who knows?
As I mentioned on the previous thread, this poll is rather odd in not asking respondents about their own views of the potential candidates; instead it asks their views of other voters' views. That makes it even harder to interpret than hypothetical polls usually are.
Perhaps the main lesson we should draw is not about individuals, but about the need for the Conservative Party to (dare I say it) 'modernise'. Those polled seem to think the party needs a refresh if it is to appeal more widely. They would be right to think that.
"Jeremy Corbyn has refused to endorse calls for the UK to follow the United States and impose tougher sanctions on Russia, describing it as a "huge player on the world stage"."
Well, there's a free pass for Putin - for anything.
Jeremy Corbyn. Unfit to be PM.
He must not get into 10 Downing Street. Brexit will be a cakewalk compared to leaving NATO and the end of our defence and intelligence relationship with the US.
It is not Labour policy to leave NATO or end our defence and intelligence relationship with the US. Is this the pb equivalent of push polling? Ascribe an absurd policy to your opponents and ask who will support it? Labour spent above the 2% guideline and it is the Conservatives who have decimated our armed forces.
How can they possibly treat us as a trusted partner when the head of government has made a career out of apologias for the Soviet/Russian government?
We might still be in NATO. There’s no way we’d be involved in meaningful discussions at the strategic level, because we couldn’t be trusted.
It’s your party leader who’s absurd.
It is not my party or my party leader. And come to think of it, France did leave NATO.
"Jeremy Corbyn has refused to endorse calls for the UK to follow the United States and impose tougher sanctions on Russia, describing it as a "huge player on the world stage"."
Well, there's a free pass for Putin - for anything.
Jeremy Corbyn. Unfit to be PM.
He must not get into 10 Downing Street. Brexit will be a cakewalk compared to leaving NATO and the end of our defence and intelligence relationship with the US.
It is not Labour policy to leave NATO or end our defence and intelligence relationship with the US. Is this the pb equivalent of push polling? Ascribe an absurd policy to your opponents and ask who will support it? Labour spent above the 2% guideline and it is the Conservatives who have decimated our armed forces.
How can they possibly treat us as a trusted partner when the head of government has made a career out of apologias for the Soviet/Russian government?
We might still be in NATO. There’s no way we’d be involved in meaningful discussions at the strategic level, because we couldn’t be trusted.
It’s your party leader who’s absurd.
It is not my party or my party leader. And come to think of it, France did leave NATO.
What did they get out of it, apart from soothing De Gaulle’s ego? They rejoined in full when Sarkozy was president.
"Jeremy Corbyn has refused to endorse calls for the UK to follow the United States and impose tougher sanctions on Russia, describing it as a "huge player on the world stage"."
Well, there's a free pass for Putin - for anything.
Jeremy Corbyn. Unfit to be PM.
He must not get into 10 Downing Street. Brexit will be a cakewalk compared to leaving NATO and the end of our defence and intelligence relationship with the US.
It is not Labour policy to leave NATO or end our defence and intelligence relationship with the US. Is this the pb equivalent of push polling? Ascribe an absurd policy to your opponents and ask who will support it? Labour spent above the 2% guideline and it is the Conservatives who have decimated our armed forces.
How can they possibly treat us as a trusted partner when the head of government has made a career out of apologias for the Soviet/Russian government?
We might still be in NATO. There’s no way we’d be involved in meaningful discussions at the strategic level, because we couldn’t be trusted.
It’s your party leader who’s absurd.
Given the state of our land forces, we'd only be effective as NATO members if the Baltics were invaded by kittens.
"Jeremy Corbyn has refused to endorse calls for the UK to follow the United States and impose tougher sanctions on Russia, describing it as a "huge player on the world stage"."
Well, there's a free pass for Putin - for anything.
Jeremy Corbyn. Unfit to be PM.
He must not get into 10 Downing Street. Brexit will be a cakewalk compared to leaving NATO and the end of our defence and intelligence relationship with the US.
It is not Labour policy to leave NATO or end our defence and intelligence relationship with the US. Is this the pb equivalent of push polling? Ascribe an absurd policy to your opponents and ask who will support it? Labour spent above the 2% guideline and it is the Conservatives who have decimated our armed forces.
How can they possibly treat us as a trusted partner when the head of government has made a career out of apologias for the Soviet/Russian government?
We might still be in NATO. There’s no way we’d be involved in meaningful discussions at the strategic level, because we couldn’t be trusted.
It’s your party leader who’s absurd.
Given the state of our land forces, we'd only be effective as NATO members if the Baltics were invaded by kittens.
Why should our contribution be land forces? As an island state, it seems to me we should concentrate on sea and air power. I can’t think of a scenario in which the British Army’s main battle tanks would ever be decisive, so why retain the capability?
"Jeremy Corbyn has refused to endorse calls for the UK to follow the United States and impose tougher sanctions on Russia, describing it as a "huge player on the world stage"."
Well, there's a free pass for Putin - for anything.
Jeremy Corbyn. Unfit to be PM.
He must not get into 10 Downing Street. Brexit will be a cakewalk compared to leaving NATO and the end of our defence and intelligence relationship with the US.
It is not Labour policy to leave NATO or end our defence and intelligence relationship with the US. Is this the pb equivalent of push polling? Ascribe an absurd policy to your opponents and ask who will support it? Labour spent above the 2% guideline and it is the Conservatives who have decimated our armed forces.
And that's Corbyn's position, is it? We're a long way from the days of Gordon Brown now.
So the mythical wonderkid who we can project all our hopes and dreams onto leads the polling ? Who knew
In reality this is a very good poll for May.
George Osborne CH.
Darth Gideon: Remember back to your early teachings. "All who gain power are afraid to lose it." Even the LEAVERS. TSE: The LEAVERS use their power for good. Darth Gideon: Good is a point of view, Anakin, er, I mean TSE. The LEAVERS and the REMAINERS are similar in almost every way, including their quest for greater power. TSE: The REMAINERS rely on their passion for their strength. They think inward, only about themselves. Darth Gideon: And the LEAVERS don't? TSE: The LEAVERS are selfless... they only care about others. Darth Gideon:[looking a little frustrated] Did you ever hear the tragedy of Darth Smithson "the Wise"? TSE: No. Darth Gideon: I thought not. It's not a story the LibDems would tell you. It's a Blogging legend. Darth Smithson was a Daft Lord of the Sith who lived many years ago. He was so powerful and so wise that he could use the Force to influence the midichlorians to create... AV threads. He had such a knowledge of the Daft Side that he could even keep the ones he cared about from dying from boredom on Thursday Nights. TSE: He could do that? He could actually save people from boring themselves to death? Darth Gideon: The Daft Side of the Force is a pathway to many policy platforms some consider to be unelectable. TSE: What happened to him? Darth Gideon: He became so powerful... the only thing he was afraid of was losing his power, which eventually, of course, he did. Unfortunately, he taught his apprentice everything he knew, and then one night, his apprentice wiped his servers' hard drives while he slept. It's ironic that he could save others from obscurity, but not himself. TSE: Is it possible to learn this power? Darth Gideon: Not from a LibDem...
"Jeremy Corbyn has refused to endorse calls for the UK to follow the United States and impose tougher sanctions on Russia, describing it as a "huge player on the world stage"."
Well, there's a free pass for Putin - for anything.
Jeremy Corbyn. Unfit to be PM.
He must not get into 10 Downing Street. Brexit will be a cakewalk compared to leaving NATO and the end of our defence and intelligence relationship with the US.
It is not Labour policy to leave NATO or end our defence and intelligence relationship with the US. Is this the pb equivalent of push polling? Ascribe an absurd policy to your opponents and ask who will support it? Labour spent above the 2% guideline and it is the Conservatives who have decimated our armed forces.
And that's Corbyn's position, is it? We're a long way from the days of Gordon Brown now.
