> @Cyclefree said: > > @Sunil_Prasannan said: > > > > @Cyclefree said: > > > > > > > All is well in the real world. > > > > > > > > > > > > Not like this board which is crawling with racists. > > > > > > Islam is not a race. > > > > In many contexts it's a magically accurate predictor of race, in the same way that first language is. As with language it is possible that our brains are specifically wired to acquire it from our parents at an early age (see under Chomsky, Noam). Believing it is therefore in most cases not a voluntary choice like, say, thinking that radiohead are good musicians or the LDs are a natural party of government. Indeed it's a difficult question whether being, say, muslim is any more a voluntary or alterable choice any more than being gay is. I don't therefore have much time for the "it's a belief, so we can point at them and laugh" school of thought. > > > That is one of the most nonsensical statements I've read on here. > > If Islam is not a voluntary choice it is because of the social pressures on those who do not believe or want to leave, not least the rules on apostasy. > > Islam is a religion. Not a bit of your DNA. However much it may be important to a person it is no more worthy of protection than anything else which matters very much to a person. It is something which was created by man and can be discarded by man, as it has been in parts of the world where once it ruled. > > If we start protecting from criticism deeply held belief systems on the grounds that particular ones are more deeply held than others, we are giving up freedom of thought and will effectively end up living under the theocracy of whichever group shouts and screams the loudest. No thank you.
+1 Of course it is a choice. A choice often coerced through deliberate lack of education, that is what makes the schooling case all the more important to win.
> @justin124 said: > > @Big_G_NorthWales said: > > > @justin124 said: > > > > @Big_G_NorthWales said: > > > > > @justin124 said: > > > > > > @Big_G_NorthWales said: > > > > > > > @justin124 said: > > > > > > > > @Cyclefree said: > > > > > > > > Raab as the non-nutcase option? Really? I don’t think so. He strikes me both as a nutcase and utterly dishonest, if the reports about his behaviour from Europe and Ireland are true. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He actually sounds a pretty nasty piece of work - seeking further big spending cuts whilst reducing Income Tax to 35% > > > > > > > > > > > > 15% tax for most would be a winner > > > > > > > > > > No - it shows a callous indifference to the suffering of the less fortunate. He is clearly committed to making the Tory party even nastier than it already is - very much from the Arbeit Macht Frei wing. > > > > > > > > Low taxes help everyone and why on earth do you use that unacceptable last few words > > > > > > > > Disgusting > > > > > > Low taxes do not help everyone when accompanied by big spending cuts. Why not abolish Income Tax and get rid of all state benefits at the same time? That is clearly the direction favoured by this evil guy. > > > > You throw idiotic comments and brand people evil far too easily > > I am well versed in both economics and 20th century history - particularly with regard to the Third Reich. Those who always equate 'Arbeit Macht Frei' with genocide just reveal their ignorance of when and where the term was first used. > Raab would clearly be happy to dismantle the Welfare State in all but name - whilst slashing taxes for the benefit of Alan Bstard types such as himself. I find that evil.
It's good to see the true Justin 124 revealed in all his nastiness now he must finally have realised that Labour are not about to gain Scotland.
> @justin124 said: > > @JosiasJessop said: > > I am well versed in both economics and 20th century history - particularly with regard to the Third Reich. Those who always equate 'Arbeit Macht Frei' with genocide just reveal their ignorance of when and where the term was first used. > > (Snip) > > > > Like it or not, that's exactly what the term is now equated with. The deeper history of the phrase is pretty irrelevant. > > > > It's like people arguing that displaying the swastika is fine because it was used in other cultures for thousands of years. > > That depends on the context. When the user makes it clear that he is not alluding to genocide but the much earlier promotion of programmes to deal with unemployment, the message should be obvious.
You'd think a serial Labour supporter would lay off too many Nazi Germany references in the light of the current state of play within the party. Massive self-awareness fail
> If there is one thing the remain side has shown it is that just because something or other is "decided", the battle is not in fact over till the final letter has been signed, railtrack or brick laid.
>
> I'm in favour of Heathrow expansion, and slightly against HS2. I don't see why hardcore opponents of both should stop battling though, and expect BRX to come out against HS2 in particular.
I expect BRX to come out against pretty much everything. Kind of appropriate for the ultimate repository for the protest vote.
What will be interesting is if they (if they can be accurately called 'they') ever come out in favour of anything.
Nigel will certainly have TBP come out against Heathrow expansion, but he'll wait until Boris gains the leadership. It will be a terrific way of embarrassing him.
> If there is one thing the remain side has shown it is that just because something or other is "decided", the battle is not in fact over till the final letter has been signed, railtrack or brick laid.
>
> I'm in favour of Heathrow expansion, and slightly against HS2. I don't see why hardcore opponents of both should stop battling though, and expect BRX to come out against HS2 in particular.
I expect BRX to come out against pretty much everything. Kind of appropriate for the ultimate repository for the protest vote.
What will be interesting is if they (if they can be accurately called 'they') ever come out in favour of anything.
> @Stark_Dawning said: > > @Pulpstar said: > > > If there is one thing the remain side has shown it is that just because something or other is "decided", the battle is not in fact over till the final letter has been signed, railtrack or brick laid. > > > > > > I'm in favour of Heathrow expansion, and slightly against HS2. I don't see why hardcore opponents of both should stop battling though, and expect BRX to come out against HS2 in particular. > > > > I expect BRX to come out against pretty much everything. Kind of appropriate for the ultimate repository for the protest vote. > > > > What will be interesting is if they (if they can be accurately called 'they') ever come out in favour of anything. > > Nigel will certainly have TBP come out against Heathrow expansion, but he'll wait until Boris gains the leadership. It will be a terrific way of embarrassing him.
> If there is one thing the remain side has shown it is that just because something or other is "decided", the battle is not in fact over till the final letter has been signed, railtrack or brick laid.
>
> I'm in favour of Heathrow expansion, and slightly against HS2. I don't see why hardcore opponents of both should stop battling though, and expect BRX to come out against HS2 in particular.
I expect BRX to come out against pretty much everything. Kind of appropriate for the ultimate repository for the protest vote.
What will be interesting is if they (if they can be accurately called 'they') ever come out in favour of anything.
Possibly rail nationalisation
Gold braid on uniforms, porters, smoking permitted on platforms and on trains. An unusual combination of nostalgia and quasi-libertarianism.
Yet there never seems to be any shortage of tickets on the Leeds to LKX route.
There are several aspect to this.
Firstly, HS2 is infrastructure for the future. It is not designed to counter current loadings and traffic patterns, but projected future ones. That is an area that is in area that antis can reasonably argue: although they're as clueless about traffic patterns in twenty or thirty years as anyone. Few people in 1990 would have projected railway passenger levels to have doubled in thirty years.
And if we leave it until the traffic patterns do arise, it's too late as these things take decades to plan and build.
Secondly, it is not just about passenger loadings per train, but paths. Say you can currently get tickets as a train is at 80% loadings. At a 2% p.a. compound passenger increase, it's not many years (12?) before that train is absolutely full.
So you might say: "just put on another train" - and that's where 'capacity' comes in: you might not be able to run another train (create a path) at that time of day, because the line is at capacity. This is made worse by the fact that express, stopping passenger and freight trains all have to use the same route, reducing available paths.
HS2 creates oodles of capacity by not only creating a new line, but by separating fast express passenger trains from stopping 'local' and freight services.
> If there is one thing the remain side has shown it is that just because something or other is "decided", the battle is not in fact over till the final letter has been signed, railtrack or brick laid.
>
> I'm in favour of Heathrow expansion, and slightly against HS2. I don't see why hardcore opponents of both should stop battling though, and expect BRX to come out against HS2 in particular.
I expect BRX to come out against pretty much everything. Kind of appropriate for the ultimate repository for the protest vote.
What will be interesting is if they (if they can be accurately called 'they') ever come out in favour of anything.
Possibly rail nationalisation
Isn't Batten's UKIP already pro-renationalisation of rail ?
> If there is one thing the remain side has shown it is that just because something or other is "decided", the battle is not in fact over till the final letter has been signed, railtrack or brick laid.
>
> I'm in favour of Heathrow expansion, and slightly against HS2. I don't see why hardcore opponents of both should stop battling though, and expect BRX to come out against HS2 in particular.
I expect BRX to come out against pretty much everything. Kind of appropriate for the ultimate repository for the protest vote.
What will be interesting is if they (if they can be accurately called 'they') ever come out in favour of anything.
Possibly rail nationalisation
Isn't Batten's UKIP already pro-renationalisation of rail ?
So is Corbyn's labour. It's undeniably popular whatever the merits so possibly Farage will be too.
> @felix said: > > @justin124 said: > > > @JosiasJessop said: > > > I am well versed in both economics and 20th century history - particularly with regard to the Third Reich. Those who always equate 'Arbeit Macht Frei' with genocide just reveal their ignorance of when and where the term was first used. > > > (Snip) > > > > > > Like it or not, that's exactly what the term is now equated with. The deeper history of the phrase is pretty irrelevant. > > > > > > It's like people arguing that displaying the swastika is fine because it was used in other cultures for thousands of years. > > > > That depends on the context. When the user makes it clear that he is not alluding to genocide but the much earlier promotion of programmes to deal with unemployment, the message should be obvious. > > You'd think a serial Labour supporter would lay off too many Nazi Germany references in the light of the current state of play within the party. Massive self-awareness fail
It may have escaped your notice but I have long declared my firm intention to spoil my ballot paper at the next election. Moreover post 1992 I did not vote Labour at a Parliamentary election until 2015. I also suspect you might benefit from taking a cursory look in the mirror.
They havent even started yet!? I feel like it has been underway most of my life. No wonder people are annoyed. You need to start pretty quickly with big stuff. (Snip)
That depends how you define 'start'. There is a great deal of work going on, and has been for years. This is not the 'proper' construction works, but 'enabling' ones. TBF, when it means moving roads then there is a very fine line between the two.
And Euston station is currently an enormous building site. The London-Birmingham leg will probably get built, whatever happens.
Greenford junction to Old Oak Common is now closed, due to HS2 work, the South Ruislip to Paddington "Parliamentary" service now starts/terminates at West Ealing.
> If there is one thing the remain side has shown it is that just because something or other is "decided", the battle is not in fact over till the final letter has been signed, railtrack or brick laid.
>
> I'm in favour of Heathrow expansion, and slightly against HS2. I don't see why hardcore opponents of both should stop battling though, and expect BRX to come out against HS2 in particular.
I expect BRX to come out against pretty much everything. Kind of appropriate for the ultimate repository for the protest vote.
What will be interesting is if they (if they can be accurately called 'they') ever come out in favour of anything.
Possibly rail nationalisation
Isn't Batten's UKIP already pro-renationalisation of rail ?
So is Corbyn's labour. It's undeniably popular whatever the merits so possibly Farage will be too.
It is indeed popular; though as I've said many times passim, I fear 'nationalisation' by itself will do nothing to improve the network or customer service.
And I thought that this morning before even reading the article!
However far Hunt goes he will fail (ultimately at the members) because he's flip flopped and doesn't offer anything.
Gove, Raab and Stewart are the ones who have (the last mainly outreach and rhetoric) but if Gove does become PM I think he will admire the cut of Rory's jib and offer him a senior position in his cabinet.
How much are Tory MP brexiteers and grassroots (as opposed to Labour brexiteers) wedded to opposition of FoM within any post Brexit EU relationship? Can Gove use ditching this 'red line' as a way to be distinctive (and possible appeal to soft brexiteers/remainers)?
How much are Tory MP brexiteers and grassroots (as opposed to Labour brexiteers) wedded to opposition of FoM within any post Brexit EU relationship? Can Gove use ditching this 'red line' as a way to be distinctive (and possible appeal to soft brexiteers/remainers)?
> Ten years of time and billions spent and nothing to show but arrogance and delays.
>
>
>
> I'm sorry if this is a bit inconvenient but HS2 has failed to get 'buy-in' - its had the chance but it increasingly looks like a 20th century project.
>
> I can't quite see why you think what I said was 'arrogant'.
>
> I fear nothing I - or HS2 - could have said would have led you to 'buy-in' to it. You're consistently anti the project - and fair enough. But it seems a little odd when you pretend to give the project 'advice' that is not exactly fact-based.
What comes across as arrogant from the HS2 supporters is the assumption that it should continue despite failing to make the case for it and despite report after report demolishing its claims.
Now it doesn't matter what I think but we are now approaching the time when politicians will be looking for an easy source of billions to back up their spending promises.
Likewise we are now overdue a recession whereupon the public finances will be even more severely constrained.
Has HS2 done anything to prepare for this or has it casually and arrogantly IMO assumed that the money being spent on it will be certain to happen.
There have been reports into why HS2 is necessary - I've linked to them in the past. Have you read them? There are also reports into how other oft-mentioned alternatives do not meet the requirements.
And most of the 'reports' that (in your eyes) 'demolish' the case for HS2 are fairly laughable - especially the ones from StopHS2.
What is arrogant is the belief by some people that if HS2 is cancelled, the money will automagically be allocated to their favoured projects.
I am well versed in both economics and 20th century history - particularly with regard to the Third Reich. Those who always equate 'Arbeit Macht Frei' with genocide just reveal their ignorance of when and where the term was first used. (Snip)
Like it or not, that's exactly what the term is now equated with. The deeper history of the phrase is pretty irrelevant.
It's like people arguing that displaying the swastika is fine because it was used in other cultures for thousands of years.
