Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Punters rate Johnson’s chances of taking the UK out of the EU

12357

Comments

  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,266
    edited October 2019

    Cyclefree said:



    Maybe Jake Berry is just trying to get ahead of the crowd, Kippers are standard now. The hardcore need to go further to stand out.
    "Britain First" is what Jo Cox's killer shouted as he murdered her. If this is true then Berry should have the whip withdrawn. Assuming it happened, it is a plain expression of support for fascism and terrorism from the Tory front bench.
    Agreed. It is an utter disgrace.
    Come on @Cyclefree, you know better than to take Richard Burgon at face value, surely?

    The exact words of Jo Cox's killer were "put Britain first". So even if Jake Berry appended "why don't you" in front and "for once" behind, I personally still think it is disgraceful to parrot the words of a fascist and convicted terrorist at the colleagues of the terrorist's victim, and is part of a deliberate Tory effort to employ extreme language to inflame passions, irrespective of the violence they might encourage. It is fine to engage robustly with your opponents but suggesting they are acting against the interests of this country is deeply irresponsible in today's climate.
    He's not "parroting the words of a fascist" by using three common words in a natural order. He's simply making a reasonable point.
    It appears the best solution is that we are all speechless in case we inadvertently use words, which all have violent connotation and can be taken in a context to be offensive.

    Welcome to the world of the silent generation. We dare not speak, Shall we complete the process by following the celibate orthodoxy of Monks? That way we can avoid unwanted attention to persons of the opposite gender to men as well.

    Sometimes I despair at the incontinent lengths people will go to to find offence.

    There is real danger of crying Wolf, Wolf and Wolf again, thus ditching the positives in restraint and respectful use of language.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    An apparently liberal Conservative won the London mayoralty twice ....

    Just a thought .... :sunglasses:
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786

    This is very disappointing and a clear error from Baroness Hale. I speak as a Conservative very prepared to defend the Supreme Court, and their decision last week.

    Yay for the independence and impartiality of the judiciary!
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    felix said:



    Bridge of Don (Aberdeen) first preferences:

    CON: 36.2% (+10.3)
    SNP: 35.0% (+0.9)
    LDEM: 18.1% (+8.8)
    LAB: 5.9% (-5.2)
    GRN: 2.7% (+2.7)
    UKIP: 1.1% (+1.1)
    IND: 0.8% (-0.1)
    RED: 0.2% (+0.2)

    No other Ind(s) (-18.3) as prev.
    3:40 am - 4 Oct 2019

    Swing 4.7% SNP to the Tories in Aberdeen
    Ruth must have been a real drag on the Tory vote there....
    Yes clearly St Ruth was not the only reason for Scottish Tory voters voting blue
    I can never understand the alledged allure of Ruth Davidson. I presumed it was because she ticked boxes that made her interesting to the media?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 33,944
    Pulpstar said:

    FF43 said:

    I agree the questions are a little leading, but they highlight a problem for the government with its People (ie Johnson) versus MPs rhetoric. It depends on those MPs to get Brexit through without a second referendum.

    Not just that, but the whole strategy is built around a pre-brexit election, and backfires hilariously if the opposition have the presence if mind to do a GNU.

    Him: BACK ME OR LOSE THE WHIP
    Them: Guess we're on the opposition side now ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    Him: GET BREXIT DONE
    Them: OK, you couldn't so it so we will

    Him: THE PEOPLE DECIDE NOT PARLIAMENT
    Them: Referendum it is then
    Nah I think a second referendum works fine for the Tories provided it's in no way orchestrated by them (I don't think it has the numbers still). See the SNP.
    A second referendum will have defined options which will create bitter splits, especially if no deal is on the ballot.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    felix said:



    Bridge of Don (Aberdeen) first preferences:

    CON: 36.2% (+10.3)
    SNP: 35.0% (+0.9)
    LDEM: 18.1% (+8.8)
    LAB: 5.9% (-5.2)
    GRN: 2.7% (+2.7)
    UKIP: 1.1% (+1.1)
    IND: 0.8% (-0.1)
    RED: 0.2% (+0.2)

    No other Ind(s) (-18.3) as prev.
    3:40 am - 4 Oct 2019

    Swing 4.7% SNP to the Tories in Aberdeen
    Ruth must have been a real drag on the Tory vote there....
    Yes clearly St Ruth was not the only reason for Scottish Tory voters voting blue
    I can never understand the alledged allure of Ruth Davidson. I presumed it was because she ticked boxes that made her interesting to the media?
    It's the old chicken and egg. Did the Tories improve in Scotland because of her or despite her?
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 13,891
    isam said:

    I agree that Sadiq looks the value. I have backed him at 4/5. Crudely speaking, I don’t think London’s Muslims will ever vote for a non Muslim again unless there’s not a Muslim candidate, and they must be the biggest voting bloc

    'London's Muslims' would vote for a Muslim Tory candidate over a non-Muslim Labour one?

    What makes you think that?
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 12,360

    DavidL said:

    nico67 said:

    Pensioners set to lose their healthcare in the EU after 6 months in the event of no deal .

    And to think some of them voted Brexit , I think the award for turkey voting for Christmas must go to one of them interviewed who said when she voted to Leave she didn’t realize it would effect her rights in Spain .

    WTF did she think would happen .Aswell as this I really can’t stand Leavers who live in EU countries and think they’re something special whilst moaning about immigration into the UK .

    Not correct according to the government website. If we leave without a deal the UK and Spain have already agreed that existing residents will qualify for health care until at least December 2020: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/living-in-spain#healthcare

    The Spanish government has recently said that all arrangements must be reciprocal. It is currently not convinced that the UK is guaranteeing Spanish citizens’ rights.

    https://elpais.com/elpais/2019/09/23/inenglish/1569214269_989612.html

    We pay the Spanish for health services for Uk citizens, which is more than they do. Cheeky bastards.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    In court submissions now Bozo has promised to send the extension letter .

    The judge says that means now if he doesn’t he could be in contempt of court.

  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 19,596

    So could HMtQ advise the PM that unless there was a respectable interval between her speech and the election..... i.e time for sensible(!) proposals to be enacted..... the speech wouldn't take place.

    Unless of course it's a very short speech. 'My Government has decided that since there are not enough MP's who support it, that it's going to see if it can get some more!'

    Or words to that effect.
    She could always send Prince Charles?! That would be the cat amung the pigeons...
    Doesn't the Heir to the Throne traditionally support the Opposition?
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 12,360
    Cyclefree said:



    Maybe Jake Berry is just trying to get ahead of the crowd, Kippers are standard now. The hardcore need to go further to stand out.
    "Britain First" is what Jo Cox's killer shouted as he murdered her. If this is true then Berry should have the whip withdrawn. Assuming it happened, it is a plain expression of support for fascism and terrorism from the Tory front bench.
    Agreed. It is an utter disgrace.
    I assume we're going off a clear recording of this are we?
  • Cyclefree said:



    Maybe Jake Berry is just trying to get ahead of the crowd, Kippers are standard now. The hardcore need to go further to stand out.
    "Britain First" is what Jo Cox's killer shouted as he murdered her. If this is true then Berry should have the whip withdrawn. Assuming it happened, it is a plain expression of support for fascism and terrorism from the Tory front bench.
    Agreed. It is an utter disgrace.
    Come on @Cyclefree, you know better than to take Richard Burgon at face value, surely?

