What kind of insecure 55-year old pillock gets a jacket with Prime Minister written on it? It's the sort of thing a 5-year old might wear if photographed outside 10 Downing Street. Not a grown man.
It's in the style of Football managers. Something the metropolitan elite can sneer at, but the Match of the Day watching millions will be very familiar with and think nothing of it.
You're right. I know nothing about football. I assume that a PM would aspire to behave like a PM - with some level of dignity, for the office, if not himself. But hey ho. Maybe that's out of fashion these days. To me it looks like insecurity.
I'm more angry that his FS has just been on the radio and elsewhere telling outright lies about what he said during the campaign in order to pretend that the 2016 vote was a mandate for a No Deal exit. He is a lawyer; according to his CV with a distinguished record (though I am sceptical) but nonetheless a lawyer and he has just flat out lied, repeatedly and flagrantly.
Still, maybe one should not be bothered about such things. Millions will think nothing of it, I dare say. Why should integrity and honesty count in public life?
I am not sure about the insignia on Boris jacket.
It is a gift to those who want to mock him but it could be a means of identity if anything extraordinary happened like a terror attack
I think it is Navy standard, this must be a gift from the Navy as a little memento and feel like you are one of us whilst you are here
What kind of insecure 55-year old pillock gets a jacket with Prime Minister written on it? It's the sort of thing a 5-year old might wear if photographed outside 10 Downing Street. Not a grown man.
It's in the style of Football managers. Something the metropolitan elite can sneer at, but the Match of the Day watching millions will be very familiar with and think nothing of it.
You're right. I know nothing about football. I assume that a PM would aspire to behave like a PM - with some level of dignity, for the office, if not himself. But hey ho. Maybe that's out of fashion these days. To me it looks like insecurity.
I'm more angry that his FS has just been on the radio and elsewhere telling outright lies about what he said during the campaign in order to pretend that the 2016 vote was a mandate for a No Deal exit. He is a lawyer; according to his CV with a distinguished record (though I am sceptical) but nonetheless a lawyer and he has just flat out lied, repeatedly and flagrantly.
Still, maybe one should not be bothered about such things. Millions will think nothing of it, I dare say. Why should integrity and honesty count in public life?
I am not sure about the insignia on Boris jacket.
It is a gift to those who want to mock him but it could be a means of identity if anything extraordinary happened like a terror attack
Nice try Big_G!
Tbf to Boris (why, I don't know) the jacket was probably just given to him by whoever was on the organising committee for the event, I doubt if he asked for it.
I do not think Boris asked for it but he was on a military base and it is normal for all personnel to display their names on their uniforms
Interesting reading how Dodd’s is framing the campaign over a no deal and not making a big thing over stopping Brexit.
I think this is a good plan. The Lib Dem stance as clearly pro Remain is well known already .
It is very close to Labour's position!
Which one? They've had more positions than there are in the Kama Sutra.
Who has been consistent? Certainly not the Tories - and the Libdem line at B&R focussing on avoiding No Deal seems a departure from the firm Remain line.
Justin.
The conservatives are the leave party.
The lib dems are the remain party. (Also SNP)
Labour are remain in London and leave in the north
Not all Tories agree with you - particularly in terms of what Leave should amount to.
How can Boris claim he wants a new deal if he is not prepared to spend the Summer meeting with EU leaders?
They have to be prepared to meet him
They haven’t said they will not meet him have they? Ok they have said they won’t change the backstop but there is no chance of alternative arrangements if we are not prepared to engage.
What kind of insecure 55-year old pillock gets a jacket with Prime Minister written on it? It's the sort of thing a 5-year old might wear if photographed outside 10 Downing Street. Not a grown man.
It's in the style of Football managers. Something the metropolitan elite can sneer at, but the Match of the Day watching millions will be very familiar with and think nothing of it.
You're right. I know nothing about football. I assume that a PM would aspire to behave like a PM - with some level of dignity, for the office, if not himself. But hey ho. Maybe that's out of fashion these days. To me it looks like insecurity.
I'm more angry that his FS has just been on the radio and elsewhere telling outright lies about what he said during the campaign in order to pretend that the 2016 vote was a mandate for a No Deal exit. He is a lawyer; according to his CV with a distinguished record (though I am sceptical) but nonetheless a lawyer and he has just flat out lied, repeatedly and flagrantly.
Still, maybe one should not be bothered about such things. Millions will think nothing of it, I dare say. Why should integrity and honesty count in public life?
Surely, that means he's an effective lawyer.
That's a cheap joke - and you know it.
An effective lawyer speaks truth to power - and that means his/her client - and realises that their integrity (and therefore the confidence that the client and everyone else can place in them) is the single most important thing about them.
Raab is being flagrantly dishonest. He knows that this government has no mandate for a No Deal exit - for an exit, yes - but not on No Deal terms and he simply lies about what he said on this both before and after the referendum. He degrades public life - as well as his own reputation - by behaving in this way. It ought to be a matter for censure and shame. That it isn't - especially by a party keen on law and order - is in itself shaming.
But apart from probably being unbelievably pompous on this (not that I care - it's important) I am making the mistake of thinking that the current Tory party cares about such things.
Interesting reading how Dodd’s is framing the campaign over a no deal and not making a big thing over stopping Brexit.
I think this is a good plan. The Lib Dem stance as clearly pro Remain is well known already .
It is very close to Labour's position!
Which one? They've had more positions than there are in the Kama Sutra.
Who has been consistent? Certainly not the Tories - and the Libdem line at B&R focussing on avoiding No Deal seems a departure from the firm Remain line.
Justin.
The conservatives are the leave party.
The lib dems are the remain party. (Also SNP)
Labour are remain in London and leave in the north
Not all Tories agree with you - particularly in terms of what Leave should amount to.
You misunderstand.
I am talking about the public's perception of each party
What kind of insecure 55-year old pillock gets a jacket with Prime Minister written on it? It's the sort of thing a 5-year old might wear if photographed outside 10 Downing Street. Not a grown man.
It's in the style of Football managers. Something the metropolitan elite can sneer at, but the Match of the Day watching millions will be very familiar with and think nothing of it.
You're right. I know nothing about football. I assume that a PM would aspire to behave like a PM - with some level of dignity, for the office, if not himself. But hey ho. Maybe that's out of fashion these days. To me it looks like insecurity.
I'm more angry that his FS has just been on the radio and elsewhere telling outright lies about what he said during the campaign in order to pretend that the 2016 vote was a mandate for a No Deal exit. He is a lawyer; according to his CV with a distinguished record (though I am sceptical) but nonetheless a lawyer and he has just flat out lied, repeatedly and flagrantly.
Still, maybe one should not be bothered about such things. Millions will think nothing of it, I dare say. Why should integrity and honesty count in public life?
I am not sure about the insignia on Boris jacket.
It is a gift to those who want to mock him but it could be a means of identity if anything extraordinary happened like a terror attack
Amazing how none of our previous PMs needed to be identified in this way. What can their personal protection officers have been thinking?
Interesting reading how Dodd’s is framing the campaign over a no deal and not making a big thing over stopping Brexit.
I think this is a good plan. The Lib Dem stance as clearly pro Remain is well known already .
It is very close to Labour's position!
Which one? They've had more positions than there are in the Kama Sutra.
Who has been consistent? Certainly not the Tories - and the Libdem line at B&R focussing on avoiding No Deal seems a departure from the firm Remain line.
But, if you read the article, it is clear she wants to Remain, but she doesn't say so because it will lose her votes.
It is not that Dodds is inconsistent. She is dishonest.
If it's clear from the article that she wants to Remain it makes no difference if she says so or not.
Not all (or even many) of the voters of B&R read the Guardian.
The article makes it clear that she does not tell voters she wants to remain. She tells voters that she wants to avoid a No Deal Brexit.
If the LibDems want to remain and want a People's Vote, then fine. Say so. Be proud of the policy. There is a constituency out there that believes that and wants to vote for it.
(But perhaps not a large constituency in Brecon & Radnorshire).
Sorry, it is just characteristic LibDemmery.
If you want an example of dishonesty in your politicians take a look at this lot...