It was the position in the 2017 manifesto when Corbyn was LoTO.
"Jeremy Corbyn has refused to endorse calls for the UK to follow the United States and impose tougher sanctions on Russia, describing it as a "huge player on the world stage"."
Well, there's a free pass for Putin - for anything.
Jeremy Corbyn. Unfit to be PM.
Corbyn is not PM now. If you think the current government should impose tougher sanctions or be declared unfit ... ah, but the former Foreign Secretary has been.
You can only be unfit to be PM if you are PM?
You can only impose sanctions if you are in government, which Corbyn is not. If the test for unfitness is tougher sanctions than those already imposed, then surely the government is unfit -- but since the former FS is Boris, that might not be a controversial view.
He can endorse them - and he can even say the government should go further. But Corbyn is doing the opposite.
As I said the other week: if you, I or anyone else on PB was killed in a terrorist attack by one of the groups that Corbyn likes, his sympathy would not be with us - the victims - but with the perpetrators.
And if he was PM, the state's sympathies would not be with us.
Perhaps the main lesson we should draw is not about individuals, but about the need for the Conservative Party to (dare I say it) 'modernise'. Those polled seem to think the party needs a refresh if it is to appeal more widely. They would be right to think that.
Dontcha know, you're talkin' 'bout a revolution.....
"Jeremy Corbyn has refused to endorse calls for the UK to follow the United States and impose tougher sanctions on Russia, describing it as a "huge player on the world stage"."
Well, there's a free pass for Putin - for anything.
Jeremy Corbyn. Unfit to be PM.
He must not get into 10 Downing Street. Brexit will be a cakewalk compared to leaving NATO and the end of our defence and intelligence relationship with the US.
It is not Labour policy to leave NATO or end our defence and intelligence relationship with the US. Is this the pb equivalent of push polling? Ascribe an absurd policy to your opponents and ask who will support it? Labour spent above the 2% guideline and it is the Conservatives who have decimated our armed forces.
And that's Corbyn's position, is it? We're a long way from the days of Gordon Brown now.
It was the position in the 2017 manifesto when Corbyn was LoTO.
Surely the danger with intelligence sharing with the other four of the five eyes (US/Can/Aus/NZ), is that they see Corbyn walking up Downing St and note that nice Mr Milne and others of that ilk by his side and pull the cable out of its socket there and then that connects GCHQ and the Pentagon.
Won't really matter what Labour Party policy is on this at that point.
"Jeremy Corbyn has refused to endorse calls for the UK to follow the United States and impose tougher sanctions on Russia, describing it as a "huge player on the world stage"."
Well, there's a free pass for Putin - for anything.
Jeremy Corbyn. Unfit to be PM.
He must not get into 10 Downing Street. Brexit will be a cakewalk compared to leaving NATO and the end of our defence and intelligence relationship with the US.
It is not Labour policy to leave NATO or end our defence and intelligence relationship with the US. Is this the pb equivalent of push polling? Ascribe an absurd policy to your opponents and ask who will support it? Labour spent above the 2% guideline and it is the Conservatives who have decimated our armed forces.
And that's Corbyn's position, is it? We're a long way from the days of Gordon Brown now.
It was the position in the 2017 manifesto when Corbyn was LoTO.
Surely the danger with intelligence sharing with the other four of the five eyes (US/Can/Aus/NZ), is that they see Corbyn walking up Downing St and note that nice Mr Milne and others of that ilk by his side and pull the cable out of its socket there and then that connects GCHQ and the Pentagon.
Won't really matter what Labour Party policy is on this at that point.
The plug would get pulled following the Exit Poll being published at 10pm
"Jeremy Corbyn has refused to endorse calls for the UK to follow the United States and impose tougher sanctions on Russia, describing it as a "huge player on the world stage"."
Well, there's a free pass for Putin - for anything.
Jeremy Corbyn. Unfit to be PM.
He must not get into 10 Downing Street. Brexit will be a cakewalk compared to leaving NATO and the end of our defence and intelligence relationship with the US.
It is not Labour policy to leave NATO or end our defence and intelligence relationship with the US. Is this the pb equivalent of push polling? Ascribe an absurd policy to your opponents and ask who will support it? Labour spent above the 2% guideline and it is the Conservatives who have decimated our armed forces.
And that's Corbyn's position, is it? We're a long way from the days of Gordon Brown now.
It was the position in the 2017 manifesto when Corbyn was LoTO.
Surely the danger with intelligence sharing with the other four of the five eyes (US/Can/Aus/NZ), is that they see Corbyn walking up Downing St and note that nice Mr Milne and others of that ilk by his side and pull the cable out of its socket there and then that connects GCHQ and the Pentagon.
Won't really matter what Labour Party policy is on this at that point.
Tbh I do not think there will be a military coup if Labour wins the next election. What happened when President Trump was sworn in? Was America excluded? Because Trump's Russian links seem to be more extensive than Corbyn's.
As long as the architects of Brexit can avoid taking responsibility by blaming the lackluster outcome on sabotage by “Remoaners” or the intransigence of Brussels, May will continue to soldier on. She’s betting that the country will at some point tire of Brexit and that a settlement will be reached that most Britons will be able to live with, allowing Britain to move on to other subjects.
If she can pull off that feat, she is bound to go down in history as one of the greatest prime ministers of our time and the epitome of the authentic brand of conservatism — prudent, cautious and incremental — championed by the great British political philosopher Michael Oakeshott.
This cautious disposition stands in sharp contrast to the zero-sum zeal endemic to self-styled conservatives on both sides of the Atlantic. More importantly, it serves as a reminder of what democratic politics is supposed to be like: the art of forging compromises that most people can live with (sometimes unenthusiastically). The Western world could do a whole lot worse than to emulate that approach.
While I suspect many may dispute the author's rosy assessment of Mrs May, his critique of the Brexiteers and zero-sum Conservatives on both sides of the Atlantic is bang on.
Yet, there has been a great deal of churn underneath that apparent stability.
Greater London has gone from marginal Conservative to safe Labour; the Conservative position has collapsed in Scotland, before recovering to about the same position as in 1988. Birmingham, Manchester, Merseyside, Sheffield, and Leeds have all shifted heavily to Labour as historic middle class seats either moved downmarket, or shifted allegiance to Labour.
But, the East and West Midlands and Yorkshire and Humberside outside the big cities, and the New Towns, have all shifted over to the Conservatives. And, Labour have collapsed in Scotland.
"Jeremy Corbyn has refused to endorse calls for the UK to follow the United States and impose tougher sanctions on Russia, describing it as a "huge player on the world stage"."
Well, there's a free pass for Putin - for anything.
Jeremy Corbyn. Unfit to be PM.
He must not get into 10 Downing Street. Brexit will be a cakewalk compared to leaving NATO and the end of our defence and intelligence relationship with the US.
It is not Labour policy to leave NATO or end our defence and intelligence relationship with the US. Is this the pb equivalent of push polling? Ascribe an absurd policy to your opponents and ask who will support it? Labour spent above the 2% guideline and it is the Conservatives who have decimated our armed forces.
And that's Corbyn's position, is it? We're a long way from the days of Gordon Brown now.
It was the position in the 2017 manifesto when Corbyn was LoTO.
Surely the danger with intelligence sharing with the other four of the five eyes (US/Can/Aus/NZ), is that they see Corbyn walking up Downing St and note that nice Mr Milne and others of that ilk by his side and pull the cable out of its socket there and then that connects GCHQ and the Pentagon.
Won't really matter what Labour Party policy is on this at that point.
That's a doubtful scenario. Five Eyes operations are pretty much tangential to the make up of the various members' administrations.
However, intelligence priorities are set by HMG, and we might well change our focus.
Yet, there has been a great deal of churn underneath that apparent stability.
