The worst thing about this whole Labour anti-semitism saga is that people, on the whole, just don’t care.
As someone of Jewish heritage myself it makes me very depressed.
No its far far worse than that. Cretinous scum do care, they care because the truth about their sick cancer death cult has come out. Hence their screaming hypocrisy attacking whistle blowers "who keep us safe" and libelling the former party staffers.
Soon we will have two Labour Parties represented in Parliament as in the past we have had two Liberal Parties. I expect two Tory Parties shortly afterwards when PM Bozza demands no deal in "shock" at the EU refusing to renegotiate
Except we wont. Corbynistas will cling onto power. Labour MPs will not do anything. The general public will become numb (this has already happened) and then eventually he will be voted into Downing Street.
He won't. He is Labour voter kyptonite. Only the death cultists still think He is Perfect. Everyone with a heart and a brain can see what a godawful group of people he represents. And he has pissed off leave and remain voters in equal measure. Labour would need a coalition deal. And can't do compromise to have a coalition with their own deputy leader.
I hope you are right, I really do. However, I think 95% are not paying attention and they don’t care.
The worst thing about this whole Labour anti-semitism saga is that people, on the whole, just don’t care.
As someone of Jewish heritage myself it makes me very depressed.
No its far far worse than that. Cretinous scum do care, they care because the truth about their sick cancer death cult has come out. Hence their screaming hypocrisy attacking whistle blowers "who keep us safe" and libelling the former party staffers.
Soon we will have two Labour Parties represented in Parliament as in the past we have had two Liberal Parties. I expect two Tory Parties shortly afterwards when PM Bozza demands no deal in "shock" at the EU refusing to renegotiate
From 1931-35 there were actually three Liberal parties - the official party led by Samuel, the National Liberals led by Simon, and the Lloyd George group of independent Liberals.
Always found it curious that all three were led by people with boys Christian names for surnames. In fact four between the three of them!
Oh dear. I am no Boris fan at all but it is shame that when various people have already pointed out the error in your interpretation, you persist with a misleading claim.
Yet you were happy to campaign for but get outraged by this bar chart.
Except that is yet another outright lie from you. I made clear I opposed that poster when it was first produced and refused to campaign using it. It is on the record on here.
Basically if your only response to being caught fiddling figures is to reply with outright lies then you are unfit to moderate on here.
Oh dear. I am no Boris fan at all but it is shame that when various people have already pointed out the error in your interpretation, you persist with a misleading claim.
Yet you were happy to campaign for but get outraged by this bar chart.
Except that is yet another outright lie from you. I made clear I opposed that poster when it was first produced and refused to campaign using it. It is on the record on here.
Basically if your only response to being caught fiddling figures is to reply with outright lies then you are unfit to moderate on here.
You are a disgrace.
Yet you still vote Leave, so much for opposing that poster.
There are many other posters from Vote Leave that are of a similar favour.
You are the second worst anti racist campaigner after Jeremy Corbyn.
Oh dear. I am no Boris fan at all but it is shame that when various people have already pointed out the error in your interpretation, you persist with a misleading claim.
Yet you were happy to campaign for but get outraged by this bar chart.
Except that is yet another outright lie from you. I made clear I opposed that poster when it was first produced and refused to campaign using it. It is on the record on here.
Basically if your only response to being caught fiddling figures is to reply with outright lies then you are unfit to moderate on here.
You are a disgrace.
Yet you still vote Leave, so much for opposing that poster.
There are many other posters from Vote Leave that are of a similar favour.
You are the second worst anti racist campaigner after Jeremy Corbyn.
Desperate defence from someone who has been caught out making claims that in the past would have got people banned. Like I said you are a disgrace.
I am sick of Johnson already and he hasn't been elected yet.
I've just watched his interview with Andrew Neill on iplayer. It was pathetic. Totally unconvincing. I am now more certain than ever that Brexit will not be delivered.
Oh dear. I am no Boris fan at all but it is shame that when various people have already pointed out the error in your interpretation, you persist with a misleading claim.
Yet you were happy to campaign for but get outraged by this bar chart.
Except that is yet another outright lie from you. I made clear I opposed that poster when it was first produced and refused to campaign using it. It is on the record on here.
Basically if your only response to being caught fiddling figures is to reply with outright lies then you are unfit to moderate on here.