What kind of insecure 55-year old pillock gets a jacket with Prime Minister written on it? It's the sort of thing a 5-year old might wear if photographed outside 10 Downing Street. Not a grown man.
It's in the style of Football managers. Something the metropolitan elite can sneer at, but the Match of the Day watching millions will be very familiar with and think nothing of it.
You're right. I know nothing about football. I assume that a PM would aspire to behave like a PM - with some level of dignity, for the office, if not himself. But hey ho. Maybe that's out of fashion these days. To me it looks like insecurity.
I'm more angry that his FS has just been on the radio and elsewhere telling outright lies about what he said during the campaign in order to pretend that the 2016 vote was a mandate for a No Deal exit. He is a lawyer; according to his CV with a distinguished record (though I am sceptical) but nonetheless a lawyer and he has just flat out lied, repeatedly and flagrantly.
Still, maybe one should not be bothered about such things. Millions will think nothing of it, I dare say. Why should integrity and honesty count in public life?
I am not sure about the insignia on Boris jacket.
It is a gift to those who want to mock him but it could be a means of identity if anything extraordinary happened like a terror attack
What kind of insecure 55-year old pillock gets a jacket with Prime Minister written on it? It's the sort of thing a 5-year old might wear if photographed outside 10 Downing Street. Not a grown man.
It's in the style of Football managers. Something the metropolitan elite can sneer at, but the Match of the Day watching millions will be very familiar with and think nothing of it.
You're right. I know nothing about football. I assume that a PM would aspire to behave like a PM - with some level of dignity, for the office, if not himself. But hey ho. Maybe that's out of fashion these days. To me it looks like insecurity.
I'm more angry that his FS has just been on the radio and elsewhere telling outright lies about what he said during the campaign in order to pretend that the 2016 vote was a mandate for a No Deal exit. He is a lawyer; according to his CV with a distinguished record (though I am sceptical) but nonetheless a lawyer and he has just flat out lied, repeatedly and flagrantly.
Still, maybe one should not be bothered about such things. Millions will think nothing of it, I dare say. Why should integrity and honesty count in public life?
Surely, that means he's an effective lawyer.
That's a cheap joke - and you know it.
An effective lawyer speaks truth to power - and that means his/her client - and realises that their integrity (and therefore the confidence that the client and everyone else can place in them) is the single most important thing about them.
Raab is being flagrantly dishonest. He knows that this government has no mandate for a No Deal exit - for an exit, yes - but not on No Deal terms and he simply lies about what he said on this both before and after the referendum. He degrades public life - as well as his own reputation - by behaving in this way. It ought to be a matter for censure and shame. That it isn't - especially by a party keen on law and order - is in itself shaming.
But apart from probably being unbelievably pompous on this (not that I care - it's important) I am making the mistake of thinking that the current Tory party cares about such things.
How can Boris claim he wants a new deal if he is not prepared to spend the Summer meeting with EU leaders?
They have to be prepared to meet him
They haven’t said they will not meet him have they? Ok they have said they won’t change the backstop but there is no chance of alternative arrangements if we are not prepared to engage.
Sky explained that the EU constantly humilated TM so Boris has taken his stand that they remove the backstop or he will not engage as there is nothing to discuss
What kind of insecure 55-year old pillock gets a jacket with Prime Minister written on it? It's the sort of thing a 5-year old might wear if photographed outside 10 Downing Street. Not a grown man.
It's in the style of Football managers. Something the metropolitan elite can sneer at, but the Match of the Day watching millions will be very familiar with and think nothing of it.
You're right. I know nothing about football. I assume that a PM would aspire to behave like a PM - with some level of dignity, for the office, if not himself. But hey ho. Maybe that's out of fashion these days. To me it looks like insecurity.
I'm more angry that his FS has just been on the radio and elsewhere telling outright lies about what he said during the campaign in order to pretend that the 2016 vote was a mandate for a No Deal exit. He is a lawyer; according to his CV with a distinguished record (though I am sceptical) but nonetheless a lawyer and he has just flat out lied, repeatedly and flagrantly.
Still, maybe one should not be bothered about such things. Millions will think nothing of it, I dare say. Why should integrity and honesty count in public life?
Surely, that means he's an effective lawyer.
That's a cheap joke - and you know it.
An effective lawyer speaks truth to power - and that means his/her client - and realises that their integrity (and therefore the confidence that the client and everyone else can place in them) is the single most important thing about them.
Raab is being flagrantly dishonest. He knows that this government has no mandate for a No Deal exit - for an exit, yes - but not on No Deal terms and he simply lies about what he said on this both before and after the referendum. He degrades public life - as well as his own reputation - by behaving in this way. It ought to be a matter for censure and shame. That it isn't - especially by a party keen on law and order - is in itself shaming.
But apart from probably being unbelievably pompous on this (not that I care - it's important) I am making the mistake of thinking that the current Tory party cares about such things.
I'm not sure the law and those practising it are universally viewed as you portray
Interesting reading how Dodd’s is framing the campaign over a no deal and not making a big thing over stopping Brexit.
I think this is a good plan. The Lib Dem stance as clearly pro Remain is well known already .
It is very close to Labour's position!
Which one? They've had more positions than there are in the Kama Sutra.
Who has been consistent? Certainly not the Tories - and the Libdem line at B&R focussing on avoiding No Deal seems a departure from the firm Remain line.
You said Labour had a position. I merely wanted to know what it was.
To seek a Referendum in which they will campaign for Remain on the existing Tory deal or anything closely resembling it. In the event of taking office pre-Brexit , to seek a new deal based on changed red lines. Any deal then reached to be presented to the electorate in a Referendum with a Remain option included. Labour MPs would be free to campaign on either side in such a Referendum - as happened in 1975 and indeed in 2016.
Interesting reading how Dodd’s is framing the campaign over a no deal and not making a big thing over stopping Brexit.
I think this is a good plan. The Lib Dem stance as clearly pro Remain is well known already .
It is very close to Labour's position!
Which one? They've had more positions than there are in the Kama Sutra.
Who has been consistent? Certainly not the Tories - and the Libdem line at B&R focussing on avoiding No Deal seems a departure from the firm Remain line.
But, if you read the article, it is clear she wants to Remain, but she doesn't say so because it will lose her votes.
It is not that Dodds is inconsistent. She is dishonest.
If it's clear from the article that she wants to Remain it makes no difference if she says so or not.
Not all (or even many) of the voters of B&R read the Guardian.
The article makes it clear that she does not tell voters she wants to remain. She tells voters that she wants to avoid a No Deal Brexit.
If the LibDems want to remain and want a People's Vote, then fine. Say so. Be proud of the policy. There is a constituency out there that believes that and wants to vote for it.
(But perhaps not a large constituency in Brecon & Radnorshire).
Sorry, it is just characteristic LibDemmery.
If you want an example of dishonesty in your politicians take a look at this lot...
What kind of insecure 55-year old pillock gets a jacket with Prime Minister written on it? It's the sort of thing a 5-year old might wear if photographed outside 10 Downing Street. Not a grown man.
It's in the style of Football managers. Something the metropolitan elite can sneer at, but the Match of the Day watching millions will be very familiar with and think nothing of it.
You're right. I know nothing about football. I assume that a PM would aspire to behave like a PM - with some level of dignity, for the office, if not himself. But hey ho. Maybe that's out of fashion these days. To me it looks like insecurity.
I'm more angry that his FS has just been on the radio and elsewhere telling outright lies about what he said during the campaign in order to pretend that the 2016 vote was a mandate for a No Deal exit. He is a lawyer; according to his CV with a distinguished record (though I am sceptical) but nonetheless a lawyer and he has just flat out lied, repeatedly and flagrantly.
Still, maybe one should not be bothered about such things. Millions will think nothing of it, I dare say. Why should integrity and honesty count in public life?
Surely, that means he's an effective lawyer.
That's a cheap joke - and you know it.
An effective lawyer speaks truth to power - and that means his/her client - and realises that their integrity (and therefore the confidence that the client and everyone else can place in them) is the single most important thing about them.
