Labour goes into the next election stronger, the Tories weaker. The campaign will be interesting again.
Corbyn is good on the stump. He surprised in 2017. The Tories had a hard time pinning a charge incompetence on someone clearly better at it than they were. The last couple of years have done nothing for the Tories claims of managerial competence or pragmatism.
Could be a close run thing.
Is Corbyn actually good 'on the stump' ? He has to appeal to voters well outside his usual demographic of far-leftists, and ISTR he has shown a certain impatience during interviews when pressed.
Of course he shows impatience because everyone who interviews him asks if he still hates Jews.
perfectly reasonable question. everyone knows he is a jew hater so why not prod him about it
Labour goes into the next election stronger, the Tories weaker. The campaign will be interesting again.
Corbyn is good on the stump. He surprised in 2017. The Tories had a hard time pinning a charge incompetence on someone clearly better at it than they were. The last couple of years have done nothing for the Tories claims of managerial competence or pragmatism.
Could be a close run thing.
Corbyn will be viewed as a probable PM this time, that was not the case in 2017 when virtually nobody thought that would happen .That will not end well for Corbyn.
As an ex-Labour member I sat out the last election for the first time and I doubt I will vote next time unless Labour has a change of leader. I am thoroughly p*ssed off with the arrogant way he ignores the party members' and MPs' views on Brexit. The members must be listened to but only when they agree with the Dear Leader it would seem
Morning all. I agree that Labour must not be complacent, especially about the prospect of a new Tory leader. We see at Man Utd the galvanizing effect a change at the top can have. Free of Jose Mourinho’s baleful influence they are a team reborn, banging in goals for fun. Could the political equivalent happen with the Tory Party? Certainly there are similarities between May and Mourinho. In particular the repressed and joyless bunker mentality that both seem to foster. Just as Paul Pogba, given his head and allowed to express himself, suddenly catches fire, is it too much of a stretch to imagine something similar happening with the likes of Liam Fox, Penny Mordaunt and Chris Grayling? I don’t think it is. Under a new leader, no longer cowed and bullied, they will be off the leash, able to enjoy their politics without fretting all the time about getting a ticking off from the boss. If the Man Utd example is anything to go by, the results will follow. That’s not good for Labour. If Corbyn & Co are not worried about it, they should be.
A record number of applications for Irish passports this year.
.........Get in there fast while stocks last
Yes, an Irish passport is a very worthwhile asset. Right to vote and residence anywhere in the UK and the freedom of a continent.
Sadly Dr Foxys Irish ancestors are rather too distant.
200,000 applied for last year and the numbers are going up fast. Don't worry about ancestry. A couple of hundred quid and pronounce Saoirse Ronan correctly and it's yours!
We had a good look at this one after the vote. We thought my maternal grandfather might have been born in Ireland, but unfortunately it turned out that he was bon in Glasgow shortly after the family's arrival from the Emerald Isle. Still, the silver lining is that I turned quickly from 'No' to 'Yes' on the question of Scottish independence.
Labour goes into the next election stronger, the Tories weaker. The campaign will be interesting again.
Corbyn is good on the stump. He surprised in 2017. The Tories had a hard time pinning a charge incompetence on someone clearly better at it than they were. The last couple of years have done nothing for the Tories claims of managerial competence or pragmatism.
Could be a close run thing.
Corbyn will be viewed as a probable PM this time, that was not the case in 2017 when virtually nobody thought that would happen .That will not end well for Corbyn.
As an ex-Labour member I sat out the last election for the first time and I doubt I will vote next time unless Labour has a change of leader. I am thoroughly p*ssed off with the arrogant way he ignores the party members' and MPs' views on Brexit. The members must be listened to but only when they agree with the Dear Leader it would seem
Corbyn has certainly accrued baggage (Antisemitism, Brexit) and will be less interesting because he is better known, but for all that he is today stronger than he was going into 2017.
Morning all. I agree that Labour must not be complacent, especially about the prospect of a new Tory leader. We see at Man Utd the galvanizing effect a change at the top can have. Free of Jose Mourinho’s baleful influence they are a team reborn, banging in goals for fun. Could the political equivalent happen with the Tory Party? Certainly there are similarities between May and Mourinho. In particular the repressed and joyless bunker mentality that both seem to foster. Just as Paul Pogba, given his head and allowed to express himself, suddenly catches fire, is it too much of a stretch to imagine something similar happening with the likes of Liam Fox, Penny Mordaunt and Chris Grayling? I don’t think it is. Under a new leader, no longer cowed and bullied, they will be off the leash, able to enjoy their politics without fretting all the time about getting a ticking off from the boss. If the Man Utd example is anything to go by, the results will follow. That’s not good for Labour. If Corbyn & Co are not worried about it, they should be.
Thank you for this: best laugh I've had in a long time. Strangely, I'd never noticed the similarity between Paul Pogba and Chris Grayling before you pointed it out.
In other news, I have written to the ludicrous Chris Grayling to volunteer to pretend to run a ferry company for just £10 million. As he continues to plan for what is setting itself up to be a triumphant No Deal Brexit I think this offer to save the country £4 million is a deeply patriotic act.
I'm a dab hand in a pedalo. I'm in.
I feel a Matt cartoon with a fleet of little boats a la Dunkirk coming
Morning all. I agree that Labour must not be complacent, especially about the prospect of a new Tory leader. We see at Man Utd the galvanizing effect a change at the top can have. Free of Jose Mourinho’s baleful influence they are a team reborn, banging in goals for fun. Could the political equivalent happen with the Tory Party? Certainly there are similarities between May and Mourinho. In particular the repressed and joyless bunker mentality that both seem to foster. Just as Paul Pogba, given his head and allowed to express himself, suddenly catches fire, is it too much of a stretch to imagine something similar happening with the likes of Liam Fox, Penny Mordaunt and Chris Grayling? I don’t think it is. Under a new leader, no longer cowed and bullied, they will be off the leash, able to enjoy their politics without fretting all the time about getting a ticking off from the boss. If the Man Utd example is anything to go by, the results will follow. That’s not good for Labour. If Corbyn & Co are not worried about it, they should be.
Where your Man U analogy breaks down is that Pogba has real talent; the same cannot be said for Fox, Mordaunt and Grayling.
Labour goes into the next election stronger, the Tories weaker. The campaign will be interesting again.
Corbyn is good on the stump. He surprised in 2017. The Tories had a hard time pinning a charge incompetence on someone clearly better at it than they were. The last couple of years have done nothing for the Tories claims of managerial competence or pragmatism.
Could be a close run thing.
Corbyn will be viewed as a probable PM this time, that was not the case in 2017 when virtually nobody thought that would happen .That will not end well for Corbyn.
As an ex-Labour member I sat out the last election for the first time and I doubt I will vote next time unless Labour has a change of leader. I am thoroughly p*ssed off with the arrogant way he ignores the party members' and MPs' views on Brexit. The members must be listened to but only when they agree with the Dear Leader it would seem
Corbyn has certainly accrued baggage (Antisemitism, Brexit) and will be less interesting because he is better known, but for all that he is today stronger than he was going into 2017.
Incorrect IMHO. He has a stronger hold on the Labour Party, that's not the same as being stronger.
Morning all. I agree that Labour must not be complacent, especially about the prospect of a new Tory leader. We see at Man Utd the galvanizing effect a change at the top can have. Free of Jose Mourinho’s baleful influence they are a team reborn, banging in goals for fun. Could the political equivalent happen with the Tory Party? Certainly there are similarities between May and Mourinho. In particular the repressed and joyless bunker mentality that both seem to foster. Just as Paul Pogba, given his head and allowed to express himself, suddenly catches fire, is it too much of a stretch to imagine something similar happening with the likes of Liam Fox, Penny Mordaunt and Chris Grayling? I don’t think it is. Under a new leader, no longer cowed and bullied, they will be off the leash, able to enjoy their politics without fretting all the time about getting a ticking off from the boss. If the Man Utd example is anything to go by, the results will follow. That’s not good for Labour. If Corbyn & Co are not worried about it, they should be.
Are you a spoof?
While your logic is sound the choice of Fox and Grayling as examples to be equivalent to Pogba is a tad strange.
Labour goes into the next election stronger, the Tories weaker. The campaign will be interesting again.
Corbyn is good on the stump. He surprised in 2017. The Tories had a hard time pinning a charge incompetence on someone clearly better at it than they were. The last couple of years have done nothing for the Tories claims of managerial competence or pragmatism.
Could be a close run thing.
Is Corbyn actually good 'on the stump' ? He has to appeal to voters well outside his usual demographic of far-leftists, and ISTR he has shown a certain impatience during interviews when pressed.
It is more his 70s message rehash has gained a new audience. He is a well rehearsed pitch, because he has been doing for the last 40 years, the difference is now there is more people willing to give it a look and ignore the fact lots of his "solutions" have previously failed.
Mr. Pointer, agree on Fox and Grayling, but Mordaunt is clearly a superb and talented politician.
Getting away with telling lies and having had the tenth highest expenses claim in the entire Parliament (most of the others being Scots with expensive travel), so she's successfully shameless, I assume you mean?
Remember that Channel 4 interview that got young Tulip into trouble last year? That was about Tulip’s failure to assist a British man who had been arrested and locked up in Bangladesh for some political reason.
Labour goes into the next election stronger, the Tories weaker. The campaign will be interesting again.
Corbyn is good on the stump. He surprised in 2017. The Tories had a hard time pinning a charge incompetence on someone clearly better at it than they were. The last couple of years have done nothing for the Tories claims of managerial competence or pragmatism.
Could be a close run thing.
Is Corbyn actually good 'on the stump' ? He has to appeal to voters well outside his usual demographic of far-leftists, and ISTR he has shown a certain impatience during interviews when pressed.
Of course he shows impatience because everyone who interviews him asks if he still hates Jews.
If that's what he's getting upset about (and ISTR it's often not about that), then it's still a perfectly reasonable thing for a journalist to ask. He claims to be anti-racist, but does not give the appearance of actually understanding that means being against *all* racism, not just racism against groups he likes.
He should at least be able to answer without getting angry.
Everyone focuses on May’s negatives during GE2017 (dementia tax, pensioners’ benefits) but just as important was the lack of positives.
There were no baubles to attract floating voters other than “give me a stonking big majority”. The only proactive policy ideas May could manage were resurrecting grammar schools and a free vote on hunting, which it turns out no one really wants but which do a great job of energising your opponents.
Given that May probably won’t fight the next election, the question is whether this paucity of ideas is limited to May-Timothy-Crosby, or endemic to the current Conservative party. I used to think the former, but the complete lack of policy thinking from other wings of the party (no, Javid magicking up an imaginary threat of invasion doesn’t count), I’m starting to wonder whether the party is indeed a busted flush.
While your logic is sound the choice of Fox and Grayling as examples to be equivalent to Pogba is a tad strange.
A touch spoofy, I admit. But also to make the serious point that good leadership involves bringing the best out of your team, and an effective way to do that (if done right) is to give them their head. TM is not that way inclined and I think it's a weakness of hers.
Labour goes into the next election stronger, the Tories weaker. The campaign will be interesting again.
Corbyn is good on the stump. He surprised in 2017. The Tories had a hard time pinning a charge incompetence on someone clearly better at it than they were. The last couple of years have done nothing for the Tories claims of managerial competence or pragmatism.
Could be a close run thing.
Is Corbyn actually good 'on the stump' ? He has to appeal to voters well outside his usual demographic of far-leftists, and ISTR he has shown a certain impatience during interviews when pressed.