    The exact words of Jo Cox's killer were "put Britain first". So even if Jake Berry appended "why don't you" in front and "for once" behind, I personally still think it is disgraceful to parrot the words of a fascist and convicted terrorist at the colleagues of the terrorist's victim, and is part of a deliberate Tory effort to employ extreme language to inflame passions, irrespective of the violence they might encourage. It is fine to engage robustly with your opponents but suggesting they are acting against the interests of this country is deeply irresponsible in today's climate.
    He's not "parroting the words of a fascist" by using three common words in a natural order. He's simply making a reasonable point.
    Accusing Labour of not putting the interests of Britain first is not making a reasonable point, but accusing your opponents of something which is manifestly untrue. You are also using inflammatory language, as we know that at least one far right terrorist has already murdered a Labour MP based on precisely that same view. A view that a Tory MP feels perfectly relaxed about parroting at that dead MP's colleagues. I am genuinely surprised that anyone on here is willing to defend it. It's a sad reflection on where this country is heading.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    This is very disappointing and a clear error from Baroness Hale. I speak as a Conservative very prepared to defend the Supreme Court, and their decision last week.

    Yay for the independence and impartiality of the judiciary!
    Yay for a woman with a good sense of irony and humour.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    The bridge of don result makes me suspect that Aberdeenshire West might be the second most defendable Scottish tory seat ahead of Mundell and that Banff and Aberdeen South might be held in a slightly lower national % than I suspected (21 might do it), they do seem to be holding up in the NE better than elsewhere in Scotland
  • isamisam Posts: 33,370

    isam said:

    Cyclefree said:



    Maybe Jake Berry is just trying to get ahead of the crowd, Kippers are standard now. The hardcore need to go further to stand out.
    "Britain First" is what Jo Cox's killer shouted as he murdered her. If this is true then Berry should have the whip withdrawn. Assuming it happened, it is a plain expression of support for fascism and terrorism from the Tory front bench.
    Agreed. It is an utter disgrace.
    Come on @Cyclefree, you know better than to take Richard Burgon at face value, surely?

    The exact words of Jo Cox's killer were "put Britain first". So even if Jake Berry appended "why don't you" in front and "for once" behind, I personally still think it is disgraceful to parrot the words of a fascist and convicted terrorist at the colleagues of the terrorist's victim, and is part of a deliberate Tory effort to employ extreme language to inflame passions, irrespective of the violence they might encourage. It is fine to engage robustly with your opponents but suggesting they are acting against the interests of this country is deeply irresponsible in today's climate.
    He's not "parroting the words of a fascist" by using three common words in a natural order. He's simply making a reasonable point.
    If I say ‘Liverpool will win the league’ and someone else says ‘I don’t think Liverpool will win the league’ they’re basically quoting me, according to the insanely inconsistent rule book of progressive politics
    Not really, because the words you have added fundamentally change the meaning whereas the words Berry added didn't. But apart from that you are 100% correct, well done.
    I am 100% correct? Gee!

    Thanks for the well done
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 36,982

    This is very disappointing and a clear error from Baroness Hale. I speak as a Conservative very prepared to defend the Supreme Court, and their decision last week.

    Yep, I agree.
  • isamisam Posts: 33,370
    philiph said:

    Cyclefree said:



    Maybe Jake Berry is just trying to get ahead of the crowd, Kippers are standard now. The hardcore need to go further to stand out.
    "Britain First" is what Jo Cox's killer shouted as he murdered her. If this is true then Berry should have the whip withdrawn. Assuming it happened, it is a plain expression of support for fascism and terrorism from the Tory front bench.
    Agreed. It is an utter disgrace.
    Come on @Cyclefree, you know better than to take Richard Burgon at face value, surely?

    The exact words of Jo Cox's killer were "put Britain first". So even if Jake Berry appended "why don't you" in front and "for once" behind, I personally still think it is disgraceful to parrot the words of a fascist and convicted terrorist at the colleagues of the terrorist's victim, and is part of a deliberate Tory effort to employ extreme language to inflame passions, irrespective of the violence they might encourage. It is fine to engage robustly with your opponents but suggesting they are acting against the interests of this country is deeply irresponsible in today's climate.
    He's not "parroting the words of a fascist" by using three common words in a natural order. He's simply making a reasonable point.
    It appears the best solution is that we are all speechless in case we inadvertently use words, which all have violent connotation and can be taken in a context to be offensive.

    Welcome to the world of the silent generation. We dare not speak, Shall we complete the process by following the celibate orthodoxy of Monks? That way we can avoid unwanted attention to persons of the opposite gender to men as well.

    Sometimes I despair at the incontinent lengths people will go to to find offence.

    There is real danger of crying Wolf, Wolf and Wolf again, thus ditching the positives in restraint and respectful use of language.
    Those silenced will take their revenge at the ballot box

    But the result won’t be implemented
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,266
    edited October 2019

    Cyclefree said:



    Maybe Jake Berry is just trying to get ahead of the crowd, Kippers are standard now. The hardcore need to go further to stand out.
    "Britain First" is what Jo Cox's killer shouted as he murdered her. If this is true then Berry should have the whip withdrawn. Assuming it happened, it is a plain expression of support for fascism and terrorism from the Tory front bench.
    Agreed. It is an utter disgrace.
    Come on @Cyclefree, you know better than to take Richard Burgon at face value, surely?

    The exact words of Jo Cox's killer were "put Britain first". So even if Jake Berry appended "why don't you" in front and "for once" behind, I personally still think it is disgraceful to parrot the words of a fascist and convicted terrorist at the colleagues of the terrorist's victim, and is part of a deliberate Tory effort to employ extreme language to inflame passions, irrespective of the violence they might encourage. It is fine to engage robustly with your opponents but suggesting they are acting against the interests of this country is deeply irresponsible in today's climate.
    He's not "parroting the words of a fascist" by using three common words in a natural order. He's simply making a reasonable point.
    Accusing Labour of not putting the interests of Britain first is not making a reasonable point, but accusing your opponents of something which is manifestly untrue. You are also using inflammatory language, as we know that at least one far right terrorist has already murdered a Labour MP based on precisely that same view. A view that a Tory MP feels perfectly relaxed about parroting at that dead MP's colleagues. I am genuinely surprised that anyone on here is willing to defend it. It's a sad reflection on where this country is heading.
    There is a massive difference between accepting normal use of language without taking a couple of words out of context and defending violence, murder or other violent actions.

    It isn't out of the acceptable political discourse to accuse your opponents of not putting your country first.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    JackW said:

    This is very disappointing and a clear error from Baroness Hale. I speak as a Conservative very prepared to defend the Supreme Court, and their decision last week.

    Yay for the independence and impartiality of the judiciary!
    Yay for a woman with a good sense of irony and humour.
    Yay for 6 million year old Scottish lords
  • Could Boris return as a candidate for London Mayor? He might be in need of a job quite soon.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    philiph said:

    Cyclefree said:



    Maybe Jake Berry is just trying to get ahead of the crowd, Kippers are standard now. The hardcore need to go further to stand out.
    "Britain First" is what Jo Cox's killer shouted as he murdered her. If this is true then Berry should have the whip withdrawn. Assuming it happened, it is a plain expression of support for fascism and terrorism from the Tory front bench.
    Agreed. It is an utter disgrace.
    Come on @Cyclefree, you know better than to take Richard Burgon at face value, surely?

    The exact words of Jo Cox's killer were "put Britain first". So even if Jake Berry appended "why don't you" in front and "for once" behind, I personally still think it is disgraceful to parrot the words of a fascist and convicted terrorist at the colleagues of the terrorist's victim, and is part of a deliberate Tory effort to employ extreme language to inflame passions, irrespective of the violence they might encourage. It is fine to engage robustly with your opponents but suggesting they are acting against the interests of this country is deeply irresponsible in today's climate.
    He's not "parroting the words of a fascist" by using three common words in a natural order. He's simply making a reasonable point.
    Accusing Labour of not putting the interests of Britain first is not making a reasonable point, but accusing your opponents of something which is manifestly untrue. You are also using inflammatory language, as we know that at least one far right terrorist has already murdered a Labour MP based on precisely that same view. A view that a Tory MP feels perfectly relaxed about parroting at that dead MP's colleagues. I am genuinely surprised that anyone on here is willing to defend it. It's a sad reflection on where this country is heading.
    There is a massive difference between accepting normal use of language without taking a couple of words out of context and defending violence, murder or other violent actions.
    It's the usual manufactured outrage, scourge of the modern world
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 36,982

    Tricky - he could catch fire. He has a lot of nous even if his current positioning isn't that promising. And Khan hasn't been very impressive imho (though it's a long time since I had my finger on the pulse of London politics).