Raab is being flagrantly dishonest. He knows that this government has no mandate for a No Deal exit - for an exit, yes - but not on No Deal terms and he simply lies about what he said on this both before and after the referendum. He degrades public life - as well as his own reputation - by behaving in this way. It ought to be a matter for censure and shame. That it isn't - especially by a party keen on law and order - is in itself shaming.
But apart from probably being unbelievably pompous on this (not that I care - it's important) I am making the mistake of thinking that the current Tory party cares about such things.
You're almost certainly right, and I should probably be very angry about this, but I can't spare any due to being totally fed up with the likes of Dominic Grieve and the other intellectually bankrupt lawyers on the Remain side.
Not sure which will be more amusing, the left's meltdown after the Boris victory party after defeating Corbyn, or the left's meltdown after the Trump victory party after beating Warren or Harris!
If you're counting hard left social democrats like me in this I'm afraid you'll be disappointed.
I will not be having a meltdown if Johnson were to beat Jeremy. I'll be disappointed but not surprised. I can see it going either way.
If Trump wins again, though, that will be sickening. Really not sure how I would cope with that. But the good news is I don't think I will have to.
Given his attitude towards climate change, it’s the planet that might be facing meltdown in the event of a Trump being re-elected...
Well I've only gone and done it. I've just handed my notice in at work and I am going back to university to study law!
Anxious but exciting times lie ahead.
The very best of luck. We are struggling to recruit property solicitors right now, and get a call a week from chins trying to poach me or a colleague, but YMMV with different fields, locations and level of qualification. Don't shy away from getting all the experience you can in your chosen field, however modest.
How can Boris claim he wants a new deal if he is not prepared to spend the Summer meeting with EU leaders?
They have to be prepared to meet him
They haven’t said they will not meet him have they? Ok they have said they won’t change the backstop but there is no chance of alternative arrangements if we are not prepared to engage.
Sky explained that the EU constantly humilated TM so Boris has taken his stand that they remove the backstop or he will not engage as there is nothing to discuss
From a PR stand point that is good politics
It may seem to be good PR right now but if we end up with a damaging no deal and disintegration of the UK it will not be good politics then. It is a high risk strategy.
Interesting reading how Dodd’s is framing the campaign over a no deal and not making a big thing over stopping Brexit.
I think this is a good plan. The Lib Dem stance as clearly pro Remain is well known already .
It is very close to Labour's position!
Which one? They've had more positions than there are in the Kama Sutra.
Who has been consistent? Certainly not the Tories - and the Libdem line at B&R focussing on avoiding No Deal seems a departure from the firm Remain line.
Justin.
The conservatives are the leave party.
The lib dems are the remain party. (Also SNP)
Labour are remain in London and leave in the north
Not all Tories agree with you - particularly in terms of what Leave should amount to.
You misunderstand.
I am talking about the public's perception of each party
I suspect it has not escaped the attention of the public that the Tories are far more split re-Brexit than any other party!
What kind of insecure 55-year old pillock gets a jacket with Prime Minister written on it? It's the sort of thing a 5-year old might wear if photographed outside 10 Downing Street. Not a grown man.
It's in the style of Football managers. Something the metropolitan elite can sneer at, but the Match of the Day watching millions will be very familiar with and think nothing of it.
You're right. I know nothing about football. I assume that a PM would aspire to behave like a PM - with some level of dignity, for the office, if not himself. But hey ho. Maybe that's out of fashion these days. To me it looks like insecurity.
I'm more angry that his FS has just been on the radio and elsewhere telling outright lies about what he said during the campaign in order to pretend that the 2016 vote was a mandate for a No Deal exit. He is a lawyer; according to his CV with a distinguished record (though I am sceptical) but nonetheless a lawyer and he has just flat out lied, repeatedly and flagrantly.
Still, maybe one should not be bothered about such things. Millions will think nothing of it, I dare say. Why should integrity and honesty count in public life?
I am not sure about the insignia on Boris jacket.
It is a gift to those who want to mock him but it could be a means of identity if anything extraordinary happened like a terror attack
Amazing how none of our previous PMs needed to be identified in this way. What can their personal protection officers have been thinking?
I think it is a poor pr but I do not think Boris had anything to do with it other than wear it
Interesting reading how Dodd’s is framing the campaign over a no deal and not making a big thing over stopping Brexit.
I think this is a good plan. The Lib Dem stance as clearly pro Remain is well known already .
It is very close to Labour's position!
Which one? They've had more positions than there are in the Kama Sutra.
Who has been consistent? Certainly not the Tories - and the Libdem line at B&R focussing on avoiding No Deal seems a departure from the firm Remain line.
But, if you read the article, it is clear she wants to Remain, but she doesn't say so because it will lose her votes.
It is not that Dodds is inconsistent. She is dishonest.
If it's clear from the article that she wants to Remain it makes no difference if she says so or not.
Not all (or even many) of the voters of B&R read the Guardian.
The article makes it clear that she does not tell voters she wants to remain. She tells voters that she wants to avoid a No Deal Brexit.
If the LibDems want to remain and want a People's Vote, then fine. Say so. Be proud of the policy. There is a constituency out there that believes that and wants to vote for it.
(But perhaps not a large constituency in Brecon & Radnorshire).
Sorry, it is just characteristic LibDemmery.
If you want an example of dishonesty in your politicians take a look at this lot...
It’s like the Da Vinci Code ! Apparently it’s a people’s vote on a Tory deal or no deal and they’ll back Remain then but if in government they’ll try to get a Brexit deal so you could say that means they want to Brexit but that will be difficult as most of their MPs will be campaigning against a Labour deal if there’s another vote then and want to Remain but we’re not a hundred percent sure if they’ll put forward another vote then if they’re in government . And we’re not sure whether Corbyn will take a neutral stance and just go to his allotment for that time and let Labour MPs campaign for whatever they like.
In a nutshell don’t bother trying to understand the Labour position , as shadow cabinet members make it up as they go along , all say different things and it will probably change again soon.
TBF although the path to get here was long and ludicrous I think it's now coherent.
1) A deal is needed, crashing out without one would be really, really bad 2) The deal should be put to a referendum, because not all the voters' previous expectations can be met and when they see what they're actually getting the voters may prefer to stay 3) Lab will decide what side they recommend in the referendum when they know what kind of deal they'll get
Although (3) is obviously disappointing to enthusiasts on either side I think it makes logical sense. It's slightly weird to say you'll negotiate a deal then campaign to reject it no matter what it is, especially if the justification for the referendum is that the details of the deal affect whether you want to do it or not.
Gosh these arguments seem awfully familiar. But Harris still needs to excite. She has been disappointingly pedestrian so far.
Despite Mike's reservations, I think this always has been and remains Biden's to lose. Someone needs to be totally on fire to take away the feeling that he is the one to beat Trump and that is all that matters.
Can you think of one positive attributes Biden has that does not include the word "Obama"?
Biden delivers a decent stump speech in a political system where that seems to matter. Harris and Warren are useless; Sanders is long winded. Trump can carry an audience. Obama and Clinton were two of the best speech makers of modern times. Reagan was very good too.
Reagan came up with one of the best metaphors for the EU.
What kind of insecure 55-year old pillock gets a jacket with Prime Minister written on it? It's the sort of thing a 5-year old might wear if photographed outside 10 Downing Street. Not a grown man.
It's in the style of Football managers. Something the metropolitan elite can sneer at, but the Match of the Day watching millions will be very familiar with and think nothing of it.
You're right. I know nothing about football. I assume that a PM would aspire to behave like a PM - with some level of dignity, for the office, if not himself. But hey ho. Maybe that's out of fashion these days. To me it looks like insecurity.
I'm more angry that his FS has just been on the radio and elsewhere telling outright lies about what he said during the campaign in order to pretend that the 2016 vote was a mandate for a No Deal exit. He is a lawyer; according to his CV with a distinguished record (though I am sceptical) but nonetheless a lawyer and he has just flat out lied, repeatedly and flagrantly.
Still, maybe one should not be bothered about such things. Millions will think nothing of it, I dare say. Why should integrity and honesty count in public life?
