Unskilled working class DE voters voted for Brexit in 2016 they also voted for Corbyn Labour in 2017, it was skilled working class C2 voters who voted for both Brexit and the Tories in 2017
So the people most likely to vote for Boris in 2019 are those who will be worst hit by a No Deal Brexit.
No as the Boris voting skilled working class would benefit most strongly from tighter immigration controls increasing their wages, it would be the Corbyn voting poor most hit by No Deal (though Boris still wants the Deal minus the backstop)
That Boris Johnson "oyster card" tweet, so eagerly repeated by the slavish Scott P, is an intriguing example of social media fake news.
It is almost completely wrong. Boris is clearly referring to contactless cards (while explaining to the interviewer that = oyster cards). Boris is entirely right that he oversaw their introduction from 2012 on.
Yet this provably erroneous tweet claiming that he lied, already has 2k likes and endless retweets: it has gone viral. And thus a new meme enters the political sphere, spun from falsehoods.
Both sides do it.
It's hardly the worst thing he's ever done, and it may well be an honest error, but it isn't true that he introduced Oyster Cards on buses. As explained below, debit and credit cards in 2012, but Oyster contactless cards in 2004, pre-Boris.
No, that's wrong. Contactless didn't even EXIST, as a UK retail thing, until about 2008.
Contactless payments on the Tube, bus etc were rolled out from 2012
"Contactless cards can be used on London Buses (End of 2012) Cash no longer accepted on buses. Cash ticket machines removed from bus stops in central London (Summer 2014)[79] Contactless cards can be used on London Underground, Docklands Light Railway, London Overground and National Rail service. Weekly capping introduced on contactless cards. (September 2014) Apple Pay, Android Pay and Samsung Pay accepted. (September 2014)"
While I agree with that, it is troubling that we have an asymmetric situation
Charlotte Easton (?) could have made these allegations public - or complained to the police - at any point in the last 20 years.
She could have done so during the #metoo campaign a couple of years ago
And yet she chooses to make a word-against-word allegation at a time it will draw the most attention and thereby benefit her career the most while potentially damaging the accused the most
That doesn’t seem equitable to me.
What is not equitable is that women have to fight to be heard. Many a woman over the years has had allegations dismissed so that a powerful man's reputation is not besmirched.
#meToo came into existence because women are often highly disadvantaged in these situations. Whilst some men have been assaulted by women, the vast majority of assaults is the other way round.
That doesn’t seem equitable to me - but I do not want men to achieve equality of assault. I would just like to get through the day without having my a*se grabbed.
Any you should absolutely have the right to get through the day without that happening.
Equally innocent men (there may be some) should have the right to defend themselves without suffering the reputational damage of a public accusation
Unskilled working class DE voters voted for Brexit in 2016 they also voted for Corbyn Labour in 2017, it was skilled working class C2 voters who voted for both Brexit and the Tories in 2017
What demographic voted remain (2016) and then Conservative (2017)?
Upper middle class ABs, the demographic the LDs now poll most strongly in
And are you, as an upper middle class AB, thinking of joining the LDs?
One rarely commented upon aspect of this is that it will tend to drag the LDs to the libertarian and fiscally conservative right, and away from the social democrat left over time. Just as the Conservatives move into the economically and culturally conservative space; the LDs will move into the equivalent liberal space.
I suspect they’ll become much more like the Free Democrats in Germany.
They certainly were in the Coalition years but to win most seats the LDs need to be more soft left Chuka Umunna than libertarian, fiscally conservative David Laws even if in both cases not as left as Corbyn Labour or as culturally conservative as the Tories
Yes, that's much more sensible. There's a little pocket around Eastbourne which gets 1900 hours of sun a year - almost Mediterranean. Meanwhile, parts of western Scotland get under 900 hours a year, which is on a par, for bleakness, with southwestern Alaska.
Byronic, have a look at Ayrshire here, just to clear up your misconceptions, we don't have palm trees here for nothing.
Parts of the north west can have average annual sunshine totals of between 700 and 1,000 hours, while parts of Angus, Fife, the Lothians, Ayrshire, and Dumfries and Galloway average over 1,400 hours of sunshine per year. Scotland's sunniest city is Dundee.
Boris is charming, fun, reasonably intelligent, famous and very wealthy. Which is why he is so good at courtship. He is out of shape, but not so much (yet!) as to become repulsive. However he does have serious personality problems (see previous posts) which is why all his relationships have ended badly and his previous partners do not speak well of him. It is possible that Boris will be lonely in old age.
Conversely, Farage is not attractive and while not actually repulsive he is in the category of men who are not the first choice physically. However he has fewer personality problems and better personal characteristics, which is why his relationships are longer and has fewer regretful ex-partners. Provided you're willing to overlook his poorer looks and you share his prejudices, Farage is the better bet.
Astute post. I would probably prefer Boris Johnson for a fling but when it comes to settling down into a serious relationship it would be Nigel Farage over him all day long. I imagine most people feel the same.
Boris is charming, fun, reasonably intelligent, famous and very wealthy. Which is why he is so good at courtship. He is out of shape, but not so much (yet!) as to become repulsive. However he does have serious personality problems (see previous posts) which is why all his relationships have ended badly and his previous partners do not speak well of him. It is possible that Boris will be lonely in old age.
Conversely, Farage is not attractive and while not actually repulsive he is in the category of men who are not the first choice physically. However he has fewer personality problems and better personal characteristics, which is why his relationships are longer and has fewer regretful ex-partners. Provided you're willing to overlook his poorer looks and you share his prejudices, Farage is the better bet.
Astute post. I would probably prefer Boris Johnson for a fling but when it comes to settling down into a serious relationship it would be Nigel Farage over him all day long. I imagine most people feel the same.
Boris is charming, fun, reasonably intelligent, famous and very wealthy. Which is why he is so good at courtship. He is out of shape, but not so much (yet!) as to become repulsive. However he does have serious personality problems (see previous posts) which is why all his relationships have ended badly and his previous partners do not speak well of him. It is possible that Boris will be lonely in old age.