> @JosiasJessop said: > Yet there never seems to be any shortage of tickets on the Leeds to LKX route. > > There are several aspect to this. > > Firstly, HS2 is infrastructure for the future. It is not designed to counter current loadings and traffic patterns, but projected future ones. That is an area that is in area that antis can reasonably argue: although they're as clueless about traffic patterns in twenty or thirty years as anyone. Few people in 1990 would have projected railway passenger levels to have doubled in thirty years. > > And if we leave it until the traffic patterns do arise, it's too late as these things take decades to plan and build. > > Secondly, it is not just about passenger loadings per train, but paths. Say you can currently get tickets as a train is at 80% loadings. At a 2% p.a. compound passenger increase, it's not many years (12?) before that train is absolutely full. > > So you might say: "just put on another train" - and that's where 'capacity' comes in: you might not be able to run another train (create a path) at that time of day, because the line is at capacity. This is made worse by the fact that express, stopping passenger and freight trains all have to use the same route, reducing available paths. > > HS2 creates oodles of capacity by not only creating a new line, but by separating fast express passenger trains from stopping 'local' and freight services.
Although that assumes that usage will continually increase.
While speaking from my own experience, and I would say that is how most people form their views, the ECML has much greater availability now than it had in the 1990s.
Promises of extra capacity in decades hence might be nice theoretically but its the current spending which matters.
And that's where HS2's problems now fall - its going to be stuck between the desire of politicians to find money for more immediate, more popular and possibly more worthwhile areas ** and an economic cycle in which public finances are at some point going to severely deteriorate.
** Is HS2 more worthwhile than sorting out adult social care or student finances for example ? And which would be the least electorally popular ?
> @Pulpstar said: > > @Pulpstar said: > > > If there is one thing the remain side has shown it is that just because something or other is "decided", the battle is not in fact over till the final letter has been signed, railtrack or brick laid. > > > > > > I'm in favour of Heathrow expansion, and slightly against HS2. I don't see why hardcore opponents of both should stop battling though, and expect BRX to come out against HS2 in particular. > > > > I expect BRX to come out against pretty much everything. Kind of appropriate for the ultimate repository for the protest vote. > > > > What will be interesting is if they (if they can be accurately called 'they') ever come out in favour of anything. > > Possibly rail nationalisation > > Isn't Batten's UKIP already pro-renationalisation of rail ? > > So is Corbyn's labour. It's undeniably popular whatever the merits so possibly Farage will be too.
I wonder how its popularity varies between regular rail users, occasional rail users and non rail users.
> @Casino_Royale said: > I could see Gove v Raab being the final two. > > And I thought that this morning before even reading the article! > > However far Hunt goes he will fail (ultimately at the members) because he's flip flopped and doesn't offer anything. > > Gove, Raab and Stewart are the ones who have (the last mainly outreach and rhetoric) but if Gove does become PM I think he will admire the cut of Rory's jib and offer him a senior position in his cabinet.
The membership would elect Raaaab in all likelihood. The MPs can't give them the choice of someone to the right of Gove.
Of course, from a Labour perspective, McVey v Baker in the run off would be ideal.
Can anyone explain to me how back-stabber Gove, who suckles on the teat of Climate Correctness, and only offers a continuity-May plan, can possibly save the Tories?
> @another_richard said: > Although that assumes that usage will continually increase. > > While speaking from my own experience, and I would say that is how most people form their views, the ECML has much greater availability now than it had in the 1990s. > > Promises of extra capacity in decades hence might be nice theoretically but its the current spending which matters. > > And that's where HS2's problems now fall - its going to be stuck between the desire of politicians to find money for more immediate, more popular and possibly more worthwhile areas ** and an economic cycle in which public finances are at some point going to severely deteriorate. > > ** Is HS2 more worthwhile than sorting out adult social care or student finances for example ? And which would be the least electorally popular ?
As much as I'm not a fan of HS2, talking about it in the same breath as adult social care and student finances is not helpful. The question should be, what do we need from our railways and what's the best way to deliver it. The problem with HS2 is that it's a nice shiney new thing for which a politician can cut a ribbon. Upgrading signalling infrastructure to increase capacity is not as sexy and appealing to politicians.
Say you can currently get tickets as a train is at 80% loadings. At a 2% p.a. compound passenger increase, it's not many years (12?) before that train is absolutely full.
> @SandyRentool said: > > @Casino_Royale said: > > I could see Gove v Raab being the final two. > > > > And I thought that this morning before even reading the article! > > > > However far Hunt goes he will fail (ultimately at the members) because he's flip flopped and doesn't offer anything. > > > > Gove, Raab and Stewart are the ones who have (the last mainly outreach and rhetoric) but if Gove does become PM I think he will admire the cut of Rory's jib and offer him a senior position in his cabinet. > > The membership would elect Raaaab in all likelihood. The MPs can't give them the choice of someone to the right of Gove. > > Of course, from a Labour perspective, McVey v Baker in the run off would be ideal.
I'm not so sure.
Gove is well respected amongst the membership. They will vote for whoever they believe can most credibly deliver Brexit.
Raab would risk revoke and no Brexit whereas Gove would get the job done.
> @JosiasJessop said: > > @Pulpstar said: > > > If there is one thing the remain side has shown it is that just because something or other is "decided", the battle is not in fact over till the final letter has been signed, railtrack or brick laid. > > > > > > I'm in favour of Heathrow expansion, and slightly against HS2. I don't see why hardcore opponents of both should stop battling though, and expect BRX to come out against HS2 in particular. > > > > I expect BRX to come out against pretty much everything. Kind of appropriate for the ultimate repository for the protest vote. > > > > What will be interesting is if they (if they can be accurately called 'they') ever come out in favour of anything. > > Possibly rail nationalisation > > Isn't Batten's UKIP already pro-renationalisation of rail ? > > So is Corbyn's labour. It's undeniably popular whatever the merits so possibly Farage will be too. > > It is indeed popular; though as I've said many times passim, I fear 'nationalisation' by itself will do nothing to improve the network or customer service.
> @JosiasJessop said: > > @JosiasJessop said: > > > And this is why HS2 is in trouble. > > > > > > Ten years of time and billions spent and nothing to show but arrogance and delays. > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm sorry if this is a bit inconvenient but HS2 has failed to get 'buy-in' - its had the chance but it increasingly looks like a 20th century project. > > > > > > I can't quite see why you think what I said was 'arrogant'. > > > > > > I fear nothing I - or HS2 - could have said would have led you to 'buy-in' to it. You're consistently anti the project - and fair enough. But it seems a little odd when you pretend to give the project 'advice' that is not exactly fact-based. > > > > What comes across as arrogant from the HS2 supporters is the assumption that it should continue despite failing to make the case for it and despite report after report demolishing its claims. > > > > Now it doesn't matter what I think but we are now approaching the time when politicians will be looking for an easy source of billions to back up their spending promises. > > > > Likewise we are now overdue a recession whereupon the public finances will be even more severely constrained. > > > > Has HS2 done anything to prepare for this or has it casually and arrogantly IMO assumed that the money being spent on it will be certain to happen. > > There have been reports into why HS2 is necessary - I've linked to them in the past. Have you read them? There are also reports into how other oft-mentioned alternatives do not meet the requirements. > > And most of the 'reports' that (in your eyes) 'demolish' the case for HS2 are fairly laughable - especially the ones from StopHS2. > > What is arrogant is the belief by some people that if HS2 is cancelled, the money will automagically be allocated to their favoured projects.
You should know by now JJ that most people operate off policy based evidence not evidence based policy.
> @Sunil_Prasannan said: > > @Cyclefree said: > > > All is well in the real world. > > > > Not like this board which is crawling with racists. > > Islam is not a race.
You wanna tell me that this isn't racist? "It’s the Trojan Horse scandal again. If you allow mass immigration on the scale the UK has, it’s entirely predictable. Foreigners aren’t desperate to ‘become British’, they don’t think we are better than them, it was arrogant of the establishment to think otherwise."
> @MarkHopkins said: > Can anyone explain to me how back-stabber Gove, who suckles on the teat of Climate Correctness, and only offers a continuity-May plan, can possibly save the Tories?
He made the Beachy head coastal area - stretching from Hastings to Eastbourne - a conservation area to get Amber Rudd's vote? No such luck for Clacton or Skegness.
Gove isn't just continuity May - he was the architect of May through the 2016 contest.
He would make a great Chancellor - maybe even get him to lead on more devolution for England. But I am not sure if he is the answer the Tories need in the top job.
> @MarkHopkins said: > Can anyone explain to me how back-stabber Gove, who suckles on the teat of Climate Correctness, and only offers a continuity-May plan, can possibly save the Tories?
Gove does have a tendency to take things too far.
I could see him going full Greta Thunberg and declaring a climate emergency if he wins, for example.
Although that assumes that usage will continually increase.
While speaking from my own experience, and I would say that is how most people form their views, the ECML has much greater availability now than it had in the 1990s.
Promises of extra capacity in decades hence might be nice theoretically but its the current spending which matters.
And that's where HS2's problems now fall - its going to be stuck between the desire of politicians to find money for more immediate, more popular and possibly more worthwhile areas ** and an economic cycle in which public finances are at some point going to severely deteriorate.
** Is HS2 more worthwhile than sorting out adult social care or student finances for example ? And which would be the least electorally popular ?
"Although that assumes that usage will continually increase."
Indeed, and that's an area that is immensely hard to judge. But the problem is that we do need to judge it, and getting it wrong either way can be immensely expensive. But once built, the infrastructure is there for many, many decades.
You might believe that anecdotally the ECML has much greater availability than in the 1990s. It will also have many more services running than back then 9e.g. post the completion of electrification in 1991) - though sadly I can't immediatey find figures.
Say you can currently get tickets as a train is at 80% loadings. At a 2% p.a. compound passenger increase, it's not many years (12?) before that train is absolutely full.
> @tlg86 said: > > @another_richard said: > > Although that assumes that usage will continually increase. > > > > While speaking from my own experience, and I would say that is how most people form their views, the ECML has much greater availability now than it had in the 1990s. > > > > Promises of extra capacity in decades hence might be nice theoretically but its the current spending which matters. > > > > And that's where HS2's problems now fall - its going to be stuck between the desire of politicians to find money for more immediate, more popular and possibly more worthwhile areas ** and an economic cycle in which public finances are at some point going to severely deteriorate. > > > > ** Is HS2 more worthwhile than sorting out adult social care or student finances for example ? And which would be the least electorally popular ? > > As much as I'm not a fan of HS2, talking about it in the same breath as adult social care and student finances is not helpful. The question should be, what do we need from our railways and what's the best way to deliver it. The problem with HS2 is that it's a nice shiney new thing for which a politician can cut a ribbon. Upgrading signalling infrastructure to increase capacity is not as sexy and appealing to politicians.
It is helpful because that's the way politicians think.
And I suspect that some of our politicians are now doing electoral cost benefit analyses of HS2 compared to other areas of government spending.
> @ah009 said: > > @Sunil_Prasannan said: > > > @Cyclefree said: > > > > > All is well in the real world. > > > > > > > > Not like this board which is crawling with racists. > > > > Islam is not a race. > > You wanna tell me that this isn't racist? > "It’s the Trojan Horse scandal again. If you allow mass immigration on the scale the UK has, it’s entirely predictable. Foreigners aren’t desperate to ‘become British’, they don’t think we are better than them, it was arrogant of the establishment to think otherwise." > > For fuck's sake.
No it is not. What race do.you think is desperate to "become British" that is being impugned?
> @Casino_Royale said: > > @SandyRentool said: > > > @Casino_Royale said: > > > I could see Gove v Raab being the final two. > > > > > > And I thought that this morning before even reading the article! > > > > > > However far Hunt goes he will fail (ultimately at the members) because he's flip flopped and doesn't offer anything. > > > > > > Gove, Raab and Stewart are the ones who have (the last mainly outreach and rhetoric) but if Gove does become PM I think he will admire the cut of Rory's jib and offer him a senior position in his cabinet. > > > > The membership would elect Raaaab in all likelihood. The MPs can't give them the choice of someone to the right of Gove. > > > > Of course, from a Labour perspective, McVey v Baker in the run off would be ideal. > > I'm not so sure. > > Gove is well respected amongst the membership. They will vote for whoever they believe can most credibly deliver Brexit. > > Raab would risk revoke and no Brexit whereas Gove would get the job done.
But you are more sensible than the median Tory member (and probably the upper quartile). The nutters are judging by one metric alone, and it isn't a helpful or sensible one (see downthread). The only hope is that, knowing this, the MPs head them off at the pass
Looking at other elections, the Swinson-Davey show came to London last night. It seems they will be the only runners even though nominations formally close on Friday.
At the moment, I'm hard pressed to see policy differences between the two but I do hope to get to a Hustings event later this month.
In Denmark where they vote Wednesday, the latest Voxmeter poll, translated into seats, gives the centre-left bloc 101 seats and the centre-right bloc 74 which would be a huge win with the Social Democrats back on 50 seats.
The latest Austrian poll reads well for the centre-right People's Party which has gained on both the Social Democrats and the Freedom Party. In 2017, those three parties won 163 of the 183 seats in the Austrian Parliament and nearly 85% of the vote but both the liberal NEOS Party and the Greens are making a little headway.
The big three vote share is down to 78.5% but these numbers may offer some different possibilities for the OVP under Kurz - could he seek a coalition with NEOS, would they go into a Government with him? On these poll numbers, an OVP-NEOS Government would probably have a majority or be very close to it?
> @MarkHopkins said: > Can anyone explain to me how back-stabber Gove, who suckles on the teat of Climate Correctness, and only offers a continuity-May plan, can possibly save the Tories?
> > Although that assumes that usage will continually increase.
> >
> > While speaking from my own experience, and I would say that is how most people form their views, the ECML has much greater availability now than it had in the 1990s.
> >
> > Promises of extra capacity in decades hence might be nice theoretically but its the current spending which matters.
> >
> > And that's where HS2's problems now fall - its going to be stuck between the desire of politicians to find money for more immediate, more popular and possibly more worthwhile areas ** and an economic cycle in which public finances are at some point going to severely deteriorate.
> >
> > ** Is HS2 more worthwhile than sorting out adult social care or student finances for example ? And which would be the least electorally popular ?