You are a disgrace.
Yet you still vote Leave, so much for opposing that poster.
There are many other posters from Vote Leave that are of a similar favour.
You are the second worst anti racist campaigner after Jeremy Corbyn.
Desperate defence from someone who has been caught out making claims that in the past would have got people banned. Like I said you are a disgrace.
Even Charles has acknowledged my figures are consistent.
The worst thing about this whole Labour anti-semitism saga is that people, on the whole, just don’t care.
As someone of Jewish heritage myself it makes me very depressed.
No its far far worse than that. Cretinous scum do care, they care because the truth about their sick cancer death cult has come out. Hence their screaming hypocrisy attacking whistle blowers "who keep us safe" and libelling the former party staffers.
Soon we will have two Labour Parties represented in Parliament as in the past we have had two Liberal Parties. I expect two Tory Parties shortly afterwards when PM Bozza demands no deal in "shock" at the EU refusing to renegotiate
From 1931-35 there were actually three Liberal parties - the official party led by Samuel, the National Liberals led by Simon, and the Lloyd George group of independent Liberals.
Two Labour parties, three Liberals. Con got a landslide bigger than God and just for shits and giggles still went into coalition with some other bits and bobs. 554 seats out of 615. Bigger than any wet dream of Blair.
We don't talk about the 1930's National Governments enough...
St John’s Wood used to be the only tube station that had none of the letters of the word MACKEREL in it. Perhaps Sunil could confirm if that is still true.
Oh dear. I am no Boris fan at all but it is shame that when various people have already pointed out the error in your interpretation, you persist with a misleading claim.
Yet you were happy to campaign for but get outraged by this bar chart.
Except that is yet another outright lie from you. I made clear I opposed that poster when it was first produced and refused to campaign using it. It is on the record on here.
Basically if your only response to being caught fiddling figures is to reply with outright lies then you are unfit to moderate on here.
You are a disgrace.
Yet you still vote Leave, so much for opposing that poster.
There are many other posters from Vote Leave that are of a similar favour.
You are the second worst anti racist campaigner after Jeremy Corbyn.
Desperate defence from someone who has been caught out making claims that in the past would have got people banned. Like I said you are a disgrace.
Even Charles has acknowledged my figures are consistent.
Are you disputing the figures are accurate?
Consistent, yes. Meaningful, well that's another question entirely...
Oh dear. I am no Boris fan at all but it is shame that when various people have already pointed out the error in your interpretation, you persist with a misleading claim.
Yet you were happy to campaign for but get outraged by this bar chart.
Except that is yet another outright lie from you. I made clear I opposed that poster when it was first produced and refused to campaign using it. It is on the record on here.
Basically if your only response to being caught fiddling figures is to reply with outright lies then you are unfit to moderate on here.
You are a disgrace.
Yet you still vote Leave, so much for opposing that poster.
There are many other posters from Vote Leave that are of a similar favour.
You are the second worst anti racist campaigner after Jeremy Corbyn.
Desperate defence from someone who has been caught out making claims that in the past would have got people banned. Like I said you are a disgrace.
Even Charles has acknowledged my figures are consistent.
Are you disputing the figures are inaccurate?
They are misleading on a scale that would embarrass even the Lib Dems.
St John’s Wood used to be the only tube station that had none of the letters of the word MACKEREL in it. Perhaps Sunil could confirm if that is still true.
The worst thing about this whole Labour anti-semitism saga is that people, on the whole, just don’t care.
As someone of Jewish heritage myself it makes me very depressed.
No its far far worse than that. Cretinous scum do care, they care because the truth about their sick cancer death cult has come out. Hence their screaming hypocrisy attacking whistle blowers "who keep us safe" and libelling the former party staffers.
Soon we will have two Labour Parties represented in Parliament as in the past we have had two Liberal Parties. I expect two Tory Parties shortly afterwards when PM Bozza demands no deal in "shock" at the EU refusing to renegotiate
From 1931-35 there were actually three Liberal parties - the official party led by Samuel, the National Liberals led by Simon, and the Lloyd George group of independent Liberals.
Two Labour parties, three Liberals. Con got a landslide bigger than God and just for shits and giggles still went into coalition with some other bits and bobs. 554 seats out of 615. Bigger than any wet dream of Blair.