Conversely, Farage is not attractive and while not actually repulsive he is in the category of men who are not the first choice physically. However he has fewer personality problems and better personal characteristics, which is why his relationships are longer and has fewer regretful ex-partners. Provided you're willing to overlook his poorer looks and you share his prejudices, Farage is the better bet.
Astute post. I would probably prefer Boris Johnson for a fling but when it comes to settling down into a serious relationship it would be Nigel Farage over him all day long. I imagine most people feel the same.
Boris would take you to Aruba but Nige is the man to get planning permission for your art studio in the garden
Life is not fair. 20 years ago no-one cared about this stuff. No-one really cared 5 years ago.
I regret to say, I suspect a huge amount of people TODAY don't care. People haven't really changed all that much from the 1970s. I do believe people are getting better, but this isn't something that really changes over a few years. Its a century long issue that'll take forever to properly work itself out.
Boris is charming, fun, reasonably intelligent, famous and very wealthy. Which is why he is so good at courtship. He is out of shape, but not so much (yet!) as to become repulsive. However he does have serious personality problems (see previous posts) which is why all his relationships have ended badly and his previous partners do not speak well of him. It is possible that Boris will be lonely in old age.
Conversely, Farage is not attractive and while not actually repulsive he is in the category of men who are not the first choice physically. However he has fewer personality problems and better personal characteristics, which is why his relationships are longer and has fewer regretful ex-partners. Provided you're willing to overlook his poorer looks and you share his prejudices, Farage is the better bet.
Astute post. I would probably prefer Boris Johnson for a fling but when it comes to settling down into a serious relationship it would be Nigel Farage over him all day long. I imagine most people feel the same.
Boris would take you to Aruba but Nige is the man to get planning permission for your art studio in the garden
Or you could go for Nick Clegg and the looks and the money
I don’t think so. The women Boris dates/snogs/Marries weren’t cleaning toilets for £6ph before he met them. I’d say they have their choice of millionaires in the circles in which they mix. Thrice married Jeremy Corbyn obviously has something too, and Farage. None of them ostensibly attractive to my eye, but all attract many women... and at the top of the tree in their chosen career. I’d say it’s because they are beguiling characters
If I recall correctly, you're an estate agent (or have I mixed you up with someone else? Apols if I have). Given that, I assume you're familiar with the concept of "trading up".
Boris is charming, fun, reasonably intelligent, famous and very wealthy. Which is why he is so good at courtship. He is out of shape, but not so much (yet!) as to become repulsive. However he does have serious personality problems (see previous posts) which is why all his relationships have ended badly and his previous partners do not speak well of him. It is possible that Boris will be lonely in old age.
Conversely, Farage is not attractive and while not actually repulsive he is in the category of men who are not the first choice physically. However he has fewer personality problems and better personal characteristics, which is why his relationships are longer and has fewer regretful ex-partners. Provided you're willing to overlook his poorer looks and you share his prejudices, Farage is the better bet.
No I’m not an estate agent, you’ve mixed me up with someone else.
Boris is charming, fun, reasonably intelligent, famous and very wealthy. Which is why he is so good at courtship. He is out of shape, but not so much (yet!) as to become repulsive. However he does have serious personality problems (see previous posts) which is why all his relationships have ended badly and his previous partners do not speak well of him. It is possible that Boris will be lonely in old age.
Conversely, Farage is not attractive and while not actually repulsive he is in the category of men who are not the first choice physically. However he has fewer personality problems and better personal characteristics, which is why his relationships are longer and has fewer regretful ex-partners. Provided you're willing to overlook his poorer looks and you share his prejudices, Farage is the better bet.
Astute post. I would probably prefer Boris Johnson for a fling but when it comes to settling down into a serious relationship it would be Nigel Farage over him all day long. I imagine most people feel the same.
Boris would take you to Aruba but Nige is the man to get planning permission for your art studio in the garden
Or you could go for Nick Clegg and the looks and the money
Or Jeremy for that musty old man smell that drives you wild
Mr. B, tough on crime's popular, but even as it stands the prison service needs more resources. Increasing effective sentence times just exacerbates that.
All Boris Johnson's approach amounts to is throwing money at everything hoping people will like him. It's idiotic. He'll live or die by the EU, not by splurging money up the wall and helping to legitimise Corbynite drunken spending.
Yes, that's much more sensible. There's a little pocket around Eastbourne which gets 1900 hours of sun a year - almost Mediterranean. Meanwhile, parts of western Scotland get under 900 hours a year, which is on a par, for bleakness, with southwestern Alaska.
Byronic, have a look at Ayrshire here, just to clear up your misconceptions, we don't have palm trees here for nothing.
Parts of the north west can have average annual sunshine totals of between 700 and 1,000 hours, while parts of Angus, Fife, the Lothians, Ayrshire, and Dumfries and Galloway average over 1,400 hours of sunshine per year. Scotland's sunniest city is Dundee.
I have spent many hours freezing my bollocks off or getting wet through in Dundee. The thought that it's Scotland's sunniest city truly is a bleak one. It does have a beautiful view of Fife though.
Whilst it’s probably rarer for a man I can confirm that having one’s bottom pinched is not unique to the female gender.
When i was in my first week at university, the lad who had the room next to me had his girlfriend come to stay. We were sat in a nightclub and she kept running her hand up the inside of my leg! He was sat next to her at the table but i dont think he noticed! I dont think they were swingers and he had told me in the weeks before he met her he had put a loaded gun in his mouth but cried instead of pulling the trigger! She even later gave me a valentine card in person when he was not there! He is now a multi-millionaire and still with her and I am surviving...
If women and girls reported every sexual assault, however minor, to the police, they’d be doing little else from about the age of 12 onwards. And doubtless they’d be criticised for diverting the police from “more important” crimes and/or accused of being hysterical about trivial matters. It is beyond tiresome that women have to - as a matter of routine in pretty much all walks of life - put up with chimpanzee-like behaviour from men of all types. It’d be quite nice if they’d grow up and learn some more civilized mating techniques.
Depressingly, I doubt all these stories will affect peoples’ views of Boris one bit: that he’s a priapic liar is priced in. His opponents are making the same mistake as those thinking that all those IRA stories would harm Corbyn during the last GE. Something more than “Boris is a lech” is needed.
