Strikes me that the SLAB comparison is far more apt for English Con Party. They are the party in power after all. They held on last time for fear of the alternative, but with very little positive enthusiasm. They have controlled huge swathes of the country with barely a challenge for generations. They then collapsed in Council elections, losing power in places once thought unthinkable. They backed it up by coming third or worse in every district bar one at the Euros. They insouciantly believe a change of leadership will magically place them back at their natural and rightful place in charge. Their campaign has so far been marked by factionalism and back biting, and an almost total lack of ideas or policy beyond one thing. They also now face a rising force on their side of the political spectrum. A force which has one single aim, and which commands great enthusiasm amongst many of their supporters, but which repels others.
Labour's next problem won't be the tack to remain, it'll be the absolute lack of enthusiasm with which Corbyn delivers the half hearted second referendum message.
Vanilla tip: If you middle click on the quote button (or however you normally click to open something in a new tab), the page that opens will be using the old quote style.
You are absolutely right. Can't see any reason why I would not do it like this from now on.
> @dixiedean said: > Strikes me that the SLAB comparison is far more apt for English Con Party. They are the party in power after all. They held on last time for fear of the alternative, but with very little positive enthusiasm. They have controlled huge swathes of the country with barely a challenge for generations. > They then collapsed in Council elections, losing power in places once thought unthinkable. They backed it up by coming third or worse in every district bar one at the Euros. > They insouciantly believe a change of leadership will magically place them back at their natural and rightful place in charge. Their campaign has so far been marked by factionalism and back biting, and an almost total lack of ideas or policy beyond one thing.
Shrewd post. Their saving grace is that they have a model in SLab of what not to do. That doesn't mean they will have learned that lesson, but they might yet.
I don't know what you Tories have planned, there do seem to have been a lot of admiring glances towards the Republicans vote suppression strategies, but short of suspending elections then the Tories remaining in power 'for ever' seem incredibly short, even being generous and assuming we are thinking more 1000 year Tory reich style then I think most of your fellow Tories have realised that isn't happening....
I don't want to dampen your spirits but the reason the rest of the Tories aren't quite so happy is because they have a slightly more realistic view of the Conservatives electoral future.
Yeah good try. A for effort. I shall try to keep the rhetorical devices at their most basic for you in future (maybe forever).
We shall of course see whether or not the Conservatives stay in power at the next GE or are supplanted by Jeremy's Labour Party. Or Nigel for that matter. My view, what with the shenanigans in Scotland and the various competing views internally, oh and the fact that Jeremy (not you, him) is an absolute fucking loon, is that the Labour Party as currently constituted will not be doing the supplanting.
As I responded initially to your first (equally ill-informed) point my view is that if you take Jeremy and his Socialist Wykehamists out of the party and replace them with some more centre-left types, there is a very good chance that Labour could form the next government.
> @ah009 said: > > @GIN1138 said: > > > @TheScreamingEagles said: > > > https://twitter.com/skynews/status/1133670495679860737?s=21 > > > > Oh god they're not still going on about that bloody bus are they? > > It's not about the bus, it's about the statements Johnson made repeatedly in the media. > There is no question he misled the public deliberately; as far as I can tell the main question at stake here is whether or not the relevant legislation covers this, and in my inexpert opinion it does not. > > Johnson will walk free and in the criminal sense is entirely innocent.
> @Pulpstar said: > Labour's next problem won't be the tack to remain, it'll be the absolute lack of enthusiasm with which Corbyn delivers the half hearted second referendum message.
I agree. It's a massive problem for Labour. I'm sure McDonnell also agrees with you. Will he take action by gently persuading Corbyn to set aside for someone who believes in his socialist agenda but is more voter friendly? Not himself obviously but one of the women.
> @Wulfrun_Phil said: > > @Mysticrose said: > > Excellent post by Mike. > > > On the contrary, I have rarely read a thread header here that I have disagreed with more. I disagree that it is "rubbish thinking" that Labour is vulnerable in its Leave voting Westminster seat (or at least many of them). In fact it is "rubbish thinking" to dismiss that threat. >
My guess is that this idea Labour Leavers don't care enough about Brexit to vote for other parties will crash and burn like the narrative we had on here for years that no one cared about the EU and it was a non-issue... And then we voted to leave.
> @Wulfrun_Phil said: > > @Mysticrose said: > > Excellent post by Mike. > > > On the contrary, I have rarely read a thread header here that I have disagreed with more. I disagree that it is "rubbish thinking" that Labour is vulnerable in its Leave voting Westminster seat (or at least many of them). In fact it is "rubbish thinking" to dismiss that threat. > > What people are forgetting is that Labour built a successful campaign* in 2017 around a position of defusing Brexit as an issue, which largely allowed them to keep their Leave voters whilst still as it turns out attracting tactical votes from some Remainers in a polarised two party election. Any general election fought in the near future will be very different and the 2019 Euros demonstrated just how vulnerable Labour is in its Leave voting seats, especially some of the marginal gains in 2017 listed above, as well as other narrow holds (e.g Dudley North even before Austin relinquished the whip). > > Note that that does not mean that I am denying that there is a good tactical case for Labour now to tack towards Remain as the least bad option available to it, at least consolidating support amongst those who are at least receptive to a clear message. Significant losses for Labour in strong Leave voting areas are very likely now for Labour - people who are not going to be won back by continued sitting on the fence. If the Tories elect an unequivocal leaver as leader then the "very likely" become the inevitable. In those circumstances, Labour's best bet is to try and hold their support and pick up a few seats in compensation in Remain voting areas to try and contain the net losses to reasonable levels. > > > * Successful at least in terms of a campaign that turned around opinion from the starting point of a huge deficit if not quite reaching the winning post. >
I find it hard to believe that TBP voters in Durham or Doncaster are just Tories on holiday.
> @Barnesian said: > > @Pulpstar said: > > Labour's next problem won't be the tack to remain, it'll be the absolute lack of enthusiasm with which Corbyn delivers the half hearted second referendum message. > > I agree. It's a massive problem for Labour. I'm sure McDonnell also agrees with you. Will he take action by gently persuading Corbyn to set aside for someone who believes in his socialist agenda but is more voter friendly? Not himself obviously but one of the women.
They could do what the Conservatives did and not take a party position on leave/remain. Let Corbyn campaign for Leave and the bulk of the party campaign for Remain. Might actually help Remain.
Vanilla tip: If you middle click on the quote button (or however you normally click to open something in a new tab), the page that opens will be using the old quote style.
You are absolutely right. Can't see any reason why I would not do it like this from now on.
> @ah009 said: > > @GIN1138 said: > > > @TheScreamingEagles said: > > > https://twitter.com/skynews/status/1133670495679860737?s=21 > > > > Oh god they're not still going on about that bloody bus are they? > > It's not about the bus, it's about the statements Johnson made repeatedly in the media. > There is no question he misled the public deliberately; as far as I can tell the main question at stake here is whether or not the relevant legislation covers this, and in my inexpert opinion it does not. > > Johnson will walk free and in the criminal sense is entirely innocent.
Agreed, sadly he will get away with it, though it doesn't mean it is not a worthwhile exercise. As Alan Sugar has pointed out, any CEO who made the kind of wild promises backed by downright lies in the way that politicians like Boris (and Corbyn) do would be locked up for misleading shareholders. It is about time politicians were held to higher regulatory standards than CEOs of public companies.
Vanilla tip: If you middle click on the quote button (or however you normally click to open something in a new tab), the page that opens will be using the old quote style.
On a PC it's right click then select open link in new tab. Thank you. That makes me so happy!
> @TOPPING said: > I don't know what you Tories have planned, there do seem to have been a lot of admiring glances towards the Republicans vote suppression strategies, but short of suspending elections then the Tories remaining in power 'for ever' seem incredibly short, even being generous and assuming we are thinking more 1000 year Tory reich style then I think most of your fellow Tories have realised that isn't happening.... > > I don't want to dampen your spirits but the reason the rest of the Tories aren't quite so happy is because they have a slightly more realistic view of the Conservatives electoral future. > > Yeah good try. A for effort. I shall try to keep the rhetorical devices at their most basic for you in future (maybe forever). > > We shall of course see whether or not the Conservatives stay in power at the next GE or are supplanted by Jeremy's Labour Party. Or Nigel for that matter. My view, what with the shenanigans in Scotland and the various competing views internally, oh and the fact that Jeremy (not you, him) is an absolute fucking loon, is that the Labour Party as currently constituted will not be doing the supplanting. > > As I responded initially to your first (equally ill-informed) point my view is that if you take Jeremy and his Socialist Wykehamists out of the party and replace them with some more centre-left types, there is a very good chance that Labour could form the next government. > > Edit: perhaps you as well.
If they did put someone with some credibility in charge (Kier Starmer would do) I would vote for them for the first time ever (don't tell Conservative Central Office - I need to keep my membership card to vote against Boris)
I suspect that it is true that Labour leavers are generally less motivated than Tory leavers when it comes to the ballot box. However Labour does need to give what was formally its bedrock vote (north and Scotland) a reason to vote for it.
As it continues to move towards metropolitan elitism, there is less and less reason for these people to vote for them.
Vanilla tip: If you middle click on the quote button (or however you normally click to open something in a new tab), the page that opens will be using the old quote style.
On a PC it's right click then select open in new tab. Thank you. That makes me so happy!
> @nico67 said: > The court case against Bozo will help him with the Tory Membership and Leavers. > > He can play the martyr . However it will remind others what a lying charlatan he is . > >
He might just do a Jeffrey Archer - he will need to be very careful
Vanilla tip: If you middle click on the quote button (or however you normally click to open something in a new tab), the page that opens will be using the old quote style.
That is the PB poster of the year title wrapped up for 2019.
Agreed. It might be. The problem for the Tories is that, as I added in an edit, the rising new force, with one simple policy, sits in their natural political territory,, as the SNP to SLAB. There will always be voters of the left to vote Labour. There is, as yet, no competition there in England at least. If you are of the Right there is now a choice.
> I don't know what you Tories have planned, there do seem to have been a lot of admiring glances towards the Republicans vote suppression strategies, but short of suspending elections then the Tories remaining in power 'for ever' seem incredibly short, even being generous and assuming we are thinking more 1000 year Tory reich style then I think most of your fellow Tories have realised that isn't happening....
>
> I don't want to dampen your spirits but the reason the rest of the Tories aren't quite so happy is because they have a slightly more realistic view of the Conservatives electoral future.
>
> Yeah good try. A for effort. I shall try to keep the rhetorical devices at their most basic for you in future (maybe forever).
>
> We shall of course see whether or not the Conservatives stay in power at the next GE or are supplanted by Jeremy's Labour Party. Or Nigel for that matter. My view, what with the shenanigans in Scotland and the various competing views internally, oh and the fact that Jeremy (not you, him) is an absolute fucking loon, is that the Labour Party as currently constituted will not be doing the supplanting.
>
> As I responded initially to your first (equally ill-informed) point my view is that if you take Jeremy and his Socialist Wykehamists out of the party and replace them with some more centre-left types, there is a very good chance that Labour could form the next government.
>
> Edit: perhaps you as well.
If they did put someone with some credibility in charge (Kier Starmer would do) I would vote for them for the first time ever (don't tell Conservative Central Office - I need to keep my membership card to vote against Boris)
I agree, but cannot see a scenario where one of these Corbynite idiots isn't the next leader. They might manage to scrape around and find a woman to prove how radical they are (imagine!), but it will be someone dim like Del Piero or Rayner.
> @Scott_P said: > https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1133682217220235264 > > > > I have no idea if this prosecution will succeed or not (I suspect not), but I do think this is an interesting question. > > There are already clearly some things you cannot say, and you can be prosecuted for saying them. > > A legal case that explores some of those limits is probably of value
For political questions, we have a political remedy.
Consider <em>R (on the application of Wheeler) v Office of the Prime Minister</em>, where Stuart Wheeler's JR in respect of the signing of the Lisbon Treaty was blocked in part because, if you thought the Lisbon Treaty = EU Constitution = breach of government promise, you had a political remedy.
I don't know what you Tories have planned, there do seem to have been a lot of admiring glances towards the Republicans vote suppression strategies, but short of suspending elections then the Tories remaining in power 'for ever' seem incredibly short, even being generous and assuming we are thinking more 1000 year Tory reich style then I think most of your fellow Tories have realised that isn't happening....
I don't want to dampen your spirits but the reason the rest of the Tories aren't quite so happy is because they have a slightly more realistic view of the Conservatives electoral future.
Yeah good try. A for effort. I shall try to keep the rhetorical devices at their most basic for you in future (maybe forever).
We shall of course see whether or not the Conservatives stay in power at the next GE or are supplanted by Jeremy's Labour Party. Or Nigel for that matter. My view, what with the shenanigans in Scotland and the various competing views internally, oh and the fact that Jeremy (not you, him) is an absolute fucking loon, is that the Labour Party as currently constituted will not be doing the supplanting.