I am not sure about the insignia on Boris jacket.
It is a gift to those who want to mock him but it could be a means of identity if anything extraordinary happened like a terror attack
Gosh these arguments seem awfully familiar. But Harris still needs to excite. She has been disappointingly pedestrian so far.
Despite Mike's reservations, I think this always has been and remains Biden's to lose. Someone needs to be totally on fire to take away the feeling that he is the one to beat Trump and that is all that matters.
Can you think of one positive attributes Biden has that does not include the word "Obama"?
He beats Trump on head-to-head polling.
Because he has name recognition.
Donald Trump scores 43-44% against every opponent. Every single one.
The only difference is that there are far fewer don't knows when Biden is the candidate, because everyone knows Sleepy Joe.
Not sure which will be more amusing, the left's meltdown after the Boris victory party after defeating Corbyn, or the left's meltdown after the Trump victory party after beating Warren or Harris!
Different groups, surely. The kind of left who would support Corbyn will be as depressed by the prospect of President Harris as they are by President Clinton
They would still prefer her to Trump and would be cheering on Warren or Sanders v Trump
It’s like the Da Vinci Code ! Apparently it’s a people’s vote on a Tory deal or no deal and they’ll back Remain then but if in government they’ll try to get a Brexit deal so you could say that means they want to Brexit but that will be difficult as most of their MPs will be campaigning against a Labour deal if there’s another vote then and want to Remain but we’re not a hundred percent sure if they’ll put forward another vote then if they’re in government . And we’re not sure whether Corbyn will take a neutral stance and just go to his allotment for that time and let Labour MPs campaign for whatever they like.
In a nutshell don’t bother trying to understand the Labour position , as shadow cabinet members make it up as they go along , all say different things and it will probably change again soon.
TBF although the path to get here was long and ludicrous I think it's now coherent.
1) A deal is needed, crashing out without one would be really, really bad 2) The deal should be put to a referendum, because not all the voters' previous expectations can be met and when they see what they're actually getting the voters may prefer to stay 3) Lab will decide what side they recommend in the referendum when they know what kind of deal they'll get
Although (3) is obviously disappointing to enthusiasts on either side I think it makes logical sense. It's slightly weird to say you'll negotiate a deal then campaign to reject it no matter what it is, especially if the justification for the referendum is that the details of the deal affect whether you want to do it or not.
Gosh these arguments seem awfully familiar. But Harris still needs to excite. She has been disappointingly pedestrian so far.
Despite Mike's reservations, I think this always has been and remains Biden's to lose. Someone needs to be totally on fire to take away the feeling that he is the one to beat Trump and that is all that matters.
Can you think of one positive attributes Biden has that does not include the word "Obama"?
Biden delivers a decent stump speech in a political system where that seems to matter. Harris and Warren are useless; Sanders is long winded. Trump can carry an audience. Obama and Clinton were two of the best speech makers of modern times. Reagan was very good too.
Reagan came up with one of the best metaphors for the EU.
Gosh these arguments seem awfully familiar. But Harris still needs to excite. She has been disappointingly pedestrian so far.
Despite Mike's reservations, I think this always has been and remains Biden's to lose. Someone needs to be totally on fire to take away the feeling that he is the one to beat Trump and that is all that matters.
Can you think of one positive attributes Biden has that does not include the word "Obama"?
Biden delivers a decent stump speech in a political system where that seems to matter. Harris and Warren are useless; Sanders is long winded. Trump can carry an audience. Obama and Clinton were two of the best speech makers of modern times. Reagan was very good too.
Reagan came up with one of the best metaphors for the EU.
Yep, comparing the EU to a medieval religion is probably a good comparison.
From the clip provided, neither the EU nor European integration are explicitly mentioned.
Reagan is talking about a new Europe as a democratic community. It sounds more like a celebration of the liberation of Eastern Europe from Soviet control.
We would need to have more context than the 1 minute 29 seconds provided to be sure of what Reagan actually means here.
Gosh these arguments seem awfully familiar. But Harris still needs to excite. She has been disappointingly pedestrian so far.
Despite Mike's reservations, I think this always has been and remains Biden's to lose. Someone needs to be totally on fire to take away the feeling that he is the one to beat Trump and that is all that matters.
Can you think of one positive attributes Biden has that does not include the word "Obama"?
Biden delivers a decent stump speech in a political system where that seems to matter. Harris and Warren are useless; Sanders is long winded. Trump can carry an audience. Obama and Clinton were two of the best speech makers of modern times. Reagan was very good too.
Reagan came up with one of the best metaphors for the EU.
Not sure which will be more amusing, the left's meltdown after the Boris victory party after defeating Corbyn, or the left's meltdown after the Trump victory party after beating Warren or Harris!
If you're counting hard left social democrats like me in this I'm afraid you'll be disappointed.
I will not be having a meltdown if Johnson were to beat Jeremy. I'll be disappointed but not surprised. I can see it going either way.
If Trump wins again, though, that will be sickening. Really not sure how I would cope with that. But the good news is I don't think I will have to.
The latest Fox poll from last week has Biden beating Trump 49% to 39% but Trump beating Harris 41% to 40% and Trump beating Warren 42% to 41%.
So if the Democrats dump Biden in favour of Warren or Harris you may have to cope with a re elected President Trump I am afraid
From the clip provided, neither the EU nor European integration are explicitly mentioned.
Reagan is talking about a new Europe as a democratic community. It sounds more like a celebration of the liberation of Eastern Europe from Soviet control.
We would need to have more context than the 1 minute 29 seconds provided to be sure of what Reagan actually means here.
It's a thread with other clips from a speech he gave in the European Parliament in 1985.
Not sure which will be more amusing, the left's meltdown after the Boris victory party after defeating Corbyn, or the left's meltdown after the Trump victory party after beating Warren or Harris!
If you're counting hard left social democrats like me in this I'm afraid you'll be disappointed.
I will not be having a meltdown if Johnson were to beat Jeremy. I'll be disappointed but not surprised. I can see it going either way.
If Trump wins again, though, that will be sickening. Really not sure how I would cope with that. But the good news is I don't think I will have to.
Given his attitude towards climate change, it’s the planet that might be facing meltdown in the event of a Trump being re-elected...
'President Donald Trump has said he believes climate change "goes both ways" following a 90-minute discussion with environmentalist Prince Charles. "I believe that there's a change in weather and I think it changes both ways," Mr Trump told Piers Morgan in an interview that aired on Wednesday.'
How can Boris claim he wants a new deal if he is not prepared to spend the Summer meeting with EU leaders?
They have to be prepared to meet him
They haven’t said they will not meet him have they? Ok they have said they won’t change the backstop but there is no chance of alternative arrangements if we are not prepared to engage.
Sky explained that the EU constantly humilated TM so Boris has taken his stand that they remove the backstop or he will not engage as there is nothing to discuss
From a PR stand point that is good politics
It may seem to be good PR right now but if we end up with a damaging no deal and disintegration of the UK it will not be good politics then. It is a high risk strategy.
Gosh these arguments seem awfully familiar. But Harris still needs to excite. She has been disappointingly pedestrian so far.
Despite Mike's reservations, I think this always has been and remains Biden's to lose. Someone needs to be totally on fire to take away the feeling that he is the one to beat Trump and that is all that matters.
Can you think of one positive attributes Biden has that does not include the word "Obama"?
Biden delivers a decent stump speech in a political system where that seems to matter. Harris and Warren are useless; Sanders is long winded. Trump can carry an audience. Obama and Clinton were two of the best speech makers of modern times. Reagan was very good too.
Reagan came up with one of the best metaphors for the EU.
From the clip provided, neither the EU nor European integration are explicitly mentioned.
Reagan is talking about a new Europe as a democratic community. It sounds more like a celebration of the liberation of Eastern Europe from Soviet control.
We would need to have more context than the 1 minute 29 seconds provided to be sure of what Reagan actually means here.
It's a thread with other clips from a speech he gave in the European Parliament in 1985.
Not sure which will be more amusing, the left's meltdown after the Boris victory party after defeating Corbyn, or the left's meltdown after the Trump victory party after beating Warren or Harris!