While I agree with that, it is troubling that we have an asymmetric situation
Charlotte Easton (?) could have made these allegations public - or complained to the police - at any point in the last 20 years.
She could have done so during the #metoo campaign a couple of years ago
And yet she chooses to make a word-against-word allegation at a time it will draw the most attention and thereby benefit her career the most while potentially damaging the accused the most
That doesn’t seem equitable to me.
Oh, Charles; in the nicest possible manner, genuinely, do grow up!
Life is not fair. 20 years ago no-one cared about this stuff. No-one really cared 5 years ago. People like Boris got away with such behaviour because no-one cared, because they had power and women didn’t. So women put up with it. And when they are in a position to get their own back, some of them do.
Of course, it’s not fair. But it’s also not fair for women to have to put up with gross behaviour that would shame any decent man. So if a man doesn’t want journalists bringing up such stories when it is inconvenient or embarrassing perhaps he might try not behaving like a rutting oaf. Just a thought.
Boris is a unique case, because people believe the reputational impact is "priced in"
But there are cases from time to time of men falsely accused of rape.
By the time they are cleared their reputations have been traduced.
Yes, that's much more sensible. There's a little pocket around Eastbourne which gets 1900 hours of sun a year - almost Mediterranean. Meanwhile, parts of western Scotland get under 900 hours a year, which is on a par, for bleakness, with southwestern Alaska.
Byronic, have a look at Ayrshire here, just to clear up your misconceptions, we don't have palm trees here for nothing.
Parts of the north west can have average annual sunshine totals of between 700 and 1,000 hours, while parts of Angus, Fife, the Lothians, Ayrshire, and Dumfries and Galloway average over 1,400 hours of sunshine per year. Scotland's sunniest city is Dundee.
Unskilled working class DE voters voted for Brexit in 2016 they also voted for Corbyn Labour in 2017, it was skilled working class C2 voters who voted for both Brexit and the Tories in 2017
What demographic voted remain (2016) and then Conservative (2017)?
Upper middle class ABs, the demographic the LDs now poll most strongly in
And are you, as an upper middle class AB, thinking of joining the LDs?
One rarely commented upon aspect of this is that it will tend to drag the LDs to the libertarian and fiscally conservative right, and away from the social democrat left over time. Just as the Conservatives move into the economically and culturally conservative space; the LDs will move into the equivalent liberal space.
I suspect they’ll become much more like the Free Democrats in Germany.
I believe the social liberals are already worrying about this.
It’s either that or the LDs don’t hoover up those soft Tory Remain votes in the South.
The social (democratic) liberals will probably decant to the Greens/Labour over time, I’d have thought.
Here's hoping. They're mostly hangovers from the day when Labour was too establishment.
Unskilled working class DE voters voted for Brexit in 2016 they also voted for Corbyn Labour in 2017, it was skilled working class C2 voters who voted for both Brexit and the Tories in 2017
What demographic voted remain (2016) and then Conservative (2017)?
Upper middle class ABs, the demographic the LDs now poll most strongly in
And are you, as an upper middle class AB, thinking of joining the LDs?
One rarely commented upon aspect of this is that it will tend to drag the LDs to the libertarian and fiscally conservative right, and away from the social democrat left over time. Just as the Conservatives move into the economically and culturally conservative space; the LDs will move into the equivalent liberal space.
I suspect they’ll become much more like the Free Democrats in Germany.
They certainly were in the Coalition years but to win most seats the LDs need to be more soft left Chuka Umunna than libertarian, fiscally conservative David Laws even if in both cases not as left as Corbyn Labour or as culturally conservative as the Tories
Boris is completely right, and "Steve Anglesey" is a tit
"Contactless payments were first launched on London's buses in December 2012. TfL (Transport for London) states that each day there are around 69,000 payments made using contactless on London Buses."
Next.
Next, you're wrong.
Oyster Cards were introduced in buses in 2004. Contactless debit and credit cards as an alternative to Oyster in 2012.
No, he obviously means contactless, and says that, but for the better understanding of the interviewer he contextualises it as meaning Oyster.
Only someone utterly determined to hate him and disbelieve him could interpret it any other way. However, he has lots of people who DO hate him and disbelieve him, even when he is right, so I guess he just has to live with the political weather he helped to create.
Yeah, if you think it was misleading it's just because you don't realise that all the words he was saying meant different words.
Yes, that's much more sensible. There's a little pocket around Eastbourne which gets 1900 hours of sun a year - almost Mediterranean. Meanwhile, parts of western Scotland get under 900 hours a year, which is on a par, for bleakness, with southwestern Alaska.
Byronic, have a look at Ayrshire here, just to clear up your misconceptions, we don't have palm trees here for nothing.
Parts of the north west can have average annual sunshine totals of between 700 and 1,000 hours, while parts of Angus, Fife, the Lothians, Ayrshire, and Dumfries and Galloway average over 1,400 hours of sunshine per year. Scotland's sunniest city is Dundee.
Sure (I like Ayrshire), but 700 hours of sun a year is shockingly bad. It's roughly on a par with the Faroe Isles, or the most miserable part of Colombia - Totoro (where it is infamously cloudy year round). 700 hours of sun a year makes western Scotland one of the most sunless places on the entire planet. By contrast, much of Antarctica (a cold desert) gets ~3500 hours.
It's amazing we don't have a higher suicide rate. Thank God for decent scotch whisky.
Unskilled working class DE voters voted for Brexit in 2016 they also voted for Corbyn Labour in 2017, it was skilled working class C2 voters who voted for both Brexit and the Tories in 2017
What demographic voted remain (2016) and then Conservative (2017)?
Upper middle class ABs, the demographic the LDs now poll most strongly in
And are you, as an upper middle class AB, thinking of joining the LDs?
One rarely commented upon aspect of this is that it will tend to drag the LDs to the libertarian and fiscally conservative right, and away from the social democrat left over time. Just as the Conservatives move into the economically and culturally conservative space; the LDs will move into the equivalent liberal space.
I suspect they’ll become much more like the Free Democrats in Germany.