We don't talk about the 1930's National Governments enough...
My favourite anecdote is about Edgar Wallace, who stood for the Indie Liberals in Blackpool and lost badly. It was said he came up against a candidate who had it all over him when it came to chilling people's blood with far-fetched stories.
Consistent, yes. Meaningful, well that's another question entirely...
Since the 2010 GE the Tory share of the vote nationwide went up by over 6% yet Boris managed to halve the Tory majority in Uxbridge whilst in the same period Jeremy Hunt has increased the Tory majority in SW Surrey by 6k.
As I said in my original post it was one of the stats I was planning on using in a thread tomorrow, but that thread has been nuked by this thread as it was similar to my piece.
Oh dear. I am no Boris fan at all but it is shame that when various people have already pointed out the error in your interpretation, you persist with a misleading claim.
Yet you were happy to campaign for but get outraged by this bar chart.
Two Labour parties, three Liberals. Con got a landslide bigger than God and just for shits and giggles still went into coalition with some other bits and bobs. 554 seats out of 615. Bigger than any wet dream of Blair.
We don't talk about the 1930's National Governments enough...
So lets talk. The governing Conservative Party is about to elect a leader who will repel a good dozen or more MPs from its ranks when No Deal becomes the policy. The Labour Party is as divided as its possible to get - unhappy MPs are unlikely to put up with the increasingly paranoid insanity of LOTO especially of the Lords quit en masse.
And at the same time as blue on blue / red on red madness we have the ticking time bomb of Brexit, with impossible promises made and impossible numbers to deliver any solution. An election may cure it, or may not. And cowardice suggests no election is happening anyway.
Which means we get to the denouement - there is agreement across the house, but not across parties. A Country Before Party solution is needed. Entertainingly, watch how Jezbollah scum cultists denounce Country before Party Labour MPs as Tories, whilst Corbyn and the continuity communists sit in opposition alongside the ERG and DUP and vote with them
Shame on you Mike for knowingly misleading your twitter followers
Which are the selection years in question?
Hunt is showing the 2001 Hague election
Johnson the 2015 Cameron result
Nope, Hunt is 2001 and Johnson is 2010.
Boris wasn't the candidate in 2010. If you are going to fiddle the figures at east try to be consistent about it.
I'm not fiddling the figures, I'm pointing out the majority they inherited.
Hunt inherited the 2001 majority, Boris inherited the 2010 majority.
My figures are consistent, I'm comparing their majorities today to the majority they were defending when they first stood in the seat.
While point blank ignoring the fact that one was selected at an electoral lowpoint, the other at an electoral high point, while also ignoring the split vote due to the independent taking thousands of votes in Hunt's.
Its garbage data meant to mislead not inform. Comparing from the same starting point in 2010 Hunt has lost share and Boris has gained it.
Consistent, yes. Meaningful, well that's another question entirely...
Since the 2010 GE the Tory share of the vote nationwide went up by over 6% yet Boris managed to halve the Tory majority in Uxbridge whilst in the same period Jeremy Hunt has increased the Tory majority in SW Surrey by 6k.
As I said in my original post it was one of the stats I was planning on using in a thread tomorrow, but that thread has been nuked by this thread as it was similar to my piece.
Once again, consistent but not necessarily meaningful. As has already been pointed out, the Tory share of the vote in Boris's seat has increased since 2010 and it has decreased in Hunt's.
Consistent, yes. Meaningful, well that's another question entirely...
Since the 2010 GE the Tory share of the vote nationwide went up by over 6% yet Boris managed to halve the Tory majority in Uxbridge whilst in the same period Jeremy Hunt has increased the Tory majority in SW Surrey by 6k.
As I said in my original post it was one of the stats I was planning on using in a thread tomorrow, but that thread has been nuked by this thread as it was similar to my piece.
Stop right there! You started talking about share, so continue talking about share. Now you're being inconsistent.
Since 2010 GE the Tory share has gone up by over 6%, Boris's share has gone up but by less in that period, Hunt's share has actually gone down in that period.
Consistent, yes. Meaningful, well that's another question entirely...
Since the 2010 GE the Tory share of the vote nationwide went up by over 6% yet Boris managed to halve the Tory majority in Uxbridge whilst in the same period Jeremy Hunt has increased the Tory majority in SW Surrey by 6k.