If you're counting hard left social democrats like me in this I'm afraid you'll be disappointed.
I will not be having a meltdown if Johnson were to beat Jeremy. I'll be disappointed but not surprised. I can see it going either way.
If Trump wins again, though, that will be sickening. Really not sure how I would cope with that. But the good news is I don't think I will have to.
Given his attitude towards climate change, it’s the planet that might be facing meltdown in the event of a Trump being re-elected...
'President Donald Trump has said he believes climate change "goes both ways" following a 90-minute discussion with environmentalist Prince Charles. "I believe that there's a change in weather and I think it changes both ways," Mr Trump told Piers Morgan in an interview that aired on Wednesday.'
TBF although the path to get here was long and ludicrous I think it's now coherent.
1) A deal is needed, crashing out without one would be really, really bad 2) The deal should be put to a referendum, because not all the voters' previous expectations can be met and when they see what they're actually getting the voters may prefer to stay 3) Lab will decide what side they recommend in the referendum when they know what kind of deal they'll get
Although (3) is obviously disappointing to enthusiasts on either side I think it makes logical sense. It's slightly weird to say you'll negotiate a deal then campaign to reject it no matter what it is, especially if the justification for the referendum is that the details of the deal affect whether you want to do it or not.
What's the question for stage 2?
Leave with the deal they negotiated vs Remain.
I'm not sure if they've *explicitly* ruled out a No Deal option but they've said nothing to the contrary, and it would be weird to have one given (1).
From the clip provided, neither the EU nor European integration are explicitly mentioned.
Reagan is talking about a new Europe as a democratic community. It sounds more like a celebration of the liberation of Eastern Europe from Soviet control.
We would need to have more context than the 1 minute 29 seconds provided to be sure of what Reagan actually means here.
It's a thread with other clips from a speech he gave in the European Parliament in 1985.
This is like quoting Sir Robert Peel as being in favour of the Common Agricultural Policy because he masterminded the Repeal of the Corn Laws.
Not really. Reagan specifically advocates things that didn’t happen until the next century, like the expansion of free movement of people to Eastern Europe. (He includes Moscow, which highlights the significant fissure that still remains.)
I'm more angry that his FS has just been on the radio and elsewhere telling outright lies about what he said during the campaign in order to pretend that the 2016 vote was a mandate for a No Deal exit. He is a lawyer; according to his CV with a distinguished record (though I am sceptical) but nonetheless a lawyer and he has just flat out lied, repeatedly and flagrantly.
Still, maybe one should not be bothered about such things. Millions will think nothing of it, I dare say. Why should integrity and honesty count in public life?
Surely, that means he's an effective lawyer.
That's a cheap joke - and you know it.
An effective lawyer speaks truth to power - and that means his/her client - and realises that their integrity (and therefore the confidence that the client and everyone else can place in them) is the single most important thing about them.
Raab is being flagrantly dishonest. He knows that this government has no mandate for a No Deal exit - for an exit, yes - but not on No Deal terms and he simply lies about what he said on this both before and after the referendum. He degrades public life - as well as his own reputation - by behaving in this way. It ought to be a matter for censure and shame. That it isn't - especially by a party keen on law and order - is in itself shaming.
But apart from probably being unbelievably pompous on this (not that I care - it's important) I am making the mistake of thinking that the current Tory party cares about such things.
I'm not sure the law and those practising it are universally viewed as you portray
Every good lawyer knows this in their bones. If they don't they have no business being a lawyer. The fact that some lawyers fall short of this does not make it any less true or important.
Telegraph saying Boris is off to Wales tomorrow, where he will visit B&R - main message is farmers will get a better deal after brexit.
Up for the fight is Boris.
Well, yes. But will he provide any details as to what this better deal may be? Cos so far he hasn't. Boris is certainly stacking up hostages to fortune.
Telegraph saying Boris is off to Wales tomorrow, where he will visit B&R - main message is farmers will get a better deal after brexit.
Up for the fight is Boris.
Boris seems to be happiest campaigning.
Farmers who export to the EU face large tariffs which will wipe many of them out. Those that remain will be wiped out by US agricultural imports, if the promised US-UK FTA is ever agreed and implemented. The US have made it crystal clear that they would expect access for their agricultural produce. There is no way UK farmers can compete with the sort of farming seen in Iowa. And that means we can kiss goodbye to any sort of care for nature or wildlife over here of the type being promoted by Gove. Plus it also makes it unlikely that we could get an FTA with the EU.
The government could try and mitigate some or all of this damage by spending lots of money on farmers. How likely is this? It's not what was on the side of the bus. The farming population is pretty small - and the areas which will be hardest hit are not ones the Tories care about.
The idea that Brexit on a No Deal basis will be good for farmers is so much hot air from Boris.
Doubtless it will be lapped up by his fans and uncritical / credulous journalists.
As above, if the Union is to continue to have relevance, we need grands projets and initiatives like the one Ethiopia has managed.
God knows why you think you are the person to comment on strengthening the Union.
It is like getting a lecture on the importance of marital fidelity from Boris Johnson.
A start might be to try and avoid your casual racism. Try to get your facts right when talking about Scotland. And try not to talk about dunghills and mud huts when talking about Wales.
We can move onto the grand projects that your munificence will bestow after you have got the simple stuff right.
What kind of insecure 55-year old pillock gets a jacket with Prime Minister written on it? It's the sort of thing a 5-year old might wear if photographed outside 10 Downing Street. Not a grown man.
It's in the style of Football managers. Something the metropolitan elite can sneer at, but the Match of the Day watching millions will be very familiar with and think nothing of it.
life?
Surely, that means he's an effective lawyer.
That's a cheap joke - and you know it.
An effective lawyer speaks truth to power - and that means his/her client - and realises that their integrity (and therefore the confidence that the client and everyone else can place in them) is the single most important thing about them.
Raab is being flagrantly dishonest. He knows that this government has no mandate for a No Deal exit - for an exit, yes - but not on No Deal terms and he simply lies about what he said on this both before and after the referendum. He degrades public life - as well as his own reputation - by behaving in this way. It ought to be a matter for censure and shame. That it isn't - especially by a party keen on law and order - is in itself shaming.
But apart from probably being unbelievably pompous on this (not that I care - it's important) I am making the mistake of thinking that the current Tory party cares about such things.
Not only was Raab bullshitting, he was bullshitting needlessly. There is no course of action more legitimate than no-deal. A50 was written before the referendum was contemplated and expressly provides for a no-deal exit. The electorate had a say cognizant of the possibility of no-deal, and chose that path. The executive then had a choice of whether and how to exit the EU using A50, and chose it, knowing full well what A50 meant. The judiciary then considered, in the Miller case, whether the path the exec chose needed parliamentary approval. They decided so, again knowing what that path entailed. Theninally Parliament considered whether to grant the then PM the power to serve the notice and set in train the possibility that the PM or the EU or both could orchestrate no-deal. They did. Finally Parliament had a think about the deal and decided it was as welcome as a pork pie at a bar mitzvah.
No-deal is part of a treaty, is stated policy, has been contemplated and permitted by referendum, considered by judiciary, and has been expressly authorised by parliament. Raab flapping about like a meat piñata just gives succour to the continuity remain campaign's nonsensical pretence that other options are more valid.
Telegraph saying Boris is off to Wales tomorrow, where he will visit B&R - main message is farmers will get a better deal after brexit.
Up for the fight is Boris.
Boris seems to be happiest campaigning.
Farmers who export to the EU face large tariffs which will wipe many of them out. Those that remain will be wiped out by US agricultural imports, if the promised US-UK FTA is ever agreed and implemented. The US have made it crystal clear that they would expect access for their agricultural produce. There is no way UK farmers can compete with the sort of farming seen in Iowa. And that means we can kiss goodbye to any sort of care for nature or wildlife over here of the type being promoted by Gove. Plus it also makes it unlikely that we could get an FTA with the EU.
The government could try and mitigate some or all of this damage by spending lots of money on farmers. How likely is this? It's not what was on the side of the bus. The farming population is pretty small - and the areas which will be hardest hit are not ones the Tories care about.