Of course he shows impatience because everyone who interviews him asks if he still hates Jews.
If that's what he's getting upset about (and ISTR it's often not about that), then it's still a perfectly reasonable thing for a journalist to ask. He claims to be anti-racist, but does not give the appearance of actually understanding that means being against *all* racism, not just racism against groups he likes.
He should at least be able to answer without getting angry.
A record number of applications for Irish passports this year.
.........Get in there fast while stocks last
Yes, an Irish passport is a very worthwhile asset. Right to vote and residence anywhere in the UK and the freedom of a continent.
Sadly Dr Foxys Irish ancestors are rather too distant.
200,000 applied for last year and the numbers are going up fast. Don't worry about ancestry. A couple of hundred quid and pronounce Saoirse Ronan correctly and it's yours!
That could be the resolution for the Brexit dilemma - grant the whole of the UK the right to Irish passports, and Ulster independence from the Irish Isles.
Appears Facebook are still doing their best Johnny Five impersonation...
Facebook places the sole responsibility on app developers to ensure that they have the lawful right to collect, use and share people’s data before providing Facebook with any data. However, the default implementation of the Facebook SDK is designed to automatically transmit event data to Facebook.
I'm wondering if everyone isn't getting this while thing the wrong was around. CA is voting from right after Iowa, but they're not counting the votes until after Super Tuesday, which judging by how fast they normally do things means we don't get their results until somewhere around 2026. What that says to me is that it's Iowa or Bust. If you defeat your similar opponents in Iowa, and the voters start voting in serious numbers right after that, then even NH doesn't matter as much: Your opponents have already been found unviable. Iowa decides who's in the race, and if it doesn't pick you, it's too late to come back. And even the less tactical of Democrats will be aware that the Dems need the mid-west, and they care a *lot* about beating Trump, so proving electability in Iowa is a big deal.
Facebook places the sole responsibility on app developers to ensure that they have the lawful right to collect, use and share people’s data before providing Facebook with any data. However, the default implementation of the Facebook SDK is designed to automatically transmit event data to Facebook.
Yep. I offer Facebook login on a couple of sites I run. Just login, nothing else. Facebook has given me a whole bunch of additional permissions without asking, and is now doing a cursory job of asking me to justify why I need them.
Also, the UI on the permissions pages for app developers is beyond confusing. It makes iTunes Connect look good, and any iOS developer will understand how hard that is.
A record number of applications for Irish passports this year.
.........Get in there fast while stocks last
Yes, an Irish passport is a very worthwhile asset. Right to vote and residence anywhere in the UK and the freedom of a continent.
Sadly Dr Foxys Irish ancestors are rather too distant.
200,000 applied for last year and the numbers are going up fast. Don't worry about ancestry. A couple of hundred quid and pronounce Saoirse Ronan correctly and it's yours!
We had a good look at this one after the vote. We thought my maternal grandfather might have been born in Ireland, but unfortunately it turned out that he was bon in Glasgow shortly after the family's arrival from the Emerald Isle. Still, the silver lining is that I turned quickly from 'No' to 'Yes' on the question of Scottish independence.
I wonder whether they'll take in 16.5 million of us if we promise not to make a noise.
Everyone focuses on May’s negatives during GE2017 (dementia tax, pensioners’ benefits) but just as important was the lack of positives.
There were no baubles to attract floating voters other than “give me a stonking big majority”. The only proactive policy ideas May could manage were resurrecting grammar schools and a free vote on hunting, which it turns out no one really wants but which do a great job of energising your opponents.
Given that May probably won’t fight the next election, the question is whether this paucity of ideas is limited to May-Timothy-Crosby, or endemic to the current Conservative party. I used to think the former, but the complete lack of policy thinking from other wings of the party (no, Javid magicking up an imaginary threat of invasion doesn’t count), I’m starting to wonder whether the party is indeed a busted flush.
I believe the idea of holding the election was to 'crush the saboteurs'.
A record number of applications for Irish passports this year.
.........Get in there fast while stocks last
Yes, an Irish passport is a very worthwhile asset. Right to vote and residence anywhere in the UK and the freedom of a continent.
Sadly Dr Foxys Irish ancestors are rather too distant.
200,000 applied for last year and the numbers are going up fast. Don't worry about ancestry. A couple of hundred quid and pronounce Saoirse Ronan correctly and it's yours!
We had a good look at this one after the vote. We thought my maternal grandfather might have been born in Ireland, but unfortunately it turned out that he was bon in Glasgow shortly after the family's arrival from the Emerald Isle. Still, the silver lining is that I turned quickly from 'No' to 'Yes' on the question of Scottish independence.
I wonder whether they'll take in 16.5 million of us if we promise not to make a noise.
If it'd help, I'd be quite willing to sign an undertaking never to set foot in the place.
Thank you for this: best laugh I've had in a long time. Strangely, I'd never noticed the similarity between Paul Pogba and Chris Grayling before you pointed it out.
:-)
Interesting thought experiment is to consider the effects of a job switch.
Bad news for Utd, the goals dry up, but probably an improvement in the train network.
Interesting interview with David Petraeus. When asked whether the UK would be better reversing Brexit he paused and quoted Francis Urquart "you might say that..... " So even prominent Americans think we're Sid and Doris
David Petraeus has been to our village in Buckinghamshire to see where his ancestors lived a couple of hundred years ago.
Everyone focuses on May’s negatives during GE2017 (dementia tax, pensioners’ benefits) but just as important was the lack of positives.
There were no baubles to attract floating voters other than “give me a stonking big majority”. The only proactive policy ideas May could manage were resurrecting grammar schools and a free vote on hunting, which it turns out no one really wants but which do a great job of energising your opponents.
Given that May probably won’t fight the next election, the question is whether this paucity of ideas is limited to May-Timothy-Crosby, or endemic to the current Conservative party. I used to think the former, but the complete lack of policy thinking from other wings of the party (no, Javid magicking up an imaginary threat of invasion doesn’t count), I’m starting to wonder whether the party is indeed a busted flush.
I believe the idea of holding the election was to 'crush the saboteurs'.
If we do manage to escape from Brexit, maybe it did?
So what's Javid's master plan for the petits bateaux? Is he going to light them up with a 20mm Oerlikon as soon as they clear the French 12nm limit?
....... I heard the devastating news that a small boat containing 4 foreigners was heading towards the Kent coast when I woke up.
I imagine the government is calling a Cobra meeting urgently
There are rules in place to manage asylum claims. France is, as far as I know (although you will have a better view) a safe and tolerant country.
But they have decided that the rules shouldn’t apply to them
Why should that kind of attitude to the law be welcome in our country?
Why doesn’t the government state that anyone coming here from France - a safe country, indeed, a civilised and beautiful one - is not and will not be treated as an asylum seeker, no matter what they claim, precisely because they have come from and passed through several safe countries? They are welcome to apply to settle in Britain but will have to comply with the same rules as anyone else and their attempt to enter the country illegally will count against them. If they are much needed highly qualified engineers, doctors etc that should help them. In the meanwhile, they will be detained while their application is considered. If it is rejected, they will have three choices: return home, go to another country or remain in detention.
Abbott was on the TV yesterday saying that people would not embark on these dangerous journeys if we facilitated them making an asylum claim from France. From France? Why should anyone in France need to claim asylum?
Thank you for this: best laugh I've had in a long time. Strangely, I'd never noticed the similarity between Paul Pogba and Chris Grayling before you pointed it out.
:-)
Interesting thought experiment is to consider the effects of a job switch.
Bad news for Utd, the goals dry up, but probably an improvement in the train network.
So what's Javid's master plan for the petits bateaux? Is he going to light them up with a 20mm Oerlikon as soon as they clear the French 12nm limit?
....... I heard the devastating news that a small boat containing 4 foreigners was heading towards the Kent coast when I woke up.
I imagine the government is calling a Cobra meeting urgently
There are rules in place to manage asylum claims. France is, as far as I know (although you will have a better view) a safe and tolerant country.
But they have decided that the rules shouldn’t apply to them
Why should that kind of attitude to the law be welcome in our country?
Why doesn’t the government state that anyone coming here from France - a safe country, indeed, a civilised and beautiful one - is not and will not be treated as an asylum seeker, no matter what they claim, precisely because they have come from and passed through several safe countries? They are welcome to apply to settle in Britain but will have to comply with the same rules as anyone else and their attempt to enter the country illegally will count against them. If they are much needed highly qualified engineers, doctors etc that should help them. In the meanwhile, they will be detained while their application is considered. If it is rejected, they will have three choices: return home, go to another country or remain in detention.
Abbott was on the TV yesterday saying that people would not embark on these dangerous journeys if we facilitated them making an asylum claim from France. From France? Why should anyone in France need to claim asylum?
The way macron is going he might be needing to claim asylum in the uk!
He's not dropped any real clangers for a long time (people didn't feel that possibly muttering "stupid woman" to himself after TM's panto performance was that unreasonable), which is why we still read stuff about what he said in a leftie magazine in 1974 etc.
"Stupid woman" was a huge potential clanger, not for the comment itself (which as you say was not that unreasonable in context and so should have been dealt with easily) but for the brazen denial in a parliamentary statement which followed and which exposed him as an utter liar to all, even though his true believers bizarrely continued to deny what was plain for all to see, thus confirming that they really are members of a cult. He was very fortunate that the drones saga took over the news cycle from "stupid woman" and that the Speaker chose not to haul him over the coals for lying to parliament.
I would also class as a clanger his efforts to put off the Remain supporters who are shoring up Labour's polling by suggesting in an aside last week that he would press on with Brexit if he won a general election. That was an avoidable self-inflicted wound and came just a week ago.
Maybe we're just so used to the clangers now that we don't notice them as much. Two in a fortnight is still pretty good going though.
Everyone focuses on May’s negatives during GE2017 (dementia tax, pensioners’ benefits) but just as important was the lack of positives.
There were no baubles to attract floating voters other than “give me a stonking big majority”. The only proactive policy ideas May could manage were resurrecting grammar schools and a free vote on hunting, which it turns out no one really wants but which do a great job of energising your opponents.
Given that May probably won’t fight the next election, the question is whether this paucity of ideas is limited to May-Timothy-Crosby, or endemic to the current Conservative party. I used to think the former, but the complete lack of policy thinking from other wings of the party (no, Javid magicking up an imaginary threat of invasion doesn’t count), I’m starting to wonder whether the party is indeed a busted flush.
He's not dropped any real clangers for a long time (people didn't feel that possibly muttering "stupid woman" to himself after TM's panto performance was that unreasonable), which is why we still read stuff about what he said in a leftie magazine in 1974 etc.
"Stupid woman" was a huge potential clanger, not for the comment itself (which as you say was not that unreasonable in context and so should have been dealt with easily) but for the brazen denial in a parliamentary statement which followed and which exposed him as an utter liar to all, even though his true believers bizarrely continued to deny what was plain for all to see, thus confirming that they really are members of a cult. He was very fortunate that the drones saga took over the news cycle from "stupid woman" and that the Speaker chose not to haul him over the coals for lying to parliament.
I would also class as a clanger his efforts to put off the Remain supporters who are shoring up Labour's polling by suggesting in an aside last week that he would press on with Brexit if he won a general election. That was an avoidable self-inflicted wound and came just a week ago.
Maybe we're just so used to the clangers now that we don't notice them as much. Two in a fortnight is still pretty good going though.