    It's all about being the clear alternative to Khan (with only a second preference a Green-LD or Tory-LD ballot is no use), and he's probably best placed to be that. 20% sounds fair enough but Sadiq looks the value today - his challenge will be staying in - or at least close enough to - the Labour Party over Brexit.

    The pattern of second preferences isn't likely to be very helpful to Rory. For a start a lot of voters in the mayoral election don't make a second preference at all, and of those that do, it's not clear that Rory is going to be their second choice: LD or Green voters may well put Khan second, or waste their second pref on Green/LD respectively. Tory voters won't necessarily put him second either, if they are angry about him being sane on Brexit.

    He might get into the second round, but it's a big step to actually win the thing. I'd put fair odds at maybe 10/1, perhaps even longer.

    Which is a great pity, because I think he's the best candidate ever to have stood for London Mayor since the modern post was created. So I hope I'm wrong and he manages to catch the zeitgeist. (I suspect he'll have a lot of support from the Evening Standard, which will help).
    It’d have been better if he’d had stood on a Tory ticket with a very soft Brexit slant, with Bailey edged aside.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    Here’s another law term that we might need to get used to over the next few weeks .

    An order of specific performance !
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786

    Could Boris return as a candidate for London Mayor? He might be in need of a job quite soon.

    Only if Ken promises to run against him
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    felix said:



    Bridge of Don (Aberdeen) first preferences:

    CON: 36.2% (+10.3)
    SNP: 35.0% (+0.9)
    LDEM: 18.1% (+8.8)
    LAB: 5.9% (-5.2)
    GRN: 2.7% (+2.7)
    UKIP: 1.1% (+1.1)
    IND: 0.8% (-0.1)
    RED: 0.2% (+0.2)

    No other Ind(s) (-18.3) as prev.
    3:40 am - 4 Oct 2019

    Swing 4.7% SNP to the Tories in Aberdeen
    Ruth must have been a real drag on the Tory vote there....
    Yes clearly St Ruth was not the only reason for Scottish Tory voters voting blue
    I can never understand the alledged allure of Ruth Davidson. I presumed it was because she ticked boxes that made her interesting to the media?
    It's the old chicken and egg. Did the Tories improve in Scotland because of her or despite her?
    Ironically (given her somewhat fluid opposition to it) Brexit mixed up with Loyalism is probably a stronger foundation stone for the SCon 'miracle' than Ruth.
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    felix said:



    Bridge of Don (Aberdeen) first preferences:

    CON: 36.2% (+10.3)
    SNP: 35.0% (+0.9)
    LDEM: 18.1% (+8.8)
    LAB: 5.9% (-5.2)
    GRN: 2.7% (+2.7)
    UKIP: 1.1% (+1.1)
    IND: 0.8% (-0.1)
    RED: 0.2% (+0.2)

    No other Ind(s) (-18.3) as prev.
    3:40 am - 4 Oct 2019

    Swing 4.7% SNP to the Tories in Aberdeen
    Ruth must have been a real drag on the Tory vote there....
    Yes clearly St Ruth was not the only reason for Scottish Tory voters voting blue
    I can never understand the alledged allure of Ruth Davidson. I presumed it was because she ticked boxes that made her interesting to the media?
    It's the old chicken and egg. Did the Tories improve in Scotland because of her or despite her?
    I suppose you have to seperate the UK Parliament Tory improvement from the Scottish Parliament. She arguably did a better performance than would have been the case in the Scottish Parliament elections but some of that was due to the electoral system. The Tories in the UK Parliament in terms of Scottish seats may have had their best result in 35 years but if you go back further they are still a deminished force given in the 1950 the Tories won a majority of Scottish seats.
  • Cyclefree said:



    Maybe Jake Berry is just trying to get ahead of the crowd, Kippers are standard now. The hardcore need to go further to stand out.
    "Britain First" is what Jo Cox's killer shouted as he murdered her. If this is true then Berry should have the whip withdrawn. Assuming it happened, it is a plain expression of support for fascism and terrorism from the Tory front bench.
    Agreed. It is an utter disgrace.
    Come on @Cyclefree, you know better than to take Richard Burgon at face value, surely?

    The exact words of Jo Cox's killer were "put Britain first". So even if Jake Berry appended "why don't you" in front and "for once" behind, I personally still think it is disgraceful to parrot the words of a fascist and convicted terrorist at the colleagues of the terrorist's victim, and is part of a deliberate Tory effort to employ extreme language to inflame passions, irrespective of the violence they might encourage. It is fine to engage robustly with your opponents but suggesting they are acting against the interests of this country is deeply irresponsible in today's climate.
    So if a bad person says something then anyone else who says similar is also bad?

    What if the Boston Strangler's last words had been "eat your greens kids"?

    This kind of shrill faux outrage is so depressing. Where would you place Britain out of interest? Last? 37th?

    First works for me, being, er, British. If you choose to extrapolate wildly from that that I am some kind of fascist/racist/whatever then I can't help you.
  • hamiltonacehamiltonace Posts: 642
    edited October 2019

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    felix said:



    Bridge of Don (Aberdeen) first preferences:

    CON: 36.2% (+10.3)
    SNP: 35.0% (+0.9)
    LDEM: 18.1% (+8.8)
    LAB: 5.9% (-5.2)
    GRN: 2.7% (+2.7)
    UKIP: 1.1% (+1.1)
    IND: 0.8% (-0.1)
    RED: 0.2% (+0.2)

    No other Ind(s) (-18.3) as prev.
    3:40 am - 4 Oct 2019

    Swing 4.7% SNP to the Tories in Aberdeen
    Ruth must have been a real drag on the Tory vote there....
    Yes clearly St Ruth was not the only reason for Scottish Tory voters voting blue
    I can never understand the alledged allure of Ruth Davidson. I presumed it was because she ticked boxes that made her interesting to the media?
    It's the old chicken and egg. Did the Tories improve in Scotland because of her or despite her?
    Ruth is still seen as the head of Conservatives in Scotland and she will get support for her MSPs and councillors. It is the Tory MPs who are seen as dead ducks.

    It maybe hard for the English to understand how hated the Tories were in Scotland before Ruth and how badly Boris is seen here. No-one but no-one will support him publicly.

    As for his agreement. The main border of Northern Ireland with the rest of the UK is Scotland. Trying to make Stranraer like Dover will not go down well.

    Many years ago when my dad was a Lib Dem councillor in Aberdeen it was split between Labour and Lib Dems. To see Labour almost wiped out is amazing. The Lib Dems will be happy to see their vote up by a significant amount. Maybe they are returning as a force in Scotland.


  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 4,092

    JackW said:

    This is very disappointing and a clear error from Baroness Hale. I speak as a Conservative very prepared to defend the Supreme Court, and their decision last week.

    Yay for the independence and impartiality of the judiciary!
    Yay for a woman with a good sense of irony and humour.
    Yay for 6 million year old Scottish lords
    To be honest, although the US Supreme Court design leaves a lot to be desired, at least they're open about the fact that the judges being apolitical is impossible. Over here we still seem to be living in a state of technocratic delusion.
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    felix said:



    Bridge of Don (Aberdeen) first preferences:

    CON: 36.2% (+10.3)
    SNP: 35.0% (+0.9)
    LDEM: 18.1% (+8.8)
    LAB: 5.9% (-5.2)
    GRN: 2.7% (+2.7)
    UKIP: 1.1% (+1.1)
    IND: 0.8% (-0.1)
    RED: 0.2% (+0.2)

    No other Ind(s) (-18.3) as prev.
    3:40 am - 4 Oct 2019

    Swing 4.7% SNP to the Tories in Aberdeen
    Ruth must have been a real drag on the Tory vote there....
    Yes clearly St Ruth was not the only reason for Scottish Tory voters voting blue
    I can never understand the alledged allure of Ruth Davidson. I presumed it was because she ticked boxes that made her interesting to the media?
    She manages to come across as both charismatic and down to earth at the same time - which is quite a rare combination in a politician.
  • Harris_TweedHarris_Tweed Posts: 1,255
    edited October 2019

    Do you really think he is?

