American network equipment: if the NSA doesn't get you the bugs will.
It's probably why the likes of Google, Amazon, Facebook and Microsoft design their own network kit and servers nowadays, with their own software builds running on it. Of course they can afford to go down this route, they have the money and skills, and the incentive to do it right when they are hosting so much of other companies data and services.
If you are a carrier wanting to build a 5G network due to consolidation over the last decade or so your remainging choices are:
1. Nokia - which has bits of Siemens, Alcatel, and Lucent; and Lucent itself was once part of AT&T. 2. Ericsson - which has bits of Nortel and Marconi. 3. Samsung 4. Huawei 5. ZTE
So if you eliminate Huawei and ZTE because they are Chinese, and that really does seem to be the what the argument against them boils down to, you are left with only three suppliers to choose from.
Now the problem with that is one way of mitigating risk, is to build a network using a range of equipment so that no single risk, whether it's a security risk, or a bug, or commercial failure, can result in severe network degradation.
Being restricted to three suppliers means less competiton for contracts and less diversity in equipment, as a carrier you will almost certainly end up paying more for a worse network, where if there is an issue (of whatever type) it impacts more of your network than it might otherwise.
This is also why "buy British" makes no sense, because being sensible about it you wouldn't want to restrict yourself to a single British supplier. We'd need to come up with a plan to create say at least three successful British carrier equipment suppliers, otherwise we are going to end up with too many eggs in one basket.
There are no easy answers to the question of whose kit should be allowed in our networks.
Are shy Tories back in force? Thats what I'm wondering looking at polls
At these polling levels the Conservatives must be hoping that they're not so much shy as reclusive.
As Stephen Bush says, one of the big mysteries of the local elections is, what will the many people who go to the polling stations today intending to vote for the Brexit Party do when they get a ballot paper without them on it?
Almost by definition local elections tend to attract those most interested in politics. I doubt there are many who will vote today who don’t have an idea of who is standing in their ward. So anyone who would vote for the Brexit Party either stays at home or votes for another option (UKIP, LDs, Greens, Ind etc) to spite the main parties.
On Tuesday I am apparently taking delivery of 97 kitchen appliances including 24 ovens, 24 dishwashers and 24 fridge/freezers.
Anybody want one! I only want 1 of each.
Almost on a par with the HMRC letter I received a few weeks ago telling me that I don't get child benefit (I know) and that the child benefit I don't get is going up (nice to know, but of no interest to me) and that as of Sept this year I will stop getting the child benefit that I don't get.
> @TudorRose said: > > @Danny565 said: > > Are shy Tories back in force? Thats what I'm wondering looking at polls > > > > At these polling levels the Conservatives must be hoping that they're not so much shy as reclusive. > > > > > > As Stephen Bush says, one of the big mysteries of the local elections is, what will the many people who go to the polling stations today intending to vote for the Brexit Party do when they get a ballot paper without them on it? > > A similar issue arises for Change UK supporters. My guess is that they will vote LibDem, pushing up the LD share of the vote to the point where they can claim unequivocally to be the voice of Remain and, paradoxically, seal the fate of Change UK. > >
The difference being that, according to most polls (YouGov is a semi-exception), there aren't enough Change UK supporters to make a bit of difference to anything.
I have an ex-Lib-Dem-now-Independent leaflet through this morning with the works.
- A3 cut lengthways so it sticks out of the letterbox. - "Former Chairman of local Labour Party accepted Police Caution for lying on Election Leaflet" (true) - Conservatives cannot win here - "Jeremy Corbyn's Man" - "You do not need your polling card to vote"
1) People calling justifiable criticism of Israel anti-Semitism, to protect Israel. 2) People hiding their anti-Semitism behind criticism of Israel, to protect their anti-Semitism.
IMV the evidence for Corbyn to be firmly in the second category is fairly strong.
I agree both of those things are going on. And furthermore there's an unholy tacit (and in some extreme cases- especially among non-Jewish neocons- explicit) alliance between the people in group 1 and group 2.
What worries me is that regardless of your views on Corbyn, it seems extremely clear from PB and twitter that opponents of Labour are now much, much more willing to uncritically accept the arguments of people in group 1 for political reasons. Take pb yesterday, where several people happily accepted that a protest against a fundraiser for recruitment from oversees into the IDF was antisemitic based on deliberate disinformation from some pro-Israel journalists. And one reason that's so worrying is because accepting group 1 helps group 2.
As a separate point, on Corbyn, what evidence do you mean? The way I see it, there's two possible Corbyns: Corbyn A is antisemitic, Corbyn B is anti-Israel and suspicious of the tactics of group 1 but not antisemitic. Starting from premise that Corbyn is Corbyn A, what's the evidence against that? What about Corbyn B?
I'd say that him attending a seder (which very much looked like it was just a decision he made, not a political stunt) is consistent with Corbyn B but not Corbyn A. What do you have which is consistent with Corbyn A but not Corbyn B?
Greens quite chipper in Norwich, they fancy an anti Corbyn swing I think, will be against the tide if so which is going out for them here Edit - their poster and placard game is quite strong this time compared to 17
Apologies. Quote button is causing the site to crash on my IPad for some reason. Stoke, Ashfield and Wigan are three very different places. The Brexit Party will not beat Labour in Wigan. Don't know the other two well enough to say. All 3 Wigan constituencies were comfortably 50% plus Labour last time. UKIP has zero presence on the Council and never has had. The Tory vote, as was, tends to be middle class. Manchester commuters and self employed tradesmen and the like. This can be seen by the poorer wards of the Borough correlating strongly with the highest Labour shares and lowest Conservative. Highest Tory shares are in areas of new build detached and semi detached housing. There are some very, very nice bits of Wigan, with highly affordable housing, and good schools. The population of the borough is rising, as part of Manchester overspill.
> @Danny565 said: > Are shy Tories back in force? Thats what I'm wondering looking at polls > At these polling levels the Conservatives must be hoping that they're not so much shy as reclusive. > As Stephen Bush says, one of the big mysteries of the local elections is, what will the many people who go to the polling stations today intending to vote for the Brexit Party do when they get a ballot paper without them on it? ______ Most people are 'sick of Brexit', i.e. the 3-year ongoing process, 'want it to go away' and don't care strongly if we leave or stay. They're more concerned about 10s of other things.
> @RobD said: > On Topic: > > > > If Williamson is so offended, is there anything to stop him launching a Judicial Review? > > Surely May can sack her ministers at will?
She can. All gavin can do is swear on other peoples lives it wasn't him, which is terribly brave of him
> @logical_song said: > > @dyedwoolie said: > > I bet the EU are thrilled at the prospect of 25 faragists taking their seats > > What's their half-life? Will it be as short as a UKIP MEP?
If we dont Brexit they will all have defected to Farage 3.0 by 2024
> @kjh said: > O/T - Nobody reads what they send out these days! > > On Tuesday I am apparently taking delivery of 97 kitchen appliances including 24 ovens, 24 dishwashers and 24 fridge/freezers. > > Anybody want one! I only want 1 of each. > > Almost on a par with the HMRC letter I received a few weeks ago telling me that I don't get child benefit (I know) and that the child benefit I don't get is going up (nice to know, but of no interest to me) and that as of Sept this year I will stop getting the child benefit that I don't get. > > Who writes these letters?
A computer who hasn't been told to use its discretion.
Apologies. Quote button is causing the site to crash on my IPad for some reason.
Stoke, Ashfield and Wigan are three very different places. The Brexit Party will not beat Labour in Wigan. Don't know the other two well enough to say.
All 3 Wigan constituencies were comfortably 50% plus Labour last time. UKIP has zero presence on the Council and never has had.
The Tory vote, as was, tends to be middle class. Manchester commuters and self employed tradesmen and the like. This can be seen by the poorer wards of the Borough correlating strongly with the highest Labour shares and lowest Conservative. Highest Tory shares are in areas of new build detached and semi detached housing.
There are some very, very nice bits of Wigan, with highly affordable housing, and good schools. The population of the borough is rising, as part of Manchester overspill.
Wigan is less likely admittedly, but not impossible, judging by the 2014 European results. A 2% UKIP lead over Labour nationally translated into an 8% Labour lead in Wigan... so a 9% national Brexit lead over Labour this time would likely make Wigan too close to call, but with Labour maybe a hair ahead.
The UKIP leads over Labour in Stoke and Ashfield were 8% and 10% respectively, so the BP will thrash them there if that YouGov poll is anywhere near accurate. And there's a ton of other Labour places in the North and the Midlands where the same will apply.
> @OblitusSumMe said: > > @kjh said: > > O/T - Nobody reads what they send out these days! > > > > On Tuesday I am apparently taking delivery of 97 kitchen appliances including 24 ovens, 24 dishwashers and 24 fridge/freezers. > > > > Anybody want one! I only want 1 of each. > > > > Almost on a par with the HMRC letter I received a few weeks ago telling me that I don't get child benefit (I know) and that the child benefit I don't get is going up (nice to know, but of no interest to me) and that as of Sept this year I will stop getting the child benefit that I don't get. > > > > Who writes these letters? > > A computer who hasn't been told to use its discretion.
In february I had a letter from DWP telling me theh had all the info they needed to make a decision. I got it again late April. It's a functional dept for sure
> @Danny565 said: > Apologies. Quote button is causing the site to crash on my IPad for some reason. > > Stoke, Ashfield and Wigan are three very different places. The Brexit Party will not beat Labour in Wigan. Don't know the other two well enough to say. > > All 3 Wigan constituencies were comfortably 50% plus Labour last time. UKIP has zero presence on the Council and never has had. > > The Tory vote, as was, tends to be middle class. Manchester commuters and self employed tradesmen and the like. This can be seen by the poorer wards of the Borough correlating strongly with the highest Labour shares and lowest Conservative. Highest Tory shares are in areas of new build detached and semi detached housing. > > There are some very, very nice bits of Wigan, with highly affordable housing, and good schools. The population of the borough is rising, as part of Manchester overspill. > > Wigan is less likely admittedly, but not impossible, judging by the 2014 European results. A 2% UKIP lead over Labour nationally translated into an 8% Labour lead in Wigan... so a 9% national Brexit lead over Labour this time would likely make Wigan too close to call, but with Labour maybe a hair ahead. > > The UKIP leads over Labour in Stoke and Ashfield were 8% and 10% respectively, so the BP will thrash them there if that YouGov poll is anywhere near accurate. And there's a ton of other Labour places in the North and the Midlands where the same will apply.