OT, i’m spending NYE this year in Ulverston in Cumbria. Never been before and wasn’t impressed initially but the old town is lovely.
Congratulations! You are not far from our place. Ulverston has some good restaurants - a good Italian one (Bici’s Cafe) and the Spanish tapas place (Churrasco) plus a great chippy, Gillam’s Tea Rooms (Jess Gillam is the magnificent saxophonist who played at this year’s Last Night of the Proms) and a very nice bookshop. And The Bay Horse Inn just outside Ulverston.
The drive from Ulverston to Millom over the fells is glorious and you get a lovely view of Coniston lake glinting in the distance on your right. And if the day is clear a walk up Black Combe is bracing with wonderful views from the top. Or the beach at Silecroft where you can go riding.
Now that I have been mildly rude to people, the question is assuming Saint Theresa doesn't land a general election on us before she can fall on her sword, who will be Tory leader?
I agree with others that when one looks back at elections past, most modern politicians wouldn't make the junior ranks of government or opposition front bench let alone cabinet/shadow cabinet rank. A bit like the education system. Keep dumbing it down until almost everyone passes.
I have been impressed by Hunt at the FO and clearly this migrant dinghy situation will make or break Javid. My hunch is we might see "tickets" in the next Tory leadership contest so for example Hunt and Gove for PM/DPM up against Javid and Raab or Mordaunt for PM/DPM. One thing is for sure Alexander Johnson will never be PM.
I agree with Mike that without a good number of Scotland's seats, Labour will be unlikely to win a general election and right now if a GE took place, Labour would hold Edinburgh South and little else. Richard Leonard makes Kezia Dugdale look like a political titan! I have no idea who the Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland is and indeed Ian Murray in Edinburgh South, Roger's relative is the only SLAB MP I can name.
Mike was certain last night that the next GE will not be on the new boundaries but now that the revised Northern Ireland constituency proposals don't crucify the DUP, why shouldn't they support them? Would Labour really want to go into a GE campaign with the electorate being reminded that it had opposed the reduction in the number of MPs!
Of course for unionists like me the solution for NI is for the DUP/UUP and NI Tories to combine to create the NIU and then SF would win very few seats. Sadly unlikely in my lifetime unless they find an Ulster version of Ruth Davidson. It would mean we could have a Northern Ireland Secretary sitting for a Northern Ireland seat.
I am looking like I am spending it in hospital which is a bit of a bore. My view is of another bit of white concrete opposite. No doubt the nurses will have a good selection of spirits ready for the bells. Possibly water with the water.
Morning all. I agree that Labour must not be complacent, especially about the prospect of a new Tory leader. We see at Man Utd the galvanizing effect a change at the top can have. Free of Jose Mourinho’s baleful influence they are a team reborn, banging in goals for fun. Could the political equivalent happen with the Tory Party? Certainly there are similarities between May and Mourinho. In particular the repressed and joyless bunker mentality that both seem to foster. Just as Paul Pogba, given his head and allowed to express himself, suddenly catches fire, is it too much of a stretch to imagine something similar happening with the likes of Liam Fox, Penny Mordaunt and Chris Grayling? I don’t think it is. Under a new leader, no longer cowed and bullied, they will be off the leash, able to enjoy their politics without fretting all the time about getting a ticking off from the boss. If the Man Utd example is anything to go by, the results will follow. That’s not good for Labour. If Corbyn & Co are not worried about it, they should be.
Are you a spoof?
While your logic is sound the choice of Fox and Grayling as examples to be equivalent to Pogba is a tad strange.
I think whilst the analogy is valid it more on the side of Rashford - the young dynamic talent repacking Lukaku the wayward big money signing. Someone who has perhaps less skill himself but brings out more from the whole team. So in political terms this is Fox being replaced by someone who more than two brain cells.
Generally on topic, I have made this point several times but my view of politics is that we underestimate the reaction, rather than the action. Those of us interested in politics look at Corbyn and think he’s done a lot of talking to big crowds in safe labour seats - he must be something to do with it. That would be as big a mistake as assuming the 42% voting Tory liked May. May boosted the labour vote by saying I need a large majority to push through Brexit. This coalesced a lot of the minor votes in England around labour rather than Libdem, green and socialist front of Judaea types. Corbyn being Corbyn then drove a very large number of people to vote Tory. Neither will be in play next time, but unless UKIP can rematerialise then the scope for success looks greater for the Tories. Corbyn will have to fight the following ; votes being lost to Greens / Libdems who don’t see voting labour as a possible way to stop Brexit, votes being lost from those who think that Israel should exist. Votes being lost where people voted for an uncosted fantasy manifesto as it wasn’t going to be implemented, votes being lost due to increased scrutiny as feasible new leader rather than plucky underdog.
Unfortunately Labour types I have come across think that they will go up 20% during the campaign again so complacency is probably a good word for it.
Now that I have been mildly rude to people, the question is assuming Saint Theresa doesn't land a general election on us before she can fall on her sword, who will be Tory leader?
I agree with others that when one looks back at elections past, most modern politicians wouldn't make the junior ranks of government or opposition front bench let alone cabinet/shadow cabinet rank. A bit like the education system. Keep dumbing it down until almost everyone passes.
I have been impressed by Hunt at the FO and clearly this migrant dinghy situation will make or break Javid. My hunch is we might see "tickets" in the next Tory leadership contest so for example Hunt and Gove for PM/DPM up against Javid and Raab or Mordaunt for PM/DPM. One thing is for sure Alexander Johnson will never be PM.
I agree with Mike that without a good number of Scotland's seats, Labour will be unlikely to win a general election and right now if a GE took place, Labour would hold Edinburgh South and little else. Richard Leonard makes Kezia Dugdale look like a political titan! I have no idea who the Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland is and indeed Ian Murray in Edinburgh South, Roger's relative is the only SLAB MP I can name.
Mike was certain last night that the next GE will not be on the new boundaries but now that the revised Northern Ireland constituency proposals don't crucify the DUP, why shouldn't they support them? Would Labour really want to go into a GE campaign with the electorate being reminded that it had opposed the reduction in the number of MPs!
Of course for unionists like me the solution for NI is for the DUP/UUP and NI Tories to combine to create the NIU and then SF would win very few seats. Sadly unlikely in my lifetime unless they find an Ulster version of Ruth Davidson. It would mean we could have a Northern Ireland Secretary sitting for a Northern Ireland seat.
Thanks for this @NorthCadboll. It's a great insight into what untrammelled Tory wish-fulfillment looks like.
A record number of applications for Irish passports this year.
.........Get in there fast while stocks last
Yes, an Irish passport is a very worthwhile asset. Right to vote and residence anywhere in the UK and the freedom of a continent.
Sadly Dr Foxys Irish ancestors are rather too distant.
200,000 applied for last year and the numbers are going up fast. Don't worry about ancestry. A couple of hundred quid and pronounce Saoirse Ronan correctly and it's yours!
We had a good look at this one after the vote. We thought my maternal grandfather might have been born in Ireland, but unfortunately it turned out that he was bon in Glasgow shortly after the family's arrival from the Emerald Isle. Still, the silver lining is that I turned quickly from 'No' to 'Yes' on the question of Scottish independence.
I wonder whether they'll take in 16.5 million of us if we promise not to make a noise.
The Scottish Tories are starting to get really worried. While a few of the MPS actually support a hard Brexit the main base under Ruth Davidson are getting prepared for a second Independence vote. It may lead to a split in the Tory party with the Scottish Tories becoming fully independent group like the DUP.
As a staunch unionist who helped fight for No I have given up the fight in the case of a hard Brexit and assume the vote will be lost. The only question is how to save the Scottish Tory party.
PS we will welcome all English who want to keep their EC passport. Those who can play football especially
Grayling takes politics to a surrealist performance art. Not thinking to check whether the ferry operator has a boat is worthy of Dali.
He is indeed a truly remarkable talent.
And then there's Gavin Williamson, Liam Fox, Andrea Leadsom ... everywhere you look in the cabinet there is astounding, breathtaking, mediocrity and incompetence. The country is, without doubt, in the safest possible hands.
The fuss about the company with no ships continues. One of the directors is the brother of a Tory donor, so that must have been a really tough interview. The company's login page is a photograph of a login page. Yes, really.
Grayling takes politics to a surrealist performance art. Not thinking to check whether the ferry operator has a boat is worthy of Dali.
He is indeed a truly remarkable talent.
And then there's Gavin Williamson, Liam Fox, Andrea Leadsom ... everywhere you look in the cabinet there is astounding, breathtaking, mediocrity and incompetence. The country is, without doubt, in the safest possible hands.
A record number of applications for Irish passports this year.
.........Get in there fast while stocks last
Yes, an Irish passport is a very worthwhile asset. Right to vote and residence anywhere in the UK and the freedom of a continent.
Sadly Dr Foxys Irish ancestors are rather too distant.
200,000 applied for last year and the numbers are going up fast. Don't worry about ancestry. A couple of hundred quid and pronounce Saoirse Ronan correctly and it's yours!
We had a good look at this one after the vote. We thought my maternal grandfather might have been born in Ireland, but unfortunately it turned out that he was bon in Glasgow shortly after the family's arrival from the Emerald Isle. Still, the silver lining is that I turned quickly from 'No' to 'Yes' on the question of Scottish independence.
I wonder whether they'll take in 16.5 million of us if we promise not to make a noise.
The Scottish Tories are starting to get really worried. While a few of the MPS actually support a hard Brexit the main base under Ruth Davidson are getting prepared for a second Independence vote. It may lead to a split in the Tory party with the Scottish Tories becoming fully independent group like the DUP.
As a staunch unionist who helped fight for No I have given up the fight in the case of a hard Brexit and assume the vote will be lost. The only question is how to save the Scottish Tory party.
PS we will welcome all English who want to keep their EC passport. Those who can play football especially
The Scottish Tories would probably do ok in an independent Scotland. Questions is, what would happen to the SNP?
Good article. Of course the main thing that happened in the 2017 general election campaign was Corbyn squeezed the minor party vote not the Tory vote, that cannot be repeated again. For example at the May 2017 county council elections the Tories got 38%, Labour just 27% and the LDs 18%, at the general election a month later the Tories were up 4% to 42%, Labour up a large 13% to 40% mainly at the LDs expense who were down 11% to 7%.
To become PM at the next general election even with the SNP, let alone with a Labour majority, Corbyn will have to win over 2017 Tory voters and there is little sign of that at present. Even if some 2017 Tories vote UKIP if the Deal is passed that could also be cancelled out by Labour voters voting LD due to Corbyn's opposition to EUref2.
So what's Javid's master plan for the petits bateaux? Is he going to light them up with a 20mm Oerlikon as soon as they clear the French 12nm limit?
....... I heard the devastating news that a small boat containing 4 foreigners was heading towards the Kent coast when I woke up.
I imagine the government is calling a Cobra meeting urgently
There are rules in place to manage asylum claims. France is, as far as I know (although you will have a better view) a safe and tolerant country.
But they have decided that the rules shouldn’t apply to them
Why should that kind of attitude to the law be welcome in our country?
Yes, it almost as if we should form a pan-continental union of sovereign states to deal with such issues as they affect all states. Any suggestions as to names?
Good idea.
How about the Dover Treaty between Her Majesty and the President of the French Republic?