    Khan will beat him easily, quite frankly I don't think Corbyn would be that harmed even if he didn't.
    As with the same spiel against coalition LibDems, I don't think most people in Rory's target market will buy it - his attraction is that he hasn't unthinkingly followed the pack. Quite apart from how true it is, it's one more example of Corbyn just hissing at anyone who's not signed up to his project. (And one to store up next time the outriders proclaim what a cuddly chap he is).

    It leaves me (as a floating voter, but often Lab in the past) cold.
    Why in God's name would Corbyn support Stewart for London mayor? Have you completely taken leave of your senses?
    I wouldn't expect him to. But compare and contrast with Shaun Bailey welcoming all candidates blah blah. It's the tone rather than content which I find objectionable.

    Exactly the same message could have been delivered along the lines of "It's always good to see prominent Tories jumping ship, but Rory Stewart will have to explain his voting record in support of their most harmful policies. We look forward to challenging him in our capital city".

    Instead, it just encourages the outriders to double down that everyone left of Ed Miliband eats babies. That's their right (until they lie or threaten), but it's doing bugger all to attract me as a voter.
  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 4,092

    Cyclefree said:



    Maybe Jake Berry is just trying to get ahead of the crowd, Kippers are standard now. The hardcore need to go further to stand out.
    "Britain First" is what Jo Cox's killer shouted as he murdered her. If this is true then Berry should have the whip withdrawn. Assuming it happened, it is a plain expression of support for fascism and terrorism from the Tory front bench.
    Agreed. It is an utter disgrace.
    Come on @Cyclefree, you know better than to take Richard Burgon at face value, surely?

    The exact words of Jo Cox's killer were "put Britain first". So even if Jake Berry appended "why don't you" in front and "for once" behind, I personally still think it is disgraceful to parrot the words of a fascist and convicted terrorist at the colleagues of the terrorist's victim, and is part of a deliberate Tory effort to employ extreme language to inflame passions, irrespective of the violence they might encourage. It is fine to engage robustly with your opponents but suggesting they are acting against the interests of this country is deeply irresponsible in today's climate.
    So if a bad person says something then anyone else who says similar is also bad?

    What if the Boston Strangler's last words had been "eat your greens kids"?

    This kind of shrill faux outrage is so depressing. Where would you place Britain out of interest? Last? 37th?

    First works for me, being, er, British. If you choose to extrapolate wildly from that that I am some kind of fascist/racist/whatever then I can't help you.
    The difference- which I believe you're well aware of- is that "eat your greens" isn't an ideology that can inspire you to kill.
  • felixfelix Posts: 10,867

    Cyclefree said:



    Maybe Jake Berry is just trying to get ahead of the crowd, Kippers are standard now. The hardcore need to go further to stand out.
    "Britain First" is what Jo Cox's killer shouted as he murdered her. If this is true then Berry should have the whip withdrawn. Assuming it happened, it is a plain expression of support for fascism and terrorism from the Tory front bench.
    Agreed. It is an utter disgrace.
    Come on @Cyclefree, you know better than to take Richard Burgon at face value, surely?

    The exact words of Jo Cox's killer were "put Britain first". So even if Jake Berry appended "why don't you" in front and "for once" behind, I personally still think it is disgraceful to parrot the words of a fascist and convicted terrorist at the colleagues of the terrorist's victim, and is part of a deliberate Tory effort to employ extreme language to inflame passions, irrespective of the violence they might encourage. It is fine to engage robustly with your opponents but suggesting they are acting against the interests of this country is deeply irresponsible in today's climate.
    He's not "parroting the words of a fascist" by using three common words in a natural order. He's simply making a reasonable point.
    Accusing Labour of not putting the interests of Britain first is not making a reasonable point, but accusing your opponents of something which is manifestly untrue. You are also using inflammatory language, as we know that at least one far right terrorist has already murdered a Labour MP based on precisely that same view. A view that a Tory MP feels perfectly relaxed about parroting at that dead MP's colleagues. I am genuinely surprised that anyone on here is willing to defend it. It's a sad reflection on where this country is heading.
    They're defending the right to free speech among other things. Extremists say and do all sorts of things which in the mouths of ordinary folk have a very different meaning. This is one such example. You need to grow up.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    felix said:



    Bridge of Don (Aberdeen) first preferences:

    CON: 36.2% (+10.3)
    SNP: 35.0% (+0.9)
    LDEM: 18.1% (+8.8)
    LAB: 5.9% (-5.2)
    GRN: 2.7% (+2.7)
    UKIP: 1.1% (+1.1)
    IND: 0.8% (-0.1)
    RED: 0.2% (+0.2)

    No other Ind(s) (-18.3) as prev.
    3:40 am - 4 Oct 2019

    Swing 4.7% SNP to the Tories in Aberdeen
    Ruth must have been a real drag on the Tory vote there....
    Yes clearly St Ruth was not the only reason for Scottish Tory voters voting blue
    I can never understand the alledged allure of Ruth Davidson. I presumed it was because she ticked boxes that made her interesting to the media?
    It's the old chicken and egg. Did the Tories improve in Scotland because of her or despite her?
    I suppose you have to seperate the UK Parliament Tory improvement from the Scottish Parliament. She arguably did a better performance than would have been the case in the Scottish Parliament elections but some of that was due to the electoral system. The Tories in the UK Parliament in terms of Scottish seats may have had their best result in 35 years but if you go back further they are still a deminished force given in the 1950 the Tories won a majority of Scottish seats.
    Oh we are a long way from the days of Tories representing Glasgow seats for sure! RIP Teddy Taylor
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    JackW said:

    This is very disappointing and a clear error from Baroness Hale. I speak as a Conservative very prepared to defend the Supreme Court, and their decision last week.

    Yay for the independence and impartiality of the judiciary!
    Yay for a woman with a good sense of irony and humour.
    Yay for 6 million year old Scottish lords
    Yay, yay and thrice yay ..... indeed 6 million yays ..... :smile:
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 61,275
    Is Lady Hale attempting to paint herself as a British Bader-Ginsburg ?

    That's the distinct vibe I'm getting.
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,266

    Cyclefree said:



    Maybe Jake Berry is just trying to get ahead of the crowd, Kippers are standard now. The hardcore need to go further to stand out.
    "Britain First" is what Jo Cox's killer shouted as he murdered her. If this is true then Berry should have the whip withdrawn. Assuming it happened, it is a plain expression of support for fascism and terrorism from the Tory front bench.
    Agreed. It is an utter disgrace.
    Come on @Cyclefree, you know better than to take Richard Burgon at face value, surely?

    The exact words of Jo Cox's killer were "put Britain first". So even if Jake Berry appended "why don't you" in front and "for once" behind, I personally still think it is disgraceful to parrot the words of a fascist and convicted terrorist at the colleagues of the terrorist's victim, and is part of a deliberate Tory effort to employ extreme language to inflame passions, irrespective of the violence they might encourage. It is fine to engage robustly with your opponents but suggesting they are acting against the interests of this country is deeply irresponsible in today's climate.
    So if a bad person says something then anyone else who says similar is also bad?

    What if the Boston Strangler's last words had been "eat your greens kids"?

    This kind of shrill faux outrage is so depressing. Where would you place Britain out of interest? Last? 37th?