Greater London has gone from marginal Conservative to safe Labour; the Conservative position has collapsed in Scotland, before recovering to about the same position as in 1988. Birmingham, Manchester, Merseyside, Sheffield, and Leeds have all shifted heavily to Labour as historic middle class seats either moved downmarket, or shifted allegiance to Labour.
But, the East and West Midlands and Yorkshire and Humberside outside the big cities, and the New Towns, have all shifted over to the Conservatives. And, Labour have collapsed in Scotland.
Indeed it is possible at any single data point to find another single data point that 'matches' it – the underlying picture can be vastly different.
Trump for all his faults (and God they are many and manifest - do not get me wrong on that) did not have decades of decrying UK/Can/Aus/NZ foreign policy or those of their allies. Whereas it's going to be a stretch (being kind) for the USA to believe that Corbyn, Milne et al (like say Ms Abbott with whom Corbyn took a youthful motoring trip around that great Amercan ally the GDR of Erich Honecker - a man who really knew how to build a big wall) are really just good 'ol boys who've been hiding their love of American policy successfully for decades.
Though the US is far from a paragon of virtue all the time, I would deeply regret the breaking of such a relationship that goes back (at least) a lifetime to the darkest days of the war and I feel sure has been a large force for good for keeping us safer than would otherwise be the case. However, were I in charge of such matters in the US I would think sharing things as freely as they are now with the likes of Corbyn and Milne complete madness, and act accordingly.
As I mentioned on the previous thread, this poll is rather odd in not asking respondents about their own views of the potential candidates; instead it asks their views of other voters' views. That makes it even harder to interpret than hypothetical polls usually are.
Perhaps the main lesson we should draw is not about individuals, but about the need for the Conservative Party to (dare I say it) 'modernise'. Those polled seem to think the party needs a refresh if it is to appeal more widely. They would be right to think that.
They did effing well modernise, what with hugging hoodies and huskies and all that.
And then kaPOW! We somehow got ourselves back into the 18th century. The Party and large part of the country also.
Yet, there has been a great deal of churn underneath that apparent stability.
Greater London has gone from marginal Conservative to safe Labour; the Conservative position has collapsed in Scotland, before recovering to about the same position as in 1988. Birmingham, Manchester, Merseyside, Sheffield, and Leeds have all shifted heavily to Labour as historic middle class seats either moved downmarket, or shifted allegiance to Labour.
But, the East and West Midlands and Yorkshire and Humberside outside the big cities, and the New Towns, have all shifted over to the Conservatives. And, Labour have collapsed in Scotland.
Indeed it is possible at any single data point to find another single data point that 'matches' it – the underlying picture can be vastly different.
Over that period, I think that more than half of all constituencies have changed hands, showing that a lot of safe seats don't remain safe forever.
Can anyone here explain how attourney/client privilege works in the USA? It seems amazing that a lawyer can mouth off about his client to anyone who’ll listen, in order to try and save his own ass from the big house.
I think it depends on the nature of the work. If you are a lawyer, and I hire you to deliver newspapers, then that's not covered by Attorney-Client privilege, because that is not you acting in your legal role.
"Jeremy Corbyn has refused to endorse calls for the UK to follow the United States and impose tougher sanctions on Russia, describing it as a "huge player on the world stage"."
Well, there's a free pass for Putin - for anything.
Jeremy Corbyn. Unfit to be PM.
He must not get into 10 Downing Street. Brexit will be a cakewalk compared to leaving NATO and the end of our defence and intelligence relationship with the US.
It is not Labour policy to leave NATO or end our defence and intelligence relationship with the US. Is this the pb equivalent of push polling? Ascribe an absurd policy to your opponents and ask who will support it? Labour spent above the 2% guideline and it is the Conservatives who have decimated our armed forces.
And that's Corbyn's position, is it? We're a long way from the days of Gordon Brown now.
It was the position in the 2017 manifesto when Corbyn was LoTO.
Surely the danger with intelligence sharing with the other four of the five eyes (US/Can/Aus/NZ), is that they see Corbyn walking up Downing St and note that nice Mr Milne and others of that ilk by his side and pull the cable out of its socket there and then that connects GCHQ and the Pentagon.
Won't really matter what Labour Party policy is on this at that point.
Tbh I do not think there will be a military coup if Labour wins the next election. What happened when President Trump was sworn in? Was America excluded? Because Trump's Russian links seem to be more extensive than Corbyn's.
Trump's loyalty is purely to himself. He has a loose mouth and doesn't understand or respect the niceties or necessities of diplomacy and intelligence but those are different things from being instinctively anti-West.
Mr. Topping, parties made sceptical noises then performed EU-phile actions, most notably Brown's wretched reneging upon the referendum for the Lisbon Treaty.
It's worth pointing out this divide would still exist had Remain narrowly won or the referendum never been held (the latter point, assuming no manifesto promise, would've had an interesting impact upon the 2015 General Election). But the chattering classes would be content, so it'd get rather less airtime (in much the same way a rape gang in Newcastle being sent down was deemed less newsworthy than a journalist's knee being touched 20 years ago).
As I mentioned on the previous thread, this poll is rather odd in not asking respondents about their own views of the potential candidates; instead it asks their views of other voters' views. That makes it even harder to interpret than hypothetical polls usually are.
Perhaps the main lesson we should draw is not about individuals, but about the need for the Conservative Party to (dare I say it) 'modernise'. Those polled seem to think the party needs a refresh if it is to appeal more widely. They would be right to think that.
Just on a technical point - there is some research (can't lay my hands on it) to suggest that people express their views on controversial matters more honestly if they are asked what other people will think. Not sure that is relevant here (who cares who Joe Bloggs wants as Tory leader?), but it's not a totally off-the-wall polling technique.
It's worth pointing out this divide would still exist had Remain narrowly won or the referendum never been held..the chattering classes would be content, so it'd get rather less airtime (in much the same way a rape gang in Newcastle being sent down was deemed less newsworthy than a journalist's knee being touched 20 years ago).
That's not the only reason. We wouldn't be spending literally years trying to unpick our relationship with the EU and expending vast amounts of energy and goodwill doing it, so it would be rather less newsworthy.
As I mentioned on the previous thread, this poll is rather odd in not asking respondents about their own views of the potential candidates; instead it asks their views of other voters' views. That makes it even harder to interpret than hypothetical polls usually are.
Perhaps the main lesson we should draw is not about individuals, but about the need for the Conservative Party to (dare I say it) 'modernise'. Those polled seem to think the party needs a refresh if it is to appeal more widely. They would be right to think that.
They did effing well modernise, what with hugging hoodies and huskies and all that.
And then kaPOW! We somehow got ourselves back into the 18th century. The Party and large part of the country also.
It is staggering. One of the main parties harking back to the unambiguous failures of mid-twentieth century socialism, the other apparently hungering after the years in the wilderness which it finally manged to crawl out of in 2005, the third party invisible and ashamed of its successes in government after decades of insignificance, the Scots in truculent victim-syndrome, and all this after things were actually going rather well for once.
As I mentioned on the previous thread, this poll is rather odd in not asking respondents about their own views of the potential candidates; instead it asks their views of other voters' views. That makes it even harder to interpret than hypothetical polls usually are.
Perhaps the main lesson we should draw is not about individuals, but about the need for the Conservative Party to (dare I say it) 'modernise'. Those polled seem to think the party needs a refresh if it is to appeal more widely. They would be right to think that.
They did effing well modernise, what with hugging hoodies and huskies and all that.
And then kaPOW! We somehow got ourselves back into the 18th century. The Party and large part of the country also.
Yet, there has been a great deal of churn underneath that apparent stability.