As I responded initially to your first (equally ill-informed) point my view is that if you take Jeremy and his Socialist Wykehamists out of the party and replace them with some more centre-left types, there is a very good chance that Labour could form the next government.
Edit: perhaps you as well.
Your original post talked about being glad for Farage and Corbyn because they will mean opposition 'for ever'
A lot of people don't even think the Tories can win the next election but you think you are guaranteed power as long as you have your current opponents, who are damaging you greatly....
Ill informed doesn't cover it, you are telling the fuhrer victory is in sight in April 1945.
> @Scott_P said: > https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1133682217220235264 > > > > I have no idea if this prosecution will succeed or not (I suspect not), but I do think this is an interesting question. > > There are already clearly some things you cannot say, and you can be prosecuted for saying them. > > A legal case that explores some of those limits is probably of value
Boris's barrister seems to be suggesting that his client is at least guilty of low quality political debate
> @Greenwich_Floater said: > I suspect that it is true that Labour leavers are generally less motivated than Tory leavers when it comes to the ballot box. However Labour does need to give what was formally its bedrock vote (north and Scotland) a reason to vote for it. > > As it continues to move towards metropolitan elitism, there is less and less reason for these people to vote for them.
That’s a good point . What’s happening to Labour is similar to what’s happening with the Dems in the USA.
> > Oh god they're not still going on about that bloody bus are they?
>
> It's not about the bus, it's about the statements Johnson made repeatedly in the media.
> There is no question he misled the public deliberately; as far as I can tell the main question at stake here is whether or not the relevant legislation covers this, and in my inexpert opinion it does not.
>
> Johnson will walk free and in the criminal sense is entirely innocent.
Agreed, sadly he will get away with it, though it doesn't mean it is not a worthwhile exercise. As Alan Sugar has pointed out, any CEO who made the kind of wild promises backed by downright lies in the way that politicians like Boris (and Corbyn) do would be locked up for misleading shareholders. It is about time politicians were held to higher regulatory standards than CEOs of public companies.
No. Politicians are held to account for their promises by the people at the appropriate time. Dragging politicians through courts is a really bad idea, it’s a very long and slippery slope.
> @TheJezziah said: > I don't know what you Tories have planned, there do seem to have been a lot of admiring glances towards the Republicans vote suppression strategies, but short of suspending elections then the Tories remaining in power 'for ever' seem incredibly short, even being generous and assuming we are thinking more 1000 year Tory reich style then I think most of your fellow Tories have realised that isn't happening.... > > I don't want to dampen your spirits but the reason the rest of the Tories aren't quite so happy is because they have a slightly more realistic view of the Conservatives electoral future. > > Yeah good try. A for effort. I shall try to keep the rhetorical devices at their most basic for you in future (maybe forever). > > We shall of course see whether or not the Conservatives stay in power at the next GE or are supplanted by Jeremy's Labour Party. Or Nigel for that matter. My view, what with the shenanigans in Scotland and the various competing views internally, oh and the fact that Jeremy (not you, him) is an absolute fucking loon, is that the Labour Party as currently constituted will not be doing the supplanting. > > As I responded initially to your first (equally ill-informed) point my view is that if you take Jeremy and his Socialist Wykehamists out of the party and replace them with some more centre-left types, there is a very good chance that Labour could form the next government. > > Edit: perhaps you as well. > > Your original post talked about being glad for Farage and Corbyn because they will mean opposition 'for ever' > > A lot of people don't even think the Tories can win the next election but you think you are guaranteed power as long as you have your current opponents, who are damaging you greatly.... > > Ill informed doesn't cover it, you are telling the fuhrer victory is in sight in April 1945.
Haha, hilarious coming from a devotee of Mr. Thicky and his deluded cabal . My response to your last sentence is "take the beam out of thine own eye"
Vanilla tip: If you middle click on the quote button (or however you normally click to open something in a new tab), the page that opens will be using the old quote style.
That is the PB poster of the year title wrapped up for 2019.
I recall at the start of the year people were asked what they thought 2019 would be like, and almost all suggested ongoing issues throughout the year. But I also recall one who suggested Q1 would be turbulent but then it would all settle down.
I can't see an end to the political problems until either A50 is revoked or we leave. And even then, it isn't likely to end the matter.
This could run and run until well into the mid 2020's if we're not careful.
> @Nigel_Foremain said: > > @Scott_P said: > > https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1133682217220235264 > > > > > > > > I have no idea if this prosecution will succeed or not (I suspect not), but I do think this is an interesting question. > > > > There are already clearly some things you cannot say, and you can be prosecuted for saying them. > > > > A legal case that explores some of those limits is probably of value > > Boris's barrister seems to be suggesting that his client is at least guilty of low quality political debate
Yes. "Johnson's lies were not criminal" isn't a great message to take to the voters. Opponents will make hay of this. Real political peril for the current favourite. Delicious.
> @nico67 said: > If let’s say Bozo does end up in court a jury is likely to be a mix of Remainers and Leavers . > > How on earth will you get a unanimous verdict or even a 10 to 2 one which sometimes is allowed .
> Oh god they're not still going on about that bloody bus are they?
It's not about the bus, it's about the statements Johnson made repeatedly in the media.
There is no question he misled the public deliberately; as far as I can tell the main question at stake here is whether or not the relevant legislation covers this, and in my inexpert opinion it does not.
Johnson will walk free and in the criminal sense is entirely innocent.
Also, had the Conservatives done at the 2017 election what some on here suggested (Over the life of the next Parliament we will increase NHS spending by £350m a year) so smoothing out the increase and yet fulfilling that promise, this wouldn't be an issue as Johnson would have just (rightly) claimed it WAS being implemented.
> @Sandpit said: > > @ah009 said: > > > > @GIN1138 said: > > > > > @TheScreamingEagles said: > > > > > https://twitter.com/skynews/status/1133670495679860737 > > > > > > > > > > Oh god they're not still going on about that bloody bus are they? > > > > > > It's not about the bus, it's about the statements Johnson made repeatedly in the media. > > > There is no question he misled the public deliberately; as far as I can tell the main question at stake here is whether or not the relevant legislation covers this, and in my inexpert opinion it does not. > > > > > > Johnson will walk free and in the criminal sense is entirely innocent. > > > > Agreed, sadly he will get away with it, though it doesn't mean it is not a worthwhile exercise. As Alan Sugar has pointed out, any CEO who made the kind of wild promises backed by downright lies in the way that politicians like Boris (and Corbyn) do would be locked up for misleading shareholders. It is about time politicians were held to higher regulatory standards than CEOs of public companies. > > No. Politicians are held to account for their promises by the people at the appropriate time. Dragging politicians through courts is a really bad idea, it’s a very long and slippery slope.
Nonsense. The electorate rarely does any such thing.
It is not difficult; don't lie. If it is deliberately misleading you will face jail. We have a proper separation of powers between the judiciary and the legislature, so it is not a "slippery slope" at all, quite the contrary. Politicians like Johnson bring our system of government and our so-called democracy into disrepute.
> @DecrepitJohnL said: > > @TheScreamingEagles said: > > > https://twitter.com/skynews/status/1133670495679860737 > > > > > > Does anyone know how many Private Prosecutions for Misconduct in a Public Office have succeeded? Just asking. > > > > I'd say they would have more hope of getting Prezza for his lunchtime BJs, than Boris for his Brexit prezzentations. > > Wrong question. > > The right question is will Boris lied be all over the news during the leadership votes?
Do bears shit in the woods?
Obviously, but the only people who will be outraged by this will be anti-Brexit partisans.
> I don't know what you Tories have planned, there do seem to have been a lot of admiring glances towards the Republicans vote suppression strategies, but short of suspending elections then the Tories remaining in power 'for ever' seem incredibly short, even being generous and assuming we are thinking more 1000 year Tory reich style then I think most of your fellow Tories have realised that isn't happening....
>
> I don't want to dampen your spirits but the reason the rest of the Tories aren't quite so happy is because they have a slightly more realistic view of the Conservatives electoral future.
>
> Yeah good try. A for effort. I shall try to keep the rhetorical devices at their most basic for you in future (maybe forever).
>
> We shall of course see whether or not the Conservatives stay in power at the next GE or are supplanted by Jeremy's Labour Party. Or Nigel for that matter. My view, what with the shenanigans in Scotland and the various competing views internally, oh and the fact that Jeremy (not you, him) is an absolute fucking loon, is that the Labour Party as currently constituted will not be doing the supplanting.
>
> As I responded initially to your first (equally ill-informed) point my view is that if you take Jeremy and his Socialist Wykehamists out of the party and replace them with some more centre-left types, there is a very good chance that Labour could form the next government.
>
> Edit: perhaps you as well.
If they did put someone with some credibility in charge (Kier Starmer would do) I would vote for them for the first time ever (don't tell Conservative Central Office - I need to keep my membership card to vote against Boris)
I agree, but cannot see a scenario where one of these Corbynite idiots isn't the next leader. They might manage to scrape around and find a woman to prove how radical they are (imagine!), but it will be someone dim like Del Piero or Rayner.
Your opinion on Del Piero would probably hold more weight if you hadn't identified an MP on the right of the party who has been anti Corbyn as a Corbynite...
I am curious why though?
It is just brexit?
I realise that from reading PB you might think Labour are united against Brexit apart from the most left wing MPs but that isn't the case at all. Looking at those who are backing Brexit most strongly I think there is an argument that the right of the Labour party is more pro Brexit than the left...
> @Nigel_Foremain said: > > @ah009 said: > > > @GIN1138 said: > > > > @TheScreamingEagles said: > > > > https://twitter.com/skynews/status/1133670495679860737?s=21 > > > > > > Oh god they're not still going on about that bloody bus are they? > > > > It's not about the bus, it's about the statements Johnson made repeatedly in the media. > > There is no question he misled the public deliberately; as far as I can tell the main question at stake here is whether or not the relevant legislation covers this, and in my inexpert opinion it does not. > > > > Johnson will walk free and in the criminal sense is entirely innocent. > > Agreed, sadly he will get away with it, though it doesn't mean it is not a worthwhile exercise. As Alan Sugar has pointed out, any CEO who made the kind of wild promises backed by downright lies in the way that politicians like Boris (and Corbyn) do would be locked up for misleading shareholders. It is about time politicians were held to higher regulatory standards than CEOs of public companies.
Normally Tories and Ukippers etc get away with murder. So it`s nice to see that this pack of lies is at least going through a bit of a process. It may make some of them think twice about it next time.
> No. Politicians are held to account for their promises by the people at the appropriate time. Dragging politicians through courts is a really bad idea, it’s a very long and slippery slope.
Nonsense. The electorate rarely does any such thing.
It is not difficult; don't lie. If it is deliberately misleading you will face jail. We have a proper separation of powers between the judiciary and the legislature, so it is not a "slippery slope" at all, quite the contrary. Politicians like Johnson bring our system of government and our so-called democracy into disrepute.
If the electorate choose not to hold politicians to account for lying to them that is up to them.
I don't know what you Tories have planned, there do seem to have been a lot of admiring glances towards the Republicans vote suppression strategies, but short of suspending elections then the Tories remaining in power 'for ever' seem incredibly short, even being generous and assuming we are thinking more 1000 year Tory reich style then I think most of your fellow Tories have realised that isn't happening....
I don't want to dampen your spirits but the reason the rest of the Tories aren't quite so happy is because they have a slightly more realistic view of the Conservatives electoral future.
Yeah good try. A for effort. I shall try to keep the rhetorical devices at their most basic for you in future (maybe forever).
We shall of course see whether or not the Conservatives stay in power at the next GE or are supplanted by Jeremy's Labour Party. Or Nigel for that matter. My view, what with the shenanigans in Scotland and the various competing views internally, oh and the fact that Jeremy (not you, him) is an absolute fucking loon, is that the Labour Party as currently constituted will not be doing the supplanting.
As I responded initially to your first (equally ill-informed) point my view is that if you take Jeremy and his Socialist Wykehamists out of the party and replace them with some more centre-left types, there is a very good chance that Labour could form the next government.
Edit: perhaps you as well.
Your original post talked about being glad for Farage and Corbyn because they will mean opposition 'for ever'
A lot of people don't even think the Tories can win the next election but you think you are guaranteed power as long as you have your current opponents, who are damaging you greatly....
Ill informed doesn't cover it, you are telling the fuhrer victory is in sight in April 1945.
What is it with you Labour Party types? Do you have to set everything in the context of the Nazi Party and Hitler? Are there no other frames of reference?
So we are now focused on what the meaning of is for ever is. Righty-ho. I mean I try to keep the ball in the air here on PB but sometimes I realise one needs to get down to dullard level so apologies (to non-dullards) I will spell it out again.
I expanded on my views on the current situation with the Labour Party - namely that as currently constituted, with the situation in Scotland, and with the current internal fighting - that they would not win the next GE.
But if you want to knock yourself out on the old "for ever" thing and make a funny about the, say, 2079 election, then by all means go for it.