    First works for me, being, er, British. If you choose to extrapolate wildly from that that I am some kind of fascist/racist/whatever then I can't help you.
    The difference- which I believe you're well aware of- is that "eat your greens" isn't an ideology that can inspire you to kill.
    You haven't heard of the Green Party?
  • isamisam Posts: 33,370
    kinabalu said:

    isam said:

    I agree that Sadiq looks the value. I have backed him at 4/5. Crudely speaking, I don’t think London’s Muslims will ever vote for a non Muslim again unless there’s not a Muslim candidate, and they must be the biggest voting bloc

    'London's Muslims' would vote for a Muslim Tory candidate over a non-Muslim Labour one?

    What makes you think that?
    I’d have thought it obvious that what makes me think that is that I think Muslims vote on religion over party politics

  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    An order of specific performance in the court case would effectively stop Bozo from trying to frustrate the act by trying to skirt the boundary between what’s lawful and unlawful .

    For example sending an additional letter .
  • Pulpstar said:

    Is Lady Hale attempting to paint herself as a British Bader-Ginsburg ?

    That's the distinct vibe I'm getting.

    She's standing down in January, so no.
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,266
    nico67 said:

    An order of specific performance in the court case would effectively stop Bozo from trying to frustrate the act by trying to skirt the boundary between what’s lawful and unlawful .

    For example sending an additional letter .

    Which I thought was already covered in the Benn Bill
  • felixfelix Posts: 10,867

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    felix said:



    Bridge of Don (Aberdeen) first preferences:

    CON: 36.2% (+10.3)
    SNP: 35.0% (+0.9)
    LDEM: 18.1% (+8.8)
    LAB: 5.9% (-5.2)
    GRN: 2.7% (+2.7)
    UKIP: 1.1% (+1.1)
    IND: 0.8% (-0.1)
    RED: 0.2% (+0.2)

    No other Ind(s) (-18.3) as prev.
    3:40 am - 4 Oct 2019

    Swing 4.7% SNP to the Tories in Aberdeen
    Ruth must have been a real drag on the Tory vote there....
    Yes clearly St Ruth was not the only reason for Scottish Tory voters voting blue
    I can never understand the alledged allure of Ruth Davidson. I presumed it was because she ticked boxes that made her interesting to the media?
    It's the old chicken and egg. Did the Tories improve in Scotland because of her or despite her?
    Ruth is still seen as the head of Conservatives in Scotland and she will get support for her MSPs and councillors. It is the Tory MPs who are seen as dead ducks.

    It maybe hard for the English to understand how hated the Tories were in Scotland before Ruth and how badly Boris is seen here. No-one but no-one will support him publicly.

    As for his agreement. The main border of Northern Ireland with the rest of the UK is Scotland. Trying to make Stranraer like Dover will not go down well.

    Many years ago when my dad was a Lib Dem councillor in Aberdeen it was split between Labour and Lib Dems. To see Labour almost wiped out is amazing. The Lib Dems will be happy to see their vote up by a significant amount. Maybe they are returning as a force in Scotland.


    Even more clearly the Tories seem htere to stay.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 53,966
    Aye. Hale's made a mistake. Daft woman.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 61,275
    isam said:

    kinabalu said:

    isam said:

    I agree that Sadiq looks the value. I have backed him at 4/5. Crudely speaking, I don’t think London’s Muslims will ever vote for a non Muslim again unless there’s not a Muslim candidate, and they must be the biggest voting bloc

    'London's Muslims' would vote for a Muslim Tory candidate over a non-Muslim Labour one?

    What makes you think that?
    I’d have thought it obvious that what makes me think that is that I think Muslims vote on religion over party politics

    Hmm I disagree. I reckon a muslim left candidate (Lutfur Rahman) can do very well in say Tower Hamlets (And he did) but Javid wouldn't pick up many muslim votes at all if he stood for the mayoralty against say Keir Starmer.
  • Cyclefree said:



    Maybe Jake Berry is just trying to get ahead of the crowd, Kippers are standard now. The hardcore need to go further to stand out.
    "Britain First" is what Jo Cox's killer shouted as he murdered her. If this is true then Berry should have the whip withdrawn. Assuming it happened, it is a plain expression of support for fascism and terrorism from the Tory front bench.
    Agreed. It is an utter disgrace.
    Come on @Cyclefree, you know better than to take Richard Burgon at face value, surely?

    The exact words of Jo Cox's killer were "put Britain first". So even if Jake Berry appended "why don't you" in front and "for once" behind, I personally still think it is disgraceful to parrot the words of a fascist and convicted terrorist at the colleagues of the terrorist's victim, and is part of a deliberate Tory effort to employ extreme language to inflame passions, irrespective of the violence they might encourage. It is fine to engage robustly with your opponents but suggesting they are acting against the interests of this country is deeply irresponsible in today's climate.
    So if a bad person says something then anyone else who says similar is also bad?

    What if the Boston Strangler's last words had been "eat your greens kids"?

    This kind of shrill faux outrage is so depressing. Where would you place Britain out of interest? Last? 37th?

    First works for me, being, er, British. If you choose to extrapolate wildly from that that I am some kind of fascist/racist/whatever then I can't help you.
    Believe me the outrage is genuine. It isn't wrong to put Britain first. It is wrong to accuse your opponents of not wanting to put Britain first. Impugning the patriotism of your opponents is a clear sign you have no other arguments to make and has been a favourite of fascist and gangster regimes throughout history. I our current context it is an accusation that has already cost the life of an MP and young mother. It is disgraceful that a Tory MP used those words in the Commons and deeply depressing that PB Tories are queuing up to defend him.
  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 4,092
    felix said:

    Cyclefree said:



    Maybe Jake Berry is just trying to get ahead of the crowd, Kippers are standard now. The hardcore need to go further to stand out.
    "Britain First" is what Jo Cox's killer shouted as he murdered her. If this is true then Berry should have the whip withdrawn. Assuming it happened, it is a plain expression of support for fascism and terrorism from the Tory front bench.
    Agreed. It is an utter disgrace.
    Come on @Cyclefree, you know better than to take Richard Burgon at face value, surely?

    The exact words of Jo Cox's killer were "put Britain first". So even if Jake Berry appended "why don't you" in front and "for once" behind, I personally still think it is disgraceful to parrot the words of a fascist and convicted terrorist at the colleagues of the terrorist's victim, and is part of a deliberate Tory effort to employ extreme language to inflame passions, irrespective of the violence they might encourage. It is fine to engage robustly with your opponents but suggesting they are acting against the interests of this country is deeply irresponsible in today's climate.
    He's not "parroting the words of a fascist" by using three common words in a natural order. He's simply making a reasonable point.
    Accusing Labour of not putting the interests of Britain first is not making a reasonable point, but accusing your opponents of something which is manifestly untrue. You are also using inflammatory language, as we know that at least one far right terrorist has already murdered a Labour MP based on precisely that same view. A view that a Tory MP feels perfectly relaxed about parroting at that dead MP's colleagues. I am genuinely surprised that anyone on here is willing to defend it. It's a sad reflection on where this country is heading.
    They're defending the right to free speech among other things. Extremists say and do all sorts of things which in the mouths of ordinary folk have a very different meaning. This is one such example. You need to grow up.
    Oh yeah, free speech. That's that thing where nobody's allowed to complain about anything you say, right?
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    Beginning to think the government are going to lose this new case on one of the issues .

    O Neil’s is asking for an order of specific importance and this means it’s easier for the court to rule in their favour .
  • 148grss148grss Posts: 1,089

    This is very disappointing and a clear error from Baroness Hale. I speak as a Conservative very prepared to defend the Supreme Court, and their decision last week.

    Yep, I agree.
    Is she not just showing a newspaper headline? I personally dislike the idea of us treating SC judges like they do in the US, but I also don't see what is wrong with her pointing out what newspapers say.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 35,412

    Do you really think he is?