>
> As much as I'm not a fan of HS2, talking about it in the same breath as adult social care and student finances is not helpful. The question should be, what do we need from our railways and what's the best way to deliver it. The problem with HS2 is that it's a nice shiney new thing for which a politician can cut a ribbon. Upgrading signalling infrastructure to increase capacity is not as sexy and appealing to politicians.
It is helpful because that's the way politicians think.
And I suspect that some of our politicians are now doing electoral cost benefit analyses of HS2 compared to other areas of government spending.
Infrastructure spending is a very different beast to day-to-day spending.
I'd also expect you to be the first to criticise politicians for putting their electoral prospects ahead of the good of the country!
> @JosiasJessop said: > > @JosiasJessop said: > > > And this is why HS2 is in trouble. > > > > > > Ten years of time and billions spent and nothing to show but arrogance and delays. > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm sorry if this is a bit inconvenient but HS2 has failed to get 'buy-in' - its had the chance but it increasingly looks like a 20th century project. > > > > > > I can't quite see why you think what I said was 'arrogant'. > > > > > > I fear nothing I - or HS2 - could have said would have led you to 'buy-in' to it. You're consistently anti the project - and fair enough. But it seems a little odd when you pretend to give the project 'advice' that is not exactly fact-based. > > > > What comes across as arrogant from the HS2 supporters is the assumption that it should continue despite failing to make the case for it and despite report after report demolishing its claims. > > > > Now it doesn't matter what I think but we are now approaching the time when politicians will be looking for an easy source of billions to back up their spending promises. > > > > Likewise we are now overdue a recession whereupon the public finances will be even more severely constrained. > > > > Has HS2 done anything to prepare for this or has it casually and arrogantly IMO assumed that the money being spent on it will be certain to happen. > > There have been reports into why HS2 is necessary - I've linked to them in the past. Have you read them? There are also reports into how other oft-mentioned alternatives do not meet the requirements. > > And most of the 'reports' that (in your eyes) 'demolish' the case for HS2 are fairly laughable - especially the ones from StopHS2. > > What is arrogant is the belief by some people that if HS2 is cancelled, the money will automagically be allocated to their favoured projects.
So reports which support your view are good but those that oppose it are 'laughable'.
How about this report:
' HS2 will not offer value for money and risks "short changing" the North of England, a group of peers has warned.
A report from the House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee also said it was "far from convinced" the new high-speed railway will be built within the £55.7bn budget.
It said the project should not go ahead without a new assessment of its costs and benefits. '
> Can anyone explain to me how back-stabber Gove, who suckles on the teat of Climate Correctness, and only offers a continuity-May plan, can possibly save the Tories?
> Although that assumes that usage will continually increase.
>
> While speaking from my own experience, and I would say that is how most people form their views, the ECML has much greater availability now than it had in the 1990s.
>
> Promises of extra capacity in decades hence might be nice theoretically but its the current spending which matters.
>
> And that's where HS2's problems now fall - its going to be stuck between the desire of politicians to find money for more immediate, more popular and possibly more worthwhile areas ** and an economic cycle in which public finances are at some point going to severely deteriorate.
>
> ** Is HS2 more worthwhile than sorting out adult social care or student finances for example ? And which would be the least electorally popular ?
As much as I'm not a fan of HS2, talking about it in the same breath as adult social care and student finances is not helpful. The question should be, what do we need from our railways and what's the best way to deliver it. The problem with HS2 is that it's a nice shiney new thing for which a politician can cut a ribbon. Upgrading signalling infrastructure to increase capacity is not as sexy and appealing to politicians.
Updating signalling on existing lines is massively expensive and troublesome - and AIUI you don't actually gain that much extra capacity, especially on mixed-traffic routes.
The lessons should be learnt from the West Coast upgrade mess of 15-20 years ago, and the current Great Western electrification mess - upgrading existing railway lines whilst trains run at or near capacity is incredibly difficult and expensive.
There are no easy answers (and yes, HS2 isn't an 'easy' answer either).
> @Casino_Royale said: > > @MarkHopkins said: > > Can anyone explain to me how back-stabber Gove, who suckles on the teat of Climate Correctness, and only offers a continuity-May plan, can possibly save the Tories? > > Gove does have a tendency to take things too far. > > I could see him going full Greta Thunberg and declaring a climate emergency if he wins, for example.
That. And the public strongly dislike him as well.
> @JosiasJessop said: > > @tlg86 said: > > > > @another_richard said: > > > > Although that assumes that usage will continually increase. > > > > > > > > While speaking from my own experience, and I would say that is how most people form their views, the ECML has much greater availability now than it had in the 1990s. > > > > > > > > Promises of extra capacity in decades hence might be nice theoretically but its the current spending which matters. > > > > > > > > And that's where HS2's problems now fall - its going to be stuck between the desire of politicians to find money for more immediate, more popular and possibly more worthwhile areas ** and an economic cycle in which public finances are at some point going to severely deteriorate. > > > > > > > > ** Is HS2 more worthwhile than sorting out adult social care or student finances for example ? And which would be the least electorally popular ? > > > > > > As much as I'm not a fan of HS2, talking about it in the same breath as adult social care and student finances is not helpful. The question should be, what do we need from our railways and what's the best way to deliver it. The problem with HS2 is that it's a nice shiney new thing for which a politician can cut a ribbon. Upgrading signalling infrastructure to increase capacity is not as sexy and appealing to politicians. > > > > It is helpful because that's the way politicians think. > > > > And I suspect that some of our politicians are now doing electoral cost benefit analyses of HS2 compared to other areas of government spending. > > Infrastructure spending is a very different beast to day-to-day spending. > > I'd also expect you to be the first to criticise politicians for putting their electoral prospects ahead of the good of the country!
I'm no defender of politicians of any variety but that's how they think.
As to infrastructure spending my view is keep it small scale, keep it regular and keep it relevant.
The bigger it is the more likely it is to become a vanity project.
> @Sunil_Prasannan said: > I am well versed in both economics and 20th century history - particularly with regard to the Third Reich. Those who always equate 'Arbeit Macht Frei' with genocide just reveal their ignorance of when and where the term was first used. > (Snip) > > Like it or not, that's exactly what the term is now equated with. The deeper history of the phrase is pretty irrelevant. > > It's like people arguing that displaying the swastika is fine because it was used in other cultures for thousands of years. > > It is STILL used by other cultures!
It is a religious symbol for the Hindu religion and is widely used in temples in India - and has been for over 4,000 years as you say. It was invented in India - not Germany - and was a symbol used to promote peace and prosperity.
The Nazis also used torches for their rallies - should people be banned from using torches as symbols - the Tories used one for years?
> @Philip_Thompson said: > > @ah009 said: > > > @Sunil_Prasannan said: > > > > @Cyclefree said: > > > > > > > All is well in the real world. > > > > > > > > > > > > Not like this board which is crawling with racists. > > > > > > Islam is not a race. > > > > You wanna tell me that this isn't racist? > > "It’s the Trojan Horse scandal again. If you allow mass immigration on the scale the UK has, it’s entirely predictable. Foreigners aren’t desperate to ‘become British’, they don’t think we are better than them, it was arrogant of the establishment to think otherwise." > > > > For fuck's sake. > > No it is not. What race do.you think is desperate to "become British" that is being impugned?
The racist who typed those words was saying that the homophobia is because of "mass immigration". I.e. foreigners. Foreigners bad, British good.
And we can bring in the Islamophobia all over these boards. Spoiler: Islamophobia IS racism. Anyone with a passing familiarity with a dictionary can look up "racism" and then "race". Religious hatred is not only directly racism, but also sometimes a proxy for racism. Witness the Islamophobic attacks and threats levelled against Sajid Javid. He is not a Muslim. But because he "looks" and "sounds" like one, bam, Muslim.
I didn't think this stuff was difficult, but PB is obviously some kind of intellectual doldrums.
So reports which support your view are good but those that oppose it are 'laughable'.
How about this report:
' HS2 will not offer value for money and risks "short changing" the North of England, a group of peers has warned.
A report from the House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee also said it was "far from convinced" the new high-speed railway will be built within the £55.7bn budget.
It said the project should not go ahead without a new assessment of its costs and benefits. '
I said 'most of the reports', not all of them, and so your rant is rather ill-judged.
There are valid criticisms of the HS2 project - and I've often mentioned them on here. I'm not a blind fan. However I can also call out the b/s arguments.
And yes, you should read that HoL report. And whilst you are at it, you should read the pro- reports I've linked to many times passim.
That's the report that said HS2 should stop at Old Oak Common instead of going into Euston. If that's the case, then the report's as laughable as all of the others. It's an insanely stupid idea, and a sign of utter dishonesty.
Lots of one-sided games in the cricket. On the basis of the first few days, my final four are England, Australia, NZ and Windies. Hope that hasn't jinxed England.
> @brendan16 said: > > @Sunil_Prasannan said: > > I am well versed in both economics and 20th century history - particularly with regard to the Third Reich. Those who always equate 'Arbeit Macht Frei' with genocide just reveal their ignorance of when and where the term was first used. > > (Snip) > > > > Like it or not, that's exactly what the term is now equated with. The deeper history of the phrase is pretty irrelevant. > > > > It's like people arguing that displaying the swastika is fine because it was used in other cultures for thousands of years. > > > > It is STILL used by other cultures! > > It is a religious symbol for the Hindu religion and is widely used in temples in India - and has been for over 4,000 years as you say. It was invented in India - not Germany - and was a symbol used to promote peace and prosperity. > > The Nazis also used torches for their rallies - should people be banned from using torches as symbols - the Tories used one for years?
Don't you think that a torchlit crowd displaying swastikas proclaiming "arbeit macht frei" raises even slight concerns?
It is a religious symbol for the Hindu religion and is widely used in temples in India - and has been for over 4,000 years as you say. It was invented in India - not Germany - and was a symbol used to promote peace and prosperity.
The Nazis also used torches for their rallies - should people be banned from using torches as symbols - the Tories used one for years?
How did the argument get to the point where you are arguing for the rehabilitation of the swastika and the torchlight parade?
> @another_richard said: > > @JosiasJessop said: > > > @tlg86 said: > > > > > > @another_richard said: > > > > > > Although that assumes that usage will continually increase. > > > > > > > > > > > > While speaking from my own experience, and I would say that is how most people form their views, the ECML has much greater availability now than it had in the 1990s. > > > > > > > > > > > > Promises of extra capacity in decades hence might be nice theoretically but its the current spending which matters. > > > > > > > > > > > > And that's where HS2's problems now fall - its going to be stuck between the desire of politicians to find money for more immediate, more popular and possibly more worthwhile areas ** and an economic cycle in which public finances are at some point going to severely deteriorate. > > > > > > > > > > > > ** Is HS2 more worthwhile than sorting out adult social care or student finances for example ? And which would be the least electorally popular ? > > > > > > > > > > As much as I'm not a fan of HS2, talking about it in the same breath as adult social care and student finances is not helpful. The question should be, what do we need from our railways and what's the best way to deliver it. The problem with HS2 is that it's a nice shiney new thing for which a politician can cut a ribbon. Upgrading signalling infrastructure to increase capacity is not as sexy and appealing to politicians. > > > > > > > > It is helpful because that's the way politicians think. > > > > > > > > And I suspect that some of our politicians are now doing electoral cost benefit analyses of HS2 compared to other areas of government spending. > > > > Infrastructure spending is a very different beast to day-to-day spending. > > > > I'd also expect you to be the first to criticise politicians for putting their electoral prospects ahead of the good of the country! > > I'm no defender of politicians of any variety but that's how they think. > > As to infrastructure spending my view is keep it small scale, keep it regular and keep it relevant. > > The bigger it is the more likely it is to become a vanity project.
HS2 is NOT a vanity project.
It received overwhelming support from MPs, being passed 399 to 42 in favour in its third reading. Similar in Lords.
Parliament overwhelming decided it should be built for future generations and it was in manifestos.
> @MTimT said: > Lots of one-sided games in the cricket. On the basis of the first few days, my final four are England, Australia, NZ and Windies. Hope that hasn't jinxed England.
I suspect India will make the final four. Once they decide that they've had enough rest, that is.
It is a religious symbol for the Hindu religion and is widely used in temples in India - and has been for over 4,000 years as you say. It was invented in India - not Germany - and was a symbol used to promote peace and prosperity.
The Nazis also used torches for their rallies - should people be banned from using torches as symbols - the Tories used one for years?
How did the argument get to the point where you are arguing for the rehabilitation of the swastika and the torchlight parade?
The Swastika was NOT invented by the Nazis! As Brendan said above: It is a religious symbol for the Hindu religion and is widely used in temples in India. Not "was" but "is".
> @Foxy said: > > @brendan16 said: > > > @Sunil_Prasannan said: > > > I am well versed in both economics and 20th century history - particularly with regard to the Third Reich. Those who always equate 'Arbeit Macht Frei' with genocide just reveal their ignorance of when and where the term was first used. > > > (Snip) > > > > > > Like it or not, that's exactly what the term is now equated with. The deeper history of the phrase is pretty irrelevant. > > > > > > It's like people arguing that displaying the swastika is fine because it was used in other cultures for thousands of years. > > > > > > It is STILL used by other cultures! > > > > It is a religious symbol for the Hindu religion and is widely used in temples in India - and has been for over 4,000 years as you say. It was invented in India - not Germany - and was a symbol used to promote peace and prosperity. > > > > The Nazis also used torches for their rallies - should people be banned from using torches as symbols - the Tories used one for years? > > Don't you think that a torchlit crowd displaying swastikas proclaiming "arbeit macht frei" raises even slight concerns? > > You are Jeremy Corbyn and I claim my five pounds!
> > > Not like this board which is crawling with racists.
> > >
> > > Islam is not a race.
> >
> > You wanna tell me that this isn't racist?