> @PClipp said: > > @Nigel_Foremain said: > > > @ah009 said: > > > > @GIN1138 said: > > > > > @TheScreamingEagles said: > > > > > https://twitter.com/skynews/status/1133670495679860737?s=21 > > > > > > > > Oh god they're not still going on about that bloody bus are they? > > > > > > It's not about the bus, it's about the statements Johnson made repeatedly in the media. > > > There is no question he misled the public deliberately; as far as I can tell the main question at stake here is whether or not the relevant legislation covers this, and in my inexpert opinion it does not. > > > > > > Johnson will walk free and in the criminal sense is entirely innocent. > > > > Agreed, sadly he will get away with it, though it doesn't mean it is not a worthwhile exercise. As Alan Sugar has pointed out, any CEO who made the kind of wild promises backed by downright lies in the way that politicians like Boris (and Corbyn) do would be locked up for misleading shareholders. It is about time politicians were held to higher regulatory standards than CEOs of public companies. > > Normally Tories and Ukippers etc get away with murder. So it`s nice to see that this pack of lies is at least going through a bit of a process. It may make some of them think twice about it next time.
I think Labour and the SNP have also had their fair share of liars and fantasists that believe that it is in the best interests of the plebs for them to be misled, and Corbyn is an arch practitioner. It does need to be stopped, but that would most likely require primary legislation, which would be stopped by the vested interests in all parties. It is bizarre that we do not expect our legislators to have as high standards as is required in almost every other walk of professional life
> @OblitusSumMe said: > > @Sandpit said: > > > No. Politicians are held to account for their promises by the people at the appropriate time. Dragging politicians through courts is a really bad idea, it’s a very long and slippery slope. > > > > Nonsense. The electorate rarely does any such thing. > > > > It is not difficult; don't lie. If it is deliberately misleading you will face jail. We have a proper separation of powers between the judiciary and the legislature, so it is not a "slippery slope" at all, quite the contrary. Politicians like Johnson bring our system of government and our so-called democracy into disrepute. > > If the electorate choose not to hold politicians to account for lying to them that is up to them.
In Wheeler v Labour Prime Minister 2008 the Divisional Court held that manifesto promises were NOT justiciable. "Even if we had accepted that the relevant ministerial statements had the effect of a promise ... such a promise would not in our view give rise to a legitimate expectation enforceable in public law, such that the courts could intervene... The subject-matter, nature and context of a promise of this kind place it in the realm of politics, not of the courts."
> @Mysticrose said: > > @isam said: > > > There are many other issues for the left to campaign on, which will be aired at a General Election. > > > > You are entitled to your opinion, but I’d say if we haven’t left by the time of the next GE it will be a single issue affair about Brexit. > > > > Tone down the condescension > > Don't lecture me on etiquette. You're the most snide person on this site, constantly putting people down with nasty little retorts ('calm down dear' being just one of your latest). > > It isn't simply an opinion. As Mike Smithson has posted, Brexit is of far less concern as a GE voting issue to those on the left than the right. This is what opinion polling has demonstrated and as Mike has, once more, illustrated in this thread header. > > I'm afraid that to those on the Alt-right, Brexit so dominates their landscape that it's like a religion. They are obsessives. To many on the left there are other issues and, frankly, until Cameron called for the vote most of us* were pretty ambivalent about the EU. It ranked very low in opinion polling on what mattered. And it still won't dominate the left. To us, it's frankly less important.
Trouble is, if The Brexit Party stand at the next GE, the campaign will be about virtually nothing else. Somewhat justified paranoia will lead to endless discussion about how to stop Farage winning - either by discrediting him or by attempting to forge a Remain alliance.
> @TheJezziah said: > > @TOPPING said: > > > I don't know what you Tories have planned, there do seem to have been a lot of admiring glances towards the Republicans vote suppression strategies, but short of suspending elections then the Tories remaining in power 'for ever' seem incredibly short, even being generous and assuming we are thinking more 1000 year Tory reich style then I think most of your fellow Tories have realised that isn't happening.... > > > > > > I don't want to dampen your spirits but the reason the rest of the Tories aren't quite so happy is because they have a slightly more realistic view of the Conservatives electoral future. > > > > > > Yeah good try. A for effort. I shall try to keep the rhetorical devices at their most basic for you in future (maybe forever). > > > > > > We shall of course see whether or not the Conservatives stay in power at the next GE or are supplanted by Jeremy's Labour Party. Or Nigel for that matter. My view, what with the shenanigans in Scotland and the various competing views internally, oh and the fact that Jeremy (not you, him) is an absolute fucking loon, is that the Labour Party as currently constituted will not be doing the supplanting. > > > > > > As I responded initially to your first (equally ill-informed) point my view is that if you take Jeremy and his Socialist Wykehamists out of the party and replace them with some more centre-left types, there is a very good chance that Labour could form the next government. > > > > > > Edit: perhaps you as well. > > > > If they did put someone with some credibility in charge (Kier Starmer would do) I would vote for them for the first time ever (don't tell Conservative Central Office - I need to keep my membership card to vote against Boris) > > I agree, but cannot see a scenario where one of these Corbynite idiots isn't the next leader. They might manage to scrape around and find a woman to prove how radical they are (imagine!), but it will be someone dim like Del Piero or Rayner. > > Your opinion on Del Piero would probably hold more weight if you hadn't identified an MP on the right of the party who has been anti Corbyn as a Corbynite... > > I am curious why though? > > It is just brexit? > > I realise that from reading PB you might think Labour are united against Brexit apart from the most left wing MPs but that isn't the case at all. Looking at those who are backing Brexit most strongly I think there is an argument that the right of the Labour party is more pro Brexit than the left... > > Both are pretty anti Brexit in fairness.
Del Piero voted to trigger Article 50, then moaned on Twitter about her immigrant parents having to apply for settled status. She was quite happy to throw all the other migrants under the bus.
> @nico67 said: > > @nico67 said: > > If let’s say Bozo does end up in court a jury is likely to be a mix of Remainers and Leavers . > > > > How on earth will you get a unanimous verdict or even a 10 to 2 one which sometimes is allowed . > >
Because juries don't tend to act like that. I despise Johnson and Leave. But from what I know so far, I would be minded to acquit. Obviously I'd listen carefully to the evidence first. But my political opinions would not have any bearing whatsoever on my decision. I doubt I'm rare in that respect. Vicious tribalists are rarer than you might suppose.
> The right question is will Boris lied be all over the news during the leadership votes?
Do bears shit in the woods?
Obviously, but the only people who will be outraged by this will be anti-Brexit partisans.
It is not about outrage. Conservative MPs only need to be mildly concerned in order to switch their votes away from Boris. So the question remains, will Boris lied be making headlines during the leadership campaign?
> @OblitusSumMe said: > > @Sandpit said: > > > No. Politicians are held to account for their promises by the people at the appropriate time. Dragging politicians through courts is a really bad idea, it’s a very long and slippery slope. > > Nonsense. The electorate rarely does any such thing. > > It is not difficult; don't lie. If it is deliberately misleading you will face jail. We have a proper separation of powers between the judiciary and the legislature, so it is not a "slippery slope" at all, quite the contrary. Politicians like Johnson bring our system of government and our so-called democracy into disrepute. > > If the electorate choose not to hold politicians to account for lying to them that is up to them.
If you had a solicitor that lied on significant matters relating to your family, should it just be up to you? No it wouldn't be, she/he would be struck off for malpractice. Politicians need to be held to higher standards. It is a shame people on here seem to think it is OK for them to be liars so long as they have a big support base FFS!
> @Dadge said: > > @Mysticrose said: > > > @isam said: > > > > > There are many other issues for the left to campaign on, which will be aired at a General Election. > > > > > > You are entitled to your opinion, but I’d say if we haven’t left by the time of the next GE it will be a single issue affair about Brexit. > > > > > > Tone down the condescension > > > > Don't lecture me on etiquette. You're the most snide person on this site, constantly putting people down with nasty little retorts ('calm down dear' being just one of your latest). > > > > It isn't simply an opinion. As Mike Smithson has posted, Brexit is of far less concern as a GE voting issue to those on the left than the right. This is what opinion polling has demonstrated and as Mike has, once more, illustrated in this thread header. > > > > I'm afraid that to those on the Alt-right, Brexit so dominates their landscape that it's like a religion. They are obsessives. To many on the left there are other issues and, frankly, until Cameron called for the vote most of us* were pretty ambivalent about the EU. It ranked very low in opinion polling on what mattered. And it still won't dominate the left. To us, it's frankly less important. > > Trouble is, if The Brexit Party stand at the next GE, the campaign will be about virtually nothing else. Somewhat justified paranoia will lead to endless discussion about how to stop Farage winning - either by discrediting him or by attempting to forge a Remain alliance. > >
I suspect Farage would be destroyed by multiple and repeated questions on his plans for the NHS...
> > > Oh god they're not still going on about that bloody bus are they?
>
> >
>
> > It's not about the bus, it's about the statements Johnson made repeatedly in the media.
>
> > There is no question he misled the public deliberately; as far as I can tell the main question at stake here is whether or not the relevant legislation covers this, and in my inexpert opinion it does not.
>
> >
>
> > Johnson will walk free and in the criminal sense is entirely innocent.
>
>
>
> Agreed, sadly he will get away with it, though it doesn't mean it is not a worthwhile exercise. As Alan Sugar has pointed out, any CEO who made the kind of wild promises backed by downright lies in the way that politicians like Boris (and Corbyn) do would be locked up for misleading shareholders. It is about time politicians were held to higher regulatory standards than CEOs of public companies.
>
> No. Politicians are held to account for their promises by the people at the appropriate time. Dragging politicians through courts is a really bad idea, it’s a very long and slippery slope.
Nonsense. The electorate rarely does any such thing.
It is not difficult; don't lie. If it is deliberately misleading you will face jail. We have a proper separation of powers between the judiciary and the legislature, so it is not a "slippery slope" at all, quite the contrary. Politicians like Johnson bring our system of government and our so-called democracy into disrepute.
A hundred times no. It’s up to the electorate - and only the electorate in a democracy - to hold politicians to account should they wish to do so.
Trying to find a way of punishing politicians because you disagree with what they say, is the reaction of demagogues and dictators.
> @argyllrs said: > > @OblitusSumMe said: > > > @Sandpit said: > > > > > No. Politicians are held to account for their promises by the people at the appropriate time. Dragging politicians through courts is a really bad idea, it’s a very long and slippery slope. > > > > > > > > Nonsense. The electorate rarely does any such thing. > > > > > > > > It is not difficult; don't lie. If it is deliberately misleading you will face jail. We have a proper separation of powers between the judiciary and the legislature, so it is not a "slippery slope" at all, quite the contrary. Politicians like Johnson bring our system of government and our so-called democracy into disrepute. > > > > If the electorate choose not to hold politicians to account for lying to them that is up to them. > > In Wheeler v Labour Prime Minister 2008 the Divisional Court held that manifesto promises were NOT justiciable. "Even if we had accepted that the relevant ministerial statements had the effect of a promise ... such a promise would not in our view give rise to a legitimate expectation enforceable in public law, such that the courts could intervene... The subject-matter, nature and context of a promise of this kind place it in the realm of politics, not of the courts."
thank you for that, very interesting. I am not sure it overturns my point though. In that particular case the court did not see a promise as a lie. It is a different thing.
> > No. Politicians are held to account for their promises by the people at the appropriate time. Dragging politicians through courts is a really bad idea, it’s a very long and slippery slope.
>
> Nonsense. The electorate rarely does any such thing.
>
> It is not difficult; don't lie. If it is deliberately misleading you will face jail. We have a proper separation of powers between the judiciary and the legislature, so it is not a "slippery slope" at all, quite the contrary. Politicians like Johnson bring our system of government and our so-called democracy into disrepute.
>
> If the electorate choose not to hold politicians to account for lying to them that is up to them.
If you had a solicitor that lied on significant matters relating to your family, should it just be up to you? No it wouldn't be, she/he would be struck off for malpractice. Politicians need to be held to higher standards. It is a shame people on here seem to think it is OK for them to be liars so long as they have a big support base FFS!
That’s not what people think. They accept its a political not legal issue whether lies are punished. Particularly when not following through on an issue may not be a lie, but due to changing circumstances or development of views, yet will be called lies by opponents. You are not convincing by trying to remove any nuance from the situation. The point about promises unfulfilled vs lies vs failure to meet expectations is significant, because a lot will be called lies which are not, and let us not fool ourselves partisan sides will claim as lies that which are not, and use legal means to pursue that if they can.
Better, on balance, to leave it as a political, public reaction, than the courts, rather than overdoing it and causing unintended consequences.
Del Piero voted to trigger Article 50, then moaned on Twitter about her immigrant parents having to apply for settled status. She was quite happy to throw all the other migrants under the bus.
It seems a viable position if you assume the government didn't have to make people apply for settled status. Not sure on the assumption.
It is a very silly reason to call her Corbynite though, usually if they are Labour and doing something stupid they are Corbyn's opponents. See everything CUK did as an example of Corbyn's opponents within Labour.