As I said in my original post it was one of the stats I was planning on using in a thread tomorrow, but that thread has been nuked by this thread as it was similar to my piece.
Once again, consistent but not necessarily meaningful. As has already been pointed out, the Tory share of the vote in Boris's seat has increased since 2010 and it has decreased in Hunt's.
Positively Corbynista from you Leavers.
You're using the same faulty logic as Corbynistas who cite Labour's increase of the share of the vote in 2017 as the only metric to judge if someone is successful.
Whereas the actual votes and majority in the seat is a better metric in similar sized seats. Plus Hunt in 2017 was specifically targeted and the Greens pulled out and Labour and the Lib Dems soft pedalled.
Entertainingly, watch how Jezbollah scum cultists denounce Country before Party Labour MPs as Tories, whilst Corbyn and the continuity communists sit in opposition alongside the ERG and DUP and vote with them
He's been doing that for 22 years, why should he change now?
I'm sorry Mike and TSE, but you've had a shocker here. This is supposed to be a level headed betting site. Unfortunately you'd have lost a lot of money following your views on Boris over the last two years.
St John’s Wood used to be the only tube station that had none of the letters of the word MACKEREL in it. Perhaps Sunil could confirm if that is still true.
I'm sorry Mike and TSE, but you've had a shocker here. This is supposed to be a level headed betting site. Unfortunately you'd have lost a lot of money following your views on Boris over the last two years.
Really, I tipped Hunt at 100/1 and 66/1 and when it was clear Boris was going to make the final two I advised a reverse ferret which should have yielded you a profit, particularly from the Leadsom backer. Ask Casino Royale he followed a similar strategy to mine.
Also I did do regular threads advising laying people like IDS and Jacob Rees-Mogg.
Oh dear. I am no Boris fan at all but it is shame that when various people have already pointed out the error in your interpretation, you persist with a misleading claim.
Yet you were happy to campaign for but get outraged by this bar chart.
St John’s Wood used to be the only tube station that had none of the letters of the word MACKEREL in it. Perhaps Sunil could confirm if that is still true.
MANSION HOUSE has all the vowels.
So does Heathrow Terminal Four.
Except that the platform roundels have "4" as opposed to "Four":
St John’s Wood used to be the only tube station that had none of the letters of the word MACKEREL in it. Perhaps Sunil could confirm if that is still true.
MANSION HOUSE has all the vowels.
So does Heathrow Terminal Four.
Except that the platform roundels have "4" as opposed to "Four":
People who bet on it. People who care about racism at the top of political parties.
You misunderstand me.
I care about who is PM (though have zero say in it right now) but I really don't understand what difference it makes whether Hunt or Johnson gained or lost vote numbers or share since 2001 or 2010.
Johnson is going to become PM, a role for which he is entirely unsuited, and the country will take another step in the wrong direction; and I can do sweet FA about it.
Typical Boris Johnson, he cannot decide whether he is a journalist or somebody who upholds the national interest or security as a primary objective. Boris has a bad track record of trying to surf two waves. Michael Portillo once told Johnson he had to choose between being a serious politician and a media entertainer. Boris could not make the change back then and he cannot decide whether to be a journalist or statesman now.
People who bet on it. People who care about racism at the top of political parties.
You misunderstand me.
I care about who is PM (though have zero say in it right now) but I really don't understand what difference it makes whether Hunt or Johnson gained or lost vote numbers or share since 2001 or 2010.
Johnson is going to become PM, a role for which he is entirely unsuited, and the country will take another step in the wrong direction; and I can do sweet FA about it.
Sorry -- thought you meant the Hunt/Boris shares of the leadership vote, which some of us have bet on. A hazard of reading threads in the wrong direction.
Two Labour parties, three Liberals. Con got a landslide bigger than God and just for shits and giggles still went into coalition with some other bits and bobs. 554 seats out of 615. Bigger than any wet dream of Blair.
We don't talk about the 1930's National Governments enough...
So lets talk. The governing Conservative Party is about to elect a leader who will repel a good dozen or more MPs from its ranks when No Deal becomes the policy. The Labour Party is as divided as its possible to get - unhappy MPs are unlikely to put up with the increasingly paranoid insanity of LOTO especially of the Lords quit en masse.