The idea that Brexit on a No Deal basis will be good for farmers is so much hot air from Boris.
Doubtless it will be lapped up by his fans and uncritical / credulous journalists.
The UK is also introducing tariffs on EU exports to the UK as well in case of food.
TBF although the path to get here was long and ludicrous I think it's now coherent.
1) A deal is needed, crashing out without one would be really, really bad 2) The deal should be put to a referendum, because not all the voters' previous expectations can be met and when they see what they're actually getting the voters may prefer to stay 3) Lab will decide what side they recommend in the referendum when they know what kind of deal they'll get
Although (3) is obviously disappointing to enthusiasts on either side I think it makes logical sense. It's slightly weird to say you'll negotiate a deal then campaign to reject it no matter what it is, especially if the justification for the referendum is that the details of the deal affect whether you want to do it or not.
Yes, exactly. Now we just need to campaign for it with some zeal, instead of nervously trying to refine it or change the subject.
As above, if the Union is to continue to have relevance, we need grands projets and initiatives like the one Ethiopia has managed.
God knows why you think you are the person to comment on strengthening the Union.
It is like getting a lecture on the importance of marital fidelity from Boris Johnson.
A start might be to try and avoid your casual racism. Try to get your facts right when talking about Scotland. And try not to talk about dunghills and mud huts when talking about Wales.
We can move onto the grand projects that your munificence will bestow after you have got the simple stuff right.
As I’ve told you before, my references to dung hills etc relate to you personally, not “the Welsh”.
I make them because you keep pearl-clutching whenever someone mentions they live close to a supermarket or go to the theatre; you have a tantrum and call them a metropolitan elitist.
I thereby deduce you must live in some kind of mud hut (albeit one you have rigged up with an internet connection).
I rate Nichola Sturgeon. But getting a face on at Boris for having the nerve to be alive, and chatting to the press about his choice of exit, whilst it will have an audience, is not a classy look.
So Bozo is allowed to go round shouting no deal , suck it up. And you’re irritated because Sturgeon shows that she’s not impressed .
If it comes to that, Nichola Sturgeon wants to break up the UK, the fallout from which, logic would suggest, dwarves anything that could come from leaving the EU. But Boris isn't going around doing amateur dramatics.
It is a gift to those who want to mock him but it could be a means of identity if anything extraordinary happened like a terror attack
Er, don't you think that's a bit desperate? Can you describe the circumstances in which we were unsure who he was, but fortunately could see the little badge on his jacket?
I think your other explanation, that it wasn't his doing but sewn on by some dotty super-fan, is a lot more likely.
While I think it wrong it is pretty notable that the policies of Ireland and the EU in all this has been that the British are not very bright (we have seen statements of such happily shared) and that we will blink. Only allowable on one side, or is it ok to hold such arrogant views if you think they are correct?
So I am not feeling the outrage of it as being 'anti-Irish' since it seems to be an attitude of contempt held universally in these negotiations.
'Alastair Campbell, the former No 10 director of communications under Tony Blair, has said he no longer wishes to be a Labour member, warning that Jeremy Corbyn is poised to lose the next election against Boris Johnson and destroy the party “as a political force capable of winning power”. Campbell had planned to fight his expulsion from Labour for revealing that he voted Liberal Democrat in the European elections, but he has now written to Corbyn informing him: “With some sadness but absolute certainty, I have reached the conclusion that I no longer wish to stay in the party, even if I should be successful in my appeal or legal challenge.'
As above, if the Union is to continue to have relevance, we need grands projets and initiatives like the one Ethiopia has managed.
God knows why you think you are the person to comment on strengthening the Union.
It is like getting a lecture on the importance of marital fidelity from Boris Johnson.
A start might be to try and avoid your casual racism. Try to get your facts right when talking about Scotland. And try not to talk about dunghills and mud huts when talking about Wales.
We can move onto the grand projects that your munificence will bestow after you have got the simple stuff right.
As I’ve told you before, my references to dung hills etc relate to you personally, not “the Welsh”.
I make them because you keep pearl-clutching whenever someone mentions they live close to a supermarket or go to the theatre; you have a tantrum and call them a metropolitan elitist.
I thereby deduce you must live in some kind of mud hut (albeit one you have rigged up with an internet connection).
Many people live a long way from supermarket or theatre. It doesn't follow that they live in a shit-hole.
Dunghills in the Valleys, mud huts in Lampeter, the wild and backward Welsh speaking their gibberish, ....
Keep your 250 million trees that you want to plant in Wales to strengthen the Union,.
Just try and see if you can avoid ugly racial caricatures in future.
The LDs who he has already voted for in the Euros.
If Boris wins the next general election and Labour sticks with Corbyn or Corbynism there is a strong possibility in my view by the subsequent general election the LDs will have overtaken Labour as the main party of the centre left, with Labour reduced to socialists and patches of the inner cities.
In the European elections the SNP beat Labour in Scotland, Plaid beat Labour in Wales and the LDs beat Labour in England, there was a warning there Labour has not listened to unlike the Tories who picked Boris to win back voters lost to the Brexit Party
To call a GE they would have to VoNC the Government. There are then 14 days to form a new Government at the end of which a GE is called if no new Government has been formed which commands the support of the House.
The minimum election campaign by law is then 25 working days which takes you to Tuesday 22nd October. I assume they would stick with the Thursday date so the earliest you could hold an election is Thursday 24th October. Has he forgotten that it is 25 working days not 25 days for the campaign?
Raab is being flagrantly dishonest. He knows that this government has no mandate for a No Deal exit - for an exit, yes - but not on No Deal terms and he simply lies about what he said on this both before and after the referendum. He degrades public life - as well as his own reputation - by behaving in this way. It ought to be a matter for censure and shame. That it isn't - especially by a party keen on law and order - is in itself shaming.
Not only was Raab bullshitting, he was bullshitting needlessly. There is no course of action more legitimate than no-deal. A50 was written before the referendum was contemplated and expressly provides for a no-deal exit. The electorate had a say cognizant of the possibility of no-deal, and chose that path. The executive then had a choice of whether and how to exit the EU using A50, and chose it, knowing full well what A50 meant. The judiciary then considered, in the Miller case, whether the path the exec chose needed parliamentary approval. They decided so, again knowing what that path entailed. Theninally Parliament considered whether to grant the then PM the power to serve the notice and set in train the possibility that the PM or the EU or both could orchestrate no-deal. They did. Finally Parliament had a think about the deal and decided it was as welcome as a pork pie at a bar mitzvah.
No-deal is part of a treaty, is stated policy, has been contemplated and permitted by referendum, considered by judiciary, and has been expressly authorised by parliament. Raab flapping about like a meat piñata just gives succour to the continuity remain campaign's nonsensical pretence that other options are more valid.
That may all be so and wonderfully correct. (Though I’m not sure I agree with you. No matter.)
But it was not the argument Raab was making. He was saying that the government had a mandate because he had been going round talking about a No Deal exit before the referendum when there is no evidence of this and there is evidence of him saying the complete opposite after the result ie that the result was not a mandate for No Deal.
Is it anti Irish to suggest someone who happens to be Irish is not bright? I mean really?
No. However, a qualified doctor who speaks five languages, is probably a poor choice of target.
I have NO experience of the man. He could be Ireland's answer to Machiavelli for all I know. But booksmarts don't necessarily equal political nouse.
Apparently Varadkar's backstop strategy is polling badly in Ireland. So it's hardly inconceivable that him 'blinking' is part of the way forward.
Any criticism of UK politicians for their strategy towards Brexit resembling a man threatening to shoot his own head off if he doesn't get what he wants, goes double for Varadkar. With the icing on the cake being that he doesn't even have control of the trigger.
What kind of insecure 55-year old pillock gets a jacket with Prime Minister written on it? It's the sort of thing a 5-year old might wear if photographed outside 10 Downing Street. Not a grown man.
It's in the style of Football managers. Something the metropolitan elite can sneer at, but the Match of the Day watching millions will be very familiar with and think nothing of it.