Greater London has gone from marginal Conservative to safe Labour; the Conservative position has collapsed in Scotland, before recovering to about the same position as in 1988. Birmingham, Manchester, Merseyside, Sheffield, and Leeds have all shifted heavily to Labour as historic middle class seats either moved downmarket, or shifted allegiance to Labour.
But, the East and West Midlands and Yorkshire and Humberside outside the big cities, and the New Towns, have all shifted over to the Conservatives. And, Labour have collapsed in Scotland.
Indeed it is possible at any single data point to find another single data point that 'matches' it – the underlying picture can be vastly different.
Over that period, I think that more than half of all constituencies have changed hands, showing that a lot of safe seats don't remain safe forever.
Very true – who would think that Mansfield (Mansfield!) would one day be captured by the Tories and Kensington by Labour? The modern trend seems to be for big cities becoming redder and small towns becoming bluer. The interesting battlegrounds are suburbs where places like Chingford – once solid Tory – are now very marginal due to demographic change, and better connections to their hub city. Other suburbs are going the other way, of course.
Mr. Doethur, a fair point, but there'd be an ongoing drive to get said referendum, and UKIP polling could mean we'd be spending as much time fixating on leaving, just from the angle of pre- rather than post-poll.
As I mentioned on the previous thread, this poll is rather odd in not asking respondents about their own views of the potential candidates; instead it asks their views of other voters' views. That makes it even harder to interpret than hypothetical polls usually are.
Perhaps the main lesson we should draw is not about individuals, but about the need for the Conservative Party to (dare I say it) 'modernise'. Those polled seem to think the party needs a refresh if it is to appeal more widely. They would be right to think that.
Just on a technical point - there is some research (can't lay my hands on it) to suggest that people express their views on controversial matters more honestly if they are asked what other people will think. Not sure that is relevant here (who cares who Joe Bloggs wants as Tory leader?), but it's not a totally off-the-wall polling technique.
Yes, it might be a good approach, but it's hard to assess.
F1: off-chance Force India won't be able to race this weekend.
Likely any not to be classified bet would be made void, but may be worth bearing in mind if backing a points finish for a midfield team.
Ooh, interesting. Might made the under/over finishers markets good value too.
Top F1 hack Joe Saward reckons there’s still a lot to find out about FI, and reckons it’s not impossible that the old Indian directors might still be involved behind the scenes. https://www.motorsportweek.com/joeblogsf1/id/00291
Completely off topic. I note that the normally polite BBC has changed its billing of Stormy Daniels from 'adult film actress' to 'porn star'. I'm told that many such actresses generally prefer the former positioning (no pun intended).
Mr. Topping, parties made sceptical noises then performed EU-phile actions, most notably Brown's wretched reneging upon the referendum for the Lisbon Treaty.
As I mentioned on the previous thread, this poll is rather odd in not asking respondents about their own views of the potential candidates; instead it asks their views of other voters' views. That makes it even harder to interpret than hypothetical polls usually are.
Perhaps the main lesson we should draw is not about individuals, but about the need for the Conservative Party to (dare I say it) 'modernise'. Those polled seem to think the party needs a refresh if it is to appeal more widely. They would be right to think that.
They did effing well modernise, what with hugging hoodies and huskies and all that.
And then kaPOW! We somehow got ourselves back into the 18th century. The Party and large part of the country also.
It is staggering. One of the main parties harking back to the unambiguous failures of mid-twentieth century socialism, the other apparently hungering after the years in the wilderness which it finally manged to crawl out of in 2005, the third party invisible and ashamed of its successes in government after decades of insignificance, the Scots in truculent victim-syndrome, and all this after things were actually going rather well for once.
Quite simply one of the best, most succinct, analyses of today's politics I have ever read.
Completely off topic. I note that the normally polite BBC has changed its billing of Stormy Daniels from 'adult film actress' to 'porn star'. I'm told that many such actresses generally prefer the former positioning (no pun intended).
'Adult film actress' is I believe the first position...
As I mentioned on the previous thread, this poll is rather odd in not asking respondents about their own views of the potential candidates; instead it asks their views of other voters' views. That makes it even harder to interpret than hypothetical polls usually are.
Perhaps the main lesson we should draw is not about individuals, but about the need for the Conservative Party to (dare I say it) 'modernise'. Those polled seem to think the party needs a refresh if it is to appeal more widely. They would be right to think that.
They did effing well modernise, what with hugging hoodies and huskies and all that.
And then kaPOW! We somehow got ourselves back into the 18th century. The Party and large part of the country also.
Yes, because we are all dying of smallpox....
Idiot.
I perfectly understand that for some people, rhetorical devices are far too complicated to understand and you seem to be one of those people, so I will make a note to keep things very simple for you in future comments.
As I mentioned on the previous thread, this poll is rather odd in not asking respondents about their own views of the potential candidates; instead it asks their views of other voters' views. That makes it even harder to interpret than hypothetical polls usually are.
Perhaps the main lesson we should draw is not about individuals, but about the need for the Conservative Party to (dare I say it) 'modernise'. Those polled seem to think the party needs a refresh if it is to appeal more widely. They would be right to think that.
They did effing well modernise, what with hugging hoodies and huskies and all that.
And then kaPOW! We somehow got ourselves back into the 18th century. The Party and large part of the country also.
It is staggering. One of the main parties harking back to the unambiguous failures of mid-twentieth century socialism, the other apparently hungering after the years in the wilderness which it finally manged to crawl out of in 2005, the third party invisible and ashamed of its successes in government after decades of insignificance, the Scots in truculent victim-syndrome, and all this after things were actually going rather well for once.
Is it being so cheerful that keeps you going, Richard?
As I mentioned on the previous thread, this poll is rather odd in not asking respondents about their own views of the potential candidates; instead it asks their views of other voters' views. That makes it even harder to interpret than hypothetical polls usually are.
Perhaps the main lesson we should draw is not about individuals, but about the need for the Conservative Party to (dare I say it) 'modernise'. Those polled seem to think the party needs a refresh if it is to appeal more widely. They would be right to think that.
They did effing well modernise, what with hugging hoodies and huskies and all that.
And then kaPOW! We somehow got ourselves back into the 18th century. The Party and large part of the country also.
Yes, because we are all dying of smallpox....
Idiot.
I perfectly understand that for some people, rhetorical devices are far too complicated to understand and you seem to be one of those people, so I will make a note to keep things very simple for you in future comments.
"Jeremy Corbyn has refused to endorse calls for the UK to follow the United States and impose tougher sanctions on Russia, describing it as a "huge player on the world stage"."
Well, there's a free pass for Putin - for anything.
Jeremy Corbyn. Unfit to be PM.
He must not get into 10 Downing Street. Brexit will be a cakewalk compared to leaving NATO and the end of our defence and intelligence relationship with the US.
It is not Labour policy to leave NATO or end our defence and intelligence relationship with the US. Is this the pb equivalent of push polling? Ascribe an absurd policy to your opponents and ask who will support it? Labour spent above the 2% guideline and it is the Conservatives who have decimated our armed forces.
And that's Corbyn's position, is it? We're a long way from the days of Gordon Brown now.
It was the position in the 2017 manifesto when Corbyn was LoTO.
Surely the danger with intelligence sharing with the other four of the five eyes (US/Can/Aus/NZ), is that they see Corbyn walking up Downing St and note that nice Mr Milne and others of that ilk by his side and pull the cable out of its socket there and then that connects GCHQ and the Pentagon.
Won't really matter what Labour Party policy is on this at that point.
Tbh I do not think there will be a military coup if Labour wins the next election. What happened when President Trump was sworn in? Was America excluded? Because Trump's Russian links seem to be more extensive than Corbyn's.
Trump's loyalty is purely to himself. He has a loose mouth and doesn't understand or respect the niceties or necessities of diplomacy and intelligence but those are different things from being instinctively anti-West.