Labour 2019 arent as popular as Ed's 2014 vintage were, they will underperform 2014s in vote share I believe
"I was going to like your post in a spirit of pure passive aggression. But then I thought, no, we are better than that."
*
We are. And no need for 'like' when I can do a little smiley face. So much more rustic and real.
:-)
On topic. I don't know about the Tories being scared of Nigel Farage but I certainly am. His breezy 'True Brit' persona appeals to so many different groups and they are all sizable - the gin'n'jags, the old dears and colonels, the salt of the earths, the 'it's basic common sense' brigade, lots and lots of people, and on top of that there are plenty of others who have little interest in politics who just like him because he comes across as affable and entertaining.
He is the perfect leader for a mass populist right movement in this country. Put him into the driving seat of the right vehicle, fuel it up with big money and a compelling grievance narrative and - well who knows how far he and it can go?
> @kinabalu said: > @Ishmael_Z said: > > "I was going to like your post in a spirit of pure passive aggression. But then I thought, no, we are better than that." > > * > > We are. And no need for 'like' when I can do a little smiley face. So much more rustic and real. > > :-) > > On topic. I don't know about the Tories being scared of Nigel Farage but I certainly am. His breezy 'True Brit' persona appeals to so many different groups and they are all sizable - the gin'n'jags, the old dears and colonels, the salt of the earths, the 'it's basic common sense' brigade, lots and lots of people, and on top of that there are plenty of others who have little interest in politics who just like him because he comes across as affable and entertaining. > > He is the perfect leader for a mass populist right movement in this country. Put him into the driving seat of the right vehicle, fuel it up with big money and a compelling grievance narrative and - well who knows how far he and it can go? > > It's spooking me and I'm not ashamed to admit it.
It's not Farage that's scary, hes John the Baptist (or the anti thereof), its what Farage lets in after he gets bored and wanders off again.........
> @RobD said: > When you plug these numbers into Electoral Calculus, the Brexit Party wins 394 seats, to 153 for Labour. > > How does it handle a new party? I thought it was all based on swings.
I don't know at all.
But, when you have five or six-way splits, it may well be correct that 30% could deliver a landslide.
While I don't underestimate the difficulties in doing so, I suspect remainers will end up regretting not being able to form a single alliance for this campaign. CUK+GRN+LD would likely have given Nigel a run for his money (and demonstrated to Jezza how the left won't hang around behind him forever).
Heartening to see Gerard's UKIP disappearing up its own fundament though, especially after that "quislings, traitors and collaborators" nonsense yesterday, basically pitching the EU as a wartime enemy. Sickening.
> @Stereotomy said: > There are two broad things going on here: > > 1) People calling justifiable criticism of Israel anti-Semitism, to protect Israel. > 2) People hiding their anti-Semitism behind criticism of Israel, to protect their anti-Semitism. > > IMV the evidence for Corbyn to be firmly in the second category is fairly strong. > > I agree both of those things are going on. And furthermore there's an unholy tacit (and in some extreme cases- especially among non-Jewish neocons- explicit) alliance between the people in group 1 and group 2. > > What worries me is that regardless of your views on Corbyn, it seems extremely clear from PB and twitter that opponents of Labour are now much, much more willing to uncritically accept the arguments of people in group 1 for political reasons. Take pb yesterday, where several people happily accepted that a protest against a fundraiser for recruitment from oversees into the IDF was antisemitic based on deliberate disinformation from some pro-Israel journalists. And one reason that's so worrying is because accepting group 1 helps group 2. > > As a separate point, on Corbyn, what evidence do you mean? The way I see it, there's two possible Corbyns: Corbyn A is antisemitic, Corbyn B is anti-Israel and suspicious of the tactics of group 1 but not antisemitic. Starting from premise that Corbyn is Corbyn A, what's the evidence against that? What about Corbyn B? > > I'd say that him attending a seder (which very much looked like it was just a decision he made, not a political stunt) is consistent with Corbyn B but not Corbyn A. What do you have which is consistent with Corbyn A but not Corbyn B?
I've detailed some of the evidence before several times - except now there's more to add. I freely admit that there's no smoking gun, but the weight of evidence points at the very least to a passive anti-Semitism. I now say it goes much deeper.
There's another thing that should be worrying: Corbyn and his acolytes always fall back on the "He's been an anti-racist all his life." Yet when hes faced with anti-Semitism - whether a mural or a book - he says he fails to recognise it. And when the anti-Semitism is by friends or fellow travellers - e.g. Livingstone - it is ignored for as long as possible.
I'd also say that if you are genuinely anti-racist, you cannot pick and choose the racism you tackle - ignoring racism is letting the racists win, especially when you do do for political reasons.
> @Ishmael_Z said: > On Topic: > > > > If Williamson is so offended, is there anything to stop him launching a Judicial Review? > > Pretty sure that as hiring and firing is the personal prerogative of the PM, the courts will not interfere.
I think he'd have to wait his turn behind Osborne, for starters.
Cabinet selections are (or can be) entirely down to whether your face fits. And probably just as well.. I can see the dangers of having to performance-manage an under par cabinet minister and justify the decision to HR and an employment tribunal
I bet the EU are thrilled at the prospect of 25 faragists taking their seats
Do you know the EP has had actual fascists as MEPs? This meme that Faragist MEPs are scary people is a bit weird. The Eurosceptics limit their disruption to sarcastic and insulting speeches. By EP standards, that's tea with the vicar.
While I don't underestimate the difficulties in doing so, I suspect remainers will end up regretting not being able to form a single alliance for this campaign. CUK+GRN+LD would likely have given Nigel a run for his money (and demonstrated to Jezza how the left won't hang around behind him forever).
Heartening to see Gerard's UKIP disappearing up its own fundament though, especially after that "quislings, traitors and collaborators" nonsense yesterday, basically pitching the EU as a wartime enemy. Sickening.
It would greatly amuse me if the three were squeezed so much that none got a single seat.
"It's not Farage that's scary, he's John the Baptist (or the anti thereof), it's what Farage lets in after he gets bored and wanders off again........."
*
We need a Salome and a Dance of the Seven Veils then. Heidi Allen? Or perhaps Chuka Umunna. It's quite a thought, either way.
But yes, what you say raises even more concerns. However, although I don't have the biggest regard for the political intelligence and judgement of the Great British Public, I do think that they are fundamentally, on balance and on the whole, a decent enough bunch, and so I don't think they would go in big numbers with anything or anybody too vulgar.
Let's hope that a few years from now that does not look breathtakingly complacent.
> On topic. I don't know about the Tories being scared of Nigel Farage but I certainly am. His breezy 'True Brit' persona appeals to so many different groups and they are all sizable - the gin'n'jags, the old dears and colonels, the salt of the earths, the 'it's basic common sense' brigade, lots and lots of people, and on top of that there are plenty of others who have little interest in politics who just like him because he comes across as affable and entertaining. > > He is the perfect leader for a mass populist right movement in this country. Put him into the driving seat of the right vehicle, fuel it up with big money and a compelling grievance narrative and - well who knows how far he and it can go? > > It's spooking me and I'm not ashamed to admit it. <
_____
You're not alone. It's spooking me as well - indeed I said pretty much the same thing last night. Farage has the potential to be a British Trump, except he's cleverer than Trump, and not insane like Trump. FPTP will make it harder for Nigel than it was for Trump, but FPTP is beginning to break down.
The Tories need to dump TM sharpish, get in Mordaunt (a solid Brexiteer, but, crucially, not BoJo)
Then there's the small problem of fixing Brexit but hey. Baby steps.
The actual information, though, that Williamson remains a Privy Counsellor, is totally unsurprising.
It's a life position with no mechanism for removal, and there are currently around 600. In practice, it's pretty meaningless. The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council still has an important role, but that's only open to judges who are PCs, not former fireplace salesmen.
There have been a handful of resignations from the Privy Council - Profumo, Aitken, and Huhne resigned and with it lost the "Right Honourable" title.
They always were, still are, and the Brexit Party are no different. We think we are immune from fascism because "we won the war". We are not. People are lapping it up, and Farage loves it.
The actual information, though, that Williamson remains a Privy Counsellor, is totally unsurprising.
It's a life position with no mechanism for removal, and there are currently around 600. In practice, it's pretty meaningless. The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council still has an important role, but that's only open to judges who are PCs, not former fireplace salesmen.
There have been a handful of resignations from the Privy Council - Profumo, Aitken, and Huhne resigned and with it lost the "Right Honourable" title.
There is a mechanism as people have been expelled before.
"It's not Farage that's scary, he's John the Baptist (or the anti thereof), it's what Farage lets in after he gets bored and wanders off again........."
*
We need a Salome and a Dance of the Seven Veils then. Heidi Allen? Or perhaps Chuka Umunna. It's quite a thought, either way.
But yes, what you say raises even more concerns. However, although I don't have the biggest regard for the political intelligence and judgement of the Great British Public, I do think that they are fundamentally, on balance and on the whole, a decent enough bunch, and so I don't think they would go in big numbers with anything or anybody too vulgar.
Let's hope that a few years from now that does not look breathtakingly complacent.
Well, they're currently going for Farage and Corbyn - and some would like to go for Johnson - all of whom are, in their own way, demagogues and liars and have dodgy views and associates.
So perhaps the "decent enough bunch" is smaller than we thought?
They always were, still are, and the Brexit Party are no different. We think we are immune from fascism because "we won the war". We are not. People are lapping it up, and Farage loves it.
No elections here in London and my days of dashing off to Tandridge, Woking or Brentwood to deliver, tell and knock up on polling day are long past. I wish all candidates and their workers well.
On Williamson, the technicality is although the word "sacked" has been used, he was forced to resign and presumably he is entitled to a resignation statement in the Commons which may be interesting. Most are dull but Sir Geoffrey Howe's wasn't as I recall and Williamson could cause a lot of trouble if he so chose.
Somebody somewhere must have some compelling evidence Williamson or someone in the MOD was responsible for the leak and I simply don't buy OGH's assertion this was some plan to make the PM look strong before the local elections. You don't sack the Defence Secretary just to save a couple of councillors.
As to those local elections, I've long maintained the story will be of well-organised well-funded groups of Independents taking seats off the main parties. There will be some surprises and the fact the postal votes went in over Easter when the mood was more febrile might accentuate any problems for the Conservatives and possibly Labour too.
Low turnout is going to be the winner, based on what I’ve experienced. Empty polling station when I went, empty car park and only three names ticked off on the sheet with my details - the other two being my wife and youngest daughter. The electorate clearly suffering from a severe bout of NFI and who can’t blame them.