I believe the social liberals are already worrying about this.
Hey, I'm well up for being on the left flank of a broad church centrist / liberal party. As one admires certain politicians across party lines through Brexit, you increasingly come to hope that a Centrist refoundation is possible. I'll even bring along my little stripe of traditionalism and Euro-pragmatism to the table if they really want.
In the historical child abuse cases there is an argument, especially where the alleged perpetrator was deceased, there was little purpose to a public investigation where there could be no reasonable debate. While the language is "colourful" I don't see the grounds for apology.
Similar, with the Cox comments, her husband explicitly criticised Corbyn. I would argue that to best honour Cox's memory you need to resolve Brexit and then you can begin the healing process. If you retread the old arguments then you can't move to the next stage.
I don’t think so. The women Boris dates/snogs/Marries weren’t cleaning toilets for £6ph before he met them. I’d say they have their choice of millionaires in the circles in which they mix. Thrice married Jeremy Corbyn obviously has something too, and Farage. None of them ostensibly attractive to my eye, but all attract many women... and at the top of the tree in their chosen career. I’d say it’s because they are beguiling characters
If I recall correctly, you're an estate agent (or have I mixed you up with someone else? Apols if I have). Given that, I assume you're familiar with the concept of "trading up".
Boris is charming, fun, reasonably intelligent, famous and very wealthy. Which is why he is so good at courtship. He is out of shape, but not so much (yet!) as to become repulsive. However he does have serious personality problems (see previous posts) which is why all his relationships have ended badly and his previous partners do not speak well of him. It is possible that Boris will be lonely in old age.
Conversely, Farage is not attractive and while not actually repulsive he is in the category of men who are not the first choice physically. However he has fewer personality problems and better personal characteristics, which is why his relationships are longer and has fewer regretful ex-partners. Provided you're willing to overlook his poorer looks and you share his prejudices, Farage is the better bet.
No I’m not an estate agent, you’ve mixed me up with someone else.
Earlier this year I was sat next to a consultant radiologist at a dinner. We had an erudite and far-reaching conversation on cancer treatment.
Then, all of a sudden, she announced she had joined the Conservative Party "in order to vote for Boris". Her enthusiasm for him was positively gushing and almost adolescent. "Giggling" was the nearest adjective I could come up with. A complete transformation from sober professional to star-struck groupie.
This is why the opposition parties have a Johnson problem. "Excitement" is priced in. Sadly. His support is based on him being interesting/funny and delivering Brexit.
The fact of the matter is that Boris oozes sex, and certain men and women can become highly energized by someone with this trait. I suspect Boris's thigh-fondling antics actually work for him more times than not. It's only when he misreads his target that he falls flat on his face, but he'll probably regard that as a mere occupational hazard.
“Oozes sex” - I realise I am not his target audience but he seems to me to have all the sex appeal of a boiled potato in a suit. He also looks as if he doesn’t wash often enough.
I'm also minded of the "wardrobe with the key left in the lock" comment.
Is there any chance that Boris is playing this straight? That is he doesn't have a cunning plan to avoid the Benn bill and isn't being an idiot by pretending he has, but simply wants to give the message to Europe that he will leave with no deal (even though he can't) so appears to the EU of putting himself in the position that he claims the Benn bill has ruined for him of threatening the EU with a no deal.
I wouldn't refer to a big old bluff like that as "playing it straight" but yeah, that's probably part of what he's doing.
The other part would be that he's committed to the deadline, and can't think of a good way to back down, so he's just sticking with the previous message and hoping something lucky happens.
Boris is a unique case, because people believe the reputational impact is "priced in"
But there are cases from time to time of men falsely accused of rape.
By the time they are cleared their reputations have been traduced.
Are you happy with that?
Nobody should be happy when that happens. We should also be concerned that only a tiny fraction of rapes reported lead to a conviction. Which, given that many are not reported, means that the vast majority of perpetrators of this serious crime against the person go unpunished.
In the historical child abuse cases there is an argument, especially where the alleged perpetrator was deceased, there was little purpose to a public investigation where there could be no reasonable debate. While the language is "colourful" I don't see the grounds for apology.
Similar, with the Cox comments, her husband explicitly criticised Corbyn. I would argue that to best honour Cox's memory you need to resolve Brexit and then you can begin the healing process. If you retread the old arguments then you can't move to the next stage.
I cannot begin to comprehend the logic leads someone to believe that the best way to honour the memory of someone who vigorously campaigned against something is to do that thing.
Unskilled working class DE voters voted for Brexit in 2016 they also voted for Corbyn Labour in 2017, it was skilled working class C2 voters who voted for both Brexit and the Tories in 2017
What demographic voted remain (2016) and then Conservative (2017)?
Upper middle class ABs, the demographic the LDs now poll most strongly in
And are you, as an upper middle class AB, thinking of joining the LDs?
One rarely commented upon aspect of this is that it will tend to drag the LDs to the libertarian and fiscally conservative right, and away from the social democrat left over time. Just as the Conservatives move into the economically and culturally conservative space; the LDs will move into the equivalent liberal space.
I suspect they’ll become much more like the Free Democrats in Germany.
A good post.
As someone on the libertarian wing and would probably be considered an Orange Booker I have no issue with the more Social Democrat wing of the party. I think we fit together well. However I may be blinkered and maybe they don't feel the same about me!
Why? So you can invent a law that makes it illegal?
Pesky laws, eh?
When parliament starts trying to act as the executive it's time to peg them back.
You can’t. The executive is subordinate to Parliament, which is sovereign, and can make whatever laws it likes (theoretically).
I'm referring to the sovereign electorate pegging them back
I’ve heard the phrase a lot but so far as I am aware the electorate isn’t sovereign. Parliament can, after all, decide who is an elector. If you mean there should be a GE, just say so, but unfortunately the executive agreed to surrender the timing of the same to Parliament.
When parliament is dissolved sovereignty is placed back to the electorate who then determine the composition of the following sovereign parliament.