Trump has already been accused of leaking intelligence, yet the more excitable members of pb have GCHQ, MI6 and Uncle Tom Cobley and all planning a coup against Labour. It is absurd.
As I mentioned on the previous thread, this poll is rather odd in not asking respondents about their own views of the potential candidates; instead it asks their views of other voters' views. That makes it even harder to interpret than hypothetical polls usually are.
Perhaps the main lesson we should draw is not about individuals, but about the need for the Conservative Party to (dare I say it) 'modernise'. Those polled seem to think the party needs a refresh if it is to appeal more widely. They would be right to think that.
They did effing well modernise, what with hugging hoodies and huskies and all that.
And then kaPOW! We somehow got ourselves back into the 18th century. The Party and large part of the country also.
It is staggering. One of the main parties harking back to the unambiguous failures of mid-twentieth century socialism, the other apparently hungering after the years in the wilderness which it finally manged to crawl out of in 2005, the third party invisible and ashamed of its successes in government after decades of insignificance, the Scots in truculent victim-syndrome, and all this after things were actually going rather well for once.
Is it being so cheerful that keeps you going, Richard?
As I mentioned on the previous thread, this poll is rather odd in not asking respondents about their own views of the potential candidates; instead it asks their views of other voters' views. That makes it even harder to interpret than hypothetical polls usually are.
Perhaps the main lesson we should draw is not about individuals, but about the need for the Conservative Party to (dare I say it) 'modernise'. Those polled seem to think the party needs a refresh if it is to appeal more widely. They would be right to think that.
They did effing well modernise, what with hugging hoodies and huskies and all that.
And then kaPOW! We somehow got ourselves back into the 18th century. The Party and large part of the country also.
It is staggering. One of the main parties harking back to the unambiguous failures of mid-twentieth century socialism, the other apparently hungering after the years in the wilderness which it finally manged to crawl out of in 2005, the third party invisible and ashamed of its successes in government after decades of insignificance, the Scots in truculent victim-syndrome, and all this after things were actually going rather well for once.
It's not so strange, more a case of be careful what you wish for.
Labour won elections, the Conservative altered their approach and moved leftwards, and the Lib Dems got to do things in government for the first time in 90 years, and they each discovered that they didn't like it very much.
If May can get a deal agreed with the EU and, even more difficultly, her own party, then despite messing up a great deal in her premiership so far that will be a considerable achievement (more so if it is an actually good deal).
If she were to do that, and survive past March next year and win the next GE (or leave the Tories in a state where a new leader is able to go on and win, because they are not split to the bone), then she probably would deserve to be called a great PM, against all odds.
I'm inclined to give her quite a bit of credit for trying, at last (she did, to my mind, unnecessarily delay actually making a decision on things), but while that gives her some praise I don't think we;re yet in a state where it can be expected she will ever be called great. But I will not hesitate to do so if she does succeed, despite all the factors lined up against her.
More than anything else I just don't see how she beats Corbyn in a round 2, if she were to fight him again. Yes her figures are still better than his, whatever, while his cultists get very complacent over what would happen during a campaign, I don't think she would do much better than last time.
As I mentioned on the previous thread, this poll is rather odd in not asking respondents about their own views of the potential candidates; instead it asks their views of other voters' views. That makes it even harder to interpret than hypothetical polls usually are.
Perhaps the main lesson we should draw is not about individuals, but about the need for the Conservative Party to (dare I say it) 'modernise'. Those polled seem to think the party needs a refresh if it is to appeal more widely. They would be right to think that.
They did effing well modernise, what with hugging hoodies and huskies and all that.
And then kaPOW! We somehow got ourselves back into the 18th century. The Party and large part of the country also.
It is staggering. One of the main parties harking back to the unambiguous failures of mid-twentieth century socialism, the other apparently hungering after the years in the wilderness which it finally manged to crawl out of in 2005, the third party invisible and ashamed of its successes in government after decades of insignificance, the Scots in truculent victim-syndrome, and all this after things were actually going rather well for once.
It's not so strange, more a case of be careful what you wish for.
Labour won elections, the Conservative altered their approach and moved leftwards, and the Lib Dems got to do things in government for the first time in 90 years, and they each discovered that they didn't like it very much.
Political activists who don't want their party to be in government should go find a more appropriate hobby, such as cosplay or moaning down at the pub.
As I mentioned on the previous thread, this poll is rather odd in not asking respondents about their own views of the potential candidates; instead it asks their views of other voters' views. That makes it even harder to interpret than hypothetical polls usually are.
Perhaps the main lesson we should draw is not about individuals, but about the need for the Conservative Party to (dare I say it) 'modernise'. Those polled seem to think the party needs a refresh if it is to appeal more widely. They would be right to think that.
They did effing well modernise, what with hugging hoodies and huskies and all that.
And then kaPOW! We somehow got ourselves back into the 18th century. The Party and large part of the country also.
It is staggering. One of the main parties harking back to the unambiguous failures of mid-twentieth century socialism, the other apparently hungering after the years in the wilderness which it finally manged to crawl out of in 2005, the third party invisible and ashamed of its successes in government after decades of insignificance, the Scots in truculent victim-syndrome, and all this after things were actually going rather well for once.
Do you see a light at the end of the tunnel at least?!
As I mentioned on the previous thread, this poll is rather odd in not asking respondents about their own views of the potential candidates; instead it asks their views of other voters' views. That makes it even harder to interpret than hypothetical polls usually are.
Perhaps the main lesson we should draw is not about individuals, but about the need for the Conservative Party to (dare I say it) 'modernise'. Those polled seem to think the party needs a refresh if it is to appeal more widely. They would be right to think that.
They did effing well modernise, what with hugging hoodies and huskies and all that.
And then kaPOW! We somehow got ourselves back into the 18th century. The Party and large part of the country also.
It is staggering. One of the main parties harking back to the unambiguous failures of mid-twentieth century socialism, the other apparently hungering after the years in the wilderness which it finally manged to crawl out of in 2005, the third party invisible and ashamed of its successes in government after decades of insignificance, the Scots in truculent victim-syndrome, and all this after things were actually going rather well for once.
It's not so strange, more a case of be careful what you wish for.
Labour won elections, the Conservative altered their approach and moved leftwards, and the Lib Dems got to do things in government for the first time in 90 years, and they each discovered that they didn't like it very much.
People quickly find that the public might claim they want parties to work together for a common good, but, here at least, only in the abstract - in practice it means you compromise, eg you lose.
Mr. Doethur, a fair point, but there'd be an ongoing drive to get said referendum, and UKIP polling could mean we'd be spending as much time fixating on leaving, just from the angle of pre- rather than post-poll.
There’s definitely a book in a no-referendum counterfactual. I’d guess a couple more Con defections to UKIP, an unpopular mid-term government trying to implement social care reform with barely a majority, and Nigel Farage’s UKIP on 25 points looking forward to the Euro elections next year. Maybe the Americans elected Hillary.
As I mentioned on the previous thread, this poll is rather odd in not asking respondents about their own views of the potential candidates; instead it asks their views of other voters' views. That makes it even harder to interpret than hypothetical polls usually are.
Perhaps the main lesson we should draw is not about individuals, but about the need for the Conservative Party to (dare I say it) 'modernise'. Those polled seem to think the party needs a refresh if it is to appeal more widely. They would be right to think that.
They did effing well modernise, what with hugging hoodies and huskies and all that.
And then kaPOW! We somehow got ourselves back into the 18th century. The Party and large part of the country also.
It is staggering. One of the main parties harking back to the unambiguous failures of mid-twentieth century socialism, the other apparently hungering after the years in the wilderness which it finally manged to crawl out of in 2005, the third party invisible and ashamed of its successes in government after decades of insignificance, the Scots in truculent victim-syndrome, and all this after things were actually going rather well for once.
It's not so strange, more a case of be careful what you wish for.