> @Thayer5 said: > You're not alone. It's spooking me as well - indeed I said pretty much the same thing last night. Farage has the potential to be a British Trump, except he's cleverer than Trump, and not insane like Trump. FPTP will make it harder for Nigel than it was for Trump, but FPTP is beginning to break down. > > The Tories need to dump TM sharpish, get in Mordaunt (a solid Brexiteer, but, crucially, not BoJo) > > Then there's the small problem of fixing Brexit but hey. Baby steps.
FPTP makes the initial steps more difficult, but it them makes it much easier for a figure like Farage to win a majority.
With a well-split vote he wouldn't even need one-third of the vote to become PM.
"You're not alone. It's spooking me as well - indeed I said pretty much the same thing last night. Farage has the potential to be a British Trump, except he's cleverer than Trump, and not insane like Trump. FPTP will make it harder for Nigel than it was for Trump, but FPTP is beginning to break down.
The Tories need to dump TM sharpish, get in Mordaunt (a solid Brexiteer, but, crucially, not BoJo)
Then there's the small problem of fixing Brexit but hey. Baby steps."
*
To me it looks like the politics and the numbers prevent any Brexit getting through this parliament.
So Mordaunt (or whichever new PM) will need to first win a General Election. Which they might, but my hunch is that Labour will offer Ref2 at that point and it is they who will win.
Corbyn and Remain versus Tories and Hard Brexit. That's what you call a real and meaningful choice. No sitting on the fence for that one.
I'm amazed at those giving a moment's serious thought to the notion that Williamson is telling the truth.
The list of suspects is extremely short. Williamson uniquely spoke with the very Telegraph journalist who broke the story. Williamson uniquely failed to be candid with the inquiry about his contacts etc in the aftermath of the story breaking. Williamson was already widely and correctly regarded as a little twerp whose ambition vastly outstrips his negligible abilities.
Against that, the case for the defence appears to be that he vehemently denies it and swears (rather tastelessly) "on his children's lives" that he didn't do it. But vehement denial is worth jack - the prisons are full of old lags who swear blind they did nothing.
Case closed - the fat kid covered in crumbs and with chocolate chip stains on his teeth is the one who nicked the cookies, despite all his wailing that it wasn't him.
Why is it that some people bend over backwards to find a conspiracy or to deny the bleedin' obvious simply because some arrogant sod is loudly proclaiming their innocence way beyond the point that any decent person would say "fair cop"?
> @kinabalu said: > @Thayer5 said: > > "You're not alone. It's spooking me as well - indeed I said pretty much the same thing last night. Farage has the potential to be a British Trump, except he's cleverer than Trump, and not insane like Trump. FPTP will make it harder for Nigel than it was for Trump, but FPTP is beginning to break down. > > The Tories need to dump TM sharpish, get in Mordaunt (a solid Brexiteer, but, crucially, not BoJo) > > Then there's the small problem of fixing Brexit but hey. Baby steps." > > * > > To me it looks like the politics and the numbers prevent any Brexit getting through this parliament. > > So Mordaunt (or whichever new PM) will need to first win a General Election. Which they might, but my hunch is that Labour will offer Ref2 at that point and it is they who will win. > > Corbyn and Remain versus Tories and Hard Brexit. That's what you call a real and meaningful choice. No sitting on the fence for that one.
The Brexit Party would probably do what UKIP did in 2015 - deny Labour a lot of votes in poorer parts of the South of England.
> @AmpfieldAndy said: > Low turnout is going to be the winner, based on what I’ve experienced. Empty polling station when I went, empty car park and only three names ticked off on the sheet with my details - the other two being my wife and youngest daughter. The electorate clearly suffering from a severe bout of NFI and who can’t blame them.
This sounds very bad news for the blues. My rule of thumb is that the 8am - 6pm shift is where the Conservatives win it, as that's pensioner voting time. Reasonably brisk turnout in that period, and the rest might as well pack up and go home. Now they may be saved partially if there's no post-work flurry, but that remains to be seen.
> To me it looks like the politics and the numbers prevent any Brexit getting through this parliament. > > So Mordaunt (or whichever new PM) will need to first win a General Election. Which they might, but my hunch is that Labour will offer Ref2 at that point and it is they who will win.
Corbyn and Remain versus Tories and Hard Brexit. That's what you call a real and meaningful choice. No sitting on the fence for that one. <
____
I don't believe a Corbyn-led Labour Party will ever offer a 2nd vote.
Re, the Peterborough by-election, if the vote shares just tracked polls, then we'd expect Labour to finish with 38% and the Conservatives with 29%.
Given the circumstances of the by-election, and that people usually use by-elections to kick the government, I'd expect Labour and the Conservatives to finish lower than that.
Realistically, if anyone is to beat Labour, they need to win a vote share in the mid 30's.
> @SirNorfolkPassmore said: > > @AmpfieldAndy said: > > Low turnout is going to be the winner, based on what I’ve experienced. Empty polling station when I went, empty car park and only three names ticked off on the sheet with my details - the other two being my wife and youngest daughter. The electorate clearly suffering from a severe bout of NFI and who can’t blame them. > > This sounds very bad news for the blues. My rule of thumb is that the 8am - 6pm shift is where the Conservatives win it, as that's pensioner voting time. Reasonably brisk turnout in that period, and the rest might as well pack up and go home. Now they may be saved partially if there's no post-work flurry, but that remains to be seen.
Increasingly, the pensioners vote by post. Postal voting on demand was meant to help Labour, but it actually helped the Conservatives.
Low turnout is going to be the winner, based on what I’ve experienced. Empty polling station when I went, empty car park and only three names ticked off on the sheet with my details - the other two being my wife and youngest daughter. The electorate clearly suffering from a severe bout of NFI and who can’t blame them.
Looking at reports quoting actual election workers I suspect it’ll be patchy, some places dire, some places perhaps even better than usual. Probably with a Remain/Leave split dynamic.
> @SirNorfolkPassmore said: > I'm amazed at those giving a moment's serious thought to the notion that Williamson is telling the truth. > > The list of suspects is extremely short. Williamson uniquely spoke with the very Telegraph journalist who broke the story. Williamson uniquely failed to be candid with the inquiry about his contacts etc in the aftermath of the story breaking. Williamson was already widely and correctly regarded as a little twerp whose ambition vastly outstrips his negligible abilities. > > Against that, the case for the defence appears to be that he vehemently denies it and swears (rather tastelessly) "on his children's lives" that he didn't do it. But vehement denial is worth jack - the prisons are full of old lags who swear blind they did nothing. > > Case closed - the fat kid covered in crumbs and with chocolate chip stains on his teeth is the one who nicked the cookies, despite all his wailing that it wasn't him. > > Why is it that some people bend over backwards to find a conspiracy or to deny the bleedin' obvious simply because some arrogant sod is loudly proclaiming their innocence way beyond the point that any decent person would say "fair cop"?
Williamson doesn’t have to prove anything - innocent until proven guilty. The case against Williamson is all circumstantial - nothing concrete at all. The only part of you comment that makes sense is that he is an over ambitious twerp of dubious ability. That however doesn’t make him guilty. May promoted him and acted in haste looking for a scapegoat. She is the one who needs firing.
> @Gallowgate said: > @SirNorfolkPassmore because May and her team have a habit of being economical with the truth. For evidence see: the last 2 years.
I'm no defender of May. But he admits he spoke to the journalist in question, and has offered nothing substantive (where is his note of the call? Where is his evidence that he promptly admitted the conversation and provided details?)
Further, while we are told the civil servant has some sort of "vendetta" against him, where is the evidence? And why does the civil servant risk a long and distinguished career to deal with a here today, gone tomorrow cabinet minister who isn't alone in being a bit annoying.
No, the case in defence of Williamson is daft conspiracy theory, plain and simple.
> @Thayer5 said: > > @kinabalu said: > > > To me it looks like the politics and the numbers prevent any Brexit getting through this parliament. > > > > So Mordaunt (or whichever new PM) will need to first win a General Election. Which they might, but my hunch is that Labour will offer Ref2 at that point and it is they who will win. > > Corbyn and Remain versus Tories and Hard Brexit. That's what you call a real and meaningful choice. No sitting on the fence for that one. < > > ____ > > I don't believe a Corbyn-led Labour Party will ever offer a 2nd vote.
Agreed. It will be a "Labour Brexit" in any manifesto with Corbyn as leader.
> @Sean_F said: > > @SirNorfolkPassmore said: > > > @AmpfieldAndy said: > > > Low turnout is going to be the winner, based on what I’ve experienced. Empty polling station when I went, empty car park and only three names ticked off on the sheet with my details - the other two being my wife and youngest daughter. The electorate clearly suffering from a severe bout of NFI and who can’t blame them. > > > > This sounds very bad news for the blues. My rule of thumb is that the 8am - 6pm shift is where the Conservatives win it, as that's pensioner voting time. Reasonably brisk turnout in that period, and the rest might as well pack up and go home. Now they may be saved partially if there's no post-work flurry, but that remains to be seen. > > Increasingly, the pensioners vote by post. Postal voting on demand was meant to help Labour, but it actually helped the Conservatives.
Postal votes are still marked off on the election officers list of registered voters. To have only 3 voters voting by 3pm is bad news. Here it’s bad news for the Tories because the ward councillor is Tory - elsewhere might be different.
> > Low turnout is going to be the winner, based on what I’ve experienced. Empty polling station when I went, empty car park and only three names ticked off on the sheet with my details - the other two being my wife and youngest daughter. The electorate clearly suffering from a severe bout of NFI and who can’t blame them.
>
> This sounds very bad news for the blues. My rule of thumb is that the 8am - 6pm shift is where the Conservatives win it, as that's pensioner voting time. Reasonably brisk turnout in that period, and the rest might as well pack up and go home. Now they may be saved partially if there's no post-work flurry, but that remains to be seen.
Increasingly, the pensioners vote by post. Postal voting on demand was meant to help Labour, but it actually helped the Conservatives.
The guy behind Britain Elects claims postal turnout lower than 2011, no idea on where he’s hearing that from so take with salt.
> @GIN1138 said: > > @Sean_F said: > > When you plug these numbers into Electoral Calculus, the Brexit Party wins 394 seats, to 153 for Labour. > > LOl! Brexit Party landslide. Con suffer SLAB style wipeout. > > Would certainly be one of the more entertaining general election nights wouldn't it?
"I don't believe a Corbyn-led Labour Party will ever offer a 2nd vote."