You're right. I know nothing about football. I assume that a PM would aspire to behave like a PM - with some level of dignity, for the office, if not himself. But hey ho. Maybe that's out of fashion these days. To me it looks like insecurity.
I'm more angry that his FS has just been on the radio and elsewhere telling outright lies about what he said during the campaign in order to pretend that the 2016 vote was a mandate for a No Deal exit. He is a lawyer; according to his CV with a distinguished record (though I am sceptical) but nonetheless a lawyer and he has just flat out lied, repeatedly and flagrantly.
Still, maybe one should not be bothered about such things. Millions will think nothing of it, I dare say. Why should integrity and honesty count in public life?
I am not sure about the insignia on Boris jacket.
It is a gift to those who want to mock him but it could be a means of identity if anything extraordinary happened like a terror attack
I think it is Navy standard, this must be a gift from the Navy as a little memento and feel like you are one of us whilst you are here
You can see the names on the photo in this article on Navy dress.
As anyone with a shred of common sense would have realised immediately, unless they think Boris goes around in luminous stripes as a fashion statement.
I suppose in the same situation Nick Palmer and Cyclefree would have taken one look at this thoughtful gesture and demanded a plain jacket because the PM one wouldn't go down well on Twitter.
Is it anti Irish to suggest someone who happens to be Irish is not bright? I mean really?
No. However, a qualified doctor who speaks five languages, is probably a poor choice of target.
I have NO experience of the man. He could be Ireland's answer to Machiavelli for all I know. But booksmarts don't necessarily equal political nouse.
Apparently Varadkar's backstop strategy is polling badly in Ireland. So it's hardly inconceivable that him 'blinking' is part of the way forward.
Not arguing with you man. There are various classifications of "bright", if it were the only criterion we'd,have had Stephen Hawking or some such as PM. Corbyn is not book smart, but possesses a degree of political cunning. He wouldn't be LOTO if he didn't. John Major, too. So. Maybe we can agree that perhaps Varadkar could be described as "politically lacking", rather than "not bright".
What kind of insecure 55-year old pillock gets a jacket with Prime Minister written on it? It's the sort of thing a 5-year old might wear if photographed outside 10 Downing Street. Not a grown man.
It's in the style of Football managers. Something the metropolitan elite can sneer at, but the Match of the Day watching millions will be very familiar with and think nothing of it.
You're right. I know nothing about football. I assume that a PM would aspire to behave like a PM - with some level of dignity, for the office, if not himself. But hey ho. Maybe that's out of fashion these days. To me it looks like insecurity.
I'm more angry that his FS has just been on the radio and elsewhere telling outright lies about what he said during the campaign in order to pretend that the 2016 vote was a mandate for a No Deal exit. He is a lawyer; according to his CV with a distinguished record (though I am sceptical) but nonetheless a lawyer and he has just flat out lied, repeatedly and flagrantly.
Still, maybe one should not be bothered about such things. Millions will think nothing of it, I dare say. Why should integrity and honesty count in public life?
I am not sure about the insignia on Boris jacket.
It is a gift to those who want to mock him but it could be a means of identity if anything extraordinary happened like a terror attack
I think it is Navy standard, this must be a gift from the Navy as a little memento and feel like you are one of us whilst you are here
You can see the names on the photo in this article on Navy dress.
As anyone with a shred of common sense would have realised immediately, unless they think Boris goes around in luminous stripes as a fashion statement.
I suppose in the same situation Nick Palmer and Cyclefree would have taken one look at this thoughtful gesture and demanded a plain jacket because the PM one wouldn't go down well on Twitter.
Well, no. I’ve no reason to suppose that when you visit the navy you get given such a jacket. I have never seen the equivalent on any of our previous PMs. Have you?
Given how badly Boris dresses I don’t think you can conclude anything from his fashion sense or lack of it.
But if this was not his choice but given to him - and he was wearing it out of politeness to his hosts - then I’m happy to withdraw the suggestion that it reflects badly on him.
What kind of insecure 55-year old pillock gets a jacket with Prime Minister written on it? It's the sort of thing a 5-year old might wear if photographed outside 10 Downing Street. Not a grown man.
It's in the style of Football managers. Something the metropolitan elite can sneer at, but the Match of the Day watching millions will be very familiar with and think nothing of it.
You're right. I know nothing about football. I assume that a PM would aspire to behave like a PM - with some level of dignity, for the office, if not himself. But hey ho. Maybe that's out of fashion these days. To me it looks like insecurity.
I'm more angry that his FS has just been on the radio and elsewhere telling outright lies about what he said during the campaign in order to pretend that the 2016 vote was a mandate for a No Deal exit. He is a lawyer; according to his CV with a distinguished record (though I am sceptical) but nonetheless a lawyer and he has just flat out lied, repeatedly and flagrantly.integrity and honesty count in public life?
I am not sure about the insignia on Boris jacket.
It is a gift to those who want to mock him but it could be a means of identity if anything extraordinary happened like a terror attack
I think it is Navy standard, this must be a gift from the Navy as a little memento and feel like you are one of us whilst you are here
You can see the names on the photo in this article on Navy dress.
As anyone with a shred of common sense would have realised immediately, unless they think Boris goes around in luminous stripes as a fashion statement.
I suppose in the same situation Nick Palmer and Cyclefree would have taken one look at this thoughtful gesture and demanded a plain jacket because the PM one wouldn't go down well on Twitter.
Well, no. I’ve no reason to suppose that when you visit the navy you get given such a jacket. I have never seen the equivalent on any of our previous PMs. Have you?
Given how badly Boris dresses I don’t think you can conclude anything from his fashion sense or lack of it.
But if this was not his choice but given to him - and he was wearing it out of politeness to his hosts - then I’m happy to withdraw the suggestion that it reflects badly on him.
Oh - and goodnight.
And I agree, if it's his jacket, he's a pillock. Night.
Is it anti Irish to suggest someone who happens to be Irish is not bright? I mean really?
No. However, a qualified doctor who speaks five languages, is probably a poor choice of target.
I have NO experience of the man. He could be Ireland's answer to Machiavelli for all I know. But booksmarts don't necessarily equal political nouse.
Apparently Varadkar's backstop strategy is polling badly in Ireland. So it's hardly inconceivable that him 'blinking' is part of the way forward.
Not arguing with you man. There are various classifications of "bright", if it were the only criterion we'd,have had Stephen Hawking or some such as PM. Corbyn is not book smart, but possesses a degree of political cunning. He wouldn't be LOTO if he didn't. John Major, too. So. Maybe we can agree that perhaps Varadkar could be described as "politically lacking", rather than "not bright".
Various people involved in Irish politics I have spoken to consider him smart but arrogant and unwilling to take wider perspectives. A fairly common failing. My suspicion is he doesn't see the rug about to be pulled from under him.
Pedant point. If you want to use a telescope then it’s probably large but a long way away, and what you’re seeing is what it was like a long time ago. So for Corbyn’s Labour you’re probably correct then.
Bernie Sanders was one of the people criticising Donald Trump for likening Baltimore to a third-world county. It turns out he said exactly the same thing in 2015.
Pedant point. If you want to use a telescope then it’s probably large but a long way away, and what you’re seeing is what it was like a long time ago. So for Corbyn’s Labour you’re probably correct then.
Otoh Brian Cox is a particle physicist so is used to looking at very small things.
Whether a supporter of one political party (aka Jezza's whacko cultists) criticising a rival party counts as news is another question. There is a danger pb could be filled with "Bozzer's whacko cultists have a pop at Jezza's whacko cultists" posts.
As above, if the Union is to continue to have relevance, we need grands projets and initiatives like the one Ethiopia has managed.
God knows why you think you are the person to comment on strengthening the Union.
It is like getting a lecture on the importance of marital fidelity from Boris Johnson.
A start might be to try and avoid your casual racism. Try to get your facts right when talking about Scotland. And try not to talk about dunghills and mud huts when talking about Wales.
We can move onto the grand projects that your munificence will bestow after you have got the simple stuff right.
As I’ve told you before, my references to dung hills etc relate to you personally, not “the Welsh”.