    Khan will beat him easily, quite frankly I don't think Corbyn would be that harmed even if he didn't.
    As with the same spiel against coalition LibDems, I don't think most people in Rory's target market will buy it - his attraction is that he hasn't unthinkingly followed the pack. Quite apart from how true it is, it's one more example of Corbyn just hissing at anyone who's not signed up to his project. (And one to store up next time the outriders proclaim what a cuddly chap he is).

    It leaves me (as a floating voter, but often Lab in the past) cold.
    Why in God's name would Corbyn support Stewart for London mayor? Have you completely taken leave of your senses?
    I wouldn't expect him to. But compare and contrast with Shaun Bailey welcoming all candidates blah blah. It's the tone rather than content which I find objectionable.

    Exactly the same message could have been delivered along the lines of "It's always good to see prominent Tories jumping ship, but Rory Stewart will have to explain his voting record in support of their most harmful policies. We look forward to challenging him in our capital city".

    Instead, it just encourages the outriders to double down that everyone left of Ed Miliband eats babies. That's their right (until they lie or threaten), but it's doing bugger all to attract me as a voter.
    The Jezza tweet reads like an automated socialist bot has posted it.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    Aye. Hale's made a mistake. Daft woman.

    6 million yays for this "daft woman".

    Huzzah for Hale the Humourist .... :smile:
  • Marco1Marco1 Posts: 34
    This was extremely naive by Lady Hale. The judges are under attack for bias and political activism and she says something like that. No wonder our Institutions are creaking.
  • felix said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    felix said:



    Bridge of Don (Aberdeen) first preferences:

    CON: 36.2% (+10.3)
    SNP: 35.0% (+0.9)
    LDEM: 18.1% (+8.8)
    LAB: 5.9% (-5.2)
    GRN: 2.7% (+2.7)
    UKIP: 1.1% (+1.1)
    IND: 0.8% (-0.1)
    RED: 0.2% (+0.2)

    No other Ind(s) (-18.3) as prev.
    3:40 am - 4 Oct 2019

    Swing 4.7% SNP to the Tories in Aberdeen
    Ruth must have been a real drag on the Tory vote there....
    Yes clearly St Ruth was not the only reason for Scottish Tory voters voting blue
    I can never understand the alledged allure of Ruth Davidson. I presumed it was because she ticked boxes that made her interesting to the media?
    It's the old chicken and egg. Did the Tories improve in Scotland because of her or despite her?
    Ruth is still seen as the head of Conservatives in Scotland and she will get support for her MSPs and councillors. It is the Tory MPs who are seen as dead ducks.

    It maybe hard for the English to understand how hated the Tories were in Scotland before Ruth and how badly Boris is seen here. No-one but no-one will support him publicly.

    As for his agreement. The main border of Northern Ireland with the rest of the UK is Scotland. Trying to make Stranraer like Dover will not go down well.

    Many years ago when my dad was a Lib Dem councillor in Aberdeen it was split between Labour and Lib Dems. To see Labour almost wiped out is amazing. The Lib Dems will be happy to see their vote up by a significant amount. Maybe they are returning as a force in Scotland.


    Even more clearly the Tories seem htere to stay.
    I agree but don't think they will stay fully aligned with the English Tory party.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 12,360

    Cyclefree said:



    Maybe Jake Berry is just trying to get ahead of the crowd, Kippers are standard now. The hardcore need to go further to stand out.
    "Britain First" is what Jo Cox's killer shouted as he murdered her. If this is true then Berry should have the whip withdrawn. Assuming it happened, it is a plain expression of support for fascism and terrorism from the Tory front bench.
    Agreed. It is an utter disgrace.
    Come on @Cyclefree, you know better than to take Richard Burgon at face value, surely?

    The exact words of Jo Cox's killer were "put Britain first". So even if Jake Berry appended "why don't you" in front and "for once" behind, I personally still think it is disgraceful to parrot the words of a fascist and convicted terrorist at the colleagues of the terrorist's victim, and is part of a deliberate Tory effort to employ extreme language to inflame passions, irrespective of the violence they might encourage. It is fine to engage robustly with your opponents but suggesting they are acting against the interests of this country is deeply irresponsible in today's climate.
    So if a bad person says something then anyone else who says similar is also bad?

    What if the Boston Strangler's last words had been "eat your greens kids"?

    This kind of shrill faux outrage is so depressing. Where would you place Britain out of interest? Last? 37th?

    First works for me, being, er, British. If you choose to extrapolate wildly from that that I am some kind of fascist/racist/whatever then I can't help you.
    There's nothing which we can do about such idiocy other than be mildly amused by it.
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,266

    Cyclefree said:



    Maybe Jake Berry is just trying to get ahead of the crowd, Kippers are standard now. The hardcore need to go further to stand out.
    "Britain First" is what Jo Cox's killer shouted as he murdered her. If this is true then Berry should have the whip withdrawn. Assuming it happened, it is a plain expression of support for fascism and terrorism from the Tory front bench.
    Agreed. It is an utter disgrace.
    Come on @Cyclefree, you know better than to take Richard Burgon at face value, surely?

    The exact words of Jo Cox's killer were "put Britain first". So even if Jake Berry appended "why don't you" in front and "for once" behind, I personally still think it is disgraceful to parrot the words of a fascist and convicted terrorist at the colleagues of the terrorist's victim, and is part of a deliberate Tory effort to employ extreme language to inflame passions, irrespective of the violence they might encourage. It is fine to engage robustly with your opponents but suggesting they are acting against the interests of this country is deeply irresponsible in today's climate.
    So if a bad person says something then anyone else who says similar is also bad?

    What if the Boston Strangler's last words had been "eat your greens kids"?

    This kind of shrill faux outrage is so depressing. Where would you place Britain out of interest? Last? 37th?

    First works for me, being, er, British. If you choose to extrapolate wildly from that that I am some kind of fascist/racist/whatever then I can't help you.
    Believe me the outrage is genuine. It isn't wrong to put Britain first. It is wrong to accuse your opponents of not wanting to put Britain first. Impugning the patriotism of your opponents is a clear sign you have no other arguments to make and has been a favourite of fascist and gangster regimes throughout history. I our current context it is an accusation that has already cost the life of an MP and young mother. It is disgraceful that a Tory MP used those words in the Commons and deeply depressing that PB Tories are queuing up to defend him.
    No comment


  • Believe me the outrage is genuine. It isn't wrong to put Britain first. It is wrong to accuse your opponents of not wanting to put Britain first. Impugning the patriotism of your opponents is a clear sign you have no other arguments to make and has been a favourite of fascist and gangster regimes throughout history. I our current context it is an accusation that has already cost the life of an MP and young mother. It is disgraceful that a Tory MP used those words in the Commons and deeply depressing that PB Tories are queuing up to defend him.

    So, to be clear, you are saying that it's an outrage when Labour accuses the Tories of putting party before country.

    It's a view, as they say.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    philiph said:

    nico67 said:

    An order of specific performance in the court case would effectively stop Bozo from trying to frustrate the act by trying to skirt the boundary between what’s lawful and unlawful .

    For example sending an additional letter .

    Which I thought was already covered in the Benn Bill
    Not specifically . Sending an additional letter could be seen as frustrating the act but then it would end up in court .

    The order of specific importance is trying to narrow Bozos options by already declaring attempts to frustrate the act as unlawful.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    nico67 said:

    Beginning to think the government are going to lose this new case on one of the issues .

    O Neil’s is asking for an order of specific importance and this means it’s easier for the court to rule in their favour .

    He wants to lose. Forced by parliament and the courts to request an extension..... fits perfectly with the narrative. Everything is now about the post extension election if the deal falls, if he wins a majority in that then his deal will be the only game in town that isn't no deal.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    148grss said:

    This is very disappointing and a clear error from Baroness Hale. I speak as a Conservative very prepared to defend the Supreme Court, and their decision last week.