*
Because he actively wants Brexit? I know many think that. And perhaps he does. But IMO what he wants above all else is to be PM, he wants power, and this will require winning a GE.
So come that GE, if it is before Brexit, which it most probably will be, I reckon that he and his team will ask themselves one simple question: If we offer Ref2 will it materially improve our chances of winning?
And if the answer is YES, which I think will be the case, they will do it. If not, they won't.
> @brokenwheel said: > > @SirNorfolkPassmore said: > > > > @AmpfieldAndy said: > > > > Low turnout is going to be the winner, based on what I’ve experienced. Empty polling station when I went, empty car park and only three names ticked off on the sheet with my details - the other two being my wife and youngest daughter. The electorate clearly suffering from a severe bout of NFI and who can’t blame them. > > > > > > This sounds very bad news for the blues. My rule of thumb is that the 8am - 6pm shift is where the Conservatives win it, as that's pensioner voting time. Reasonably brisk turnout in that period, and the rest might as well pack up and go home. Now they may be saved partially if there's no post-work flurry, but that remains to be seen. > > > > Increasingly, the pensioners vote by post. Postal voting on demand was meant to help Labour, but it actually helped the Conservatives. > > The guy behind Britain Elects claims postal turnout lower than 2011, no idea on where he’s hearing that from so take with salt. > > https://www.twitter.com/spreadsheetben/status/1123930649386258432
Makes sense.
Con voters just stay at home and seethe today. That will have a big impact on turnout.
> Williamson doesn’t have to prove anything - innocent until proven guilty. The case against Williamson is all circumstantial - nothing concrete at all. The only part of you comment that makes sense is that he is an over ambitious twerp of dubious ability. That however doesn’t make him guilty. May promoted him and acted in haste looking for a scapegoat. She is the one who needs firing.
There is nothing wrong with circumstantial evidence and, in the absence of confiscating a journalist's notepad (which isn't something an internal inquiry can or should be able to do) it is all you are going to get.
All it means for evidence to be circumstantial is that in theory there could be more than one explanation. It's perfectly legitimate to accept weight of circumstantial evidence where those alternatives simply aren't credible. In theory, could Williamson's call with the journalist between the meeting and the story being broken have been wholly innocent? Yes. Is it at all credible? Is it heck - Williamson was less than candid, he's produced no notes of his own, there's no evidence of others on the extremely short list of suspects or their close associates having similar contact, and the guy has form as a dim, duplicitous oik.
So you can buy into to Gav's innocent explanation if you like, but excuse me if I find it utterly laughable.
> @SirNorfolkPassmore said: > > @Gallowgate said: > > @SirNorfolkPassmore because May and her team have a habit of being economical with the truth. For evidence see: the last 2 years. > > I'm no defender of May. But he admits he spoke to the journalist in question, and has offered nothing substantive (where is his note of the call? Where is his evidence that he promptly admitted the conversation and provided details?) > > Further, while we are told the civil servant has some sort of "vendetta" against him, where is the evidence? And why does the civil servant risk a long and distinguished career to deal with a here today, gone tomorrow cabinet minister who isn't alone in being a bit annoying. > > No, the case in defence of Williamson is daft conspiracy theory, plain and simple.
There is also, to be fair, a degree of fudge around what actually was the offence. Was it leaking anything at all, the final decision (which would shortly and necessarily have been revealed anyway) or was it the names of which ministers agreed or disagreed on various details?
It is possible Williamson and May disagree on his guilt because they disagree on what is the the charge. Williamson might have pinched the chocolate cookies but not the custard creams.
Otoh the country is probably safer without a defence secretary wanting to send gunboats up the Yangtse River and telling Russia to shut up and go away.
> @brokenwheel said: > > @SirNorfolkPassmore said: > > > > @AmpfieldAndy said: > > > > Low turnout is going to be the winner, based on what I’ve experienced. Empty polling station when I went, empty car park and only three names ticked off on the sheet with my details - the other two being my wife and youngest daughter. The electorate clearly suffering from a severe bout of NFI and who can’t blame them. > > > > > > This sounds very bad news for the blues. My rule of thumb is that the 8am - 6pm shift is where the Conservatives win it, as that's pensioner voting time. Reasonably brisk turnout in that period, and the rest might as well pack up and go home. Now they may be saved partially if there's no post-work flurry, but that remains to be seen. > > > > Increasingly, the pensioners vote by post. Postal voting on demand was meant to help Labour, but it actually helped the Conservatives. > > The guy behind Britain Elects claims postal turnout lower than 2011, no idea on where he’s hearing that from so take with salt. > > https://www.twitter.com/spreadsheetben/status/1123930649386258432 ———————————————- It would be very hard to know that at this stage - certainly nationwide as against a few random anecdotes. The information isn’t published or shared with agents so it can only be gossip. And, in any case, handing them in on the day is becoming increasingly common, and given how fast recent events have been moving possibly some people have been waiting until the last minute, in case something suddenly happens.
> @SirNorfolkPassmore because May and her team have a habit of being economical with the truth. For evidence see: the last 2 years.
I'm no defender of May. But he admits he spoke to the journalist in question, and has offered nothing substantive (where is his note of the call? Where is his evidence that he promptly admitted the conversation and provided details?)
Further, while we are told the civil servant has some sort of "vendetta" against him, where is the evidence? And why does the civil servant risk a long and distinguished career to deal with a here today, gone tomorrow cabinet minister who isn't alone in being a bit annoying.
No, the case in defence of Williamson is daft conspiracy theory, plain and simple.
I'm far from clear if he is definitely guilty, but as you say some if the defences seem weak at best, or distractions.
The innocent until proven guilty sort of comments are a case in point. Its not a court of law, yet, a PM doesnt need beyond reasonable doubt proof. If she has erred that's a concern and I feel bad for him, but enough grounds to lose confidence in him is reasonable to sack. The idea a smoking gun in his hand is needed is laughable.
I'm amazed at those giving a moment's serious thought to the notion that Williamson is telling the truth.
The list of suspects is extremely short. Williamson uniquely spoke with the very Telegraph journalist who broke the story. Williamson uniquely failed to be candid with the inquiry about his contacts etc in the aftermath of the story breaking. Williamson was already widely and correctly regarded as a little twerp whose ambition vastly outstrips his negligible abilities.
Against that, the case for the defence appears to be that he vehemently denies it and swears (rather tastelessly) "on his children's lives" that he didn't do it. But vehement denial is worth jack - the prisons are full of old lags who swear blind they did nothing.
Case closed - the fat kid covered in crumbs and with chocolate chip stains on his teeth is the one who nicked the cookies, despite all his wailing that it wasn't him.
Why is it that some people bend over backwards to find a conspiracy or to deny the bleedin' obvious simply because some arrogant sod is loudly proclaiming their innocence way beyond the point that any decent person would say "fair cop"?
"I don't believe a Corbyn-led Labour Party will ever offer a 2nd vote."
*
Because he actively wants Brexit? I know many think that. And perhaps he does. But IMO what he wants above all else is to be PM, he wants power, and this will require winning a GE.
So come that GE, if it is before Brexit, which it most probably will be, I reckon that he and his team will ask themselves one simple question: If we offer Ref2 will it materially improve our chances of winning?
And if the answer is YES, which I think will be the case, they will do it. But if not, they won't.
They will come to the view that offering a second referendum won't materially improve their chances and may hinder them. The fact that such a conclusion perfectly coincides with what they want anyway - Brexit without any restrictions on what they could do in power - is I am sure a happy accident and will in no way influence their assessment of whether a referendum would help.
Corbyn is in the happy position of being able to take his voters for granted. The Tories are not. That alone gives him a pretty good path to victory.
> @Thayer5 said: > @kinabalu said: > > > On topic. I don't know about the Tories being scared of Nigel Farage but I certainly am. His breezy 'True Brit' persona appeals to so many different groups and they are all sizable - the gin'n'jags, the old dears and colonels, the salt of the earths, the 'it's basic common sense' brigade, lots and lots of people, and on top of that there are plenty of others who have little interest in politics who just like him because he comes across as affable and entertaining. > > > > He is the perfect leader for a mass populist right movement in this country. Put him into the driving seat of the right vehicle, fuel it up with big money and a compelling grievance narrative and - well who knows how far he and it can go? > > > > It's spooking me and I'm not ashamed to admit it. < > > > _____ > > You're not alone. It's spooking me as well - indeed I said pretty much the same thing last night. Farage has the potential to be a British Trump, except he's cleverer than Trump, and not insane like Trump. FPTP will make it harder for Nigel than it was for Trump, but FPTP is beginning to break down. > > The Tories need to dump TM sharpish, get in Mordaunt (a solid Brexiteer, but, crucially, not BoJo) > > Then there's the small problem of fixing Brexit but hey. Baby steps. > > > > - ———————————————— Both the Tory and Labour MPs on last week’s TWIW agreed that the voting system is now broken.
"I don't believe a Corbyn-led Labour Party will ever offer a 2nd vote."
*
Because he actively wants Brexit? I know many think that. And perhaps he does. But IMO what he wants above all else is to be PM, he wants power, and this will require winning a GE.
So come that GE, if it is before Brexit, which it most probably will be, I reckon that he and his team will ask themselves one simple question: If we offer Ref2 will it materially improve our chances of winning?
And if the answer is YES, which I think will be the case, they will do it. But if not, they won't.
I don't see how Labour will conclude that shifting to an even more anti-Brexit / pro-2ndref position is in their electoral interests, if the European elections show them in a comfortable first place in Labour Remain areas (including London) while losing to the Brexit Party in Labour Leave areas.
Question: if an ordinary person like you or me broke the official secrets act, would the police wait for an official complaint before doing something about it?
> @RobD said: > When you plug these numbers into Electoral Calculus, the Brexit Party wins 394 seats, to 153 for Labour. > > How does it handle a new party? I thought it was all based on swings.
I think you could relatively safely map the Brexit party vote share onto the distribution of either the Leave vote in the referendum, or the votes for UKIP in 2015.
> @AndyJS said: > Question: if an ordinary person like you or me broke the official secrets act, would the police wait for an official complaint before doing something about it?
There would be an official complaint quickly so the situation doesn't arise. It's why there hasn't been an official complaint that is the question.