> @Nigel_Foremain said: > > @argyllrs said: > > > @OblitusSumMe said: > > > > @Sandpit said: > > > > > > > No. Politicians are held to account for their promises by the people at the appropriate time. Dragging politicians through courts is a really bad idea, it’s a very long and slippery slope. > > > > > > > > > > > > Nonsense. The electorate rarely does any such thing. > > > > > > > > > > > > It is not difficult; don't lie. If it is deliberately misleading you will face jail. We have a proper separation of powers between the judiciary and the legislature, so it is not a "slippery slope" at all, quite the contrary. Politicians like Johnson bring our system of government and our so-called democracy into disrepute. > > > > > > If the electorate choose not to hold politicians to account for lying to them that is up to them. > > > > In Wheeler v Labour Prime Minister 2008 the Divisional Court held that manifesto promises were NOT justiciable. "Even if we had accepted that the relevant ministerial statements had the effect of a promise ... such a promise would not in our view give rise to a legitimate expectation enforceable in public law, such that the courts could intervene... The subject-matter, nature and context of a promise of this kind place it in the realm of politics, not of the courts." > > thank you for that, very interesting. I am not sure it overturns my point though. In that particular case the court did not see a promise as a lie. It is a different thing.
Indeed. You can say what you like about the future. It hasn't happened yet.
> @nichomar said: > > @isam said: > > > The best idea would be for Leave and Remain parties to form two alliances and run as such at a GE. Much more likely good of a settled result (and it being Leave!) > > > > Oct GE: > > > > Tories under (say) Johnson running on Hard Brexit. Labour under Corbyn running on No Brexit. > > > > There's your 2nd referendum. > > I don’t know a single lib dem that would vote for corbyn or Johnson so no way would that be a second referendum
I'm a LibDem who switched to Corbyn's Labour, and polling shows there's plenty of us.
The idea of the next GE being a proxy referendum is anathema to me. At the same time, voters will be aware of the risk of a victory for a Hard-Brexit leader (Raab or Farage) and will vote tactically accordingly. It would make it easier for voters, and reduce the number of spoiler candidates, if some electoral deals were done. You're right that there is a limit to how much people will switch to another centre-left party, but there are enough people willing to do so to make it worthwhile.
> > I expect that Labour MPs in Leave constituents are being bombarded incessantly by Leaver constituents. But these will be mainly Tories who won't vote for them anyway so can be safely ignored.
> >
>
> Really?
>
> I think there is a HUGE amount of wishful thinking going on here in the Remain Central world of PB lol!
The wishful thinking is in your head my friend. If Brexit was so important how come that the majority of LAB gains from CON at GE2017 were in Leave seats?
> > I expect that Labour MPs in Leave constituents are being bombarded incessantly by Leaver constituents. But these will be mainly Tories who won't vote for them anyway so can be safely ignored.
> >
>
> Really?
>
> I think there is a HUGE amount of wishful thinking going on here in the Remain Central world of PB lol!
The wishful thinking is in your head my friend. If Brexit was so important how come that the majority of LAB gains from CON at GE2017 were in Leave seats?
GE 2017 was fought on the premise both sides had accepted the result & we were leaving. Farage had retired. I think looking at that election is a waste of time, akin to placing too much importance on firm ground form when the going is heavy
> @Sandpit said: > > @Sandpit said: > > > > @ah009 said: > > > > > > > > @GIN1138 said: > > > > > > > > > @TheScreamingEagles said: > > > > > > > > > https://twitter.com/skynews/status/1133670495679860737 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Oh god they're not still going on about that bloody bus are they? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's not about the bus, it's about the statements Johnson made repeatedly in the media. > > > > > > > There is no question he misled the public deliberately; as far as I can tell the main question at stake here is whether or not the relevant legislation covers this, and in my inexpert opinion it does not. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Johnson will walk free and in the criminal sense is entirely innocent. > > > > > > > > > > > > Agreed, sadly he will get away with it, though it doesn't mean it is not a worthwhile exercise. As Alan Sugar has pointed out, any CEO who made the kind of wild promises backed by downright lies in the way that politicians like Boris (and Corbyn) do would be locked up for misleading shareholders. It is about time politicians were held to higher regulatory standards than CEOs of public companies. > > > > > > No. Politicians are held to account for their promises by the people at the appropriate time. Dragging politicians through courts is a really bad idea, it’s a very long and slippery slope. > > > > Nonsense. The electorate rarely does any such thing. > > > > It is not difficult; don't lie. If it is deliberately misleading you will face jail. We have a proper separation of powers between the judiciary and the legislature, so it is not a "slippery slope" at all, quite the contrary. Politicians like Johnson bring our system of government and our so-called democracy into disrepute. > > A hundred times no. It’s up to the electorate - and only the electorate in a democracy - to hold politicians to account should they wish to do so. > > Trying to find a way of punishing politicians because you disagree with what they say, is the reaction of demagogues and dictators.
Oh dear. You believe we have democracy? Are you not a Farragist? I thought you would be in favour of a little Putinesque demagoguery?
Seriously though, lying by politicians, public figures or professionals is a very bad thing. It is shame you do not agree. Having a large following that overlooks lying does not make it right, and that really is the domain of dictators and despots. It is easy to legislate against it and make it apply to all stripes. The fact that you think lying is OK and you support Brexit tells us all we need to know I guess!
> @isam said: > GE 2017 was fought on the premise both sides had accepted the result & we were leaving. Farage had retired. I think looking at that election is a waste of time, akin to placing too much importance on firm ground form when the going is heavy
Circumstances have changed and people might well vote very differently than they did a few short years ago?
The Bozo case will likely get thrown out eventually .
It will help him with the Tory Membership and Leavers but the fact the headlines are mentioning misconduct in public office just highlights what damaged goods he is .
This will open up other issues in which he has been found wanting .
> @Dadge said: > > @nichomar said: > > > @isam said: > > > > > The best idea would be for Leave and Remain parties to form two alliances and run as such at a GE. Much more likely good of a settled result (and it being Leave!) > > > > > > > > Oct GE: > > > > > > > > Tories under (say) Johnson running on Hard Brexit. Labour under Corbyn running on No Brexit. > > > > > > > > There's your 2nd referendum. > > > > I don’t know a single lib dem that would vote for corbyn or Johnson so no way would that be a second referendum > > I'm a LibDem who switched to Corbyn's Labour, and polling shows there's plenty of us. > > The idea of the next GE being a proxy referendum is anathema to me. At the same time, voters will be aware of the risk of a victory for a Hard-Brexit leader (Raab or Farage) and will vote tactically accordingly. It would make it easier for voters, and reduce the number of spoiler candidates, if some electoral deals were done. You're right that there is a limit to how much people will switch to another centre-left party, but there are enough people willing to do so to make it worthwhile.
Hilarious. That is one of the most unbelievable trolls I have seen on here for years!! A LibDem that has switched to hard left Corbyn. I must go and chortle my way to lunch!
> @nico67 said: > > @Greenwich_Floater said: > > I suspect that it is true that Labour leavers are generally less motivated than Tory leavers when it comes to the ballot box. However Labour does need to give what was formally its bedrock vote (north and Scotland) a reason to vote for it. > > > > As it continues to move towards metropolitan elitism, there is less and less reason for these people to vote for them. > > That’s a good point . What’s happening to Labour is similar to what’s happening with the Dems in the USA. > > > >
Labour is in a worse position than the Democrats, both because its birth as champion of the working class make finding a new path exceptionally difficult and because it already faces competition from other parties as the alternative to the Conservatives.
The [Tories] then collapsed in Council elections, losing power in places once thought unthinkable. They backed it up by coming third or worse in every district bar one at the Euros.
> @Nigel_Foremain said: > > @Sandpit said: > > > @Sandpit said: > > > > > > @ah009 said: > > > > > > > > > > > > @GIN1138 said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > @TheScreamingEagles said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://twitter.com/skynews/status/1133670495679860737 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Oh god they're not still going on about that bloody bus are they? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's not about the bus, it's about the statements Johnson made repeatedly in the media. > > > > > > > > > > > There is no question he misled the public deliberately; as far as I can tell the main question at stake here is whether or not the relevant legislation covers this, and in my inexpert opinion it does not. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Agreed, sadly he will get away with it, though it doesn't mean it is not a worthwhile exercise. As Alan Sugar has pointed out, any CEO who made the kind of wild promises backed by downright lies in the way that politicians like Boris (and Corbyn) do would be locked up for misleading shareholders. It is about time politicians were held to higher regulatory standards than CEOs of public companies. > > > > > > > > > > No. Politicians are held to account for their promises by the people at the appropriate time. Dragging politicians through courts is a really bad idea, it’s a very
> > It is not difficult; don't lie. If it is deliberately misleading you will face jail. We have a proper separation of powers between the judiciary and the legislature, so it is not a "slippery slope" at all, quite the contrary. Politicians like Johnson bring our system of government and our so-called democracy into disrepute. > > > > A hundred times no. It’s up to the electorate - and only the electorate in a democracy - to hold politicians to account should they wish to do so. > > > > Trying to find a way of punishing politicians because you disagree with what they say, is the reaction of demagogues and dictators. > > Oh dear. You believe we have democracy? Are you not a Farragist? I thought you would be in favour of a little Putinesque demagoguery? > > Seriously though, lying by politicians, public figures or professionals is a very bad thing. It is shame you do not agree. Having a large following that overlooks lying does not make it right, and that really is the domain of dictators and despots. It is easy to legislate against it and make it apply to all stripes. The fact that you think lying is OK and you support Brexit tells us all we need to know I guess!
Come now, like Voltaire, we should defend to the death the right to be lied to by politicians.
> @Sunil_Prasannan said: > The [Tories] then collapsed in Council elections, losing power in places once thought unthinkable. They backed it up by coming third or worse in every district bar one at the Euros. > > > Which was the one?
My guess was Dumfries but they missed second place by 0.8%
> @IanB2 said: > > @Sunil_Prasannan said: > > The [Tories] then collapsed in Council elections, losing power in places once thought unthinkable. They backed it up by coming third or worse in every district bar one at the Euros. > > > > > > Which was the one? > > My guess was Dumfries but they missed second place by 0.8%
Next door - South Ayrshire, where Trump has his golf course. Second with 20.5%
> @ah009 said: > > @ah009 said: > > Very much off topic: > > I would literally pay double to sit in a train carriage where there was a strongly enforced ban on crisps. > > Immediately I sent that, someone's just got on, sat next to me and immediately opened a huge bag of crisps. Fuck my life.
> @Nigelb said: > > @Nigel_Foremain said: > > > @Sandpit said: > > > > @Sandpit said: > > > > > > > > @ah009 said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @GIN1138 said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > ; @TheScreamingEagles said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Oh god they're not still going on about that bloody bus are they? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's not about the bus, it's about the statements Johnson made repeatedly in the media. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no question he misled the public deliberately; as far as I can tell the main question at stake here is whether or not the relevant legislation covers this, and in my inexpert opinion it does not. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Agreed, sadly he will get away with it, though it doesn't mean it is not a worthwhile exercise. As Alan Sugar has pointed out, any CEO who made the kind of wild promises backed by downright lies in the way that politicians like Boris (and Corbyn) do would be locked up for misleading shareholders. It is about time politicians were held to higher regulatory standards than CEOs of public companies. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. Politicians are held to account for their promises by the people at the appropriate time. Dragging politicians through courts is a really bad idea, it’s a very > > > > It is not difficult; don't lie. If it is deliberately misleading you will face jail. We have a proper separation of powers between the judiciary and the legislature, so it is not a "slippery slope" at all, quite the contrary. Politicians like Johnson bring our system of government and our so-called democracy into disrepute. > > > > > > A hundred times no. It’s up to the electorate - and only the electorate in a democracy - to hold politicians to account should they wish to do so. > > > > > > Trying to find a way of punishing politicians because you disagree with what they say, is the reaction of demagogues and dictators. > > > > Oh dear. You believe we have democracy? Are you not a Farragist? I thought you would be in favour of a little Putinesque demagoguery? > > > > Seriously though, lying by politicians, public figures or professionals is a very bad thing. It is shame you do not agree. Having a large following that overlooks lying does not make it right, and that really is the domain of dictators and despots. It is easy to legislate against it and make it apply to all stripes. The fact that you think lying is OK and you support Brexit tells us all we need to know I guess! > > Come now, like Voltaire, we should defend to the death the right to be lied to by politicians. >
> @IanB2 said: > > @Nigelb said: > > > @Nigel_Foremain said: > > > > @Sandpit said: > > > > > @Sandpit said: > > > > > > > > > > @ah009 said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @GIN1138 said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Agreed, sadly he will get away with it, though it doesn't mean it is not a worthwhile exercise. As Alan Sugar has pointed out, any CEO who made the kind of wild promises backed by downright lies in the way that politicians like Boris (and Corbyn) do would be locked up for misleading shareholders. It is about time politicians were held to higher regulatory standards than CEOs of public companies. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. Politicians are held to account for their promises by the people at the appropriate time. Dragging politicians through courts is a really bad idea, it’s a very > > > > > > It is not difficult; don't lie. If it is deliberately misleading you will face jail. We have a proper separation of powers between the judiciary and the legislature, so it is not a "slippery slope" at all, quite the contrary. Politicians like Johnson bring our system of government and our so-called democracy into disrepute. > > > > > > > > A hundred times no. It’s up to the electorate - and only the electorate in a democracy - to hold politicians to account should they wish to do so. > > > > > > > > Trying to find a way of punishing politicians because you disagree with what they say, is the reaction of demagogues and dictators. > > > > > > Oh dear. You believe we have democracy? Are you not a Farragist? I thought you would be in favour of a little Putinesque demagoguery? > > > > > > Seriously though, lying by politicians, public figures or professionals is a very bad thing. It is shame you do not agree. Having a large following that overlooks lying does not make it right, and that really is the domain of dictators and despots. It is easy to legislate against it and make it apply to all stripes. The fact that you think lying is OK and you support Brexit tells us all we need to know I guess! > > > > Come now, like Voltaire, we should defend to the death the right to be lied to by politicians. > > > > Theirs or ours?