> > "It’s the Trojan Horse scandal again. If you allow mass immigration on the scale the UK has, it’s entirely predictable. Foreigners aren’t desperate to ‘become British’, they don’t think we are better than them, it was arrogant of the establishment to think otherwise."
> >
> > For fuck's sake.
>
> No it is not. What race do.you think is desperate to "become British" that is being impugned?
The racist who typed those words was saying that the homophobia is because of "mass immigration". I.e. foreigners. Foreigners bad, British good.
And we can bring in the Islamophobia all over these boards. Spoiler: Islamophobia IS racism. Anyone with a passing familiarity with a dictionary can look up "racism" and then "race". Religious hatred is not only directly racism, but also sometimes a proxy for racism. Witness the Islamophobic attacks and threats levelled against Sajid Javid. He is not a Muslim. But because he "looks" and "sounds" like one, bam, Muslim.
I didn't think this stuff was difficult, but PB is obviously some kind of intellectual doldrums.
I already told you: Islam is NOT a race!
Do you think the Kashmir dispute is about "race"? Do you think the Partition of India was about "race"? What language do they speak in Dhaka and Kolkata (for example).
Dr. Prasannan, I have a 1922 copy of the Jungle Book with said swastika on the cover, and as part of a decorative motif inside.
Telling Hindus they can't use their own symbol because it belongs to the Nazis is nuts. I appreciate many people will not be aware of the Hindu use (and I think it's been used by others too, historically) but those who do know and make that claim are silly sausages.
> @ah009 said: > > @Philip_Thompson said: > > > @ah009 said: > > > > @Sunil_Prasannan said: > > > > > @Cyclefree said: > > > > > > > > > All is well in the real world. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Not like this board which is crawling with racists. > > > > > > > > Islam is not a race. > > > > > > You wanna tell me that this isn't racist? > > > "It’s the Trojan Horse scandal again. If you allow mass immigration on the scale the UK has, it’s entirely predictable. Foreigners aren’t desperate to ‘become British’, they don’t think we are better than them, it was arrogant of the establishment to think otherwise." > > > > > > For fuck's sake. > > > > No it is not. What race do.you think is desperate to "become British" that is being impugned? > > The racist who typed those words was saying that the homophobia is because of "mass immigration". I.e. foreigners. Foreigners bad, British good. > > And we can bring in the Islamophobia all over these boards. Spoiler: Islamophobia IS racism. Anyone with a passing familiarity with a dictionary can look up "racism" and then "race". Religious hatred is not only directly racism, but also sometimes a proxy for racism. Witness the Islamophobic attacks and threats levelled against Sajid Javid. He is not a Muslim. But because he "looks" and "sounds" like one, bam, Muslim. > > I didn't think this stuff was difficult, but PB is obviously some kind of intellectual doldrums.
> @ah009 said: > > @Cyclefree said: > > > @Cyclefree said: > > > > > All is well in the real world. > > > > > > > > Not like this board which is crawling with racists. > > > > I'm not sure if that accusation is levelled at me. But if so I reject it. > > > > Anyway, stuff to do. If anyone has any good tips for the Derby send them my way! My last outing at Sandown was not very profitable so I'm hoping for better today. > > To be absolutely clear, that was not directed at you. But three openly racist people on the previous thread.
Is there any abiity in UK election law to stand as a candidate for multiple parties ? (AS happens in New York where for example Bill De Balsio ran for mayor of NYC as the Democratic Party candidate and also the Working Families Party cnadidate)
Was wondering if it is an option for the Brexit Party if they wnted to have 650 candidates but didn't want to stand against a rabid Brexiteer MP.
I know the Cooperative Party has candidates who are simultaneously Labour candidates, but I think that's a different set up.
> @tlg86 said: > > @MTimT said: > > Lots of one-sided games in the cricket. On the basis of the first few days, my final four are England, Australia, NZ and Windies. Hope that hasn't jinxed England. > > I suspect India will make the final four. Once they decide that they've had enough rest, that is.
They are on my bubble. If Windies fold, or the Aussies crack, they'll be in.
Dr. Prasannan, I have a 1922 copy of the Jungle Book with said swastika on the cover, and as part of a decorative motif inside.
Telling Hindus they can't use their own symbol because it belongs to the Nazis is nuts. I appreciate many people will not be aware of the Hindu use (and I think it's been used by others too, historically) but those who do know and make that claim are silly sausages.
Mr Dancer, that's very interesting. How did you get hold of such an old copy?
Yes but that only matters if that trend is reflected in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania ie the key swing states in the Electoral College. Trump lost the popular vote even in 2016
> @ah009 said: > > @Philip_Thompson said: > > > @ah009 said: > > > > @Sunil_Prasannan said: > > > > > @Cyclefree said: > > > > > > > > > All is well in the real world. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Not like this board which is crawling with racists. > > > > > > > > Islam is not a race. > > > > > > You wanna tell me that this isn't racist? > > > "It’s the Trojan Horse scandal again. If you allow mass immigration on the scale the UK has, it’s entirely predictable. Foreigners aren’t desperate to ‘become British’, they don’t think we are better than them, it was arrogant of the establishment to think otherwise." > > > > > > For fuck's sake. > > > > No it is not. What race do.you think is desperate to "become British" that is being impugned? > > The racist who typed those words was saying that the homophobia is because of "mass immigration". I.e. foreigners. Foreigners bad, British good. > > And we can bring in the Islamophobia all over these boards. Spoiler: Islamophobia IS racism. Anyone with a passing familiarity with a dictionary can look up "racism" and then "race". Religious hatred is not only directly racism, but also sometimes a proxy for racism. Witness the Islamophobic attacks and threats levelled against Sajid Javid. He is not a Muslim. But because he "looks" and "sounds" like one, bam, Muslim. > > I didn't think this stuff was difficult, but PB is obviously some kind of intellectual doldrums.
By analogy, is hostility towards Christianity a form of racism?
Is there any abiity in UK election law to stand as a candidate for multiple parties ? (AS happens in New York where for example Bill De Balsio ran for mayor of NYC as the Democratic Party candidate and also the Working Families Party cnadidate)
Was wondering if it is an option for the Brexit Party if they wnted to have 650 candidates but didn't want to stand against a rabid Brexiteer MP.
I know the Cooperative Party has candidates who are simultaneously Labour candidates, but I think that's a different set up.
You’d have to register TBP (Ltd)/Conservative Alliance although I not sure using Conservative would be allowed.
> @Casino_Royale said: > > @SandyRentool said: > > > @Casino_Royale said: > > > I could see Gove v Raab being the final two. > > > > > > And I thought that this morning before even reading the article! > > > > > > However far Hunt goes he will fail (ultimately at the members) because he's flip flopped and doesn't offer anything. > > > > > > Gove, Raab and Stewart are the ones who have (the last mainly outreach and rhetoric) but if Gove does become PM I think he will admire the cut of Rory's jib and offer him a senior position in his cabinet. > > > > The membership would elect Raaaab in all likelihood. The MPs can't give them the choice of someone to the right of Gove. > > > > Of course, from a Labour perspective, McVey v Baker in the run off would be ideal. > > I'm not so sure. > > Gove is well respected amongst the membership. They will vote for whoever they believe can most credibly deliver Brexit. > > Raab would risk revoke and no Brexit whereas Gove would get the job done.
Tory members would vote for Raab over Gove 56% to 35% according to last week's ConHome Tory members poll
> @alex. said: > How much are Tory MP brexiteers and grassroots (as opposed to Labour brexiteers) wedded to opposition of FoM within any post Brexit EU relationship? Can Gove use ditching this 'red line' as a way to be distinctive (and possible appeal to soft brexiteers/remainers)?
Probably not, most Tory members certainly want to end FoM (albeit EU migration to the UK has fallen since the referendum anyway)
> Not like this board which is crawling with racists.
>
> I'm not sure if that accusation is levelled at me. But if so I reject it.
>
> Anyway, stuff to do. If anyone has any good tips for the Derby send them my way! My last outing at Sandown was not very profitable so I'm hoping for better today.
To be absolutely clear, that was not directed at you. But three openly racist people on the previous thread.
> @PaulM said: > Is there any abiity in UK election law to stand as a candidate for multiple parties ? (AS happens in New York where for example Bill De Balsio ran for mayor of NYC as the Democratic Party candidate and also the Working Families Party cnadidate) > > Was wondering if it is an option for the Brexit Party if they wnted to have 650 candidates but didn't want to stand against a rabid Brexiteer MP. > > I know the Cooperative Party has candidates who are simultaneously Labour candidates, but I think that's a different set up.
Presumably the rabid Brexiteer MP would be Tory and if they stood as a joint TBP/Tory candidate they would be expelled from the Tory party. Unless the tory party comes to an agreement with TBP in which case they would lose huge support nationally. Of course they COULD the SDP?/Liberal Alliance did just that.
> > > > Not like this board which is crawling with racists.
> > > >
> > > > Islam is not a race.
> > >
> > > You wanna tell me that this isn't racist?
> > > "It’s the Trojan Horse scandal again. If you allow mass immigration on the scale the UK has, it’s entirely predictable. Foreigners aren’t desperate to ‘become British’, they don’t think we are better than them, it was arrogant of the establishment to think otherwise."
> > >
> > > For fuck's sake.
> >
> > No it is not. What race do.you think is desperate to "become British" that is being impugned?
>
> The racist who typed those words was saying that the homophobia is because of "mass immigration". I.e. foreigners. Foreigners bad, British good.
>
> And we can bring in the Islamophobia all over these boards. Spoiler: Islamophobia IS racism. Anyone with a passing familiarity with a dictionary can look up "racism" and then "race". Religious hatred is not only directly racism, but also sometimes a proxy for racism. Witness the Islamophobic attacks and threats levelled against Sajid Javid. He is not a Muslim. But because he "looks" and "sounds" like one, bam, Muslim.
>
> I didn't think this stuff was difficult, but PB is obviously some kind of intellectual doldrums.
By analogy, is hostility towards Christianity a form of racism?
> @viewcode said: > It is a religious symbol for the Hindu religion and is widely used in temples in India - and has been for over 4,000 years as you say. It was invented in India - not Germany - and was a symbol used to promote peace and prosperity. > > The Nazis also used torches for their rallies - should people be banned from using torches as symbols - the Tories used one for years? > > How did the argument get to the point where you are arguing for the rehabilitation of the swastika and the torchlight parade?
Let a thousand flowers bloom, and a thousand burning crosses blaze, as Nazis brandish flaming torches and wave swastika flags.
> @Pulpstar said: > > @williamglenn said: > > > https://twitter.com/europeelects/status/1134800823899369472 > > > > > > The Social Democrats really are in serious trouble. I thought they'd bottomed out at around 15% but it seems they can go even lower. > > Greens have become the main opposition party now ! It's like Pasok in Greece and a fate which could befall one Labour or the Tories. Perhaps both
Given the latest Yougov has LDs first and Brexit Party second it has already hit both.
In France too Les Republicains and the Socialist Party trail Le Pen's Party and En Marche and in Italy Forza Italia now trails Salvini's Lega Nord
> @SouthamObserver said: > > @StuartDickson said: > > > @SouthamObserver said: > > > Very hard to disagree with this view of what the Trump endorsement means for Johnson: > > > > > > Whether he wants to be or not, Johnson has gone from being the candidate who can reach into every part of England and Wales to one that can speak only to half of it. It underlines that the choice that the Conservatives are making is not to put the election winner of 2012 at their head, but to refight the 2017 election with a more charismatic figurehead and a more divisive Brexit offer, in the hope that they will get a better result. > > > > > > https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2019/06/donald-trumps-endorsement-underlines-there-no-way-back-boris-johnson > > > > > > Johnson is Corbyn's best hope. And vice versa, of course. > > > > > > > > > > He might appeal to half of England and Wales, but what percentage of Scots will he appeal to? Vanishingly small. As Ruthie is well aware. > > > > I doubt it’s half of Wales or England either, these days.
The Brexit Party won both Wales and England last week
It is a religious symbol for the Hindu religion and is widely used in temples in India - and has been for over 4,000 years as you say. It was invented in India - not Germany - and was a symbol used to promote peace and prosperity.
The Nazis also used torches for their rallies - should people be banned from using torches as symbols - the Tories used one for years?
How did the argument get to the point where you are arguing for the rehabilitation of the swastika and the torchlight parade?
The Swastika was NOT invented by the Nazis! As Brendan said above: It is a religious symbol for the Hindu religion and is widely used in temples in India. Not "was" but "is".
You appear to be replying to a response I did not make.
> @HYUFD said: > > @Pulpstar said: > > > @williamglenn said: > > > > > https://twitter.com/europeelects/status/1134800823899369472 > > > > > > > > > > > > The Social Democrats really are in serious trouble. I thought they'd bottomed out at around 15% but it seems they can go even lower. > > > > Greens have become the main opposition party now ! It's like Pasok in Greece and a fate which could befall one Labour or the Tories. Perhaps both > > Given the latest Yougov has LDs first and Brexit Party second it has already hit both. > > In France too Les Republicains and the Socialist Party trail Le Pen's Party and En Marche and in Italy Forza Italia now trails Salvini's Lega Nord
A little while back 4 or 5 parties in Germany were within a few points of each other. If this poll is correct SPD and AFD are now 'also rans'. The Green surge is impressive.
> It is a religious symbol for the Hindu religion and is widely used in temples in India - and has been for over 4,000 years as you say. It was invented in India - not Germany - and was a symbol used to promote peace and prosperity.
>
> The Nazis also used torches for their rallies - should people be banned from using torches as symbols - the Tories used one for years?
>
> How did the argument get to the point where you are arguing for the rehabilitation of the swastika and the torchlight parade?
Let a thousand flowers bloom, and a thousand burning crosses blaze, as Nazis brandish flaming torches and wave swastika flags.