News to me. Can you give me a citation for that? Here’s mine -
Parliament means, in the mouth of a lawyer (though the word has often a different sense in conversation) the King, the House of Lords, and the House of Commons: these three bodies acting together may be aptly described as the "King in Parliament", and constitute Parliament. The principle of Parliamentary sovereignty means neither more nor less than this, namely that Parliament thus defined has, under the English constitution, the right to make or unmake any law whatever: and, further, that no person or body is recognised by the law of England as having a right to override or set aside the legislation of Parliament.
— A.V. Dicey Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution (1885)
The monarch is never dissolved, at least not yet, so Parliament always exists and is thus always sovereign as one bit of it is always there.
Heavens, I wasn't aware that the Cons had significant numbers of 'flakey, pretend socialist MPs' amongst their ranks. I guess by PD's observation that they must all be BAME and/or women so they must be easy to identify.
I actually think it's pretty offensive to moderate Muslims to claim attacking the niqab is attacking Islam. The face veil is a cultural custom not used by the vast majority of Muslim women.
It will invite every single woman who ever worked for the Spectator to comment now, but go on, laugh it up.
With all due respect Scott I doubt you've ever spoken to a woman in your life with the exception of your mother. We're not all po-faced about these things!
Heavens, I wasn't aware that the Cons had significant numbers of 'flakey, pretend socialist MPs' amongst their ranks. I guess by PD's observation that they must all be BAME and/or women so they must be easy to identify.
In the historical child abuse cases there is an argument, especially where the alleged perpetrator was deceased, there was little purpose to a public investigation where there could be no reasonable debate. While the language is "colourful" I don't see the grounds for apology.
Similar, with the Cox comments, her husband explicitly criticised Corbyn. I would argue that to best honour Cox's memory you need to resolve Brexit and then you can begin the healing process. If you retread the old arguments then you can't move to the next stage.
I cannot begin to comprehend the logic leads someone to believe that the best way to honour the memory of someone who vigorously campaigned against something is to do that thing.
If anybody doesn't see why Boris Johnson's comments were offensively idiotic, try the following instead: "the best way to honour Ian Gow would be to have a border poll in Northern Ireland".
It would be extremely tasteless. That's not to say there's anything wrong with Brexit or a border poll -- you can argue for or against either -- but to wheel in a murder victim on one side of the debate to support the other side is utterly gross.
It will invite every single woman who ever worked for the Spectator to comment now, but go on, laugh it up.
With all due respect Scott I doubt you've ever spoken to a woman in your life with the exception of your mother. We're not all po-faced about these things!
Sexual harassment... hahaha... it is so funny. Only a miserable sod would have a problem with it!
don't pretend you know the female anatomy Scotty. Though I'm not surprised you've got behind a handful of folk frothing outrage on twitter. That's your bread and butter.
Possibly touched a thigh 20 years ago and we've just been told of it now. Blokes up and down the country will be bricking it!
I actually think it's pretty offensive to moderate Muslims to claim attacking the niqab is attacking Islam. The face veil is a cultural custom not used by the vast majority of Muslim women.
If you or anyone have an issue with the niqab because women are "forced to wear it" your issue is not with the niqab, but the forcing bit. Just as you should be offended if women from evangelical Christian communities are forced to cover themselves, or if orthodox Jewish women are forced to cover themselves. The issue is not the piece of clothing: we live in a liberal democracy where people can wear what they like, the issue is anyone, specifically historically oppressed groups like women, being forced to do things they don't want to do.
If your issue is women are wearing clothes of their own free will you dislike, well, tough.
Why? So you can invent a law that makes it illegal?
Pesky laws, eh?
When parliament starts trying to act as the executive it's time to peg them back.
You can’t. The executive is subordinate to Parliament, which is sovereign, and can make whatever laws it likes (theoretically).
I'm referring to the sovereign electorate pegging them back
I’ve heard the phrase a lot but so far as I am aware the electorate isn’t sovereign. Parliament can, after all, decide who is an elector. If you mean there should be a GE, just say so, but unfortunately the executive agreed to surrender the timing of the same to Parliament.
don't pretend you know the female anatomy Scotty. Though I'm not surprised you've got behind a handful of folk frothing outrage on twitter. That's your bread and butter.
Possibly touched a thigh 20 years ago and we've just been told of it now. Blokes up and down the country will be bricking it!
Women are entitled to follow careers in journalism without being groped. The sort of men who don't understand how you can flirt without crossing boundaries are pretty inept in holding down relationships in general.
I see the Boris camp have managed to unearth a woman who is prepared to testify that she has NOT had her thigh groped by him.
Compelling at first sight - but then one discovers that this fortunate unmolested female is the wife of Dominic Cummings, the PM's chief adviser.
Rather too convenient methinks.
She was being rumored as the 'other woman' in the story, shes clarifying she isn't and that in her time at the Spectator and since, Charlotte had never brought this up in their convos. Her husband is as relevant as Edwardes partner being the well known Boris hater Robert Peston
I actually think it's pretty offensive to moderate Muslims to claim attacking the niqab is attacking Islam. The face veil is a cultural custom not used by the vast majority of Muslim women.
If you or anyone have an issue with the niqab because women are "forced to wear it" your issue is not with the niqab, but the forcing bit. Just as you should be offended if women from evangelical Christian communities are forced to cover themselves, or if orthodox Jewish women are forced to cover themselves. The issue is not the piece of clothing: we live in a liberal democracy where people can wear what they like, the issue is anyone, specifically historically oppressed groups like women, being forced to do things they don't want to do.
If your issue is women are wearing clothes of their own free will you dislike, well, tough.
I have an issue with the niqab or any other piece of clothing that has been a historical symbol of oppression, whether it is Nazi arm bands or Confederate flag gear. Just because people have a right to wear it doesn't mean it isn't odious.
don't pretend you know the female anatomy Scotty. Though I'm not surprised you've got behind a handful of folk frothing outrage on twitter. That's your bread and butter.
Possibly touched a thigh 20 years ago and we've just been told of it now. Blokes up and down the country will be bricking it!
Women are entitled to follow careers in journalism without being groped. The sort of men who don't understand how you can flirt without crossing boundaries are pretty inept in holding down relationships in general.