> @Danny565 said: > @Thayer5 said: > > "I don't believe a Corbyn-led Labour Party will ever offer a 2nd vote." > > * > > Because he actively wants Brexit? I know many think that. And perhaps he does. But IMO what he wants above all else is to be PM, he wants power, and this will require winning a GE. > > So come that GE, if it is before Brexit, which it most probably will be, I reckon that he and his team will ask themselves one simple question: If we offer Ref2 will it materially improve our chances of winning? > > And if the answer is YES, which I think will be the case, they will do it. But if not, they won't. > > I don't see how Labour will conclude that shifting to an even more anti-Brexit / pro-2ndref position is in their electoral interests, if the European elections show them in a comfortable first place in Labour Remain areas (including London) while losing to the Brexit Party in Labour Leave areas.
____________
EU elections - PR UK elections - FPTP. Very different outcomes if BP is on 25%.
Question: if an ordinary person like you or me broke the official secrets act, would the police wait for an official complaint before doing something about it?
The government has already backtracked from the "Williamson is a danger to the state" nonsense being peddled by Liddington by saying that he was sacked for breaching the Ministerial Code rather than for breaking the law.
Circumstantial evidence may well be sufficient for the former but it most certainly is not for the latter.
BTW I'm intrigued at how @SirNorfolkPassmore knows so much about the evidence against Williamson and what he failed to produce by way of rebuttal. Where does this come from? Or is it purely an assumption?
2019 GE odds have really plummeted over the last few weeks.
About 6 weeks ago (?) it was odds on.
It's been drifting steadily since then and today has just gone above 4 - last matched at 4.2.
No doubt everyone remembers the endless posts on here about an imminent GE - and indeed the identity of the posters who churned out all those repetitive posts!
> @OblitusSumMe said: > > @AndyJS said: > > Question: if an ordinary person like you or me broke the official secrets act, would the police wait for an official complaint before doing something about it? > > There would be an official complaint quickly so the situation doesn't arise. It's why there hasn't been an official complaint that is the question.
Surely anyone can make the complaint. There isn't a special type of person who gets privileges when making complaints to the police, is there?
Question: if an ordinary person like you or me broke the official secrets act, would the police wait for an official complaint before doing something about it?
The government has already backtracked from the "Williamson is a danger to the state" nonsense being peddled by Liddington by saying that he was sacked for breaching the Ministerial Code rather than for breaking the law.
Circumstantial evidence may well be sufficient for the former but it most certainly is not for the latter.
BTW I'm intrigued at how @SirNorfolkPassmore knows so much about the evidence against Williamson and what he failed to produce by way of rebuttal. Where does this come from? Or is it purely an assumption?
Like most comments here (and I include my own here), it’s probably the latter.
I don't know who to vote for today. I don't want to vote for the Conservatives but the only alternatives in my area are a Labour candidate and an independent who used to be Labour until recently. Maybe a spoilt paper is the only thing to do.
> @AndyJS said: > > @OblitusSumMe said: > > > @AndyJS said: > > > Question: if an ordinary person like you or me broke the official secrets act, would the police wait for an official complaint before doing something about it? > > > > There would be an official complaint quickly so the situation doesn't arise. It's why there hasn't been an official complaint that is the question. > > Surely anyone can make the complaint. There isn't a special type of person who gets privileges when making complaints to the police, is there?
Unlikely that a random person will be able to claim with confidence that someone broke that particular law.
> "I don't believe a Corbyn-led Labour Party will ever offer a 2nd vote."
>
> *
>
> Because he actively wants Brexit? I know many think that. And perhaps he does. But IMO what he wants above all else is to be PM, he wants power, and this will require winning a GE.
>
> So come that GE, if it is before Brexit, which it most probably will be, I reckon that he and his team will ask themselves one simple question: If we offer Ref2 will it materially improve our chances of winning?
>
> And if the answer is YES, which I think will be the case, they will do it. But if not, they won't.
>
> I don't see how Labour will conclude that shifting to an even more anti-Brexit / pro-2ndref position is in their electoral interests, if the European elections show them in a comfortable first place in Labour Remain areas (including London) while losing to the Brexit Party in Labour Leave areas.
____________
EU elections - PR
UK elections - FPTP.
Very different outcomes if BP is on 25%.
Maybe, but perception is everything in how parties respond to mid-term elections. And the idea that Labour are going to respond to an election in which the only party to defeat them is the *Brexit Party* by becoming even more anti-Brexit is crazy!
No matter how many times people put out misleading statistics about the "majority of Labour supporters wanting a referendum", it's going to be actual election results that matter.
394 seats for the Brexit Party would make an interesting House of Commons (and winning them on 30% of the vote, they could just as easily lose almost all of them next time around).
There are usually some Tory tellers on my local polling station - just across from where I work. I don't think they are doing anything meaningful beyond showing the flag. They don't appear to do the whole canvassing and knocking up bit. But this a rural area and it gives them a chance to chat with their friends, so they are usually there most of the afternoon up until early evening.
Not a soul so far.
I don't know what it means, if anything. But I guess it will marginally depress turnout since there must have been at least a few votes that only got cast because someone stopped to talk who might otherwise of walked past.
> @Sean_F said: > > 394 seats for the Brexit Party would make an interesting House of Commons (and winning them on 30% of the vote, they could just as easily lose almost all of them next time around).
Particularly as they would have to implement some of the Blessed Nigel's non European policies.
Comments
It's probably why the likes of Google, Amazon, Facebook and Microsoft design their own network kit and servers nowadays, with their own software builds running on it. Of course they can afford to go down this route, they have the money and skills, and the incentive to do it right when they are hosting so much of other companies data and services.
If you are a carrier wanting to build a 5G network due to consolidation over the last decade or so your remainging choices are:
1. Nokia - which has bits of Siemens, Alcatel, and Lucent; and Lucent itself was once part of AT&T.
2. Ericsson - which has bits of Nortel and Marconi.
3. Samsung
4. Huawei
5. ZTE
So if you eliminate Huawei and ZTE because they are Chinese, and that really does seem to be the what the argument against them boils down to, you are left with only three suppliers to choose from.
Now the problem with that is one way of mitigating risk, is to build a network using a range of equipment so that no single risk, whether it's a security risk, or a bug, or commercial failure, can result in severe network degradation.
Being restricted to three suppliers means less competiton for contracts and less diversity in equipment, as a carrier you will almost certainly end up paying more for a worse network, where if there is an issue (of whatever type) it impacts more of your network than it might otherwise.
This is also why "buy British" makes no sense, because being sensible about it you wouldn't want to restrict yourself to a single British supplier. We'd need to come up with a plan to create say at least three successful British carrier equipment suppliers, otherwise we are going to end up with too many eggs in one basket.
There are no easy answers to the question of whose kit should be allowed in our networks.
On Tuesday I am apparently taking delivery of 97 kitchen appliances including 24 ovens, 24 dishwashers and 24 fridge/freezers.
Anybody want one! I only want 1 of each.
Almost on a par with the HMRC letter I received a few weeks ago telling me that I don't get child benefit (I know) and that the child benefit I don't get is going up (nice to know, but of no interest to me) and that as of Sept this year I will stop getting the child benefit that I don't get.
Who writes these letters?
https://twitter.com/MatthewdAncona/status/1123923701567823874
Can you imagine?
> > @Danny565 said:
> > Are shy Tories back in force? Thats what I'm wondering looking at polls
> >
> > At these polling levels the Conservatives must be hoping that they're not so much shy as reclusive.
> >
> >
> > As Stephen Bush says, one of the big mysteries of the local elections is, what will the many people who go to the polling stations today intending to vote for the Brexit Party do when they get a ballot paper without them on it?
>
> A similar issue arises for Change UK supporters. My guess is that they will vote LibDem, pushing up the LD share of the vote to the point where they can claim unequivocally to be the voice of Remain and, paradoxically, seal the fate of Change UK.
>
>
The difference being that, according to most polls (YouGov is a semi-exception), there aren't enough Change UK supporters to make a bit of difference to anything.
- A3 cut lengthways so it sticks out of the letterbox.
- "Former Chairman of local Labour Party accepted Police Caution for lying on Election Leaflet" (true)
- Conservatives cannot win here
- "Jeremy Corbyn's Man"
- "You do not need your polling card to vote"
But where's my Bar Chart?
> https://twitter.com/rowandobbins/status/1123860281451524096?s=21
UKIP are the late 70s NF under Batten. Scum.
What worries me is that regardless of your views on Corbyn, it seems extremely clear from PB and twitter that opponents of Labour are now much, much more willing to uncritically accept the arguments of people in group 1 for political reasons. Take pb yesterday, where several people happily accepted that a protest against a fundraiser for recruitment from oversees into the IDF was antisemitic based on deliberate disinformation from some pro-Israel journalists. And one reason that's so worrying is because accepting group 1 helps group 2.
As a separate point, on Corbyn, what evidence do you mean? The way I see it, there's two possible Corbyns: Corbyn A is antisemitic, Corbyn B is anti-Israel and suspicious of the tactics of group 1 but not antisemitic. Starting from premise that Corbyn is Corbyn A, what's the evidence against that? What about Corbyn B?
I'd say that him attending a seder (which very much looked like it was just a decision he made, not a political stunt) is consistent with Corbyn B but not Corbyn A. What do you have which is consistent with Corbyn A but not Corbyn B?
If Williamson is so offended, is there anything to stop him launching a Judicial Review?
Edit - their poster and placard game is quite strong this time compared to 17
Stoke, Ashfield and Wigan are three very different places. The Brexit Party will not beat Labour in Wigan. Don't know the other two well enough to say.
All 3 Wigan constituencies were comfortably 50% plus Labour last time. UKIP has zero presence on the Council and never has had.
The Tory vote, as was, tends to be middle class. Manchester commuters and self employed tradesmen and the like. This can be seen by the poorer wards of the Borough correlating strongly with the highest Labour shares and lowest Conservative. Highest Tory shares are in areas of new build detached and semi detached housing.
There are some very, very nice bits of Wigan, with highly affordable housing, and good schools. The population of the borough is rising, as part of Manchester overspill.
> Are shy Tories back in force? Thats what I'm wondering looking at polls
> At these polling levels the Conservatives must be hoping that they're not so much shy as reclusive.
> As Stephen Bush says, one of the big mysteries of the local elections is, what will the many people who go to the polling stations today intending to vote for the Brexit Party do when they get a ballot paper without them on it?
______
Most people are 'sick of Brexit', i.e. the 3-year ongoing process, 'want it to go away' and don't care strongly if we leave or stay. They're more concerned about 10s of other things.
> On Topic:
>
>
>
> If Williamson is so offended, is there anything to stop him launching a Judicial Review?
>
> Surely May can sack her ministers at will?
She can. All gavin can do is swear on other peoples lives it wasn't him, which is terribly brave of him
> I bet the EU are thrilled at the prospect of 25 faragists taking their seats
What's their half-life? Will it be as short as a UKIP MEP?