> @TGOHF said: > One thought occurred to me is that the other offer the Brexit party is making is that it will make the topic of leaving the EU disappear - quickly. > > The public wants an end - not more discussions whether by extensions or further referendum. > > The LDs are nearly offering that - if they switched to revoke, no referendum they might do even better.
Leaving without a deal will not make the topic disappear - it will be magnified tenfold and be blamed for the subsequent economic collapse. Revoke and remain might perhaps be more successful in removing the topic from the public arena, that depends how people respond to the cries of outrage and betrayal which would undoubtedly be heard from Brexiter MPs and media.
> > > Johnson will walk free and in the criminal sense is entirely innocent.
> > Agreed, sadly he will get away with it, though it doesn't mean it is not a worthwhile exercise. As Alan Sugar has pointed out, any CEO who made the kind of wild promises backed by downright lies in the way that politicians like Boris (and Corbyn) do would be locked up for misleading shareholders. It is about time politicians were held to higher regulatory standards than CEOs of public companies.
> > No. Politicians are held to account for their promises by the people at the appropriate time. Dragging politicians through courts is a really bad idea, it’s a very long and slippery slope.
> Nonsense. The electorate rarely does any such thing.
> It is not difficult; don't lie. If it is deliberately misleading you will face jail. We have a proper separation of powers between the judiciary and the legislature, so it is not a "slippery slope" at all, quite the contrary. Politicians like Johnson bring our system of government and our so-called democracy into disrepute.
>
> A hundred times no. It’s up to the electorate - and only the electorate in a democracy - to hold politicians to account should they wish to do so.
>
> Trying to find a way of punishing politicians because you disagree with what they say, is the reaction of demagogues and dictators.
Oh dear. You believe we have democracy? Are you not a Farragist? I thought you would be in favour of a little Putinesque demagoguery?
Seriously though, lying by politicians, public figures or professionals is a very bad thing. It is shame you do not agree. Having a large following that overlooks lying does not make it right, and that really is the domain of dictators and despots. It is easy to legislate against it and make it apply to all stripes. The fact that you think lying is OK and you support Brexit tells us all we need to know I guess!
I’m a conservative, but more importantly a democrat.
Should we also be calling for George Osborne to be prosecuted for the pack of lies that came out of the Treasury before the referendum? Of course not, because the place that these disputes get settled is the ballot box. Trying to equate with other professions is fatuous.
> > The [Tories] then collapsed in Council elections, losing power in places once thought unthinkable. They backed it up by coming third or worse in every district bar one at the Euros.
> >
> >
> > Which was the one?
>
> My guess was Dumfries but they missed second place by 0.8%
Next door - South Ayrshire, where Trump has his golf course. Second with 20.5%
> @Nigel_Foremain said: > > @Dadge said: > > > @nichomar said: > > > > @isam said: > > > > > > > The best idea would be for Leave and Remain parties to form two alliances and run as such at a GE. Much more likely good of a settled result (and it being Leave!) > > > > > > > > > > > > Oct GE: > > > > > > > > > > > > Tories under (say) Johnson running on Hard Brexit. Labour under Corbyn running on No Brexit. > > > > > > > > > > > > There's your 2nd referendum. > > > > > > I don’t know a single lib dem that would vote for corbyn or Johnson so no way would that be a second referendum > > > > I'm a LibDem who switched to Corbyn's Labour, and polling shows there's plenty of us. > > > > The idea of the next GE being a proxy referendum is anathema to me. At the same time, voters will be aware of the risk of a victory for a Hard-Brexit leader (Raab or Farage) and will vote tactically accordingly. It would make it easier for voters, and reduce the number of spoiler candidates, if some electoral deals were done. You're right that there is a limit to how much people will switch to another centre-left party, but there are enough people willing to do so to make it worthwhile. > > Hilarious. That is one of the most unbelievable trolls I have seen on here for years!! A LibDem that has switched to hard left Corbyn. I must go and chortle my way to lunch!
What a bizarre comment. Had you started your lunchtime drinking early? Your addled brain has forgotten that "hard left" Corbyn got 40% at the last election. Do you think he pulled all those extra supporters out of his armpit?
Setting aside that every other thread header at the moment is "Here's why Brexit smells of wee", did the poster yesterday trying to work out why Betfair have settled the Change UK share as 2.99% or under when it was 3.3% get an answer? It's bugging me too now, though I had no money on the market.
I am sorry OGH but your thread header above based on my post from the previous thread is one of the most complacent I have ever read on PB, indeed it verges on arrogance from the Remainer side.
The whole reason Labour held most of its Leave seats at the last general election and indeed gained a few was because it promised to deliver Brexit. Yet 2 years later both the Tories and Labour have still NOT delivered the Brexit Leave voters voted for and until they do both Labour and Tory Leave seats are at risk from the Brexit Party.
Hence on Sunday in the Euro elections count the Brexit Party swept to victory in Labour Leave seats from Bolsover to Wigan and they will very likely repeat that performance in the Peterborough by election on Thursday week.
You would have thought Scotland 2015 would have taught Labour a lesson not to ignore its working class vote, clearly not
> @IanB2 said: > > @nico67 said: > > > @Greenwich_Floater said: > > > I suspect that it is true that Labour leavers are generally less motivated than Tory leavers when it comes to the ballot box. However Labour does need to give what was formally its bedrock vote (north and Scotland) a reason to vote for it. > > > > > > As it continues to move towards metropolitan elitism, there is less and less reason for these people to vote for them. > > > > That’s a good point . What’s happening to Labour is similar to what’s happening with the Dems in the USA. > > > > > > > > > > Labour is in a worse position than the Democrats, both because its birth as champion of the working class make finding a new path exceptionally difficult and because it already faces competition from other parties as the alternative to the Conservatives.
Labour's problem resembles that of its Australian sister party who also emerged from the working class, are now increasingly a party of champagne social democrats and who suffered the consequences a fortnight ago
Setting aside that every other thread header at the moment is "Here's why Brexit smells of wee", did the poster yesterday trying to work out why Betfair have settled the Change UK share as 2.99% or under when it was 3.3% get an answer? It's bugging me too now, though I had no money on the market.
Northern Ireland knocks the vote shares of the GB parties down when its results come in.
Comments
They then collapsed in Council elections, losing power in places once thought unthinkable. They backed it up by coming third or worse in every district bar one at the Euros.
They insouciantly believe a change of leadership will magically place them back at their natural and rightful place in charge. Their campaign has so far been marked by factionalism and back biting, and an almost total lack of ideas or policy beyond one thing.
They also now face a rising force on their side of the political spectrum. A force which has one single aim, and which commands great enthusiasm amongst many of their supporters, but which repels others.
> Strikes me that the SLAB comparison is far more apt for English Con Party. They are the party in power after all. They held on last time for fear of the alternative, but with very little positive enthusiasm. They have controlled huge swathes of the country with barely a challenge for generations.
> They then collapsed in Council elections, losing power in places once thought unthinkable. They backed it up by coming third or worse in every district bar one at the Euros.
> They insouciantly believe a change of leadership will magically place them back at their natural and rightful place in charge. Their campaign has so far been marked by factionalism and back biting, and an almost total lack of ideas or policy beyond one thing.
Shrewd post.
Their saving grace is that they have a model in SLab of what not to do. That doesn't mean they will have learned that lesson, but they might yet.
We shall of course see whether or not the Conservatives stay in power at the next GE or are supplanted by Jeremy's Labour Party. Or Nigel for that matter. My view, what with the shenanigans in Scotland and the various competing views internally, oh and the fact that Jeremy (not you, him) is an absolute fucking loon, is that the Labour Party as currently constituted will not be doing the supplanting.
As I responded initially to your first (equally ill-informed) point my view is that if you take Jeremy and his Socialist Wykehamists out of the party and replace them with some more centre-left types, there is a very good chance that Labour could form the next government.
Edit: perhaps you as well.
> > @GIN1138 said:
> > > @TheScreamingEagles said:
> > > https://twitter.com/skynews/status/1133670495679860737?s=21
> >
> > Oh god they're not still going on about that bloody bus are they?
>
> It's not about the bus, it's about the statements Johnson made repeatedly in the media.
> There is no question he misled the public deliberately; as far as I can tell the main question at stake here is whether or not the relevant legislation covers this, and in my inexpert opinion it does not.
>
> Johnson will walk free and in the criminal sense is entirely innocent.
It's displacement activity.
> Labour's next problem won't be the tack to remain, it'll be the absolute lack of enthusiasm with which Corbyn delivers the half hearted second referendum message.
I agree. It's a massive problem for Labour. I'm sure McDonnell also agrees with you. Will he take action by gently persuading Corbyn to set aside for someone who believes in his socialist agenda but is more voter friendly? Not himself obviously but one of the women.
> > @Mysticrose said:
> > Excellent post by Mike.
> >
> On the contrary, I have rarely read a thread header here that I have disagreed with more. I disagree that it is "rubbish thinking" that Labour is vulnerable in its Leave voting Westminster seat (or at least many of them). In fact it is "rubbish thinking" to dismiss that threat.
>
My guess is that this idea Labour Leavers don't care enough about Brexit to vote for other parties will crash and burn like the narrative we had on here for years that no one cared about the EU and it was a non-issue... And then we voted to leave.
> > @Mysticrose said:
> > Excellent post by Mike.
> >
> On the contrary, I have rarely read a thread header here that I have disagreed with more. I disagree that it is "rubbish thinking" that Labour is vulnerable in its Leave voting Westminster seat (or at least many of them). In fact it is "rubbish thinking" to dismiss that threat.
>
> What people are forgetting is that Labour built a successful campaign* in 2017 around a position of defusing Brexit as an issue, which largely allowed them to keep their Leave voters whilst still as it turns out attracting tactical votes from some Remainers in a polarised two party election. Any general election fought in the near future will be very different and the 2019 Euros demonstrated just how vulnerable Labour is in its Leave voting seats, especially some of the marginal gains in 2017 listed above, as well as other narrow holds (e.g Dudley North even before Austin relinquished the whip).
>
> Note that that does not mean that I am denying that there is a good tactical case for Labour now to tack towards Remain as the least bad option available to it, at least consolidating support amongst those who are at least receptive to a clear message. Significant losses for Labour in strong Leave voting areas are very likely now for Labour - people who are not going to be won back by continued sitting on the fence. If the Tories elect an unequivocal leaver as leader then the "very likely" become the inevitable. In those circumstances, Labour's best bet is to try and hold their support and pick up a few seats in compensation in Remain voting areas to try and contain the net losses to reasonable levels.
>
>
> * Successful at least in terms of a campaign that turned around opinion from the starting point of a huge deficit if not quite reaching the winning post.
>
I find it hard to believe that TBP voters in Durham or Doncaster are just Tories on holiday.
> > @Pulpstar said:
> > Labour's next problem won't be the tack to remain, it'll be the absolute lack of enthusiasm with which Corbyn delivers the half hearted second referendum message.
>
> I agree. It's a massive problem for Labour. I'm sure McDonnell also agrees with you. Will he take action by gently persuading Corbyn to set aside for someone who believes in his socialist agenda but is more voter friendly? Not himself obviously but one of the women.
They could do what the Conservatives did and not take a party position on leave/remain. Let Corbyn campaign for Leave and the bulk of the party campaign for Remain. Might actually help Remain.
EDIT: Yep that works
> > @GIN1138 said:
> > > @TheScreamingEagles said:
> > > https://twitter.com/skynews/status/1133670495679860737?s=21
> >
> > Oh god they're not still going on about that bloody bus are they?
>
> It's not about the bus, it's about the statements Johnson made repeatedly in the media.
> There is no question he misled the public deliberately; as far as I can tell the main question at stake here is whether or not the relevant legislation covers this, and in my inexpert opinion it does not.
>
> Johnson will walk free and in the criminal sense is entirely innocent.