Morning all. I agree that Labour must not be complacent, especially about the prospect of a new Tory leader. We see at Man Utd the galvanizing effect a change at the top can have. Free of Jose Mourinho’s baleful influence they are a team reborn, banging in goals for fun. Could the political equivalent happen with the Tory Party? Certainly there are similarities between May and Mourinho. In particular the repressed and joyless bunker mentality that both seem to foster. Just as Paul Pogba, given his head and allowed to express himself, suddenly catches fire, is it too much of a stretch to imagine something similar happening with the likes of Liam Fox, Penny Mordaunt and Chris Grayling? I don’t think it is. Under a new leader, no longer cowed and bullied, they will be off the leash, able to enjoy their politics without fretting all the time about getting a ticking off from the boss. If the Man Utd example is anything to go by, the results will follow. That’s not good for Labour. If Corbyn & Co are not worried about it, they should be.
Are you a spoof?
While your logic is sound the choice of Fox and Grayling as examples to be equivalent to Pogba is a tad strange.
Unfortunately Labour types I have come across think that they will go up 20% during the campaign again so complacency is probably a good word for it.
I'm not sure I've spoken (or typed) to anyone who actually believes Labour will go up to around (or a bit under) 60% (being on around or a bit under 40% at the moment)
Although I am reliably told there are 15-20% leads available should Labour change their leader and possibly their policies, which made up around 41% of their voters primary reason for voting Labour.
Edit: I imagine you could find the odd crazy person who would believe Labour will go up to around 60% during the next election campaign but I would doubt even a significant minority would believe that let alone a majority...
A record number of applications for Irish passports this year.
.........Get in there fast while stocks last
Yes, an Irish passport is a very worthwhile asset. Right to vote and residence anywhere in the UK and the freedom of a continent.
Sadly Dr Foxys Irish ancestors are rather too distant.
200,000 applied for last year and the numbers are going up fast. Don't worry about ancestry. A couple of hundred quid and pronounce Saoirse Ronan correctly and it's yours!
We had a good look at this one after the vote. We thought my maternal grandfather might have been born in Ireland, but unfortunately it turned out that he was bon in Glasgow shortly after the family's arrival from the Emerald Isle. Still, the silver lining is that I turned quickly from 'No' to 'Yes' on the question of Scottish independence.
I wonder whether they'll take in 16.5 million of us if we promise not to make a noise.
The Scottish Tories are starting to get really worried. While a few of the MPS actually support a hard Brexit the main base under Ruth Davidson are getting prepared for a second Independence vote. It may lead to a split in the Tory party with the Scottish Tories becoming fully independent group like the DUP.
As a staunch unionist who helped fight for No I have given up the fight in the case of a hard Brexit and assume the vote will be lost. The only question is how to save the Scottish Tory party.
PS we will welcome all English who want to keep their EC passport. Those who can play football especially
The only polls putting Yes ahead in Scotland are in the event of No Deal
A record number of applications for Irish passports this year.
.........Get in there fast while stocks last
Yes, an Irish passport is a very worthwhile asset. Right to vote and residence anywhere in the UK and the freedom of a continent.
Sadly Dr Foxys Irish ancestors are rather too distant.
200,000 applied for last year and the numbers are going up fast. Don't worry about ancestry. A couple of hundred quid and pronounce Saoirse Ronan correctly and it's yours!
We had a good look at this one after the vote. We thought my maternal grandfather might have been born in Ireland, but unfortunately it turned out that he was bon in Glasgow shortly after the family's arrival from the Emerald Isle. Still, the silver lining is that I turned quickly from 'No' to 'Yes' on the question of Scottish independence.
I wonder whether they'll take in 16.5 million of us if we promise not to make a noise.
The Scottish Tories are starting to get really worried. While a few of the MPS actually support a hard Brexit the main base under Ruth Davidson are getting prepared for a second Independence vote. It may lead to a split in the Tory party with the Scottish Tories becoming fully independent group like the DUP.
As a staunch unionist who helped fight for No I have given up the fight in the case of a hard Brexit and assume the vote will be lost. The only question is how to save the Scottish Tory party.
PS we will welcome all English who want to keep their EC passport. Those who can play football especially
The Scottish Tories would probably do ok in an independent Scotland. Questions is, what would happen to the SNP?
Good article. Of course the main thing that happened in the 2017 general election campaign was Corbyn squeezed the minor party vote not the Tory vote, that cannot be repeated again.
To become PM at the next general election even with the SNP, let alone with a Labour majority, Corbyn will have to win over 2017 Tory voters and there is little sign of that at present. Even if some 2017 Tories vote UKIP if the Deal is passed that could also be cancelled out by Labour voters voting LD due to Corbyn's opposition to EUref2.
Or, as has been said repeatedly on here, Tory voters will have to stay away in large numbers.
A number of scenarios could lead to that: a chaotic No Deal Brexit, revocation of A50, a 2nd Referendum, and May's BINO Deal, could all hack off sections of the Tory vote.
My prediction is that anything could happen - and I'm definitely not going to be wrong with that one!
Now that I have been mildly rude to people, the question is assuming Saint Theresa doesn't land a general election on us before she can fall on her sword, who will be Tory leader?
I agree with others that when one looks back at elections past, most modern politicians wouldn't make the junior ranks of government or opposition front bench let alone cabinet/shadow cabinet rank. A bit like the education system. Keep dumbing it down until almost everyone passes.
I have been impressed by Hunt at the FO and clearly this migrant dinghy situation will make or break Javid. My hunch is we might see "tickets" in the next Tory leadership contest so for example Hunt and Gove for PM/DPM up against Javid and Raab or Mordaunt for PM/DPM. One thing is for sure Alexander Johnson will never be PM.
I agree with Mike that without a good number of Scotland's seats, Labour will be unlikely to win a general election and right now if a GE took place, Labour would hold Edinburgh South and little else. Richard Leonard makes Kezia Dugdale look like a political titan! I have no idea who the Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland is and indeed Ian Murray in Edinburgh South, Roger's relative is the only SLAB MP I can name.
Mike was certain last night that the next GE will not be on the new boundaries but now that the revised Northern Ireland constituency proposals don't crucify the DUP, why shouldn't they support them? Would Labour really want to go into a GE campaign with the electorate being reminded that it had opposed the reduction in the number of MPs!
Of course for unionists like me the solution for NI is for the DUP/UUP and NI Tories to combine to create the NIU and then SF would win very few seats. Sadly unlikely in my lifetime unless they find an Ulster version of Ruth Davidson. It would mean we could have a Northern Ireland Secretary sitting for a Northern Ireland seat.
Re- Scotland - The most recent poll has the Tories and Labour level pegging at 26% with the SNP at 37%. That is much better for Labour than the 19% being recorded in polls in May 2017 when the SNP were well over 40%. As far as the boundary changes are concerned, the problem now is less the absence of DUP support but the fact that as many as 40 Tory MPs would oppose them!
I am looking like I am spending it in hospital which is a bit of a bore. My view is of another bit of white concrete opposite. No doubt the nurses will have a good selection of spirits ready for the bells. Possibly water with the water.
Oh no! How awful. Hope you feel better soon.
Best wishes Mr L. Remind which organisation it is which 'stops the clock' so that negotiations will have to finish whenever can. You'll have to do that with your New Year libations. And again, hope everything goes OK.
A record number of applications for Irish passports this year.
.........Get in there fast while stocks last
Yes, an Irish passport is a very worthwhile asset. Right to vote and residence anywhere in the UK and the freedom of a continent.
Sadly Dr Foxys Irish ancestors are rather too distant.
200,000 applied for last year and the numbers are going up fast. Don't worry about ancestry. A couple of hundred quid and pronounce Saoirse Ronan correctly and it's yours!
We had a good look at this one after the vote. We thought my maternal grandfather might have been born in Ireland, but unfortunately it turned out that he was bon in Glasgow shortly after the family's arrival from the Emerald Isle. Still, the silver lining is that I turned quickly from 'No' to 'Yes' on the question of Scottish independence.
I wonder whether they'll take in 16.5 million of us if we promise not to make a noise.
The Scottish Tories are starting to get really worried. While a few of the MPS actually support a hard Brexit the main base under Ruth Davidson are getting prepared for a second Independence vote. It may lead to a split in the Tory party with the Scottish Tories becoming fully independent group like the DUP.
As a staunch unionist who helped fight for No I have given up the fight in the case of a hard Brexit and assume the vote will be lost. The only question is how to save the Scottish Tory party.
PS we will welcome all English who want to keep their EC passport. Those who can play football especially
The Scottish Tories would probably do ok in an independent Scotland. Questions is, what would happen to the SNP?
The Scottish Fianna Fail?
They are surely too progressive for that. But I guess the Irish Dáil is a guide in the sense that there are 4 or 5 parties who all compete and combine to govern.
Labour goes into the next election stronger, the Tories weaker. The campaign will be interesting again.
Corbyn is good on the stump. He surprised in 2017. The Tories had a hard time pinning a charge incompetence on someone clearly better at it than they were. The last couple of years have done nothing for the Tories claims of managerial competence or pragmatism.
Could be a close run thing.
Corbyn will be viewed as a probable PM this time, that was not the case in 2017 when virtually nobody thought that would happen .That will not end well for Corbyn.
As an ex-Labour member I sat out the last election for the first time and I doubt I will vote next time unless Labour has a change of leader. I am thoroughly p*ssed off with the arrogant way he ignores the party members' and MPs' views on Brexit. The members must be listened to but only when they agree with the Dear Leader it would seem
Corbyn has certainly accrued baggage (Antisemitism, Brexit) and will be less interesting because he is better known, but for all that he is today stronger than he was going into 2017.
If OGH's theory is correct and leaders standings are a more accurate guide to GEs than party standings then Labour are sunk under Corbyn.
I would also class as a clanger his efforts to put off the Remain supporters who are shoring up Labour's polling by suggesting in an aside last week that he would press on with Brexit if he won a general election. That was an avoidable self-inflicted wound and came just a week ago.
Not so sure that was a clanger.
I think the calculation, given the GE will likely be after we have left the EU, and perhaps quite a while after, is that most of the votes they got in 2017 from centrists and agnostics who have no appetite for Corbyn but wanted to express hostility to Brexit, those are probably lost anyway, since the issue will be history.
The important thing is not to lose support in our equivalent of the rust belt, the large areas of the Midlands and the North which were pro Leave and where many of Labour's target seats can be found. If they do well there, and in Scotland, they can IMO beat their 2017 seat performance.
Labour goes into the next election stronger, the Tories weaker. The campaign will be interesting again.
Corbyn is good on the stump. He surprised in 2017. The Tories had a hard time pinning a charge incompetence on someone clearly better at it than they were. The last couple of years have done nothing for the Tories claims of managerial competence or pragmatism.
Could be a close run thing.
Corbyn will be viewed as a probable PM this time, that was not the case in 2017 when virtually nobody thought that would happen .That will not end well for Corbyn.
As an ex-Labour member I sat out the last election for the first time and I doubt I will vote next time unless Labour has a change of leader. I am thoroughly p*ssed off with the arrogant way he ignores the party members' and MPs' views on Brexit. The members must be listened to but only when they agree with the Dear Leader it would seem
Corbyn has certainly accrued baggage (Antisemitism, Brexit) and will be less interesting because he is better known, but for all that he is today stronger than he was going into 2017.
If OGH's theory is correct and leaders standings are a more accurate guide to GEs than party standings then Labour are sunk under Corbyn.
Not particularly accurate in 2017 if the leader ratings at the outset of the campaign are considered!
Good article. Of course the main thing that happened in the 2017 general election campaign was Corbyn squeezed the minor party vote not the Tory vote, that cannot be repeated again.