> > @dyedwoolie said:
> > I bet the EU are thrilled at the prospect of 25 faragists taking their seats
>
> What's their half-life? Will it be as short as a UKIP MEP?
If we dont Brexit they will all have defected to Farage 3.0 by 2024
> O/T - Nobody reads what they send out these days!
>
> On Tuesday I am apparently taking delivery of 97 kitchen appliances including 24 ovens, 24 dishwashers and 24 fridge/freezers.
>
> Anybody want one! I only want 1 of each.
>
> Almost on a par with the HMRC letter I received a few weeks ago telling me that I don't get child benefit (I know) and that the child benefit I don't get is going up (nice to know, but of no interest to me) and that as of Sept this year I will stop getting the child benefit that I don't get.
>
> Who writes these letters?
A computer who hasn't been told to use its discretion.
The UKIP leads over Labour in Stoke and Ashfield were 8% and 10% respectively, so the BP will thrash them there if that YouGov poll is anywhere near accurate. And there's a ton of other Labour places in the North and the Midlands where the same will apply.
> > @kjh said:
> > O/T - Nobody reads what they send out these days!
> >
> > On Tuesday I am apparently taking delivery of 97 kitchen appliances including 24 ovens, 24 dishwashers and 24 fridge/freezers.
> >
> > Anybody want one! I only want 1 of each.
> >
> > Almost on a par with the HMRC letter I received a few weeks ago telling me that I don't get child benefit (I know) and that the child benefit I don't get is going up (nice to know, but of no interest to me) and that as of Sept this year I will stop getting the child benefit that I don't get.
> >
> > Who writes these letters?
>
> A computer who hasn't been told to use its discretion.
In february I had a letter from DWP telling me theh had all the info they needed to make a decision. I got it again late April. It's a functional dept for sure
> https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1123913065613885449
Go Nige!!!!!!!!!!!
> Apologies. Quote button is causing the site to crash on my IPad for some reason.
>
> Stoke, Ashfield and Wigan are three very different places. The Brexit Party will not beat Labour in Wigan. Don't know the other two well enough to say.
>
> All 3 Wigan constituencies were comfortably 50% plus Labour last time. UKIP has zero presence on the Council and never has had.
>
> The Tory vote, as was, tends to be middle class. Manchester commuters and self employed tradesmen and the like. This can be seen by the poorer wards of the Borough correlating strongly with the highest Labour shares and lowest Conservative. Highest Tory shares are in areas of new build detached and semi detached housing.
>
> There are some very, very nice bits of Wigan, with highly affordable housing, and good schools. The population of the borough is rising, as part of Manchester overspill.
>
> Wigan is less likely admittedly, but not impossible, judging by the 2014 European results. A 2% UKIP lead over Labour nationally translated into an 8% Labour lead in Wigan... so a 9% national Brexit lead over Labour this time would likely make Wigan too close to call, but with Labour maybe a hair ahead.
>
> The UKIP leads over Labour in Stoke and Ashfield were 8% and 10% respectively, so the BP will thrash them there if that YouGov poll is anywhere near accurate. And there's a ton of other Labour places in the North and the Midlands where the same will apply.
Labour 2019 arent as popular as Ed's 2014 vintage were, they will underperform 2014s in vote share I believe
"I was going to like your post in a spirit of pure passive aggression. But then I thought, no, we are better than that."
*
We are. And no need for 'like' when I can do a little smiley face. So much more rustic and real.
:-)
On topic. I don't know about the Tories being scared of Nigel Farage but I certainly am. His breezy 'True Brit' persona appeals to so many different groups and they are all sizable - the gin'n'jags, the old dears and colonels, the salt of the earths, the 'it's basic common sense' brigade, lots and lots of people, and on top of that there are plenty of others who have little interest in politics who just like him because he comes across as affable and entertaining.
He is the perfect leader for a mass populist right movement in this country. Put him into the driving seat of the right vehicle, fuel it up with big money and a compelling grievance narrative and - well who knows how far he and it can go?
It's spooking me and I'm not ashamed to admit it.
> @Ishmael_Z said:
>
> "I was going to like your post in a spirit of pure passive aggression. But then I thought, no, we are better than that."
>
> *
>
> We are. And no need for 'like' when I can do a little smiley face. So much more rustic and real.
>
> :-)
>
> On topic. I don't know about the Tories being scared of Nigel Farage but I certainly am. His breezy 'True Brit' persona appeals to so many different groups and they are all sizable - the gin'n'jags, the old dears and colonels, the salt of the earths, the 'it's basic common sense' brigade, lots and lots of people, and on top of that there are plenty of others who have little interest in politics who just like him because he comes across as affable and entertaining.
>
> He is the perfect leader for a mass populist right movement in this country. Put him into the driving seat of the right vehicle, fuel it up with big money and a compelling grievance narrative and - well who knows how far he and it can go?
>
> It's spooking me and I'm not ashamed to admit it.
It's not Farage that's scary, hes John the Baptist (or the anti thereof), its what Farage lets in after he gets bored and wanders off again.........
> When you plug these numbers into Electoral Calculus, the Brexit Party wins 394 seats, to 153 for Labour.
>
> How does it handle a new party? I thought it was all based on swings.
I don't know at all.
But, when you have five or six-way splits, it may well be correct that 30% could deliver a landslide.
> > @williamglenn said:
> > https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1123913065613885449
>
> Go Nige!!!!!!!!!!!
While I don't underestimate the difficulties in doing so, I suspect remainers will end up regretting not being able to form a single alliance for this campaign. CUK+GRN+LD would likely have given Nigel a run for his money (and demonstrated to Jezza how the left won't hang around behind him forever).
Heartening to see Gerard's UKIP disappearing up its own fundament though, especially after that "quislings, traitors and collaborators" nonsense yesterday, basically pitching the EU as a wartime enemy. Sickening.
> There are two broad things going on here:
>
> 1) People calling justifiable criticism of Israel anti-Semitism, to protect Israel.
> 2) People hiding their anti-Semitism behind criticism of Israel, to protect their anti-Semitism.
>
> IMV the evidence for Corbyn to be firmly in the second category is fairly strong.
>
> I agree both of those things are going on. And furthermore there's an unholy tacit (and in some extreme cases- especially among non-Jewish neocons- explicit) alliance between the people in group 1 and group 2.
>
> What worries me is that regardless of your views on Corbyn, it seems extremely clear from PB and twitter that opponents of Labour are now much, much more willing to uncritically accept the arguments of people in group 1 for political reasons. Take pb yesterday, where several people happily accepted that a protest against a fundraiser for recruitment from oversees into the IDF was antisemitic based on deliberate disinformation from some pro-Israel journalists. And one reason that's so worrying is because accepting group 1 helps group 2.
>
> As a separate point, on Corbyn, what evidence do you mean? The way I see it, there's two possible Corbyns: Corbyn A is antisemitic, Corbyn B is anti-Israel and suspicious of the tactics of group 1 but not antisemitic. Starting from premise that Corbyn is Corbyn A, what's the evidence against that? What about Corbyn B?
>
> I'd say that him attending a seder (which very much looked like it was just a decision he made, not a political stunt) is consistent with Corbyn B but not Corbyn A. What do you have which is consistent with Corbyn A but not Corbyn B?
I've detailed some of the evidence before several times - except now there's more to add.
There's another thing that should be worrying: Corbyn and his acolytes always fall back on the "He's been an anti-racist all his life." Yet when hes faced with anti-Semitism - whether a mural or a book - he says he fails to recognise it. And when the anti-Semitism is by friends or fellow travellers - e.g. Livingstone - it is ignored for as long as possible.
I'd also say that if you are genuinely anti-racist, you cannot pick and choose the racism you tackle - ignoring racism is letting the racists win, especially when you do do for political reasons.
> On Topic:
>
>
>
> If Williamson is so offended, is there anything to stop him launching a Judicial Review?
>
> Pretty sure that as hiring and firing is the personal prerogative of the PM, the courts will not interfere.
I think he'd have to wait his turn behind Osborne, for starters.
Cabinet selections are (or can be) entirely down to whether your face fits. And probably just as well.. I can see the dangers of having to performance-manage an under par cabinet minister and justify the decision to HR and an employment tribunal
https://twitter.com/BethRigby/status/1123943028480200715
https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1123940032354631680
What a bunch of muppets.
> When you plug these numbers into Electoral Calculus, the Brexit Party wins 394 seats, to 153 for Labour.
The EU elections are not a predictor of Westminster results in any way. As we have seen before.
"It's not Farage that's scary, he's John the Baptist (or the anti thereof), it's what Farage lets in after he gets bored and wanders off again........."
*
We need a Salome and a Dance of the Seven Veils then. Heidi Allen? Or perhaps Chuka Umunna. It's quite a thought, either way.
But yes, what you say raises even more concerns. However, although I don't have the biggest regard for the political intelligence and judgement of the Great British Public, I do think that they are fundamentally, on balance and on the whole, a decent enough bunch, and so I don't think they would go in big numbers with anything or anybody too vulgar.
Let's hope that a few years from now that does not look breathtakingly complacent.
> On topic. I don't know about the Tories being scared of Nigel Farage but I certainly am. His breezy 'True Brit' persona appeals to so many different groups and they are all sizable - the gin'n'jags, the old dears and colonels, the salt of the earths, the 'it's basic common sense' brigade, lots and lots of people, and on top of that there are plenty of others who have little interest in politics who just like him because he comes across as affable and entertaining.
>
> He is the perfect leader for a mass populist right movement in this country. Put him into the driving seat of the right vehicle, fuel it up with big money and a compelling grievance narrative and - well who knows how far he and it can go?
>
> It's spooking me and I'm not ashamed to admit it. <
_____
You're not alone. It's spooking me as well - indeed I said pretty much the same thing last night. Farage has the potential to be a British Trump, except he's cleverer than Trump, and not insane like Trump. FPTP will make it harder for Nigel than it was for Trump, but FPTP is beginning to break down.
The Tories need to dump TM sharpish, get in Mordaunt (a solid Brexiteer, but, crucially, not BoJo)
Then there's the small problem of fixing Brexit but hey. Baby steps.
> Not a leak.
>
> https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1123940032354631680
>
> What a bunch of muppets.
The actual information, though, that Williamson remains a Privy Counsellor, is totally unsurprising.
It's a life position with no mechanism for removal, and there are currently around 600. In practice, it's pretty meaningless. The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council still has an important role, but that's only open to judges who are PCs, not former fireplace salesmen.