Agreed, sadly he will get away with it, though it doesn't mean it is not a worthwhile exercise. As Alan Sugar has pointed out, any CEO who made the kind of wild promises backed by downright lies in the way that politicians like Boris (and Corbyn) do would be locked up for misleading shareholders. It is about time politicians were held to higher regulatory standards than CEOs of public companies.
The right question is will Boris lied be all over the news during the leadership votes?
> I don't know what you Tories have planned, there do seem to have been a lot of admiring glances towards the Republicans vote suppression strategies, but short of suspending elections then the Tories remaining in power 'for ever' seem incredibly short, even being generous and assuming we are thinking more 1000 year Tory reich style then I think most of your fellow Tories have realised that isn't happening....
>
> I don't want to dampen your spirits but the reason the rest of the Tories aren't quite so happy is because they have a slightly more realistic view of the Conservatives electoral future.
>
> Yeah good try. A for effort. I shall try to keep the rhetorical devices at their most basic for you in future (maybe forever).
>
> We shall of course see whether or not the Conservatives stay in power at the next GE or are supplanted by Jeremy's Labour Party. Or Nigel for that matter. My view, what with the shenanigans in Scotland and the various competing views internally, oh and the fact that Jeremy (not you, him) is an absolute fucking loon, is that the Labour Party as currently constituted will not be doing the supplanting.
>
> As I responded initially to your first (equally ill-informed) point my view is that if you take Jeremy and his Socialist Wykehamists out of the party and replace them with some more centre-left types, there is a very good chance that Labour could form the next government.
>
> Edit: perhaps you as well.
If they did put someone with some credibility in charge (Kier Starmer would do) I would vote for them for the first time ever (don't tell Conservative Central Office - I need to keep my membership card to vote against Boris)
He can play the martyr . However it will remind others what a lying charlatan he is .
As it continues to move towards metropolitan elitism, there is less and less reason for these people to vote for them.
> The court case against Bozo will help him with the Tory Membership and Leavers.
>
> He can play the martyr . However it will remind others what a lying charlatan he is .
>
>
He might just do a Jeffrey Archer - he will need to be very careful
> @dixiedean It might be both !
Agreed. It might be. The problem for the Tories is that, as I added in an edit, the rising new force, with one simple policy, sits in their natural political territory,, as the SNP to SLAB.
There will always be voters of the left to vote Labour. There is, as yet, no competition there in England at least. If you are of the Right there is now a choice.
I have no idea if this prosecution will succeed or not (I suspect not), but I do think this is an interesting question.
There are already clearly some things you cannot say, and you can be prosecuted for saying them.
A legal case that explores some of those limits is probably of value
https://twitter.com/OliverCooper/status/1133682728929562630
Tories win - Leave, deal or no deal.
Labour win - Renegotiate, put resulting soft BINO to a Ref, where it loses to Remain.
So, a GE that is a quasi Ref leads (if Lab win) to an actual Ref which leads to Remain.
Once again their strategy is absolutely hopeless.
> https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1133682217220235264
>
>
>
> I have no idea if this prosecution will succeed or not (I suspect not), but I do think this is an interesting question.
>
> There are already clearly some things you cannot say, and you can be prosecuted for saying them.
>
> A legal case that explores some of those limits is probably of value
For political questions, we have a political remedy.
Consider <em>R (on the application of Wheeler) v Office of the Prime Minister</em>, where Stuart Wheeler's JR in respect of the signing of the Lisbon Treaty was blocked in part because, if you thought the Lisbon Treaty = EU Constitution = breach of government promise, you had a political remedy.
A lot of people don't even think the Tories can win the next election but you think you are guaranteed power as long as you have your current opponents, who are damaging you greatly....
Ill informed doesn't cover it, you are telling the fuhrer victory is in sight in April 1945.
> https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1133682217220235264
>
>
>
> I have no idea if this prosecution will succeed or not (I suspect not), but I do think this is an interesting question.
>
> There are already clearly some things you cannot say, and you can be prosecuted for saying them.
>
> A legal case that explores some of those limits is probably of value
Boris's barrister seems to be suggesting that his client is at least guilty of low quality political debate
> I suspect that it is true that Labour leavers are generally less motivated than Tory leavers when it comes to the ballot box. However Labour does need to give what was formally its bedrock vote (north and Scotland) a reason to vote for it.
>
> As it continues to move towards metropolitan elitism, there is less and less reason for these people to vote for them.
That’s a good point . What’s happening to Labour is similar to what’s happening with the Dems in the USA.
> I don't know what you Tories have planned, there do seem to have been a lot of admiring glances towards the Republicans vote suppression strategies, but short of suspending elections then the Tories remaining in power 'for ever' seem incredibly short, even being generous and assuming we are thinking more 1000 year Tory reich style then I think most of your fellow Tories have realised that isn't happening....
>
> I don't want to dampen your spirits but the reason the rest of the Tories aren't quite so happy is because they have a slightly more realistic view of the Conservatives electoral future.
>
> Yeah good try. A for effort. I shall try to keep the rhetorical devices at their most basic for you in future (maybe forever).
>
> We shall of course see whether or not the Conservatives stay in power at the next GE or are supplanted by Jeremy's Labour Party. Or Nigel for that matter. My view, what with the shenanigans in Scotland and the various competing views internally, oh and the fact that Jeremy (not you, him) is an absolute fucking loon, is that the Labour Party as currently constituted will not be doing the supplanting.
>
> As I responded initially to your first (equally ill-informed) point my view is that if you take Jeremy and his Socialist Wykehamists out of the party and replace them with some more centre-left types, there is a very good chance that Labour could form the next government.
>
> Edit: perhaps you as well.
>
> Your original post talked about being glad for Farage and Corbyn because they will mean opposition 'for ever'
>
> A lot of people don't even think the Tories can win the next election but you think you are guaranteed power as long as you have your current opponents, who are damaging you greatly....
>
> Ill informed doesn't cover it, you are telling the fuhrer victory is in sight in April 1945.
Haha, hilarious coming from a devotee of Mr. Thicky and his deluded cabal . My response to your last sentence is "take the beam out of thine own eye"
I can't see an end to the political problems until either A50 is revoked or we leave. And even then, it isn't likely to end the matter.
This could run and run until well into the mid 2020's if we're not careful.
> > @Scott_P said:
> > https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1133682217220235264
> >
> >
> >
> > I have no idea if this prosecution will succeed or not (I suspect not), but I do think this is an interesting question.
> >
> > There are already clearly some things you cannot say, and you can be prosecuted for saying them.
> >
> > A legal case that explores some of those limits is probably of value
>
> Boris's barrister seems to be suggesting that his client is at least guilty of low quality political debate
Yes. "Johnson's lies were not criminal" isn't a great message to take to the voters. Opponents will make hay of this. Real political peril for the current favourite. Delicious.
I'm not sure Ouch is true or accurate, that blank list almost generous - there are a lot of negative outcomes that are missing which could be listed.
Even ignoring Brexit destroying any chance of a sane debate on social care costs should be listed.
And yet she's still only the second worst prime minister of the 21st century...
How on earth will you get a verdict.
> If let’s say Bozo does end up in court a jury is likely to be a mix of Remainers and Leavers .
>
> How on earth will you get a unanimous verdict or even a 10 to 2 one which sometimes is allowed .
> > @ah009 said:
>
> > > @GIN1138 said:
>
> > > > @TheScreamingEagles said:
>
> > > > https://twitter.com/skynews/status/1133670495679860737
>
>
>
> > >
>
> > > Oh god they're not still going on about that bloody bus are they?
>
> >
>
> > It's not about the bus, it's about the statements Johnson made repeatedly in the media.
>
> > There is no question he misled the public deliberately; as far as I can tell the main question at stake here is whether or not the relevant legislation covers this, and in my inexpert opinion it does not.
>
> >
>
> > Johnson will walk free and in the criminal sense is entirely innocent.
>
>
>
> Agreed, sadly he will get away with it, though it doesn't mean it is not a worthwhile exercise. As Alan Sugar has pointed out, any CEO who made the kind of wild promises backed by downright lies in the way that politicians like Boris (and Corbyn) do would be locked up for misleading shareholders. It is about time politicians were held to higher regulatory standards than CEOs of public companies.
>
> No. Politicians are held to account for their promises by the people at the appropriate time. Dragging politicians through courts is a really bad idea, it’s a very long and slippery slope.
Nonsense. The electorate rarely does any such thing.
It is not difficult; don't lie. If it is deliberately misleading you will face jail. We have a proper separation of powers between the judiciary and the legislature, so it is not a "slippery slope" at all, quite the contrary. Politicians like Johnson bring our system of government and our so-called democracy into disrepute.
> > @TheScreamingEagles said:
>
> > https://twitter.com/skynews/status/1133670495679860737
>
>
>
>
>
> Does anyone know how many Private Prosecutions for Misconduct in a Public Office have succeeded? Just asking.
>
>
>
> I'd say they would have more hope of getting Prezza for his lunchtime BJs, than Boris for his Brexit prezzentations.
>
> Wrong question.
>
> The right question is will Boris lied be all over the news during the leadership votes?
Do bears shit in the woods?
Obviously, but the only people who will be outraged by this will be anti-Brexit partisans.
I am curious why though?
It is just brexit?
I realise that from reading PB you might think Labour are united against Brexit apart from the most left wing MPs but that isn't the case at all. Looking at those who are backing Brexit most strongly I think there is an argument that the right of the Labour party is more pro Brexit than the left...
Both are pretty anti Brexit in fairness.
> > @ah009 said:
> > > @GIN1138 said:
> > > > @TheScreamingEagles said:
> > > > https://twitter.com/skynews/status/1133670495679860737?s=21
> > >
> > > Oh god they're not still going on about that bloody bus are they?
> >
> > It's not about the bus, it's about the statements Johnson made repeatedly in the media.
> > There is no question he misled the public deliberately; as far as I can tell the main question at stake here is whether or not the relevant legislation covers this, and in my inexpert opinion it does not.
> >
> > Johnson will walk free and in the criminal sense is entirely innocent.
>
> Agreed, sadly he will get away with it, though it doesn't mean it is not a worthwhile exercise. As Alan Sugar has pointed out, any CEO who made the kind of wild promises backed by downright lies in the way that politicians like Boris (and Corbyn) do would be locked up for misleading shareholders. It is about time politicians were held to higher regulatory standards than CEOs of public companies.
Normally Tories and Ukippers etc get away with murder. So it`s nice to see that this pack of lies is at least going through a bit of a process. It may make some of them think twice about it next time.
So we are now focused on what the meaning of
isfor ever is. Righty-ho. I mean I try to keep the ball in the air here on PB but sometimes I realise one needs to get down to dullard level so apologies (to non-dullards) I will spell it out again.I expanded on my views on the current situation with the Labour Party - namely that as currently constituted, with the situation in Scotland, and with the current internal fighting - that they would not win the next GE.
But if you want to knock yourself out on the old "for ever" thing and make a funny about the, say, 2079 election, then by all means go for it.
> > @Nigel_Foremain said:
> > > @ah009 said:
> > > > @GIN1138 said:
> > > > > @TheScreamingEagles said:
> > > > > https://twitter.com/skynews/status/1133670495679860737?s=21
> > > >
> > > > Oh god they're not still going on about that bloody bus are they?
> > >
> > > It's not about the bus, it's about the statements Johnson made repeatedly in the media.
> > > There is no question he misled the public deliberately; as far as I can tell the main question at stake here is whether or not the relevant legislation covers this, and in my inexpert opinion it does not.
> > >
> > > Johnson will walk free and in the criminal sense is entirely innocent.
> >
> > Agreed, sadly he will get away with it, though it doesn't mean it is not a worthwhile exercise. As Alan Sugar has pointed out, any CEO who made the kind of wild promises backed by downright lies in the way that politicians like Boris (and Corbyn) do would be locked up for misleading shareholders. It is about time politicians were held to higher regulatory standards than CEOs of public companies.
>
> Normally Tories and Ukippers etc get away with murder. So it`s nice to see that this pack of lies is at least going through a bit of a process. It may make some of them think twice about it next time.
I think Labour and the SNP have also had their fair share of liars and fantasists that believe that it is in the best interests of the plebs for them to be misled, and Corbyn is an arch practitioner.
It does need to be stopped, but that would most likely require primary legislation, which would be stopped by the vested interests in all parties. It is bizarre that we do not expect our legislators to have as high standards as is required in almost every other walk of professional life
> > @Sandpit said:
>
> > No. Politicians are held to account for their promises by the people at the appropriate time. Dragging politicians through courts is a really bad idea, it’s a very long and slippery slope.
>
>
>
> Nonsense. The electorate rarely does any such thing.
>
>
>
> It is not difficult; don't lie. If it is deliberately misleading you will face jail. We have a proper separation of powers between the judiciary and the legislature, so it is not a "slippery slope" at all, quite the contrary. Politicians like Johnson bring our system of government and our so-called democracy into disrepute.
>
> If the electorate choose not to hold politicians to account for lying to them that is up to them.