Maybe this is the new tolerance?
I'll take it as a personal favour if you edit that to clarify that I did not say the bits from "It is a religious symbol..." to "...used one for years?", it was @brendan16 . This fucked-up Vanilla quoting system is attributing quotes to the wrong people.
> @viewcode said: > > @viewcode said: > > > It is a religious symbol for the Hindu religion and is widely used in temples in India - and has been for over 4,000 years as you say. It was invented in India - not Germany - and was a symbol used to promote peace and prosperity. > > > > > > The Nazis also used torches for their rallies - should people be banned from using torches as symbols - the Tories used one for years? > > > > > > How did the argument get to the point where you are arguing for the rehabilitation of the swastika and the torchlight parade? > > > > Let a thousand flowers bloom, and a thousand burning crosses blaze, as Nazis brandish flaming torches and wave swastika flags. > > > > Maybe this is the new tolerance? > > I'll take it as a personal favour if you edit that to clarify that I did not say the bits from "It is a religious symbol..." to "...used one for years?", it was @brendan16 . This fucked-up Vanilla quoting system is attributing quotes to the wrong people.
I tried, but I think I am too late to be allowed to edit it.
But of course you didn't say those things, and my comment certainly wasn't directed at you.
I don't understand why the siteowners don't do something about the quoting problem. The site has been pretty much unreadable for weeks now.
> @Chris said: > > @viewcode said: > > It is a religious symbol for the Hindu religion and is widely used in temples in India - and has been for over 4,000 years as you say. It was invented in India - not Germany - and was a symbol used to promote peace and prosperity. > > > > The Nazis also used torches for their rallies - should people be banned from using torches as symbols - the Tories used one for years? > > > > How did the argument get to the point where you are arguing for the rehabilitation of the swastika and the torchlight parade? > > Let a thousand flowers bloom, and a thousand burning crosses blaze, as Nazis brandish flaming torches and wave swastika flags. > > Maybe this is the new tolerance?
We were merely debating the origin of the Swastika - the Nazis didn't invent it they stole it.
The point was that in India it is a religious symbol and therefore its perfectly legitimate for Hindus to continue use a symbol they invented and had been using for 4,000 years in their religion including as an emblem on temples - as opposed to 15. Its hardly their fault Hitler stole it to promote his evil philosophy.
> @StuartDickson said: > > @SouthamObserver said: > > Very hard to disagree with this view of what the Trump endorsement means for Johnson: > > > > Whether he wants to be or not, Johnson has gone from being the candidate who can reach into every part of England and Wales to one that can speak only to half of it. It underlines that the choice that the Conservatives are making is not to put the election winner of 2012 at their head, but to refight the 2017 election with a more charismatic figurehead and a more divisive Brexit offer, in the hope that they will get a better result. > > > > https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2019/06/donald-trumps-endorsement-underlines-there-no-way-back-boris-johnson > > > > Johnson is Corbyn's best hope. And vice versa, of course. > > > > > > He might appeal to half of England and Wales, but what percentage of Scots will he appeal to? Vanishingly small. As Ruthie is well aware. >
The Brexit Party beat the Tories in Scotland in the European Parliament elections
> @Casino_Royale said: > I could see Gove v Raab being the final two. > > And I thought that this morning before even reading the article! > > However far Hunt goes he will fail (ultimately at the members) because he's flip flopped and doesn't offer anything. > > Gove, Raab and Stewart are the ones who have (the last mainly outreach and rhetoric) but if Gove does become PM I think he will admire the cut of Rory's jib and offer him a senior position in his cabinet.
Jeremy Hunt is the one the Conservatives would choose if they were smart. They’re not smart.
> @SouthamObserver said: > Very hard to disagree with this view of what the Trump endorsement means for Johnson: > > Whether he wants to be or not, Johnson has gone from being the candidate who can reach into every part of England and Wales to one that can speak only to half of it. It underlines that the choice that the Conservatives are making is not to put the election winner of 2012 at their head, but to refight the 2017 election with a more charismatic figurehead and a more divisive Brexit offer, in the hope that they will get a better result. > > https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2019/06/donald-trumps-endorsement-underlines-there-no-way-back-boris-johnson > > Johnson is Corbyn's best hope. And vice versa, of course. > >
Not what the polls show, Comres before a few weeks ago had the Tories 7% behind Labour but a Boris led Tory Party tied with Corbyn Labour, a Raab or Rudd led Tories still trailed Labour though
> @AlastairMeeks said: > > @Casino_Royale said: > > I could see Gove v Raab being the final two. > > > > And I thought that this morning before even reading the article! > > > > However far Hunt goes he will fail (ultimately at the members) because he's flip flopped and doesn't offer anything. > > > > Gove, Raab and Stewart are the ones who have (the last mainly outreach and rhetoric) but if Gove does become PM I think he will admire the cut of Rory's jib and offer him a senior position in his cabinet. > > Jeremy Hunt is the one the Conservatives would choose if they were smart. They’re not smart.
> @AlastairMeeks said: > > @Casino_Royale said: > > I could see Gove v Raab being the final two. > > > > And I thought that this morning before even reading the article! > > > > However far Hunt goes he will fail (ultimately at the members) because he's flip flopped and doesn't offer anything. > > > > Gove, Raab and Stewart are the ones who have (the last mainly outreach and rhetoric) but if Gove does become PM I think he will admire the cut of Rory's jib and offer him a senior position in his cabinet. > > Jeremy Hunt is the one the Conservatives would choose if they were smart. They’re not smart.
If Hunt leads the Tories I think they could come third at the next general election behind the Brexit Party, even 4th if the LDs sustain their recent surge
> @brendan16 said: > > @Chris said: > > > @viewcode said: > > > It is a religious symbol for the Hindu religion and is widely used in temples in India - and has been for over 4,000 years as you say. It was invented in India - not Germany - and was a symbol used to promote peace and prosperity. > > > > > > The Nazis also used torches for their rallies - should people be banned from using torches as symbols - the Tories used one for years? > > > > > > How did the argument get to the point where you are arguing for the rehabilitation of the swastika and the torchlight parade? > > > > Let a thousand flowers bloom, and a thousand burning crosses blaze, as Nazis brandish flaming torches and wave swastika flags. > > > > Maybe this is the new tolerance? > > We were merely debating the origin of the Swastika - the Nazis didn't invent it they stole it. > > The point was that in India it is a religious symbol and therefore its perfectly legitimate for Hindus to continue use a symbol they invented and had been using for 4,000 years in their religion including as an emblem on temples - as opposed to 15. Its hardly their fault Hitler stole it to promote his evil philosophy. >
Oh, sure. I've noticed the deep and abiding interest in comparative religion here.
I'm sure trolldom had nothing at all to do with the defence of the swastika.
Comments
> > @Sunil_Prasannan said:
>
> > > @Cyclefree said:
>
> >
>
> > > All is well in the real world.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Not like this board which is crawling with racists.
>
> >
>
> > Islam is not a race.
>
>
>
> In many contexts it's a magically accurate predictor of race, in the same way that first language is. As with language it is possible that our brains are specifically wired to acquire it from our parents at an early age (see under Chomsky, Noam). Believing it is therefore in most cases not a voluntary choice like, say, thinking that radiohead are good musicians or the LDs are a natural party of government. Indeed it's a difficult question whether being, say, muslim is any more a voluntary or alterable choice any more than being gay is. I don't therefore have much time for the "it's a belief, so we can point at them and laugh" school of thought.
>
>
> That is one of the most nonsensical statements I've read on here.
>
> If Islam is not a voluntary choice it is because of the social pressures on those who do not believe or want to leave, not least the rules on apostasy.
>
> Islam is a religion. Not a bit of your DNA. However much it may be important to a person it is no more worthy of protection than anything else which matters very much to a person. It is something which was created by man and can be discarded by man, as it has been in parts of the world where once it ruled.
>
> If we start protecting from criticism deeply held belief systems on the grounds that particular ones are more deeply held than others, we are giving up freedom of thought and will effectively end up living under the theocracy of whichever group shouts and screams the loudest. No thank you.
+1 Of course it is a choice. A choice often coerced through deliberate lack of education, that is what makes the schooling case all the more important to win.
> > @Big_G_NorthWales said:
> > > @justin124 said:
> > > > @Big_G_NorthWales said:
> > > > > @justin124 said:
> > > > > > @Big_G_NorthWales said:
> > > > > > > @justin124 said:
> > > > > > > > @Cyclefree said:
> > > > > > > > Raab as the non-nutcase option? Really? I don’t think so. He strikes me both as a nutcase and utterly dishonest, if the reports about his behaviour from Europe and Ireland are true.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > He actually sounds a pretty nasty piece of work - seeking further big spending cuts whilst reducing Income Tax to 35%
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 15% tax for most would be a winner
> > > > >
> > > > > No - it shows a callous indifference to the suffering of the less fortunate. He is clearly committed to making the Tory party even nastier than it already is - very much from the Arbeit Macht Frei wing.
> > > >
> > > > Low taxes help everyone and why on earth do you use that unacceptable last few words
> > > >
> > > > Disgusting
> > >
> > > Low taxes do not help everyone when accompanied by big spending cuts. Why not abolish Income Tax and get rid of all state benefits at the same time? That is clearly the direction favoured by this evil guy.
> >
> > You throw idiotic comments and brand people evil far too easily
>
> I am well versed in both economics and 20th century history - particularly with regard to the Third Reich. Those who always equate 'Arbeit Macht Frei' with genocide just reveal their ignorance of when and where the term was first used.
> Raab would clearly be happy to dismantle the Welfare State in all but name - whilst slashing taxes for the benefit of Alan Bstard types such as himself. I find that evil.
It's good to see the true Justin 124 revealed in all his nastiness now he must finally have realised that Labour are not about to gain Scotland.
> > @JosiasJessop said:
> > I am well versed in both economics and 20th century history - particularly with regard to the Third Reich. Those who always equate 'Arbeit Macht Frei' with genocide just reveal their ignorance of when and where the term was first used.
> > (Snip)
> >
> > Like it or not, that's exactly what the term is now equated with. The deeper history of the phrase is pretty irrelevant.
> >
> > It's like people arguing that displaying the swastika is fine because it was used in other cultures for thousands of years.
>
> That depends on the context. When the user makes it clear that he is not alluding to genocide but the much earlier promotion of programmes to deal with unemployment, the message should be obvious.
You'd think a serial Labour supporter would lay off too many Nazi Germany references in the light of the current state of play within the party. Massive self-awareness fail
If the MPs are stupid enough to exclude him from the final 2 again they deserve to be led by a swivel eyed No Deal fanatic.
They need to engineer Gove v Hancock (or similar) so that a membership full of gammon entryists votes the right way.
> > @Pulpstar said:
>
> > If there is one thing the remain side has shown it is that just because something or other is "decided", the battle is not in fact over till the final letter has been signed, railtrack or brick laid.
>
> >
>
> > I'm in favour of Heathrow expansion, and slightly against HS2. I don't see why hardcore opponents of both should stop battling though, and expect BRX to come out against HS2 in particular.
>
>
>
> I expect BRX to come out against pretty much everything. Kind of appropriate for the ultimate repository for the protest vote.
>
>
>
> What will be interesting is if they (if they can be accurately called 'they') ever come out in favour of anything.
>
> Nigel will certainly have TBP come out against Heathrow expansion, but he'll wait until Boris gains the leadership. It will be a terrific way of embarrassing him.
Nah. PM Boris can resurrect His Island.
Firstly, HS2 is infrastructure for the future. It is not designed to counter current loadings and traffic patterns, but projected future ones. That is an area that is in area that antis can reasonably argue: although they're as clueless about traffic patterns in twenty or thirty years as anyone. Few people in 1990 would have projected railway passenger levels to have doubled in thirty years.
And if we leave it until the traffic patterns do arise, it's too late as these things take decades to plan and build.
Secondly, it is not just about passenger loadings per train, but paths. Say you can currently get tickets as a train is at 80% loadings. At a 2% p.a. compound passenger increase, it's not many years (12?) before that train is absolutely full.
So you might say: "just put on another train" - and that's where 'capacity' comes in: you might not be able to run another train (create a path) at that time of day, because the line is at capacity. This is made worse by the fact that express, stopping passenger and freight trains all have to use the same route, reducing available paths.
HS2 creates oodles of capacity by not only creating a new line, but by separating fast express passenger trains from stopping 'local' and freight services.
https://twitter.com/alanferrier/status/1134792034211041280?s=19
Might not be a vote winner though.
> SCons finally come out with a policy that isn't just No to Sindy
>
> https://twitter.com/alanferrier/status/1134792034211041280
>
>
>
> Might not be a vote winner though.
LOL - maybe they really do eat babies!!!!
> https://twitter.com/europeelects/status/1134800823899369472?s=21
The Social Democrats really are in serious trouble. I thought they'd bottomed out at around 15% but it seems they can go even lower.
> > @justin124 said:
> > > @JosiasJessop said:
> > > I am well versed in both economics and 20th century history - particularly with regard to the Third Reich. Those who always equate 'Arbeit Macht Frei' with genocide just reveal their ignorance of when and where the term was first used.
> > > (Snip)
> > >
> > > Like it or not, that's exactly what the term is now equated with. The deeper history of the phrase is pretty irrelevant.
> > >
> > > It's like people arguing that displaying the swastika is fine because it was used in other cultures for thousands of years.
> >
> > That depends on the context. When the user makes it clear that he is not alluding to genocide but the much earlier promotion of programmes to deal with unemployment, the message should be obvious.
>
> You'd think a serial Labour supporter would lay off too many Nazi Germany references in the light of the current state of play within the party. Massive self-awareness fail
It may have escaped your notice but I have long declared my firm intention to spoil my ballot paper at the next election. Moreover post 1992 I did not vote Labour at a Parliamentary election until 2015. I also suspect you might benefit from taking a cursory look in the mirror.