And at the same time as blue on blue / red on red madness we have the ticking time bomb of Brexit, with impossible promises made and impossible numbers to deliver any solution. An election may cure it, or may not. And cowardice suggests no election is happening anyway.
Which means we get to the denouement - there is agreement across the house, but not across parties. A Country Before Party solution is needed. Entertainingly, watch how Jezbollah scum cultists denounce Country before Party Labour MPs as Tories, whilst Corbyn and the continuity communists sit in opposition alongside the ERG and DUP and vote with them
I'm no lawyer but when I looked at the legislation the other day it looked quite clear-cut to me that the disclosure meets the section 3 terms.
Also clear cut that section 5 of the Official Secrets Act applies to Oakshott and the Mail. In other words if Oakshott obtains damaging material relating to foreign relations from a Crown servant and publishes it, she also commits an offence under the Act. If they found the material accidentally left on a train, it would be different.
I'm sorry Mike and TSE, but you've had a shocker here. This is supposed to be a level headed betting site. Unfortunately you'd have lost a lot of money following your views on Boris over the last two years.
TSE owes me a £1 when Boris beats Hunt I shall kindly donate to PB funds
I'm sorry Mike and TSE, but you've had a shocker here. This is supposed to be a level headed betting site. Unfortunately you'd have lost a lot of money following your views on Boris over the last two years.
TSE owes me a £1 when Boris beats Hunt I shall kindly donate to PB funds
Be happy with that. It’s probably the only consequence of his winning which won’t end up disappointing you.
It’s plausible. I was using Fidonet via a dialup modem in the late 80s. I think I remember bulletin boards with dating sections - though I was at a sufficiently tender age my main interest was downloading programs for my Amstrad.
In other dating news, La Oakeshott’s (evidently now estranged) husband is lovely, and if she’s left him for a Brexit Party Neanderthal than more fool her.
I'm sorry Mike and TSE, but you've had a shocker here. This is supposed to be a level headed betting site. Unfortunately you'd have lost a lot of money following your views on Boris over the last two years.
TSE owes me a £1 when Boris beats Hunt I shall kindly donate to PB funds
Be happy with that. It’s probably the only consequence of his winning which won’t end up disappointing you.
I have the champagne on ice for election night in the autumn and a famous Boris victory
I'm sorry Mike and TSE, but you've had a shocker here. This is supposed to be a level headed betting site. Unfortunately you'd have lost a lot of money following your views on Boris over the last two years.
TSE owes me a £1 when Boris beats Hunt I shall kindly donate to PB funds
Be happy with that. It’s probably the only consequence of his winning which won’t end up disappointing you.
I have the champagne on ice for election night in the autumn and a famous Boris victory
I'm sorry Mike and TSE, but you've had a shocker here. This is supposed to be a level headed betting site. Unfortunately you'd have lost a lot of money following your views on Boris over the last two years.
TSE owes me a £1 when Boris beats Hunt I shall kindly donate to PB funds
Be happy with that. It’s probably the only consequence of his winning which won’t end up disappointing you.
I have the champagne on ice for election night in the autumn and a famous Boris victory
You claimed the Brexit party was going to win Peterborough, then that the Brexit party would win the next GE and now you think Boris will win a GE this autumn! I can see why you like Boris as he has similar levels of consistency...
I'm sorry Mike and TSE, but you've had a shocker here. This is supposed to be a level headed betting site. Unfortunately you'd have lost a lot of money following your views on Boris over the last two years.
TSE owes me a £1 when Boris beats Hunt I shall kindly donate to PB funds
Be happy with that. It’s probably the only consequence of his winning which won’t end up disappointing you.
I have the champagne on ice for election night in the autumn and a famous Boris victory
What if Boris is the memo leaker and they need a flunky to take the rap. By the time you get out the ice will have melted
I'm sorry Mike and TSE, but you've had a shocker here. This is supposed to be a level headed betting site. Unfortunately you'd have lost a lot of money following your views on Boris over the last two years.
TSE owes me a £1 when Boris beats Hunt I shall kindly donate to PB funds
Be happy with that. It’s probably the only consequence of his winning which won’t end up disappointing you.