Like Scott
In all seriousness the permanently ourtaged twitter brigade probably wish they were top shaggers but ultimately spend their free time chasing outrage rather than the opposite sex. Obviously the journo has brought this up now to try and get maximum attention and no one knows for sure if it happened but it's the immediate faux outrage when something is unproven from the twittersphere that I think most Brits dislike.
Boris is charming, fun, reasonably intelligent, famous and very wealthy. Which is why he is so good at courtship. He is out of shape, but not so much (yet!) as to become repulsive. However he does have serious personality problems (see previous posts) which is why all his relationships have ended badly and his previous partners do not speak well of him. It is possible that Boris will be lonely in old age.
Conversely, Farage is not attractive and while not actually repulsive he is in the category of men who are not the first choice physically. However he has fewer personality problems and better personal characteristics, which is why his relationships are longer and has fewer regretful ex-partners. Provided you're willing to overlook his poorer looks and you share his prejudices, Farage is the better bet.
Astute post. I would probably prefer Boris Johnson for a fling but when it comes to settling down into a serious relationship it would be Nigel Farage over him all day long. I imagine most people feel the same.
I actually think it's pretty offensive to moderate Muslims to claim attacking the niqab is attacking Islam. The face veil is a cultural custom not used by the vast majority of Muslim women.
First of all the jails are already at breaking point. Where are they going to be kept? Secondly a sensible prison reform would be to ensure prisoners get the chance to be educated OUT of crime, rather deeper into it.
Whilst it’s probably rarer for a man I can confirm that having one’s bottom pinched is not unique to the female gender.
When i was in my first week at university, the lad who had the room next to me had his girlfriend come to stay. We were sat in a nightclub and she kept running her hand up the inside of my leg! He was sat next to her at the table but i dont think he noticed! I dont think they were swingers and he had told me in the weeks before he met her he had put a loaded gun in his mouth but cried instead of pulling the trigger! She even later gave me a valentine card in person when he was not there! He is now a multi-millionaire and still with her and I am surviving...
Why? So you can invent a law that makes it illegal?
Pesky laws, eh?
When parliament starts trying to act as the executive it's time to peg them back.
You can’t. The executive is subordinate to Parliament, which is sovereign, and can make whatever laws it likes (theoretically).
I'm referring to the sovereign electorate pegging them back
I’ve heard the phrase a lot but so far as I am aware the electorate isn’t sovereign. Parliament can, after all, decide who is an elector. If you mean there should be a GE, just say so, but unfortunately the executive agreed to surrender the timing of the same to Parliament.
When parliament is dissolved sovereignty is placed back to the electorate who then determine the composition of the following sovereign parliament.
Parliament's authority comes from the people
In an election individuals are asking for an appointment as representatives
But if Parliament requests specific instruction from the source of their authority then that over-rides their freedom of action
I am interested by those saying "we had a referendum we can't have a second one just because some don't like the result" are making the same argument about a GE, despite the fact that the rules about how long between each GE is written in law and was passed by Parliament. I know the FTPA is a load of crock, but it is the law, and the premise of it is followed in many other countries. Our PM used to have the power to call a GE if governing wasn't possible. They no longer have that power. So instead the PM should work with the Parliament he has. He is refusing. If that means 5 years of gridlock, so be it. But a GE is not necessarily a remedy.
He is attempting to persuade Conservative voters let down by the fact we are staying in the EU they shouldn't blame the MPs that required us to stay in the EU but the PM fighting to take us out the EU. Is there a single Leave voter on here that supports such logic?
I actually think it's pretty offensive to moderate Muslims to claim attacking the niqab is attacking Islam. The face veil is a cultural custom not used by the vast majority of Muslim women.
Absolutely agreed!
I had an oyster card in 2003, remember it well as I was finishing school back then. More fake news from Mr twitter.
Not really, he thinks its an amusing comment on the NI border, whereas the fact the government needs extraordinary measures to prevent attempts to blow them up is not really a joking matter
The NI border needs extraordinary measures to prevent attempts to blow them up
That's the point. You missed it. Again.
No it doesn't.
Yes it would.
Very funny tweet, spot on. Makes its point extremely well.
No it doesn't, since there's no plans to put infrastructure on the border, there's nothing to blow up! What are they going to blow up if there's no infrastructure to attack?
It would = infrastructure.
Which is why that tweet is so funny.
But look if you don't get it that's cool.
No infrastructure, nothing to bomb.
You keep pretending there will be infrastructure.
I have no idea if there will be infrastructure. If there can be none that is of course fantastic. If all the requisite checks can be done with no regulatory alignment and no hard border that would be great.
In much the same way that if they could somehow check people going into the Conservative Party conference without fuck off big steel gates, that would also be fantastic.
The requisite checks can be done on trust without a hard border, and prosecuting any criminals after the fact, just as there's no hard border of a VAT inspector outside every single shop in the country.
Oddly enough trust is insufficient regarding Conference and dealing with them afterwards is insufficient there too.
Excellent Butlins there. Perhaps the best one. Used to go with my granddad. He loved it. Or he said he did anyway and I have no reason to doubt his veracity. Long gone now, my granddad, but the Butlins is still going strong.
In the historical child abuse cases there is an argument, especially where the alleged perpetrator was deceased, there was little purpose to a public investigation where there could be no reasonable debate. While the language is "colourful" I don't see the grounds for apology.
Similar, with the Cox comments, her husband explicitly criticised Corbyn. I would argue that to best honour Cox's memory you need to resolve Brexit and then you can begin the healing process. If you retread the old arguments then you can't move to the next stage.
I cannot begin to comprehend the logic leads someone to believe that the best way to honour the memory of someone who vigorously campaigned against something is to do that thing.
There was no logic: it was reflexive. In other words, he didn’t think.
I’m not sure there was any malice or intent there to offend, it just demonstrates a lack of emotional intelligence and, since, an unwillingness to say sorry.
Which, of course, is quite another problem for a PM.
Boris is a unique case, because people believe the reputational impact is "priced in"
But there are cases from time to time of men falsely accused of rape.
By the time they are cleared their reputations have been traduced.
Are you happy with that?