    Yep, I agree.
    Is she not just showing a newspaper headline? I personally dislike the idea of us treating SC judges like they do in the US, but I also don't see what is wrong with her pointing out what newspapers say.
    Well, exactly. An independent judiciary does not mean they are devoid of personality, humour, or their own opinions(!!) of how they've been portrayed in the press.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 76,312

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    felix said:



    Bridge of Don (Aberdeen) first preferences:

    CON: 36.2% (+10.3)
    SNP: 35.0% (+0.9)
    LDEM: 18.1% (+8.8)
    LAB: 5.9% (-5.2)
    GRN: 2.7% (+2.7)
    UKIP: 1.1% (+1.1)
    IND: 0.8% (-0.1)
    RED: 0.2% (+0.2)

    No other Ind(s) (-18.3) as prev.
    3:40 am - 4 Oct 2019

    Swing 4.7% SNP to the Tories in Aberdeen
    Ruth must have been a real drag on the Tory vote there....
    Yes clearly St Ruth was not the only reason for Scottish Tory voters voting blue
    I can never understand the alledged allure of Ruth Davidson. I presumed it was because she ticked boxes that made her interesting to the media?
    It's the old chicken and egg. Did the Tories improve in Scotland because of her or despite her?
    Ruth is still seen as the head of Conservatives in Scotland and she will get support for her MSPs and councillors. It is the Tory MPs who are seen as dead ducks.

    It maybe hard for the English to understand how hated the Tories were in Scotland before Ruth and how badly Boris is seen here. No-one but no-one will support him publicly.

    As for his agreement. The main border of Northern Ireland with the rest of the UK is Scotland. Trying to make Stranraer like Dover will not go down well.

    Many years ago when my dad was a Lib Dem councillor in Aberdeen it was split between Labour and Lib Dems. To see Labour almost wiped out is amazing. The Lib Dems will be happy to see their vote up by a significant amount. Maybe they are returning as a force in Scotland.


    The Tories got just 1 MP under Ruth in 2015, they are still polling 21% in Scotland in the latest Yougov
  • felix said:

    Cyclefree said:



    Maybe Jake Berry is just trying to get ahead of the crowd, Kippers are standard now. The hardcore need to go further to stand out.
    "Britain First" is what Jo Cox's killer shouted as he murdered her. If this is true then Berry should have the whip withdrawn. Assuming it happened, it is a plain expression of support for fascism and terrorism from the Tory front bench.
    Agreed. It is an utter disgrace.
    Come on @Cyclefree, you know better than to take Richard Burgon at face value, surely?

    The exact words of Jo Cox's killer were "put Britain first". So even if Jake Berry appended "why don't you" in front and "for once" behind, I personally still think it is disgraceful to parrot the words of a fascist and convicted terrorist at the colleagues of the terrorist's victim, and is part of a deliberate Tory effort to employ extreme language to inflame passions, irrespective of the violence they might encourage. It is fine to engage robustly with your opponents but suggesting they are acting against the interests of this country is deeply irresponsible in today's climate.
    He's not "parroting the words of a fascist" by using three common words in a natural order. He's simply making a reasonable point.
    Accusing Labour of not putting the interests of Britain first is not making a reasonable point, but accusing your opponents of something which is manifestly untrue. You are also using inflammatory language, as we know that at least one far right terrorist has already murdered a Labour MP based on precisely that same view. A view that a Tory MP feels perfectly relaxed about parroting at that dead MP's colleagues. I am genuinely surprised that anyone on here is willing to defend it. It's a sad reflection on where this country is heading.
    They're defending the right to free speech among other things. Extremists say and do all sorts of things which in the mouths of ordinary folk have a very different meaning. This is one such example. You need to grow up.
    Oh yeah, free speech. That's that thing where nobody's allowed to complain about anything you say, right?
    No, no, complaining about what lady SC judges say is perfectly fine.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502

    nico67 said:

    Beginning to think the government are going to lose this new case on one of the issues .

    O Neil’s is asking for an order of specific importance and this means it’s easier for the court to rule in their favour .

    He wants to lose. Forced by parliament and the courts to request an extension..... fits perfectly with the narrative. Everything is now about the post extension election if the deal falls, if he wins a majority in that then his deal will be the only game in town that isn't no deal.
    Yes it would help Bozo if the court also signed the letter on his behalf but he would already be in contempt of court if it got that far .

  • DruttDrutt Posts: 1,042

    This is very disappointing and a clear error from Baroness Hale. I speak as a Conservative very prepared to defend the Supreme Court, and their decision last week.

    Yep, I agree.
    That's an awful look.

    If (heavy lifting) the president of the Supreme Court has been gleefully quoting one of the pieces of evidence in Miller 2 to make a policy point and publicly revelling in headlines about crushing the PM, might we see an application for Lady Hale's recusal for apparent bias if Vince v Boris (the nob off case) comes before the SC?

    The test is whether the fair-minded and informed observer, having considered the facts, would conclude there was a real possibility the court was biased.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 27,901
    edited October 2019
    HYUFD said:

    If Rory gets to the final 2 in the London Mayoral race he could have an outside chance of beating Sadiq Khan with Tory and LD preferences

    If the current surge towards the LibDems in London continues, Rory won’t even make second. Although he’d probably have got my second preference had he been clear that he’s no longer and not returning to the Tories. Khan is helped by having a strong pro-Remain profile himself and, unless either Siobhan or Rory can set the campaign alight, is still far most likely to win. The mayoral election isn’t as high a turnout one as a GE, and in London Labour has a massive activist machine to throw at GOTV, whereas the LibDems and Tories are only well organised in isolated Boroughs.

    The most amusing thing will be seeing the “official” Tory come fourth.
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,266
    nico67 said:

    philiph said:

    nico67 said:

    An order of specific performance in the court case would effectively stop Bozo from trying to frustrate the act by trying to skirt the boundary between what’s lawful and unlawful .

    For example sending an additional letter .

    Which I thought was already covered in the Benn Bill
    Not specifically . Sending an additional letter could be seen as frustrating the act but then it would end up in court .

    The order of specific importance is trying to narrow Bozos options by already declaring attempts to frustrate the act as unlawful.
    It all has potential to blow up in someones face and make them look stupid.

    Question is will it be Johnsons face, or those bringing this case.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    He wants to lose.

    Do or Die! Dead...

    Hulk! Smashed...
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 61,275
    I still don't think Johnson can politically speaking sign the letter even if he's to be found in contempt outwith that signature.

    He's repeatedly termed it "surrender". I think you have to resign the Gov't before "surrendering" (his words).
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    There is no British EU commissioner. If parliament tries to force the government to select one they will select someone so utterly unfit for purpose the EU will baulk. Nigel Farage?
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Will Bercow haul BoZo to the House to explain why he lied misled them earlier this week?
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    Lady Hale...
    Anorak said:

    148grss said:


    Is she not just showing a newspaper headline? I personally dislike the idea of us treating SC judges like they do in the US, but I also don't see what is wrong with her pointing out what newspapers say.

    Well, exactly. An independent judiciary does not mean they are devoid of personality, humour, or their own opinions(!!) of how they've been portrayed in the press.
    It's also one slide taken completely out of context from the rest of her talk/presentation. One is almost tempted to make use of a Trumpian expression with the initials F.N.
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,266

    There is no British EU commissioner. If parliament tries to force the government to select one they will select someone so utterly unfit for purpose the EU will baulk. Nigel Farage?

    That bloke that plays the trumpet all day at Cricket? Billy ??
  • isamisam Posts: 33,370
    edited October 2019
    Pulpstar said:

    isam said:

    kinabalu said:

    isam said:

    I agree that Sadiq looks the value. I have backed him at 4/5. Crudely speaking, I don’t think London’s Muslims will ever vote for a non Muslim again unless there’s not a Muslim candidate, and they must be the biggest voting bloc

    'London's Muslims' would vote for a Muslim Tory candidate over a non-Muslim Labour one?