I make them because you keep pearl-clutching whenever someone mentions they live close to a supermarket or go to the theatre; you have a tantrum and call them a metropolitan elitist.
I thereby deduce you must live in some kind of mud hut (albeit one you have rigged up with an internet connection).
Many people live a long way from supermarket or theatre. It doesn't follow that they live in a shit-hole.
Dunghills in the Valleys, mud huts in Lampeter, the wild and backward Welsh speaking their gibberish, ....
Keep your 250 million trees that you want to plant in Wales to strengthen the Union,.
Just try and see if you can avoid ugly racial caricatures in future.
Under the Learning and Skills Council it had been turned into a teacher training centre, where Welsh was dinned into the skulls of graduates, with a view to passing on this weird creole to the listless children of Denbighshire. Boris Johnson, in his novel, 72 Virgins.
Hardly “polling badly” and many of the people who are not satisfied want him to be tougher.
I thought you'd probably note that. Boris would probably quite like 43% to approve of his handling of Brexit. However, it is doqn from the 60's so I'd say confidence is eroding pretty fast.
Comments
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/mar/18/royal-navy-trial-new-uniform
You can see the names on the photo in this article on Navy dress.
An effective lawyer speaks truth to power - and that means his/her client - and realises that their integrity (and therefore the confidence that the client and everyone else can place in them) is the single most important thing about them.
Raab is being flagrantly dishonest. He knows that this government has no mandate for a No Deal exit - for an exit, yes - but not on No Deal terms and he simply lies about what he said on this both before and after the referendum. He degrades public life - as well as his own reputation - by behaving in this way. It ought to be a matter for censure and shame. That it isn't - especially by a party keen on law and order - is in itself shaming.
But apart from probably being unbelievably pompous on this (not that I care - it's important) I am making the mistake of thinking that the current Tory party cares about such things.
Simply telling people that we would consider no deal is not a plan.
I am talking about the public's perception of each party
Amazing how none of our previous PMs needed to be identified in this way. What can their personal protection officers have been thinking?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/29/what-vote-leave-leaders-really-said-about-no-deal-brexit
From a PR stand point that is good politics
If you are happy with dishonesty, fine. You have a choice of three highly dishonest parties.
Given his attitude towards climate change, it’s the planet that might be facing meltdown in the event of a Trump being re-elected...
1) A deal is needed, crashing out without one would be really, really bad
2) The deal should be put to a referendum, because not all the voters' previous expectations can be met and when they see what they're actually getting the voters may prefer to stay
3) Lab will decide what side they recommend in the referendum when they know what kind of deal they'll get
Although (3) is obviously disappointing to enthusiasts on either side I think it makes logical sense. It's slightly weird to say you'll negotiate a deal then campaign to reject it no matter what it is, especially if the justification for the referendum is that the details of the deal affect whether you want to do it or not.
Less of the latter now
Reagan is talking about a new Europe as a democratic community. It sounds more like a celebration of the liberation of Eastern Europe from Soviet control.
We would need to have more context than the 1 minute 29 seconds provided to be sure of what Reagan actually means here.
So if the Democrats dump Biden in favour of Warren or Harris you may have to cope with a re elected President Trump I am afraid
https://www.scribd.com/document/419763495/Fox-News-Poll-July-25
https://twitter.com/PropertySpot/status/1154754040624029696
"I believe that there's a change in weather and I think it changes both ways," Mr Trump told Piers Morgan in an interview that aired on Wednesday.'
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-48531019
I'm not sure if they've *explicitly* ruled out a No Deal option but they've said nothing to the contrary, and it would be weird to have one given (1).
Every good lawyer knows this in their bones. If they don't they have no business being a lawyer. The fact that some lawyers fall short of this does not make it any less true or important.
Up for the fight is Boris.
Now, I am sceptical of their figures, but can you imagine this country attempting something on so grand a scale? The paperwork and planning permission would take years. Not to mention furious press controversy.
The government could try and mitigate some or all of this damage by spending lots of money on farmers. How likely is this? It's not what was on the side of the bus. The farming population is pretty small - and the areas which will be hardest hit are not ones the Tories care about.
The idea that Brexit on a No Deal basis will be good for farmers is so much hot air from Boris.
Doubtless it will be lapped up by his fans and uncritical / credulous journalists.
It is like getting a lecture on the importance of marital fidelity from Boris Johnson.
A start might be to try and avoid your casual racism. Try to get your facts right when talking about Scotland. And try not to talk about dunghills and mud huts when talking about Wales.
We can move onto the grand projects that your munificence will bestow after you have got the simple stuff right.
No-deal is part of a treaty, is stated policy, has been contemplated and permitted by referendum, considered by judiciary, and has been expressly authorised by parliament. Raab flapping about like a meat piñata just gives succour to the continuity remain campaign's nonsensical pretence that other options are more valid.
https://twitter.com/tahir4tahir/status/1155876037223428096?s=21
It’s just a shame that, as @Cyclefree points out, the media don’t hold him to account.
Think supply and demand.
I make them because you keep pearl-clutching whenever someone mentions they live close to a supermarket or go to the theatre; you have a tantrum and call them a metropolitan elitist.
I thereby deduce you must live in some kind of mud hut (albeit one you have rigged up with an internet connection).
PS I am a quarter Welsh and a quarter Scots.
I think your other explanation, that it wasn't his doing but sewn on by some dotty super-fan, is a lot more likely.
So I am not feeling the outrage of it as being 'anti-Irish' since it seems to be an attitude of contempt held universally in these negotiations.
Ouch.
Campbell had planned to fight his expulsion from Labour for revealing that he voted Liberal Democrat in the European elections, but he has now written to Corbyn informing him: “With some sadness but absolute certainty, I have reached the conclusion that I no longer wish to stay in the party, even if I should be successful in my appeal or legal challenge.'
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/29/alastair-campbell-says-he-no-longer-wishes-to-be-a-labour-member
Dunghills in the Valleys, mud huts in Lampeter, the wild and backward Welsh speaking their gibberish, ....
Keep your 250 million trees that you want to plant in Wales to strengthen the Union,.
Just try and see if you can avoid ugly racial caricatures in future.
If Boris wins the next general election and Labour sticks with Corbyn or Corbynism there is a strong possibility in my view by the subsequent general election the LDs will have overtaken Labour as the main party of the centre left, with Labour reduced to socialists and patches of the inner cities.
In the European elections the SNP beat Labour in Scotland, Plaid beat Labour in Wales and the LDs beat Labour in England, there was a warning there Labour has not listened to unlike the Tories who picked Boris to win back voters lost to the Brexit Party
Apparently Varadkar's backstop strategy is polling badly in Ireland. So it's hardly inconceivable that him 'blinking' is part of the way forward.
But it was not the argument Raab was making. He was saying that the government had a mandate because he had been going round talking about a No Deal exit before the referendum when there is no evidence of this and there is evidence of him saying the complete opposite after the result ie that the result was not a mandate for No Deal.
So he is both dim and a liar.
And our Foreign Secretary. God help us.
I suppose in the same situation Nick Palmer and Cyclefree would have taken one look at this thoughtful gesture and demanded a plain jacket because the PM one wouldn't go down well on Twitter.
Given how badly Boris dresses I don’t think you can conclude anything from his fashion sense or lack of it.
But if this was not his choice but given to him - and he was wearing it out of politeness to his hosts - then I’m happy to withdraw the suggestion that it reflects badly on him.
Oh - and goodnight.
The tiny circle of acceptable, shiny happy, auomated marxist futurists is now so small we will need Brian Cox and some telescopes to locate it.
https://twitter.com/gunnergee/status/1155882373277519877
"William Hague: Boris Johnson's greatest challenge is to deliver Brexit without breaking the Union" - Telegraph
Pretty much sums up my feelings on the matter...
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/jul/28/bernie-sanders-compared-baltimore-third-world-coun/
Whether a supporter of one political party (aka Jezza's whacko cultists) criticising a rival party counts as news is another question. There is a danger pb could be filled with "Bozzer's whacko cultists have a pop at Jezza's whacko cultists" posts.
Boris Johnson, in his novel, 72 Virgins.