In Wheeler v Labour Prime Minister 2008 the Divisional Court held that manifesto promises were NOT justiciable. "Even if we had accepted that the relevant ministerial statements had the effect of a promise ... such a promise would not in our view give rise to a legitimate expectation enforceable in public law, such that the courts could intervene... The subject-matter, nature and context of a promise of this kind place it in the realm of politics, not of the courts."
> > @isam said:
>
> > There are many other issues for the left to campaign on, which will be aired at a General Election.
> >
> > You are entitled to your opinion, but I’d say if we haven’t left by the time of the next GE it will be a single issue affair about Brexit.
> >
> > Tone down the condescension
>
> Don't lecture me on etiquette. You're the most snide person on this site, constantly putting people down with nasty little retorts ('calm down dear' being just one of your latest).
>
> It isn't simply an opinion. As Mike Smithson has posted, Brexit is of far less concern as a GE voting issue to those on the left than the right. This is what opinion polling has demonstrated and as Mike has, once more, illustrated in this thread header.
>
> I'm afraid that to those on the Alt-right, Brexit so dominates their landscape that it's like a religion. They are obsessives. To many on the left there are other issues and, frankly, until Cameron called for the vote most of us* were pretty ambivalent about the EU. It ranked very low in opinion polling on what mattered. And it still won't dominate the left. To us, it's frankly less important.
Trouble is, if The Brexit Party stand at the next GE, the campaign will be about virtually nothing else. Somewhat justified paranoia will lead to endless discussion about how to stop Farage winning - either by discrediting him or by attempting to forge a Remain alliance.
> > @TOPPING said:
>
> > I don't know what you Tories have planned, there do seem to have been a lot of admiring glances towards the Republicans vote suppression strategies, but short of suspending elections then the Tories remaining in power 'for ever' seem incredibly short, even being generous and assuming we are thinking more 1000 year Tory reich style then I think most of your fellow Tories have realised that isn't happening....
>
> >
>
> > I don't want to dampen your spirits but the reason the rest of the Tories aren't quite so happy is because they have a slightly more realistic view of the Conservatives electoral future.
>
> >
>
> > Yeah good try. A for effort. I shall try to keep the rhetorical devices at their most basic for you in future (maybe forever).
>
> >
>
> > We shall of course see whether or not the Conservatives stay in power at the next GE or are supplanted by Jeremy's Labour Party. Or Nigel for that matter. My view, what with the shenanigans in Scotland and the various competing views internally, oh and the fact that Jeremy (not you, him) is an absolute fucking loon, is that the Labour Party as currently constituted will not be doing the supplanting.
>
> >
>
> > As I responded initially to your first (equally ill-informed) point my view is that if you take Jeremy and his Socialist Wykehamists out of the party and replace them with some more centre-left types, there is a very good chance that Labour could form the next government.
>
> >
>
> > Edit: perhaps you as well.
>
>
>
> If they did put someone with some credibility in charge (Kier Starmer would do) I would vote for them for the first time ever (don't tell Conservative Central Office - I need to keep my membership card to vote against Boris)
>
> I agree, but cannot see a scenario where one of these Corbynite idiots isn't the next leader. They might manage to scrape around and find a woman to prove how radical they are (imagine!), but it will be someone dim like Del Piero or Rayner.
>
> Your opinion on Del Piero would probably hold more weight if you hadn't identified an MP on the right of the party who has been anti Corbyn as a Corbynite...
>
> I am curious why though?
>
> It is just brexit?
>
> I realise that from reading PB you might think Labour are united against Brexit apart from the most left wing MPs but that isn't the case at all. Looking at those who are backing Brexit most strongly I think there is an argument that the right of the Labour party is more pro Brexit than the left...
>
> Both are pretty anti Brexit in fairness.
Del Piero voted to trigger Article 50, then moaned on Twitter about her immigrant parents having to apply for settled status. She was quite happy to throw all the other migrants under the bus.
> > @nico67 said:
> > If let’s say Bozo does end up in court a jury is likely to be a mix of Remainers and Leavers .
> >
> > How on earth will you get a unanimous verdict or even a 10 to 2 one which sometimes is allowed .
>
>
Because juries don't tend to act like that.
I despise Johnson and Leave. But from what I know so far, I would be minded to acquit. Obviously I'd listen carefully to the evidence first. But my political opinions would not have any bearing whatsoever on my decision. I doubt I'm rare in that respect. Vicious tribalists are rarer than you might suppose.
> > @Sandpit said:
>
> > No. Politicians are held to account for their promises by the people at the appropriate time. Dragging politicians through courts is a really bad idea, it’s a very long and slippery slope.
>
> Nonsense. The electorate rarely does any such thing.
>
> It is not difficult; don't lie. If it is deliberately misleading you will face jail. We have a proper separation of powers between the judiciary and the legislature, so it is not a "slippery slope" at all, quite the contrary. Politicians like Johnson bring our system of government and our so-called democracy into disrepute.
>
> If the electorate choose not to hold politicians to account for lying to them that is up to them.
If you had a solicitor that lied on significant matters relating to your family, should it just be up to you? No it wouldn't be, she/he would be struck off for malpractice. Politicians need to be held to higher standards. It is a shame people on here seem to think it is OK for them to be liars so long as they have a big support base FFS!
> > @Mysticrose said:
> > > @isam said:
> >
> > > There are many other issues for the left to campaign on, which will be aired at a General Election.
> > >
> > > You are entitled to your opinion, but I’d say if we haven’t left by the time of the next GE it will be a single issue affair about Brexit.
> > >
> > > Tone down the condescension
> >
> > Don't lecture me on etiquette. You're the most snide person on this site, constantly putting people down with nasty little retorts ('calm down dear' being just one of your latest).
> >
> > It isn't simply an opinion. As Mike Smithson has posted, Brexit is of far less concern as a GE voting issue to those on the left than the right. This is what opinion polling has demonstrated and as Mike has, once more, illustrated in this thread header.
> >
> > I'm afraid that to those on the Alt-right, Brexit so dominates their landscape that it's like a religion. They are obsessives. To many on the left there are other issues and, frankly, until Cameron called for the vote most of us* were pretty ambivalent about the EU. It ranked very low in opinion polling on what mattered. And it still won't dominate the left. To us, it's frankly less important.
>
> Trouble is, if The Brexit Party stand at the next GE, the campaign will be about virtually nothing else. Somewhat justified paranoia will lead to endless discussion about how to stop Farage winning - either by discrediting him or by attempting to forge a Remain alliance.
>
>
I suspect Farage would be destroyed by multiple and repeated questions on his plans for the NHS...
The public wants an end - not more discussions whether by extensions or further referendum.
The LDs are nearly offering that - if they switched to revoke, no referendum they might do even better.
Trying to find a way of punishing politicians because you disagree with what they say, is the reaction of demagogues and dictators.
> > @OblitusSumMe said:
> > > @Sandpit said:
> >
> > > No. Politicians are held to account for their promises by the people at the appropriate time. Dragging politicians through courts is a really bad idea, it’s a very long and slippery slope.
> >
> >
> >
> > Nonsense. The electorate rarely does any such thing.
> >
> >
> >
> > It is not difficult; don't lie. If it is deliberately misleading you will face jail. We have a proper separation of powers between the judiciary and the legislature, so it is not a "slippery slope" at all, quite the contrary. Politicians like Johnson bring our system of government and our so-called democracy into disrepute.
> >
> > If the electorate choose not to hold politicians to account for lying to them that is up to them.
>
> In Wheeler v Labour Prime Minister 2008 the Divisional Court held that manifesto promises were NOT justiciable. "Even if we had accepted that the relevant ministerial statements had the effect of a promise ... such a promise would not in our view give rise to a legitimate expectation enforceable in public law, such that the courts could intervene... The subject-matter, nature and context of a promise of this kind place it in the realm of politics, not of the courts."
thank you for that, very interesting. I am not sure it overturns my point though. In that particular case the court did not see a promise as a lie. It is a different thing.
Better, on balance, to leave it as a political, public reaction, than the courts, rather than overdoing it and causing unintended consequences.
It is a very silly reason to call her Corbynite though, usually if they are Labour and doing something stupid they are Corbyn's opponents. See everything CUK did as an example of Corbyn's opponents within Labour.
> > @argyllrs said:
> > > @OblitusSumMe said:
> > > > @Sandpit said:
> > >
> > > > No. Politicians are held to account for their promises by the people at the appropriate time. Dragging politicians through courts is a really bad idea, it’s a very long and slippery slope.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Nonsense. The electorate rarely does any such thing.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > It is not difficult; don't lie. If it is deliberately misleading you will face jail. We have a proper separation of powers between the judiciary and the legislature, so it is not a "slippery slope" at all, quite the contrary. Politicians like Johnson bring our system of government and our so-called democracy into disrepute.
> > >
> > > If the electorate choose not to hold politicians to account for lying to them that is up to them.
> >
> > In Wheeler v Labour Prime Minister 2008 the Divisional Court held that manifesto promises were NOT justiciable. "Even if we had accepted that the relevant ministerial statements had the effect of a promise ... such a promise would not in our view give rise to a legitimate expectation enforceable in public law, such that the courts could intervene... The subject-matter, nature and context of a promise of this kind place it in the realm of politics, not of the courts."
>
> thank you for that, very interesting. I am not sure it overturns my point though. In that particular case the court did not see a promise as a lie. It is a different thing.
Indeed. You can say what you like about the future. It hasn't happened yet.
> > @isam said:
>
> > The best idea would be for Leave and Remain parties to form two alliances and run as such at a GE. Much more likely good of a settled result (and it being Leave!)
>
>
>
> Oct GE:
>
>
>
> Tories under (say) Johnson running on Hard Brexit. Labour under Corbyn running on No Brexit.
>
>
>
> There's your 2nd referendum.
>
> I don’t know a single lib dem that would vote for corbyn or Johnson so no way would that be a second referendum
I'm a LibDem who switched to Corbyn's Labour, and polling shows there's plenty of us.
The idea of the next GE being a proxy referendum is anathema to me. At the same time, voters will be aware of the risk of a victory for a Hard-Brexit leader (Raab or Farage) and will vote tactically accordingly. It would make it easier for voters, and reduce the number of spoiler candidates, if some electoral deals were done. You're right that there is a limit to how much people will switch to another centre-left party, but there are enough people willing to do so to make it worthwhile.
> > @Sandpit said:
>
> > > @ah009 said:
>
> >
>
> > > > @GIN1138 said:
>
> >
>
> > > > > @TheScreamingEagles said:
>
> >
>
> > > > > https://twitter.com/skynews/status/1133670495679860737
>
>
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > Oh god they're not still going on about that bloody bus are they?
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > It's not about the bus, it's about the statements Johnson made repeatedly in the media.
>
> >
>
> > > There is no question he misled the public deliberately; as far as I can tell the main question at stake here is whether or not the relevant legislation covers this, and in my inexpert opinion it does not.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > Johnson will walk free and in the criminal sense is entirely innocent.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Agreed, sadly he will get away with it, though it doesn't mean it is not a worthwhile exercise. As Alan Sugar has pointed out, any CEO who made the kind of wild promises backed by downright lies in the way that politicians like Boris (and Corbyn) do would be locked up for misleading shareholders. It is about time politicians were held to higher regulatory standards than CEOs of public companies.
>
> >
>
> > No. Politicians are held to account for their promises by the people at the appropriate time. Dragging politicians through courts is a really bad idea, it’s a very long and slippery slope.
>
>
>
> Nonsense. The electorate rarely does any such thing.
>
>
>
> It is not difficult; don't lie. If it is deliberately misleading you will face jail. We have a proper separation of powers between the judiciary and the legislature, so it is not a "slippery slope" at all, quite the contrary. Politicians like Johnson bring our system of government and our so-called democracy into disrepute.
>
> A hundred times no. It’s up to the electorate - and only the electorate in a democracy - to hold politicians to account should they wish to do so.
>
> Trying to find a way of punishing politicians because you disagree with what they say, is the reaction of demagogues and dictators.
Oh dear. You believe we have democracy? Are you not a Farragist? I thought you would be in favour of a little Putinesque demagoguery?
Seriously though, lying by politicians, public figures or professionals is a very bad thing. It is shame you do not agree. Having a large following that overlooks lying does not make it right, and that really is the domain of dictators and despots. It is easy to legislate against it and make it apply to all stripes. The fact that you think lying is OK and you support Brexit tells us all we need to know I guess!
Leave 48%
Remain 52%
> GE 2017 was fought on the premise both sides had accepted the result & we were leaving. Farage had retired. I think looking at that election is a waste of time, akin to placing too much importance on firm ground form when the going is heavy
Circumstances have changed and people might well vote very differently than they did a few short years ago?
I quite agree.
It will help him with the Tory Membership and Leavers but the fact the headlines are mentioning misconduct in public office just highlights what damaged goods he is .
This will open up other issues in which he has been found wanting .