    What makes you think that?
    I’d have thought it obvious that what makes me think that is that I think Muslims vote on religion over party politics

    Hmm I disagree. I reckon a muslim left candidate (Lutfur Rahman) can do very well in say Tower Hamlets (And he did) but Javid wouldn't pick up many muslim votes at all if he stood for the mayoralty against say Keir Starmer.
    It would be a lot closer than if Javid were not a Muslim, in my opinion

    But I doubt labour would put up a non Muslim vs a Tory Muslim for the mayoralty
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    Drutt said:

    This is very disappointing and a clear error from Baroness Hale. I speak as a Conservative very prepared to defend the Supreme Court, and their decision last week.

    Yep, I agree.
    That's an awful look.

    If (heavy lifting) the president of the Supreme Court has been gleefully quoting one of the pieces of evidence in Miller 2 to make a policy point and publicly revelling in headlines about crushing the PM, might we see an application for Lady Hale's recusal for apparent bias if Vince v Boris (the nob off case) comes before the SC?

    The test is whether the fair-minded and informed observer, having considered the facts, would conclude there was a real possibility the court was biased.
    It depends whether this slide had her knowledge and whether she agreed to it, did the school stick it up before her appearance . I’m sure she’ll be happy to recuse herself if it becomes an issue . I admit it’s not a good look if she did this of her own volition.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    Pulpstar said:

    I still don't think Johnson can politically speaking sign the letter even if he's to be found in contempt outwith that signature.

    He's repeatedly termed it "surrender". I think you have to resign the Gov't before "surrendering" (his words).

    Post-shame politics would say otherwise.
  • "Henriques says in his report that Watson’s intervention over a separate 1967 rape allegation against Brittan left officers “in a state of panic”, and that he “grossly insulted” Brittan. He says the Met was wrong to subject Brittan to an interview over the rape claim, and ignored the view of one of its senior detectives that there was no case to answer."

    It is a disgrace that Watson isn't facing some form of serious censure over this.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 24,276

    This is very disappointing and a clear error from Baroness Hale. I speak as a Conservative very prepared to defend the Supreme Court, and their decision last week.

    Yep, I agree.
    I think one would need to read the text of her speech to have a strong opinion either way.
    From the little detail provided in the TES tweets, it appears a storm in a teacup, which has triggered the easily triggered.

  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    Scott_P said:
    What an idiot, it clearly says 'that are not in accordance with an agreement'
    What does he think the deal is? A disagreement?!
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 24,276

    "Henriques says in his report that Watson’s intervention over a separate 1967 rape allegation against Brittan left officers “in a state of panic”, and that he “grossly insulted” Brittan. He says the Met was wrong to subject Brittan to an interview over the rape claim, and ignored the view of one of its senior detectives that there was no case to answer."

    It is a disgrace that Watson isn't facing some form of serious censure over this.

    Give it time - the full report has only just been published.
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,266
    Scott_P said:
    What checks are in position now?

    A massive trusted trader operation for one.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 10,289
    I would vote 1 Rory 2 Khan.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 53,966
    Mr. W, I'm not against comedy (as an aside, the next Sir Edric book comes out 22 October). It is not something a judge should be dabbling in especially when they're already being accused of political interference.

    It's a needless and foolish misstep.

    More importantly, buy my book.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621

    "Henriques says in his report that Watson’s intervention over a separate 1967 rape allegation against Brittan left officers “in a state of panic”, and that he “grossly insulted” Brittan. He says the Met was wrong to subject Brittan to an interview over the rape claim, and ignored the view of one of its senior detectives that there was no case to answer."

    It is a disgrace that Watson isn't facing some form of serious censure over this.

    Ironically the Corbyn cheerleaders are screaming for his head, despite remaining silent during revelation after revelation about the Glorious Leader.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 14,490

    There is no British EU commissioner. If parliament tries to force the government to select one they will select someone so utterly unfit for purpose the EU will baulk. Nigel Farage?

    They have too many commissioners already, if the rules say there has to be one and the British decide to play silly buggers the EU can just make up a meaningless portfolio for them.
  • DruttDrutt Posts: 1,042
    nico67 said:

    Drutt said:

    This is very disappointing and a clear error from Baroness Hale. I speak as a Conservative very prepared to defend the Supreme Court, and their decision last week.

    Yep, I agree.
    That's an awful look.

    If (heavy lifting) the president of the Supreme Court has been gleefully quoting one of the pieces of evidence in Miller 2 to make a policy point and publicly revelling in headlines about crushing the PM, might we see an application for Lady Hale's recusal for apparent bias if Vince v Boris (the nob off case) comes before the SC?

    The test is whether the fair-minded and informed observer, having considered the facts, would conclude there was a real possibility the court was biased.
    It depends whether this slide had her knowledge and whether she agreed to it, did the school stick it up before her appearance . I’m sure she’ll be happy to recuse herself if it becomes an issue . I admit it’s not a good look if she did this of her own volition.
    That's Lady Hale bottom left giving her speech in front of the slide. Original tweet has full pic.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 76,312
    Scott_P said:
    Only without the agreement of the EU, if the EU accept the reasonable compromise from Boris including Northern Ireland staying in the Single Market for goods no problem
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 29,082

    Cyclefree said:



    Maybe Jake Berry is just trying to get ahead of the crowd, Kippers are standard now. The hardcore need to go further to stand out.
    "Britain First" is what Jo Cox's killer shouted as he murdered her. If this is true then Berry should have the whip withdrawn. Assuming it happened, it is a plain expression of support for fascism and terrorism from the Tory front bench.
    Agreed. It is an utter disgrace.
    Come on @Cyclefree, you know better than to take Richard Burgon at face value, surely?

    The exact words of Jo Cox's killer were "put Britain first". So even if Jake Berry appended "why don't you" in front and "for once" behind, I personally still think it is disgraceful to parrot the words of a fascist and convicted terrorist at the colleagues of the terrorist's victim, and is part of a deliberate Tory effort to employ extreme language to inflame passions, irrespective of the violence they might encourage. It is fine to engage robustly with your opponents but suggesting they are acting against the interests of this country is deeply irresponsible in today's climate.
    So if a bad person says something then anyone else who says similar is also bad?

    What if the Boston Strangler's last words had been "eat your greens kids"?

    This kind of shrill faux outrage is so depressing. Where would you place Britain out of interest? Last? 37th?

    First works for me, being, er, British. If you choose to extrapolate wildly from that that I am some kind of fascist/racist/whatever then I can't help you.
    The difference- which I believe you're well aware of- is that "eat your greens" isn't an ideology that can inspire you to kill.
    Cannibalising your political opponents is pretty aggressive though!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 76,312
    Pulpstar said:

    I still don't think Johnson can politically speaking sign the letter even if he's to be found in contempt outwith that signature.

    He's repeatedly termed it "surrender". I think you have to resign the Gov't before "surrendering" (his words).

  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,037
    nico67 said:

    Drutt said:

    This is very disappointing and a clear error from Baroness Hale. I speak as a Conservative very prepared to defend the Supreme Court, and their decision last week.

    Yep, I agree.
    That's an awful look.

    If (heavy lifting) the president of the Supreme Court has been gleefully quoting one of the pieces of evidence in Miller 2 to make a policy point and publicly revelling in headlines about crushing the PM, might we see an application for Lady Hale's recusal for apparent bias if Vince v Boris (the nob off case) comes before the SC?

    The test is whether the fair-minded and informed observer, having considered the facts, would conclude there was a real possibility the court was biased.
    It depends whether this slide had her knowledge and whether she agreed to it, did the school stick it up before her appearance . I’m sure she’ll be happy to recuse herself if it becomes an issue . I admit it’s not a good look if she did this of her own volition.
    Indeed, and by that logic her comment re "girly swots" is worse.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 8,652

    Scott_P said:
    What an idiot, it clearly says 'that are not in accordance with an agreement'
    What does he think the deal is? A disagreement?!
    Yes, it currently is a disagreement.
    The agreement between the UK and the EU is Mrs May's deal, complete with backstop.
This discussion has been closed.