To become PM at the next general election even with the SNP, let alone with a Labour majority, Corbyn will have to win over 2017 Tory voters and there is little sign of that at present. Even if some 2017 Tories vote UKIP if the Deal is passed that could also be cancelled out by Labour voters voting LD due to Corbyn's opposition to EUref2.
Or, as has been said repeatedly on here, Tory voters will have to stay away in large numbers.
A number of scenarios could lead to that: a chaotic No Deal Brexit, revocation of A50, a 2nd Referendum, and May's BINO Deal, could all hack off sections of the Tory vote.
My prediction is that anything could happen - and I'm definitely not going to be wrong with that one!
Yes, any and all of the options could lead to a good stuffing for the Tories !
So what's Javid's master plan for the petits bateaux? Is he going to light them up with a 20mm Oerlikon as soon as they clear the French 12nm limit?
....... I heard the devastating news that a small boat containing 4 foreigners was heading towards the Kent coast when I woke up.
I imagine the government is calling a Cobra meeting urgently
There are rules in place to manage asylum claims. France is, as far as I know (although you will have a better view) a safe and tolerant country.
But they have decided that the rules shouldn’t apply to them
Why should that kind of attitude to the law be welcome in our country?
Why doesn’t the government state that anyone coming here from France - a safe country, indeed, a civilised and beautiful one - is not and will not be treated as an asylum seeker, no matter what they claim, precisely because they have come from and passed through several safe countries? They are welcome to apply to settle in Britain but will have to comply with the same rules as anyone else and their attempt to enter the country illegally will count against them. If they are much needed highly qualified engineers, doctors etc that should help them. In the meanwhile, they will be detained while their application is considered. If it is rejected, they will have three choices: return home, go to another country or remain in detention.
Abbott was on the TV yesterday saying that people would not embark on these dangerous journeys if we facilitated them making an asylum claim from France. From France? Why should anyone in France need to claim asylum?
She might be on to something. If the UK allowed asylum claims to come to the UK to be made in France (and rejected them all on the grounds that they were in safe France) it might discourage asylum seekers from risking the dangerous journey.
I am not a fan of The Debates and very much hope they don't happen. However, if they take place at all , there will be a strong case for restricting them to the two main party leaders. Both the LibDems and UKIP performed abysmally in 2017 in terms of seats and vote share - as did the Greens - and there is no longer justification for their inclusion. SNP and Plaid should appear in any Debates scheduled in their respective regions.
The fuss about the company with no ships continues. One of the directors is the brother of a Tory donor, so that must have been a really tough interview. The company's login page is a photograph of a login page. Yes, really.
And then there's Gavin Williamson, Liam Fox, Andrea Leadsom ... everywhere you look in the cabinet there is astounding, breathtaking, mediocrity and incompetence. The country is, without doubt, in the safest possible hands.
Don't mind Fox and Leadsom. Both seem amiable and harmless, although that's on the strict proviso that they confine themselves to relatively unimportant posts. So fine as it stands. Happy for Leadsom to do the HoC timetable. Happy for Dr Fox to go around talking to people about trade deals.
Gavin Williamson, however, no no no. I get a bad vibe from him. Would not like to see him prosper.
So what's Javid's master plan for the petits bateaux? Is he going to light them up with a 20mm Oerlikon as soon as they clear the French 12nm limit?
....... I heard the devastating news that a small boat containing 4 foreigners was heading towards the Kent coast when I woke up.
I imagine the government is calling a Cobra meeting urgently
There are rules in place to manage asylum claims. France is, as far as I know (although you will have a better view) a safe and tolerant country.
But they have decided that the rules shouldn’t apply to them
Why should that kind of attitude to the law be welcome in our country?
Why doesn’t the government state that anyone coming here from France - a safe country, indeed, a civilised and beautiful one - is not and will not be treated as an asylum seeker, no matter what they claim, precisely because they have come from and passed through several safe countries? They are welcome to apply to settle in Britain but will have to comply with the same rules as anyone else and their attempt to enter the country illegally will count against them. If they are much needed highly qualified engineers, doctors etc that should help them. In the meanwhile, they will be detained while their application is considered. If it is rejected, they will have three choices: return home, go to another country or remain in detention.
Abbott was on the TV yesterday saying that people would not embark on these dangerous journeys if we facilitated them making an asylum claim from France. From France? Why should anyone in France need to claim asylum?
She might be on to something. If the UK allowed asylum claims to come to the UK to be made in France (and rejected them all on the grounds that they were in safe France) it might discourage asylum seekers from risking the dangerous journey.
Simply saying that no-one coming here from France will ever be successful with a claim for asylum (and if they make it here will be detained) would achieve the same thing.
But I don’t think that was her point. She seemed to be talking on the assumption that someone currently based in France might well have a valid basis for claiming asylum in Britain. I don’t think that can be the case and, indeed, it is highly insulting to France to suggest this.
The reality is that migrants are simply shopping around for the countries they would like to go to and using bogus asylum claims, combined with actually setting foot in their country, to achieve their aims. And since the idea of deporting those who have broken the law and have no right to be here gives everyone the collywobbles, no wonder they keep trying.
I don't think anybody in their right mind within Labour would think the next election is "in the bag", or anything close to it.
But, at the same time, it's wishful thinking to think it's impossible for Labour to win. No Tory commentators (including on PB) seem to have asked themselves how Jeremy Corbyn managed to win around 1m Tory voters in the course of the last election - or asked themselves why, if he's already shown he can win over a lot of Tory voters, why wouldn't he able to win over even more next time round.
I don't think anybody in their right mind within Labour would think the next election is "in the bag", or anything close to it.
But, at the same time, it's wishful thinking to think it's impossible for Labour to win. No Tory commentators (including on PB) seem to have asked themselves how Jeremy Corbyn managed to win around 1m Tory voters in the course of the last election - or asked themselves why, if he's already shown he can win over a lot of Tory voters, why wouldn't he able to win over even more next time round.
...If OGH's theory is correct and leaders standings are a more accurate guide to GEs than party standings...
If pressed, I'm not sure that's true except in extremely broad measure. You might be able to argue that if the ratings of leader X are better than the ratings of leader Y, then party X will get more votes than party Y. But I *think* the 2017 GE showed that the size of the gap is not necessarily proportional to the size of the lead (happy to be corrected). That in turn makes it difficult to calculate the accuracy of the prediction.
The fuss about the company with no ships continues. One of the directors is the brother of a Tory donor, so that must have been a really tough interview. The company's login page is a photograph of a login page. Yes, really.
Good article. Of course the main thing that happened in the 2017 general election campaign was Corbyn squeezed the minor party vote not the Tory vote, that cannot be repeated again.
To become PM at the next general election even with the SNP, let alone with a Labour majority, Corbyn will have to win over 2017 Tory voters and there is little sign of that at present. Even if some 2017 Tories vote UKIP if the Deal is passed that could also be cancelled out by Labour voters voting LD due to Corbyn's opposition to EUref2.
Or, as has been said repeatedly on here, Tory voters will have to stay away in large numbers.
A number of scenarios could lead to that: a chaotic No Deal Brexit, revocation of A50, a 2nd Referendum, and May's BINO Deal, could all hack off sections of the Tory vote.
My prediction is that anything could happen - and I'm definitely not going to be wrong with that one!
The Tory vote is unlikely to stay away given the risk of Corbyn, they could go that in 1997 when the alternative was the centrist Blair and New Labour, Corbyn and Momentum is a different matter altogether.
It is equally possible some Labour Remainers could stay home or vote LD if Corbyn continues to back Brexit and oppose EUref2
There are rules in place to manage asylum claims. France is, as far as I know (although you will have a better view) a safe and tolerant country.
But they have decided that the rules shouldn’t apply to them
Why should that kind of attitude to the law be welcome in our country?
Why doesn’t the government state that anyone coming here from France - a safe country, indeed, a civilised and beautiful one - is not and will not be treated as an asylum seeker, no matter what they claim, precisely because they have come from and passed through several safe countries? They are welcome to apply to settle in Britain but will have to comply with the same rules as anyone else and their attempt to enter the country illegally will count against them. If they are much needed highly qualified engineers, doctors etc that should help them. In the meanwhile, they will be detained while their application is considered. If it is rejected, they will have three choices: return home, go to another country or remain in detention.
Abbott was on the TV yesterday saying that people would not embark on these dangerous journeys if we facilitated them making an asylum claim from France. From France? Why should anyone in France need to claim asylum?
She might be on to something. If the UK allowed asylum claims to come to the UK to be made in France (and rejected them all on the grounds that they were in safe France) it might discourage asylum seekers from risking the dangerous journey.
Simply saying that no-one coming here from France will ever be successful with a claim for asylum (and if they make it here will be detained) would achieve the same thing.
But I don’t think that was her point. She seemed to be talking on the assumption that someone currently based in France might well have a valid basis for claiming asylum in Britain. I don’t think that can be the case and, indeed, it is highly insulting to France to suggest this.
The reality is that migrants are simply shopping around for the countries they would like to go to and using bogus asylum claims, combined with actually setting foot in their country, to achieve their aims. And since the idea of deporting those who have broken the law and have no right to be here gives everyone the collywobbles, no wonder they keep trying.
Well one of the more obvious reasons why they may have the right to come here rather than France is the presence of family in the UK already and the right to family life under ECHR.
I don't think anybody in their right mind within Labour would think the next election is "in the bag", or anything close to it.
But, at the same time, it's wishful thinking to think it's impossible for Labour to win. No Tory commentators (including on PB) seem to have asked themselves how Jeremy Corbyn managed to win around 1m Tory voters in the course of the last election - or asked themselves why, if he's already shown he can win over a lot of Tory voters, why wouldn't he able to win over even more next time round.
On a net basis there was actually almost no net movement of 2015 Tory voters to Labour in 2017, Corbyn lost almost as many 2015 Labour voters to the Tories as he gained 2015 Tory voters to Labour.
Almost all Labour's net gains in 2017 came from 2015 LD, Green, Plaid, SNP and UKIP voters and those who stayed home in 2015
The fuss about the company with no ships continues. One of the directors is the brother of a Tory donor, so that must have been a really tough interview. The company's login page is a photograph of a login page. Yes, really.
It's a testament to the utterly ovine nature of the British people that we're just taking this.
I know. It's bugging the hell out of me. All I'm doing is posting sarcastic stuff on a website. It's not nice to see bad people prosper and there's nothing I can do to stop it.
I don't think anybody in their right mind within Labour would think the next election is "in the bag", or anything close to it.
But, at the same time, it's wishful thinking to think it's impossible for Labour to win. No Tory commentators (including on PB) seem to have asked themselves how Jeremy Corbyn managed to win around 1m Tory voters in the course of the last election - or asked themselves why, if he's already shown he can win over a lot of Tory voters, why wouldn't he able to win over even more next time round.
On a net basis there was actually almost no net movement of 2015 Tory voters to Labour in 2017, Corbyn lost almost as many 2015 Labour voters to the Tories as he gained 2015 Tory voters to Labour.
Almost all Labour's net gains in 2017 came from 2015 LD, Green, Plaid, SNP and UKIP voters and those who stayed home in 2015
Yes, there was movement from Labour to the Tories too. Which also shows that Theresa May was more of an asset to the Tories than people think.
But, nonetheless, it's still true that ~1m who voted Tory in 2015, switched over to Corbyn in 2017. Why was this, and why would he be incapable of doing the same again?