Labour won elections, the Conservative altered their approach and moved leftwards, and the Lib Dems got to do things in government for the first time in 90 years, and they each discovered that they didn't like it very much.
Political activists who don't want their party to be in government should go find a more appropriate hobby, such as cosplay or moaning down at the pub.
If May can get a deal agreed with the EU and, even more difficultly, her own party, then despite messing up a great deal in her premiership so far that will be a considerable achievement (more so if it is an actually good deal).
If she were to do that, and survive past March next year and win the next GE (or leave the Tories in a state where a new leader is able to go on and win, because they are not split to the bone), then she probably would deserve to be called a great PM, against all odds.
I'm inclined to give her quite a bit of credit for trying, at last (she did, to my mind, unnecessarily delay actually making a decision on things), but while that gives her some praise I don't think we;re yet in a state where it can be expected she will ever be called great. But I will not hesitate to do so if she does succeed, despite all the factors lined up against her.
More than anything else I just don't see how she beats Corbyn in a round 2, if she were to fight him again. Yes her figures are still better than his, whatever, while his cultists get very complacent over what would happen during a campaign, I don't think she would do much better than last time.
That might be enough to stop him. My own view is that the balance of probabilities is for Corbyn to do worse unless a nightmare scenario of the choice being Corbyn versus JRM or BJ comes about. In the next election Corbyn / McDonell are going to get much more scruntiny and the MSM still counts over socialmedia for determining a GE.
They can't even trust him to give a prepared speech, they need to edit the bloody video for public consumption.
That could be it, they’re going to edit the video. I’m sure an old school hack such as Mr Crick will find an inventive way of getting a dictaphone into the room.
Mr. Doethur, a fair point, but there'd be an ongoing drive to get said referendum, and UKIP polling could mean we'd be spending as much time fixating on leaving, just from the angle of pre- rather than post-poll.
There’s definitely a book in a no-referendum counterfactual. I’d guess a couple more Con defections to UKIP, an unpopular mid-term government trying to implement social care reform with barely a majority, and Nigel Farage’s UKIP on 25 points looking forward to the Euro elections next year. Maybe the Americans elected Hillary.
Had there been no promise of an EU referendum, UKIP would certainly have polled better in 2015, and would continue to poll well. The party would have gained seats in the local elections of 2016, 2017, and 2018. In all likelihood, Thurrock, Thanet South, Hartlepool, and Boston would have been won by UKIP, while Rochester South and Clacton would have been retained.
The Conservatives would have won the 2015 general election, because the additional UKIP vote would have come from both disgruntled Conservative and Labour voters. There would have been no election in 2017, but some Conservative MPs might have defected to UKIP.
Labour's poll ratings would be poor, although they might edge into first place from time to time, given that UKIP would still be polling well. They might well have lost the Stoke Central by-election to UKIP.
As I mentioned on the previous thread, this poll is rather odd in not asking respondents about their own views of the potential candidates; instead it asks their views of other voters' views. That makes it even harder to interpret than hypothetical polls usually are.
Perhaps the main lesson we should draw is not about individuals, but about the need for the Conservative Party to (dare I say it) 'modernise'. Those polled seem to think the party needs a refresh if it is to appeal more widely. They would be right to think that.
They did effing well modernise, what with hugging hoodies and huskies and all that.
And then kaPOW! We somehow got ourselves back into the 18th century. The Party and large part of the country also.
Yes, because we are all dying of smallpox....
Idiot.
I perfectly understand that for some people, rhetorical devices are far too complicated to understand and you seem to be one of those people, so I will make a note to keep things very simple for you in future comments.
Don't change your patronising wanker mode. It serves you so well....
Can anyone here explain how attourney/client privilege works in the USA? It seems amazing that a lawyer can mouth off about his client to anyone who’ll listen, in order to try and save his own ass from the big house.
Attorney client privilege doesn't cover commission of crime. You can't get your lawyer to do something illegal and have that be covered.
The Conservative Party received more money from the dead than from the Tory grassroots rank and file last year as income from membership fees nearly halved.
The Tories generated £1.5million in membership fees in 2016 but that figure dropped 43 per cent to £835,000 in 2017, according to official statistics.
Meanwhile, the Tories were given £1.7million in 2017 in the form of bequests, compared to £301,000 in 2016.
The key finding from this poll is no alternative leader does any bet than Mar bar a completely new face, so if she does pull off a Brexit Deal next March with the EU and no new star emerges not impossible she could lead the Tories at the next general election and if she wins enough seats to stay PM after even beyond
As I mentioned on the previous thread, this poll is rather odd in not asking respondents about their own views of the potential candidates; instead it asks their views of other voters' views. That makes it even harder to interpret than hypothetical polls usually are.
Perhaps the main lesson we should draw is not about individuals, but about the need for the Conservative Party to (dare I say it) 'modernise'. Those polled seem to think the party needs a refresh if it is to appeal more widely. They would be right to think that.
They did effing well modernise, what with hugging hoodies and huskies and all that.
And then kaPOW! We somehow got ourselves back into the 18th century. The Party and large part of the country also.
It is staggering. One of the main parties harking back to the unambiguous failures of mid-twentieth century socialism, the other apparently hungering after the years in the wilderness which it finally manged to crawl out of in 2005, the third party invisible and ashamed of its successes in government after decades of insignificance, the Scots in truculent victim-syndrome, and all this after things were actually going rather well for once.
Is it being so cheerful that keeps you going, Richard?
I'm a cheerful sort!
I actually think that there is plenty to be cheerful about. Our economy is puttering along quite well, probably at just under 2% in reality, employment is at a record high, inflation is incredibly low, the deficit is now, finally, back to something like normal even although it has left a mountain of debt for us to carry, there are at least some indications that the economy is rebalancing somewhat and that the trade deficit might fall, I think the UK is very well positioned for the digital economy, the top end of our education system is genuinely world class, our demographics are better than most because of immigration, we are an increasingly tolerant nation, I could go on for a while.
The perception of chaos and catastrophe basically comes from our incredibly dysfunctional political class who have reached new levels of ineptitude but even there we may have reached a point where their incompetence is so profound they actually can do very little and by and large leave us alone.
As I mentioned on the previous thread, this poll is rather odd in not asking respondents about their own views of the potential candidates; instead it asks their views of other voters' views. That makes it even harder to interpret than hypothetical polls usually are.
Perhaps the main lesson we should draw is not about individuals, but about the need for the Conservative Party to (dare I say it) 'modernise'. Those polled seem to think the party needs a refresh if it is to appeal more widely. They would be right to think that.
They did effing well modernise, what with hugging hoodies and huskies and all that.
And then kaPOW! We somehow got ourselves back into the 18th century. The Party and large part of the country also.
It is staggering. One of the main parties harking back to the unambiguous failures of mid-twentieth century socialism, the other apparently hungering after the years in the wilderness which it finally manged to crawl out of in 2005, the third party invisible and ashamed of its successes in government after decades of insignificance, the Scots in truculent victim-syndrome, and all this after things were actually going rather well for once.
Is it being so cheerful that keeps you going, Richard?
I'm a cheerful sort!
I actually think that there is plenty to be cheerful about. Our economy is puttering along quite well, probably at just under 2% in reality, employment is at a record high, inflation is incredibly low, the deficit is now, finally, back to something like normal even although it has left a mountain of debt for us to carry, there are at least some indications that the economy is rebalancing somewhat and that the trade deficit might fall, I think the UK is very well positioned for the digital economy, the top end of our education system is genuinely world class, our demographics are better than most because of immigration, we are an increasingly tolerant nation, I could go on for a while.
The perception of chaos and catastrophe basically comes from our incredibly dysfunctional political class who have reached new levels of ineptitude but even there we may have reached a point where their incompetence is so profound they actually can do very little and by and large leave us alone.