> > @nichomar said:
> > > @isam said:
> >
> > > The best idea would be for Leave and Remain parties to form two alliances and run as such at a GE. Much more likely good of a settled result (and it being Leave!)
> >
> >
> >
> > Oct GE:
> >
> >
> >
> > Tories under (say) Johnson running on Hard Brexit. Labour under Corbyn running on No Brexit.
> >
> >
> >
> > There's your 2nd referendum.
> >
> > I don’t know a single lib dem that would vote for corbyn or Johnson so no way would that be a second referendum
>
> I'm a LibDem who switched to Corbyn's Labour, and polling shows there's plenty of us.
>
> The idea of the next GE being a proxy referendum is anathema to me. At the same time, voters will be aware of the risk of a victory for a Hard-Brexit leader (Raab or Farage) and will vote tactically accordingly. It would make it easier for voters, and reduce the number of spoiler candidates, if some electoral deals were done. You're right that there is a limit to how much people will switch to another centre-left party, but there are enough people willing to do so to make it worthwhile.
Hilarious. That is one of the most unbelievable trolls I have seen on here for years!! A LibDem that has switched to hard left Corbyn. I must go and chortle my way to lunch!
Genuinely curious....
Edit: I'm still sort of curious but clearly so used to seeing it I've stopped paying attention and didn't notice the figures swap!
> > @Greenwich_Floater said:
> > I suspect that it is true that Labour leavers are generally less motivated than Tory leavers when it comes to the ballot box. However Labour does need to give what was formally its bedrock vote (north and Scotland) a reason to vote for it.
> >
> > As it continues to move towards metropolitan elitism, there is less and less reason for these people to vote for them.
>
> That’s a good point . What’s happening to Labour is similar to what’s happening with the Dems in the USA.
>
>
>
>
Labour is in a worse position than the Democrats, both because its birth as champion of the working class make finding a new path exceptionally difficult and because it already faces competition from other parties as the alternative to the Conservatives.
> Just for old time's sake:
>
> Leave 48%
> Remain 52%
Yep that is prob where it is
I would literally pay double to sit in a train carriage where there was a strongly enforced ban on crisps.
> Very much off topic:
> I would literally pay double to sit in a train carriage where there was a strongly enforced ban on crisps.
Immediately I sent that, someone's just got on, sat next to me and immediately opened a huge bag of crisps. Fuck my life.
> > @Sandpit said:
> > > @Sandpit said:
> >
> > > > @ah009 said:
> >
> > >
> >
> > > > > @GIN1138 said:
> >
> > >
> >
> > > > > > @TheScreamingEagles said:
> >
> > >
> >
> > > > > > https://twitter.com/skynews/status/1133670495679860737
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > > > > Oh god they're not still going on about that bloody bus are they?
> >
> > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > > > It's not about the bus, it's about the statements Johnson made repeatedly in the media.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > > There is no question he misled the public deliberately; as far as I can tell the main question at stake here is whether or not the relevant legislation covers this, and in my inexpert opinion it does not.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> >
> >
> > > Agreed, sadly he will get away with it, though it doesn't mean it is not a worthwhile exercise. As Alan Sugar has pointed out, any CEO who made the kind of wild promises backed by downright lies in the way that politicians like Boris (and Corbyn) do would be locked up for misleading shareholders. It is about time politicians were held to higher regulatory standards than CEOs of public companies.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > No. Politicians are held to account for their promises by the people at the appropriate time. Dragging politicians through courts is a really bad idea, it’s a very
> > It is not difficult; don't lie. If it is deliberately misleading you will face jail. We have a proper separation of powers between the judiciary and the legislature, so it is not a "slippery slope" at all, quite the contrary. Politicians like Johnson bring our system of government and our so-called democracy into disrepute.
> >
> > A hundred times no. It’s up to the electorate - and only the electorate in a democracy - to hold politicians to account should they wish to do so.
> >
> > Trying to find a way of punishing politicians because you disagree with what they say, is the reaction of demagogues and dictators.
>
> Oh dear. You believe we have democracy? Are you not a Farragist? I thought you would be in favour of a little Putinesque demagoguery?
>
> Seriously though, lying by politicians, public figures or professionals is a very bad thing. It is shame you do not agree. Having a large following that overlooks lying does not make it right, and that really is the domain of dictators and despots. It is easy to legislate against it and make it apply to all stripes. The fact that you think lying is OK and you support Brexit tells us all we need to know I guess!
Come now, like Voltaire, we should defend to the death the right to be lied to by politicians.
> The [Tories] then collapsed in Council elections, losing power in places once thought unthinkable. They backed it up by coming third or worse in every district bar one at the Euros.
>
>
> Which was the one?
My guess was Dumfries but they missed second place by 0.8%
> > @Sunil_Prasannan said:
> > The [Tories] then collapsed in Council elections, losing power in places once thought unthinkable. They backed it up by coming third or worse in every district bar one at the Euros.
> >
> >
> > Which was the one?
>
> My guess was Dumfries but they missed second place by 0.8%
Next door - South Ayrshire, where Trump has his golf course. Second with 20.5%
> > @ah009 said:
> > Very much off topic:
> > I would literally pay double to sit in a train carriage where there was a strongly enforced ban on crisps.
>
> Immediately I sent that, someone's just got on, sat next to me and immediately opened a huge bag of crisps. Fuck my life.
Probably a PBer...
> > @Nigel_Foremain said:
> > > @Sandpit said:
> > > > @Sandpit said:
> > >
> > > > > @ah009 said:
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > > > @GIN1138 said:
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > ; @TheScreamingEagles said:
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > > > Oh god they're not still going on about that bloody bus are they?
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > > It's not about the bus, it's about the statements Johnson made repeatedly in the media.
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > > There is no question he misled the public deliberately; as far as I can tell the main question at stake here is whether or not the relevant legislation covers this, and in my inexpert opinion it does not.
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > Agreed, sadly he will get away with it, though it doesn't mean it is not a worthwhile exercise. As Alan Sugar has pointed out, any CEO who made the kind of wild promises backed by downright lies in the way that politicians like Boris (and Corbyn) do would be locked up for misleading shareholders. It is about time politicians were held to higher regulatory standards than CEOs of public companies.
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > No. Politicians are held to account for their promises by the people at the appropriate time. Dragging politicians through courts is a really bad idea, it’s a very
>
> > > It is not difficult; don't lie. If it is deliberately misleading you will face jail. We have a proper separation of powers between the judiciary and the legislature, so it is not a "slippery slope" at all, quite the contrary. Politicians like Johnson bring our system of government and our so-called democracy into disrepute.
> > >
> > > A hundred times no. It’s up to the electorate - and only the electorate in a democracy - to hold politicians to account should they wish to do so.
> > >
> > > Trying to find a way of punishing politicians because you disagree with what they say, is the reaction of demagogues and dictators.
> >
> > Oh dear. You believe we have democracy? Are you not a Farragist? I thought you would be in favour of a little Putinesque demagoguery?
> >
> > Seriously though, lying by politicians, public figures or professionals is a very bad thing. It is shame you do not agree. Having a large following that overlooks lying does not make it right, and that really is the domain of dictators and despots. It is easy to legislate against it and make it apply to all stripes. The fact that you think lying is OK and you support Brexit tells us all we need to know I guess!
>
> Come now, like Voltaire, we should defend to the death the right to be lied to by politicians.
>
Theirs or ours?
> > @Nigelb said:
> > > @Nigel_Foremain said:
> > > > @Sandpit said:
> > > > > @Sandpit said:
> > > >
> > > > > > @ah009 said:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > @GIN1138 said:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Agreed, sadly he will get away with it, though it doesn't mean it is not a worthwhile exercise. As Alan Sugar has pointed out, any CEO who made the kind of wild promises backed by downright lies in the way that politicians like Boris (and Corbyn) do would be locked up for misleading shareholders. It is about time politicians were held to higher regulatory standards than CEOs of public companies.
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > No. Politicians are held to account for their promises by the people at the appropriate time. Dragging politicians through courts is a really bad idea, it’s a very
> >
> > > > It is not difficult; don't lie. If it is deliberately misleading you will face jail. We have a proper separation of powers between the judiciary and the legislature, so it is not a "slippery slope" at all, quite the contrary. Politicians like Johnson bring our system of government and our so-called democracy into disrepute.
> > > >
> > > > A hundred times no. It’s up to the electorate - and only the electorate in a democracy - to hold politicians to account should they wish to do so.
> > > >
> > > > Trying to find a way of punishing politicians because you disagree with what they say, is the reaction of demagogues and dictators.
> > >
> > > Oh dear. You believe we have democracy? Are you not a Farragist? I thought you would be in favour of a little Putinesque demagoguery?
> > >
> > > Seriously though, lying by politicians, public figures or professionals is a very bad thing. It is shame you do not agree. Having a large following that overlooks lying does not make it right, and that really is the domain of dictators and despots. It is easy to legislate against it and make it apply to all stripes. The fact that you think lying is OK and you support Brexit tells us all we need to know I guess!
> >
> > Come now, like Voltaire, we should defend to the death the right to be lied to by politicians.
> >
>
> Theirs or ours?
Indeed.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2019/05/28/britains-ever-falling-interest-rates-have-entered-alice-wonderland/
Asronishing, given the political chaos looks about get a whole lot worse.
I agree with the posters below who say it’ll martyr him, which he’ll exploit to the full.
> One thought occurred to me is that the other offer the Brexit party is making is that it will make the topic of leaving the EU disappear - quickly.
>
> The public wants an end - not more discussions whether by extensions or further referendum.
>
> The LDs are nearly offering that - if they switched to revoke, no referendum they might do even better.
Leaving without a deal will not make the topic disappear - it will be magnified tenfold and be blamed for the subsequent economic collapse. Revoke and remain might perhaps be more successful in removing the topic from the public arena, that depends how people respond to the cries of outrage and betrayal which would undoubtedly be heard from Brexiter MPs and media.
Should we also be calling for George Osborne to be prosecuted for the pack of lies that came out of the Treasury before the referendum? Of course not, because the place that these disputes get settled is the ballot box. Trying to equate with other professions is fatuous.
It won't swing a single vote. People who already liked BoZo may like him more, people who hate him add a reason to their list.
nobody who was going to support Hancock is going to switch to BoZo because he ends up in court
> > @Dadge said:
> > > @nichomar said:
> > > > @isam said:
> > >
> > > > The best idea would be for Leave and Remain parties to form two alliances and run as such at a GE. Much more likely good of a settled result (and it being Leave!)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Oct GE:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Tories under (say) Johnson running on Hard Brexit. Labour under Corbyn running on No Brexit.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > There's your 2nd referendum.
> > >
> > > I don’t know a single lib dem that would vote for corbyn or Johnson so no way would that be a second referendum
> >
> > I'm a LibDem who switched to Corbyn's Labour, and polling shows there's plenty of us.
> >
> > The idea of the next GE being a proxy referendum is anathema to me. At the same time, voters will be aware of the risk of a victory for a Hard-Brexit leader (Raab or Farage) and will vote tactically accordingly. It would make it easier for voters, and reduce the number of spoiler candidates, if some electoral deals were done. You're right that there is a limit to how much people will switch to another centre-left party, but there are enough people willing to do so to make it worthwhile.
>
> Hilarious. That is one of the most unbelievable trolls I have seen on here for years!! A LibDem that has switched to hard left Corbyn. I must go and chortle my way to lunch!
What a bizarre comment. Had you started your lunchtime drinking early? Your addled brain has forgotten that "hard left" Corbyn got 40% at the last election. Do you think he pulled all those extra supporters out of his armpit?
The whole reason Labour held most of its Leave seats at the last general election and indeed gained a few was because it promised to deliver Brexit. Yet 2 years later both the Tories and Labour have still NOT delivered the Brexit Leave voters voted for and until they do both Labour and Tory Leave seats are at risk from the Brexit Party.
Hence on Sunday in the Euro elections count the Brexit Party swept to victory in Labour Leave seats from Bolsover to Wigan and they will very likely repeat that performance in the Peterborough by election on Thursday week.
You would have thought Scotland 2015 would have taught Labour a lesson not to ignore its working class vote, clearly not
This sort of political witch-hunting will infuriate them.
My book wishes it was different but if I’m objective I think that’s more likely.
> > @nico67 said:
> > > @Greenwich_Floater said:
> > > I suspect that it is true that Labour leavers are generally less motivated than Tory leavers when it comes to the ballot box. However Labour does need to give what was formally its bedrock vote (north and Scotland) a reason to vote for it.
> > >
> > > As it continues to move towards metropolitan elitism, there is less and less reason for these people to vote for them.
> >
> > That’s a good point . What’s happening to Labour is similar to what’s happening with the Dems in the USA.
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> Labour is in a worse position than the Democrats, both because its birth as champion of the working class make finding a new path exceptionally difficult and because it already faces competition from other parties as the alternative to the Conservatives.
Labour's problem resembles that of its Australian sister party who also emerged from the working class, are now increasingly a party of champagne social democrats and who suffered the consequences a fortnight ago