And I thought that this morning before even reading the article!
However far Hunt goes he will fail (ultimately at the members) because he's flip flopped and doesn't offer anything.
Gove, Raab and Stewart are the ones who have (the last mainly outreach and rhetoric) but if Gove does become PM I think he will admire the cut of Rory's jib and offer him a senior position in his cabinet.
And most of the 'reports' that (in your eyes) 'demolish' the case for HS2 are fairly laughable - especially the ones from StopHS2.
What is arrogant is the belief by some people that if HS2 is cancelled, the money will automagically be allocated to their favoured projects.
> Yet there never seems to be any shortage of tickets on the Leeds to LKX route.
>
> There are several aspect to this.
>
> Firstly, HS2 is infrastructure for the future. It is not designed to counter current loadings and traffic patterns, but projected future ones. That is an area that is in area that antis can reasonably argue: although they're as clueless about traffic patterns in twenty or thirty years as anyone. Few people in 1990 would have projected railway passenger levels to have doubled in thirty years.
>
> And if we leave it until the traffic patterns do arise, it's too late as these things take decades to plan and build.
>
> Secondly, it is not just about passenger loadings per train, but paths. Say you can currently get tickets as a train is at 80% loadings. At a 2% p.a. compound passenger increase, it's not many years (12?) before that train is absolutely full.
>
> So you might say: "just put on another train" - and that's where 'capacity' comes in: you might not be able to run another train (create a path) at that time of day, because the line is at capacity. This is made worse by the fact that express, stopping passenger and freight trains all have to use the same route, reducing available paths.
>
> HS2 creates oodles of capacity by not only creating a new line, but by separating fast express passenger trains from stopping 'local' and freight services.
Although that assumes that usage will continually increase.
While speaking from my own experience, and I would say that is how most people form their views, the ECML has much greater availability now than it had in the 1990s.
Promises of extra capacity in decades hence might be nice theoretically but its the current spending which matters.
And that's where HS2's problems now fall - its going to be stuck between the desire of politicians to find money for more immediate, more popular and possibly more worthwhile areas ** and an economic cycle in which public finances are at some point going to severely deteriorate.
** Is HS2 more worthwhile than sorting out adult social care or student finances for example ? And which would be the least electorally popular ?
> > @Pulpstar said:
>
> > If there is one thing the remain side has shown it is that just because something or other is "decided", the battle is not in fact over till the final letter has been signed, railtrack or brick laid.
>
> >
>
> > I'm in favour of Heathrow expansion, and slightly against HS2. I don't see why hardcore opponents of both should stop battling though, and expect BRX to come out against HS2 in particular.
>
>
>
> I expect BRX to come out against pretty much everything. Kind of appropriate for the ultimate repository for the protest vote.
>
>
>
> What will be interesting is if they (if they can be accurately called 'they') ever come out in favour of anything.
>
> Possibly rail nationalisation
>
> Isn't Batten's UKIP already pro-renationalisation of rail ?
>
> So is Corbyn's labour. It's undeniably popular whatever the merits so possibly Farage will be too.
I wonder how its popularity varies between regular rail users, occasional rail users and non rail users.
> I could see Gove v Raab being the final two.
>
> And I thought that this morning before even reading the article!
>
> However far Hunt goes he will fail (ultimately at the members) because he's flip flopped and doesn't offer anything.
>
> Gove, Raab and Stewart are the ones who have (the last mainly outreach and rhetoric) but if Gove does become PM I think he will admire the cut of Rory's jib and offer him a senior position in his cabinet.
The membership would elect Raaaab in all likelihood. The MPs can't give them the choice of someone to the right of Gove.
Of course, from a Labour perspective, McVey v Baker in the run off would be ideal.
Can anyone explain to me how back-stabber Gove, who suckles on the teat of Climate Correctness, and only offers a continuity-May plan, can possibly save the Tories?
> Although that assumes that usage will continually increase.
>
> While speaking from my own experience, and I would say that is how most people form their views, the ECML has much greater availability now than it had in the 1990s.
>
> Promises of extra capacity in decades hence might be nice theoretically but its the current spending which matters.
>
> And that's where HS2's problems now fall - its going to be stuck between the desire of politicians to find money for more immediate, more popular and possibly more worthwhile areas ** and an economic cycle in which public finances are at some point going to severely deteriorate.
>
> ** Is HS2 more worthwhile than sorting out adult social care or student finances for example ? And which would be the least electorally popular ?
As much as I'm not a fan of HS2, talking about it in the same breath as adult social care and student finances is not helpful. The question should be, what do we need from our railways and what's the best way to deliver it. The problem with HS2 is that it's a nice shiney new thing for which a politician can cut a ribbon. Upgrading signalling infrastructure to increase capacity is not as sexy and appealing to politicians.
0.8*(1.02^x) =1
-> 1.02^x = 1/0.8
-> loge(1.02^x) = loge(1/0.8)
-> xloge(1.02) = loge(1/0.8)
-> x = loge(1/0.8)/loge(1.02)
-> x = 11.27
https://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2019/06/royston-smith-why-i-am-voting-for-malthouse.html
> > @Casino_Royale said:
> > I could see Gove v Raab being the final two.
> >
> > And I thought that this morning before even reading the article!
> >
> > However far Hunt goes he will fail (ultimately at the members) because he's flip flopped and doesn't offer anything.
> >
> > Gove, Raab and Stewart are the ones who have (the last mainly outreach and rhetoric) but if Gove does become PM I think he will admire the cut of Rory's jib and offer him a senior position in his cabinet.
>
> The membership would elect Raaaab in all likelihood. The MPs can't give them the choice of someone to the right of Gove.
>
> Of course, from a Labour perspective, McVey v Baker in the run off would be ideal.
I'm not so sure.
Gove is well respected amongst the membership. They will vote for whoever they believe can most credibly deliver Brexit.
Raab would risk revoke and no Brexit whereas Gove would get the job done.
> > @Pulpstar said:
>
> > If there is one thing the remain side has shown it is that just because something or other is "decided", the battle is not in fact over till the final letter has been signed, railtrack or brick laid.
>
> >
>
> > I'm in favour of Heathrow expansion, and slightly against HS2. I don't see why hardcore opponents of both should stop battling though, and expect BRX to come out against HS2 in particular.
>
>
>
> I expect BRX to come out against pretty much everything. Kind of appropriate for the ultimate repository for the protest vote.
>
>
>
> What will be interesting is if they (if they can be accurately called 'they') ever come out in favour of anything.
>
> Possibly rail nationalisation
>
> Isn't Batten's UKIP already pro-renationalisation of rail ?
>
> So is Corbyn's labour. It's undeniably popular whatever the merits so possibly Farage will be too.
>
> It is indeed popular; though as I've said many times passim, I fear 'nationalisation' by itself will do nothing to improve the network or customer service.
It will make it worse.
> > @JosiasJessop said:
>
> > And this is why HS2 is in trouble.
>
> >
>
> > Ten years of time and billions spent and nothing to show but arrogance and delays.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > I'm sorry if this is a bit inconvenient but HS2 has failed to get 'buy-in' - its had the chance but it increasingly looks like a 20th century project.
>
> >
>
> > I can't quite see why you think what I said was 'arrogant'.
>
> >
>
> > I fear nothing I - or HS2 - could have said would have led you to 'buy-in' to it. You're consistently anti the project - and fair enough. But it seems a little odd when you pretend to give the project 'advice' that is not exactly fact-based.
>
>
>
> What comes across as arrogant from the HS2 supporters is the assumption that it should continue despite failing to make the case for it and despite report after report demolishing its claims.
>
>
>
> Now it doesn't matter what I think but we are now approaching the time when politicians will be looking for an easy source of billions to back up their spending promises.
>
>
>
> Likewise we are now overdue a recession whereupon the public finances will be even more severely constrained.
>
>
>
> Has HS2 done anything to prepare for this or has it casually and arrogantly IMO assumed that the money being spent on it will be certain to happen.
>
> There have been reports into why HS2 is necessary - I've linked to them in the past. Have you read them? There are also reports into how other oft-mentioned alternatives do not meet the requirements.
>
> And most of the 'reports' that (in your eyes) 'demolish' the case for HS2 are fairly laughable - especially the ones from StopHS2.
>
> What is arrogant is the belief by some people that if HS2 is cancelled, the money will automagically be allocated to their favoured projects.
You should know by now JJ that most people operate off policy based evidence not evidence based policy.
> > @Cyclefree said:
>
> > All is well in the real world.
>
>
>
> Not like this board which is crawling with racists.
>
> Islam is not a race.
You wanna tell me that this isn't racist?
"It’s the Trojan Horse scandal again. If you allow mass immigration on the scale the UK has, it’s entirely predictable. Foreigners aren’t desperate to ‘become British’, they don’t think we are better than them, it was arrogant of the establishment to think otherwise."
For fuck's sake.
> Can anyone explain to me how back-stabber Gove, who suckles on the teat of Climate Correctness, and only offers a continuity-May plan, can possibly save the Tories?
He made the Beachy head coastal area - stretching from Hastings to Eastbourne - a conservation area to get Amber Rudd's vote? No such luck for Clacton or Skegness.
Gove isn't just continuity May - he was the architect of May through the 2016 contest.
He would make a great Chancellor - maybe even get him to lead on more devolution for England. But I am not sure if he is the answer the Tories need in the top job.
> Can anyone explain to me how back-stabber Gove, who suckles on the teat of Climate Correctness, and only offers a continuity-May plan, can possibly save the Tories?
Gove does have a tendency to take things too far.
I could see him going full Greta Thunberg and declaring a climate emergency if he wins, for example.
Indeed, and that's an area that is immensely hard to judge. But the problem is that we do need to judge it, and getting it wrong either way can be immensely expensive. But once built, the infrastructure is there for many, many decades.
You might believe that anecdotally the ECML has much greater availability than in the 1990s. It will also have many more services running than back then 9e.g. post the completion of electrification in 1991) - though sadly I can't immediatey find figures.
You might be interested in the following, which highlights some of the capacity issues on the route:
https://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/16740/ecml-capacity-options-report-sept-2014.pdf
> > @another_richard said:
> > Although that assumes that usage will continually increase.
> >
> > While speaking from my own experience, and I would say that is how most people form their views, the ECML has much greater availability now than it had in the 1990s.
> >
> > Promises of extra capacity in decades hence might be nice theoretically but its the current spending which matters.
> >
> > And that's where HS2's problems now fall - its going to be stuck between the desire of politicians to find money for more immediate, more popular and possibly more worthwhile areas ** and an economic cycle in which public finances are at some point going to severely deteriorate.
> >
> > ** Is HS2 more worthwhile than sorting out adult social care or student finances for example ? And which would be the least electorally popular ?
>
> As much as I'm not a fan of HS2, talking about it in the same breath as adult social care and student finances is not helpful. The question should be, what do we need from our railways and what's the best way to deliver it. The problem with HS2 is that it's a nice shiney new thing for which a politician can cut a ribbon. Upgrading signalling infrastructure to increase capacity is not as sexy and appealing to politicians.
It is helpful because that's the way politicians think.
And I suspect that some of our politicians are now doing electoral cost benefit analyses of HS2 compared to other areas of government spending.
> > @Sunil_Prasannan said:
> > > @Cyclefree said:
> >
> > > All is well in the real world.
> >
> >
> >
> > Not like this board which is crawling with racists.
> >
> > Islam is not a race.
>
> You wanna tell me that this isn't racist?
> "It’s the Trojan Horse scandal again. If you allow mass immigration on the scale the UK has, it’s entirely predictable. Foreigners aren’t desperate to ‘become British’, they don’t think we are better than them, it was arrogant of the establishment to think otherwise."
>
> For fuck's sake.
No it is not. What race do.you think is desperate to "become British" that is being impugned?
> > @SandyRentool said:
> > > @Casino_Royale said:
> > > I could see Gove v Raab being the final two.
> > >
> > > And I thought that this morning before even reading the article!
> > >
> > > However far Hunt goes he will fail (ultimately at the members) because he's flip flopped and doesn't offer anything.
> > >
> > > Gove, Raab and Stewart are the ones who have (the last mainly outreach and rhetoric) but if Gove does become PM I think he will admire the cut of Rory's jib and offer him a senior position in his cabinet.
> >
> > The membership would elect Raaaab in all likelihood. The MPs can't give them the choice of someone to the right of Gove.
> >
> > Of course, from a Labour perspective, McVey v Baker in the run off would be ideal.
>
> I'm not so sure.
>
> Gove is well respected amongst the membership. They will vote for whoever they believe can most credibly deliver Brexit.
>
> Raab would risk revoke and no Brexit whereas Gove would get the job done.
But you are more sensible than the median Tory member (and probably the upper quartile). The nutters are judging by one metric alone, and it isn't a helpful or sensible one (see downthread). The only hope is that, knowing this, the MPs head them off at the pass
Looking at other elections, the Swinson-Davey show came to London last night. It seems they will be the only runners even though nominations formally close on Friday.
At the moment, I'm hard pressed to see policy differences between the two but I do hope to get to a Hustings event later this month.
In Denmark where they vote Wednesday, the latest Voxmeter poll, translated into seats, gives the centre-left bloc 101 seats and the centre-right bloc 74 which would be a huge win with the Social Democrats back on 50 seats.
The latest Austrian poll reads well for the centre-right People's Party which has gained on both the Social Democrats and the Freedom Party. In 2017, those three parties won 163 of the 183 seats in the Austrian Parliament and nearly 85% of the vote but both the liberal NEOS Party and the Greens are making a little headway.
The big three vote share is down to 78.5% but these numbers may offer some different possibilities for the OVP under Kurz - could he seek a coalition with NEOS, would they go into a Government with him? On these poll numbers, an OVP-NEOS Government would probably have a majority or be very close to it?