I'm wondering if everyone isn't getting this while thing the wrong was around. CA is voting from right after Iowa, but they're not counting the votes until after Super Tuesday, which judging by how fast they normally do things means we don't get their results until somewhere around 2026. What that says to me is that it's Iowa or Bust. If you defeat your similar opponents in Iowa, and the voters start voting in serious numbers right after that, then even NH doesn't matter as much: Your opponents have already been found unviable. Iowa decides who's in the race, and if it doesn't pick you, it's too late to come back. And even the less tactical of Democrats will be aware that the Dems need the mid-west, and they care a *lot* about beating Trump, so proving electability in Iowa is a big deal.
In conclusion, KLOBUCHAR
Actually Sanders only lost by 1% in Iowa last time and won New Hampshire.
Thus if Sanders wins Iowa he could be nominee in all but name through momentum alone by the end of March if he wins New Hampshire again too. No candidate has won Iowa and New Hampshire in the last 50 years and failed to be nominee
Everyone focuses on May’s negatives during GE2017 (dementia tax, pensioners’ benefits) but just as important was the lack of positives.
There were no baubles to attract floating voters other than “give me a stonking big majority”. The only proactive policy ideas May could manage were resurrecting grammar schools and a free vote on hunting, which it turns out no one really wants but which do a great job of energising your opponents.
Given that May probably won’t fight the next election, the question is whether this paucity of ideas is limited to May-Timothy-Crosby, or endemic to the current Conservative party. I used to think the former, but the complete lack of policy thinking from other wings of the party (no, Javid magicking up an imaginary threat of invasion doesn’t count), I’m starting to wonder whether the party is indeed a busted flush.
From a quick skim you wouldn't think he was a Tory.
"Ensure we tax all income the same, whether it comes from benefits, work or wealth, so the system isn’t stacked in favour of a gilded elite who live off income from interest, dividends and rents from property, but who pay lower tax rates than less well-off people who work for a living, or who claim benefits too."
Grayling takes politics to a surrealist performance art. Not thinking to check whether the ferry operator has a boat is worthy of Dali.
He is indeed a truly remarkable talent.
And then there's Gavin Williamson, Liam Fox, Andrea Leadsom ... everywhere you look in the cabinet there is astounding, breathtaking, mediocrity and incompetence. The country is, without doubt, in the safest possible hands.
I think Rory Stewart would be good
It is bewildering that he was not made Brexit secretary. He has certainly acted as such. Does May have reservations about how he came by his wife, perhaps?
The reality is that migrants are simply shopping around for the countries they would like to go to and using bogus asylum claims, combined with actually setting foot in their country, to achieve their aims. And since the idea of deporting those who have broken the law and have no right to be here gives everyone the collywobbles, no wonder they keep trying.
You talk as if trying to get to a particular country implies that the claim is bogus, but it doesn't. If you had to leave your home and suddenly start pick up your life for an somewhere else for an unknown period, it would be a big deal whether you had connections there already, whether you spoke the language etc. All the more so if you needed to navigate a complicated immigration system in a foreign language, and if you screwed up the application you could get sent back to the place you just escaped.
If you want to argue that countries should only live up to the minimum letter of their obligations under the relevant treaties and should shunt people back to any other safe country whenever possible then that's up to you, but don't assume people trying to get to the place where they can best cope with their shitty situation aren't genuine refugees.
I don't think anybody in their right mind within Labour would think the next election is "in the bag", or anything close to it.
But, at the same time, it's wishful thinking to think it's impossible for Labour to win. No Tory commentators (including on PB) seem to have asked themselves how Jeremy Corbyn managed to win around 1m Tory voters in the course of the last election - or asked themselves why, if he's already shown he can win over a lot of Tory voters, why wouldn't he able to win over even more next time round.
On a net basis there was actually almost no net movement of 2015 Tory voters to Labour in 2017, Corbyn lost almost as many 2015 Labour voters to the Tories as he gained 2015 Tory voters to Labour.
Almost all Labour's net gains in 2017 came from 2015 LD, Green, Plaid, SNP and UKIP voters and those who stayed home in 2015
Yes, there was movement from Labour to the Tories too. Which also shows that Theresa May was more of an asset to the Tories than people think.
But, nonetheless, it's still true that ~1m who voted Tory in 2015, switched over to Corbyn in 2017. Why was this, and why would he be incapable of doing the same again?
It was mostly remain-supporting Tories whose desire to punish the party for Brexit exceeded their reservations about Corbyn's Labour.
Grayling takes politics to a surrealist performance art. Not thinking to check whether the ferry operator has a boat is worthy of Dali.
He is indeed a truly remarkable talent.
And then there's Gavin Williamson, Liam Fox, Andrea Leadsom ... everywhere you look in the cabinet there is astounding, breathtaking, mediocrity and incompetence. The country is, without doubt, in the safest possible hands.
I think Rory Stewart would be good
It is bewildering that he was not made Brexit secretary. He has certainly acted as such. Does May have reservations about how he came by his wife, perhaps?
It isn't bewidering. Stewart is quiet and thoughtful: such people do not prosper in politics. Politics is the art of accruing sufficient supporters to propel you to the next level. Stewart hasn't put the work in and has no constituency of supporters. Compare and contrast to, say, Hannan or Farage, who spent decades prosletysing for a then-unpopular cause, step-by-step: I don't like them but they know how to do politics.
The reality is that migrants are simply shopping around for the countries they would like to go to and using bogus asylum claims, combined with actually setting foot in their country, to achieve their aims. And since the idea of deporting those who have broken the law and have no right to be here gives everyone the collywobbles, no wonder they keep trying.
You talk as if trying to get to a particular country implies that the claim is bogus, but it doesn't. If you had to leave your home and suddenly start pick up your life for an somewhere else for an unknown period, it would be a big deal whether you had connections there already, whether you spoke the language etc. All the more so if you needed to navigate a complicated immigration system in a foreign language, and if you screwed up the application you could get sent back to the place you just escaped.
If you want to argue that countries should only live up to the minimum letter of their obligations under the relevant treaties and should shunt people back to any other safe country whenever possible then that's up to you, but don't assume people trying to get to the place where they can cope with the situation best aren't genuine refugees.
I think that's right. I am sure the English language is a big draw. Most of us take some pride in and get benefit from the fact that English has become a global language but it does have some downsides.
I don't think anybody in their right mind within Labour would think the next election is "in the bag", or anything close to it.
But, at the same time, it's wishful thinking to think it's impossible for Labour to win. No Tory commentators (including on PB) seem to have asked themselves how Jeremy Corbyn managed to win around 1m Tory voters in the course of the last election - or asked themselves why, if he's already shown he can win over a lot of Tory voters, why wouldn't he able to win over even more next time round.
He didn't win over lots of Tory voters. The Conservatives started and finished the campaign on just over 40%, which was a huge increase on what they managed in 2015 (even taking the UKIP collapse into account). The real question for the Tories is how to make the Lib Dems and Greens run proper effective campaigns next time round.
Although that said, I do agree that it's wishful thinking that it's impossible for Labour to win next time.
I'm wondering if everyone isn't getting this while thing the wrong was around. CA is voting from right after Iowa, but they're not counting the votes until after Super Tuesday, which judging by how fast they normally do things means we don't get their results until somewhere around 2026. What that says to me is that it's Iowa or Bust. If you defeat your similar opponents in Iowa, and the voters start voting in serious numbers right after that, then even NH doesn't matter as much: Your opponents have already been found unviable. Iowa decides who's in the race, and if it doesn't pick you, it's too late to come back. And even the less tactical of Democrats will be aware that the Dems need the mid-west, and they care a *lot* about beating Trump, so proving electability in Iowa is a big deal.
In conclusion, KLOBUCHAR
Actually Sanders only lost by 1% in Iowa last time and won New Hampshire.
Thus if Sanders wins Iowa he could be nominee in all but name through momentum alone by the end of March if he wins New Hampshire again too. No candidate has won Iowa and New Hampshire in the last 50 years and failed to be nominee
That was the last cycle. A lot has happened since then, and some of the sparkle has come off Sanders with the left of the party.
I don't think anybody in their right mind within Labour would think the next election is "in the bag", or anything close to it.
But, at the same time, it's wishful thinking to think it's impossible for Labour to win. No Tory commentators (including on PB) seem to have asked themselves how Jeremy Corbyn managed to win around 1m Tory voters in the course of the last election - or asked themselves why, if he's already shown he can win over a lot of Tory voters, why wouldn't he able to win over even more next time round.
On a net basis there was actually almost no net movement of 2015 Tory voters to Labour in 2017, Corbyn lost almost as many 2015 Labour voters to the Tories as he gained 2015 Tory voters to Labour.
Almost all Labour's net gains in 2017 came from 2015 LD, Green, Plaid, SNP and UKIP voters and those who stayed home in 2015
Yes, there was movement from Labour to the Tories too. Which also shows that Theresa May was more of an asset to the Tories than people think.
But, nonetheless, it's still true that ~1m who voted Tory in 2015, switched over to Corbyn in 2017. Why was this, and why would he be incapable of doing the same again?
It was mostly remain-supporting Tories whose desire to punish the party for Brexit exceeded their reservations about Corbyn's Labour.
Again, that's not backed up by the polls showing Brexit not factoring into Labour voters' motivations (although it did for Conservative voters):
Abbott was on the TV yesterday saying that people would not embark on these dangerous journeys if we facilitated them making an asylum claim from France. From France? Why should anyone in France need to claim asylum?
She might be on to something. If the UK allowed asylum claims to come to the UK to be made in France (and rejected them all on the grounds that they were in safe France) it might discourage asylum seekers from risking the dangerous journey.
Simply saying that no-one coming here from France will ever be successful with a claim for asylum (and if they make it here will be detained) would achieve the same thing.
But I don’t think that was her point. She seemed to be talking on the assumption that someone currently based in France might well have a valid basis for claiming asylum in Britain. I don’t think that can be the case and, indeed, it is highly insulting to France to suggest this.
The reality is that migrants are simply shopping around for the countries they would like to go to and using bogus asylum claims, combined with actually setting foot in their country, to achieve their aims. And since the idea of deporting those who have broken the law and have no right to be here gives everyone the collywobbles, no wonder they keep trying.
“Well one of the more obvious reasons why they may have the right to come here rather than France is the presence of family in the UK already and the right to family life under ECHR.”
That, though, is not a claim for asylum. It is a different claim to migrate here which can - and should - be dealt with through the proper channels, just like anyone else seeking to join family here in the UK.
Three points: family life can be lived perfectly well in France. The right is to family life not to family life in the country of your choice. People smugglers use this as a way of getting one person into a country precisely so that person can then use the family option to get a large number of others in. We need to close that off.
And, second, even where there may be a good reason to let someone in under this option there needs to be a limit to the relatives (numbers/degree of consanguinity) let in. So under-age children joining parents: yes. But cousins, aunts by marriage, etc: no. And law-breaking should push you to the back of the queue: otherwise it is unfair to those who try to enter the country legitimately and it rewards the wrong behaviour and incentivises people smigglers.
Grayling takes politics to a surrealist performance art. Not thinking to check whether the ferry operator has a boat is worthy of Dali.
He is indeed a truly remarkable talent.
And then there's Gavin Williamson, Liam Fox, Andrea Leadsom ... everywhere you look in the cabinet there is astounding, breathtaking, mediocrity and incompetence. The country is, without doubt, in the safest possible hands.
I think Rory Stewart would be good
It is bewildering that he was not made Brexit secretary. He has certainly acted as such. Does May have reservations about how he came by his wife, perhaps?