There have been a handful of resignations from the Privy Council - Profumo, Aitken, and Huhne resigned and with it lost the "Right Honourable" title.
> > @williamglenn said:
> > https://twitter.com/rowandobbins/status/1123860281451524096?s=21
>
> UKIP are the late 70s NF under Batten. Scum.
They always were, still are, and the Brexit Party are no different. We think we are immune from fascism because "we won the war". We are not. People are lapping it up, and Farage loves it.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privy_Council_of_the_United_Kingdom
So perhaps the "decent enough bunch" is smaller than we thought?
No elections here in London and my days of dashing off to Tandridge, Woking or Brentwood to deliver, tell and knock up on polling day are long past. I wish all candidates and their workers well.
On Williamson, the technicality is although the word "sacked" has been used, he was forced to resign and presumably he is entitled to a resignation statement in the Commons which may be interesting. Most are dull but Sir Geoffrey Howe's wasn't as I recall and Williamson could cause a lot of trouble if he so chose.
Somebody somewhere must have some compelling evidence Williamson or someone in the MOD was responsible for the leak and I simply don't buy OGH's assertion this was some plan to make the PM look strong before the local elections. You don't sack the Defence Secretary just to save a couple of councillors.
As to those local elections, I've long maintained the story will be of well-organised well-funded groups of Independents taking seats off the main parties. There will be some surprises and the fact the postal votes went in over Easter when the mood was more febrile might accentuate any problems for the Conservatives and possibly Labour too.
> You're not alone. It's spooking me as well - indeed I said pretty much the same thing last night. Farage has the potential to be a British Trump, except he's cleverer than Trump, and not insane like Trump. FPTP will make it harder for Nigel than it was for Trump, but FPTP is beginning to break down.
>
> The Tories need to dump TM sharpish, get in Mordaunt (a solid Brexiteer, but, crucially, not BoJo)
>
> Then there's the small problem of fixing Brexit but hey. Baby steps.
FPTP makes the initial steps more difficult, but it them makes it much easier for a figure like Farage to win a majority.
With a well-split vote he wouldn't even need one-third of the vote to become PM.
"You're not alone. It's spooking me as well - indeed I said pretty much the same thing last night. Farage has the potential to be a British Trump, except he's cleverer than Trump, and not insane like Trump. FPTP will make it harder for Nigel than it was for Trump, but FPTP is beginning to break down.
The Tories need to dump TM sharpish, get in Mordaunt (a solid Brexiteer, but, crucially, not BoJo)
Then there's the small problem of fixing Brexit but hey. Baby steps."
*
To me it looks like the politics and the numbers prevent any Brexit getting through this parliament.
So Mordaunt (or whichever new PM) will need to first win a General Election. Which they might, but my hunch is that Labour will offer Ref2 at that point and it is they who will win.
Corbyn and Remain versus Tories and Hard Brexit. That's what you call a real and meaningful choice. No sitting on the fence for that one.
The list of suspects is extremely short. Williamson uniquely spoke with the very Telegraph journalist who broke the story. Williamson uniquely failed to be candid with the inquiry about his contacts etc in the aftermath of the story breaking. Williamson was already widely and correctly regarded as a little twerp whose ambition vastly outstrips his negligible abilities.
Against that, the case for the defence appears to be that he vehemently denies it and swears (rather tastelessly) "on his children's lives" that he didn't do it. But vehement denial is worth jack - the prisons are full of old lags who swear blind they did nothing.
Case closed - the fat kid covered in crumbs and with chocolate chip stains on his teeth is the one who nicked the cookies, despite all his wailing that it wasn't him.
Why is it that some people bend over backwards to find a conspiracy or to deny the bleedin' obvious simply because some arrogant sod is loudly proclaiming their innocence way beyond the point that any decent person would say "fair cop"?
> @Thayer5 said:
>
> "You're not alone. It's spooking me as well - indeed I said pretty much the same thing last night. Farage has the potential to be a British Trump, except he's cleverer than Trump, and not insane like Trump. FPTP will make it harder for Nigel than it was for Trump, but FPTP is beginning to break down.
>
> The Tories need to dump TM sharpish, get in Mordaunt (a solid Brexiteer, but, crucially, not BoJo)
>
> Then there's the small problem of fixing Brexit but hey. Baby steps."
>
> *
>
> To me it looks like the politics and the numbers prevent any Brexit getting through this parliament.
>
> So Mordaunt (or whichever new PM) will need to first win a General Election. Which they might, but my hunch is that Labour will offer Ref2 at that point and it is they who will win.
>
> Corbyn and Remain versus Tories and Hard Brexit. That's what you call a real and meaningful choice. No sitting on the fence for that one.
The Brexit Party would probably do what UKIP did in 2015 - deny Labour a lot of votes in poorer parts of the South of England.
> Low turnout is going to be the winner, based on what I’ve experienced. Empty polling station when I went, empty car park and only three names ticked off on the sheet with my details - the other two being my wife and youngest daughter. The electorate clearly suffering from a severe bout of NFI and who can’t blame them.
This sounds very bad news for the blues. My rule of thumb is that the 8am - 6pm shift is where the Conservatives win it, as that's pensioner voting time. Reasonably brisk turnout in that period, and the rest might as well pack up and go home. Now they may be saved partially if there's no post-work flurry, but that remains to be seen.
> To me it looks like the politics and the numbers prevent any Brexit getting through this parliament.
>
> So Mordaunt (or whichever new PM) will need to first win a General Election. Which they might, but my hunch is that Labour will offer Ref2 at that point and it is they who will win.
Corbyn and Remain versus Tories and Hard Brexit. That's what you call a real and meaningful choice. No sitting on the fence for that one. <
____
I don't believe a Corbyn-led Labour Party will ever offer a 2nd vote.
Given the circumstances of the by-election, and that people usually use by-elections to kick the government, I'd expect Labour and the Conservatives to finish lower than that.
Realistically, if anyone is to beat Labour, they need to win a vote share in the mid 30's.
> > @AmpfieldAndy said:
> > Low turnout is going to be the winner, based on what I’ve experienced. Empty polling station when I went, empty car park and only three names ticked off on the sheet with my details - the other two being my wife and youngest daughter. The electorate clearly suffering from a severe bout of NFI and who can’t blame them.
>
> This sounds very bad news for the blues. My rule of thumb is that the 8am - 6pm shift is where the Conservatives win it, as that's pensioner voting time. Reasonably brisk turnout in that period, and the rest might as well pack up and go home. Now they may be saved partially if there's no post-work flurry, but that remains to be seen.
Increasingly, the pensioners vote by post. Postal voting on demand was meant to help Labour, but it actually helped the Conservatives.
> I'm amazed at those giving a moment's serious thought to the notion that Williamson is telling the truth.
>
> The list of suspects is extremely short. Williamson uniquely spoke with the very Telegraph journalist who broke the story. Williamson uniquely failed to be candid with the inquiry about his contacts etc in the aftermath of the story breaking. Williamson was already widely and correctly regarded as a little twerp whose ambition vastly outstrips his negligible abilities.
>
> Against that, the case for the defence appears to be that he vehemently denies it and swears (rather tastelessly) "on his children's lives" that he didn't do it. But vehement denial is worth jack - the prisons are full of old lags who swear blind they did nothing.
>
> Case closed - the fat kid covered in crumbs and with chocolate chip stains on his teeth is the one who nicked the cookies, despite all his wailing that it wasn't him.
>
> Why is it that some people bend over backwards to find a conspiracy or to deny the bleedin' obvious simply because some arrogant sod is loudly proclaiming their innocence way beyond the point that any decent person would say "fair cop"?
Williamson doesn’t have to prove anything - innocent until proven guilty. The case against Williamson is all circumstantial - nothing concrete at all. The only part of you comment that makes sense is that he is an over ambitious twerp of dubious ability. That however doesn’t make him guilty. May promoted him and acted in haste looking for a scapegoat. She is the one who needs firing.
> @SirNorfolkPassmore because May and her team have a habit of being economical with the truth. For evidence see: the last 2 years.
I'm no defender of May. But he admits he spoke to the journalist in question, and has offered nothing substantive (where is his note of the call? Where is his evidence that he promptly admitted the conversation and provided details?)
Further, while we are told the civil servant has some sort of "vendetta" against him, where is the evidence? And why does the civil servant risk a long and distinguished career to deal with a here today, gone tomorrow cabinet minister who isn't alone in being a bit annoying.
No, the case in defence of Williamson is daft conspiracy theory, plain and simple.
> > @kinabalu said:
>
> > To me it looks like the politics and the numbers prevent any Brexit getting through this parliament.
> >
> > So Mordaunt (or whichever new PM) will need to first win a General Election. Which they might, but my hunch is that Labour will offer Ref2 at that point and it is they who will win.
>
> Corbyn and Remain versus Tories and Hard Brexit. That's what you call a real and meaningful choice. No sitting on the fence for that one. <
>
> ____
>
> I don't believe a Corbyn-led Labour Party will ever offer a 2nd vote.
Agreed. It will be a "Labour Brexit" in any manifesto with Corbyn as leader.
> > @SirNorfolkPassmore said:
> > > @AmpfieldAndy said:
> > > Low turnout is going to be the winner, based on what I’ve experienced. Empty polling station when I went, empty car park and only three names ticked off on the sheet with my details - the other two being my wife and youngest daughter. The electorate clearly suffering from a severe bout of NFI and who can’t blame them.
> >
> > This sounds very bad news for the blues. My rule of thumb is that the 8am - 6pm shift is where the Conservatives win it, as that's pensioner voting time. Reasonably brisk turnout in that period, and the rest might as well pack up and go home. Now they may be saved partially if there's no post-work flurry, but that remains to be seen.
>
> Increasingly, the pensioners vote by post. Postal voting on demand was meant to help Labour, but it actually helped the Conservatives.
Postal votes are still marked off on the election officers list of registered voters. To have only 3 voters voting by 3pm is bad news. Here it’s bad news for the Tories because the ward councillor is Tory - elsewhere might be different.
> When you plug these numbers into Electoral Calculus, the Brexit Party wins 394 seats, to 153 for Labour.
LOl! Brexit Party landslide. Con suffer SLAB style wipeout.
Would certainly be one of the more entertaining general election nights wouldn't it?
https://www.twitter.com/spreadsheetben/status/1123930649386258432
> > @Sean_F said:
> > When you plug these numbers into Electoral Calculus, the Brexit Party wins 394 seats, to 153 for Labour.