I have the champagne on ice for election night in the autumn and a famous Boris victory
You claimed the Brexit party was going to win Peterborough, then that the Brexit party would win the next GE and now you think Boris will win a GE this autumn! I can see why you like Boris as he has similar levels of consistency...
I have never said the Brexit Party will win the next general election provided the Tories deliver Brexit, only if the Tories extend again and fail to commit to deliver Brexit does that become a possibility
Strange, just about every couple I know met at school, college or work. Maybe it's an American thing.
One interesting aspect of this is that if couples last longer if met in one way, compared to another, then they will be overrepresented compared to the number of couples formed that way.
So, if I'd been asked the question 15 years ago I'd have answered "met at college", but now I would answer "met online", and the present has already lasted more than twice as long as the earlier.
It explains a very strange interview on Newsnight with Tice and two journalists who took a very different view from him on the Darroch affair. Kirsty wanted to know if he or Farage were behind the leaks and about Farage being bankrolled by Banks and he kept saying 'you're doing it again you're asking the wrong question'. A most unattractive man but at least we know what the right question was even if Kirsty didn't.
Strange, just about every couple I know met at school, college or work. Maybe it's an American thing.
One interesting aspect of this is that if couples last longer if met in one way, compared to another, then they will be overrepresented compared to the number of couples formed that way.
So, if I'd been asked the question 15 years ago I'd have answered "met at college", but now I would answer "met online", and the present has already lasted more than twice as long as the earlier.
Following on from this, some of the decline in, say, "met at school" will be due to the decline in the length of couples generally as, once you've broken up with your school sweetheart you are unlikely to meet your new partner at school (if you're no longer at school).
Does watching Pornhub count as meeting your partner online?...
Not impossible that one met someone online in 1980s via ARPANET and UseNet groups etc etc.
But 2% seems highly unlikely.
I wondered whether it included something like classified ads as "online" as they were the natural precursors to today's dating sites (in the case of Guardian soulmates directly so). That would explain the high early figures for online.
Well done Len, someone had to say it. We have had a leadership contest since 2015 time we had a deputy one as well. Tom can stand again if he thinks the members back him.
Tom Watson is a disgrace then so is Corbyn, remember he sacked Thagnam Debbonaire when she battling cancer.
___________________________________________ Deputy Labour leader Tom Watson today hit out at the plot, branding it “reprehensible bullying” and verging on “mob rule”. ___________________________________________
I'm no doctor and in fairness I haven't experienced either but being pregnant in the early stages and someone Tom doesn't mind politically seems to be a serious condition...
Having chemotherapy and being someone Tom doesn't like politically means you are okay to drag the person's name through the mud in the media for political advantage.
The conclusion here is either Tom doesn't think people's conditions is an issue when it comes to attacking them politically and he has been cynically doing so for political advantage because he is scum.
Or Tom does think peoples conditions matter as an issue when it comes to attacking them politically but is doing so anyway because he is scum.
I don't really care either way but he has shown himself up for what he is.
Does watching Pornhub count as meeting your partner online?...
Not impossible that one met someone online in 1980s via ARPANET and UseNet groups etc etc.
But 2% seems highly unlikely.
I wondered whether it included something like classified ads as "online" as they were the natural precursors to today's dating sights (in the case of Guardian soulmates directly so). That would explain the high early figures for online.
2% of people probably miss remember. Or would rather not say that they met at the freshers disco.
I was driving through the constituency about a week ago and there were Lib Dem posters everywhere, something you don't often see in England these days at election time. Brecon has a lovely area next to the canal incidentally, with an arts centre and theatre.
Comments
Johnson the 2015 Cameron result
👀👀👀👀
https://twitter.com/thesundaytimes/status/1150144887712600064
So Richard Tice is dating Isabel Oakeshott eh?
2015 for Johnson
Basically if your only response to being caught fiddling figures is to reply with outright lies then you are unfit to moderate on here.
You are a disgrace.
There are many other posters from Vote Leave that are of a similar favour.
You are the second worst anti racist campaigner after Jeremy Corbyn.
But then he isn't exactly a catch either, is he?
The point is that you are comparing a Tory election victory vs their worst result in a century
Hunt inherited the 2001 majority, Boris inherited the 2010 majority.
My figures are consistent, I'm comparing their majorities today to the majority they were defending when they first stood in the seat.