The reality is that migrants are simply shopping around for the countries they would like to go to and using bogus asylum claims, combined with actually setting foot in their country, to achieve their aims. And since the idea of deporting those who have broken the law and have no right to be here gives everyone the collywobbles, no wonder they keep trying.
You talk as if trying to get to a particular country implies that the claim is bogus, but it doesn't. If you had to leave your home and suddenly start pick up your life for an somewhere else for an unknown period, it would be a big deal whether you had connections there already, whether you spoke the language etc. All the more so if you needed to navigate a complicated immigration system in a foreign language, and if you screwed up the application you could get sent back to the place you just escaped.
If you want to argue that countries should only live up to the minimum letter of their obligations under the relevant treaties and should shunt people back to any other safe country whenever possible then that's up to you, but don't assume people trying to get to the place where they can cope with the situation best aren't genuine refugees.
I think that's right. I am sure the English language is a big draw. Most of us take some pride in and get benefit from the fact that English has become a global language but it does have some downsides.
The other thing driving the current wave is also tightening anti Iran sanctions damaging their economy, and increasing political tensions.
I don't think anybody in their right mind within Labour would think the next election is "in the bag", or anything close to it.
But, at the same time, it's wishful thinking to think it's impossible for Labour to win. No Tory commentators (including on PB) seem to have asked themselves how Jeremy Corbyn managed to win around 1m Tory voters in the course of the last election - or asked themselves why, if he's already shown he can win over a lot of Tory voters, why wouldn't he able to win over even more next time round.
On a net basis there was actually almost no net movement of 2015 Tory voters to Labour in 2017, Corbyn lost almost as many 2015 Labour voters to the Tories as he gained 2015 Tory voters to Labour.
Almost all Labour's net gains in 2017 came from 2015 LD, Green, Plaid, SNP and UKIP voters and those who stayed home in 2015
Yes, there was movement from Labour to the Tories too. Which also shows that Theresa May was more of an asset to the Tories than people think.
But, nonetheless, it's still true that ~1m who voted Tory in 2015, switched over to Corbyn in 2017. Why was this, and why would he be incapable of doing the same again?
But as I pointed out that was almost cancelled out by the number of 2015 Labour voters who moved to the Tories. Most of the tiny net movement from Tory to Labour in 2017 came from opposition to the dementia tax and Brexit. With the Tories having scrapped plans for the former and Corbyn still backing Brexit and opposed to EUref2 he is unlikely to be able to get much net movement from the Tories next time.
Corbyn will also have little further room to squeeze minor parties either beyond what he achieved in 2017 and might even lose some Labour Remainers to the LDs as the LDs back EUref2 unlike Labour
I don't think anybody in their right mind within Labour would think the next election is "in the bag", or anything close to it.
But, at the same time, it's wishful thinking to think it's impossible for Labour to win. No Tory commentators (including on PB) seem to have asked themselves how Jeremy Corbyn managed to win around 1m Tory voters in the course of the last election - or asked themselves why, if he's already shown he can win over a lot of Tory voters, why wouldn't he able to win over even more next time round.
On a net basis there was actually almost no net movement of 2015 Tory voters to Labour in 2017, Corbyn lost almost as many 2015 Labour voters to the Tories as he gained 2015 Tory voters to Labour.
Almost all Labour's net gains in 2017 came from 2015 LD, Green, Plaid, SNP and UKIP voters and those who stayed home in 2015
Yes, there was movement from Labour to the Tories too. Which also shows that Theresa May was more of an asset to the Tories than people think.
But, nonetheless, it's still true that ~1m who voted Tory in 2015, switched over to Corbyn in 2017. Why was this, and why would he be incapable of doing the same again?
I think (but can't prove obviously) that it was despite Corbyn rather than because of Corbyn.
The overwhelming message I got from my real life non-Tory friends on Facebook at the time (who are not overly political Twitter politics types) was that they didn't trust the Tories to have a huge majority, plus Corbyn couldn't possibly win, so we should vote Labour to minimise the Tories majority.
Britain loves to cut down a 'tall poppy' and the idea that the Tories would have an overwhelming majority was not an idea non-Tories found enticing.
The reality is that migrants are simply shopping around for the countries they would like to go to and using bogus asylum claims, combined with actually setting foot in their country, to achieve their aims. And since the idea of deporting those who have broken the law and have no right to be here gives everyone the collywobbles, no wonder they keep trying.
You talk as if trying to get to a particular country implies that the claim is bogus, but it doesn't. If you had to leave your home and suddenly start pick up your life for an somewhere else for an unknown period, it would be a big deal whether you had connections there already, whether you spoke the language etc. All the more so if you needed to navigate a complicated immigration system in a foreign language, and if you screwed up the application you could get sent back to the place you just escaped.
If you want to argue that countries should only live up to the minimum letter of their obligations under the relevant treaties and should shunt people back to any other safe country whenever possible then that's up to you, but don't assume people trying to get to the place where they can best cope with their shitty situation aren't genuine refugees.
Someone was talking about that on the TV this morning. Apparently the majority of the migrants/refugees who want to come to Britain have a relative here. Others have technical or professional qualifications which they obtained in English. In both cases it's understandable that they wish to come here, and in many cases they would be an asset. The interviewee also made the point very strongly that the majority of the migrants/refugees do seek asylum in the first country they come to, and it's only the minority who fall into the relatives or skills in English categories who want to come further.
The reality is that migrants are simply shopping around for the countries they would like to go to and using bogus asylum claims, combined with actually setting foot in their country, to achieve their aims. And since the idea of deporting those who have broken the law and have no right to be here gives everyone the collywobbles, no wonder they keep trying.
You talk as if trying to get to a particular country implies that the claim is bogus, but it doesn't. If you had to leave your home and suddenly start pick up your life for an somewhere else for an unknown period, it would be a big deal whether you had connections there already, whether you spoke the language etc. All the more so if you needed to navigate a complicated immigration system in a foreign language, and if you screwed up the application you could get sent back to the place you just escaped.
If you want to argue that countries should only live up to the minimum letter of their obligations under the relevant treaties and should shunt people back to any other safe country whenever possible then that's up to you, but don't assume people trying to get to the place where they can cope with the situation best aren't genuine refugees.
I think that's right. I am sure the English language is a big draw. Most of us take some pride in and get benefit from the fact that English has become a global language but it does have some downsides.
The other thing driving the current wave is also tightening anti Iran sanctions damaging their economy, and increasing political tensions.
There is a push factor as well as a pull factor.
That doesn't explain migrants in the Channel. Last I checked (gilets jaunes aside) France is a safe country that people shouldn't be getting pushed from.
Abbott was on the TV yesterday saying that people would not embark on these dangerous journeys if we facilitated them making an asylum claim from France. From France? Why should anyone in France need to claim asylum?
She might be on to something. If the UK allowed asylum claims to come to the UK to be made in France (and rejected them all on the grounds that they were in safe France) it might discourage asylum seekers from risking the dangerous journey.
Simply saying that no-one coming here from France will ever be successful with a claim for asylum (and if they make it here will be detained) would achieve the same thing.
But I don’t think that was her point. She seemed to be talking on the assumption that someone currently based in France might well have a valid basis for claiming asylum in Britain. I don’t think that can be the case and, indeed, it is highly insulting to France to suggest this.
The reality is that migrants are simply shopping .
“Well one of the more obvious reasons why they may have the right to come here rather than France is the presence of family in the UK already and the right to family life under ECHR.”
That, though, is not a claim for asylum. It is a different claim to migrate here which can - and should - be dealt with through the proper channels, just like anyone else seeking to join family here in the UK.
Three points: family life can be lived perfectly well in France. The right is to family life not to family life in the country of your choice. People smugglers use this as a way of getting one person into a country precisely so that person can then use the family option to get a large number of others in. We need to close that off.
And, second, even where there may be a good reason to let someone in under this option there needs to be a limit to the relatives (numbers/degree of consanguinity) let in. So under-age children joining parents: yes. But cousins, aunts by marriage, etc: no. And law-breaking should push you to the back of the queue: otherwise it is unfair to those who try to enter the country legitimately and it rewards the wrong behaviour and incentivises people smigglers.
It is near impossible to claim asylum anywhere without crossing into the country illegally. The whole international asylum treaty system needs wholesale revision.
I'm wondering if everyone isn't getting this while thing the wrong was around. CA is voting from right after Iowa, but they're not counting the votes until after Super Tuesday, which judging by how fast they normally do things means we don't get their results until somewhere around 2026. What that says to me is that it's Iowa or Bust. If you defeat your similar opponents in Iowa, and the voters start voting in serious numbers right after that, then even NH doesn't matter as much: Your opponents have already been found unviable. Iowa decides who's in the race, and if it doesn't pick you, it's too late to come back. And even the less tactical of Democrats will be aware that the Dems need the mid-west, and they care a *lot* about beating Trump, so proving electability in Iowa is a big deal.
In conclusion, KLOBUCHAR
Actually Sanders only lost by 1% in Iowa last time and won New Hampshire.
Thus if Sanders wins Iowa he could be nominee in all but name through momentum alone by the end of March if he wins New Hampshire again too. No candidate has won Iowa and New Hampshire in the last 50 years and failed to be nominee
That was the last cycle. A lot has happened since then, and some of the sparkle has come off Sanders with the left of the party.
If Biden stays fit and decides to run, he will probably still be favourite - though much can happen in the next year.
That poll has Biden first in Iowa, Sanders second, O'Rourke third (he has said he will not run) and no other Democrat in double figures.
I also think Sanders is more likely to be able to get young voters and left liberals to the caucus than Biden is. Biden appeals more to independents and moderates but they are less likely to turn out
Comments
As an ex-Labour member I sat out the last election for the first time and I doubt I will vote next time unless Labour has a change of leader. I am thoroughly p*ssed off with the arrogant way he ignores the party members' and MPs' views on Brexit. The members must be listened to but only when they agree with the Dear Leader it would seem
While your logic is sound the choice of Fox and Grayling as examples to be equivalent to Pogba is a tad strange.
Remember that Channel 4 interview that got young Tulip into trouble last year? That was about Tulip’s failure to assist a British man who had been arrested and locked up in Bangladesh for some political reason.
He should at least be able to answer without getting angry.
There were no baubles to attract floating voters other than “give me a stonking big majority”. The only proactive policy ideas May could manage were resurrecting grammar schools and a free vote on hunting, which it turns out no one really wants but which do a great job of energising your opponents.
Given that May probably won’t fight the next election, the question is whether this paucity of ideas is limited to May-Timothy-Crosby, or endemic to the current Conservative party. I used to think the former, but the complete lack of policy thinking from other wings of the party (no, Javid magicking up an imaginary threat of invasion doesn’t count), I’m starting to wonder whether the party is indeed a busted flush.
https://twitter.com/TimesCorbyn
https://twitter.com/TimesCorbyn/status/1079681279552118784
https://twitter.com/TimesCorbyn/status/1079683729008807937
Facebook places the sole responsibility on app developers to ensure that they have the lawful right to collect, use and share people’s data before providing Facebook with any data. However, the default implementation of the Facebook SDK is designed to automatically transmit event data to Facebook.
https://privacyinternational.org/report/2647/how-apps-android-share-data-facebook-report
[I know what you meant but you did phrase it weirdly]
Ok, maybe not Grayling, but Fox and Mordaunt?