Nobody should be happy when that happens. We should also be concerned that only a tiny fraction of rapes reported lead to a conviction. Which, given that many are not reported, means that the vast majority of perpetrators of this serious crime against the person go unpunished.
don't pretend you know the female anatomy Scotty. Though I'm not surprised you've got behind a handful of folk frothing outrage on twitter. That's your bread and butter.
Possibly touched a thigh 20 years ago and we've just been told of it now. Blokes up and down the country will be bricking it!
Women are entitled to follow careers in journalism without being groped. The sort of men who don't understand how you can flirt without crossing boundaries are pretty inept in holding down relationships in general.
Like Scott
In all seriousness the permanently ourtaged twitter brigade probably wish they were top shaggers but ultimately spend their free time chasing outrage rather than the opposite sex. Obviously the journo has brought this up now to try and get maximum attention and no one knows for sure if it happened but it's the immediate faux outrage when something is unproven from the twittersphere that I think most Brits dislike.
In all seriousness those defending sexual harassment end up as sad middle class divorcees detested by their ex-wives.
Unskilled working class DE voters voted for Brexit in 2016 they also voted for Corbyn Labour in 2017, it was skilled working class C2 voters who voted for both Brexit and the Tories in 2017
What demographic voted remain (2016) and then Conservative (2017)?
Upper middle class ABs, the demographic the LDs now poll most strongly in
And are you, as an upper middle class AB, thinking of joining the LDs?
One rarely commented upon aspect of this is that it will tend to drag the LDs to the libertarian and fiscally conservative right, and away from the social democrat left over time. Just as the Conservatives move into the economically and culturally conservative space; the LDs will move into the equivalent liberal space.
I suspect they’ll become much more like the Free Democrats in Germany.
A good post.
As someone on the libertarian wing and would probably be considered an Orange Booker I have no issue with the more Social Democrat wing of the party. I think we fit together well. However I may be blinkered and maybe they don't feel the same about me!
I think orange booker are well represented on here, but it’s the activist base where this will be contentious and I don’t know how well that will go down.
In the historical child abuse cases there is an argument, especially where the alleged perpetrator was deceased, there was little purpose to a public investigation where there could be no reasonable debate. While the language is "colourful" I don't see the grounds for apology.
Similar, with the Cox comments, her husband explicitly criticised Corbyn. I would argue that to best honour Cox's memory you need to resolve Brexit and then you can begin the healing process. If you retread the old arguments then you can't move to the next stage.
I cannot begin to comprehend the logic leads someone to believe that the best way to honour the memory of someone who vigorously campaigned against something is to do that thing.
As a politician she fought for what she believed in.
She was a victim of the fractious debate and the impact that it had on the mindset of a mentally ill individual.
To honour her memory is to end the fractious debate. That could be either via Brexiting or via revoking.
In the historical child abuse cases there is an argument, especially where the alleged perpetrator was deceased, there was little purpose to a public investigation where there could be no reasonable debate. While the language is "colourful" I don't see the grounds for apology.
Similar, with the Cox comments, her husband explicitly criticised Corbyn. I would argue that to best honour Cox's memory you need to resolve Brexit and then you can begin the healing process. If you retread the old arguments then you can't move to the next stage.
I cannot begin to comprehend the logic leads someone to believe that the best way to honour the memory of someone who vigorously campaigned against something is to do that thing.
Possibly because the person being honoured was a democrat? Who believed in democracy?
I actually think it's pretty offensive to moderate Muslims to claim attacking the niqab is attacking Islam. The face veil is a cultural custom not used by the vast majority of Muslim women.
If you or anyone have an issue with the niqab because women are "forced to wear it" your issue is not with the niqab, but the forcing bit. Just as you should be offended if women from evangelical Christian communities are forced to cover themselves, or if orthodox Jewish women are forced to cover themselves. The issue is not the piece of clothing: we live in a liberal democracy where people can wear what they like, the issue is anyone, specifically historically oppressed groups like women, being forced to do things they don't want to do.
If your issue is women are wearing clothes of their own free will you dislike, well, tough.
I have an issue with the niqab or any other piece of clothing that has been a historical symbol of oppression, whether it is Nazi arm bands or Confederate flag gear. Just because people have a right to wear it doesn't mean it isn't odious.
So are nuns habits (considering many women were forced into nunneries for misbehaving) also considered historically oppressive? All denominations of the Christian church have a pretty long history of oppressing people; can we ban the cross? Where does this end?
Whilst personally an atheist I consider there is a difference between religion, which has a tendency to reform when confronted with modernity even if it takes a while, to literal fascist garb, which is inherently a disregard and reaction to modernity and cannot be reformed.
I don't really think laws should come into the realm of what people wear (other than regulation surround materials used to make clothes). That is policed by social norms.
don't pretend you know the female anatomy Scotty. Though I'm not surprised you've got behind a handful of folk frothing outrage on twitter. That's your bread and butter.
Possibly touched a thigh 20 years ago and we've just been told of it now. Blokes up and down the country will be bricking it!
Women are entitled to follow careers in journalism without being groped. The sort of men who don't understand how you can flirt without crossing boundaries are pretty inept in holding down relationships in general.
Like Scott
In all seriousness the permanently ourtaged twitter brigade probably wish they were top shaggers but ultimately spend their free time chasing outrage rather than the opposite sex. Obviously the journo has brought this up now to try and get maximum attention and no one knows for sure if it happened but it's the immediate faux outrage when something is unproven from the twittersphere that I think most Brits dislike.
In all seriousness those defending sexual harassment end up as sad middle class divorcees detested by their ex-wives.
Wouldn't know as I'm happily married. Sorry to go all Sean T but I had a wonderful naked 23 year old Belgian girl throwing herself at me over the weekend. I wasn't offended, just found it amusing and told her I wasn't interested but appreciated her time! I doubt I'll be running to the papers to slag her off in 20 years!
Not going to belittle actually sexual assault but there's far too many puritanical folk IMO who won't even get the chance to be divorced because they'd be ringing up the Guardian and The Police if someone brushed past them at the bar.