Are you disputing the figures are accurate?
And two out of five 40% is far less than the original Leave vote so this looks pretty desperate stuff by the DE.
Two Labour parties, three Liberals. Con got a landslide bigger than God and just for shits and giggles still went into coalition with some other bits and bobs. 554 seats out of 615. Bigger than any wet dream of Blair.
We don't talk about the 1930's National Governments enough...
As I said in my original post it was one of the stats I was planning on using in a thread tomorrow, but that thread has been nuked by this thread as it was similar to my piece.
And at the same time as blue on blue / red on red madness we have the ticking time bomb of Brexit, with impossible promises made and impossible numbers to deliver any solution. An election may cure it, or may not. And cowardice suggests no election is happening anyway.
Which means we get to the denouement - there is agreement across the house, but not across parties. A Country Before Party solution is needed. Entertainingly, watch how Jezbollah scum cultists denounce Country before Party Labour MPs as Tories, whilst Corbyn and the continuity communists sit in opposition alongside the ERG and DUP and vote with them
Its garbage data meant to mislead not inform. Comparing from the same starting point in 2010 Hunt has lost share and Boris has gained it.
Since 2010 GE the Tory share has gone up by over 6%, Boris's share has gone up but by less in that period, Hunt's share has actually gone down in that period.
You're using the same faulty logic as Corbynistas who cite Labour's increase of the share of the vote in 2017 as the only metric to judge if someone is successful.
Whereas the actual votes and majority in the seat is a better metric in similar sized seats. Plus Hunt in 2017 was specifically targeted and the Greens pulled out and Labour and the Lib Dems soft pedalled.
Also I did do regular threads advising laying people like IDS and Jacob Rees-Mogg.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d7/Heathrow_Terminal_4_tube_roundel.JPG/640px-Heathrow_Terminal_4_tube_roundel.JPG
One can only hope the lunatic chokes on a cheeseburger and the world is rid of this cancer.
Though I expect to be sick in the morning, England in a world cup final is making me nervous.
https://twitter.com/afneil/status/1150152965505896450
https://twitter.com/afneil/status/1150152968328687616
https://twitter.com/robfordmancs/status/1150094687388221441
I care about who is PM (though have zero say in it right now) but I really don't understand what difference it makes whether Hunt or Johnson gained or lost vote numbers or share since 2001 or 2010.
Johnson is going to become PM, a role for which he is entirely unsuited, and the country will take another step in the wrong direction; and I can do sweet FA about it.
It may go on for some time.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/IMG_0896.jpg
It’s probably the only consequence of his winning which won’t end up disappointing you.
In other dating news, La Oakeshott’s (evidently now estranged) husband is lovely, and if she’s left him for a Brexit Party Neanderthal than more fool her.
But 2% seems highly unlikely.
Unbelievable.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/brexit-party-richard-tice-darroch-18206347
Who is Jerry Formby?
https://twitter.com/PA/status/1150083062547525634
So, if I'd been asked the question 15 years ago I'd have answered "met at college", but now I would answer "met online", and the present has already lasted more than twice as long as the earlier.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szdbKz5CyhA
But not Tom Watson...
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/row-over-bullying-of-pregnant-labour-mp-ellie-reeves-rocks-party-a4181316.html
___________________________________________
Deputy Labour leader Tom Watson today hit out at the plot, branding it “reprehensible bullying” and verging on “mob rule”.
___________________________________________
https://twitter.com/tom_watson/status/1146301290416410625?ref_src=twsrc^tfw|twcamp^tweetembed|twterm^1146301290416410625&ref_url=https://jewishnews.timesofisrael.com/watson-urges-shadow-cabinet-to-condemn-bullying-of-mp-for-williamson-criticism/
I'm no doctor and in fairness I haven't experienced either but being pregnant in the early stages and someone Tom doesn't mind politically seems to be a serious condition...
Having chemotherapy and being someone Tom doesn't like politically means you are okay to drag the person's name through the mud in the media for political advantage.
The conclusion here is either Tom doesn't think people's conditions is an issue when it comes to attacking them politically and he has been cynically doing so for political advantage because he is scum.
Or Tom does think peoples conditions matter as an issue when it comes to attacking them politically but is doing so anyway because he is scum.
I don't really care either way but he has shown himself up for what he is.