> > @Alistair said:
> > SCons finally come out with a policy that isn't just No to Sindy
> >
> > https://twitter.com/alanferrier/status/1134792034211041280
> >
> >
> >
> > Might not be a vote winner though.
>
> LOL - maybe they really do eat babies!!!!
Odd the Tories don't abolish the extortionate hospital parking charges in England then?
> Can anyone explain to me how back-stabber Gove, who suckles on the teat of Climate Correctness, and only offers a continuity-May plan, can possibly save the Tories?
May didn't fail because of any climate issues.
I'd also expect you to be the first to criticise politicians for putting their electoral prospects ahead of the good of the country!
> > @JosiasJessop said:
>
> > And this is why HS2 is in trouble.
>
> >
>
> > Ten years of time and billions spent and nothing to show but arrogance and delays.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > I'm sorry if this is a bit inconvenient but HS2 has failed to get 'buy-in' - its had the chance but it increasingly looks like a 20th century project.
>
> >
>
> > I can't quite see why you think what I said was 'arrogant'.
>
> >
>
> > I fear nothing I - or HS2 - could have said would have led you to 'buy-in' to it. You're consistently anti the project - and fair enough. But it seems a little odd when you pretend to give the project 'advice' that is not exactly fact-based.
>
>
>
> What comes across as arrogant from the HS2 supporters is the assumption that it should continue despite failing to make the case for it and despite report after report demolishing its claims.
>
>
>
> Now it doesn't matter what I think but we are now approaching the time when politicians will be looking for an easy source of billions to back up their spending promises.
>
>
>
> Likewise we are now overdue a recession whereupon the public finances will be even more severely constrained.
>
>
>
> Has HS2 done anything to prepare for this or has it casually and arrogantly IMO assumed that the money being spent on it will be certain to happen.
>
> There have been reports into why HS2 is necessary - I've linked to them in the past. Have you read them? There are also reports into how other oft-mentioned alternatives do not meet the requirements.
>
> And most of the 'reports' that (in your eyes) 'demolish' the case for HS2 are fairly laughable - especially the ones from StopHS2.
>
> What is arrogant is the belief by some people that if HS2 is cancelled, the money will automagically be allocated to their favoured projects.
So reports which support your view are good but those that oppose it are 'laughable'.
How about this report:
' HS2 will not offer value for money and risks "short changing" the North of England, a group of peers has warned.
A report from the House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee also said it was "far from convinced" the new high-speed railway will be built within the £55.7bn budget.
It said the project should not go ahead without a new assessment of its costs and benefits. '
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48284105
Yes, but that wasn't the question.
The lessons should be learnt from the West Coast upgrade mess of 15-20 years ago, and the current Great Western electrification mess - upgrading existing railway lines whilst trains run at or near capacity is incredibly difficult and expensive.
There are no easy answers (and yes, HS2 isn't an 'easy' answer either).
> > @MarkHopkins said:
> > Can anyone explain to me how back-stabber Gove, who suckles on the teat of Climate Correctness, and only offers a continuity-May plan, can possibly save the Tories?
>
> Gove does have a tendency to take things too far.
>
> I could see him going full Greta Thunberg and declaring a climate emergency if he wins, for example.
That. And the public strongly dislike him as well.
> > @tlg86 said:
>
> > > @another_richard said:
>
> > > Although that assumes that usage will continually increase.
>
> > >
>
> > > While speaking from my own experience, and I would say that is how most people form their views, the ECML has much greater availability now than it had in the 1990s.
>
> > >
>
> > > Promises of extra capacity in decades hence might be nice theoretically but its the current spending which matters.
>
> > >
>
> > > And that's where HS2's problems now fall - its going to be stuck between the desire of politicians to find money for more immediate, more popular and possibly more worthwhile areas ** and an economic cycle in which public finances are at some point going to severely deteriorate.
>
> > >
>
> > > ** Is HS2 more worthwhile than sorting out adult social care or student finances for example ? And which would be the least electorally popular ?
>
> >
>
> > As much as I'm not a fan of HS2, talking about it in the same breath as adult social care and student finances is not helpful. The question should be, what do we need from our railways and what's the best way to deliver it. The problem with HS2 is that it's a nice shiney new thing for which a politician can cut a ribbon. Upgrading signalling infrastructure to increase capacity is not as sexy and appealing to politicians.
>
>
>
> It is helpful because that's the way politicians think.
>
>
>
> And I suspect that some of our politicians are now doing electoral cost benefit analyses of HS2 compared to other areas of government spending.
>
> Infrastructure spending is a very different beast to day-to-day spending.
>
> I'd also expect you to be the first to criticise politicians for putting their electoral prospects ahead of the good of the country!
I'm no defender of politicians of any variety but that's how they think.
As to infrastructure spending my view is keep it small scale, keep it regular and keep it relevant.
The bigger it is the more likely it is to become a vanity project.
> I am well versed in both economics and 20th century history - particularly with regard to the Third Reich. Those who always equate 'Arbeit Macht Frei' with genocide just reveal their ignorance of when and where the term was first used.
> (Snip)
>
> Like it or not, that's exactly what the term is now equated with. The deeper history of the phrase is pretty irrelevant.
>
> It's like people arguing that displaying the swastika is fine because it was used in other cultures for thousands of years.
>
> It is STILL used by other cultures!
It is a religious symbol for the Hindu religion and is widely used in temples in India - and has been for over 4,000 years as you say. It was invented in India - not Germany - and was a symbol used to promote peace and prosperity.
The Nazis also used torches for their rallies - should people be banned from using torches as symbols - the Tories used one for years?
> > @ah009 said:
> > > @Sunil_Prasannan said:
> > > > @Cyclefree said:
> > >
> > > > All is well in the real world.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Not like this board which is crawling with racists.
> > >
> > > Islam is not a race.
> >
> > You wanna tell me that this isn't racist?
> > "It’s the Trojan Horse scandal again. If you allow mass immigration on the scale the UK has, it’s entirely predictable. Foreigners aren’t desperate to ‘become British’, they don’t think we are better than them, it was arrogant of the establishment to think otherwise."
> >
> > For fuck's sake.
>
> No it is not. What race do.you think is desperate to "become British" that is being impugned?
The racist who typed those words was saying that the homophobia is because of "mass immigration". I.e. foreigners. Foreigners bad, British good.
And we can bring in the Islamophobia all over these boards. Spoiler: Islamophobia IS racism. Anyone with a passing familiarity with a dictionary can look up "racism" and then "race". Religious hatred is not only directly racism, but also sometimes a proxy for racism. Witness the Islamophobic attacks and threats levelled against Sajid Javid. He is not a Muslim. But because he "looks" and "sounds" like one, bam, Muslim.
I didn't think this stuff was difficult, but PB is obviously some kind of intellectual doldrums.
There are valid criticisms of the HS2 project - and I've often mentioned them on here. I'm not a blind fan. However I can also call out the b/s arguments.
And yes, you should read that HoL report. And whilst you are at it, you should read the pro- reports I've linked to many times passim.
That's the report that said HS2 should stop at Old Oak Common instead of going into Euston. If that's the case, then the report's as laughable as all of the others. It's an insanely stupid idea, and a sign of utter dishonesty.
To aid you, the report is here:
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201719/ldselect/ldeconaf/359/359.pdf
> > @Sunil_Prasannan said:
> > I am well versed in both economics and 20th century history - particularly with regard to the Third Reich. Those who always equate 'Arbeit Macht Frei' with genocide just reveal their ignorance of when and where the term was first used.
> > (Snip)
> >
> > Like it or not, that's exactly what the term is now equated with. The deeper history of the phrase is pretty irrelevant.
> >
> > It's like people arguing that displaying the swastika is fine because it was used in other cultures for thousands of years.
> >
> > It is STILL used by other cultures!
>
> It is a religious symbol for the Hindu religion and is widely used in temples in India - and has been for over 4,000 years as you say. It was invented in India - not Germany - and was a symbol used to promote peace and prosperity.
>
> The Nazis also used torches for their rallies - should people be banned from using torches as symbols - the Tories used one for years?
Don't you think that a torchlit crowd displaying swastikas proclaiming "arbeit macht frei" raises even slight concerns?
You are Jeremy Corbyn and I claim my five pounds!
> > @JosiasJessop said:
> > > @tlg86 said:
> >
> > > > @another_richard said:
> >
> > > > Although that assumes that usage will continually increase.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > While speaking from my own experience, and I would say that is how most people form their views, the ECML has much greater availability now than it had in the 1990s.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > Promises of extra capacity in decades hence might be nice theoretically but its the current spending which matters.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > And that's where HS2's problems now fall - its going to be stuck between the desire of politicians to find money for more immediate, more popular and possibly more worthwhile areas ** and an economic cycle in which public finances are at some point going to severely deteriorate.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > ** Is HS2 more worthwhile than sorting out adult social care or student finances for example ? And which would be the least electorally popular ?
> >
> > >
> >
> > > As much as I'm not a fan of HS2, talking about it in the same breath as adult social care and student finances is not helpful. The question should be, what do we need from our railways and what's the best way to deliver it. The problem with HS2 is that it's a nice shiney new thing for which a politician can cut a ribbon. Upgrading signalling infrastructure to increase capacity is not as sexy and appealing to politicians.
> >
> >
> >
> > It is helpful because that's the way politicians think.
> >
> >
> >
> > And I suspect that some of our politicians are now doing electoral cost benefit analyses of HS2 compared to other areas of government spending.
> >
> > Infrastructure spending is a very different beast to day-to-day spending.
> >
> > I'd also expect you to be the first to criticise politicians for putting their electoral prospects ahead of the good of the country!
>
> I'm no defender of politicians of any variety but that's how they think.
>
> As to infrastructure spending my view is keep it small scale, keep it regular and keep it relevant.
>
> The bigger it is the more likely it is to become a vanity project.
HS2 is NOT a vanity project.
It received overwhelming support from MPs, being passed 399 to 42 in favour in its third reading. Similar in Lords.
Parliament overwhelming decided it should be built for future generations and it was in manifestos.
Still a few days until May finally resigns. Let's hope her successor is an improvement.
> Lots of one-sided games in the cricket. On the basis of the first few days, my final four are England, Australia, NZ and Windies. Hope that hasn't jinxed England.
I suspect India will make the final four. Once they decide that they've had enough rest, that is.
> > @brendan16 said:
> > > @Sunil_Prasannan said:
> > > I am well versed in both economics and 20th century history - particularly with regard to the Third Reich. Those who always equate 'Arbeit Macht Frei' with genocide just reveal their ignorance of when and where the term was first used.
> > > (Snip)
> > >
> > > Like it or not, that's exactly what the term is now equated with. The deeper history of the phrase is pretty irrelevant.
> > >
> > > It's like people arguing that displaying the swastika is fine because it was used in other cultures for thousands of years.
> > >
> > > It is STILL used by other cultures!
> >
> > It is a religious symbol for the Hindu religion and is widely used in temples in India - and has been for over 4,000 years as you say. It was invented in India - not Germany - and was a symbol used to promote peace and prosperity.
> >
> > The Nazis also used torches for their rallies - should people be banned from using torches as symbols - the Tories used one for years?
>
> Don't you think that a torchlit crowd displaying swastikas proclaiming "arbeit macht frei" raises even slight concerns?
>
> You are Jeremy Corbyn and I claim my five pounds!
LOL
> Good afternoon, everyone.
>
> Still a few days until May finally resigns. Let's hope her successor is an improvement.
In line with @david_herdson's header, when a disease has multiple treatments, it tends to mean none of them are very effective...
Do you think the Kashmir dispute is about "race"? Do you think the Partition of India was about "race"? What language do they speak in Dhaka and Kolkata (for example).
Telling Hindus they can't use their own symbol because it belongs to the Nazis is nuts. I appreciate many people will not be aware of the Hindu use (and I think it's been used by others too, historically) but those who do know and make that claim are silly sausages.
> > @Philip_Thompson said:
> > > @ah009 said:
> > > > @Sunil_Prasannan said:
> > > > > @Cyclefree said:
> > > >
> > > > > All is well in the real world.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Not like this board which is crawling with racists.
> > > >
> > > > Islam is not a race.
> > >
> > > You wanna tell me that this isn't racist?
> > > "It’s the Trojan Horse scandal again. If you allow mass immigration on the scale the UK has, it’s entirely predictable. Foreigners aren’t desperate to ‘become British’, they don’t think we are better than them, it was arrogant of the establishment to think otherwise."
> > >
> > > For fuck's sake.
> >
> > No it is not. What race do.you think is desperate to "become British" that is being impugned?
>
> The racist who typed those words was saying that the homophobia is because of "mass immigration". I.e. foreigners. Foreigners bad, British good.
>
> And we can bring in the Islamophobia all over these boards. Spoiler: Islamophobia IS racism. Anyone with a passing familiarity with a dictionary can look up "racism" and then "race". Religious hatred is not only directly racism, but also sometimes a proxy for racism. Witness the Islamophobic attacks and threats levelled against Sajid Javid. He is not a Muslim. But because he "looks" and "sounds" like one, bam, Muslim.
>
> I didn't think this stuff was difficult, but PB is obviously some kind of intellectual doldrums.
No, the reality it is you who is being idiotic.
> > @Cyclefree said:
> > > @Cyclefree said:
> >
> > > All is well in the real world.
> >
> >
> >
> > Not like this board which is crawling with racists.
> >
> > I'm not sure if that accusation is levelled at me. But if so I reject it.
> >
> > Anyway, stuff to do. If anyone has any good tips for the Derby send them my way! My last outing at Sandown was not very profitable so I'm hoping for better today.
>
> To be absolutely clear, that was not directed at you. But three openly racist people on the previous thread.
Can you name them?
Was wondering if it is an option for the Brexit Party if they wnted to have 650 candidates but didn't want to stand against a rabid Brexiteer MP.