>
> LOl! Brexit Party landslide. Con suffer SLAB style wipeout.
>
> Would certainly be one of the more entertaining general election nights wouldn't it?
Still backable at about 12/1
> When you plug these numbers into Electoral Calculus, the Brexit Party wins 394 seats, to 153 for Labour.
Well, that would get rid of the need for any second vote.....
"I don't believe a Corbyn-led Labour Party will ever offer a 2nd vote."
*
Because he actively wants Brexit? I know many think that. And perhaps he does. But IMO what he wants above all else is to be PM, he wants power, and this will require winning a GE.
So come that GE, if it is before Brexit, which it most probably will be, I reckon that he and his team will ask themselves one simple question: If we offer Ref2 will it materially improve our chances of winning?
And if the answer is YES, which I think will be the case, they will do it. If not, they won't.
> > @SirNorfolkPassmore said:
>
> > > @AmpfieldAndy said:
>
> > > Low turnout is going to be the winner, based on what I’ve experienced. Empty polling station when I went, empty car park and only three names ticked off on the sheet with my details - the other two being my wife and youngest daughter. The electorate clearly suffering from a severe bout of NFI and who can’t blame them.
>
> >
>
> > This sounds very bad news for the blues. My rule of thumb is that the 8am - 6pm shift is where the Conservatives win it, as that's pensioner voting time. Reasonably brisk turnout in that period, and the rest might as well pack up and go home. Now they may be saved partially if there's no post-work flurry, but that remains to be seen.
>
>
>
> Increasingly, the pensioners vote by post. Postal voting on demand was meant to help Labour, but it actually helped the Conservatives.
>
> The guy behind Britain Elects claims postal turnout lower than 2011, no idea on where he’s hearing that from so take with salt.
>
> https://www.twitter.com/spreadsheetben/status/1123930649386258432
Makes sense.
Con voters just stay at home and seethe today. That will have a big impact on turnout.
> Williamson doesn’t have to prove anything - innocent until proven guilty. The case against Williamson is all circumstantial - nothing concrete at all. The only part of you comment that makes sense is that he is an over ambitious twerp of dubious ability. That however doesn’t make him guilty. May promoted him and acted in haste looking for a scapegoat. She is the one who needs firing.
There is nothing wrong with circumstantial evidence and, in the absence of confiscating a journalist's notepad (which isn't something an internal inquiry can or should be able to do) it is all you are going to get.
All it means for evidence to be circumstantial is that in theory there could be more than one explanation. It's perfectly legitimate to accept weight of circumstantial evidence where those alternatives simply aren't credible. In theory, could Williamson's call with the journalist between the meeting and the story being broken have been wholly innocent? Yes. Is it at all credible? Is it heck - Williamson was less than candid, he's produced no notes of his own, there's no evidence of others on the extremely short list of suspects or their close associates having similar contact, and the guy has form as a dim, duplicitous oik.
So you can buy into to Gav's innocent explanation if you like, but excuse me if I find it utterly laughable.
> > @Gallowgate said:
> > @SirNorfolkPassmore because May and her team have a habit of being economical with the truth. For evidence see: the last 2 years.
>
> I'm no defender of May. But he admits he spoke to the journalist in question, and has offered nothing substantive (where is his note of the call? Where is his evidence that he promptly admitted the conversation and provided details?)
>
> Further, while we are told the civil servant has some sort of "vendetta" against him, where is the evidence? And why does the civil servant risk a long and distinguished career to deal with a here today, gone tomorrow cabinet minister who isn't alone in being a bit annoying.
>
> No, the case in defence of Williamson is daft conspiracy theory, plain and simple.
There is also, to be fair, a degree of fudge around what actually
was the offence. Was it leaking anything at all, the final decision
(which would shortly and necessarily have been revealed anyway)
or was it the names of which ministers agreed or disagreed on
various details?
It is possible Williamson and May disagree on his guilt because
they disagree on what is the the charge. Williamson might have
pinched the chocolate cookies but not the custard creams.
Otoh the country is probably safer without a defence secretary
wanting to send gunboats up the Yangtse River and telling
Russia to shut up and go away.
> > @SirNorfolkPassmore said:
>
> > > @AmpfieldAndy said:
>
> > > Low turnout is going to be the winner, based on what I’ve experienced. Empty polling station when I went, empty car park and only three names ticked off on the sheet with my details - the other two being my wife and youngest daughter. The electorate clearly suffering from a severe bout of NFI and who can’t blame them.
>
> >
>
> > This sounds very bad news for the blues. My rule of thumb is that the 8am - 6pm shift is where the Conservatives win it, as that's pensioner voting time. Reasonably brisk turnout in that period, and the rest might as well pack up and go home. Now they may be saved partially if there's no post-work flurry, but that remains to be seen.
>
>
>
> Increasingly, the pensioners vote by post. Postal voting on demand was meant to help Labour, but it actually helped the Conservatives.
>
> The guy behind Britain Elects claims postal turnout lower than 2011, no idea on where he’s hearing that from so take with salt.
>
> https://www.twitter.com/spreadsheetben/status/1123930649386258432
———————————————-
It would be very hard to know that at this stage - certainly nationwide as against a few random anecdotes. The information isn’t published or shared with agents so it can only be gossip. And, in any case, handing them in on the day is becoming increasingly common, and given how fast recent events have been moving possibly some people have been waiting until the last minute, in case something suddenly happens.
The innocent until proven guilty sort of comments are a case in point. Its not a court of law, yet, a PM doesnt need beyond reasonable doubt proof. If she has erred that's a concern and I feel bad for him, but enough grounds to lose confidence in him is reasonable to sack. The idea a smoking gun in his hand is needed is laughable.
Corbyn is in the happy position of being able to take his voters for granted. The Tories are not. That alone gives him a pretty good path to victory.
> @kinabalu said:
>
> > On topic. I don't know about the Tories being scared of Nigel Farage but I certainly am. His breezy 'True Brit' persona appeals to so many different groups and they are all sizable - the gin'n'jags, the old dears and colonels, the salt of the earths, the 'it's basic common sense' brigade, lots and lots of people, and on top of that there are plenty of others who have little interest in politics who just like him because he comes across as affable and entertaining.
> >
> > He is the perfect leader for a mass populist right movement in this country. Put him into the driving seat of the right vehicle, fuel it up with big money and a compelling grievance narrative and - well who knows how far he and it can go?
> >
> > It's spooking me and I'm not ashamed to admit it. <
>
>
> _____
>
> You're not alone. It's spooking me as well - indeed I said pretty much the same thing last night. Farage has the potential to be a British Trump, except he's cleverer than Trump, and not insane like Trump. FPTP will make it harder for Nigel than it was for Trump, but FPTP is beginning to break down.
>
> The Tories need to dump TM sharpish, get in Mordaunt (a solid Brexiteer, but, crucially, not BoJo)
>
> Then there's the small problem of fixing Brexit but hey. Baby steps.
>
>
>
>
- ————————————————
Both the Tory and Labour MPs on last week’s TWIW agreed that the voting system is now broken.
https://twitter.com/jameskirkup/status/1123856531416584192
> When you plug these numbers into Electoral Calculus, the Brexit Party wins 394 seats, to 153 for Labour.
>
> How does it handle a new party? I thought it was all based on swings.
I think you could relatively safely map the Brexit party vote share onto the distribution of either the Leave vote in the referendum, or the votes for UKIP in 2015.
> Question: if an ordinary person like you or me broke the official secrets act, would the police wait for an official complaint before doing something about it?
There would be an official complaint quickly so the situation doesn't arise. It's why there hasn't been an official complaint that is the question.
"The Brexit Party would probably do what UKIP did in 2015 - deny Labour a lot of votes in poorer parts of the South of England."
*
But if the Cons were running on Hard Brexit under a Proper Leaver would that not remove Nigel's wherewithal?
> @Thayer5 said:
>
> "I don't believe a Corbyn-led Labour Party will ever offer a 2nd vote."
>
> *
>
> Because he actively wants Brexit? I know many think that. And perhaps he does. But IMO what he wants above all else is to be PM, he wants power, and this will require winning a GE.
>
> So come that GE, if it is before Brexit, which it most probably will be, I reckon that he and his team will ask themselves one simple question: If we offer Ref2 will it materially improve our chances of winning?
>
> And if the answer is YES, which I think will be the case, they will do it. But if not, they won't.
>
> I don't see how Labour will conclude that shifting to an even more anti-Brexit / pro-2ndref position is in their electoral interests, if the European elections show them in a comfortable first place in Labour Remain areas (including London) while losing to the Brexit Party in Labour Leave areas.
____________
EU elections - PR
UK elections - FPTP.
Very different outcomes if BP is on 25%.
Circumstantial evidence may well be sufficient for the former but it most certainly is not for the latter.
BTW I'm intrigued at how @SirNorfolkPassmore knows so much about the evidence against Williamson and what he failed to produce by way of rebuttal. Where does this come from? Or is it purely an assumption?
About 6 weeks ago (?) it was odds on.
It's been drifting steadily since then and today has just gone above 4 - last matched at 4.2.
No doubt everyone remembers the endless posts on here about an imminent GE - and indeed the identity of the posters who churned out all those repetitive posts!
> > @AndyJS said:
> > Question: if an ordinary person like you or me broke the official secrets act, would the police wait for an official complaint before doing something about it?
>
> There would be an official complaint quickly so the situation doesn't arise. It's why there hasn't been an official complaint that is the question.
Surely anyone can make the complaint. There isn't a special type of person who gets privileges when making complaints to the police, is there?
> > @OblitusSumMe said:
> > > @AndyJS said:
> > > Question: if an ordinary person like you or me broke the official secrets act, would the police wait for an official complaint before doing something about it?
> >
> > There would be an official complaint quickly so the situation doesn't arise. It's why there hasn't been an official complaint that is the question.
>
> Surely anyone can make the complaint. There isn't a special type of person who gets privileges when making complaints to the police, is there?
Unlikely that a random person will be able to claim with confidence that someone broke that particular law.
No matter how many times people put out misleading statistics about the "majority of Labour supporters wanting a referendum", it's going to be actual election results that matter.
Not a soul so far.
I don't know what it means, if anything. But I guess it will marginally depress turnout since there must have been at least a few votes that only got cast because someone stopped to talk who might otherwise of walked past.
>
> 394 seats for the Brexit Party would make an interesting House of Commons (and winning them on 30% of the vote, they could just as easily lose almost all of them next time around).
Particularly as they would have to implement some of the Blessed Nigel's non European policies.