I'm wondering if everyone isn't getting this while thing the wrong was around. CA is voting from right after Iowa, but they're not counting the votes until after Super Tuesday, which judging by how fast they normally do things means we don't get their results until somewhere around 2026. What that says to me is that it's Iowa or Bust. If you defeat your similar opponents in Iowa, and the voters start voting in serious numbers right after that, then even NH doesn't matter as much: Your opponents have already been found unviable. Iowa decides who's in the race, and if it doesn't pick you, it's too late to come back. And even the less tactical of Democrats will be aware that the Dems need the mid-west, and they care a *lot* about beating Trump, so proving electability in Iowa is a big deal.
In conclusion, KLOBUCHAR
Also, the UI on the permissions pages for app developers is beyond confusing. It makes iTunes Connect look good, and any iOS developer will understand how hard that is.
Interesting thought experiment is to consider the effects of a job switch.
Bad news for Utd, the goals dry up, but probably an improvement in the train network.
I suspect we will find out in the coming year though.
Abbott was on the TV yesterday saying that people would not embark on these dangerous journeys if we facilitated them making an asylum claim from France. From France? Why should anyone in France need to claim asylum?
I would also class as a clanger his efforts to put off the Remain supporters who are shoring up Labour's polling by suggesting in an aside last week that he would press on with Brexit if he won a general election. That was an avoidable self-inflicted wound and came just a week ago.
Maybe we're just so used to the clangers now that we don't notice them as much. Two in a fortnight is still pretty good going though.
There is one Tory MP doing some interesting thinking on policy - http://johnpenrose.org/wp/2018/10/01/a-shining-city/.
The drive from Ulverston to Millom over the fells is glorious and you get a lovely view of Coniston lake glinting in the distance on your right. And if the day is clear a walk up Black Combe is bracing with wonderful views from the top. Or the beach at Silecroft where you can go riding.
Enjoy!
I agree with others that when one looks back at elections past, most modern politicians wouldn't make the junior ranks of government or opposition front bench let alone cabinet/shadow cabinet rank. A bit like the education system. Keep dumbing it down until almost everyone passes.
I have been impressed by Hunt at the FO and clearly this migrant dinghy situation will make or break Javid. My hunch is we might see "tickets" in the next Tory leadership contest so for example Hunt and Gove for PM/DPM up against Javid and Raab or Mordaunt for PM/DPM. One thing is for sure Alexander Johnson will never be PM.
I agree with Mike that without a good number of Scotland's seats, Labour will be unlikely to win a general election and right now if a GE took place, Labour would hold Edinburgh South and little else. Richard Leonard makes Kezia Dugdale look like a political titan! I have no idea who the Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland is and indeed Ian Murray in Edinburgh South, Roger's relative is the only SLAB MP I can name.
Mike was certain last night that the next GE will not be on the new boundaries but now that the revised Northern Ireland constituency proposals don't crucify the DUP, why shouldn't they support them? Would Labour really want to go into a GE campaign with the electorate being reminded that it had opposed the reduction in the number of MPs!
Of course for unionists like me the solution for NI is for the DUP/UUP and NI Tories to combine to create the NIU and then SF would win very few seats. Sadly unlikely in my lifetime unless they find an Ulster version of Ruth Davidson. It would mean we could have a Northern Ireland Secretary sitting for a Northern Ireland seat.
He is indeed a truly remarkable talent.
Generally on topic, I have made this point several times but my view of politics is that we underestimate the reaction, rather than the action. Those of us interested in politics look at Corbyn and think he’s done a lot of talking to big crowds in safe labour seats - he must be something to do with it. That would be as big a mistake as assuming the 42% voting Tory liked May. May boosted the labour vote by saying I need a large majority to push through Brexit. This coalesced a lot of the minor votes in England around labour rather than Libdem, green and socialist front of Judaea types. Corbyn being Corbyn then drove a very large number of people to vote Tory. Neither will be in play next time, but unless UKIP can rematerialise then the scope for success looks greater for the Tories. Corbyn will have to fight the following ; votes being lost to Greens / Libdems who don’t see voting labour as a possible way to stop Brexit, votes being lost from those who think that Israel should exist. Votes being lost where people voted for an uncosted fantasy manifesto as it wasn’t going to be implemented, votes being lost due to increased scrutiny as feasible new leader rather than plucky underdog.
Unfortunately Labour types I have come across think that they will go up 20% during the campaign again so complacency is probably a good word for it.
As a staunch unionist who helped fight for No I have given up the fight in the case of a hard Brexit and assume the vote will be lost. The only question is how to save the Scottish Tory party.
PS we will welcome all English who want to keep their EC passport. Those who can play football especially
https://seabornefreight.com/images/uploads/timetable-image-20180605101103.jpg
I think Rory Stewart would be good
To become PM at the next general election even with the SNP, let alone with a Labour majority, Corbyn will have to win over 2017 Tory voters and there is little sign of that at present. Even if some 2017 Tories vote UKIP if the Deal is passed that could also be cancelled out by Labour voters voting LD due to Corbyn's opposition to EUref2.
How about the Dover Treaty between Her Majesty and the President of the French Republic?
Although I am reliably told there are 15-20% leads available should Labour change their leader and possibly their policies, which made up around 41% of their voters primary reason for voting Labour.
Edit: I imagine you could find the odd crazy person who would believe Labour will go up to around 60% during the next election campaign but I would doubt even a significant minority would believe that let alone a majority...
A number of scenarios could lead to that: a chaotic No Deal Brexit, revocation of A50, a 2nd Referendum, and May's BINO Deal, could all hack off sections of the Tory vote.
My prediction is that anything could happen - and I'm definitely not going to be wrong with that one!
As far as the boundary changes are concerned, the problem now is less the absence of DUP support but the fact that as many as 40 Tory MPs would oppose them!
You'll have to do that with your New Year libations.
And again, hope everything goes OK.
I think the calculation, given the GE will likely be after we have left the EU, and perhaps quite a while after, is that most of the votes they got in 2017 from centrists and agnostics who have no appetite for Corbyn but wanted to express hostility to Brexit, those are probably lost anyway, since the issue will be history.
The important thing is not to lose support in our equivalent of the rust belt, the large areas of the Midlands and the North which were pro Leave and where many of Labour's target seats can be found. If they do well there, and in Scotland, they can IMO beat their 2017 seat performance.
https://twitter.com/TimesCorbyn/status/1079711276199301120
Gavin Williamson, however, no no no. I get a bad vibe from him. Would not like to see him prosper.
But I don’t think that was her point. She seemed to be talking on the assumption that someone currently based in France might well have a valid basis for claiming asylum in Britain. I don’t think that can be the case and, indeed, it is highly insulting to France to suggest this.
The reality is that migrants are simply shopping around for the countries they would like to go to and using bogus asylum claims, combined with actually setting foot in their country, to achieve their aims. And since the idea of deporting those who have broken the law and have no right to be here gives everyone the collywobbles, no wonder they keep trying.
But, at the same time, it's wishful thinking to think it's impossible for Labour to win. No Tory commentators (including on PB) seem to have asked themselves how Jeremy Corbyn managed to win around 1m Tory voters in the course of the last election - or asked themselves why, if he's already shown he can win over a lot of Tory voters, why wouldn't he able to win over even more next time round.
It is equally possible some Labour Remainers could stay home or vote LD if Corbyn continues to back Brexit and oppose EUref2
But I don’t think that was her point. She seemed to be talking on the assumption that someone currently based in France might well have a valid basis for claiming asylum in Britain. I don’t think that can be the case and, indeed, it is highly insulting to France to suggest this.
The reality is that migrants are simply shopping around for the countries they would like to go to and using bogus asylum claims, combined with actually setting foot in their country, to achieve their aims. And since the idea of deporting those who have broken the law and have no right to be here gives everyone the collywobbles, no wonder they keep trying.
Well one of the more obvious reasons why they may have the right to come here rather than France is the presence of family in the UK already and the right to family life under ECHR.
Almost all Labour's net gains in 2017 came from 2015 LD, Green, Plaid, SNP and UKIP voters and those who stayed home in 2015
But, nonetheless, it's still true that ~1m who voted Tory in 2015, switched over to Corbyn in 2017. Why was this, and why would he be incapable of doing the same again?
Thus if Sanders wins Iowa he could be nominee in all but name through momentum alone by the end of March if he wins New Hampshire again too. No candidate has won Iowa and New Hampshire in the last 50 years and failed to be nominee
"Ensure we tax all income the same, whether it comes from benefits, work or wealth, so the system isn’t stacked in favour of a gilded elite who live off income from interest, dividends and rents from property, but who pay lower tax rates than less well-off people who work for a living, or who claim benefits too."
Hear-hear to that one!
If you want to argue that countries should only live up to the minimum letter of their obligations under the relevant treaties and should shunt people back to any other safe country whenever possible then that's up to you, but don't assume people trying to get to the place where they can best cope with their shitty situation aren't genuine refugees.
Although that said, I do agree that it's wishful thinking that it's impossible for Labour to win next time.
The most recent Iowa polling we have is this:
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/12/15/politics/cnn-poll-iowa-2020-caucus/index.html
If Biden stays fit and decides to run, he will probably still be favourite - though much can happen in the next year.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2017/07/11/why-people-voted-labour-or-conservative-2017-gener
In response to @DavidL above -
That, though, is not a claim for asylum. It is a different claim to migrate here which can - and should - be dealt with through the proper channels, just like anyone else seeking to join family here in the UK.
Three points: family life can be lived perfectly well in France. The right is to family life not to family life in the country of your choice. People smugglers use this as a way of getting one person into a country precisely so that person can then use the family option to get a large number of others in. We need to close that off.
And, second, even where there may be a good reason to let someone in under this option there needs to be a limit to the relatives (numbers/degree of consanguinity) let in. So under-age children joining parents: yes. But cousins, aunts by marriage, etc: no. And law-breaking should push you to the back of the queue: otherwise it is unfair to those who try to enter the country legitimately and it rewards the wrong behaviour and incentivises people smigglers.
Do we really want another old-Etonian??
There is a push factor as well as a pull factor.
Corbyn will also have little further room to squeeze minor parties either beyond what he achieved in 2017 and might even lose some Labour Remainers to the LDs as the LDs back EUref2 unlike Labour
The overwhelming message I got from my real life non-Tory friends on Facebook at the time (who are not overly political Twitter politics types) was that they didn't trust the Tories to have a huge majority, plus Corbyn couldn't possibly win, so we should vote Labour to minimise the Tories majority.
Britain loves to cut down a 'tall poppy' and the idea that the Tories would have an overwhelming majority was not an idea non-Tories found enticing.
That, though, is not a claim for asylum. It is a different claim to migrate here which can - and should - be dealt with through the proper channels, just like anyone else seeking to join family here in the UK.
Three points: family life can be lived perfectly well in France. The right is to family life not to family life in the country of your choice. People smugglers use this as a way of getting one person into a country precisely so that person can then use the family option to get a large number of others in. We need to close that off.
And, second, even where there may be a good reason to let someone in under this option there needs to be a limit to the relatives (numbers/degree of consanguinity) let in. So under-age children joining parents: yes. But cousins, aunts by marriage, etc: no. And law-breaking should push you to the back of the queue: otherwise it is unfair to those who try to enter the country legitimately and it rewards the wrong behaviour and incentivises people smigglers.
It is near impossible to claim asylum anywhere without crossing into the country illegally. The whole international asylum treaty system needs wholesale revision.
I also think Sanders is more likely to be able to get young voters and left liberals to the caucus than Biden is. Biden appeals more to independents and moderates but they are less likely to turn out