In the historical child abuse cases there is an argument, especially where the alleged perpetrator was deceased, there was little purpose to a public investigation where there could be no reasonable debate. While the language is "colourful" I don't see the grounds for apology.
Similar, with the Cox comments, her husband explicitly criticised Corbyn. I would argue that to best honour Cox's memory you need to resolve Brexit and then you can begin the healing process. If you retread the old arguments then you can't move to the next stage.
I cannot begin to comprehend the logic leads someone to believe that the best way to honour the memory of someone who vigorously campaigned against something is to do that thing.
As a politician she fought for what she believed in.
She was a victim of the fractious debate and the impact that it had on the mindset of a mentally ill individual.
To honour her memory is to end the fractious debate. That could be either via Brexiting or via revoking.
That's the logic.
She was the victim of a murderer who put his extreme political view above her life.
Comments
Remarkable how people voluntarily deny their children vaccines against preventable disease.
Contactless payments on the Tube, bus etc were rolled out from 2012
"Contactless cards can be used on London Buses (End of 2012)
Cash no longer accepted on buses. Cash ticket machines removed from bus stops in central London (Summer 2014)[79]
Contactless cards can be used on London Underground, Docklands Light Railway, London Overground and National Rail service. Weekly capping introduced on contactless cards. (September 2014)
Apple Pay, Android Pay and Samsung Pay accepted. (September 2014)"
Equally innocent men (there may be some) should have the right to defend themselves without suffering the reputational damage of a public accusation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_sunshine_duration
Scroll down to Europe.
Parts of the north west can have average annual sunshine totals of between 700 and 1,000 hours, while parts of Angus, Fife, the Lothians, Ayrshire, and Dumfries and Galloway average over 1,400 hours of sunshine per year. Scotland's sunniest city is Dundee.
People haven't really changed all that much from the 1970s.
I do believe people are getting better, but this isn't something that really changes over a few years. Its a century long issue that'll take forever to properly work itself out.
https://www.politico.com/news/2019/09/30/biden-2020-campaign-latino-lawmakers-011286
As a lad I worked in a department store, I do remember being "brushed past" on a few occasions by some of the women who worked there.
All Boris Johnson's approach amounts to is throwing money at everything hoping people will like him. It's idiotic. He'll live or die by the EU, not by splurging money up the wall and helping to legitimise Corbynite drunken spending.
But there are cases from time to time of men falsely accused of rape.
By the time they are cleared their reputations have been traduced.
Are you happy with that?
What’s wrong with making an eye first if you fancy someone? Or, if you’re on the dance floor, moving a bit closer?
It's amazing we don't have a higher suicide rate. Thank God for decent scotch whisky.
Don't worry guys, it's "not institutional"
In the historical child abuse cases there is an argument, especially where the alleged perpetrator was deceased, there was little purpose to a public investigation where there could be no reasonable debate. While the language is "colourful" I don't see the grounds for apology.
Similar, with the Cox comments, her husband explicitly criticised Corbyn. I would argue that to best honour Cox's memory you need to resolve Brexit and then you can begin the healing process. If you retread the old arguments then you can't move to the next stage.
As someone on the libertarian wing and would probably be considered an Orange Booker I have no issue with the more Social Democrat wing of the party. I think we fit together well. However I may be blinkered and maybe they don't feel the same about me!
Parliament means, in the mouth of a lawyer (though the word has often a different sense in conversation) the King, the House of Lords, and the House of Commons: these three bodies acting together may be aptly described as the "King in Parliament", and constitute Parliament. The principle of Parliamentary sovereignty means neither more nor less than this, namely that Parliament thus defined has, under the English constitution, the right to make or unmake any law whatever: and, further, that no person or body is recognised by the law of England as having a right to override or set aside the legislation of Parliament.
— A.V. Dicey Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution (1885)
The monarch is never dissolved, at least not yet, so Parliament always exists and is thus always sovereign as one bit of it is always there.
https://twitter.com/adampayne26/status/1178647103402397696?s=20
Hmmm.
Can we use some other criteria, perhaps?
So, no, not at all.
https://twitter.com/borisjohnson/status/1178602491191185408?s=21
It would be extremely tasteless.
That's not to say there's anything wrong with Brexit or a border poll -- you can argue for or against either -- but to wheel in a murder victim on one side of the debate to support the other side is utterly gross.
Possibly touched a thigh 20 years ago and we've just been told of it now. Blokes up and down the country will be bricking it!
If your issue is women are wearing clothes of their own free will you dislike, well, tough.
Compelling at first sight - but then one discovers that this fortunate unmolested female is the wife of Dominic Cummings, the PM's chief adviser.
Rather too convenient methinks.
In an election individuals are asking for an appointment as representatives
But if Parliament requests specific instruction from the source of their authority then that over-rides their freedom of action
Her husband is as relevant as Edwardes partner being the well known Boris hater Robert Peston
In all seriousness the permanently ourtaged twitter brigade probably wish they were top shaggers but ultimately spend their free time chasing outrage rather than the opposite sex. Obviously the journo has brought this up now to try and get maximum attention and no one knows for sure if it happened but it's the immediate faux outrage when something is unproven from the twittersphere that I think most Brits dislike.
Oddly enough trust is insufficient regarding Conference and dealing with them afterwards is insufficient there too.
https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1178654711651676160?s=20
I’m not sure there was any malice or intent there to offend, it just demonstrates a lack of emotional intelligence and, since, an unwillingness to say sorry.
Which, of course, is quite another problem for a PM.
But you fix one problem at a time.
She was a victim of the fractious debate and the impact that it had on the mindset of a mentally ill individual.
To honour her memory is to end the fractious debate. That could be either via Brexiting or via revoking.
That's the logic.
Whilst personally an atheist I consider there is a difference between religion, which has a tendency to reform when confronted with modernity even if it takes a while, to literal fascist garb, which is inherently a disregard and reaction to modernity and cannot be reformed.
I don't really think laws should come into the realm of what people wear (other than regulation surround materials used to make clothes). That is policed by social norms.
Not going to belittle actually sexual assault but there's far too many puritanical folk IMO who won't even get the chance to be divorced because they'd be ringing up the Guardian and The Police if someone brushed past them at the bar.