What we don't have is the kind of growth (and accompanying growth in household incomes) that we took for granted between 1950 and 2000.
Interesting call about May’s premiership. I’m not entirely persuaded...
It understates the potential upside for May. If she can make the decisive call on a second referendum she could settle the division in the Tory party for good, and ultimately lead Britain into the Eurozone, oversee the peaceful reunification of Ireland, and become the indispensable figure of European politics over the next decade.
Given the number of Tories who want to see a second EU referendum and Britain in the Eurozone and a United Ireland is less than 0.001% ie TSE and maybe Ken Clarke and yourself if you are counted as a Tory and May would not last 5 minutes if she proposed that and does not support any of that anyway I think it can be discounted
You'd have thought that the LibDems would be proud to celebrate their part in introducing this policy, but they are even quieter about it than the Conservatives.
You'd have thought that the LibDems would be proud to celebrate their part in introducing this policy, but they are even quieter about it than the Conservatives.
That Labour continue to hold onto their new influx, and still increase as well, is very impressive, even if I don't get the messianic fever Corbyn seems to put them in.
As I mentioned on the previous thread, this poll is rather odd in not asking respondents about their own views of the potential candidates; instead it asks their views of other voters' views. That makes it even harder to interpret than hypothetical polls usually are.
Perhaps the main lesson we should draw is not about individuals, but about the need for the Conservative Party to (dare I say it) 'modernise'. Those polled seem to think the party needs a refresh if it is to appeal more widely. They would be right to think that.
They did effing well modernise, what with hugging hoodies and huskies and all that.
And then kaPOW! We somehow got ourselves back into the 18th century. The Party and large part of the country also.
Yes, because we are all dying of smallpox....
Idiot.
I perfectly understand that for some people, rhetorical devices are far too complicated to understand and you seem to be one of those people, so I will make a note to keep things very simple for you in future comments.
Don't change your patronising wanker mode. It serves you so well....
Some people just demand its use. Again, you are one of those people.
Yet, there has been a great deal of churn underneath that apparent stability.
Greater London has gone from marginal Conservative to safe Labour; the Conservative position has collapsed in Scotland, before recovering to about the same position as in 1988. Birmingham, Manchester, Merseyside, Sheffield, and Leeds have all shifted heavily to Labour as historic middle class seats either moved downmarket, or shifted allegiance to Labour.
But, the East and West Midlands and Yorkshire and Humberside outside the big cities, and the New Towns, have all shifted over to the Conservatives. And, Labour have collapsed in Scotland.
Yes, someone ought to write a book about it all, from a psephological point of view.
You'd have thought that the LibDems would be proud to celebrate their part in introducing this policy, but they are even quieter about it than the Conservatives.
Good point made about company contribution to employee pension often being a wage increase not included in the ONS figures for wage increases.
"BBC Radio 4 Today Verified account @BBCr4today Aug 21
Shadow Trade Secretary @BarryGardiner says a second referendum undermines democracy and could lead to "civil disobedience". Full interview: https://bbc.in/2N5uG0d #r4today"
As I mentioned on the previous thread, this poll is rather odd in not asking respondents about their own views of the potential candidates; instead it asks their views of other voters' views. That makes it even harder to interpret than hypothetical polls usually are.
.
They did effing well modernise, what with hugging hoodies and huskies and all that.
And then kaPOW! We somehow got ourselves back into the 18th century. The Party and large part of the country also.
It is staggering. One of the main parties harking back to the unambiguous failures of mid-twentieth century socialism, the other apparently hungering after the years in the wilderness which it finally manged to crawl out of in 2005, the third party invisible and ashamed of its successes in government after decades of insignificance, the Scots in truculent victim-syndrome, and all this after things were actually going rather well for once.
Is it being so cheerful that keeps you going, Richard?
I'm a cheerful sort!
I actually think that there is plenty to be cheerful about. Our economy is puttering along quite well, probably at just under 2% in reality, employment is at a record high, inflation is incredibly low, the deficit is now, finally, back to something like normal even although it has left a mountain of debt for us to carry, there are at least some indications that the economy is rebalancing somewhat and that the trade deficit might fall, I think the UK is very well positioned for the digital economy, the top end of our education system is genuinely world class, our demographics are better than most because of immigration, we are an increasingly tolerant nation, I could go on for a while.
The perception of chaos and catastrophe basically comes from our incredibly dysfunctional political class who have reached new levels of ineptitude but even there we may have reached a point where their incompetence is so profound they actually can do very little and by and large leave us alone.
What we don't have is the kind of growth (and accompanying growth in household incomes) that we took for granted between 1950 and 2000.
For sustainable wage increases you need to increase productivity and thus increase GDP per head.
Productivity was growing strongly between 1950 and 2000.
Productivity has not increased in the last decade. So neither can income per head.
The Market Drayton Advertiser had a chief reporter just for jam?
Chief reporter for Jam, Gardening, and the Rothschild Conspiracy. A man of many talents.
I am rather reminded of Blackadder's character analysis of Baldrick:
'The only decent impression he can do is of a man with no talent.'
Blackadder: “Your brain is so minute JeremyBaldrick, that if a hungry cannibal cracked your head open, there wouldn’t be enough to cover a small water biscuit.”
As I mentioned on the previous thread, this poll is rather odd in not asking respondents about their own views of the potential candidates; instead it asks their views of other voters' views. That makes it even harder to interpret than hypothetical polls usually are.
Perhaps the main lesson we should draw is not about individuals, but about the need for the Conservative Party to (dare I say it) 'modernise'. Those polled seem to think the party needs a refresh if it is to appeal more widely. They would be right to think that.
With the Conservatives getting more support from the dead than the living, reincarnation might be more effective than modernisation
As I mentioned on the previous thread, this poll is rather odd in not asking respondents about their own views of the potential candidates; instead it asks their views of other voters' views. That makes it even harder to interpret than hypothetical polls usually are.
Perhaps the main lesson we should draw is not about individuals, but about the need for the Conservative Party to (dare I say it) 'modernise'. Those polled seem to think the party needs a refresh if it is to appeal more widely. They would be right to think that.
With the Conservatives getting more support from the dead than the living, reincarnation might be more effective than modernisation
The Market Drayton Advertiser had a chief reporter just for jam?
Chief reporter for Jam, Gardening, and the Rothschild Conspiracy. A man of many talents.
I am rather reminded of Blackadder's character analysis of Baldrick:
'The only decent impression he can do is of a man with no talent.'
Blackadder: “Your brain is so minute JeremyBaldrick, that if a hungry cannibal cracked your head open, there wouldn’t be enough to cover a small water biscuit.”
Tomorrow morning Jez, er, Baldrick, we meet our makers. In my case, God. In your case, God knows. But I'd be surprised if he's won any design awards.
There are so many things that the Lib Dems could boast about, Mr Navabi, but the Tory publicity machine always rushes in and grabs all the credit, even though you Tories were bitterly opposed to the same Lib Dem policies when we shared a government. Tories just have no principles, do they?
Comments
Thus far, she’s successfully steered British Conservatives away from their destructive fantasies about Brexit to a settlement that is compatible with life in the 21st century, in the European Union’s immediate vicinity.
We might still be in NATO. There’s no way we’d be involved in meaningful discussions at the strategic level, because we couldn’t be trusted.
It’s your party leader who’s absurd.
Perhaps the main lesson we should draw is not about individuals, but about the need for the Conservative Party to (dare I say it) 'modernise'. Those polled seem to think the party needs a refresh if it is to appeal more widely. They would be right to think that.
TSE: The LEAVERS use their power for good.
Darth Gideon: Good is a point of view, Anakin, er, I mean TSE. The LEAVERS and the REMAINERS are similar in almost every way, including their quest for greater power.
TSE: The REMAINERS rely on their passion for their strength. They think inward, only about themselves.