I know the Cooperative Party has candidates who are simultaneously Labour candidates, but I think that's a different set up.
> > @MTimT said:
> > Lots of one-sided games in the cricket. On the basis of the first few days, my final four are England, Australia, NZ and Windies. Hope that hasn't jinxed England.
>
> I suspect India will make the final four. Once they decide that they've had enough rest, that is.
They are on my bubble. If Windies fold, or the Aussies crack, they'll be in.
> https://twitter.com/FrankLuntz/status/1134522965880582144
Yes but that only matters if that trend is reflected in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania ie the key swing states in the Electoral College. Trump lost the popular vote even in 2016
> Good afternoon, everyone.
>
> Still a few days until May finally resigns. Let's hope her successor is an improvement.
May only resigns as Tory leader on Friday, she remains PM until mid July and the election of a new Tory leader.
> > @Philip_Thompson said:
> > > @ah009 said:
> > > > @Sunil_Prasannan said:
> > > > > @Cyclefree said:
> > > >
> > > > > All is well in the real world.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Not like this board which is crawling with racists.
> > > >
> > > > Islam is not a race.
> > >
> > > You wanna tell me that this isn't racist?
> > > "It’s the Trojan Horse scandal again. If you allow mass immigration on the scale the UK has, it’s entirely predictable. Foreigners aren’t desperate to ‘become British’, they don’t think we are better than them, it was arrogant of the establishment to think otherwise."
> > >
> > > For fuck's sake.
> >
> > No it is not. What race do.you think is desperate to "become British" that is being impugned?
>
> The racist who typed those words was saying that the homophobia is because of "mass immigration". I.e. foreigners. Foreigners bad, British good.
>
> And we can bring in the Islamophobia all over these boards. Spoiler: Islamophobia IS racism. Anyone with a passing familiarity with a dictionary can look up "racism" and then "race". Religious hatred is not only directly racism, but also sometimes a proxy for racism. Witness the Islamophobic attacks and threats levelled against Sajid Javid. He is not a Muslim. But because he "looks" and "sounds" like one, bam, Muslim.
>
> I didn't think this stuff was difficult, but PB is obviously some kind of intellectual doldrums.
By analogy, is hostility towards Christianity a form of racism?
> > @SandyRentool said:
> > > @Casino_Royale said:
> > > I could see Gove v Raab being the final two.
> > >
> > > And I thought that this morning before even reading the article!
> > >
> > > However far Hunt goes he will fail (ultimately at the members) because he's flip flopped and doesn't offer anything.
> > >
> > > Gove, Raab and Stewart are the ones who have (the last mainly outreach and rhetoric) but if Gove does become PM I think he will admire the cut of Rory's jib and offer him a senior position in his cabinet.
> >
> > The membership would elect Raaaab in all likelihood. The MPs can't give them the choice of someone to the right of Gove.
> >
> > Of course, from a Labour perspective, McVey v Baker in the run off would be ideal.
>
> I'm not so sure.
>
> Gove is well respected amongst the membership. They will vote for whoever they believe can most credibly deliver Brexit.
>
> Raab would risk revoke and no Brexit whereas Gove would get the job done.
Tory members would vote for Raab over Gove 56% to 35% according to last week's ConHome Tory members poll
https://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2019/05/next-tory-leader-run-offs-our-panels-support-hasnt-changed-they-want-johnson-followed-by-raab-gove-javid-and-hunt-in-that-order.html
Raab has committed to take the UK out of the EU by the end of October Deal or No Deal
> How much are Tory MP brexiteers and grassroots (as opposed to Labour brexiteers) wedded to opposition of FoM within any post Brexit EU relationship? Can Gove use ditching this 'red line' as a way to be distinctive (and possible appeal to soft brexiteers/remainers)?
Probably not, most Tory members certainly want to end FoM (albeit EU migration to the UK has fallen since the referendum anyway)
> Is there any abiity in UK election law to stand as a candidate for multiple parties ? (AS happens in New York where for example Bill De Balsio ran for mayor of NYC as the Democratic Party candidate and also the Working Families Party cnadidate)
>
> Was wondering if it is an option for the Brexit Party if they wnted to have 650 candidates but didn't want to stand against a rabid Brexiteer MP.
>
> I know the Cooperative Party has candidates who are simultaneously Labour candidates, but I think that's a different set up.
Presumably the rabid Brexiteer MP would be Tory and if they stood as a joint TBP/Tory candidate they would be expelled from the Tory party. Unless the tory party comes to an agreement with TBP in which case they would lose huge support nationally.
Of course they COULD the SDP?/Liberal Alliance did just that.
> It is a religious symbol for the Hindu religion and is widely used in temples in India - and has been for over 4,000 years as you say. It was invented in India - not Germany - and was a symbol used to promote peace and prosperity.
>
> The Nazis also used torches for their rallies - should people be banned from using torches as symbols - the Tories used one for years?
>
> How did the argument get to the point where you are arguing for the rehabilitation of the swastika and the torchlight parade?
Let a thousand flowers bloom, and a thousand burning crosses blaze, as Nazis brandish flaming torches and wave swastika flags.
Maybe this is the new tolerance?
> > @williamglenn said:
>
> > https://twitter.com/europeelects/status/1134800823899369472
>
>
>
>
>
> The Social Democrats really are in serious trouble. I thought they'd bottomed out at around 15% but it seems they can go even lower.
>
> Greens have become the main opposition party now ! It's like Pasok in Greece and a fate which could befall one Labour or the Tories. Perhaps both
Given the latest Yougov has LDs first and Brexit Party second it has already hit both.
In France too Les Republicains and the Socialist Party trail Le Pen's Party and En Marche and in Italy Forza Italia now trails Salvini's Lega Nord
> https://twitter.com/europeelects/status/1134800823899369472?s=21
Greens and CDU lead and AFD just 1% behind the SPD, the coalition is killing the Social Democrats
> > @StuartDickson said:
> > > @SouthamObserver said:
> > > Very hard to disagree with this view of what the Trump endorsement means for Johnson:
> > >
> > > Whether he wants to be or not, Johnson has gone from being the candidate who can reach into every part of England and Wales to one that can speak only to half of it. It underlines that the choice that the Conservatives are making is not to put the election winner of 2012 at their head, but to refight the 2017 election with a more charismatic figurehead and a more divisive Brexit offer, in the hope that they will get a better result.
> > >
> > > https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2019/06/donald-trumps-endorsement-underlines-there-no-way-back-boris-johnson
> > >
> > > Johnson is Corbyn's best hope. And vice versa, of course.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > He might appeal to half of England and Wales, but what percentage of Scots will he appeal to? Vanishingly small. As Ruthie is well aware.
> >
>
> I doubt it’s half of Wales or England either, these days.
The Brexit Party won both Wales and England last week
> > @Pulpstar said:
> > > @williamglenn said:
> >
> > > https://twitter.com/europeelects/status/1134800823899369472
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > The Social Democrats really are in serious trouble. I thought they'd bottomed out at around 15% but it seems they can go even lower.
> >
> > Greens have become the main opposition party now ! It's like Pasok in Greece and a fate which could befall one Labour or the Tories. Perhaps both
>
> Given the latest Yougov has LDs first and Brexit Party second it has already hit both.
>
> In France too Les Republicains and the Socialist Party trail Le Pen's Party and En Marche and in Italy Forza Italia now trails Salvini's Lega Nord
A little while back 4 or 5 parties in Germany were within a few points of each other. If this poll is correct SPD and AFD are now 'also rans'. The Green surge is impressive.
> > @viewcode said:
>
> > It is a religious symbol for the Hindu religion and is widely used in temples in India - and has been for over 4,000 years as you say. It was invented in India - not Germany - and was a symbol used to promote peace and prosperity.
>
> >
>
> > The Nazis also used torches for their rallies - should people be banned from using torches as symbols - the Tories used one for years?
>
> >
>
> > How did the argument get to the point where you are arguing for the rehabilitation of the swastika and the torchlight parade?
>
>
>
> Let a thousand flowers bloom, and a thousand burning crosses blaze, as Nazis brandish flaming torches and wave swastika flags.
>
>
>
> Maybe this is the new tolerance?
>
> I'll take it as a personal favour if you edit that to clarify that I did not say the bits from "It is a religious symbol..." to "...used one for years?", it was @brendan16 . This fucked-up Vanilla quoting system is attributing quotes to the wrong people.
I tried, but I think I am too late to be allowed to edit it.
But of course you didn't say those things, and my comment certainly wasn't directed at you.
I don't understand why the siteowners don't do something about the quoting problem. The site has been pretty much unreadable for weeks now.
> > @viewcode said:
> > It is a religious symbol for the Hindu religion and is widely used in temples in India - and has been for over 4,000 years as you say. It was invented in India - not Germany - and was a symbol used to promote peace and prosperity.
> >
> > The Nazis also used torches for their rallies - should people be banned from using torches as symbols - the Tories used one for years?
> >
> > How did the argument get to the point where you are arguing for the rehabilitation of the swastika and the torchlight parade?
>
> Let a thousand flowers bloom, and a thousand burning crosses blaze, as Nazis brandish flaming torches and wave swastika flags.
>
> Maybe this is the new tolerance?
We were merely debating the origin of the Swastika - the Nazis didn't invent it they stole it.
The point was that in India it is a religious symbol and therefore its perfectly legitimate for Hindus to continue use a symbol they invented and had been using for 4,000 years in their religion including as an emblem on temples - as opposed to 15. Its hardly their fault Hitler stole it to promote his evil philosophy.
> > @SouthamObserver said:
> > Very hard to disagree with this view of what the Trump endorsement means for Johnson:
> >
> > Whether he wants to be or not, Johnson has gone from being the candidate who can reach into every part of England and Wales to one that can speak only to half of it. It underlines that the choice that the Conservatives are making is not to put the election winner of 2012 at their head, but to refight the 2017 election with a more charismatic figurehead and a more divisive Brexit offer, in the hope that they will get a better result.
> >
> > https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2019/06/donald-trumps-endorsement-underlines-there-no-way-back-boris-johnson
> >
> > Johnson is Corbyn's best hope. And vice versa, of course.
> >
> >
>
> He might appeal to half of England and Wales, but what percentage of Scots will he appeal to? Vanishingly small. As Ruthie is well aware.
>
The Brexit Party beat the Tories in Scotland in the European Parliament elections
> I could see Gove v Raab being the final two.
>
> And I thought that this morning before even reading the article!
>
> However far Hunt goes he will fail (ultimately at the members) because he's flip flopped and doesn't offer anything.
>
> Gove, Raab and Stewart are the ones who have (the last mainly outreach and rhetoric) but if Gove does become PM I think he will admire the cut of Rory's jib and offer him a senior position in his cabinet.
Jeremy Hunt is the one the Conservatives would choose if they were smart. They’re not smart.
> Very hard to disagree with this view of what the Trump endorsement means for Johnson:
>
> Whether he wants to be or not, Johnson has gone from being the candidate who can reach into every part of England and Wales to one that can speak only to half of it. It underlines that the choice that the Conservatives are making is not to put the election winner of 2012 at their head, but to refight the 2017 election with a more charismatic figurehead and a more divisive Brexit offer, in the hope that they will get a better result.
>
> https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2019/06/donald-trumps-endorsement-underlines-there-no-way-back-boris-johnson
>
> Johnson is Corbyn's best hope. And vice versa, of course.
>
>
Not what the polls show, Comres before a few weeks ago had the Tories 7% behind Labour but a Boris led Tory Party tied with Corbyn Labour, a Raab or Rudd led Tories still trailed Labour though
> > @Casino_Royale said:
> > I could see Gove v Raab being the final two.
> >
> > And I thought that this morning before even reading the article!
> >
> > However far Hunt goes he will fail (ultimately at the members) because he's flip flopped and doesn't offer anything.
> >
> > Gove, Raab and Stewart are the ones who have (the last mainly outreach and rhetoric) but if Gove does become PM I think he will admire the cut of Rory's jib and offer him a senior position in his cabinet.
>
> Jeremy Hunt is the one the Conservatives would choose if they were smart. They’re not smart.
I don't see what he offers at all.
> > @Casino_Royale said:
> > I could see Gove v Raab being the final two.
> >
> > And I thought that this morning before even reading the article!
> >
> > However far Hunt goes he will fail (ultimately at the members) because he's flip flopped and doesn't offer anything.
> >
> > Gove, Raab and Stewart are the ones who have (the last mainly outreach and rhetoric) but if Gove does become PM I think he will admire the cut of Rory's jib and offer him a senior position in his cabinet.
>
> Jeremy Hunt is the one the Conservatives would choose if they were smart. They’re not smart.
If Hunt leads the Tories I think they could come third at the next general election behind the Brexit Party, even 4th if the LDs sustain their recent surge
> > @Chris said:
> > > @viewcode said:
> > > It is a religious symbol for the Hindu religion and is widely used in temples in India - and has been for over 4,000 years as you say. It was invented in India - not Germany - and was a symbol used to promote peace and prosperity.
> > >
> > > The Nazis also used torches for their rallies - should people be banned from using torches as symbols - the Tories used one for years?
> > >
> > > How did the argument get to the point where you are arguing for the rehabilitation of the swastika and the torchlight parade?
> >
> > Let a thousand flowers bloom, and a thousand burning crosses blaze, as Nazis brandish flaming torches and wave swastika flags.
> >
> > Maybe this is the new tolerance?
>
> We were merely debating the origin of the Swastika - the Nazis didn't invent it they stole it.
>
> The point was that in India it is a religious symbol and therefore its perfectly legitimate for Hindus to continue use a symbol they invented and had been using for 4,000 years in their religion including as an emblem on temples - as opposed to 15. Its hardly their fault Hitler stole it to promote his evil philosophy.
>
Oh, sure. I've noticed the deep and abiding interest in comparative religion here.
I'm sure trolldom had nothing at all to do with the defence of the swastika.