Darth Gideon: And the LEAVERS don't?
TSE: The LEAVERS are selfless... they only care about others.
Darth Gideon: [looking a little frustrated] Did you ever hear the tragedy of Darth Smithson "the Wise"?
TSE: No.
Darth Gideon: I thought not. It's not a story the LibDems would tell you. It's a Blogging legend. Darth Smithson was a Daft Lord of the Sith who lived many years ago. He was so powerful and so wise that he could use the Force to influence the midichlorians to create... AV threads. He had such a knowledge of the Daft Side that he could even keep the ones he cared about from dying from boredom on Thursday Nights.
TSE: He could do that? He could actually save people from boring themselves to death?
Darth Gideon: The Daft Side of the Force is a pathway to many policy platforms some consider to be unelectable.
TSE: What happened to him?
Darth Gideon: He became so powerful... the only thing he was afraid of was losing his power, which eventually, of course, he did. Unfortunately, he taught his apprentice everything he knew, and then one night, his apprentice wiped his servers' hard drives while he slept. It's ironic that he could save others from obscurity, but not himself.
TSE: Is it possible to learn this power?
Darth Gideon: Not from a LibDem...
As I said the other week: if you, I or anyone else on PB was killed in a terrorist attack by one of the groups that Corbyn likes, his sympathy would not be with us - the victims - but with the perpetrators.
And if he was PM, the state's sympathies would not be with us.
Won't really matter what Labour Party policy is on this at that point.
As long as the architects of Brexit can avoid taking responsibility by blaming the lackluster outcome on sabotage by “Remoaners” or the intransigence of Brussels, May will continue to soldier on. She’s betting that the country will at some point tire of Brexit and that a settlement will be reached that most Britons will be able to live with, allowing Britain to move on to other subjects.
If she can pull off that feat, she is bound to go down in history as one of the greatest prime ministers of our time and the epitome of the authentic brand of conservatism — prudent, cautious and incremental — championed by the great British political philosopher Michael Oakeshott.
This cautious disposition stands in sharp contrast to the zero-sum zeal endemic to self-styled conservatives on both sides of the Atlantic. More importantly, it serves as a reminder of what democratic politics is supposed to be like: the art of forging compromises that most people can live with (sometimes unenthusiastically). The Western world could do a whole lot worse than to emulate that approach.
While I suspect many may dispute the author's rosy assessment of Mrs May, his critique of the Brexiteers and zero-sum Conservatives on both sides of the Atlantic is bang on.
Greater London has gone from marginal Conservative to safe Labour; the Conservative position has collapsed in Scotland, before recovering to about the same position as in 1988. Birmingham, Manchester, Merseyside, Sheffield, and Leeds have all shifted heavily to Labour as historic middle class seats either moved downmarket, or shifted allegiance to Labour.
But, the East and West Midlands and Yorkshire and Humberside outside the big cities, and the New Towns, have all shifted over to the Conservatives. And, Labour have collapsed in Scotland.
However, intelligence priorities are set by HMG, and we might well change our focus.
"
@DecreptJohnL
Trump for all his faults (and God they are many and manifest - do not get me wrong on that) did not have decades of decrying UK/Can/Aus/NZ foreign policy or those of their allies. Whereas it's going to be a stretch (being kind) for the USA to believe that Corbyn, Milne et al (like say Ms Abbott with whom Corbyn took a youthful motoring trip around that great Amercan ally the GDR of Erich Honecker - a man who really knew how to build a big wall) are really just good 'ol boys who've been hiding their love of American policy successfully for decades.
Though the US is far from a paragon of virtue all the time, I would deeply regret the breaking of such a relationship that goes back (at least) a lifetime to the darkest days of the war and I feel sure has been a large force for good for keeping us safer than would otherwise be the case. However, were I in charge of such matters in the US I would think sharing things as freely as they are now with the likes of Corbyn and Milne complete madness, and act accordingly.
And then kaPOW! We somehow got ourselves back into the 18th century. The Party and large part of the country also.
Likely any not to be classified bet would be made void, but may be worth bearing in mind if backing a points finish for a midfield team.
It's worth pointing out this divide would still exist had Remain narrowly won or the referendum never been held (the latter point, assuming no manifesto promise, would've had an interesting impact upon the 2015 General Election). But the chattering classes would be content, so it'd get rather less airtime (in much the same way a rape gang in Newcastle being sent down was deemed less newsworthy than a journalist's knee being touched 20 years ago).
Idiot.
https://twitter.com/MichaelLCrick/status/1032284357959012354
Top F1 hack Joe Saward reckons there’s still a lot to find out about FI, and reckons it’s not impossible that the old Indian directors might still be involved behind the scenes.
https://www.motorsportweek.com/joeblogsf1/id/00291
I'll get my coat.
https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2018-pick-your-own-brexit/
Mr. JohnL, no, it was Brown who signed the Lisbon Treaty.
Labour won elections, the Conservative altered their approach and moved leftwards, and the Lib Dems got to do things in government for the first time in 90 years, and they each discovered that they didn't like it very much.
If she were to do that, and survive past March next year and win the next GE (or leave the Tories in a state where a new leader is able to go on and win, because they are not split to the bone), then she probably would deserve to be called a great PM, against all odds.
I'm inclined to give her quite a bit of credit for trying, at last (she did, to my mind, unnecessarily delay actually making a decision on things), but while that gives her some praise I don't think we;re yet in a state where it can be expected she will ever be called great. But I will not hesitate to do so if she does succeed, despite all the factors lined up against her.
More than anything else I just don't see how she beats Corbyn in a round 2, if she were to fight him again. Yes her figures are still better than his, whatever, while his cultists get very complacent over what would happen during a campaign, I don't think she would do much better than last time.
The Conservatives would have won the 2015 general election, because the additional UKIP vote would have come from both disgruntled Conservative and Labour voters. There would have been no election in 2017, but some Conservative MPs might have defected to UKIP.
Labour's poll ratings would be poor, although they might edge into first place from time to time, given that UKIP would still be polling well. They might well have lost the Stoke Central by-election to UKIP.
The Conservative Party received more money from the dead than from the Tory grassroots rank and file last year as income from membership fees nearly halved.
The Tories generated £1.5million in membership fees in 2016 but that figure dropped 43 per cent to £835,000 in 2017, according to official statistics.
Meanwhile, the Tories were given £1.7million in 2017 in the form of bequests, compared to £301,000 in 2016.
https://gifer.com/i/F2uO.gif
The perception of chaos and catastrophe basically comes from our incredibly dysfunctional political class who have reached new levels of ineptitude but even there we may have reached a point where their incompetence is so profound they actually can do very little and by and large leave us alone.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/workplacepensions/articles/pensionparticipationatrecordhighbutcontributionsclusteratminimumlevels/2018-05-04
You'd have thought that the LibDems would be proud to celebrate their part in introducing this policy, but they are even quieter about it than the Conservatives.
Verified account @BBCr4today
Aug 21
Shadow Trade Secretary @BarryGardiner says a second referendum undermines democracy and could lead to "civil disobedience". Full interview: https://bbc.in/2N5uG0d #r4today"
Nor saving sufficient for their retirement and care in old age.
'The only decent impression he can do is of a man with no talent.'
What do we do then?
For sustainable wage increases you need to increase productivity and thus increase GDP per head.
Productivity was growing strongly between 1950 and 2000.
Productivity has not increased in the last decade. So neither can income per head.
https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1032211668355428352
Scotland - £13.4bn
UK - £39.4bn
Does anyone know - does the UK figure include the Scotland figure?
One might assume it does - unless the UK figure is for the UK Govt and the Scottish Govt is separate?
Also - if the answer is indeed "Yes" - how can Hammond control the UK deficit when he can't control what the Scottish Govt does?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-45260268